Saturday 03rd of January 2009 04:33:33 AMtMwRoH
ofqxgjnrghmb, [url=http://klpkfdzqvakl.com/]klpkfdzqvakl[/url], [link=http://gxlsigaitxqx.com/]gxlsigaitxqx[/link], http://evfmtxfsuzch.com/
Friday 01st of August 2008 04:47:48 PM
Planetary Pelosi
Posted by Butler Shaffer at July 31, 2008 09:42 PM
Nancy Pelosi is focused on "trying to save the planet; I'm trying to save the planet," while ignoring such mundane problems as wars, depressions, corporate bankruptcies, escalating rates of inflation, etc. This may be all to the good, provided we can get her to leave the earth alone, as she and her fellow politicos have done enough damage here. Perhaps she can be persuaded to direct her attention to saving another planet - Pluto comes to mind - whose very existence as a planetary member of the solar system was lost by the Bush administration when its status was downgraded by astronomers. A "Fair Play for Pluto" committee might be formed - under her astute leadership - for the purpose of fostering legislation that would bring this distant cousin back into the family.
Friday 01st of August 2008 04:37:31 PMTo Secure These Rights?
Posted by Manuel Lora at August 1, 2008 01:38 PM
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/022230.html
The state fails to do even the things that its supporters claim it should do: the protection of our rights. Take a look at
this story or
this one or
this one --these abominations represent the complete collapse of the concepts of "justice" and "defense" and "protection." In true Orwellian fashion, justice now means plunder, defense means offense and protection means aggression.
To the
radical libertarian, the above headlines are, while shocking, not really surprising. What does surprise is that many of those who claim to favor liberty still stop short of fully accepting the conclusion of their own premises: that government is inefficient and operates via aggressive means. If we claim that the state should not be engaged in education because the result is monstrous, why not, then, apply the same reasoning to other functions that the state performs, such as defense and protection and law and courts? We oppose state education, state entertainment and every other state industry but when it comes to police and justice and law, many --too many-- give their consent and support!
It seems to me that the classical libertarians (such as minarchists and constitutionalists) have made a terrible mistake. They have taken the
most important of institutions, namely the protection of our rights, and given them to the monopolist. I believe that, if it were possible, it would be preferable to have the government take care of things like entertainment and toilets instead of the "slightly" more important functions of defense and law.
Ultimately, the state cannot be reformed and the political system can only do so much. Indeed, nothing short of the abolition of statist politics --of the state itself-- is acceptable to the radical libertarian. If the government isn't fit to be my janitor or educator, it is not fit to be my police, my judge, my jury, president, prosecutor or legislator.
Says Thoreau:
That government is best which governs not at all; and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have.
The freedom revolution begins with one's consent. Withdraw it. It's time.
Friday 01st of August 2008 09:08:09 AM
Barack Obama has misled and deceived the American public about his dual identity, dual citizenship, religious background, and birth records.
He was, and possibly still is, a citizen of Indonesia.
Contrary to Obama’s public statements that he’s “always been a Christian” Obama was at one time a Muslim.
His Hawaiian Birth Certificate reveals the legal name Barry Soetoro. His original Birth Certificate, with the name Barack H. Obama, was sealed.
That is why the Birth Certificate published on his campaign website “FightTheSmears” is fake. Barack Obama does not want you to know about his Soetoro identity.
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/showthread.php?t=296304
Thursday 31st of July 2008 03:09:17 PM
George W. Brezhnev's America
Posted by Charles Featherstone at July 31, 2008 07:25 AM
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/022210.html
I have long believed that there has been a great deal more inflation in the U.S. economy than official figures indicate, and that this has been true since at least the early 1990s. The stock market, housing and commodities markets of the last 15 or so years are ample proof that more dollars have been out there chasing goods and services. The global economy of the 1990s, which meant falling prices on numerous manufactured goods, was able to hide a great deal of that inflation from typical consumers, but it was there, in bourses and real estate and now bushels and barrels.
Joshua Holland at Alternet has a piece today looking at stagflation in the US and how the gummint has changed how inflation is calculated since the 1970s to deliberately under-report inflation. Holland's piece is interesting, not as deep as it could be, but it thankfully lacks much of the "progressive" nonsense that characterizes Alternet pieces. Holland concludes, based on 1970s methodology, that the current US rate of inflation is about 9.5 percent.
(Holland, of course, also misses entirely the real cause of inflation, which is the central bank's running of the printing press -- both real and electronic. The Left needs central banking for its well-managed social democratic world.)
In addition, Holland says that because inflation is underestimated, economic growth is overestimated. The US economy has not grown anywhere near as much since the 1980s as "official" statistics say.
The picture Holland paints, and one I am sympathetic with, is that of an inflation-plagued economy that has been growing slowly or not at all for at least 30 years. An economy dominated by government spending, especially a sprawling and bloated war machine. It sounds an awful lot like Leonid Brezhnev's USSR, a state and society no one could fix.
Thursday 31st of July 2008 02:53:10 PM
Obama flipping
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2008/07/21/080721taco_talk_hertzberg
Obama’s U-turn on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act last week was not so trivial. He had promised to filibuster it if it retained the provision immunizing telecom companies from lawsuits arising from the companies’ compliance with Administration requests—orders, really—to coöperate in patently illegal activity. The bill did retain that provision, and Obama voted not only for the bill but against the filibuster. Opinion is divided on the seriousness of the bill’s threat to civil liberties. In the Times last week, the Open Society Institute’s Morton H. Halperin, whose devotion to civil liberties is rivalled only by his knowledge of national-security matters, called the bill “our best chance to protect both our national security and our civil liberties.” Other civil libertarians see it as the death knell for the Fourth Amendment. But there can be little doubt that Obama’s vote—which could not have affected the outcome—was influenced by worry about being branded as soft on terrorism. Unlike FISA, the Iraq war can’t be repealed. But perhaps Obama will now take a more compassionate view of Hillary Clinton’s vote to authorize it.
