r3volution! News

Archive for the tag “current-events”

States Seceding from the Union : Can We? Should We?

There is a huge debate going on all over the internet regarding States seceding from the United States of America.  There are those, on one side who are completely in favor of this, those who are completely against this, and those who fall in a wide range of in between. Those who are against it, are so against it, they are telling those in favor of it to “Move to Somalia!” Move to Somalia? Really? Have these people seen how Somalia is governed? Have these people ever read our Constitution? How they equate people who want to restore our country to a Constitutional Republic (or declare Sovereignty with a State Constitution) with Somalia, I’ll never understand. But, I’ll leave that for another day and another discussion.

As of this writing, residents from the following states have added their own secession petitions: New Hampshire, Illinois, Idaho, Rhode Island, Virginia, Wisconsin, Alaska, Utah, Wyoming, California, Delaware, Nevada, Kansas, Ohio, South Dakota, West Virginia, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, Arizona, Oklahoma, Arkansas, South Carolina, Georgia, Missouri, Tennessee, Michigan, New York, Colorado, Oregon, New Jersey, North Dakota, Montana, Indiana, Mississippi, Kentucky, Florida, North Carolina, Alabama and Texas.

I count 39 States and I find that significant.  Now, before the White House will address a petition, it must first have 25,000 signatures. And to my knowledge, as of now, Texas is the only State that has met that requirement with over 80,000. Will the numbers of signers from other States increase? Probably. Will they each get the required 25,000? Doubtful. But what strikes me is citizens from39 of the 50 States are entertaining the idea of seceding from the Union. Suppose all 50 States end up filing petitions. Seems to me, with or without 25,000 signatures for each petition, that is something the White House must acknowledge. That goes well beyond a few fringe radicals having a temper tantrum.

But enough of me rambling. There are much smarter folks than I discussing this issue, so I will provide some links and maybe a brief commentary, and you decide. Is this something we #1) Realistically can do, and #2) Should do?

Ben Swann discusses Do States Actually Have The Right To Secede?

“Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and institute new Government.”

Texas Secession Petition Racks Up More Than 80,000 Signatures, Qualifies For White House Response

A petition for Texas secession has qualified to receive a White House response.

As of Tuesday evening, the petition — which asks for the peaceful withdrawal of the state of Texas from the union — had racked up more than 81,000 signatures. (Only 25,000 are needed to elicit an official response from the Obama administration.)

Continue Reading: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/13/texas-secession-petition-qualifies-for-white-house-response_n_2125159.html

Residents In More Than 30 States File Secession Petitions

Micah H. (no last name provided) of Arlington, Texas filed a petition that had nearly 60,000 signatures as of Tuesday morning.

It reads:

The US continues to suffer economic difficulties stemming from the federal government’s neglect to reform domestic and foreign spending. The citizens of the US suffer from blatant abuses of their rights such as the NDAA, the TSA, etc. Given that the state of Texas maintains a balanced budget and is the 15th largest economy in the world, it is practically feasible for Texas to withdraw from the union, and to do so would protect it’s citizens’ standard of living and re-secure their rights and liberties in accordance with the original ideas and beliefs of our founding fathers which are no longer being reflected by the federal government.

Continue Reading: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/13/petition-to-secede-states_n_2120410.html

“Secession an important Constitutional Principle”

“It’s an American tradition to talk about secession”

Dr. Paul on Secession

Video from September 2008, describing Vermont, a very left leaning State, and their desire for secession.

THE STATES WANT TO SECEDE FROM THE UNION – FREE VT!

Following are two videos discussing New Hamphire citizens wanting to seced from 2009.

NH to Secede over Obama NWO Agenda

State of New Hampshire with Bill HCR 6 is just on one of several States who are drawing a line in the sand against the Federal Government. For any one of 6 very specific reasons, they will secede.

I. Declaring Involuntary Martial Law over any of the 50 States

II. Any kind of “domestic Draft” (Obama’s Service Corps)
*Obama’s Plan for The Draft- MANDATORY SERVICE everyone 18-25
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtDSwyCPEsQ

III. Any kind of required service of Minors (Youth Brigades)
*”Obama’s Nazi Youth Brigade”pt1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVjcRkeKFsc

IV. Surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation or foreign government. (UN Millenium Declaration, which Obama supports.
North American Union/SPP agreement.
UN Carbon Taxes)
*CNN-Lou Dobbs- Obama Backing North American Union Agenda – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JgGEv-cdoms
**CNN- Obama and UN “Millenium Declaration”- Carbon Taxes – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PePbtEABzGk

V. Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press. (Fairness Doctrine)

VI. Any attempt to further restrict the the Right to Bear Arms
(Obama preposed a 500% tax on ammunition in his State and supports a nationwide version.
*CNN- Obama To BAN Guns SPREAD THIS FOLKS, PLZ!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vKfL2ETnF8

Obama’s Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel want to put Gun Owners on a political black list that will strip them of their rights.
*Commie Rahm Emanuel to Disarm America:”#1 Issue”, Gun Owners are Terrorists
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vp7f1QKYmg

Obama’s Attorney General lobbied for the Total Gun Ban in DC, and thought it should go Nationwide.)

Heres the Bill:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2009/HCR0006.html

Legislators tell feds to back off
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=87987

21 States Claiming Sovereignty: AZ, AL, AK, AR, CA, CO, GA, HI, ID, IN, KS, ME, MI, MO, MT, NH, NV, OK, PA, TX, & WA
http://www.mrstep.com/politics/az-wa-mo-nh-ok-claiming-sovereignty/

New Hampshire Bill to Secede from the Union

Glenn Beck’s interview with NH representative on NH bill to approve state’s desire to secede from the union

Even my own State, the Commonwealth of Virginia is getting in on this.

Peacefully Grant The COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA to Withdraw from The U.S.of America,and create it’s own Self-Government

Obama Federal Government Corruption,Lies,and Cover-Ups.Including potential Voter Fraud,with The Obama Admin.behind and Fostering the Ruination of Country,Laws,and Constitution,from every aspect of Governing,circumvention of the Law of The Land,and Utilization of Beurocratic means to bypass the Will of THE PEOPLE. 17 States so Far Have Filed for Secession.Must Originate and get 150 for WHITE house to post,and Recognize.Pls Sign:The government allows one month from the day the petition is submitted to obtain 25,000 signatures in order for the Obama administration to consider the request.

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/peacefully-grant-commonwealth-virginia-withdraw-usof-americaand-create-its-own-self-government/R2BzGMPF

UPDATE!

Since starting this document, a lot has changed. It appears that now 7 States have the required 25,000 signatures and ALL 50 States are now on board.

Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, North CarolinaTennessee and Texas residents have accrued at least 25,000 signatures, the number the Obama administration says it will reward with a staff review of onlineproposals.

Things are getting quite interesting friends. I am looking forward to watching this play out. For mor information on the petitions, please refer to We the People web site.

Colorado SWAT Team Will Be Met By 1500 Member Organized Militia?

A highly militarized police force arrived at the home of 63 year old Sahara Donahue to evict her from her residence of 24 years. She was petitioning US Bank for an additional 60 days to remain in her home, so she could have some time to find a new place to live, secure her belongings and leave her home with dignity. She came to the Colorado Foreclosure Resistance Coalition and Occupy Denver General Assembly to ask for our help. She knew no one in Occupy Denver prior to reaching out. We immediately started mobilizing to try to get her the assistance she needed and a group went up to her house for the first rumored eviction on Thursday 10/25. When that eviction didn’t happen, we planned an in-town action at US Bank on Monday for Sahara to try to find someone to speak with about her situation, with carpools up to her house later that day as the eviction was said to be scheduled for Tuesday 10/30. Occupiers laid barricades from fallen trees to prevent moving trucks and workers from entering the property and were able to stave off the eviction for a few hours. At 2:45pm ten or more truckloads of police in full combat gear armed with live-ammo AR-15’s, and grenade launchers arrived on the scene & forced occupiers to the ground at gun point. Police then made their way to the house, broke down the front door, threw Sahara to the ground in her own kitchen and pointed their guns at the heads of a mother and son who were in the house with Sahara along with others. They continued to break items in the house as they searched it.

 

Sahara Donahue (Victim) and Darren O’Connel (Occupy Denver) join Pete to tell the story of what really happened when a militarized swat team from Clear Creek County Sheriffs Department swarmed Miss Donahue’s property in an unlawful, unconstitutional raid to remove her from her home.

Pete places a call to the Clear Creek Count Colorado’s Sheriffs Department and speaks to SRGT Spraley properly schooling him on his oath to defend the constitution. The talk Pete has with this Sheriff is not to be missed or taken lightly. It is a very rare look into the minds of local law enforcement and how far they are willing to go to protect the banks. This officer actually admits in this interview that the laws are screwed up and until the people change them he is obligated to enforce them even though they are unconstitutional.

http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2012/11/colorado-swat-team-will-be-met-by-1500-member-organized-militia-2495036.html

San Diego Residents Face 6 Years In Prison For Washing Their Car

San Diegans could face 6 years in prison and fines of $100,000 dollars a day for washing their car in the driveway or failing to pick up dog poop under new EPA-mandated environmental regulations related to water quality.

Although residents of the city are forced to drink toxic waste in their water supply in the form of sodium fluoride, measures imposed as a consequence of the Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Water Act would turn the most mundane of activities into a criminal offense.

“California’s latest experiment in faith-based policymaking is being unleashed today on the San Diego public, as regional water-quality officials begin hearings on new regulations that seem crafted to turn most owners of a car, house or dog into criminals within a decade or so. We wish we were exaggerating,” reports the North County Times.

“Under the draft rules, ordinary homeowners may face six years in prison and fines of $100,000 a day if they are deemed serial offenders of such new crimes as allowing sprinklers to hit the pavement, washing a car in the driveway, or, conceivably, failing to pick up dog poop promptly from their own backyards, let alone the sidewalk.”

The regulations will be enforced with the aid of a 24-hour telephone snitch line which residents of San Diego, south Orange and southwest Riverside counties can use to report on their neighbors for violating the new code.

The new rules could even force firefighters to collect the water they use to douse burning buildings.

The regulations are being passed under the justification of minimizing the bacteria Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) that runs into rivers and streams.

The editorial board of the North County Times warns that the rules are “preposterous” and will “sap billions of dollars from the local economy.”

“In hundreds of pages, the new regulations set targets that measure bacteria from animal waste during dry periods at local beaches, even as they note that wide variations in bacteria occur naturally in the environment. And we could find no evidence from these officials that severe cuts in stormwater runoff will cause improvements in human or wildlife health. Indeed, nowhere do they bother to say why today’s levels are considered bad for us,” writes the newspaper.

Ironically, while San Diegans could be turned into criminals for failing to uphold dubious water quality standards, they are simultaneously being forced to consume drinking water contaminated with a known toxic waste – sodium fluoride.

Almost 60 years after it was barred from public pumps and pipes, the city utilities department started fluoridating the water supply in San Diego again last year.

As numerous studies and expert testimony affirm, sodium fluoride is a toxic waste from the phosphate industry and has been linked with innumerable debilitating and in some cases terminal health problems such as disorders affecting teeth, bones, the brain and the thyroid gland, as well as lowering IQ.

Environmentalists and EPA regulators don’t appear to be too concerned about a product which has on its packaging a skull and crossbones being artificially added to the water supply, but the runoff from a car wash or a piece of dog poop apparently poses a big enough threat to turn residents into criminals for engaging in activity as mundane as cleaning their vehicle.

Stephanie Gaines, land use and environmental planner for the county’s Department of Public Works, pointed out that ”The regulations stem from the federal Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Water Act and are passed down to the state, regional, and local levels.”

Planning group member Chad Anderson said that the regulations appeared to “Overlap with statements from Agenda 21, the comprehensive global plan for sustainable development that was created at a United Nation’s Earth Summit in 1992. It was signed by more than 178 countries, including the United States, and opponents say it targets private property.”

As we have previously highlighted, the UN’s Agenda 21, which is being implemented across the United States in a number of different guises, demands that member nations adopt “sustainable development” policies that are little more than a disguise for the reintroduction of neo-feudalism and only serve to reduce living standards and quality of life.

The regulations about to be foisted upon San Diegans are merely a taste of the kind of big government tyranny and control freak micromanagement we can expect to see unleashed against Americans under the guise of environmentalism when real environmental issues like toxic waste being added to the water supply are completely ignored.

*********************

http://govtslaves.info/san-diego-residents-face-6-years-in-prison-for-washing-their-car/

Homeowner tasered by police as he fought fire spreading from house next door

  • Dan Jensen woke from a nap to find his neighbors’ house on fire
  • He used a garden hose to protect his own property, but police asked him to stop
  • He was tasered by the cops after when he refused to stop
  • His attorney claims the police used ‘excessive force’ and Jensen is considering legal action

A man was tasered by police after he picked up his garden hose and attempted to stop a fire spreading that was threatening to engulf his home.

Dan Jensen, 42, awoke from a nap last Thursday when he hear his wife, Angela, also 42, scream that the house next door at 3420 Beechwood Terrace N in Tampa Bay was ablaze.

When the father of two went outside, the fire had already engulfed his neighbors’ home and a fence in between the two houses and the flames were starting to lick the corners of the Jensens’ home.

Jensen first emptied a fire extinguisher on to the blaze, before grabbing his garden hose.

Police officers arrived on the scene before firefighters and told Jensen to back off. He did, but quickly grew frustrated waiting for the fire department and so decided to pick up the hose again.

As he did, and without warning, Jensen felt electricity run through his body and he collapsed to the ground.

‘It was wrong,’ he told The Tampa Bay Times. ‘There’s no way around it. … I was fighting a fire. I wasn’t fighting police. I thought they were here to help me. Instead, they hurt me.’

Pinellas Park Police say they had to tase Jensen because he was putting not only himself, but also officers in danger because he refused to back down. They claim it only took six minutes for fire fighters to respond and that they could have charged Jensen with obstruction, but decided against it.

An attorney working for Jensen has described the police’s actions as ‘excessive force.’

Heidi Imhof said the police have no right to taser an unarmed person on private property and that they should have considered other options including turning the water off.

Police policy states that officers must issue a warning before using a Taser, ‘except when such warning could provide a tactical advantage to the subject.’

Jensen says he was never warned and is now considering legal action.

Paramedics rushed Jensen to the hospital after he was incident. He suffered smoke inhalation and has some scarring on his back from where he was tasered.

It took firefighters 20 to 30 minutes to extinguish the blaze, which was started by neighbors leaving a frying pan unattended.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2232340/Homeowner-tasered-police-fought-spreading-house-door.html#ixzz2C89QlcCb
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Judge Napolitano on Pot Legalization

The Importance of One Vote…A Closer Look

Commentary provided by:Josey Wales.

With election day right around the corner, I am still torn between what decision to make. Vote Third Party or stay home? Well, I think I have made it clear what my personal choice will be. I have not swayed at all. Still going to write-in Congressman Ron Paul as well as file the affidavit with Write In Revolution! and I HIGHLY recommend everyone who is writing in OR voting Third Party do the same.

But back to the initial concern that got me to put together this document. I am hearing a lot of people choosing to just opt out completely. They know their vote is meaningless, so their only recourse to further playing their game is to just stay home. I completely understand, but disagree.  I think we all have to show our force at the polls, and show our disdain by voting, but NOT for the establishment.

Anyway, I have run across the following piece on Facebook lately, and wanted to share it with you. I had to do quite a bit of digging to find out  WHO was originally responsible for this piece, but I think I’ve found it. But once I found it, I started researching the validity of the points used to demonstrate the The Importance of One Vote. It turns out, some of these points used are false, if you believe Snopes.com to be reliable. At any rate, I have linked to sources for each of the bullet points used in the article, and as always provided the link to the original article. While some of the examples might not be true, I still found this to be interesting, and I hope you do as well.

THE IMPORTANCE OF ONE VOTE
By Mary W. Morgan, Supervisor of Elections, Collier County, Florida

The most often heard excuse for not voting in an election is “my one little vote won’t make a difference.” Yet history is full of instances proving the enormous power of one single vote. In many cases, the course of nations has been changed because one individual ballot was cast, or not cast, depending upon your point of view. Consider this:

