Saturday, February 13, 2010
The first problem that cropped up is, who is in charge? The root of this is the Presidents inability to not only define terrorist, or to even define what terrorism is. Janet Napolitano called terrorists creators of man-made disasters. President Obama twisted belief that Islamic terrorism is a result of oppressive poverty. The reality is Islamic terrorists come from all socioeconomic backgrounds. In the Washington Post article, “5 Myths About Who Becomes a Terrorists”, Jessica Stern completely debunks President Obama's flawed worldview. “The reasons that some people become terrorists are as varied as the reasons that others choose conventional professions: market conditions, social networks, contact with recruiters, education and individual preferences. And just as the passion for justice that may animate a young law student is not necessarily what keeps him working long hours at a law firm while hoping to make partner, a terrorist's motivations for staying with his cause can also change”. It's as simple as this, is a terrorists a criminal or an enemy combatants. At least with President Bush everyone knew the US considered terrorists as enemy soldiers, most guilty of crimed against humanity.
First we have Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab (let's just call him Umar), somehow getting by Amsterdam's Airport security. After talk of a “sharped dress man”, first he didn't have a passport, then he did, then he didn't, it turned out Umar “was” being watched by the CIA, and he was let onto the plane, so they could follow him to a identify his Al Qaeda “higher up”; oops! Once the bomb fizzled and burned, Umar was arrested and taken into custody at Ohare Int Airport by the FBI and Inspector Hol-der', the FBI's prosecutor So what happens next? Does Hol-der' talk with Napolitano, Head of Homeland Security (and the TST)? No. Does he discuss options with Dennis Blair, the Director of Homeland Security, who mans the High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group? No. Does he ask Michael Leiter, the head of the National Counter Terrorism Center? No. Instead, he sends in cold (no background information) and FBI interrogator, who talks with Umar for 50 minutes, calls it good and Miandizes him. 50 Minutes! Robert Gibbs, the White House Press secretary said, "Well, FBI interrogators believe they got valuable intelligence and were able to get all that they could out of him,"
I will never forget the congressional hearing where Napolitano, Blair and Leiter were sitting together at a table at Congressional Hearing, Sen. Susan Collins, the panel’s ranking Republican: “Were you consulted regarding the decision to file criminal charges ... in civilian court?” They all looked at each other and one at a time they said, Nope, Not me, Uh-Ah (okay the really said “I was not”). When Blair was asked about the use of the HIG, he said, “"That unit was created exactly for this purpose," Blair told the Senate Homeland Security Committee. "We did not invoke the HIG in this case. We should have." Blair had to later clarify his remarks and admit the HIG was not yet operational! Further, Blair said it never dawned on them that the HIG would be used on a suspect arrested on US soil. Huh?
THEN!...Then!...then. The piece de resistance; the pinnacle of naiveté and self serving idiocy. As Inspector Hol-der' and the other national security heads are looking for a desk to hide under, Sen Diane Fienstein comes to their supposed rescue and announces the the world, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab is talking again. With those few words, any information that was of any value was compromised. At the very least, Inspector's Hol-der's' incompetence seemed to have had the usual Clouseau success, until the information was leaked. I know know there is no intelligence left in Washington, but I know there are US spooks somewhere in this country, who are sitting at their desks, elbows on the top, forehead cradled in their hands and slowly rocking their heads back and forth; sorry man.
There's more, but this is the jest. Again, the way Bush looked at this was, since 911, the US was at war with terrorists. Any terrorists captured were prisoners of war; that's what Guantanamo Bay was, a POW camp. Remember all those WWII films. Do you try prisoners of war in a civilian court? or do you hold them until the war is over? Granted, there are some POW's that have committed crimes against humanity ala Nurenburg; in those cases you have a military tribunal and try them. Inspector Hol-der' is also attempting to try the 911 arrested terrorists in a civilian court in New York. In a court system that has a Constituional guarantee that you are innocent until proven guilty, President Obama has said, of 911 suspect, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, "I don't think it will be offensive at all when he is convicted and when the death penalty is applied to him." and Sen. Patrick Leahy said, "He's going to be convicted - that's the important thing. We show the world that our judicial system works."