Meanwhile, McCain has been busily reversing his views in highly consequential ways. He opposed the Bush tax cuts because they favored the rich; now he supports their eternal extension. He was against offshore oil drilling as not being worth the environmental damage it brings; now he’s for it, and damn the costs. He was against torture, period; now he’s against it unless the C.I.A. does it. He keeps flipping to the wrong flops. But he and Obama can both take comfort in what they’re avoiding. If they were clinging to every past position, the flip-flop police would be busting them for stubbornness and rigidity in the face of changing circumstances. Bush all over again! Flip-flops are preferable to cement shoes, especially in summertime.
Wednesday 30th of July 2008 10:01:10 PM
In Rumsfeld’s Shop
A senior Air Force officer watches as the neocons consolidate their Pentagon coup.
mailto:ksusiek@shentel.net
Today, on the radio, I heard another cool talking point, a neat device to explain the Iraq War. A caller to Bill Bennett’s show said that he now believed the war was based on lies, and that it would have never happened had the government and most of the media had not presented lies as unquestionable truth. The host’s answer was basically, lies or no lies, "The American people wanted this war!" While the neocon host admitted that even though maybe the American people should have informed themselves more thoroughly – it was the American people who had pushed for the invasion of Iraq. It was indeed our fault, but one has to appreciate the irony of hearing it articulated with such delight by a bleating neocon goat.
Wednesday 30th of July 2008 02:37:11 PM
My letter to Obama re. this quote:
"We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
http://fredsitelive.com/reference/ObamaLetter.jpg
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/showthread.php?t=295986&page=2
Wednesday 30th of July 2008 02:33:16 PM
Obama on Iran Nukes
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1215331099249&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Monday 28th of July 2008 10:18:23 PM
Barack Obama
“We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded!”
Monday 28th of July 2008 07:47:19 PM
More on banking
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/showthread.php?t=295956
So it's not just the Fed and the Treasury that are ruining the system; the politicos are busy bankrupting the country, too. In fact, the Fannie bailout could quite possibly be the last straw.
It now looks like Obama has been anointed by Wall Street (who are his biggest contributors) to revive the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC)--a morgue for dead banks---so that the investment giants can off-load hundreds of billions in bad paper in one fell swoop and purge the system. That will be the big "post election" surprise; another bone for investment giants.
The path ahead has never looked so uncertain. Still, niether Paulson nor Bernanke seem at all upset by the riskiness of their strategy or by the fact that the nation's economic future has been reduced to a crap-shoot. The Fed has already spent more than $300 billion to prop up the teetering banking system in the last year alone, plus another $29 (that was never approved by congress) to buy the toxic bonds from Bear Stearns in the JP Morgan acquisition. Now, the Treasury has been authorized by congress to buy an "unlimited amount" of Fannie and Freddie shares at their own discretion. They are presently exchanging Fannie and Freddie securities for US Treasurys, which means that the dollar is now backed by dodgy mortgage-backed sludge for which there is no market. According to Rep Ron Paul, "This is the asset (MBS) which now backs up our currency. An asset that no one else wants. If they were to dump these securities on the market today, the value of these stocks would go straight to 0. But that is literally the asset that is behind our currency. It is a very serious situation."
None of congress's back-room maneuvering has anything to do with "providing a lifeline for the struggling homeowner", as Senator Dodd claims. That's all bunkum. The homeowner won't get a lick of help from this bill. Its just another handout for the brokerage fraternity. The country is putting its AAA credit rating on the line for same clatter of carpetbaggers who created the mammoth equity bubble in the first place. Now they are being rewarded for their criminal conduct. Also, Bloomberg News notes that, "Sensible people are starting to question whether the U.S. can hang on to its AAA credit rating. The prospect of an extra $5 trillion or thereabouts leaking onto the U.S. government's tab from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac has spooked investors."
America's AAA rating will vanish in a year. It should be zero anyway. No one really believes the US will repay its debts. The US bond market is just a glitzy imitation of casino roulette only the odds are considerably worse.
Monday 28th of July 2008 05:55:18 PM
NAB Announcement today.
Dow: 11,131.08, -239.61, (-2.11%)
Nasdaq: 2,264.22, -46.31, (-2.00%)
S&P 500: 1,234.37, -23.39, (-1.86%)
Also IndyMac people were informed that most of their investments in CDO's are essentially worthless.
Saturday 26th of July 2008 08:46:55 AM
Getting to Know You
By Bob Herbert
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/26/opinion/26herbert.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin
But what we’ve learned over the years is that Mr. McCain is one of those guys who never has to pay much of a price for his missteps and foul-ups and bad behavior. Can you imagine the firestorm of outrage and criticism that would have descended on Senator Obama if he had made the kind of factual mistakes that John McCain has repeatedly made in this campaign?
Thursday 24th of July 2008 08:07:56 PM
http://fredsite.mine.nu/Zweb/Politics/SecretTeam/U2Powers.htm
The Sabotaging of the American Presidency
by L. Fletcher Prouty
In 1960, the Secret Team, terrified that President Eisenhower was coming to terms with the USSR, resolved that there must be no peace. A surefire plan was needed to destruct the upcoming summit conference. What better way to show American bad faith than by arranging for a US "spy" plane to be forced down over the USSR on the Russian's most important national holiday.
More than one-third of all the Federal Taxes you and I pay goes into something called "Defense"; yet, we have almost no defense at all. We do have some offense, though, and that offense is supposed to operate on a "fail-safe" system. How safe is fail-safe? What happens when fail-safe fails?
Thursday 24th of July 2008 07:05:18 PM
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/
At the center of this dissent-suppressive policy was Gregory Jenkins, the former deputy assistant to President Bush and White House director of advance, as well as a former Fox News producer. Jenkins was sued by the ACLU for his role in the removal of the Denver attendees and in several other cases. Bush officials originally denied any role in this conduct, but a Presidential Advance Manual for which Jenkins was responsible uncovered by the ACLU explicitly instructed event workers on when and how "to stop a demonstrator from getting into the event" and "calls for Bush volunteers to distribute tickets in a manner to deter protesters and to stop demonstrators from entering." As the ACLU put it:
The American Civil Liberties Union national office today filed a federal lawsuit against a former high-level White House staffer for enacting a policy that unlawfully excluded individuals perceived to be critical of the administration from public events where President Bush was present. The policy is laid out in an October 2002 "Presidential Advance Manua" obtained by the ACLU. . . .