  • In 1645, one vote gave Oliver Cromwell control of England.
    According to snopes.com, this claim is FALSE.
  • In 1649, one vote literally cost King Charles I of England his head. The vote to behead him was 67 against and 68 for—the ax fell thanks to one vote.
    According to snopes.com, this claim is FALSE.
  • In 1714, one vote placed King George I on the throne of England and restored the monarchy.
    I’m not so sure this is accurate either, at least in the case of one vote. I found this site that describes how George I ascended to the throne. It was through  The Act of Settlement, which does not look to me like a vote.
  • In 1776, one vote gave America the English language instead of German (at least according to folk lore.)
    According to snopes.com, this claim is FALSE.
  • In 1800, the Electoral College met in the respective states to cast their two votes for President. At that time, the U.S. Constitution provided the candidate receiving the most electoral votes would become President and the candidate receiving the second highest number of votes would become Vice President. When the results of the Electoral College votes were opened by both houses of Congress, there was a tie vote for President between Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr. That threw the election of President into the House of Representatives where Thomas Jefferson was elected our third president by a one-vote margin.
    Ok, again, I am not convinced that this was decided by one vote. It is clear that one man, Alexander Hamilton was highly influential in the eventual tie-breaker, but I have not found that his, or anyone’s one vote did it.
    A couple of interesting articles :
    Election of 1800 Was Significant and Controversial
    1800 Presidential Election
  • In 1824, none of the four Presidential candidates received an electoral majority. The election was again thrown into the House of Representatives, where John Quincy Adams defeated front runner Andrew Jackson by one vote to become the nation’s 6th president. Andrew Jackson received the majority of the nation’s popular vote.
    Here, it seems it did come down to one vote. It seems, Andrew Jackson had the most votes in the Electoral College, but not a necessary majority. So once again it came down to House of Representatives vote.  Henry Clay was not only a Presidential Candidate in this race, but was also Speaker of the House. Clay could not fathom the thought of a Jackson Presidency, so he cast his support behind John Quincy Adams. In return Adams named Clay as his secretary of state, a position that had been the stepping-stone to the presidency for the previous four executives. Can you say “corruption”?
    The 1824 Election and the “Corrupt Bargain”
    1824 Presidential Election
  • In 1844 in the backwoods area of Switzerland County, Indiana on election day, a farmer named Freeman Clark lay seriously ill in bed. He begged his sons to carry him to the county seat so he could vote for David Kelso to become a state senator. David Kelso had defended old Freeman Clark on a murder charge and obtained his acquittal. The old farmer Freeman Clark got to vote for Kelso but Clark died on his way back home. Kelso won the election by one vote. Both Freeman Clark and David Kelso were long-time Andrew Jackson supporters.
    I can’t find ANYTHING to substantiate this claim. Sure makes for a nice story though.You can choose to use this site In Indiana One Vote Counts  as a credible source if you want.
  • In 1844 when the new Indiana senate convened, Democrats had a majority of one, counting David Kelso. At that time, state senates had the task of electing the states’ United States Senator. The Indiana Senate Democrats held a caucus where it developed a majority of the party delegation favored a man who would vote against the annexation of Texas if elected to the U.S. Senate. David Kelso refused to vote for the Democratic Party choice, and a deadlock resulted between the Democratic and Whig candidates. This continued for days. Finally, Kelso made his move. He proposed a new candidate: Edward A. Hannigan. In his party caucus, Kelso notified his Democratic associates he would bolt and vote with the Whigs—thus electing a Whig to the Senate—unless the Democrats supported Hannigan. The Democrats felt constrained to accept Hannigan who was then elected as Indiana’s U.S. Senator by one vote—that of David Kelso.
    Same as above. In Indiana One Vote Counts. But, this claim directly relates to the next claim which according to snopes.com, is FALSE.
  • In 1845, Texas was admitted to the union as a state by one vote—that of Edward A. Hannigan from Indiana. The 1844 and 1845 excerpts on the series of single votes leading to Texas statehood are from the book Magnificent Destiny.
    According to snopes.com, this claim is FALSE.
  • In 1846, a one-vote margin in the U.S. Senate approved President Polk’s request for a Declaration of War against Mexico.
    Not according to what I have found. All I can find that is Senate specific is other blogs and opinions restating the claim. However, the legitimate sources I have discovered ALL say that Congress overwhelmingly voted in favor and indeed Declared War against Mexico. So was there a one vote difference in the Senate? Maybe. But did that one vote make a significant difference? Not that I can see.
    Mexican-American War
    Mexican War
    A Guide to the Mexican War
  • In 1850, California was admitted to the union by a margin of one vote.
    Not finding anything proving this to be fact. I have found lots of information surrounding the controversy in admitting California, which had to do with the slavery issue at the time. This seems to be another instance where one man, Henry Clay, introduced a Bill that was instrumental in the outcome of the vote, but nothing to suggest that it was one vote.
    California Admission Day
    Compromise of 1850
    The Compromise of 1850 and the Fugitive Slave Act
  • In 1859, Oregon was admitted to the union by a margin of one vote.
    Looks like another instance of controversy surrounding slavery, but I can’t find anything regarding one vote.
    Slavery Clouds Oregon’s Admission to the Union.
  • The Alaska Purchase of 1867 was ratified by just one vote—paving the way for the eventual annexation of America’s largest state in 1958.
    Still having difficulties finding credible sources to back these claims. On this site, Seward`s Folly, the Purchase of Alaska it is claimed the Senate ratified it by one vote, but that is not backed up by a source for that actual vote. I found another site that appears to be an official government memo, where it states that the Senate did ratify the Purchase of Alaska, but mentions NOTHING about one vote. You’d think that would be a big deal, and people would highlight that fact.
    Purchase of Alaska
  • In 1868, one vote in the U.S. Senate saved President Andrew Johnson from impeachment.
    FINALLY! Something that looks to be somewhat true. It’s not so much that one vote was the outcome one way or another. They were just one vote short of the necessary votes to have the two-thirds needed to impeach. Well, maybe we are getting closer to getting one of these claims to be true.
    The Senate Votes on a Presidential Impeachment
  • In 1875, a one-vote margin changed France from a monarchy to a republic.
    According to snopes.com, this claim is FALSE.
  • In 1875, Florida’s U.S. Senators were still elected by the state Legislature. Democrat Charles W. Jones of Pensacola was elected by the U.S. Senate by a majority of one vote.
    Well, I only found one thing on this guy and it is a Wikipediaarticle. And it doesn’t say anything about him winning this Senate Seat by one vote.
  • In 1876, no presidential contender received a majority of electoral votes so the determination of the country’s president was again thrown into the U.S. House of Representatives. By a one-vote margin, Rutherford B. Hayes became the new U.S. president. When Tilden’s party protested the tabulation and demanded a recount, Congress established a 15-member electoral commission to again count the electoral votes and declare the result. By an eight to seven margin—again, one vote—the commission affirmed the count and gave the election and presidency to Hayes.
    Again, there seems to be a misleading of facts here. From The Office of the Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives :
    Democrat Samuel Tilden had emerged from the close election leading Republican Rutherford B. Hayes of Ohio, just one vote shy of the 185 needed to win.
  • In 1885, two members of the Florida House of Representatives waged a friendly but close contest for Speaker of the House. Robert W. Davis of Green Cove Springs defeated Gen. Ernest Yonge of Pensacola by one vote.
    I cannot find one single piece of evidence to support this claim from a google search. Could it be true? Sure. But it sure seems like a one vote victory would have been big news, and it wouldn’t be too difficult to find a newspaper clipping.
  • In 1889, by a one-vote margin, Washington was admitted to statehood with the union.
  • In 1890, by a one-vote margin, Idaho became a state.
    Not even going to waste any more time looking up claims like the last two.
  • In 1916, if presidential hopeful Charles E. Hughes had received one additional vote in each of California’s precincts, he would have defeated President Woodrow Wilson’s re-election bid.
    From Wikipedia : The electoral vote was one of the closest in American history – with 266 votes needed to win, Wilson took 30 states for 277 electoral votes, while Hughes won 18 states and 254 electoral votes.
    1916 Presidential Election:

    Woodrow Wilson (I) Democratic 277 9,129,606
     Charles E. Hughes Republican 254 8,538,221

    I’m no mathematician,  but it looks like more than one vote.

  • On November 8, 1923, members of the then recently-formed revolutionary political party met to elect a leader in a Munich, Germany beer hall. By a majority of one vote, they chose an ex-soldier named Adolph Hitler to become the NAZI Party leader.
    According to snopes.com, this claim is FALSE.
  • In 1940, the vote taken by the French parliament to maintain its status as a republic failed by a margin of one vote.
    I once again googled this. I found this site, Poet Patriot.com, which makes this claim: “I believe my ‘one vote’ lists, National, by State, and Other to be the most comprehensive listing on the internet.
    So I scrolled down to 1940, and indeed saw this claim about the french Parliament vote with a link:
    1 vote failed a proposal by the French parliament to maintain its status as a republic.
    404: Page not found
    This error is generated when there was no web page with the name you specified at the web site.
  • In 1941, the Selective Service Act (the draft) was saved by a one-vote margin—just weeks before Pearl Harbor was attacked.
    According to snopes.com, this claim is FALSE.
  • In 1948, a Texas convention voted for Lyndon B. Johnson over ex-Governor Coke Stevens in a contested Senatorial election. Lyndon Johnson because U.S. Senator by a one-vote margin.
    Lyndon Johnson’s 1948 Senate Race states that Johnson won by 87 votes.  This article Lyndon Johnson’s victory in the 1948 Texas Senate race: a reappraisal. seems to back that up.
  • In 1948, if Thomas E. Dewey had gotten one vote more per precinct in Ohio and California, the presidential election would have been thrown into the U.S. House of Representatives where Dewey enjoyed more support than his rival—incumbent Harry Truman. As it was, Dewey was expected to win the general election by a landslide, so most Republicans stayed home. Only 51.5 percent of the electorate voted. Truman defeated Dewey.
    Ok, this was a crazy election. Newspapers were prematurely reporting that Dewey defeated Truman. A large percentage of voters did stay home. I think I will just post some links here, and you all can do some further digging if you want to confirm or debunk the one vote thing.
    1948 Presidential General Election Results
    1948 Presidential Election
    Results of the 1948 Election
  • In a 1955 city election in Huron, Ohio, the mayor was elected to office by one vote.
    This is actually becoming comical. All I can find is more blogs and opinion pieces repeating the this original list as proof of the accuracy of the one vote claim.  Again, I have to say, all these important instances coming down to just one vote, seems like it would be newsworthy. I wouldn’t think it would be so difficult to find sources to back the claims.
  • In a 1959 city election, mayors of both Rose Creek and Odin, Minnesota were elected to their respective offices by one vote.
    Not even going to bother looking.
  • In the 1960 presidential election, an additional one vote per precinct in Illinois, Missouri, New Jersey, and Texas may have altered the course of America’s modern history by denying John F. Kennedy the presidency and placing Richard Nixon in the White House eight years earlier.
    There is no doubt, this was won of the most controversial, and closest elections in U.S. Presidential history. But I am having a difficult time believing that one vote in each of these States would have changed it all. There are far too many other factors involved, such as accusations of election fraud. So, I have provided some links to the individual State results of the election, and for those of you who have the patience and aptitude, who want to try to figure it out, please do. I look forward to seeing your pie charts and line graphs.
    Illinois, Missouri, New Jersey, Texas
    Wikipedia U.S. Presidential Election 1960
    Was Nixon Robbed?
    Chicago Ties Cast Shadow on 1960 Presidential Win
    Did JFK Steal the 1960 Election?
  • In 1962, the governors of Maine, Rhode Island, and North Dakota were all elected by a margin of one vote per precinct.
  • In 1984, a Monroe County, Florida commissioner was elected by one vote.
  • In 1994, the U.S. House of Representatives enacted a law banning specific classes of assault weapons. The vote was initially tied but one member changed his vote to approve the ban.
    From Wikipedia, In 1994, Swett voted for a bill to ban assault weapons that narrowly passed by two votes in the United States House of Representatives.
  • Bills proposing amendment to the U.S. Constitution require a two-thirds vote of each House in order to be approved. When the balanced budget amendment bill came before the U.S. Senate in March, 1995, the measure failed by one vote—Mark Hatfield, Republican from Oregon, was the sole Republican failing to vote with other members of the Republican Party, which was the majority party of the U.S. Senators. When it became apparent the measure would fail, Senate Republican Whip, Bob Dole, changed his vote to enable him to bring the matter back up under parliamentary rules for a vote in the future.
    Considering a Balanced Budget Amendment: Lessons from HistoryRick Santorum says he called for resignation of a high-ranking Republican over no vote on balanced budget amendment

I realize I am not a historian or a professional researcher, but these claims, should be much easier to substantiate. I started this document with the hopes of demonstrating that our one vote can make a difference. But after trying to verify these claims that would have you believe that to be true, I’m not so sure. I think I have proven though, no matter how good information looks, and no matter how in line it is with our preconceived notions, we should never take it at face value. Research the claims made by others. Perhaps Mary W. Morgan, while producing her document did research all of these points. And perhaps, there are verifiable original sources to back these claims. I could not find such sources, and I would have liked very much if Miss Morgan would have provided these sources. But again, I am speculating. Who’s to say in her original, the sources weren’t provided? But in the original article (I doubt this was the first reproduction) I could find that reproduced Miss Morgan’s findings, and ALL subsequent re-postings of her work, no such sources are listed.


http://www.spiritlifemag.com/?p=2482

UPDATE!!! Citizens’ Grand Jury Indicts Obama and Biden

Overnight I was given a lot of other information that in one way or another deals with this issue. There are questions surrounding just how feasible this indictment is as far as legalities in convicting a sitting President and such. I have not been able to read all of this information, and certainly haven’t had time to give my own perspective. What I have done, is provide all of the links I received at the bottom of this post. I would really appreciate it if some of you who have the time and interest, to PLEASE leave some detailed comments and sources. I am thinking, since my time right now is being taken up on another subject I’m working on, that I may just make a finalized posting of this as a USER created blog post and host it on my site. I do hope the information I’ve listed here is enough to get some of you interested enough to do some further digging. Thanks for all your help.

I would be very interested in seeing Judge Andrew Napolitano’s take on this if anyone can find that!

Sometimes in my blog, I take creative license in the way I form my posts and link and unlink parts within. I will ALWAYS inform you, my loyal readers when I have done so, and ALWAYS provide the link for the original story. I have altered the original article somewhat here and you will find the link at the bottom.

Citizens’ Grand Jury Indicts Obama and Biden

OCALA, Fla., Oct. 30, 2012– /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ —

Larry Klayman

Larry Klayman, founder and chairman of Freedom Watch, today announced that President Barack Obama and Vice President Joseph Biden have been criminally indicted for having willfully released classified national security information concerning the raid on Osama bin Laden’s compound, U.S. and Israeli war plans concerning Iran and their cyber-attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities. The release of this information, among other harm to U.S. national security, resulted in the killing of members of Seal Team Six by terrorists and the arrest and imprisonment of American covert agents by Pakistan, such as the doctor who aided the CIA with regard to the bin Laden assassination. U.S.-Israeli war plans with Iran have also been compromised.

A true bill of indictment was issued by a Citizens’ Grand Jury in Ocala, Florida, who reviewed evidence and voted unanimously to indict Obama and Biden at 6:02 pm on October 29, 2012.

The authority for a Citizens’ Grand Jury 

can be found at :  www.citizensgrandjury.com.

The criminal defendants, Obama and Biden, will now be given notice of their indictment, arraigned and then tried for their alleged crimes.

Mr. Klayman, the Citizens’ Prosecutor, issued the following statement: “The Citizens’ Grand Jury, after having deliberated, yesterday issued a true bill of indictment.  It did the work that the government should have done, but does not have the integrity to do; that is hold these public officials accountable under the law. For far too long government prosecutors, who are put in place by politicians, have looked the other way as high public officials like Obama and Biden violate the law to further their political agendas. Now, as a result, the people must therefore exercise the rights given to them by the framers of the Constitution, and themselves take legitimate measures to restore the nation to some semblance of legality. This indictment of Obama and Biden is just the first step in a legal revolution to reclaim the nation from establishment politicians, government officials and judges who have represented only their own political and other interests at the expense of ‘We the People.’ Obama and Biden will now be tried in a court of law and I am confident that they will be convicted of these alleged crimes.”

The original Full Story can be read at :
http://www.sacbee.com/2012/10/30/4948682/citizens-grand-jury-indicts-obama.html

Citizens Grand Jury video evidence

Citizens’ Grand Jury Manual Grand Jury Qualifications and Selection of Grand Jury

http://www.citizensgrandjury.com/pdf/manual.pdf

A collection of videos from Freedom Watch Inc.

http://www.youtube.com/user/FreedomWatchInc?feature=watch

Editors Note:

I plan on adding information relating to this as it comes to me, and would be most grateful to readers of my blog for contacting me with any news concerning this matter.

This was submitted from a long time friend and frequent contributor to my research, Ali Myownbiz III :

Can It All Be Coincidence?

by Don Fredrick,

Don Fredrick

As I noted in the introduction to my book, The Obama Timeline, a jury at a murder trial will often find the accumulated circumstantial evidence so overwhelming that a guilty verdict is obvious—even though there may be no witness to the crime. “The jurors in the Scott Peterson trial believed the collection of evidence more than they believed Scott Peterson. Among other things, the jury thought that being arrested with $15,000 in cash, recently-dyed hair, a newly-grown goatee, four cell phones, camping equipment, a map to a new girlfriend’s house, a gun, and his brother’s driver’s license certainly did not paint a picture of a grieving husband who had nothing to do with his pregnant wife’s disappearance and murder.”

In the four years I have been gathering information about—and evidence against—Barack Hussein Obama, I have encountered hundreds of coincidences that strike me as amazing. None of those coincidences, by themselves, may mean much. But taken as a whole it is almost impossible to believe they were all the result of chance.

continue reading Full Story at :
http://www.themoralliberal.com/2012/10/03/can-it-all-be-coincidence/
 

Citizen grand jury indicts Obama

Groups in 20 more states reviewing eligibility claims

Published: 03/31/2009 at 8:35 PM by Bob Unruh

http://www.wnd.com/2009/03/93481/

In Conservative Circles, Calls for ‘Citizen Grand Juries’ Grow

By Dan Testa, 12-09-09

Earlier this year, protesters hold signs during a Tax Day Tea Party protest on north Main Street in Kalispell. – File photo by Lido Vizzutti/Flathead Beacon

The idea of changing state law, or the state Constitution, to allow citizens to convene grand juries in their counties appears to be gathering steam in some conservative circles of Western Montana. The concept would allow citizens to summon juries comprised of members of the public to investigate alleged crimes – not just judges, as is the case currently.

With a Bitterroot man crafting language for a proposed ballot initiative and a Hungry Horse man forming a group to work on draft legislation, a measure allowing for citizen grand juries, in one form or another, seems poised for broader consideration in the coming year – by either the public or, possibly, lawmakers.
Continue Reading at : http://www.flatheadbeacon.com/articles/article/in_conservative_circles_calls_for_citizen_grand_juries_grow/14634

Citizens Grand Jury Validity and Legal Authority

CAN CITIZENS FORM THEIR OWN GRAND JURY AND INDICT POLITICIANS FOR CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR

By Jim Frazier

An organization called the “American Grand Jury.org” has convened a Grand Jury and indicted President Obama for the crime of treason. Will their indictment be acknowledged in a U.S. District court of law? Are common citizens able to indict an elected official?

“Yes,” says Hal Von Luebbert,” author of “Citizen Power Now.” “The US government has no power to bring anyone to trial. The government can NOT find any person guilty of anything. Both of those powers belong to The People through use of a jury.”

The U.S. Attorney’s office in Colorado does not agree.  “I don’t think any citizen- convened Grand Jury has power to be enforced in a court of law,” said Jeff Dorschnor, spokesperson for the U.S. Attorneys office in Denver.

Weld County District Attorney Ken Buck echoed the same idea. “I’ve never heard of a Grand Jury called by citizens,” he said.

Mike Saccone, the Colorado Department of Law’s spokesperson, said, “There are no provisions for formation of citizen grand juries in Colorado. That is the way the statues stand now.”

Continue Reading at : http://www.greeleygazette.com/press/?p=4498

IF IT’S NOT A RUNAWAY, IT’S NOT A REAL GRAND JURY

by : ROGER ROOTS

I. INTRODUCTION

The doings of American grand juries are notoriously misunderstood and unknown by most sectors of the public.[1] Generally, the grand jury process escapes obscurity only when indictments are made public and when, for whatever reason, grand jury “leaks” are disclosed in the news media.[2] In theory, the grand jury is supposed to act as a check on the government — a people’s watchdog against arbitrary and malevolent prosecutions.[3] By and large, however, federal grand juries rarely challenge federal prosecutors.

Today, critics are nearly unanimous in describing the alleged oversight function of modern grand juries as essentially a tragic sham.[4] The Framers of the Bill of Rights would scarcely recognize a grand jury upon seeing the modern version conduct business in a federal courthouse.[5] In modern federal grand jury proceedings, the government attorney is clearly in charge and government agents may outnumber the witnesses by six-to-one.[6]

A “runaway” grand jury, loosely defined as a grand jury which resists the accusatory choices of a government prosecutor, has been virtually eliminated by modern criminal procedure. Today’s “runaway” grand jury is in fact the common law grand jury of the past. Prior to the emergence of governmental prosecution as the standard model of American criminal justice, all grand juries were in fact “runaways,” according to the definition of modern times; they operated as completely independent, self-directing bodies of inquisitors, with power to pursue unlawful conduct to its very source, including the government itself.[7]

Before the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure — which made independently-acting grand juries illegal for all practical purposes — grand juries were understood to have broad powers to operate at direct odds with both judges and prosecutors.[8] One recent criminal procedure treatise sums up the inherent inconsistency of the modern grand jury regime:

In theory, the grand jury is a body of independent citizens that can investigate any crime or government misdeed that comes to its attention. In practice, however, the grand jury is dependent upon the prosecutor to bring cases and gather evidence. Except in rare instances of a “runaway” grand jury investigation of issues that a prosecutor does not want investigated, the powers of the grand jury enhance the powers of the prosecutor.[9]

Thus, while the grand jury still exists as an institution — in a sterile, watered-down, and impotent form — its decisions are the mere reflection of the United States Justice Department.[10] In practice, the grand jury’s every move is controlled by the prosecution, whom the grand jury simply does not know it is supposed to be pitted against.[11]

The term “runaway grand jury” did not appear in legal literature until the mid-twentieth century.[12] The reason for this is that the term would have been inapplicable in the context of previous generations: every American grand jury known by the Constitution’s Framers would be considered a runaway grand jury under modern criminal procedure. Constitutional framers knew criminal law to be driven by private prosecution and did not contemplate the omnipresence of government prosecutors.[13] Additionally, early American common law placed far more power and investigative judgment in the hands of grand juries than does the criminal procedure of the twentieth century.

Although in 1946 the drafters of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure looked with horror at the prospect of grand juries that “could act from their own knowledge or observation,”[14] long-standing common law precedent upholds the power of grand juries to act “independently of either the prosecuting attorney or judge.”[15] At common law, a grand jury could freely “investigate merely on [the] suspicion that the law [was] being violated, or even because it want[ed] assurance that it [was] not.”[16] In light of the historic independence of the grand jury, the perfidy of the Federal Rules Advisory Committee in limiting the institution through codification can only be seen as willful subversion of well-settled law.[17] A truly independent grand jury — which pursues a course different from the prosecutor — is today so rare that it is an oddity, and a virtual impossibility at the federal level since Rule 6 was codified in 1946.