In other words he will have a fair trail and then he will be shot. Is this the example the senator wants to show the world on, not only the strength but the fairness of our courts? AND KNOW!; And Know! And know, after months of jabbering, political pressure seems to be sufficient to reverse Inspector Hol-der' and try the 911 suspects with a military tribunal. There is a god, he doesn't like terrorist and apparently doesn't think much of incompetent prosecutors either.
As a final caveat, what seems to be lost in all this, is that the information we can extract from Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, is much more important then prosecuting him. The idea that all Inspector Hol-der' could think about was a successful court case, shows the Obama Administration really doesn't care; they really don't care. The proper response to the underwear bomber publicly should have been very little. Just like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. The underwear bomber should have disappeared of the face of the earth for a while. No, I don't mean torture him. I mean take a couple of months and extract every bit of information, useful or not, out of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. Then once your done, you figure out what you are going to do about him. This is not supposed to be about a posturing President and his Attorney general, it's about keeping American citizens safe. Remember us?
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Control of business and unions.
President Obama took over GM and Chrysler and handed then over to the unions; 17.5% GM and 65% Chrysler. Both are being run by CEO's installed by the Federal Government. It is not hard to imagine a scenario where the government will continue to team up with the unions and and extend hegemony over all unionized business in the US. In fascism the government creates a commission to address all union matters and decide issues; the commissions decisions are final and not negotiable.
One of President Obama's agenda items is called “guaranteed income stream” of a Federal Guaranteed Return Annuity. These are mandatory retirement accounts, were a portion of your retirement will be placed in an account backed by US Treasury Bonds. Then when you retire, you will receive a fixed amount for life. The reason for this is diabolical. There is close to $10 trillion out there in private and public retirement and pension funds in the US. The way the US pays for it's debt is to sell treasury bonds (i.e. Savings Bonds). So, the Federal Government is going to force the citizenry to buy it's debt. The original plan is to mandate 15% of your retirement funds must go into this government annuity, but one suspects this will grow. As Duke in the Doonebarry comic strip once said, “Besides, the pension fund was just sitting there” .
In the area of Cap and Trade, it appears the Senate will not produce a bill any time soon, but that has not stopped the President.. On Dec 9, 2009 Environmental Protection Agency officials said that greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide endanger people's health. Using this “endangerment finding”, the EPA overcame a hurtle placed by the US Supreme Court before it could regulate C02. In a move out of the fascist play book, the President has directed the EPA to bypass Congress and strong arm cities into investing in Cap and Trade; a scheme that will bring all business under federal control and cost the country tax payers $500 billion @ year conservatively. This area of fascism also demonstrates the use of science which is typical of socialism. It is surprising how quickly intellectuals and scientist jump on the band wagon to scientifically prove aspects of a planned society and fascism. Everything from Eugenics to fascism being the inevitable result of evolved capitalism and the free market, was shown to be scientifically proven in Germany and Italy. The idea that science is somehow more objective and immune from the political pressures of social and economic planners is a pit we continue to where we continually fall; even to this day.
Control of the Banking system
As a result of the TARP buy out, the US Treasury silently included what is referred to as an “explicit guarantee”. Meaning the Treasury will back the banks to the tune of $27.3 trillion for any future debts they may incur; with this extent of this pending liability, the government should have unfettered influence on the banks.
Our current banking system with the Federal Reserve has the framework of fascism already in place; someone would say the Federal Reserve is already an operating fascist entity. With fascism in place, all semblance of an independent banking system will disappear and the banks will simply become an annex of the government and every aspect of the economics of the state will be planned and controlled.
Media and Information control
Seemingly without any prodding the main stream media, with the exception of Fox news have been biased toward President Obama at a scale never seen before. Further, with Cass Sustein, the Information and Regulatory Czar, we have an ideologue who appears to accept the extremest Constitutional theory the First Amendment was meant for politicians in Congress and not the American citizens . He has written a now infamous white paper calling for censorship of any individual or group stating he, “doubt(s) whether, as interpreted, the constitutional guarantee of free speech is adequately serving democratic goals”.