The ACLU is suing Gregory Jenkins, former Director of the White House Office of Presidential Advance and a Deputy Assistant to President Bush for setting the policy in the manual. Jenkins' policies have led to the removal and, in some cases, arrest of innocent people from taxpayer-funded events.
Thursday 24th of July 2008 01:40:53 PM:
Ron Paul on the bailout:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/022123.html
Monday, 12:52, Jul 23, 2007
Because oil companies and gas stations cannot set their prices arbitrarily, they must make their profits by earning them – by efficiently producing something that we value and are eager to buy. In so doing, they assume great risks and expend enormous effort.
Over the decades, oil companies have created a huge infrastructure to produce and distribute gasoline by investing hundreds of billions of dollars in prospecting, drilling, transporting, stocking and refining oil.
This downward trend is all the more impressive because it required the discovery and exploration of previously inaccessible sources of oil and because it persisted despite massive taxation and increased government regulation of the oil industry.
When we see the price of gasoline today, we should not accuse oil companies of gouging but rather thank them that prices are not much higher.
Monday, 16:40, Jul 23, 2007
AT&T spokesman Michael Coe said the monitors who cut the broadcast went too far and it was a mistake.
The telecom firm, which showed highlights from the three-day Lollapallooza festival on its Blue Room site, said it would draw up guidelines to prevent future misunderstandings.
AT&T said it was working to secure the rights to post the entire song, uncensored.
Monday, 17:00, Jul 23, 2007
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/iraq-intro.htm
In late 2003 the 82nd Airborne Division's area of operations in Iraq was about the size of Wyoming and stretches west from the outskirts of Baghdad to the Syrian, Jordanian and Saudi Arabian borders. The division is composed of a brigade of paratroopers and several other units that have been attached. Those units include mechanized infantry from the 1st Infantry Division and tanks and armored vehicles from the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment. Within the division's area is part of the Sunni triangle, a collection of towns that include Fallujah. The towns have have been hotspots of resistance in the guerilla war against coalition forces. The towns have have been hotspots of resistance in the guerilla war against coalition forces.
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/05/04/senate-speaks-no-permanent-bases-in-iraq/
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Permanent_U.S._bases_in_Iraq
* "You can't distinguish between Al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror". --George W. Bush, September 25, 2002.
* "We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the September 11th ... There's no question that Saddam Hussein had al Qaeda ties." --George W. Bush, September 17, 2003.
Thursday, 13:29, Aug 09, 2007
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/25575
Numerous points were made by all 15 pro-Impeachment activists in attendance. Waxman said he would take our literature under submission. What were his expressed reservations and issues?
(1) Timing -- Waxman said that he didn't think Impeachment by the House could happen until May 2008 and that a trial by the Senate would create huge political problems for the Democrats as the trial would run into the November 2008 elections thereby 'alienating' many American voters much like the impeachment of Clinton -- Waxman claimed -- alienated many voters from Republicans;
(2) He did not think he had enough 'convincing' evidence' to warrant impeachment and he valued his impartiality and 'information gathering' role on the Oversight and Government Reform Committee;
(3) He didn't believe the poll #s in favor of impeachment were greater than 20%;
(4) He was worried about Congressional Paralysis if impeachment proceedings were initiated and accusations of 'partisanship';
(5) Waxman was 'not sure' about his constitutional obligations and stated he would have to look into this (hence the faxed inquiry by us below and the request for a response);
(6) He needed to consult with the Democratic Party's leadership (presumably, Pelosi and Clinton's campaign team).
Hopefully we will hear from Waxman's office by Friday. We will discuss his response at Saturday's volunteer meeting. Hopefully Congressman Waxman will do the right thing after having reviewed the materials we have submitted and reflected on what is at stake here.
Thursday, 21:01, Aug 09, 2007
By PETE YOST Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON Oct 19, 2006 (AP)
Days before the Bush administration put Canadian citizen Maher Arar on a plane for Syria, Canadian law enforcement officials advised their U.S. counterparts that evidence of terrorist links by Arar was not definitive.
Speaking from Canada this week, Arar said a representative of the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service was present when he was put on the plane for Syria in 2002. Arar said he told the INS representative that the Syrians would torture him.
"She said something like: 'The INS is not the body or the agency that signed the Geneva Convention convention against torture.' For me what that really meant is, 'We will send you to torture, and we don't care.'"
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/WireStory?id=2588333&page=3
http://www.ararcommission.ca/eng/Vol I English.pdf
------------------
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-canada-torture-case,0,755888.story
The newly declassified memo was dated two days after U.S. authorities removed Arar from a holding cell in New York and put him on a plane to Jordan -- from where he was sent to Syria. Canadian officials learned on Oct. 9 that he had been sent to Syria but they were not sure why.
"I think the U.S. would like to get Arar to Jordan where they can have their way with him," Canadian Security Intelligence Service deputy director Jack Hooper said in the memorandum.
'Harsh Methods' Aren't Torture, Says NY Times
15-May-04
Torture
FAIR writes: "The May 13 article, headlined 'Harsh CIA Methods Cited in Top Qaeda Interrogation,' described 'coercive interrogation methods' endorsed by the CIA and the Justice Dept, including hooding, food and light deprivation, withholding medications, and 'water boarding.'... [But] the article seemed to accept [the Bushevik lie] that the techniques described are something other than torture: 'The tactics simulate torture, but officials say they are supposed to stop short of serious injury.' The implication is that only interrogation methods that cause serious physical harm would be real and not simulated torture.'" Yet the 1984 Convention Against Torture makes it clear that psychological as well as physical methods of coercion are prohibited - but the Times didn't quote any experts. Ask Times ombudsman Daniel Okrent to remind editors that experts on human rights and international law should have been included in the May 13 report on CIA torture: public@nytimes.com (212) 556-7652
Torture Memo Trail Gets Perilously Close to Bush...