The loss of the grand jury in its traditional, authentic, or runaway form, leaves the modern federal government with few natural enemies capable of delivering any sort of damaging blows against it.[18] The importance of this loss of a once powerful check on the “runaway” federal government is a focus that has remained largely untouched in the legal literature.

This article examines the historic decrease in the powers of the American grand jury during the twentieth century. It introduces the subject of the grand jury in the context of the constitutional language which invoked it, and then compares the modern application of the institution at the federal level with its common law model.[19] Tracing the historic evolution of the grand jury as an anti-government institution in the English common law until its “capture” by the government in the mid-twentieth century, this article will demonstrate how the role of the grand jury has changed considerably over time. Finally, this article will argue that the modern loss of “runaway” or independent grand juries is unconstitutional and recommend a restoration of the grand jury’s historic powers.

Continue Reading at : http://www.constitution.org/lrev/roots/runaway.htm

SCOTUS on the unique power of Grand Jurors

A blog by : Natural Born Citizen

My recent post concerning the 5th Amendment right of we the people to use the “presentment” power to investigate criminal activity on our own volition to review Government activity and bring all criminality to justice was very well received.  It seems to have woken alot of people up to the possibility of reviving the Constitution.  The power of  “presentment” is not some fanciful concept but a very real provision stated unequivocally in the 5th Amendment.   There’s no legal reason why we can’t use it.

That being said, the question of how we can use it must be tackled.  But always keep this in mind when the naysayers start harassing you.  25 people sitting on Grand Juries is the way we do all criminal indictments in the US.  If somebody is facing the death penalty or life in prison, they must first be brought before a Grand Jury and if 13 of the 25 agree that the person should stand trial then that’s what happens.

Continue Reading at : http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/01/26/scotus-on-the-unique-power-of-grand-jurors/

LaRouche: Impeach Obama for Complicity in Murder of U.S. Ambassador Stevens

Sept. 15—Lyndon LaRouche today demanded that Congress remain in session to immediately convene impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives against President Barack Obama for his criminal complicity in the Sept. 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, in which Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other U.S. officials were killed.

LaRouche declared this afternoon:

“President Obama was complicit before the fact in the events that lead to the killing of four valuable American diplomats. There is sufficient evidence to warrant immediate impeachment proceedings. U.S. officials were repeatedly warned, in the weeks preceding the 9/11 Benghazi attacks, that there was a breakdown of security in the city. The State Department issued a travel alert to all Americans, urging them to stay out of Libya. All of the evidence was there to impose strict security measures. Yet, nothing was done. That failure is on the President’s plate.”

Continue Reading at : http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2012/3937impeach_obama_complicity.html

Obama Supporters Actually Hate Obama’s Policies

***ATTENTION: This video is NOT in support of Mitt Romney, in any way, nor is this organization.***

Follow Luke @ http://www.twitter.com/lukewearechange

Luke Rudkowski hits the streets of NYC to find out where Obama supporters really stand on his policies. Now he did this in an underhanded way where the policies where presented to be Romney’s, but this was only done to get an honest opinion. The reactions when the truth was uncovered varied but they were very telling to say the least.

Here are some of the sources that were mentioned throughout the interviews

1st question, part 1 – Obama, in Europe, signs Patriot Act extension
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43180202/ns/us_news-security/t/obama-europe-signs-patriot-act-extension/#.UIkNUcXA_fU

1st question, part 2 – Warrantless Spying Skyrockets Under Obama
http://reason.com/archives/2012/10/03/warrantless-spying-skyrockets-under-obam

2nd question – President Obama Signed the National Defense Authorization Act – Now What?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/01/02/president-obama-signed-the-national-defense-authorization-act-now-what/

3rd question – Secret ‘Kill List’ Proves a Test of Obama’s Principles and Will
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-al-qaeda.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

4th question – Drone wars and state secrecy — how Barack Obama became a hardliner
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jun/02/drone-wars-secrecy-barack-obama

Father of Slain SEAL: Who Made the Decision Not to Save My Son?

On meeting Obama: “Could not look me in the eye … like shaking hands with a dead fish.”

Charles Woods, the father of Tyrone Woods, who was killed in the 9/11 terrorist attack at the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya, reveals details of meeting Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton at the publically broadcast memorial service for the slain Americans at Andrews Air Force Base only days after the attack. And, in a recent radio appearance, Woods publicly questions who made the call not to send in back-up forces to possibly save his son’s life, as well as the three other Americans killed in Benghazi (which includes the American ambassador to Libya).

“When [Obama] came over to our little area” at Andrew Air Force Base, says Woods, “he kind of just mumbled, you know, ‘I’m sorry.’ His face was looking at me, but his eyes were looking over my shoulder like he could not look me in the eye. And it was not a sincere, ‘I’m really sorry, you know, that your son died,’ but it was totally insincere, more of whining type, ‘I’m sorry.’”

Woods says that shaking President Obama’s hands at his son’s memorial service was “like shaking hands with a dead fish.”

“It just didn’t feel right,” he says of his encounter with the commander in chief. “And now that it’s coming out that apparently the White House situation room was watching our people die in real time, as this was happening,” Woods says, he wants answers on what happened—and why there was no apparent effort to save his son’s life.

“Well, this is what Hillary did,” Woods continues. “She came over and, you know, did the same thing—separately came over and talked with me. I gave her a hug, shook her hand. And she did not appear to be one bit sincere—at all. And you know, she mentioned that the thing about, we’re going to have that person arrested and prosecuted that did the video. That was the first time I had even heard about anything like that.”

Woods continues: “Apparently even the State Department had a live stream and was aware of their calls for help. My son wasn’t even there. He was at a safe house about a mile away. He got the distress call; he heard them crying for help; that’s why he and Glen risked their lives to go that extra mile just to take care of the situation. And I’m sure that wasn’t the only one received that distress call—you know, come save our lives … I’m sure that other people in the military, in the State Department, in the White House, received that same call that he would receive. And I’m sure that most military people would jump at the chance … to protect that life [and] not leave anyone behind.”

Woods made clear that he isn’t “mad,” but that he wants to the “truth” to be told because he feels ” abandoned.”

Woods says he was told by military officials that the military could have “come above [the area] and completely carpeted area,” and therefore saved the officials in Benghazi, Libya. But that someone gave the command for the American military not to save the lives of the Americans under attack.

“When I heard, you know, that there’s a very good chance that the White House as well as other members of the military knew what was going on and obviously someone had to say, don’t go rescue them. Because every person in the military–their first response [would be], we’re going to go rescue them. We need to find out who it was that gave that command–do not rescue them.”

Woods told his story to radio host Lars Larson. Here’s the full interview.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/father-slain-seal-who-made-decision-not-save-my-son_657782.html

ITS STILL STRENGTHENING: ‘WORST STORM IN 100 YEARS’ SEEN FOR NORTHEAST U.S… SANDY TO HIT FROM NC TO MASS… DC, VA, MD, WV, DE, PA, NJ, NY, CT, RI…

Hurricane Sandy will probably grow into a “Frankenstorm” that may become the worst to hit the U.S. Northeast in 100 years if current forecasts are correct.

Sandy may combine with a second storm coming out of the Midwest to create a system that would rival the New England hurricane of 1938 in intensity, said Paul Kocin, aNational Weather Service meteorologist in College Park,Maryland. The hurricane currently passing the Bahamas has killed 21 people across the Caribbean, the Associated Press reported, citing local officials.

“What we’re seeing in some of our models is a storm at an intensity that we have not seen in this part of the country in the past century,” Kocin said in a telephone interview yesterday. “We’re not trying to hype it, this is what we’re seeing in some of our models. It may come in weaker.”

The hybrid storm may strike anywhere from the Delaware- Maryland-Virginia peninsula to southern New England. The current National Hurricane Center track calls for the system to go ashore in New Jersey on Oct. 30, although landfall predictions often change as storms get closer to shore.

A tropical-storm watch was issued from Savannah River northward to Oregon Inlet in North Carolina, the U.S. NHC said in an advisory. A tropical storm warning is in effect forFlorida’s east coast from Ocean Reef to Flagler Beach. A storm watch means tropical storm conditions are possible within the region, a warning means tropical storm conditions are expected.

———————————–

A full moon at the same time will add higher than normal tides to the water that Sandy will be pushing up on shore.

Expect massive flooding.

Wind field could be huge, on the order of 500 miles diameter all at Cat 1 strength.

Also, Appalachians could see massive snow falls.

Real doom with catastrophic damage potential and electricity out for many days.

Get your preps ready.

Colin Powell endorses Obama

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell on Thursday endorsed President Barack Obama for reelection, arguing the president has improved the poor economy he inherited and sharply criticizing Mitt Romney’s foreign policy positions as a “moving target.”

“I voted for him in 2008, and I plan to stick with him in 2012,” Powell said of Obama on CBS’s “This Morning.” “I’ll be voting for he and for Vice President Joe Biden next month.”

(PHOTOS: Colin Powell over the years)

One of the most coveted endorsements remaining in the 2012 presidential race, Powell said Obama walked into a horrendous economic situation and has begun to turn it around.

“I think, generally, we’ve come out of the dive and we’re starting to gain altitude,” said Powell, who served as George W. Bush’s secretary of state. “It doesn’t mean all our problems are solved.”

While Powell, a Republican, said that he had the “utmost respect” for Romney, he charged that the former Massachusetts governor hasn’t outlined how he would pay for increased defense spending or for his proposed across-the-board tax cut.

(Also on POLITICO: Obama calls Colin Powell)

Powell had even harsher words for Romney’s foreign policy, questioning his changing stances on withdrawing from Iraq and Afghanistan.

“The governor who was speaking on Monday night at the debate was saying things that were quite different from what he said earlier,” Powell said.

“I’m not quite sure which Governor Romney we would be getting with respect to foreign policy,” he added. “I don’t sense he’s thought through these issues as thoroughly as he should have. He gets advice from his campaign staff that he then has to modify as he goes along.”

(Also on POLITICO: 7 takeaways from final debate)

While in the Bush administration, Powell regularly clashed with neoconservatives, some of whom are now advising Romney. Powell said he has “trouble with” some of Romney’s “very strong neoconservative views.”

While Powell has endorsed the Democratic presidential candidate in back-to-back elections, he said he remains a Republican.

“I think I’m a Republican of more moderate mold and that’s something of a dying breed, I’m sorry to say,” Powell said. “But, you know, the Republicans I worked for are President Reagan, President Bush 41, the Howard Bakers of the world, people who were conservative, people who were willing to push their conservative views, but people who recognize that at the end of the day you got to find a basis for compromise. Compromise is how this country runs.”

Powell said he had a “very good conversation” with Romney a few weeks ago, and said he regularly speaks to Obama. Neither man directly asked Powell for an endorsement, and Powell said he didn’t alert either campaign before making his announcement Thursday.

Texas attorney general threatens to arrest international election monitors

The Texas attorney general, Greg Abbott, has threatened to arrest international election monitors invited by liberal groups to observe the conduct of next month’s presidential vote in states accused of attempting to disenfranchise minorities.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott

Abbott has written to the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe warning that its monitors have no right to monitor the vote even though they have observed previous US elections.

“The OSCE’s representatives are not authorized by Texas law to enter a polling place. It may be a criminal offence for OSCE’s representatives to maintain a presence within 100 feet of a polling place’s entrance,” he said. “Failure to comply with these requirements could subject the OSCE’s representatives to criminal prosecution for violating state law.”

The OSCE is sending 44 observers to voting stations across the US at the request of various groups, including the NAACP and the American Civil Liberties Union, because of “an unprecedented and sophisticated level of coordination to restrict voting rights in our nation”. These include attempts by several states, including Texas, to introduce voter identification laws and other measures blocked by federal courts which have ruled they were motivated by racial discrimination.

In his letter, Abbott glossed over the recent judgements striking down the Texas identification law and pointed to a supreme court ruling in a case involving another state.

“The OSCE may be entitled to its opinions about voter ID laws, but your opinion is legally irrelevant in the United States, where the supreme court has already determined that voter ID laws are constitutional,” Abbott said.

The US routinely sends poll watchers to elections in foreign countries, particularly those where there are concerns about the fairness of the vote. In television interviews, Abbott denounced the OSCE as an interfering foreign body even though the US is a founding member and it was invited by President George Bush’s administration to monitor the 2004 and 2008 presidential elections in the US.

“If OSCE members want to learn more about our election processes so they can improve their own democratic systems, we welcome the opportunity to discuss the measures Texas has implemented to protect the integrity of elections,” Abbott wrote. “However, groups and individuals from outside the United States are not allowed to influence or interfere with the election process in Texas. This state has robust election laws that were carefully crafted to protect the integrity of our election system. All persons – including persons connected with OSCE – are required to comply with these laws.”

The OSCE responded later on Wednesday in a letter to the US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, calling Abbott’s threat “unacceptable” and noting that the organisation’s Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) has an agreement with the US permitting it to monitor elections.

“The United States, like all countries in the OSCE, has an obligation to invite ODIHR observers to observe its elections,” it said. “The threat of criminal sanctions against OSCE/ODIHR observers is unacceptable.”

A Florida congressman running for the Senate, Connie Mack, also waded into the debate, saying that reports the United Nations wants to send election monitors was an outrage. The OSCE was founded under the UN charter.

“The very idea that the United Nations – the world body dedicated to diminishing America’s role in the world – would be allowed, if not encouraged, to install foreigners sympathetic to the likes of Castro, Chavez, Ahmadinejad, and Putin to oversee our elections is nothing short of disgusting,” he told the Orlando Sentinal.

“The United Nations should be kicked off of American soil once and for all. And the American people should demand that the United Nations be stopped from ‘monitoring’ American elections. The only ones who should ever oversee American elections are Americans.”

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/10/24/texas-attorney-general-threatens-to-arrest-international-election-monitors/

Top 10 Survival Downloads You Should Have Copy & Keep For Reference

There are tons of good downloads in the Survival Database Download section of this website. For this article – I have selected 10 that everyone should have either printed and put away, or placed on a USB drive – or better yet both.

#10. FM 4-25-11 First Aid (2002)Military First Aid Manual.First aid information is a must – get training before you need it – use this manual for reference.

#9. Guide to Canning– Being able to preserve crops to be able to provide for yourself and your family long after the growing season is over is important. This guide will help with that.
#8. Rangers Handbook (2006) – Crammed with info on demolitions, booby traps, communications, patrolling, tactical movement, battle drills, combat intelligence and much more
#7. Where There is No Dentist– The author uses straightforward language and careful instructions to explain how to: examine patients; diagnose common dental problems; make and use dental equipment; use local anesthetics; place fillings; and remove teeth.
#6. NATO Emergency War Surgery– While this is certainly not a manual that would stand alone in most persons emergency/disaster library, it is an absolutely necessary resource if you expect to handle any type of trauma where immediate comprehensive medical care is not available.
#5. A Guide to Raised Bed Gardening– This is not an “all knowing” gardening book – however it provides a lot of information to the “urban gardener” before or after TSHTF. Best to get the experience and knowledge of gardening NOW rather than later.
#4. FM 3-06 Combined Arms Operations in Urban Terrain – Combat techniques covered in the manual which may be very valuable in a “Roadwarrior”-type world.
#3. 1881 Household Cyclopedia – A massive resource of information that much of it has been lost over the past 203 generations. From Angling to Knitting – its here.
#2. FM 21-76-1 Survival-Evasion-Recovery (1999) – Excellent manual geared towards the soldier that finds himself behind enemy lines
#1. FM 21-76 US Army Survival Manual – From Amazon.com: This manual has been written to help you acquire survival skills. It tells you how to travel, find water and food, shelter yourself from the weather and care for yourself if you become sick or injured. This information is first treated generally and then applied specifically to such special areas as the Arctic, the desert, the jungle and the ocean.1970 Military Issue Manual. General Introduction and Individual and Group Survival Orientation Navigation, Finding Water In All Parts of The Globe. How To Obtain Food, Start a Fire and much more!

Jim Moran’s (D-Va.) Field Director Conspires to Commit Voter Fraud,

JOIN US AT http://WWW.ENDVOTERFRAUDNOW.COM

“Effective immediately, I have resigned from the Moran for Congress campaign,” Patrick Moran said in a statement to TPM sent from his campaign email address. http://bitly.com/QYwF22

Watch our Project Veritas reporter being educated on how to properly commit massive voter fraud by the son of a sitting US Congressman. Patrick Moran, son of Congressman James Moran, discusses forging utility bills and impersonating pollsters, all for the goal of circumventing voter ID laws in Virginia and casting ballots for unsuspecting inactive voters within the state for Barack Obama. Patrick Moran holds the salaried title of Field Director for his father’s congressional campaign, and assures our reporter that “committee” lawyers will defend his fraud if the forged documents “look good”.

ADHD Drugs Prescribed to Poor Children to ‘Help’ in School

By Dr. Mercola

Medicating children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a double-edged sword, not only because of the steep health risks posed by the medications themselves, but also because many kids labeled with “ADHD” actually do not have ADHD at all.

Diagnosing ADHD really comes down to a matter of opinion, as there is no physical test, like a brain scan, that can pinpoint the condition.

There’s only subjective evaluation, based on signs nearly every child will display at some point (fidgeting, easily distracted, difficulty waiting his or her turn, and so on).

But a recent report from the New York Times highlights an equally concerning, if not more so, practice that is endangering some low-income families: pediatricians using the ADHD diagnosis as “an excuse” to prescribe powerful drugs like Adderall to kids simply because they are struggling in school.

Mind-Altering Drugs to Boost Elementary School Grades?

One pediatrician told the New York Times that because society has decided not to modify a child’s school environment to promote better learning, there is no choice left but to “modify the kid,” which is done by prescribing drugs.

Adderall, which contains amphetamine (aka “speed”) and dextroamphetamine, is a stimulant drug that is often prescribed to improve attention and focus and reduce impulsiveness and hyperactivity in patients with ADHD.

Because of its stimulant properties, it’s become a black-market drug of choice for college kids looking to pull all-nighters to boost their grades. An estimated one in 10 college students abuse Adderall as a way to gain a competitive edge in their studies, often comparing it to athletes who use steroids.1 But the pills have a dark side, often quickly leading to addiction and causing other side effects like mood swings, insomnia, depression and panic attacks.

College students who use Adderall as a “study drug” is a large enough problem on its own, but for pediatricians to prescribe these drugs to children for the same purpose is shocking, and dangerous. Even more alarming is that one particular physician interviewed by the New York Times said he views the drugs as a tool for “evening the scales a little bit,” to give poor children a leg up in their schooling…

Prescriptions for Adderall on the Rise

The use of psychotropic drugs in children has been on a steep upward trend for decades. Writing in the Huffington Post, Lawrence Diller, MD said:2

Given the current CDC data, one can safely estimate (based on previously detailed distribution curves) that one of six 11-year-old white boys with medical insurance currently take a stimulant drug at least during the school week… we are the only society currently managing our under performing/misbehaving children with drugs to this degree.”

Many of the children prescribed ADHD drugs do not have ADHD at all. One study determined that about 20 percent of children have likely been misdiagnosed.3 That’s nearly 1 million children in the United States alone.

The study found that many of the youngest children in any given grade level are perceived as exhibiting “symptoms” of ADHD, such as fidgeting and inability to concentrate, simply because they’re younger and being compared to their older, more mature classmates. In fact, the youngest students were 60 percent more likely to be diagnosed with ADHD than the oldest in the same grade. And when you take into account the maturity level, and in large part normal behavior of a 6- versus a 7-year old, you can easily see why.

Even if they did have ADHD, there are many superior alternatives for treatment than mind-altering drugs (which I’ll get to shortly).

But it is especially appalling when a physician openly admits that the ADHD diagnosis is simply a ruse to give kids drugs for the purpose of boosting their academic performance. In some cases, three and four children from the same family are all put on the medications, usually along with a prescribed sleep aid, as the pills often cause insomnia – as well as a long list of other serious side effects.