The Federal Cybersecurity Act of 2009 is on it's way to becoming law and has prescribed (from Mother Jones) new Presidential powers to shut down or limit Internet traffic in any "critical" information network "in the interest of national security." Further, the bill does not only add to the power of the president. It also grants the Secretary of Commerce "access to all relevant data concerning [critical] networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access." This means he or she can monitor or access any data on private or public networks without regard to privacy laws.
The End of Individualism
In order for fascism to take hold, collectivism must replace Individualism. Of all the freedoms in our current society, this will be the most problematic. The avenue of choice here by the Progressives appear to be healthcare. The current healthcare reforms are specifically designed to devalue individualism. The goal has always been single payer, where the government controls the health needs of all citizens; even the so called public option, was simply designed to create a incremental step toward single payer, where none existed before. Once single payer is initiated, the American will have surrendered their individualism and joined the collective. Care will be dolled out and rationed according to the individual value to the state; the plan also includes the government having access to banking accounts and medical records. As with all collective healthcare systems, the higher quality of care must be reduced to accommodate greater demand on the system. The collective citizen's health, diet, exercise and general quality of life will be dictated by the benevolent State, that is supposedly unbiased toward the betterment and health of the State , of which the collective is part.
I did not create a separate heading for indoctrination, as the Progressives have been in charge of education since their inception, and tacit revisionist history is already pervasive. In order for a society born of individualism to become a collective, the Progressives have re-written history to down play the positives effects of individual freedom and liberty, which has made the American people the most prosperous people in history. The interjection of Progressive policies especially in the 20th century has been an object failure, so in a form of historical misdirection, the Progressive educational system attempts to take credit for the blessings of liberty and freedom. Cass Sustein presents this Orwellian worldview best when he says, "There is no liberty without dependency”.
Along the same lines, Alex Jones and his side kick, Jason Bermas have completely bought into the Gary Allen's false dilemma, that there are only two theories of history, either accidental or planned; Jones believing in the latter. I tend to believe that most is planned, but some is also accidental. This has really raised it's head with the issue of the Tea Party Nation and Sarah Palin. Jones stated very succinctly, that the litmus test of whether Palin was a member of the new World Order, was whether she backed Debra Medina or Rick Perry, and she backed Perry. This also spilled over into the Glenn Beck radio show with Debra Medina as a guest and she was not unfriendly to 911. As I have mentioned in previous blogs, Glenn Beck believes that 911 Truthers are ideologues that have no place in government. The reason should be self evident. If you really believe that 911 was a government plot, then it is pervasive through your entire world view, leaving no room for any other belief system. In this case, the sole reason Jones has thrown Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin under the bus, is because they are unfriendly to 911 Truth (and recent events has caused him to soften his opinion on Palin). But, when Jones isn't ranting, he's so far above anyone else doing the same thing, no one can touch him.
You know, I can understand Jones demonising Beck for his 911 Truth bashing, but what I don't understand is Jones anger at Beck for "strafing" Debra Medina by showing her to be friendly to the 911 Truthers. Alex, which is it? Is the 911 Truth Movement good thing or bad thing? Is it something your supposed to hide, with a nod and a wink or proudly come out of the closet? But this is the tactic of many 911 Truthers; they are very selective in their world view, and say that anyone who disagrees with them is a traitor. Alex Jones and Glenn Beck surely have more in common than they disagree about. Rather than being a corporate shill, Beck seems to look at the banking system and thinks you can still put the smoke back in the box; oh and he thinks 911 Truthers are nuts. Alex Jones on the other hand sees the banking system as a tool of the New World Order, so trying to save is like trying to make sure your enemies' weapons don't malfunction any more. So yes, they have some mutually exclusive beliefs, but they also tend to balance each other out.
On a recent Alex Jones (2/12) Jason Bermes and another 911 Truther declared a figurative war on Glenn Beck, calling him the figurehead of 911 Liar (I'm not kidding). They actually believe their movement has a level of political influence, that has accomplished, amongst other things, the defeat of Rudy Giuliana in his bid for the 2008 Presidency. Reality of course is entirely different; 911 Truther is the touch of death to any politician. There is no doubt that the Tea Bag Movement is being co-opted; some whacked out lawyer, Judson Phillips actually used the North Carolina Tea Bag Convention to declare the "Tea Bag Nation" as his money making organization and plans on making a million dollars off the Tea Bag movement.