10-Jun-04
Torture
"An Aug. 1, 2002, memo from the Justice Dept's Office of Legal Counsel [written by Jay S. Bybee - now a federal judge!], addressed to Gonzales, said that torturing suspected al Qaeda members abroad 'may be justified' and that international laws against torture 'may be unconstitutional if applied to interrogation' conducted against suspected terrorists. The document provided legal guidance for the CIA, which crafted new, more aggressive techniques for its operatives in the field.... [It said] physical torture 'must be equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death.' For a cruel or inhuman psychological technique to rise to the level of mental torture, the Justice Department argued, the psychological harm must last 'months or even years.' A former senior administration official said Bush's aides knew he wanted them to take an aggressive approach." Bush Approved Torture - Impeach Bush Now!
New Smoking Memo! State Dept. Warned Bush in 2002 that Prisoner Abuse Would Place US Troops in Danger
11-Jun-04
Torture
AP: "The State Department warned the White House two years ago that rejecting international standards against torture when dealing with detainees could put U.S. troops at risk. A department memo from Feb. 2, 2002, surfaced Thursday as Bush said he ordered U.S. officials to follow the law while interrogating suspected terrorists. Bush sidestepped an opportunity to denounce the use of torture. The memo followed recommendations from the Justice Department advising the president he could suspend international treaties prohibiting torture. It warned that failing to apply the Geneva Conventions to detainees from the war in Afghanistan -- whether al-Qaida or Taliban -- would put U.S. troops at risk. "
Did Bush Reward Bybee for Advocating Torture with a Federal Judgeship?
15-Jun-04
Torture
Robert Scheer writes, "Jay S. Bybee [wrote the infamous memo] which argued darkly that torturing Al Qaeda captives 'may be justified' and that international laws against torture 'may be unconstitutional if applied to interrogations' conducted under President Bush. The memo then continued for 50 pages to make the case for the use of torture. Was it as a reward for such bold legal thinking that only months later Bybee was appointed to one of the top judicial benches in the country? Perhaps he was anointed for his law journal articles bashing Roe vs. Wade and legal protection for homosexuals, or for his innovative attack on the 17th Amendment to the Constitution, which provides for the popular election of U.S. senators. But it's hard to shake the notion that his memo to Counsel to the President Alberto Gonzales established Bybee's hard-line credentials for an administration that has no use for moderation in any form." Bybee should be impeached - and disbarred!
Pentagon Prepares to Distribute 'Non-Lethal' Laser Designed to 'Boil' Water Molecules in Victims' Skin
20-Aug-04
Torture
This is the Pentagon's "nifty new toy" : a taser that uses microwaves to, literally, heat the water molecules in your skin, causing horrific pain. Like most Pentagon monstrosities, this has a 'sanitized' title: Active Denial System. The Pentagon plans to distribute the tasers to all services "for evaluation" this fall - just in time to terrorize Iraqis on a large scale. The Pentagon declares the weapon safe - tested, of course under the strictly controlled conditions that almost NEVER occur in real life. Dominique Loye of the Red Cross has pleaded for more disclosure on the weapons and independent investigation into possible side effects. (the Pentagon won't release its findings). Says Loye: "Directed energy may cause 'new types of injuries we're not aware of and may not be capable of taking care of.' " See http://mirrors.meepzorp.com/deps.org/adt
According to the documents, the next day a CSIS official in Washington wrote to his superiors about the so-called "rendering" to third countries. The official said Arar's detention and subsequent handover amounted to such a case. The officer was not identified in the documents.
Monday, 15:14, Sep 10, 2007
Location Afghanistan 1987
Present Khalid Shaikh Mohammed1, Osama bin Laden1
Notes: Reliable They fought together in 1987. It is believed to be when they met.
Sources: The 9-11 Commission Report. July 22, 2004. Chapter 5.1.
Known Activities of Maktab al-Khidamat
Location Pakistan 1988
Participants Osama bin Laden (Speaker) Jamal Ahmed al-Fadl
Notes: According to Jamal al-Fadl, Osama bin Laden gave a lecture in Pakistan that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein was not a proper Muslim and his goal was to conquer all the of the Middle East. This was well before Iraq's invasion of Kuwait.
Sources: Jamal Ahmed al-Fadl testimony, United States vs. Osama bin Laden et al, trial transcript, Day 4, Feb. 13, 2001.
Location Afghanistan
Participants: Osama bin Laden, Abu Rida al Suri
Notes: The record of this meeting comes from documents found during a raid of the Benevolence International Foundation's office in Sarajevo, uncovered in searches by Bosnian authorities in March 2002. Abu Rida and bin Laden discussed forming a "camp" or "base (Qaeda)" and notes differences with Abdullah Azzam
Source: United States versus Enaam Arnaout, government proffer.
Location Areen Guesthouse, Paktia, Afghanistan Winter 19891
Present: Osama bin Laden, Mamdouh Mahmud Salim, Abu Nofal al-Saudi, Jamal Ahmed al-Fadl
Sources: Jamal al-Fadl testimony, United States vs. Osama bin Laden et al, trial transcript, Day 2, Feb. 6, 2001.
Wednesday, 14:35, Sep 12, 2007
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/10/AR2007091002065.html
A democracy, wrote the diplomat and scholar George Kennan, "fights for the very reason that it was forced to go to war. It fights to punish the power that was rash enough and hostile enough to provoke it -- to teach that power a lesson it will not forget, to prevent the thing from happening again. Such a war must be carried to the bitter end." Which is why "unconditional surrender" was a natural U.S. goal in World War II and why Americans were so uncomfortable with three "wars of choice" since then -- in Korea, Vietnam and Iraq.
What "forced" America to go to war in 2003 -- the "gathering danger" of weapons of mass destruction -- was fictitious. That is one reason this war will not be fought, at least not by Americans, to the bitter end. The end of the war will, however, be bitter for Americans, partly because the president's decision to visit Iraq without visiting its capital confirmed the flimsiness of the fallback rationale for the war -- the creation of a unified, pluralist Iraq.