The Downward Spiral of Psychotropic Drug Use

Drugs like Adderall are powerful, mind-altering medications linked to growth suppression, increased blood pressure and psychotic episodes. In children, the impacts of their long-term use are completely unknown, although given the drug’s addictive nature, it’s quite possible these kids could become life-long addicts.

The New York Times featured the case of one family whose four children (ranging in age from 9 to 12) were prescribed either Adderall or Risperdal (an antipsychotic drug) along with sleep aids. After taking Adderall for years, one of the boys began seeing people and hearing voices that weren’t there – a known side effect of the drug. He became suicidal and was admitted to a psychiatric hospital, where he was then taken off Adderall and put onto Risperdal – another mind-altering drug with serious side effects.

Despite the child’s psychotic reaction, the parents continued to use the drugs in their other children, even though they acknowledged some of them did not have ADHD and were using Adderall “merely to help their grades.” Perhaps they are not aware, as many aren’t, that Adderall can cause potentially life-threatening side effects – the risks of which simply can’t be justified when used only to boost grades. Among them:4

Aggressive behavior or hostility Bipolar illness Worse behavior or thought problems
Psychotic symptoms (hearing voices, believing things that are not true) or manic symptoms Sudden death in patients who have heart problems or heart defects Stroke or heart attack
Increased blood pressure and heart rate Seizures and eyesight changes Slowing of growth in children

Does Adderall Steal Your Ability to Enjoy Life?

Many who start taking Adderall in high school or college as a way to boost their success find it does help them to excel in school and, later, in the job market. But the easy path to success comes at a price…

Former addicts explain the feeling that the drug took over their lives, allowing them to work and concentrate with a robot-like efficiency, but causing them to ignore the physical, emotional and social aspects of life, as well as their former creative passions.5 If they’re lucky, those affected are able to break free from Adderall’s spell – a process one former addict described as a “horrible, horrible process”6 – but what becomes of the child who started Adderall at the age of 8 or 9, during some of his or her key formative years?

Do these children grow up never knowing who they really are? What passions they may have had if not under the drug’s influence? And will they be able to quit when they are older, or will they be turned into life-long addicts? The answers to these questions are unknown.

Dr. William Graf, a pediatrician and child neurologist, told the New York Times he’s concerned the rising use of stimulant drugs may impact “the authenticity of development:”

“These children are still in the developmental phase, and we still don’t know how these drugs biologically affect the developing brain. There’s an obligation for parents, doctors and teachers to respect the authenticity issue, and I’m not sure that’s always happening.”

If You Have a “Hyper” Child You Want to Help Excel at School…

Before resorting to drugs, please understand that behavioral problems in children – including what might appear to be serious mental disorders – are very frequently related to improper diet, emotional upset and exposure to toxins.

Increasingly, scientific evidence shows that nourishing your gut flora with the beneficial bacteria found in traditionally fermented foods (or a probiotic supplement) is extremely important for proper brain function, and that includes psychological well-being and mood control. Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride has successfully demonstrated the power and effectiveness of this theory. In her Cambridge, England clinic, she treats children and adults with a range of conditions, including autism, ADD/ADHD, neurological disorders, psychiatric disorders, immune disorders, and digestive problems using the GAPS (Gut and Psychology Syndrome) Nutritional Program, which she developed.

Her GAPS theory – which is fully explained in her excellent book, Gut and Psychology Syndrome – is an elegant description of how such conditions can develop as a direct result of gastrointestinal toxicity. Another helpful tool is my three-part interview with renowned children’s health expert, the late Dr. Lendon Smith, on Non-Drug Treatment of ADD/ADHD.

Advice from a World-Class Expert

Dr. Lendon Smith was one of the pioneer physicians in the treatment of ADHD. He had been effectively using nutrition and dietary interventions to help relieve the symptoms of ADHD for decades. He realized that drugs like Ritalin were not the answer for ADHD right from the start. Over ten years ago I did an extensive interview with him on this topic and I would encourage you to review it if you have an interest in this area. He stated in the interview:

“It is too bad psychiatrists have failed to recognize that if a stimulant acts as a calming agent, then they must shore up the flagging enzyme that is under-producing. This all fits with the damage that we have done to the top soil. It is washing and blowing away and with it, the magnesium. The psychiatrists have made ADD/ADHD a disease, like pneumonia.

It is actually a syndrome due to a defect in the screening device of the brain. I understand that since they had made it a disease they can be compensated for treating it. Another rule they have used: ‘If the Ritalin works, they need it.’ Sort of like a Ritalin deficiency.”

According to Dr. Smith, stimulant drugs like Ritalin have a calming effect in children with ADHD because there is not enough norepinephrine, a hormone and neurotransmitter, in their limbic system, the part of the brain that is supposed to filter out unimportant stimuli. Because of this, one common denominator that Dr. Smith often used as a diagnostic criterion for ADHD was being extremely ticklish. In other words, they were unable to disregard unimportant stimuli.

Dietary and Lifestyle Interventions to Help Relieve ADHD Symptoms Naturally

As mentioned, dietary interventions can be incredibly effective in helping alleviate the symptoms of ADHD. Dr. Smith also said in our interview:

“When I became familiar with nutrition, I found that if a stimulant drug had a calming effect [as is the case with ADHD], it meant that the child did not have enough norepinephrine (a stimulant) in his limbic system, and that I could help with a good diet and some supplements which should shore up the enzymes in his brain that make that neurotransmitter.

  • If he had ever had ear infections, I stopped his dairy products, and added calcium – 1,000 mg – usually at bedtime. (Note that while I think removing the milk is a great idea, adding the calcium is not. Adding magnesium typically is far more effective)
  • If he was ticklish, I added magnesium – 500 mg is usually safe for a child or adult.
  • If he was a ‘Jekyll and Hyde’ type of person (severe mood swings), he had intermittent low blood sugar and he needed to nibble all day to keep his blood sugar up. Or at least eat some additional protein and fewer carbohydrates for better maintenance of blood sugar levels. No sugar or white-flour junk food.
  • If he could not remember his dreams, he needed vitamin B6 – 50 mg is about right.
  • If he ever had eczema or dry scaly skin, he is to take the essential fatty acids [omega-3 fats like krill oil].
  • If he had dark circles under his eyes, he was eating something to which he is sensitive. Milk, wheat, corn, chocolate, eggs, citrus. Usually it is his favorite food.”

Here are a few additional guidelines to help you address underlying toxins in your child, without, or at least BEFORE, you agree to any kind of drug therapy:

    1. Severely limit or eliminate fructose from your child’s diet as sugar/fructose has been linked to mental health problems such as depression and schizophrenia.
    2. Avoid giving your child ANY processed foods, especially those containing artificial colors, flavors, and preservatives. This includes lunch meats and hot dogs, which are common food staples in many households.
    3. Replace soft drinks, fruit juices, and pasteurized milk with pure water. This is HUGE since high fructose corn syrup is a primary source of calories in children.
    4. Make sure your child is getting large regular doses of healthy bacteria, either with high-quality fermented organic foods and/or high quality probiotic supplements.
    5. Give your child plenty of high-quality, animal-based omega-3 fats like krill oil. Also, make sure to balance your child’s intake of omega-3 and omega-6 fats, by simultaneously limiting their intake of vegetable oils.
    6. Include as many whole organic foods as possible in your child’s diet, both to reduce chemical exposure and increase nutrient content of each meal.
    7. Also reduce or eliminate grains from your child’s diet, especially wheat. Beyond the fact that even healthy organic whole grains can cause problems as they too break down into sugars, gluten-containing grains have pharmacologically active peptides that can cause cognitive and behavioral issues in susceptible children.7

Additionally, whole and even sprouted wheat contains high amounts of wheat germ agglutinin (WGA), which can have adverse effects on mental health due to its neurotoxic actions. Wheat also inhibits production of serotonin, the largest concentration of which can, again, be found in your intestines, not your brain. Try eliminating them first for 1-2 weeks and see if you don’t notice a radical and amazing improvement in your child’s behavior.

    1. Avoid artificial sweeteners and colors of all kinds.
    2. Make sure your child gets plenty of exercise and outdoor playtime.
    3. Get them out into the sun to help maintain optimal vitamin D levels. Scientists are now beginning to realize vitamin D is involved in maintaining the health of your brain, as they’ve recently discovered vitamin D receptors in the brain, spinal cord, and central nervous system. There’s even evidence indicating vitamin D improves your brain’s detoxification process. For children and pregnant women, getting enough vitamin D is especially crucial, as it may play a major role in protecting infants from autism.

If natural sun exposure is not feasible, for whatever reason, you can use either a safe tanning bed or an oral vitamin D3 supplement. For more details on how to safely optimize your and your child’s vitamin D levels, please see this previous article.

    1. Give your child a way to address his or her emotions. Even children can benefit from the Emotional Freedom Technique (EFT), which you or an EFT practitioner can teach them to use.

Be sure you are also providing positive praise to your child. Dr. Smith believed parents should be able to say nice things to their child twice as often as they give commands or ask questions. If you are shouting and scolding more than you are complimenting and rewarding your child, it could be contributing to psychiatric problems.

  1. Prevent exposure to toxic metals and chemical by replacing personal care products, detergents and household cleaners with all natural varieties. Metals like aluminum, cadmium, lead and mercury are commonly found in thousands of different food products, household products, personal products and untold numbers of industrial products and chemicals. The presence of toxic metals in your child’s body is highly significant for they are capable of causing serious health problems by interfering with normal biological functioning. The health effects range from minor physical ailments to chronic diseases, and altered mood and behavior.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/10/24/children-adhd-drugs.aspx?e_cid=20121024_DNL_art_2

Nancy Pelosi’s brother-in-law is given $737m of taxpayers’ money to build giant solar power plant in middle of the desert

  • Obama administration approved $1bn in green energy loans days after failed Solyndra project due to be completed
  • $737m handed to Crescent Dunes project in Tonopah, Nevada, for 110-megawatt desert solar power plant
  • Investors include firm Minority leader’s brother-in-law and major Solyndra stakeholder
  • Republicans warn Energy Department is ‘rushing’ $5bn in loans ahead of Friday deadline

Cronyism? A solar energy project backed by Nancy Pelosi’s brother has been granted a massive government loan (file picture)

 

Nancy Pelosi is facing accusations of cronyism after a solar energy project, which her brother-in-law has a stake in, landed a $737 million loan guarantee from the Department of Energy, despite the growing Solyndra scandal.

The massive loan agreement is raising new concerns about the use of taxpayers’ money as vast sums are invested in technology similar to that of the doomed energy project.

The investment has intensified the debate over the effectiveness of solar energy as a major power source.

The SolarReserve project is backed by an energy investment fund where the Minority Leader’s brother-in-law Ronald Pelosi is second in command.

PCG Clean Energy & Technology Fund (East) LLC is listed as one of the investors in the project that has been given the staggering loan, which even dwarfs that given to failed company Solyndra.

Other investors include one of the major investors in Solyndra, which is run by one of the directors of Solyndra.

Steve Mitchell, who served on the board of directors at the bankrupt energy company, is also managing director of Argonaut Private Equity, which has invested in the latest project.

Since Solyndra has filed for bankruptcy has been asked to testify about the goings on at the firm by two members of the House and ‘asked to provide documents to Congress’.

Generator: Artist’s impression of the solar plant being constructed north west of Tonopah, Nevada

 

The artist’s impression shows the incredible size of the giant solar power plant, which is being bankrolled by President Obama’s green jobs fund.

Energy will be generated using concentrated solar power technology, in which a series of mirrors direct sunlight to a receiver at the centre of the plant.

The ‘solar tower’ in the middle, which will be taller than the Washington Monument, is the first of its kind to be built.

Stretching out across a plain in Tonopah, Nevada, the mind-bogglingly big project will generate enough electricity to power 43,000 homes.

But the joint announcement by Energy Secretary Steven Chu comes just two days after the doomed Solyndra project, which cost the taxpayer $528 million from the same cash pot, was meant to be completed.

The project approval came as part of $1 billion in new loans to green energy companies yesterday.

Republican critics of the President Obama’s solar energy program have voiced their outrage at the new loans while the Solyndra scandal is still being investigated.

They have raised concerns that the Department of Energy is rushing through the approval of loans before stimulus funds expire on Friday.

While the departments insists the projects are being properly vetted, some lawmakers have written to express concern that they vast loans are not being adequately scrutinised.

‘The administration’s flagship project Solyndra is bankrupt and being investigated by the FBI, the promised jobs never materialised, and now the Department of Energy is preparing to rush out nearly $5 billion in loans in the final 48 hours before stimulus funds expire — that’s nearly $105 million every hour that must be finalised until the deadline,’ said Florida representative Cliff Stearns, who is chairman of the investigations subcommittee of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Tom Schatz, president of Washington-based advocacy group Citizens Against Government Waste, said: ‘It is time for a full audit of their activities, their management and their results.

‘Candidly, it might be time for the federal government to rethink the whole idea of loan programs.’

Energy Department spokesman Damien LaVera said the project, which was had extensive reviews that included scrutiny of the parent companies’ finances.

Investigation: Solyndra CEO Brian Harrison and Chief Financial Officer Bill Stover are sworn in at a House Oversight and Investigations subcommittee hearing

 

The shocking scale of spending Solyndra lavished on the factory it started building alongside Interstate 880 in Fremont, California, has been revealed.When it was completed at an estimated cost of $733 million, including proceeds from the company’s $535 million U.S. loan guarantee, it covered 300,000 sq ft, the equivalent of five football fields.It had robots that whistled Disney tunes, spa-like showers with liquid-crystal displays of the water temperature, and glass-walled conference rooms.John Pierce, 54, a San Jose resident who worked as a facilities manager at Solyndra, said: ‘The new building is like the Taj Mahal.’Designed to make far more solar panels than Solyndra got orders for, the site is now empty and U.S. taxpayers may be stuck with it.Solyndra filed for bankruptcy protection on September 6, leaving in its wake investigations by Congress and the FBI.

 

Mr Chu said the two projects will create about 900 construction jobs and at least 52 permanent jobs.

He added: ‘If we want to be a player in the global clean energy race, we must continue to invest in innovative technologies that enable commercial-scale deployment of clean, renewable power like solar.’

The 110-megawatt Crescent Dunes project will use the sun’s heat to create steam that drives a turbine, SolarReserve, which is based in Santa Monica, California.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is a strong supporter of the Nevada project, which he says will help his state’s economy recover. Former Governor Jim Gibbons, a Republican, also supported the project.

Mr Pelosi is one of several controversial figures set to benefit from the huge loan agreement.

The loan approvals came just two days before the renewable energy loan program approved under the 2009 economic stimulus law is set to expire. At least seven projects worth more than $5 billion are also waiting to be approved.

California-based solar panel maker Solyndra Inc went bankrupt after receiving its money and laid off 1,100 workers. The firm is now under investigation by the FBI.

It was the first renewable-energy company to receive a loan guarantee under a stimulus-law program to encourage green energy and was frequently touted by the Obama administration as a model.

President Barack Obama visited the company’s Silicon Valley headquarters last year, and Vice President Joe Biden spoke by satellite at its groundbreaking ceremony.

Since then, the company’s failure has become an embarrassment for Obama.

Nut Scott Crider, a spokesman for Sempra Generation, a Sempra Energy subsidiary that is developing the Arizona project, said its loan guarantee was not as risky as the Solyndra loan.

Most important, the project has a 20-year agreement with Pacific Gas & Electric Co. to buy power supplied by the solar plant, he said

Mr Crider claimed the purchase agreement is a key element of the project and will ‘provide assurance that there are sufficient revenues in place to support the loan guarantee’.

A similar agreement is in place in Nevada. NV Energy, the state’s largest electric utility, has agreed to buy power from the Tonopah tower, which will connect to NV Energy’s power grid.

Jimmy Carter Claims Israel Creating ‘Catastrophic’ Situation With Palestinians

Former President Jimmy Carter, former president of Ireland Mary Robinson, right, and former prime minister of Norway Gro Harlem Brundtland, left, listen to a guide as they tour East Jerusalem, on Oct. 22, 2012, during the second day of a visit by “The Elders”, a group of global leaders focused on human rights. (credit: AHMAD GHARABLI/AFP/Getty Images)

JERUSALEM (AP) — Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter said Monday during a visit to Jerusalem that the prospect of an Israel-Palestinian peace accord is “vanishing,” blaming Israeli settlement of the West Bank.

Carter, a longtime critic of Israeli policies, called the current situation “catastrophic” and blamed Israel for the growing isolation of east Jerusalem from the West Bank. He said a Palestinian state has become “unviable.”

“We’ve reached a crisis stage,” said Carter, 88. “The two-state solution is the only realistic path to peace and security for Israel and the Palestinians.”

Carter is currently on a two-day visit leading a delegation known as the “The Elders,” which includes the former prime minister of Norway and the former president of Ireland. The group met with Israeli President Shimon Peres and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.

But they didn’t meet with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. Carter said that the delegation didn’t request a meeting because they haven’t been granted meetings on previous visits.

Netanyahu has pledged support for a Palestinian state but peace talks with the Palestinians have been frozen for most of his tenure. Carter criticized him for not doing enough.

“Up until now, every prime minister has been a willing and enthusiastic supporter of the two-state solution,” he said.

The Palestinians say they will only return to the negotiating table if Israel freezes settlement construction on occupied lands claimed by the Palestinians. Israel says talks should resume without preconditions.

As president, Carter brokered the historic peace treaty between Israel and Egypt. But since he left office, he has become increasingly critical of Israel. His 2006 book, “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid,” claimed that Israel’s settlement of Palestinian land was the primary obstacle to Mideast peace. The book sparked widespread outrage in Israel.

Carter and the delegation also expressed concern about the ongoing divisions between the main Palestinian parties, Fatah and Hamas, and vowed support for a Palestinian observer state status bid at the United Nations General Assembly in November.

The group departs for Egypt on Tuesday, where they will meet with newly elected Islamist President Mohammed Morsi.

(© Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.)

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/10/22/jimmy-carter-claims-israel-creating-catastrophic-situation-with-palestinians/

The Internet Revolution is a Liberty Revolution

Ron Paul

Until the late 1990s, individuals interested in Austrian economics, U.S. constitutional history, and libertarian philosophy had few sources of information. They had to spend hours scouring used book stores or the back pages of obscure libertarian periodicals to find the great works of Mises, Rothbard, Hayek, and other giants of liberty. Local library and university collections ignored libertarian politics and economics.

Today, however, the greatest classics of libertarian thought, libertarian philosophy, and libertarian economics are available instantly to anyone with internet access. Thanks to the internet, it is easier than ever before for liberty activists to spread news and other information regarding the evils of government power and the benefits of freedom. For the first time in human history, supporters of liberty around the world can share information across borders quickly and cheaply. Without the filter of government censors, this information emboldens millions to question governments and promote liberty.

This is why liberty-minded Americans must do everything possible to oppose– and stop– government attempts to censor or limit the free flow of information online.

One such attempt is known as “CISPA”, or the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act. This bill will create a monstrous coalition of big business and big government to rob Americans of their protections under the 4th Amendment of the Constitution.

CISPA permits both the federal government and private companies to view your private online communications with no judicial oversight, provided they merely do so in the name of “cybersecurity.” But America is a constitutional republic, not a surveillance state– and the wildly overhyped need for security does not trump the Constitution.

“Cybersecurity” is the responsibility of companies that operate and make money in cyberspace, not taxpayers. Those companies should develop market-based private solutions to secure their networks, servers, cloud data centers, and user/customer information. The role of the US intelligence community is to protect the United States from military threats, not to provide corporate welfare to the private sector. Much like the TSA at the airport, CISPA would socialize security costs and remove market incentives for private firms to protect their own investments.