Earlier in this blog I mentioned Gary Allen. Back in the 70's Gray Allen wrote a global (or the global) conspiracy book called, "None Dare Call It Conspiracy"; read this book and you will understand Alex Jones. I also once said that Jones appears to be a clearing house for conspiracy theories. What this means is he mixes real conspiracies with false (or questionable) conspiracies, which can casts doubt on them all; not that that is his intent, it just the result. None Dare Call It Conspiracy, is like the global warming of conspiracies; it's written so anything or everything that happens, proves that it is true. It creates a duality that, either there is a omnipresent bankers conspiracy, or life is just a series of events loosely related to each other. I prefer to live in a world with more choices than that.
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
As I mentioned in my last article, The Myth Of Carbon Credits , the whole idea behind Man Made Climate Change is to create a new financial market for Cap and Trade; to trade Carbon Credit Derivatives (CCD). There is no way to discuss Man Made Climate Change without mentioning Al Gore and the United Nations, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Since it's inception the United Nations stated purpose was to regulate the industrial countries of the world and redistribute their wealth to poorer countries. This can not be done, unless an organization, such as the IPCC, has regulatory authority that overrides sovereignty; this has already been accomplished by EU directives, which have the authority of law over EU member nations. In essence the United Nations intent is to use the discredited concept of Man Made Global Warming to create a world regulatory authority using carbon credits as a Global currency. The idea of carbon credits is simple enough, if you are a big oil company, like Shell Oil, you simply need to shut down a couple of poorly producing oil fields and you will be flush with carbon credits. If you are a big industry polluter, you will buy these credits and simply pass the cost on to the consumer; referred to as "pay to pollute". What is hoped is there will be companies investing in low C02 producing technology, that will be offset by the resulting carbon credits (low C02 producing technology has been referred to as “Green Technology”, however there is nothing “Green” about reducing C02, since C02 is what is used by plants for photosynthesis, which makes them green; the theory of Man Made Climate Change and carbon credits, will have no effect on reducing any pollution, as it is again, a method for the re-distribution of wealth).
The CCD market will, by definition become as complicated as the Sub-prime financial market of old. As investors in CCD market, speculators have no need for carbon credits, they are simply buying CCD, to drive up the price and make a profit; that's what speculators do. Further there is another derivative called a Credit Default Swap (CDS), which is an unregulated insurance policy on investments. A CDS is unregulated because 1) the insurer does not have to hold funds in reserve in the event the insured investment losses money, and 2) anyone can buy one of these insurance policies, regardless if they own the insured investment; this has been compared to going into a retirement home and buying life insurance on the residents. What eventually happened with the sub-prime meltdown was, the banks sold 10 times more CDS insurance policies than Mortgage Derivatives, and when housing tanked and the mortgage securities value was suspect (i.e. toxic), the banks could not pay the the CDS and had to be propped up by the US Tax Payers. This is how a bubble forms and explodes and there is no reason why this will not happen again. If the CCD tank, as the well intentioned company is converting to low C02 technology, the CCD will be worthless and the company will have no compensation.
The use of Credit Default Swaps and other derivatives has a negative effect far worse that the occasional bubble. The real problem is the Fed gave an “implicit guarantee” with these banks, that they are too big to fail. Even after TARP expires Oct, 2010, the government will still guarantee the banks to the tune of over $23 trillion (that's trillion with a “t”). This means the banks can continue to keep the casino going, gambling with these financial instruments, rather than investing in American businesses. It is a recipe for national failure; and if they create another bubble and it blows up, the Fed will continue to pay. But it doesn't have to be this way. With the stroke of a pin, Congress can regulate Credit Default Swaps, and restrict derivatives to individual contracts, based on articulated needs, such as commodities and Interest Swaps; not just profit for profit sake. The message to the banks should have been, “You gambled all your money away, now you need to get back to the work of investing in America”; the casino is CLOSED.