After more than four years of war, two questions persist: Is there an Iraq? Are there Iraqis?
Wednesday, 17:16, Sep 12, 2007
[QUOTE]Years of vigilance without an indisputable attack have led to a slow but systematic meltdown in the American consensus that was forged white hot on Sept. 11. [/QUOTE]
Far as I can tell the "American consensus" is still there. They want bin Laden hangin' in a tree by a meat hook through his butt. It's the administration that's abandoned the consensus.
It was Bin Laden we wanted. But that's not what is being sought by this huge, costly effort.
Not one penny, not one life spent in Iraq contributes to this. The "surge" in Iraq began the day we got there. Toppling Saddam was a huge blunder. Every country in the middle east knew it, friend and foe alike. Even [B][URL="http://www.youtube.com/jp.swf?video_id=6BEsZMvrq-I&eurl=&iurl=http%3A//img.youtube.com/vi/6BEsZMvrq-I/default.jpg&t=OEgsToPDskJZdDA40FVhc8uTD8Y1W7f3"]Dick Cheney[/URL][/B] knew it, he just "had other priorities". A tarBaby waiting to happen, and all our efforts there since are reaction to weaknesses we created there, exploited by several groups, including Al Qaeda.
160,000 troops in the one country we [b]know[/b] Bin Laden isn't hiding. Arguing whether it's due to deception, or total incompetence, while our soldiers are there creates a delay that isn't worth one more soldier's life. It can wait.
Put 1/4 of those troops on our own border, and send the rest after Bin Laden wherever that trail leads, and you'd see a marked improvement in the resolve.
"Top military brass admitted more than a month ago that the surge cannot persist after April 2008 without extending tours to 18 months or instituting a draft." Paul Rieclhoff
Monday, 09:31, Oct 01, 2007
H L Mencken - If, after I depart this vale, you ever remember me and have thought to please my ghost, forgive some sinner and wink your eye at some homely girl.
Monday, 16:53, Oct 01, 2007
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiBBJgMktpA
Monday, 20:00, Oct 01, 2007
(8)His mother sent newspaper clippings to him, about his old friends who'd stopped being boys
(8)Theres Harlot C. Green just turned 33 his leather chair waits at the bank.
(8)And Sgt Dow Jones, 27 years old, commanding his very own tank
(8)But Lather still finds it a nice thing to do, to lie about nude in the sand
(8)Drawing pictures of mtns that look like bumps, and thrashing the air with his hands
Tuesday, 01:21, Oct 02, 2007
http://www.lewrockwell.com/sardi/sardi73.html
Are Cancer Cures Being Hidden From the Public?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21091678/
Technology was trying. The Pentagon's Joint IED Task Force had spent almost $1.5 billion by the late summer of 2005, with an additional $3.6 billion planned for the fiscal year that began Oct. 1; $4 of every $5 went to defeat-the-device technologies intended to foil the bomb or mitigate the blast. But with an IED attack occurring in Iraq every 48 minutes in 2005 -- twice the frequency of the previous year -- there was much to foil and a great deal to mitigate.
True, the number of troops killed and wounded was escalating at a lower rate than the number of roadside bombs. "We are being effective," said Brig. Gen. Joseph L. Votel, director of the task force. "The casualties are not going up as much as the IEDs are." Yet nearly 500 troops had been killed in Iraq through August 2005, including those 14 at Haditha. "This thing could unravel on us by wearing down the American public with these IED casualties," Gen. John P. Abizaid, head of U.S. Central Command, told Votel.
Some promising technologies fizzled. The Defense Department invested more than $2 million in the Stealthy Insect Sensor Project, including extensive research at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, where the "Manhattan Project-like" effort that Abizaid had called for had realized its goal: a nuclear bomb. Various engineers were pursuing the "scientific molecular sniffer" that Abizaid had also envisioned shortly after taking over at Centcom in 2003, but Los Alamos hoped to exploit the honeybee's keen sense of smell as a means to detect explosives.
Researchers placed each bee in a tiny harness, exposed the insects to various explosive scents for six seconds, and then provided a sugar water reward. This Pavlovian conditioning soon caused a bee to extend its proboscis -- tongue -- in anticipation of sugar whenever it detected a whiff of TNT or C-4 plastic explosive. A small television camera placed in a box where the bees were harnessed would allow a soldier watching a monitor to see whether the "proboscis extension reflex" signaled the presence of explosives. In 2004, bees had stuck out their tongues at 50 pounds of TNT in a simulated IED, according to Robert Wingo, a Los Alamos chemist.
Votel's reaction upon learning of the project was typical: "What?" The practical applications in combat seemed limited. "How do we operationalize this?" he asked. "How does, say, 1st Platoon manage their bees?" Among other problems, harnessed bees tended to be short-lived. After an analysis concluded that the honeybee's "explosive-detection capabilities have significant reliability issues," as a Defense Department official put it earlier this year, the Pentagon withdrew its support.
Other technologies reached the battlefield only to find that the battle had moved on. Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, was aghast to learn that there was no "man-portable" electronic jammer for dismounted infantrymen. The thousands of jammers already sent to counter radio-controlled IEDs in Iraq and Afghanistan -- Warlock Green, Warlock Red, ICE, SSVJ, MMBJ -- were designed to be mounted on vehicles only.
Chinese hackers broke into Department of Homeland Security computers and made off with "many megabytes" of data, and the contractor charged with securing the department's networks attempted to cover up the breaches, according to Congressional investigators who have asked the department's inspector general to investigate the computer security breaches. The Federal Bureau of Investigation has launched a separate investigation into Unisys Corp., which for $1.75 billion was supposed to install and monitor network intrusion devices for the Transportation Security Administration and at DHS headquarters, but failed to install and monitor the devices properly...
...
A Unisys spokeswoman, Lisa Meyer, said that "no investigative body has notified us formally or informally of a criminal investigation" on the matter and added that she could not comment on specific security incidents.
Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/blogBurst/topNews?type=t...
Tuesday, 19:46, Oct 02, 2007
At a fundamental level reality is a set of rules, the result of whose interaction is nature.