Imagine security-cleared agents embedded at private companies to serve as conduits for intelligence information about their customers back to the US intelligence community– while enjoying immunity from any existing civil or criminal laws. Imagine Google or Facebook reporting directly to the National Security Agency about the online activity of US citizens. Imagine US government resources being wasted on a grand scale to “assist” private companies in the global market. All of this would become reality under CISPA.

As of this writing, it appears that the House and Senate will not agree on a final version of CISPA this year. However, the Obama administration seems ready to impose provisions of this bill by executive order if Congress does not act soon.

The past five years have seen an explosion in the liberty movement, fueled in large part by the internet. Preserving that freedom is crucial if the liberty movement is to continue its progress. Therefore, all activists in the liberty movement have a stake in the battle for internet freedom. We must be ready to come together to fight any attempt to increase government’s power over the internet, regardless of the supposed justifications. We must resist voices from both the political right and left which alternatively seek to legislate morality or enforce political correctness with force. Copyright protection, pornography, cyberterrorism, gambling, and “hate speech” are merely excuses for doing what all governments have done throughout human history: increase their size, scope, and power.

Once we understand this, we understand the critical link between internet freedom and human freedom.

http://www.activistpost.com/2012/10/the-internet-revolution-is-liberty.html

Israeli Navy used tasers and beat passengers aboard the Ship to Gaza

Oct. 22, 2012

The Israeli activists detained on board the Estelle were released
Elik Elhanan: excessive force was used against us, without any reason

Electric shocks by taser out of vengeful hatred
A Greek MP was beaten by Shabak Security Service interrogators

Parents of Israeli activist, Elik Elhanan, protest with other activists outside the Ashdod police station, after three Israeli activists were arrested on the Estelle ship on their way to Gaza, October 20, 2012. (Photo: Oren Ziv/ActiveStills)

“I am now on my way home, but I keep thinking of my shipmates, my fellow activists from abroad who are still imprisoned under harsh conditions and undergo interrogation by the Shabak Security Service, among them Parliament Members from several countries,” said Elik Elhanan, one of the Israeli activists who had sailed aboard the Gaza-bound Swedish ship “Estelle”. Today, the court ordered his release and that of two other detained Israelis, Yonatan Shapira and Reut Mor. “At first they tried to charge us with all kinds of very serious felonies, such as ‘aiding the enemy’. The court rejected this out of hand. Today they tried a article on the law books called “Attempted infiltration into a part of the Land of Israel which is not part of the State of Israel” (sic). But the court threw out this charge, too.” The detained activists were represented by Attorney Gaby Lasky and her team, who have considerable experience with Human Rights cases.

The released detainees were cheerfully greeted by peace activists who arrived at the courtroom, among them Elik Elhanan’s parents – Rami Elhanan and Nurit Peled-Elhanan, who is the daughter of the late Major General Matti Peled. Smadar Elhanan, Elik’s sister, was killed in a suicide bombing at the center of Jerusalem – a harsh experience which made surviving family members all the more determined to strive for peace between Israel and the Palestinians, so as to prevent further casualties on either side.

“I have gone though difficult days, but I certainly do not regret sailing on that boat. I knew what I was getting into” said Elik Elhanan. “During the voyage I made a special contact with Evangelis, a Member of the Greek Parliament who sailed with us. When the Naval Commandos came aboard and while we were blocking their way to the bridge, Evangelis told me we have generated in him a love for the people of Israel and a hope for a better future in the Middle East. Shortly afterwards they separated us. Yesterday evening, when they put Dror Feiler in our cell, he told us that Evangelis had been beaten by the Shabak interrogators. The Shabak lied shamelessly to the Consuls and representatives of foreign countries, telling them that their citizens and MPs were being treated well.” Dror Feiler, who was born in Israel and whose mother Pnina lives in Kibbutz Yad Hana, gave up his Israeli citizenship after moving to Stockholm, and was therefore separated most of the time from the Israeli detainees.

“They used a completely disproportional amount of force against us” continues Elhanan. “When the Navy arrived to take us over, Yonatan Shapira counted no less than fifteen vessels surrounding us on all sides. Large and small ships and boats, a ship carrying a helicopter, as well as the Zodiacs of the Naval Commandos. Fifteen armed naval vessels against one small civilian boat carrying games for the children of Gaza. We must have disturbed very much the Navy and those who give orders to the Navy.

When they came aboard and we blocked their way, the soldiers knew exactly who I was. They shouted in Hebrew: ‘Elhanan, you will pay for your Leftism!’ and used the taser to give me electric shocks. Even after they completed their takeover of the boat, they continued to use the taser and administer more shocks. But if they think they could deter me and those who sailed with me, they are mistaken. The siege of Gaza is an ongoing crime and it must be ended. We will continue the struggle.”

http://mondoweiss.net/2012/10/israeli-navy-used-tasers-and-beat-passengers-aboard-the-ship-to-gaza.html

Mitt Romney Thinks He’s Won The Election, And Last Night He Just Played Not To Lose

The final presidential debate is over, and Mitt Romneyplayed it very safe, passing over opportunities to go on offense and generally avoiding confrontation with President Barack Obama.

The Republican candidate had a largely unremarkable debate, devoid of any major flubs, but also lacking in memorable attack lines or zingers. While the incumbent came out swinging, Romney repeatedly passed up opportunities to go after his opponent, even on key campaign flashpoints like trade with China and the White House’s handling of last month’s attacks on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.

Instead, Romney once again tacked far to the center and actually embraced many of Obama’s foreign policies, offering up positions that differed only marginally from those of his Democratic opponent on issues like U.S. troop withdrawals from Afghanistan, foreign aid and intervention in the Middle East, and the use of drones.

In the immediate aftermath of the debate, several conservative pundits bemoaned the Republican nominee’s performance as a missed opportunity.

Here’s a tweet from Glenn Beck:

And here’s conservative commentator Laura Ingraham:

But in the end, most conservative pundits and Republican strategists agreed that the “play it safe” strategy may have been the smartest choice for the Republican nominee, who has so far struggled to effectively attack Obama on foreign policy issues. Moreover, in Monday’s debate, Romney faced the difficult challenge of setting himself apart from his Republican predecessor, former President George W. Bush, whose national security policies remain widely unpopular.

But with his campaign still riding the momentum from his strong performance in the first presidential debate, Romney didn’t need a big win tonight at his third and final match-up with Obama. He just needed to prevent a routing — and avoid stumbles like the botched response on Libya that he gave in last week’s town hall debate.

To that end, Romney accomplished what his campaign had set out to do during the final debate. It remains to be seen, however, whether Romney’s momentum really is strong enough to carry him through a merely passable performance.

Obama or Romney: War and Economic Collapse Regardless Who Wins the Election

CNN is making a big deal out of Romney’s “right leaning” supporters.

The corporate media branch of the Pentagon’s psyops program thinks there’s a good chance these “severely conservative” voters may push Romney over the top and get him installed in the White House as preeminent teleprompter reader for the global elite.

In August, Peter Schiff, economic adviser to Ron Paul’s 2008 presidential campaign, said he thinks the economic implosion will occur during the next administration.

He has no faith in Obama and little in Romney to turn things around.

Despite the flaccid neo-Tea Party rhetoric of Paul Ryan, prior to the Obama administration Republicans out-spent Democrats threefold. Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II racked up $6.4 trillion dollars in debt and thus put to rest the obscene fantasy of “fiscal conservatism.”

In September, according to official figures, the national debt surpassed $16 trillion. In reality, it is much higher – well over $200 trillion when unfunded liabilities from Medicare and Social Security are thrown into the mix.

“Let’s get real. The U.S. is bankrupt,” writes Boston University economic professor Laurence Kotlikoff.

Due to the astronomical debt and profligate spending by largely unaccountable professional political careerists in Washington, “what we have to look forward to is a very bleak future,” writes Michael Snyder.

“Even if we totally scrapped our current monetary system and repudiated the debt, the transition would be ‘rocky’ at best and we would not enjoy anything close to the standard of living that we are enjoying today.”

As for war, a Romney win in November will ensure the re-installment of the Bush-era neocons and a speedy timeline for war in the Middle East, particularly against Syria and sooner before later Iran.

Because the election is a couple of weeks away, Romney’s saying there’s no need to attack Iran in response to its imaginary nuclear weapons program.

His foreign policy advisers, on the other hand, are neocons who have repeatedly called for taking out Iran.

More frightening, Romney is close friends with Israel’s ardent Likudnik, Benjamin Netanyahu, and Mitt has stated that they “almost speak in shorthand.”

Martin S. Indyk, a United States ambassador to Israel in the Clinton administration, told the New York Times that Romney would “subcontract Middle East policy to Israel,” i.e., the U.S. will attack Israel’s enemies during the reign of Mitt.

In other words, if Romney wins we can expect an attack on Iran that would certainly compound the above mentioned economic problems.

Following Obama’s lackluster performance during the last presidential debate, his administration trotted out what can be described as “Iran Attack Light,” a plan to use “surgical strikes” against the country in lieu of an all-out attack.

Foreign Policy CEO and editor at large David Rothkopf, a former Clintonite, “reported that the White House and Israeli officials ‘assert that the two sides, behind the scenes, have come closer together in their views [regarding Iran] in recent days,’” according to the Jerusalem Post.

Bizarrely, the establishment media continues to pretend there is a widening chasm of difference between Obama and Romney.

In fact, they both present the same economic and foreign policy goals, which are, of course, not their goals but those of the global elite.

The establishment media does its part by playing up minor differences in style between the two and uses a trusty false left-right paradigm to distract weary voters and excite indoctrinated loyalists.

http://theintelhub.com/2012/10/17/obama-or-romney-war-and-economic-collapse-regardless-who-wins-the-election/

Monday’s Debate Puts Focus on Foreign Policy Clashes

When President Obama and Mitt Romney sit down Monday night for the last of their three debates, two things should be immediately evident: there should be no pacing the stage or candidates’ getting into each other’s space, and there should be no veering into arguments over taxes.

This debate is about how America deals with the world — and how it should.

If the moderator, Bob Schieffer of CBS News, has his way, it will be the most substantive of the debates. He has outlined several topics: America’s role in the world, the continuing war in Afghanistan, managing the nuclear crisis with Iran and the resultant tensions with Israel, and how to deal with rise of China.

The most time, Mr. Schieffer has said, will be spent on the Arab uprisings, their aftermath and how the terrorist threat has changed since the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001. No doubt the two candidates will spar again, as they did in the second debate, about whether the Obama administration was ready for the attack in Benghazi, Libya, that killed J. Christopher Stevens, the American ambassador, and three other Americans. Mr. Romney was widely judged to not have had his most effective critique ready, and this time, presumably, he will be out to correct that.

The early line is that this is an opportunity for Mr. Obama to shine, and to repair the damage from the first debate. (He was already telling jokes the other night, at a dinner in New York, about his frequent mention of Osama bin Laden’s demise.)

But we can hope that it is a chance for both candidates to describe, at a level of detail they have not yet done, how they perceive the future of American power in the world. They view American power differently, a subject I try to grapple with at length in a piece in this Sunday’s Review, “The Debatable World.”

But for now, here is a field guide to Monday’s debate.

LIBYA AND BENGHAZI Both candidates will come ready for a fight on this topic, but the question is whether it is the right fight. Mr. Obama already admitted mistakes on “The Daily Show With Jon Stewart” and promised to get to the bottom of them, but the White House has been less than transparent about what kind of warnings filtered up from the intelligence agencies before the attack on the consulate, and whether there was a way that American security forces could have arrived sooner, perhaps in time to save some of the American lives. No doubt the argument will focus on a narrower issue: why the administration stuck so long to its story that this was a protest against a film that turned into something worse, rather than a preplanned attack by insurgents. For Mr. Romney, the task is to show that the Benghazi attack was symptomatic of bigger failings in the Middle East, a road he started down in the last debate, but an argument he never completed.

IRAN With the revelation in The New York Times on Sunday reported by Helene Cooper and Mark Landler that the Obama administration has secretly agreed in principle to direct, bilateral talks after the election, the urgent question for the candidates is this: in a negotiation, what would you be willing to let Iran hold onto in return for a deal that gave the United States and Israel confidence that Tehran could not gain a nuclear weapons capability? It’s a hard question for both men.

Mr. Romney has said he would not allow Iran to have any enrichment capability at all — something it is allowed under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as long as it is abiding by the treaty’s rules — a position that would kill any talks. But Mr. Obama does not want to say the obvious: that he is willing to allow Iran to hold onto some face-saving enrichment capability as long as it does not retain its stockpiles of medium-enriched fuel, which can be converted to bomb-grade. Also, look for answers to the question of whether the United States would back up Israel if it decided to conduct a military strike against Iran. Mr. Romney wants to show that Mr. Obama has created “daylight” between the United States and Israel; Mr. Obama wants to demonstrate that while he has Israel’s back, he is trying to protect the country from taking an action he considers unwise, at least at this stage.

CYBERWAR Mr. Obama cannot talk about “Olympic Games,” the covert program that the United States has conducted against Iran, with Israel’s help, using a cyberweapon against another country for the first time in history. But do Mr. Obama and Mr. Romney consider cyberweapons a legitimate tool in America’s arsenal, or too risky, since the United States is the most vulnerable country in the world? We have never heard either candidate answer the question.

AFGHANISTAN There was a time when Mr. Romney declared that America should not be negotiating with the Taliban, but that it should be killing all the Taliban. He stopped saying that after his aides suggested that it sounded like a prescription for endless war. Now both Mr. Romney and Mr. Obama say they think that America should be out of Afghanistan by 2014, the internationally agreed deadline for the withdrawal of forces, though Mr. Romney has the caveat that he wants to hear from his generals first. (The generals thought that Mr. Obama’s insistence on setting a clear deadline for withdrawal was a bad idea — as did Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and many others.) So what do we want to hear from the candidates?

Lots.

For starters, if it looks as if Kabul could fall back into Taliban hands in a few years, do either of them think the United States should re-intervene? It would be nice to know if Mr. Obama agrees with his vice president, Joseph R. Biden Jr., that all American troops should be out by the end of 2014, since the White House plan calls for an “enduring presence” of 10,000 to 15,000 troops that would back up the weak Afghan security forces and keep an eye on Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal. (The remaining base would also be a place to launch drone strikes into Pakistan and Afghanistan, when necessary.) And for Mr. Romney, if he believes the pullout in Iraq was too hasty, and the pullout in Afghanistan risks making the same mistake, what kind of continuing presence would he have in mind?

THE ARAB UPRISINGS Afghanistan is already in America’s rearview mirror, but the Arab uprisings are not. Mr. Romney says that the rise of Islamic governments is an Obama administration failure. The White House says that if you have free elections in Islamic nations, you cannot be surprised when the Muslim Brotherhood and the harder-line Salafists win control of the government. The question is how to deal with these governments: conditional aid, to ensure American values are respected? Trade restrictions? Gentle persuasion?

This would also be the area to understand when and why each man would advocate future interventions. Mr. Obama joined in the Libya strike, which Mr. Romney thought was a mistake. But Mr. Obama has been hesitant to do much in Syria — a very different kind of conflict — while Mr. Romney says he would arm the rebels with heavy-duty antiaircraft and antitank weapons. Since the light weapons are already going into the wrong hands, how exactly would he find a way to overthrow Syria’s president, Bashar al-Assad?

CHINA Perhaps the most important long-term subject of the debate. Mr. Romney promises a hard line, saying he would declare China as a currency manipulator from Day 1 of his presidency. But he has not said much about Day 2, or Year 2. This is the moment for each candidate to describe how he would counter China’s growing claims in the South China Sea and other disputed territories, how he would handle trade tensions, and how he would manage a world in which the United States, for better or worse, is going to be reliant on Chinese investment in American debt for years to come. And it is the moment for each to give his view of the leadership change under way in China, where three-quarters of the top political posts are about to change hands.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/21/mondays-debate-puts-focus-on-foreign-policy-clashes/?hp

Romney family buys voting machines through Bain Capital investment

Tagg Romney, the son of Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, has purchased electronic voting machines that will be used in the 2012 elections in Ohio, Texas, Oklahoma, Washington and Colorado.

“Late last month, Gerry Bello and Bob Fitrakis at FreePress.org broke the story of the Mitt Romney/Bain Capital investment team involved in H.I.G. Capital which, in July of 2011, completed a “strategic investment” to take over a fair share of the Austin-based e-voting machine company Hart Intercivic,” according to independent journalist Brad Friedman.

But Friedman is not the only one to discover the connection between the Romney family, Bain Capital, and ownership of voting machines.

Truth out reports:

“Through a closely held equity fund called Solamere, Mitt Romney and his wife, son and brother are major investors in an investment firm called H.I.G. Capital. H.I.G. in turn holds a majority share and three out of five board members in Hart Intercivic, a company that owns the notoriously faulty electronic voting machines that will count the ballots in swing state Ohio November 7. Hart machines will also be used elsewhere in the United States.

In other words, a candidate for the presidency of the United States, and his brother, wife and son, have a straight-line financial interest in the voting machines that could decide this fall’s election. These machines cannot be monitored by the public. But they will help decide who “owns” the White House.”

Both The Nation and New York Times confirm the connection between the Romney family, Solamere and the Bain Capital investment in the voting machine company, Hart Intercivic, whose board of directors serve H.I.G. Capital.

“Mitt Romney, his wife Ann Romney, and their son Tagg Romney are also invested in H.I.G. Capital, as is Mitt’s brother G. Scott Romney.

The investment comes in part through the privately held family equity firm called Solamere, which bears the name of the posh Utah ski community where the Romney family retreats to slide down the slopes.” Truth out added.

There are also political connections between Solamere and the Romney’s. “Matt Blunt, the former Missouri governor who backed Mr. Romney in 2008, is a senior adviser to Solamere, as is Mitt Romney’s brother, Scott, a lawyer,” according to the New York Times.

Voter ID and voter fraud have been top issues in the 2012 race, as have claims of Republican voter suppression. Mr. Romney’s campaign has also been the subject of controversy over misleading ads, false claims, sketchy math on his tax plan, and overall vagueness on women’s rights and other hot button issues.

Raising further questions of legitimacy in the Romney campaign is an audio recording recently made public, where Mitt Romney is heard asking independent business owners to apply pressure to their employees to influence their votes. What has also been made public are the emails those employers have sent to their employees with an implied threat that if they don’t vote for Romney they may lose their jobs.

What it all says is that Mitt Romney, with the help of his family and Bain Capital connections, is more than willing to try to take the White House through illegitimate and highly unethical, if not specifically illegal means.

With each passing day, the character and campaign methods of Mitt Romney cast an ever-darker shadow over free and fair American elections.

Yet there is an irony in the Romney campaign that cannot be ignored. For all the noise the right-wing has made in questioning the legitimacy of Obama’s presidency, there have been so many questionable efforts made to help put Romney in the White House, if he wins, there should be great dispute over whether his election could ever be called genuinely illegitimate.

The nagging question is why, if Mr. Romney truly has the qualities that American voters want in their president, does he have to go to such great and questionable lengths to try to win the election.

http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/13221476-romney-family-buys-voting-machines-through-bain-capital-investment

Introducing Greg Brannon the next Ron Paul

Video Caption

Leah-Lynn Plante Tells Her Story of Resisting

Leah-Lynn Plante is a political activist who, on July 25th, 2012, was arrest by FBI and Joint Terrorism Task Force agents at her home. She received several sopenas, and on October 10th, 2012, she was convicted and sentenced to prison, along with other activists.

The official reason for this was about a May Day rally which resulted in broken windows. But the truth is clear; this is an attack on an idea. This isn’t about vandalism, or civil disobedience, this is an attack on people who do not agree with their government. It is a crime on the highest order.

Send her mail, books, and download and spread this video!

Leah-Lynne Plante
#42611-086
FDC SeaTac
PO Box 13900
Seattle, WA 98198

Rothschild Heir Reputation Ruined After £700m Investment

Even at 76, with untold wealth and the holder of a rare Order of Merit from the Queen, Lord Rothschild has continued to dream.