Thursday, 06:11, Oct 04, 2007
Schlesinger picks up much of his best stuff from friend and fellow gossip Henry Kissinger, who tells him in 1981 that Nixon had been his old, "poisonous" self at Anwar Sadat's funeral, leading Gerald Ford to remark, "Sometimes I wish I had never pardoned that son of a bitch." Later he quotes Kissinger describing George H.W. Bush as "a very petty man" and Donald Rumsfeld as "the rottenest person he had known in government."
He confesses that in 1976 he could vote for neither Ford nor Jimmy Carter, whom he calls "a mean little man" unwilling to listen to anyone. Likewise, "loopy" Ronald Reagan is privately described by his secretary of State, George Shultz, as a president who "never ingests anything you tell him."
When Bill Clinton is elected, Schlesinger picks up early on Clinton's "Nixon-style paranoia about the media." But he comes to admire both Clintons, if not their "historically disgusting" use of the Lincoln Bedroom for contributors. During the Monica Lewinsky scandal, he publicly defends Clinton's right to lie about sex (and quotes Brooke Astor saying to Pamela Harriman, "Why couldn't Mr. Clinton have stayed with girls of his own class?"). Al Gore fares less well. He has a "holistic, even mystical fervor" that reminds Schlesinger of one of FDR's vice presidents, Henry Wallace, known for his weakness for gurus.
The private score-settling is fun reading. Joan Didion is "a viperish, whispering little creature." When Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis tells him that there's no one she'd rather sit next to, he writes that it "would be more convincing if she ever invited us over for dinner." He calls the play "Angels in America" "pretentious crap" and dishes about Norman Mailer cheating on his wife. But there's also some unintentional pathos in his social ambitions: at 76, he agrees to interview Bianca Jagger for German Vogue. Some of his most memorable books, like "The Cycles of American History," he wrote for money because he was "perennially broke." No tears. For Arthur Schlesinger's efforts, the rest of us are richer.
Sunday, 20:04, Oct 07, 2007
http://fredsitelive.com/politics/usconst.htm
The Constitution
We the people of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union...
Thursday, 00:51, Oct 11, 2007
memes and meme transfer
http://www.planetdan.net/pics/misc/georgie.htm
Saturday, 17:52, Oct 20, 2007
The tinkering networks of the Internet criminal/hacker marketplace have produced a major innovation called the "Storm Worm" and it is rewriting the rules of engagement in computer security. It's essentially a new breed of malware that is a combination of worm/trojan/bot
Monday, 00:54, Nov 05, 2007
Kïttÿ : Guided by American legal advisers, the Iraqi government has canceled a controversial development contract with the Russian company Lukoil for a vast oil field in Iraq's southern desert, freeing it up for potential international investment in the future.
Tuesday, 21:23, Nov 06, 2007
ok...remember how they were "never going after american citizens, just those nasty terrorists"?
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-1955&tab=summary
H.R. 1955: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007
4/19/2007--Introduced.
Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 - Amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to add provisions concerning the prevention of homegrown terrorism (terrorism by individuals born, raised, or based and operating primarily in the United States).
Directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to: (1) establish a grant program to prevent radicalization (use of an extremist belief system for facilitating ideologically-based violence) and homegrown terrorism in the United States; (2) establish or designate a university-based Center of Excellence for the Study of Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism in the United States; and (3) conduct a survey of methodologies implemented by foreign nations to prevent radicalization and homegrown terrorism.
Prohibits the Department of Homeland Security's efforts to prevent ideologically-based violence and homegrown terrorism from violating the constitutional and civil rights, and civil liberties, of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/uc/20071102/cm_uc_crpbux/op_334275
The euro, worth 83 cents in the early George W. Bush years, is at $1.45.
Oil is over $90 a barrel. Gold, down to $260 an ounce not so long ago, has hit $800.
Have gold, silver, oil, the euro, the pound and the Canadian dollar all suddenly soared in value in just a few years?
Nope. The dollar has plummeted in value, more so in Bush's term than during any comparable period of U.S. history. Indeed, Bush is presiding over a worldwide abandonment of the American dollar.
Is it all Bush's fault? Nope.
The dollar is plunging because America has been living beyond her means, borrowing $2 billion a day from foreign nations to maintain her standard of living and to sustain the American Imperium.
The prime suspect in the death of the dollar is the massive trade deficits America has run up, some $5 trillion in total since the passage of NAFTA and the creation of the World Trade Organization in 1994.
In 2006, that U.S. trade deficit hit $764 billion. The current account deficit, which includes the trade deficit, plus the net outflow of interest, dividends, capital gains and foreign aid, hit $857 billion, 6.5 percent of GDP. As some of us have been writing for years, such deficits are unsustainable and must lead to a decline of the dollar.
A sinking dollar means a poorer nation, and a sinking currency has historically been the mark of a sinking country. And a superpower with a sinking currency is a contradiction in terms.
What does this mean for America and Americans?
As nations realize that the dollars they are being paid for their products cannot buy in the world markets what they once did, they will demand more dollars for those goods. This will mean rising prices for the imports on which America has become more dependent than we have been since before the Civil War.
U.S. tourists traveling to the countries whence their ancestors came will find that the money they saved up does not go as far as they thought.
U.S. soldiers stationed overseas will find the cost of rent, gasoline, food, clothing and dining out takes larger and larger bites out of their paychecks. The people those U.S. soldiers defend will be demanding more and more of their money.
U.S. diplomats stationed overseas, students and businessmen are already facing tougher times.
U.S. foreign aid does not go as far as it did. And there is an element of comedy in seeing the United States going to Beijing to borrow dollars, thus putting our children deeper in debt, to send still more foreign aid to African despots who routinely vote the Chinese line at the United Nations.
The Chinese, whose currency is tied to the dollar, and Japan will continue, as long as they can, to keep their currencies low against the dollar. For the Asians think long term, and their goals are strategic.
China — growing at 10 percent a year for two decades and now growing at close to 12 percent — is willing to take losses in the value of the dollars it holds to keep the U.S. technology, factories and jobs pouring in, as their exports capture America's markets from U.S. producers.
The Japanese will take some loss in the value of their dollar hoard to take down Chrysler, Ford and GM, and capture the U.S. auto market as they captured our TV, camera and computer chip markets.
Asians understand that what is important is not who consumes the apples, but who owns the orchard.
Other nations that have kept cash reserves in U.S. Treasury bonds and T-bills are watching the value of these assets sink. Not fools, they will begin, as many already have, to divest and diversify, taking in fewer dollars and more euros and yen. As more nations abandon the dollar, its decline will continue.
The oil-producing and exporting nations, with trade surpluses, like China, have also begun to take the stash of dollars they have and stuff them into sovereign wealth funds, and use these immense and growing funds to buy up real assets in the United States — investment banks and American companies.
Nor is there any end in sight to the sinking of the dollar. For, as foreigners demand more dollars for the oil and goods they sell us, the trade deficit will not fall. And as the U.S. government prints more and more dollars to cover the budget deficits that stretch out — with the coming retirement of the baby boomers — all the way to the horizon, the value of the dollar will fall. And as Ben Bernanke at the Fed tries to keep interest rates low, to keep the U.S. economy from sputtering out in the credit crunch, the value of the dollar will fall.
The chickens of free trade are coming home to roost.
Thursday, 16:14, Nov 08, 2007
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/coleen-rowley/urgent-letter-from-intel_b_71264.html
I would think there would be thousands of signatories on the following memorandum if there had been sufficient time and a way of canvassing all former U.S. Intelligence Officers. Certainly my former agency, the FBI, combining law enforcement and intelligence gathering roles, as it does in one agency, was in a better position to recognize, from the start, the dangers of the terrible slippery slope that would result from the use of waterboarding and other "harsh interrogation techniques". The significance of the FBI reportedly ordering its agents not to particpate in such "coercive interrogations" must be clear to others.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/geoffrey-r-stone/uncle-sam-on-the-lam_b_71248.html
In an op-ed in the New York Times on November 5, ("Uncle Sam on the Line"), former Attorney General John Ashcroft offers a seemingly reasonable case for Congress to grant immunity to the major telecommunications carriers accused of cooperating in allegedly unlawful government surveillance programs. In short, Ashcroft argues that the carriers should not be held liable for their actions insofar as they acted on the basis of "explicit assurances from the highest levels of the government that the activities in question were authorized by the president and determined to be lawful."
Sunday, 07:46, Nov 11, 2007
Voyager: MUSH information
Sunday, 12:30, Nov 18, 2007
http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=41721
“Paul is no racist,” says one source. “He’s been in the public spotlight for years. Wouldn’t someone have noticed? They had to go back to the early 1990s to find something – and he’s explained that he was not aware of what was going out under his name and publicly disavowed it. They’re desperate and willing to try anything before he gains more momentum.”
Nonetheless, Ron Paul's past writings on race are catching flak from right & left, according to the USA Today OnPolitics website:
Some things published in the past under the name of Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, especially about blacks, are getting renewed attention from bloggers on the left and right now that he's made something of a name for himself after his performances in the first two Republican presidential debates. From the right, Flopping Aces says Paul "appears to have had a few racist viewpoints." From the left, Daily Kos calls him "a vicious, contemptible racist who comforts the radical right wing like no presidential candidate since David Duke."
Getting much attention: A 1996 Houston Chronicle story that says a newsletter Paul published in the early 1990s "highlighted portrayals of blacks as inclined toward crime and lacking sense about top political issues." That newsletter was called the Ron Paul Political Report, and according to Kos, Paul told Texas Monthly magazine in October 2001 that "I could never say this in the campaign, but those words weren't really written by me. ... It wasn't my language at all.” Kos points out, though, that the newsletter was eight pages long and "whether he employed other writers or not, it beggars belief that Paul would not have had full control and approval over its contents."
http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/2007/05/ron_pauls_past_.html
Ron Paul’s own words on racism, circa 2002, are perhaps his own best rebuttal, according to sources close to the campaign:
“The true antidote to racism is liberty. Liberty means having a limited, constitutional government devoted to the protection of individual rights rather than group claims. Liberty means free-market capitalism, which rewards individual achievement and competence, not skin color, gender, or ethnicity. In a free market, businesses that discriminate lose customers, goodwill, and valuable employees – while rational businesses flourish by choosing the most qualified employees and selling to all willing buyers. More importantly, in a free society every citizen gains a sense of himself as an individual, rather than developing a group or victim mentality. This leads to a sense of individual responsibility and personal pride, making skin color irrelevant. Rather than looking to government to correct what is essentially a sin of the heart, we should understand that reducing racism requires a shift from group thinking to an emphasis on individualism.”
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul68.html
Sources close to the campaign point out that Paul's message is one of liberty and individual achievement divorced from government giveaways and self-worth-sapping programs. These sources add that for Paul to espouse racism - the idea that one's physical characteristics are more important than his or her abilities and promise - he would have to run counter to the conservative libertarian philosophy that he espoused during a previous campaign for president as libertarian candidate.
Ron Paul's message, articles and dozens of major speeches on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives clearly portray his beliefs and perspectives. None of them are racist. None of them contain racist imagery. They deal with taxation, the federal reserve and focus on attempts to constrain the power and abuses of the federal government.
Monday, 15:13, Nov 19, 2007
hilary"There seems to be a pattern here. It takes a Clinton to clean up after a Bush,"
Wednesday, 13:21, Nov 28, 2007
Rove rewrites history: "Congress Pushed Bush To War In Iraq Prematurely" 11-28
Bush, April 2007: "Nancy Pelosi should not meet with Bashar Assad because he is a state sponsor of terror." Bush, November 2007: "Mr. Assad, meet Secretary of State Condi Rice" 11-28
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jagsc4AGjwI
Frank Zappa, stairway:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=7vEmQnExY0c&feature=related
Sunday, 18:19, Dec 09, 2007
Nancy Pelosi was among two Democrats briefed on the CIA's secret plan to waterboard terror suspects and didn't object, an aide confirmed in Sunday's Washington Post. What's more? She booted the only House member who objected (Jane Harman) from a chance to chair the House Intelligence Committee.