It is a father’s dream: that his only son Nat might one day lead the world’s most enduring banking dynasty to new heights, repairing an old family schism and burnishing its blue-chip image to even greater brilliance.

Today Jacob Rothschild is a bitterly disappointed, even angry man, as his son and heir fights to save his own dwindling reputation and, with it, the first soiling of the proud Rothschild name in centuries.

Living the high life: Nat Rothschild, pictured with L’Wren Scott at a partu during the Cannes Film Festival, has seen his City reputation destroyed after a deal to invest in an Indonesian coal mining company turned sour

Nat himself can hardly believe what has happened. A mere tick of the dynastic clock ago he was widely seen to be on course to be the richest of all the Rothschilds.

Helped by the pulling power of his name, he was hailed as a financial genius, a young man — once a wild child but now drinking nothing stronger than Coca-Cola — with a unique networking ability to bring billionaires together to make deals.

His private £5 million Gulfstream was criss-crossing the globe for 750 flying hours a year. That was before he decided to raise £700 million from investors — ‘big players only’ he airily informed one relatively minor figure who expressed interest — to plough funds into an Indonesian coal-mining company called Bumi that a City contact had drawn to his attention.

By July, 2010, Bumi’s £10 shares had been absorbed into his own  FTSE-quoted cash vehicle, a shell company called Vallar, which was then renamed Bumi plc.

For Rothschild’s new Indonesian partners, the Bakrie family (one of whom is currently standing for election as president of the country), the deal offered the back-door prestige of being quoted on the London Stock Exchange — quite a prize to businessmen in a part of the world not noted for the transparency of its corporate culture.

Yesterday, after acrimonious disagreements and accusations in the Bumi boardroom, and Nat Rothschild having dramatically stood down as a director, his investors were showing a loss of three quarters of their money with the share price slumping to around £2.50.

Nat Rothschild’s fierce letter of resignation from the board arrived on Monday from an address in St Peter Port on the low-tax Channel island of Guernsey, where one of his corporate offices is registered.

Meanwhile, an internal investigation into allegations of financial impropriety at Bumi has expanded to include alleged threats and the hacking of email systems to snoop on exchanges of messages at boardroom level.

The company chairman Samin Tan claimed that Rothschild indicated he’d had ‘access’ to his emails and had been reading them.

Rothschild’s response was to declare that the allegations were ‘untrue and defamatory.’ Attention has also been drawn to the level of expenses paid to directors.

And he did not just fall out with the Bakrie family. Senior British industrialists he installed as independent directors to safeguard UK shareholders’ interests also had their disagreements with him.

Dynasty: The collapsed deal has reignited tensions between Lord Jacob Rothschild, right, and his one-time wild-child son Nat Rothschild

Sir Julian Horn-Smith, former deputy chief executive of Vodafone, who is senior independent director of Bumi, asked Mr Rothschild to step down because of his ‘disruptive behaviour’ on the board.

The crisis has been a shock to Nat Rothschild’s overblown ego, especially as many feel his reputation can never fully recover, and one top City banker was quoted in The Times this week as saying that ‘Nat Rothschild will never raise another dollar from anybody’.

Another puts it this way: ‘His  name has become toxic in the City  of London.’

Now, his father Lord Rothschild, a figure of great integrity who was once a shoulder to cry on over lunch for a distraught Princess Diana, is the one who needs consoling, says a City friend.

To add insult to injury, it is  NM Rothschild, the family bank from which Jacob Rothschild split three decades ago to found his own highly successful investment trust, that has been called in by Bumi plc to sort out the mess.

Playboy: Nat Rothschild had a reputation for being a wildchild

The last time there were tensions between Lord Rothschild and his son — he also has three daughters — it was because Nat was virtually running wild, drinking and partying to excess.

Nat has never denied an escort girl’s story that she was asked to provide strippers and drugs to a party he threw in 1994 at Waddesdon Manor, the magnificent Rothschild family seat in Buckinghamshire where Presidents Reagan and Clinton, as well as Lady Thatcher, have stayed, and which is now run by the National Trust.

According to the girl: ‘They were very precise in what they wanted — three slim black girls in stockings, suspenders and high heels. They also wanted the girls to do extras.’

In those days, just down from Oxford, Nat enjoyed his wildchild reputation with almost as  much pleasure as, in recent years, he has relished being seen as a  pivotal figure in the world of billionaire  finance.

True, he spent not far short of £1 million on his own 40th birthday party last year in Porto Montenegro, in the tiny Balkan state, but most saw this as more of a classic networking bash — the invitations even included helpful details of where guests could park their private jets.

And Porto Montenegro, of course, is a development on the Adriatic coast in which he has a considerable personal investment.

But his most satisfying parties in recent years have been of the kind of gathering in Corfu on the £80 million yacht of his good friend and business associate Oleg Deripaska, the Russian oligarch, which ended in a spectacular and very public fall-out with his old Oxford Bullingdon Club friend George Osborne, now Chancellor of the Exchequer. It was to reveal a side of Nat Rothschild which those publicly pillorying him now would do well to consider.

For when Nat heard that Osborne had been repeating details of a private conversation with Peter Mandelson, who was also there, he in retaliation famously claimed that Osborne and the Tory party fundraiser Andrew (now Lord) Feldman had solicited a contribution to party funds from the Russian tycoon. Osborne issued an immediate denial, but considerable damage was done.

Friends in high places: This is the family home on the Greek island of Corfu where Nat Rothschild entertained Chancellor George Osborne and former business secretary Peter Mandleson

Fast forward three years to a lunch party in 2011 near St Tropez. One of the guests, on being invited by old friends, explained he had Nat Rothschild staying with him, and could he bring him along? And Rothschild came — but not for long.

As one of those guests recalls: ‘We’d barely sat down to lunch when he breezily said he was off. I can’t even remember whether he ate anything. I can only imagine we weren’t important enough.’

Ex-wife: Nat Rothschild was married for three years to Annabelle Neilson, model friend of Kate Moss

And one figure close to him says: ‘Nat’s mind is always turning over deals. He used to be fun — more than that — but these days, apart from the odd girlfriend, his closest companion seems to be his St Bernard dog.’

Girlfriends there have certainly been, including the actress Natalie Portman and, most recently Florence von Preussen, a  slim, attractive scion of the Guinness family.

He was also married for three years to Annabelle Neilson, model friend of Kate Moss.

Acquaintances find a somewhat unsettled sense about him.

He has homes in  Paris, Moscow, New York and Greece but seldom spends more than a few days at a time in  any of them.

The home where he spends most time during the winter is his sumptuous penthouse in Klosters. He was introduced to the Swiss ski resort by Canadian mining and property magnate Peter Munk.

While his father Lord Rothschild continued to live in Britain — holding board meetings in the basement kitchen of the London townhouse in St James’s he uses as an office — six years ago  Nat took Swiss citizenship and became a tax exile.

His reputation already was that of a young man with the ability  to make big money fast.

This was the point at which the personal fortune of the son and heir was poised to overtake the personal fortune of the father. This year’s Sunday Times Rich List places him 73rd with a personal fortune of £1 billion. His father is 192nd with a mere £465 million.

Over in Klosters his life is remarkably low-key. One place where he is a regular is the village’s only pizzeria, Alberto’s.

Carol Thatcher’s partner Marco Grass is his ski instructor, while his highly-supportive mother Serena — she and Jacob have been married 51 years today — is a regular winter guest. His peaceful life there is in stark contrast to the battle raging over Bumi.

But the dismay Lord Rothschild feels at the way the unseemly hostilities over the running of a public company have engulfed Nat cannot be underestimated.

‘He is furious with him — they are barely on speaking terms,’ says a family friend. ‘No Rothschild has ever before been involved in such a mess.’

Old Etonian Nat, of course, bears the name of his 19th-century ancestor Nathan Rothschild, who arranged the finance that helped the Duke of Wellington win the Battle of Waterloo.

CIA WHISTLEBLOWER SUSAN LINDAUER INTERVIEW WITH WE ARE CHANGE CONNECTICUT

Jeff Durkin of We Are Change Connecticut interviews CIA asset, whistleblower and political prisoner Susan Lindauer.

Watch TRUTH TALK NEWS
Hosted by Howard Nema
Monday – Thursday 9PM EST

“Where the truth is uncensored and news the controlled mainstream media ignores is the top story!”

TruthBroadcastNetwork.com

WE ARE CHANGE CONNECTICUT
Hosted by Howard Nema and Vinny Bdatruth
Saturdays 5-8PM EST

News, commentary, special guests and events

TruthBroadcastNetwork.com
Audio Simulcast on ProjectFreedom.ws
NFormDRadio.com

FAIR USE NOTICE: Some content displayed may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes

James Carville Says 80% Of Democrats Are Politically Clueless

RESPECTED DEMOCRAT OPERATIVE SPILLS HIS GUTS ON WHAT HE THINKS OF HIS PARTY

James Carville, Democrat political consultant extraordinaire – and former Bill Clinton campaign manager, has astonishingly come out and said what all good Republicans have known for decades: Not only are most Democrats politically clueless; they’re easily manipulated by the puppet masters of their party as well. Wow. James Freaking Carville. Of all people. Here’s an excerpt, as quoted on Amazon.com:

“Ideologies aren’t all that important. What’s important is psychology

The Democratic constituency is just like a herd of cows. All you have to do is lay out enough silage and they come running. That’s why I became an operative working with Democrats. With Democrats all you have to do is make a lot of noise, lay out the hay, and be ready to use the ole cattle prod in case a few want to bolt the herd.

Eighty percent of the people who call themselves Democrats don’t have a clue as to political reality.

What amazes me is that you could take a group of people who are hard workers and convince them that they should support social programs that were the exact opposite of their own personal convictions. Put a little fear here and there and you can get people to vote any way you want.

The voter is basically dumb and lazy. The reason I became a Democratic operative instead of a Republican was because there were more Democrats that didn’t have a clue than there were Republicans.

Truth is relative. Truth is what you can make the voter believe is the truth. If you’re smart enough, truth is what you make the voter think it is. That’s why I’m a Democrat. I can make the Democratic voters think whatever I want them to.”

Bingo. I couldn’t have written that for ol’ James any better myself. Truth be told, I’ve always had kind of a love-hate relationship with Carville. While I’ve never agreed with him on much of anything – unless he was commenting on the failures of his party, which unlike most political operatives, he’s not been afraid to do through the years – this is different. This amounts to a total confession of what I define in the right sidebar of this blog as the quintessential “political lie”:

Liberals saying things they know aren’t true for the sole purpose of exploiting the “less-than-informed” for political gain.

http://mikesright.wordpress.com/2012/10/16/james-carville-says-80-of-democrats-are-politically-clueless/

Bev Harris – Hacking Democracy – Full Length

This is the story of Bev Harris and her organization Black Box Voting (http://www.blackboxvoting.org). She is a true American hero and a good example of what ALL Americans should be doing to ensure that our rights and liberties are protected against the elitist and special interest’s agenda!

“The fight is against the whole establishment!”-Tom Woods

Tom Woods guest hosts the Peter Schiff Show. After interviewing Sen. Rand Paul, Woods rips into compromising for the lesser of two evils and offers Ron Paul support in standing on principle.
Like- http://facebook.com/LibertyEvolution

FASCISM RISING; America, Mitt Romney’s ‘CREATIVE DESTRUCTION’ Is NeoCon Economic Theory With Roots In FASCISM

Creative destruction is our middle name, both within our own society and abroad.  We tear down the old order every day, from business to science, literature, art, architecture, and cinema to politics and the law.  Our enemies have always hated this whirlwind of energy and creativity, which menaces their traditions (whatever they may be) and shames them for their inability to keep pace.  Seeing America undo traditional societies, they fear us, for they do not wish to be undone.  They cannot feel secure so long as we are there, for our very existence—our existence, not our politics—threatens their legitimacy.  They must attack us in order to survive, just as we must destroy them to advance our historic mission.”

– Michael Ledeen, NeoCon Theoretician, Author Of Book Universal Fascism

The quote above tells the truth… there is a world wide war on “traditional societies”, a culture war to destroy all cultures, home and abroad, to install a single world wide universal culture.  Ledeen mentions tearing down the “old order”, and in the article below he also mentions the “New Order” and the “New World Order”… ancient themes reinvigorated by the fascists of Italy, Nazi Germany, and France… and reinvigorated once again by George Bush Sr. when he said the “New Order is struggling to be born” and spoke of “the dream of a New World Order” on September 11, 1990.

Mitt Romney spouts “CREATIVE DESTRUCTION” NeoCon economic theories while at the same time and surrounding himself with top NeoCons like Bush Sr., Dick Cheney, Eliot Cohen (Romney 2012 Foreign Policy Adviser), and John Bolton (likely choice as Romney’s Secretary Of State), just to name a few… all war mongers, and all Project For The New American Century (PNAC) members*.

*Note: Bush Jr. & Bush Sr. are not officially on the PNAC Members list for political reasons, but they were both integral in the organization.

For more information on “CREATIVE DESTRUCTION” and its roots in FASCISM see the following story…

2003.6.30 Flirting With FASCISM (NeoCon Theorist Michael Ledeen Draws More From Italian FASCISM Than From The American Right) (theamericanconservative.com):

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/flirting-with-fascism/

http://deadlinelive.info/2012/10/18/fascism-rising-america-mitt-romneys-creative-destruction-is-neocon-economic-theory-with-roots-in-fascism/

Top 10 Most Influential Whistleblowers

The subject of insiders — or “whistleblowers” — is somewhat tricky; anyone on the inside is often presumed to be compromised by their former allegiance. Nonetheless, the nature of government work is rooted in compartmentalization. So, perhaps the best indication as to whether whistleblowers have something valid to say is the level of persecution they have endured.

The following whistleblowers have endured a varying degree of pushback from the system, but are still around to reveal key points of information that make us all question what we are being told by our government and the corporate media.

Please listen to the video presentations of the following insiders who have used their positions to educate those on the outside about the machinations of people far more devious than ourselves. They follow in the footsteps of people such as Daniel Ellsberg, and are not the criminals that the U.S. government increasingly charges them as. Rather, these whistleblowers represent the highest level of activism and courage.

Jesselyn Radack –  Radack is a former ethics attorney and adviser to the Justice Department. She had been presented with the first case of a detainee in Afghanistan following 9/11. That detainee was John Walker Lindh, an American citizen labeled “The American Taliban.” Lindh was set to be interrogated (tortured) without council. Her advice not to pursue that direction went unheeded to the point where her e-mails to the court were deleted, which she had to then resurrect from her computer and present to the media. She subsequently was put on the No-Fly list and was targeted for investigation. Rather than fold, she fought back and wound up going to work for the premier whistleblowing advocacy group, the Government Accountability Project at whistleblower.org, founded in 1977.

After everything we have come to know about the torture apparatus overseas, and the subsequent arrival of that apparatus onto American shores embodied in the NDAA, Radack’s work is more important than ever. She discusses in the video below her background and the intensified war on whistleblowers.

Thomas Drake, (NSA) – The world got an historical overview that shed quite a bit of light on the NSA through a former ABC News reporter, James Bamford, when he released two books The Puzzle Palace and Body of Secretswhich lifted the veil and revealed a massive spying structure that far surpasses the capabilities of the CIA. The apparatus Bamford revealed was comprised of programs like Echelon that were suspected of not only massive international spying and data collection, but also domestic operations. Now those suspicions are being confirmed by high-level insiders such as Thomas Drake, who appeared in a Baltimore Sun article that highlighted a $1.2 billion program called “Trailblazer” which Drake submitted was a program of “fraud, waste, and abuse.” He was subsequently charged under The Espionage Act and was facing 35 years in prison. Drake’s defense team actually hired James Bamford as an expert witness. The case for 10 felony charges against Drake could not stand up, and he reached a misdemeanor plea deal.  Drake was the first to come forward under a new climate of aggressive formal indictment for whistleblowers that equates their truth-telling with real espionage such as selling state secrets.

William Binney (NSA) Former top NSA mathematician and code breaker, William Binney, has gone on record to publicly reveal the scope of a top-secret surveillance program that has directly targeted everyday Americans following 9/11. He is sounding an alarm about the massive scope of this project that engages in 24/7 warrantless wiretapping of the American population. Thomas Drake’s testimony was revealing, but Binney was a 32-year, top-level veteran of the NSA who reveals in the video below the domestic component of a program code named “Stellar Wind.” With the NSA working to complete its $2 billion fortress of surveillance by September 2013, which can store 100 years worth of electronic information, Binney’s concerns that we are heading down the road to totalitarianism ring true.

Mark Klein (AT&T) A veteran of twenty-two years as an AT&T technician, Mark Klein left no doubt about the veracity of an NSA domestic spying program when he revealed how he found secret rooms at a switching center in San Francisco. And he had the documents and blueprints to prove it:

Klein says he collected 120 pages of technical documents left around the San Francisco office showing how the NSA was installing ‘splitters’ that would allow it to copy both domestic and international Internet traffic moving through AT&T connections with 16 other trunk lines. ‘It’s gobs and gobs of information going across the Internet,’ Klein says. President Bush has acknowledged he authorized the NSA to intercept the communications of people with known links to terrorist organizations ‘into or out of the United States,’ but that ‘we’re not trolling through the personal lives of millions of innocent Americans.’ Intelligence experts say the NSA has the means to filter out suspect communications with sophisticated machines that spot key words, names, addresses or patterns. Eventually, Klein says he decided to take his documents to the Los Angeles Times, to blow the whistle on what he calls ‘an illegal and Orwellian project.’ (Source)

Yet, the LA Times‘ editor Dean Baquet killed the story after speaking with Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte and Director of the NSA Gen. Michael Hayden. The story later appeared at the New York Times. Mark Klein recounts his version of events below and how he came to realize that he was “being forced to connect the Big Brother machine.” It is worth noting that the Electronic Frontier Foundation has spearheaded lawsuits to reveal just what is being done to the American people, but courts recently ruled that warrantless wiretapping can continue.

Sibel Edmonds (FBI / 9/11) In the wake of 9/11, Edmonds was enlisted as a translator in the FBI language division to interpret wiretaps conducted inside the United States, having been born in Turkey and speaking several key languages. She describes the language division as “the highest security unit in the FBI.” She has since become the most classified woman in history, and her efforts to uncover FBI criminality that included, “money laundering, narcotic activities, and nuclear black market converg(ing) with terrorist activities” led her to be pursued and persecuted to an incredible degree by the Justice Department under John Ashcroft and Robert Mueller invoking “state secrets.” Her story is harrowing, to say the least; however, she sparked serious doubts among the general population regarding the 9/11 Commission Report – and she hasn’t stopped. To get a glimpse of the energy and tenacity of Sibel Edmonds, see the video trailer below for the whistleblower documentary “Kill The Messenger” which can be viewed in 5 parts starting HERE. More of her work can be found at Boiling Frogs. She also set up the National Security Whisleblower Coalition. And what is The American-Turkish council?

Susan Lindauer (CIA / 9/11) Susan was a former CIA asset who worked with the Libyan and Iraqi embassies prior to 9/11. Following that day, she began to reveal CIA complicity in Middle East heroin trafficking.

Lindauer also talked candidly about how Israel tried to buy U.S. Intelligence officers and Assets. For the first time on record, she revealed that a known Mossad agent tried to bribe her into handing over Iraq’s collection of banking records on Al Qaeda’s financial pipeline by phoning her home in Maryland while she was traveling in Baghdad, and promising to deliver a suitcase full of cash to any city in the world in exchange for the papers. (Source)

Susan subsequently became the second non-Arab citizen to be arrested under the Patriot Act, which culminated in a five-year indictment and near total prison lockdown for one year.

While in prison Susan was subjected to harsh conditions that would be considered torture in multiple countries. Contrary to what most Americans think, Susan and the other inmates in solitary confinement were only allowed outside once every TEN days and even then the actual amount of time outside was closer to thirty minutes. (Source)

In the video below she discusses her revelations about pre-9/11 warnings and all that followed, which eventually got published in her book Extreme Prejudice: The Terrifying Story of  the Patriot Act and the Cover-ups of 9/11 and Iraq.

Col. Anthony Shaffer (Military) – Shaffer is an intelligence agent who claimed that there was deliberate stonewalling of information prior to 9/11 as part of what came to be known as Able Danger. Beyond that, he revealed a culture of infighting between intelligence agencies that, even taken at face value, is concerning for the American taxpayer. Shaffer published his account inOperation Dark Heart. The Department of Defense responded by purchasing the book’s first, uncensored, 10,000 copy print run (with U.S. taxpayer dollars, by the way). He might have had something important to say. The video below touches upon what that might have been.

Joe Banister (IRS) – In our article 10 Ways to Stop Being a Slave and Bring Down The Pyramids of Control, IRS resistance was presented last. Here are the questions we asked:

How can a machine be built without the funding to build it?  The entire prison system we see around us has been built with our own money. Did you authorize it? Did you authorize the preemptive wars, bank bailouts, corporate subsidies, the high-tech surveillance grid that enslaves you?

Special agent, Joe Banister, exposed the mechanics of what the IRS is and how fundamentally illegal and unconstitutional their tax collection policies and methods are. The system came down HARD on one of its own. His story is instrumental in understanding what happened to the next IRS whistleblower, Sherry Peel Jackson, who took exposure to a whole new level and was pursued ruthlessly for her revelations. The income tax we have been told to believe is a patriotic obligation is itself a complete fraud. The current tax code is 72,000 pages. It is complicated for a reason. If we can wake up to the foundations of this nightmare coercive system, we stand a great chance of restoring power into the hands of the people instead of a tiny few at the top of the pyramid. Caution is warranted, however: the IRS is ready, willing and able to lock you up for a longer term than human trafficking and child porn. So, proceed with caution, but keep courage close at hand. You can see Joe Banister with Ron Paul, below.

Bradley Manning  (Military) – Manning allegedly transmitted state secrets to WikiLeaks:

Manning was arrested at forward operating base Hammer outside Baghdad on 27 May 2010 on suspicion of being the source of the biggest leak of confidential state documents in US history. He faces 22 charges relating to the transferal of hundreds of thousands of diplomatic cables, videos and war logs to the whistleblowing website.

Under the US military rule book, a soldier must be arraigned and his trial officially started within 120 days of him being put into captivity.

(…)

Should the trial kick off on 4 February next year, as it is currently scheduled to do, he will have been held for 983 days. (Source)

Bradley Manning’s case and treatment is at the heart of a new U.S. government mission that equates the revealing of truth as aiding an abetting the enemy, which should serve as an indictment upon the system which pursues truth-tellers like Manning so vehemently. He only sought to expose the horrific “collateral damage” of the war in which he was enlisted, which has been properly retitled into “Collateral Murder.” Due to his total lockdown, there is no video we can present of Bradley Manning speaking for himself, but the video he brought out to the public through WikiLeaks says it all:

Julian Assange and WikiLeaks – Assange is in a category all his own due to heading up the whistleblower repository of WikiLeaks. It has been argued that Assange and WikiLeaks are controlled opposition, much the same as Anonymous; or is it just a global chess game?  Given the subsequent persecution of Assange that continues on without relent by the establishment, he seems to have more likely been a patsy who has served to demonize all manner of whistleblowing and intimidate anyone who would take center stage in an effort to bolster people such as those documented above. Very well-respected alternative news voices such as Max Keiser and Paul Craig Roberts insist that Assange is legitimate and should be given the Nobel Peace Prize rather than warmongers and corporate financiers.

Despite whistleblowers’ explosive disclosures, the surveillance state has been normalized, as the House has voted to reauthorize the 2008 FISA Amendment Act. And, sadly, many whistleblowers who might have had even more to say have been assassinated by the system they were employed to serve. That alone should serve as a warning to those who have chosen to enter such employment, knowing the level of evil they contract with. The control structure is massive, and growing, so we must listen to the voices who courageously come forth to issue their concerns, especially when those of good conscience are being persecuted as never before.

 

So who did we miss? Add your own with links to the history of what has been revealed.

http://theintelhub.com/2012/10/21/top-10-most-influential-whistleblowers/

Does Mitt Romney’s Son Tagg Have An Investment In Some Ohio Voting Machines?

Tagg Romney made headlines yesterday after he said in an interview that he wanted to punch Barack Obama during the presidential debate on Monday night. Mitt Romney’s 42-year-old son, who has already faced criticism for his dealings with Allen Stanford who was convicted of milking investors out of $8 Billion in a Ponzi scheme, may have much bigger questions to answer after shocking allegations brought forth by PolitcolNews.com.

The website claims that Romney owns an interest in Hart Intercivic voting machines which will be used to calculate votes in Hamilton County. If true, this raises serious questions as there were a number of red flags during the 2004 campaign that saw George Bush defeat John Kerry. Some politicos still call into question the 2004 election for strange calculations that Diebold voting machines, who had openly supported Bush, came up with that November.

PoliticolNews.com writes:

As Lee Fang points out in his detailed analysis of the Romney investments

“Many of these private equity–owned companies rely on federal and state contracts, from HIG Capital’s Hart Intercivic, a voting machine company, to EnviroFoam Technologies, a biological and chemical decontamination firm that does business with the US military and is owned by Peterson Partners, a private equity firm listed in the Solamere prospectus.”

Solarmere’s tangled web of investments now includes Hart Intercivic voting machines which will be used in Cincinnati Ohio says Truth Out which could guarantee Mitt Romney the White House.

The State of Ohio is Ground Zero for the White House, in particular Hamilton County a repeat of the George Bush election in 2004

The report was only released hours ago and Obama supporters already seem to be taking the news seriously. Change.org already has an online petition up and running that calls for “Attorney General Eric Holder: Investigate Tagg Romney owning voting machines in OHIO….”.

Looks like things may get very interesting in the Buckeye state in the coming weeks.

http://www.clevelandleader.com/node/19137

Feds Arrest Second Patsy in Federal Reserve Bombing Case

Quazi Mohammad Rezwanul Ahsan Nafis, the deluded al-Qaeda wanna-be who supposedly plotted to bomb the Federal Reserve, had an accomplice, according to the feds.

The government says Howard Willie Carter II, aka Yaqueen, is a child porno pervert who collaborated with Nafis.


A 21-year-old man has been arrested for attempting to blow up the US government’s largest bank, the New York Federal Reserve, which contains one of the world’s largest gold stockpiles and is based just minutes away from Wall Street.

The suspected bomber, Quazi Nafis, is of Bangladeshi origin and arrived in the US on a student visa earlier this year. Nafis acquired what he believed was a 1,000-pound bomb, but was caught by an FBI undercover sting operation as he tried to remotely detonate the inert device, which was planted inside a parked van.

Police Commissioner Ray Kelly:

“This individual came here for the purpose of doing a terrorist act. He came in January of this year he gets a student visa under the pretext of being a student at a college in Missouri and he comes here with, again the vowed purpose of committing some sort of jihad here in the United States.”

After Nafis arrived, he considered a variety of targets for the attack, including President Barack Obama, before seeking recruits to help him target the Federal Reserve. Nafis has been charged with conspiring to use weapons of mass destruction and providing support to al-Qaeda.

This is not the first terror attack attempt this year. In February, a 29-year-old Moroccan man was charged with attempting to blow up the US Congress.

 

The dysfunctional duo allegedly communicated with each other over the internet. Nafis lives in New York and Carter in San Diego.

Both men were under government surveillance as part of an elaborate sting operation. FBI informers acted as agents provocateurs in the case. The government claims the bus boy turned terrorist Nafis wanted to kill Obama and blow up the New York Stock Exchange.

NYPD Commissioner Raymond Kelly used a precrime argument to justify the entrapment of Nafis.

“You have to be otherwise not disposed to do a crime,” he said. “And if it’s your intent to do a crime, and somehow there are means made available, then generally speaking, the entrapment defense does not succeed.”

Despite the government’s assertion that Nafis is a hardened terrorist who pledged loyalty to Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda, a classmate at a Missouri college where Nafis enrolled said he often said Muslims don’t believe in violence.

Jim Dow, a 54-year-old Army veteran, said the terrorist image portrayed by the federal government “doesn’t seem to be in character” of Nafis, the Seattle Times reports.

The feds claim Nafis was inspired by American-born cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, who was “the spiritual leader of the alleged 9/11 hijackers, a fact that didn’t seem to concern Pentagon top brass who invited him to dine with them just months after the September 11 attacks despite the fact that he had personally colluded with the very hijackers who were alleged to have slammed Flight 77 into the Pentagon,” Steve Watson wrote for Infowars.com in September, 2011.

“Every indication points to Awlaki being a double agent working for US intelligence. He has been involved in almost every terror plot over the last couple of years.”

The case has rekindled the argument that the government needs more authority to violate the Constitution in order to root out terrorists.

“Civil liberties have taken a backseat to preempting terrorism, there’s just no doubt about it,” Columbia University foreign policy and counterterrorism expert Stuart Gottlieb told GlobalPost.

“And that’s because, whether you were under the Bush or the Obama administration, they still are operating under the premise that there are groups and individuals trying to do some pretty bad things, and they need to have the policies in place that remain controversial with civil libertarians … that will preempt attacks, rather than just respond to them after they occur with the criminal justice system.”

http://theintelhub.com/2012/10/19/feds-arrest-second-patsy-in-federal-reserve-bombing-case/

How Mitt Romney cheated his way to the GOP nomination

New evidence is coming out about just how tough and dirty the Mitt Romney campaign fought to block the Ron Paul takeover of the Republican Party at the State Conventions last summer.

It may offer a little sneak preview of what a Romney presidency will be like.  And make no mistake, barring war with Syria or some other dramatic October surprise, Romney will now win this election in a landslide.  At least, that is my humble opinion, as one who loves and reads history.  The economy will decide that.

It  turns out that Mitt Romney and other Republican operatives were apparently very much aware of what was going on at the precinct, county, district and state conventions.  This was not greedy state and country chairmen wanting to hang onto power so they could go to the RNC as delegates and get drunk.  The hardball tactics were apparently approved and refined from state to state from Iowa, where the state chairman got money for the GOP and promises and conveniently kept a Santorum popularity vote win and a Ron Paul delegate win, out of the news for months, all the way to Tampa, where pudgy, Romney Brownshirt  goons raced along the streets in golf cart-like vehicles, looking for demonstrators to divert into chain fence cages beyond view of the media.  Welcome to Romney’s America.

Remember Arizona?  Where there were accusations of voter fraud and physical violence against Ron Paul delegates?  Where delegates were sweated out, kept in 100 degree temperatures without air conditioning and without breaks for water or toilet, in hopes of getting them to give up?

Remember Nathan Sproul?

Remember my blog last summer, claiming fraud and miscounts and ballots taken away for the night to be recounted with numbers changed the next day?  Well,  Mr. Sproul called Ron Paul headquarters and threatened a lawsuit so I had to take down one of those blogs.  Now, what I wrote last summer, as a voice in the wilderness , is being published openly by the New York Times.  The mainstream media didn’t mind seeing Ron Paul get mauled but their precious Obama is another matter.  Now there are public reports of voter fraud at the hands of Mr. Sproul and a new revelation that he has recently been on the Republican Party payroll to the tune of millions of dollars and assigned to do his deeds in five states.

There is more.  It turns out that Nathan Sproul is now linked to Karl Rove who may have hired him as well.  Rove has a curiously malevolent streak of his own.   In Tampa, at the Romney coronation, Rove suggested – in jest we all presume – the murder of fellow Republican Senate Candidate Todd Akin, who had won the Missouri primary fair and square but now refused to resign and let Rove’s favorite candidate, who had lost, take his place.

Akin misspoke on abortion.  Rove, who misspoke on murder, is to be excused.

See: Karl Rove tied to shady GOP operative Nathan Sproul

Meanwhile, a major television network is now finally tracking the story of the Louisiana  State GOP.  Remember how Romney-Santorum people hired off duty policemen, telling them to arrest troublemakers when they pointed them out?  And then after they were voted out and new Ron Paul people were voted in to run the convention they had the hired off duty policeman arrest the new duly elected chairmen who was manhandled?  One was knocked to the ground another had his fingers broken while in police custody?  Well, that is going to court.  Yes, the Ron Paul victims will win, but the Romney people could care less, they got what they wanted and no apology has been offered.  Welcome to Romney’s America.

Remember our Ron Paul hero in Missouri, Brent Stafford, who was elected county chairman in St. Charles?  Who was arrested and hauled off to jail by off duty police hired by Romney people?  He was finally acquitted and the Romney person who ordered the arrest actually applauded the court’s decision.  Stafford, may file a lawsuit as well, but the Romney people won’t care.  They got what they wanted.

Perhaps the most damaging news of all for the Romney campaign is the emerging story of Charlie “The Cheater” Nejedly.  Charlie was caught in Maine, wearing a Ron Paul sticker, passing out fake Ron Paul slates at the Maine State Convention which the Romney people had clearly lost.  He was outed on the floor in Maine and soon afterward overheard talking to Romney’s likely nominee for Attorney General, campaign legal counsel, Ben Ginsburg.  According to the source, Ginsburg told Nejedly, “We need to get you to Boston.”

It now appears that Charlie “the Cheater” worked the Massachusetts convention too and that he was a paid staffer on the Romney payroll.  What’s worse, he is a Notre Dame graduate, which leads to all kinds of conflicts for this author.  I grew up in South Bend and I love Notre Dame.  And this week they play Brigham Young University.  And Manti Teo’s parents are in the audience.  Oh my?  What can I do?

I will still root for Notre Dame, of course, but Mitt Romney “the cheater” may have to wait for me to cool down a bit.  What was he thinking?  I know what he was thinking?  He was thinking that we would all come around and vote for him instead of Obama because of the economy.  So he could cheat and fake to his heart’s content.  But the more clearly in focus it becomes the less impressed I am of Romney’s America.  Where are we headed?

http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2012/10/18/how-mitt-romney-cheated-his-way-to-the-gop-nomination/

The Brands that Own the Brands

Exploring the illusion of choice and the true meaning of big business

This lovely illustration and web of brands that own brands was featured on reedit.com today and reveals something very interesting about our choices as a consumer or, if you will, lack of choices. It’s titled, “The Illusion of Choice”.

If you look at the brand groupings, it makes a lot of sense. Of course Nestle owns a bunch of animal feed, candy, cosmetics, and powdered food companies, they’re probably all made from the same ingredients. It’s the clothing brands that throw me. Perhaps some of the dehydrated horse meat they make the dog food with is set aside, and the best cuts are used for belts.

Regardless of how it goes down, all these brands seem to all be owned by about ten larger brands namely Kraft, Nestle, Coca-Cola, Pepsi-Co, General Mills (very fitting), Proctor & Gamble, Johnson & Johnson, Mars, and Unilever.

It’s not just our products:

If you found “brands that own brands” to be shocking, than you should also take a look this infographic on who now controls the media in this country. It seems as if their’s hundreds of media choices, but in the end it all boils down to just a handful.

In 1983, 90% of America’s media was owned and powered by over 50 companies. As of last year, the media is owned by 6 companies. Talk about the illusion of choice. GE, Time Warner, CBS, Viacom, Disney, and News Corp. are controlling everything. No wonder it’s the same thing on every channel. How can the media be impartial when all the real decisions are made by only a few people?

Perhaps that’s a narrow-minded view, but this direction we seem to be moving in doesn’t sound like it’s very good for the greater good. Maybe I’m wrong, these people who own all this stuff are probably the nicest, most caring folks out there. How else could they be so successful? I’ll leave it up to you to decide.

http://www.blacklistednews.com/The_Brands_that_Own_the_Brands_%5BInfographic%5D/21888/0/0/0/Y/M.html?morestories=obinsite

Ben Affleck Defends TSA ‘Dick Grabbing’

During a recent appearance on Bill Maher’s Real Time, actor Ben Affleck defended the TSA’s policy of grabbing people’s genitals.

Affleck probably isn’t too fussed about what the TSA do because he is driven straight to the runway to board his private jet – he doesn’t even have to go through TSA security!

Ron Paul given rock star treatment at UVU

“I, quite frankly, am convinced that we live in a great period of time. It’s a great time to be alive because I think the opportunities are different than ever before.”Ron Paul

 

OREM — Ron Paul received a robust welcome at Utah Valley University on Thursday, drawing supportive chants, cheers and standing ovations from the audience as he lambasted the federal reserve, income taxes, the war on drugs, the war in Afghanistan, medicare, welfare and foreign policy.

The longtime Texas congressman and three-time presidential candidate brought his trademark small government message to the UCCU Center to the delight of the near-capacity crowd. But while Paul’s remarks were critical of U.S. government both past and present, his message focused on the ability of individuals to band together and demand change.

“There truly is a revolution happening in the country, and people’s attitudes are changing,” he said. “There is reason to be optimistic about what is happening today.”

Paul made several references to the role technology plays in society today. He encouraged all in attendance to take advantage of the Internet and social networking to educate themselves and help other people understand the benefits of limited government.

Paul also said that personal freedom and civil liberty are not ideas embraced only by a small subset of the Republican party. They are fundamental principals that bring people together from the entire political spectrum, he said.

“Peace is better than war. Free markets are better than socialism. Balanced budgets are better than spending,” Paul said. “Why do we lose this argument? It seems like it’s so attractive.”

On policy issues, he spent a large portion of his speech discussing the welfare system and federal spending. In his lifetime, Paul said he’s watched government increase its commitment to social programs to the detriment of the middle and lower classes.

“Once you endorse the principle of welfarism, guess what? The poor get poorer, and the rich get richer,” he said. “It’s a totally failed system. And we can’t be intimidated by those that argue, ‘If you don’t support the welfare system, you’re not a humanitarian.'”

Some of the loudest applause from the audience came from the portion of Paul’s remarks focused on foreign policy, particularly comments that he was opposed to pre-emptive war and that U.S. forces should be immediately removed from Afghanistan.

Audience members also cheered during Paul’s more traditionally liberal arguments. He talked at length about individual liberty as it pertains to intellectual and religious freedom, adding that the same concepts should be applied to what people eat and drink or how they choose to live their lives.

People should be free to make their own choices, Paul said, as long as they take personal responsibility for the consequences of their actions. He said there are a number of bad habits that can hurt people, but they are no more damaging than bad intellectual ideas.

“If we allow people to make their own decisions about their eternity and what they put into their brain, why is it that we have not adapted and accepted that same principle to what people do with their personal habits and what they put into their bodies?”

Daniel Hermansen, a Sandy resident and Paul supporter, traveled to Orem to listen to the speech. Hermansen said he volunteered for the Paul campaign in Iowa and Nevada and last spring was working to organize a Paul event at the University of Utah before the candidate suspended his active campaign.

Hermansen has had the opportunity to hear Paul speak several times, but he said the remarks at UVU was a good mixed bag for people with little exposure to Paul’s ideology, as well as more researched Libertarians.

“It was an awesome speech,” he said of Paul’s address at UVU. “I always love hearing Ron Paul.”

Hermansen said he wasn’t surprised at the audience’s warm reception to Paul’s talking points, even those subjects on the typically liberal end of the spectrum, because everything the congressman said ties back to the idea of personal responsibility.

Paul doesn’t endorse certain choices, Hermansen explained, but argues that people should be free to make their choices and face the consequences.

“That’s one of the most fundamental principles behind liberty and our constitution,” he said.

Paul concluded his remarks by commenting on the state of democratic debate in the information age. He said any person who is for peace, prosperity or any other issue has access to the world around them, and he urged those in attendance to work toward causing an intellectual revolution.

“I, quite frankly, am convinced that we live in a great period of time,” Paul said. “It’s a great time to be alive because I think the opportunities are different than ever before.”