Congressman Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) has become the latest member of Congress to sign on as a co-sponsor of Dennis Kucinich's "Articles of Impeachment Against Dick Cheney", which were reintroduced on November 6, 2007 as H Res 799.' Now there are 23 co-sponsors.
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse ripped the Bush administration's legal opinion of itself today. He has gotten his hands on some of the documents from the Office of Legal Counsel and had this to say about them:
For years under the Bush Administration, the Office of Legal Counsel within the Department of Justice has issued highly classified secret legal opinions related to surveillance. This is an administration that hates answering to an American court, that wants to grade its own papers, and OLC is the inside place the administration goes to get legal support for its spying program.
As a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, I was given access to those opinions, and spent hours poring over them. Sitting in that secure room, as a lawyer, as a former U.S. Attorney, legal counsel to Rhode Island's Governor, and State Attorney General, I was increasingly dismayed and amazed as I read on.
To give you an example of what I read, I have gotten three legal propositions from these OLC opinions declassified. Here they are, as accurately as my note taking could reproduce them from the classified documents. Listen for yourself. I will read all three, and then discuss each one.
1. An executive order cannot limit a President. There is no constitutional requirement for a President to issue a new executive order whenever he wishes to depart from the terms of a previous executive order. Rather than violate an executive order, the President has instead modified or waived it.
2. The President, exercising his constitutional authority under Article II, can determine whether an action is a lawful exercise of the President's authority under Article II.
3. The Department of Justice is bound by the President's legal determinations.
Saturday, 00:45, Dec 15, 2007
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/12/13/journal-waterboarding/
Conservative Military Journal Slams Giuliani And Mukasey’s ‘Tacit Support For Waterboarding’
rudymike3.jpgWhen asked about the practice of waterboarding at a recent debate, former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani declared that he would allow “every method [interrogators] could think of and I would support them in doing it.” Attorney General Mike Mukasey consistently refused to render a legal opinion on the matter.
In its December issue, the military magazine Armed Forces Journal chastises Giuliani and Mukasey for “their tacit support for waterboarding”:
Let AFJ be crystal clear on a subject where these men are opaque: Waterboarding is a torture technique that has its history rooted in the Spanish Inquisition. In 1947, the U.S. prosecuted a Japanese military officer for carrying out a form of waterboarding on a U.S. civilian during World War II.
Waterboarding inflicts on its victims the terror of imminent death. And as with all torture techniques, it is, therefore, an inherently flawed method for gaining reliable information. In short, it doesn’t work. That blunt truth means all U.S. leaders, present and future, should be clear on the issue.
Furthermore, Armed Forces Journal leans conservative. Four out of six of its contributing editors are either conservative pundits or have positions in conservative think-tanks.
Comments
Yeah, well, if it’s not torture when WE do it - it ain’t torture when THEY do it to our troops, either.
Comment by Leftside Annie — December 13, 2007 @ 3:26 pm
Let them know how ridiculous they all are!
http://tshirtinsurgency.com/node/12
Comment by desaparecido — December 13, 2007 @ 3:26 pm
No wonder Dear Leader’s Glorious War is taking so long — we have Terrorist Appeasers in the top ranks of our military!
Comment by ralph the wonder llama — December 13, 2007 @ 3:27 pm
Why does the Armed Forces Journal hate the troops? Don’t these wimps know that we averted a full-scale invasion of camel-driving darkie hordes by waterboarding AQ#3? Shame on them for following hte law; they’ll never be good Republican sociopathic mass-murderers.
Comment by Lefty Patriot — December 13, 2007 @ 3:27 pm
t’s amazing how the historical evidence that torture does not work can be so conveniently ignored by these neocon fools.
Are they such cowards that they have to puff their chests out and torture people to try and appear tough? The whole historical basis of the neocon movement says it all. Some were either related to or were themselves Holocaust survivors that decided that they wanted to never let anything so horrible happen ever again. But in doing this, they took on the least honorable traits and tactics of the very people that they despised.
Then we have the old chickenhawks who have been on the job too long and are seeing the enemy everywhere they look. They conveniently jump onto the neocon bandwagon and unwittingly cultivate perpetual war to nurture their own insecurities.
They all want to take the most cowardly path that serves to weaken the constitution and ultimately leaves all of us more vulnerable.
Thursday, 14:08, Feb 07, 2008
WAR POWERS ACT
The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to
(1) a declaration of war,
(2) specific statutory authorization, or
(3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.
SEC. 3. The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situation where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and after every such introduction shall consult regularly with the Congress until United States Armed Forces are no longer engaged in hostilities or have been removed from such situations.
A declaration of war is no longer necessary. All the president has to do is report it to congress within 60 days.
In the absence of a declaration of war, in any case in which United States Armed Forces are introduced--
That's supposed to be section A.
Wednesday, 15:07, Mar 05, 2008
howie12125 : There is going to be a massive Earthquake on the west coast within 31 days,write that down folks and ask me later how i knew ok ?
Saturday, 11:37, Jun 14, 2008
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25145600/
A 22-gun British warship that sank during the American Revolution and has long been regarded as one of the "Holy Grail" shipwrecks in the Great Lakes has been discovered at the bottom of Lake Ontario
the HMS Ontario, which was lost with barely a trace and as many as 130 people aboard during a gale in 1780.
The 80-foot sloop of war is the oldest shipwreck and the only fully intact British warship ever found in the Great Lakes, Scoville and Kennard said.
Saturday, 12:41, Jun 14, 2008
http://loanworkout.org/2008/03/25/obama-penny-pritzker/
The media has been virtually silent about the Penny Pritzker and her family’s involvement in the banks failure and her new position with the Obama campaign as his finance chair. Penny Pritzker who bilked Fran Sweet out of $45 million, and many others as well, also gave the U of C a $30 million gift during the same time. Um where does/did Obama's wife work?
Eric Holder who just left the campaign was the guy who got the Mark Rich pardon going.