With less than a month before the election, Hermansen said it’s not likely the political paradigm shift called for by Paul could happen before the next president is decided. But he added that part of what Paul and his supporters are frustrated with is the idea that election day is the only time when individuals can influence government.

“That one day is only part of what are our decisions and what our actions are during the rest of the year,” Hermansen said. “The other 364 days are what make election day more or less important.”

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865564794/Ron-Paul-given-rock-star-treatment-at-UVU.html?pg=1

LA Times: Romney’s a drug-money launderer

Why Has Not Only Corporate Media, but also Obama’s Opposition Research Let Romney Slide on his Criminal Associations?

Mitt Romney made his fortune cleaning druglords’ cash

Back in July, the Los Angeles Times – not VT, Infowars or Truth Jihad Radio – broke the story that Mitt Romney is a drug money launderer. How did we all miss this story? (Until John Hankey and then Gordon Duff picked it up.)

Maybe it’s because the Times story never comes right out and says “drug money laundering.” It doesn’t have to.

What the Times article does say translates directly and unambiguously as DRUG MONEY LAUNDERING, in caps, exclamation point.

According to the Los Angeles Times, Romney’s company, Bain Capital, “paid out a stunning 173% in average annual returns over a decade.” “Stunning” is not the word. “Criminal” is more like it.

Bernie Madoff was arrested and went to jail because he was paying 10% annual returns. That’s how it came to light that he was running a criminal enterprise. You just cannot possibly pay 10% returns consistently, year in and year out, with legitimate investments. Never happened, never will.

Ponzi schemes sometimes pay as high as 20% – and soon collapse, and the perps go to jail. But a 173% annual return is far beyond the range of the craziest, most short-lived ponzi scheme.

Romney wasn’t running a ponzi scheme. He was running a drug money laundry. His clients, the Times explains, were shady characters from Panama. Here’s how it works:

A druglord hands Romney, a.k.a. Bain Capital, ten million dollars in cash. Romney puts it on his books as a one million dollar investment in Bain Capital.

At 173% interest, it only takes Romney a few years (officially) to return ten million laundered dollars to the druglord.

When the druglord is asked where he got his ten million dollars, he explains that he made a lucky investment with Bain Capital. And he has the papers to prove it.

Getting caught paying out an average 173% interest over ten years is like getting caught with a hundred pounds of cocaine. If you’re busted with a hundred pounds of cocaine, the presumption is that you’re dealing. If you’re caught paying 173% interest, the presumption is that you’re laundering drug money.

Romney, you are SO BUSTED.

For more information on Mitt Romney’s criminal history, check out John Hankey’s video Mitt Romney Exposed, and listen to my interview with Hankey on Truth Jihad Radio, to be archived soon here.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/10/17/la-times-romneys-a-drug-money-launderer/

The World for Ron Paul

This video was made to show those that doubt Ron Paul’s foreign policy that people around the world agree with Ron Paul’s stance, The media tries to undermine Ron Paul with their biased attempts to say that his foreign policy is out of touch with the rest of the world.
Ron Paul is not a “wacko.” The CIA has coined a term called “blowback” and Dr. Paul understands this better than any candidate running for President. He understands that our actions directly affect our safety and security.

It is time for the American people to realize just how we are seen across the world: WE ARE THE BULLY OF THE WORLD!!

Just because we have power and force does not mean we can dictate what the world does and how the world should behave. We should mind our own business and defend our own borders; not the borders of other countries!

We need to promote peace through example not through force.

Please like and share this video! Subscribe for more videos.

But more importantly…
Donate during moneybombs!

Ask your loved ones to donate for you as a Christmas present for you if you don’t have the money.

Like Ron Paul on Facebook:
Help him reach 1 million Likes.

In order for me to use the music in the background, I am required to put it in my video and description. I found this guy with a quick search on Google and the music is pretty awesome. So you can get some free music from below:

Song list in order:
Childhood Memories of Winter (Piano)
Film — Beginnings
Watching the Sun Go Down 2

I support Leah-Lynn Plante and the integrity of free speech

I would say it’s a safe bet to claim that most people reading this column are at least vaguely familiar with Pussy Riot, the Russian anarchist demonstrators who made recent headlines for the arrest of three of its members.

This arrest prompted the United States State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland to state that the U.S. is “concerned about both the verdict and the disproportionate sentences…and the negative impact on freedom of expression” that may result. The State Department urged Russian authorities to “review this case and to ensure that the right of freedom of expression is upheld.”

I would also bet that most people reading this column are not familiar at all with the recent arrests of three American anarchist demonstrators. America’s dissenters appear to not be making headlines on any popular news sources that Americans regularly come into contact with.

In the past month, Matt Duran, Katherine “Kateeo” Olejnik, and Leah-Lynn Plante have all been incarcerated and placed into solitary confinement (generally reserved for high risk and dangerous criminals) at the Federal Detention Center in Seatac, Wash.

The heinous crime these three were found guilty of committing? Exercising silence.

Plante, the most recently indicted on Oct. 10, had her home occupied and raided by the FBI and Joint Terrorism Task Force agents on the morning of July 25.

She was accused of being involved with vandalism that occurred at Seattle on May Day and accused of lying when she insisted that nothing in her home was used in the alleged vandalism. The FBI agents confiscated personal items, books and other literature as “evidence” in a fashion reminiscent of “1984.”

Shortly after, Plante was called to testify in a federal grand jury that was intended to investigate anarchists in the Pacific Northwest.

Federal grand juries are convened as a means of honoring the Fifth Amendment (“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury.”)

However, in a grand jury, the Fourth (the part about search warrants, searches, and seizures) and Sixth (speedy public trial, right to defense, and due process of law) Amendments become void.

Grand juries are used as a means of gathering evidence to decide if a crime has actually been committed. They accomplish this through using subpoenas — orders to testify or face punishment — to extract information from people with hopes of gathering enough solid evidence to create a criminal trial.

If you refuse to answer the questions asked by a grand jury, then you can be accused of civil contempt, which will immediately result in a trial and (as is the case of Duran, Olejnik, and Plante) can result in being remanded into federal custody.

In essence, grand juries have a ton of power, and the defense can’t do a thing about it except kneel over in submission or face penance.

There is no “innocent until proven guilty.” There is only “cooperate or you are guilty.” Federal grand juries are little more than witch hunts designed to force whistleblowing or face punishment.

Further adding to the unconscionable nature of the series of events that has occurred, evidence gathered via the Freedom of Information Act request has let it known that the jury was called on March 2, two months before the May Day vandalism that the jury focused on.

Everything about these arrests seems incredibly unethical. Every facet of the “justice” system feels grossly misused: The grand jury usage, the raid, the resulting punishment.

Things just smell fishy. Pieces don’t add up. It’s reflecting McCarthy-era fear tactics used to unjustly target people who have seemingly threatening political affiliations. I can’t speak for everyone, but simply saying “I will not answer your questions today” does not sound very threatening to me.

Despite everything, these activists have taken their penalties gracefully. As Plante said in her official statement on the day of her arrest, “Today is Oct. 10, 2012, and I am ready to go to prison.”

I do not know if Plante and her comrades have participated in activities worthy of legal punishment. But I do know that I commend and admire them all for remaining unwavering in their convictions and resisting the federal grand jury, despite the resulting punishments.

Despite their anarchist affiliations, I cannot actually imagine a more “American” ideal than sacrificing everything in order to fight for the integrity in freedom of speech.

If only the United States State Department felt freedom of expression was as important on domestic soil as they do for Russian activists.

Anna Mitchell is a junior liberal arts major. Her columns appear Wednesdays in the Collegian. Letters and feedback can be sent to letters@collegian.com.

http://www.collegian.com/2012/10/17/i-support-leah-lynn-plante-and-the-integrity-of-free-speech/

Ron Paul Presidential Debate Analysis: Why the American People Lost This Debate

This may seem like a cop-out, but I have to say tonight’s second presidential debate was a virtual tie.

Barack Obama came out swinging from the start, and he was much more aggressive and assertive than he was the first time around. Almost angry at times. Romney fought back hard and didn’t back down at all.

Obama portrayed Romney as some free-market capitalist deregulator, and Romney ran away from that (false) caricature every chance he could get. Even from someone like me who honestly sees virtually no difference between the two, even their rhetoric was very similar.

Both of them talked about “closing deductions,” cutting taxes for the middle class, attacked outsourcing, went after China, defended protectionism, limits on gun ownership, restrictions on immigration, and “energy independence.”

They really are struggling to keep this interesting. I can see why there are so many “undecided” voters. Predator R or Predator D?

Finally, I have to point the biggest lie that each of them told.

President Obama claimed that he ended the war in Iraq and is “winding down the war” in Afghanistan. Obama repeats this lie a lot, and it’s a shame Romney is such a warmonger himself that he can’t hit him on it. President Bush negotiated a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) with Iraq before he left office, and Obama simply abided by it. In fact, Obama has been slowly sneaking in as many troops as he can into the region, especially in the lower Arabian Peninsula.

As I pointed out in my pre-debate coverage, Obama is not winding down the Afghan war in 2014 like he claims, but rather negotiating to keep U.S. troops there until 2024. Do I even need to mention his wars and drone strikes in Yemen, Pakistan, Somalia, etc?

And as for Mitt Romney, the biggest lie that stood out for me was his claim that “China is manipulating its currency” and his general belligerence and hawkishness toward China. The first thing that comes to mind is: what about the manipulation of our currency by the U.S. government and the Federal Reserve? The Fed has created over $16 trillion in money in the last few years, distributed it discreetly around the globe to foreign banks and foreign governments, and price-fixes interest rates. What about that “currency manipulation,” Mitt?

And finally, as I expected, the Fed, Obama’s wars overseas, the National Defense Authorization Act, the war on drugs, inflation, America’s growing police state, and our vanishing Bill of Rights were not mentioned at all. The ultimate winner is the status quo of the welfare-warfare state and the perpetuation of the One Party System, and the loser was the American people, liberty, peace, and sound economics.

This article was part of my debate liveblog/recap for PolicyMic.

Refreshing, rational U.S. views on Iran

Sometimes things happen so slowly that the casual observer misses them, and one such occurrence is the slow evolution in the United States’ position in its faceoff with Iran.

Two important things seem to have occurred since the spring: Washington seems to have taken control of the Iran situation from Israel’s hard-line prime minister who had been pushing the U.S. toward imminent war, and there seems to be more flexibility among top echelons of the American establishment on the realistic and achievable goal of any negotiations with Iran, which will require simultaneously addressing issues of concern to Iran beyond the nuclear file that has been the main preoccupation of the United States and Israel.

The loose and jingoistic talk about bombing Iran into submission that had prevailed in the United States and Israel in recent years has slowly been replaced recently by a much more hard-nosed realization of the actual costs and consequences of an attack. The evolving tone accepts that Iran is already enriching uranium and continues to develop a full nuclear fuel cycle capability, and has not been significantly deterred either by existing sanctions or the threat of being attacked. A military strike against Iran would set back the nuclear research program by a few years, but not end it, experts here seem to agree.

So an important sign of rational change in the U.S. is a more serious assessment of the pros and cons of attacking Iran – an exercise that was not carried out when the United States and Great Britain decided to attack Iraq in 2003.

The world is still paying for the disastrous consequences and many prices of that reckless venture – by the way, if you are unhappy with those Salafist militants streaming into Syria to fight the Assad regime, you should ask George W. Bush and Tony Blair why they created in Iraq the greatest magnet, training ground and export hub for Salafist militants and terrorists since the Soviets invaded Afghanistan.

A good example of this more rational public discussion is a paper that was recently published by a group of eminent American former officials and national security professionals entitled “Weighing the Benefits and Costs of Military Action Against Iran,” under the aegis of the independent Iran Project that was established in 2002 in New York to encourage more official contacts among Americans and Iranians.

The report’s respected authors – like Thomas Pickering, Paul Volcker, Ann-Marie Slaughter, Nicholas Burns, Zbigniew Brzenzski, Lee Hamilton, Gen. Anthony Zinni and others – do not offer policy recommendations, but simply lay out the expected costs, benefits and consequences of a military strike against Iran.

This report is important therefore for both the substantive issues it raises, but perhaps even more because of its insistence on promoting a serious national debate about considering the military option against Iran. I especially liked the quotation by Abraham Lincoln at the start of the report: “I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts.” It suggests that perhaps the American people have not had all the facts on this matter presented to them.

Based on my discussions around the United States during the last month, I have a sense that a slow but important shift in American attitudes toward Iran continues to see diplomacy as being the best route to achieving the legitimate goal of preventing Iran from producing a nuclear weapon.

One of the best expressions of this view comes from former ambassador and senior State Department official Nicholas Burns, who worked on Iran policy under presidents Bush and Obama, and is now a professor at Harvard University. To his credit, he says the same things in his public pronouncements and private discussions, and makes several critical points that are worth pondering:

First, he says, the American president should “create a direct channel between Washington and Tehran and begin an extended one-on-one negotiation with all issues on the table. The United States should aim for the sustained and substantive talks it has not had in the three decades.”

Second, he urges the United States “for the first time” to put “far-reaching proposals” on the table if diplomacy and negotiations are to succeed.

Third, he feels the United States must take control of the Iran issue from Israel, both to give Washington more independence and to protect Israel’s core interests.

Like most other Americans who deal with this issue, he also says that military force should not be removed as an option if it is needed one day. Yet it is refreshing to hear solid establishment types like Burns stress the need for substantive and direct high-level negotiations on issues of concern to all sides, and that are not managed from afar by Israelis.

Most Americans oppose war with Iran, and perhaps the Obama administration and others in the policy establishment now feel that achieving legitimate foreign policy goals through diplomacy is preferable to waging war. What a refreshing change that would be.

Violent crime jumps 18 percent in 2011, first rise in nearly 20 years

Violent crimes unexpectedly jumped 18 percent last year, the first rise in nearly 20 years, and property crimes rose for first time in a decade. But academic experts said the new government data fall short of signaling a reversal of the long decline in crime.

The U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics reported Wednesday that the increase in the number of violent crimes was the result of an upward swing in simple assaults, which rose 22 percent, from 4 million in 2010 to 5 million last year. The incidence of rape, sexual assault and robbery remained largely unchanged, as did serious violent crime involving weapons or injury.

Property crimes were up 11 percent in 2011, from 15.4 million in 2010 to 17 million, according to the bureau’s annual national crime victimization survey. Household burglaries rose 14 percent, from 3.2 million to 3.6 million. The number of thefts jumped by 10 percent, from 11.6 million to 12.8 million.

The statistics bureau said the percentage increases last year were so large primarily because the 2011 crime totals were compared to historically low levels of crime in 2010. Violent crime has fallen by 65 percent since 1993, from 16.8 million to 5.8 million last year.

“2011 may be worse than 2010, but it was also the second-best in recent history,” said Northeastern University criminology professor James Alan Fox.

“These simple assaults are so low-level in severity that they are not even included in the FBI counts of serious crime,” Fox said. FBI crime data only counts aggravated assaults.

The growth in violent crime experienced by whites, Hispanics, younger people and men accounted for the majority of the increase.

Chris Melde, an assistant professor at Michigan State University’s school of criminal justice, said: “you can have percentage changes that seem quite large but unless you put them in a longer-term perspective you can sometimes misinterpret the overall seriousness of the problem. I would caution against forecasting future crime trends based on a one-year fluctuation.”

A retired police chief says the growing number of assaults last year may reflect a need by law enforcement to spend more time and attention on what’s happening in the nation’s schools.

“My experience was that almost always, disputes started on campus and the young people took care of them off-campus with fists,” said Jim Bueermann, president of the Police Foundation, the country’s oldest, non-partisan, nonprofit police research organization. Bueermann was the police chief in Redlands, Calif., for 13 years.

Bueermann said the bureau’s crime victimization reports can be a useful tool for police because “you get a different snapshot that’s just as valuable” as looking at crimes which are formally reported to police.

The victimization figures are based on surveys by the Census Bureau of a large sample of Americans in order to gather data from those who are victims of crime. The results are considered the government’s most comprehensive crime statistics because they count both crimes that never are reported to the police as well as those reported.

Historically, less than half of all crimes, including violent crimes, are reported to police.

Last May, the FBI’s preliminary crime report for 2011, which counts only crimes reported to police, concluded that while crime dropped again last year, the declines slowed in the last half of the year. In the FBI report, violent crime fell 6.4 percent in the first six months of last year. But for the entire year, the decline was much less, just 4 percent. The number of reported property crimes fell 3.7 percent in the first half of last year, but for all of 2011, went down just 0.8 percent.

The slowing of declines in the second half of last year was seen by some academic experts as a sign that the years of falling crime levels might be nearing an end.

“It will be fascinating to see” the next FBI report, which comes out at the end of October, said professor Alfred Blumstein of the Heinz College of Carnegie Mellon University.

The 7-Eleven Presidency

In the wake of the Treasury Department’s newly released summary of federal spending for 2012, it’s now possible to detail just how profligate the Obama years have been.  Here’s the upshot:  Under Obama, for every $7 we’ve had, we’ve spent nearly $11 (or, to be more exact, $10.95).  That’s like a family that makes $70,000 a year — and is already knee-deep in debt — blowing nearly $110,000 a year.

To illustrate this a bit differently, for every Jackson ($20) we’ve had available to spend under Obama, we’ve also borrowed a Hamilton ($10) and a Washington ($1) and spent those too.  The only thing is that, under Obama, we’ve (literally) spent the equivalent of 342 billion Jacksons, 342 billion Hamiltons, and 342 billion Washingtons — borrowing all of the Hamiltons and Washingtons.

Let’s take a look at the scorecard, based on official government figures.  In fiscal year 2012 (which ended on September 30), the federal government acquired $2.449 trillion in tax revenue and other receipts.  It spent $3.538 trillion — 44 percent more than it had available to spend.  The resulting deficit was $1.089 trillion.

In fiscal year 2011 (see table S-1), the federal government acquired $2.303 trillion in tax revenues and other receipts.  It spent $3.603 trillion — 56 percent more than it had available to spend.  The resulting deficit was $1.3 trillion.

In fiscal year 2010 (see table S-1), the federal government acquired $2.163 trillion in tax revenues and other receipts.  It spent $3.456 trillion — 60 percent more than it had available to spend.  The resulting deficit was $1.293 trillion.

In fiscal year 2009 — which was, for the most part, President Bush’s fiscal year (his final one) — Obama’s economic “stimulus” added $183 billion (see table 1-2) to the deficit (it would add far more in future years), on top of the deficit that we were already running that year under Bush.

So in all, under Obama, the federal government has acquired $6.846 trillion in tax revenues and other receipts, and it has spent $10.711 trillion — 56 percent more than it has had available to spend.

Moreover, Obama has amassed this historic record of fiscal profligacy even before his centerpiece legislation has really taken effect.  If it’s not repealed first, the colossally expensive Obamacare is poised to present grave new challenges to our fiscal solvency — and to our liberty — once it would become a reality on these shores in early 2014.

With one fiscal year of this 7-Eleven presidency still to come (regardless of the outcome on Election Day, fiscal year 2013 will belong to Obama) — and with the specter of Obamacare looming — our national debt is now over $16 trillion.  That’s more than $6 trillion higher (see table S-9) than it was during the first presidential debate of 2008, when Obama bemoaned what he called the “orgy of spending and enormous deficits” under Bush.

Yet Obama — who recently showed that he apparently has no idea how big our national debt is — amazingly says of that debt, “[W]e don’t have to worry about it short-term.”  In other words, if you have $7, spend $11 — let future generations of Americans worry about it.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/7-eleven-presidency_654846.html

Jill Stein: US political system hostile to Americans

The money-ruled American political system has a pretty straight-ahead Wall Street agenda and is designed to eliminate opposition the way dictatorships do, Jill Stein, the US presidential candidate for the Green Party, shared with RT – FULL SCRIPT at http://on.rt.com/alzdzn

Post Navigation

%d bloggers like this: