tagged w/ Corrupt Politics
-
The Keystone XL zombie is lurching back to life and we need your help to knock it back again.
This week, the Senate is considering a series of tricks designed to force approval of the project. It’s hard to track what’s real and what’s just noise, but our friends on the Hill assure us this is a crucial moment for the public to weigh in.
Keystone XL is the perfect symbol of the cronyism that’s corrupting our government: the 44 Senators who co-sponsored the most recent piece of legislation have taken $22.3 million in oil and gas money -- that’s more than three times as much dirty money as those opposing the pipeline. The one Democrat on this list, West Virginia’s Joe Manchin, has taken more money from the fossil fuel barons than anyone else in his party—it’s really just a game of follow-the-cash.
We need to let the Senate know that we’re on to their game. Last month, we called a penalty on Congress with hundreds of referees blowing the whistle in Washington, DC. In the coming weeks, we’ll be organizing dozens of similar referee actions in districts across the country.
Together, we’re not only beating back Keystone XL but going on the offensive against an even larger scam -- the billions of taxpayer dollars the fossil fuel industry gets in handouts and subsidies every year.
Right now, the most important thing we can do is flood the Senate with messages opposing Keystone XL. Here’s the link where you can send an email:
act.350.org/letter/senate-keystone-xl-feb/
Your great work all fall and winter has meant that energy and climate issues are at the heart of the debate in Washington as they’ve really never been before. It’s good to see our representatives engaged on this.
Now we need to press even harder—and not just about this single pipeline, but about the deeper question of whether we’re ready to rein in the fossil fuel industry and get serious about clean energy. Thanks to you, that’s what’s on the line.
With respect,
Bill McKibben for 350.orgThe Keystone XL zombie is lurching back to life and we need your help to knock it back... more
-
-
"I was watching this tonight and found this video worth sharing!!! Seems, that now we know why they do Nothing for the people these days, and that means Both of the Corrupt Parties of our Fine United States!!!"
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7388130n&tag=contentBody;storyMediaBox
"I have no Clue why the video would not play so please check the link... " =)"I was watching this tonight and found this video worth sharing!!! Seems, that... more
-
-
KB723
-
added this
-
3 months ago
- |
-
With the Occupy movement coming to London we could all do with some of this rational spirit. See you there guys!With the Occupy movement coming to London we could all do with some of this rational... more
-
-
A charitable foundation set up by Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal’s wife has accepted about $790,000 in donations from corporations that also have given to the governor’s campaign committee since 2007, a nonpartisan watchdog group said Thursday.A charitable foundation set up by Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal’s wife has... more
-
-
By Gerard Ange'
THE SCAM OF AUSTERITY:
As we look around us today... we see a war zone. A war against the Middle Class ! A covert war that has been going on for years! A war with a battle plan. A plan to finance politicians like (Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin ) to take over our Government and with an agenda to give the final death blow against Labor and the Middle Class.
WHAT WE SEE IS... A war to steal the money out of the hands and pockets of hard working families'. A war that takes food from children's mouths. A war that sucks the heat from our furnaces on the coldest winter's days.
THIS IS OUR REALITY.... THIS IS WHAT IS GOING... HERE & NOW!
I ASK THEN... Where is all that money going? Money doesn't disappear nor does it dematerialize. it had to go somewhere.
It went into the huge bank vaults of the bankers and, The 2% of the population who intentionally sucked all the money from our country and created all the job loss and the home foreclosures in the first place.
The same bankers and, the 2% of the population who were bailed-out by the US Tax Payers with over $700 Billion dollars.., from hard working people.
These same 2% and same Wall Street Bankers who took our Bail-Out money and didn't re-invest it in the people to create jobs as they had promised. But, they kept the money and continued to foreclose against families and then rewarded themselves with lavish million dollar bonuses as "job well done".
~ Proving again that: "TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMICS" was a Scam.!
These Bankers and, the 2% who now sit comfortably on piles money, now have all the time in the world to wait... Wait and watch as the citizens, families and workers squirm in pain and misery fighting poverty just for the basics in life... as they continue to lose their homes and jobs.
> IT IS TIME WE ALL ~ FOLLOW THE MONEY!
What we are seeing is a process leading this country down the same economic path as Turkey, Mexico, Greece. "A country with NO middle class!" A country with only the VERY RICH and The VERY POOR. What we are witnessing is the Resurgence Economic Principals dating back to the "PRE-INDUSTRIAL ERA"!
~ HENERY FORD CREATED THE MIDDLE CLASS IN AMERICA ~
Henry Ford in 1914 Set an Example for all of us to follow. Breaking with the long on-going "Industrial Era" Mentality ... When He Broke the Greedy On-Going Practice of Rich Industrialists: of paying their workers (a pittance!) ~ as little as possible...
Henry Ford made a bold deliberate move to "think outside the box" ! To pay twice the going labor rate to his workers. With an Idea so that this workers could then afford to buy his automobiles... His workers bought automobiles and more... houses and refrigerators and life got better for everyone... It was then...The Middle Class was born.
**Henry Ford's one bold act changed the world forever... And today has proven one very important economic principal for all us to follow into the future.
BUT TODAY:
We see that there is a plan in the works to turn back the clock! To reverted back again to those old failed economic principals of the Industrial Age ~ Once again paying people as little as possible... (a pittance!) While "The New Industrialists" once again horde huge profits on the backs of poor exploited labor. These are greedy people, this slash and burn industrial age thinking is destructive to the global economy as it is to our families our neighbors and to the fabric of our society.
** The Future is before us: **
But before we can move forward... We must learn from the past.
We must act,,, to plant the seeds of the future and stimulate growth to grow a strong "global economy" an economy that gives "all workers" a fair "World Wage" And basic global worker's rights. Rights, that regulate and protect the global work force. We need to level the playing field world-wide for long-term global growth and stability. To put and end to the Greedy Destructive Short-Term Profits and Exploitation of Labor that is destroying the world around us.
THE LESSON LEARNED:
Henry Ford's proved by example that in order for a populous to contribute to the economy they must be paid a fair living wage. It is in everyones best interest! A fair " Wage" globally expands the market place for all goods stimulates all commerce allows all people to be better their lives and contribute to a healthy economy and future for all of us everywhere.
~In a Democracy it is important that we.. FLOAT ALL BOATS ~
More about Henry Ford & Trickle UP Economics
http://www.newamerica.net/node/8628By Gerard Ange'
THE SCAM OF AUSTERITY:
As we look around us today... we see a... more
-
-
"It is easer for a Camel to go through the eye of a needle, that it is for a Rich Man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven." Or, maybe you just need to buy a bigger needle?
It's official: as Egypt was burning, Mubarak was stealing the gold. When we reported, presumably jokingly, two weeks ago that the Egyptian Central Bank may have been plundered, it turns out we were pretty much accurate once again. For all those wondering why Mubarak was refusing to hand over power for the past two weeks as hundreds of people were dying, we now have the answer - it was all just to make sure he transferred his assets, especially gold, to safe regimes (in the process paying tens of millions in commissions to that most noble of jobs - the banker class). The Telegraph reports: "A US official told The Sunday Telegraph: "Hosni Mubarak used the 18 days it took for protesters to topple him to shift his vast wealth into untraceable accounts overseas, Western intelligence sources have said...There's no doubt that there will have been some frantic financial activity behind the scenes. They can lose the homes and some of the bank accounts, but they will have wanted to get the gold bars and other investments to safe quarters. The Mubaraks are understood to have wanted to shift assets to Gulf states where they have considerable investments already – and, crucially, friendly relations. The United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia have frequently been mentioned as likely final destinations for Mr Mubarak and possibly his family."As usual, we remind readers that according to the World Gold Council, Egypt had 75.6 tonnes of gold at the end of 2010. Should this number not be reduced following Mubarak's plundering, we will know just how pervasive Tungsten is in the world central banking cartel.
-------------------- //~// ----------------------
From Telegraph: ---
The former Egyptian president is accused of amassing a fortune of more than £3 billion - although some suggest it could be as much as £40 billion - during his 30 years in power. It is claimed his wealth was tied up in foreign banks, investments, bullion and properties in London, New York, Paris and Beverly Hills.
In the knowledge his downfall was imminent, Mr Mubarak is understood to have attempted to place his assets out of reach of potential investigators.
On Friday night Swiss authorities announced they were freezing any assets Mubarak and his family may hold in the country's banks while pressure was growing for the UK to do the same. Mr Mubarak has strong connections to London and it is thought many millions of pounds are stashed in the UK.
But a senior Western intelligence source claimed that Mubarak had begun moving his fortune in recent weeks.
"We're aware of some urgent conversations within the Mubarak family about how to save these assets," said the source, "And we think their financial advisers have moved some of the money around. If he had real money in Zurich, it may be gone by now."
-------------------- //~// ----------------------
Perhaps Goldman Sachs can take a proactive PR step and disclose to the population that the flow trade-frontrunning hedge fund had nothing to do with facilitating the transfer of Mubarak's billions in stolen wealth from point A to point B. And perhaps all other banks can follow suit. Either that, or we can all just wait for Mubarak's sworn deposition when he is put on trial for crimes against the Egyptian people some time in 1-2 months. Doing text searches for "Goldman" in those thousand page PDFs will be breeze...
GO TO STORY:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/egypt/8320912/Egypt-Hosni-Mubarak-used-last-18-days-in-power-to-secure-his-fortune.html
Story By: Philip Sherwell, in New York, Robert Mendick, and Nick Meo in Cairo
Shadowy Cabal: Tyler Durden
Illustration & Art Work: Gérard Angé"It is easer for a Camel to go through the eye of a needle, that it is for a... more
-
-
Mr. Orange: Dick, dick, dick, dick, dick, dick, dick, dick, dick.
Mr. Blue: How many dicks is that?
Mr. White: A lot.Mr. Orange: Dick, dick, dick, dick, dick, dick, dick, dick, dick.
Mr. Blue: How many... more
-
-
OPEN LETTER FROM ANONYMOUS TO THE UK GOVERNMENT
Dear UK government,
We are Anonymous. It has come to our attention that you deemed it necessary
to arrest five of our fellow anons for their participation in the DDoS
attacks against PayPal, Mastercard, and others, that have been carried out
in our name in retaliation for those organisations’ actions against WikiLeaks.
We understand you are planning to charge these fellow anons with offences
under the 1990 Computer Misuse Act, which prohibits impairing the operation
of a computer or the readability of data. Anonymous believes, however, that
pursuing this direction is a sad mistake on your behalf. Not only does it
reveal the fact that you do not seem to understand the present-day political
and technological reality, we also take this as a serious declaration of war
from yourself, the UK government, to us, Anonymous, the people.
First and foremost, it is important to realize what a DDoS attack exactly is
and what it means in the contemporary political context. As traditional means
of protest (peaceful demonstrations, sit-ins, the blocking of a crossroads
or the picketing of a factory fence) have slowly turned into nothing but an
empty, ritualised gesture of discontent over the course of the last century,
people have been anxiously searching for new ways to pressure politicians
and give voice to public demands in a manner that might actually be able
to change things for the better. Anonymous has, for now, found this new
way of voicing civil protest in the form of the DDoS, or Distributed Denial of
Service, attack. Just as is the case with traditional forms of protest, we block
access to our opponents infrastructure to get our message across. Whether
or not this infrastructure is located in the real world or in cyberspace, seems
completely irrelevant to us.
Moreover, we would like to take this opportunity to set the record straight
on the difference between a DDoS attack and hacking, as these concepts
often seem to be confounded when media and policy-makers talk about
Anonymous. Hacking as such is defined by the law as ‘unauthorised access
to a computer or network’, whereas a DDoS attack is simply a case of
thousands of people making legitimate connections to a publicly accessible
webserver at the same time, using up the entire bandwidth or processing
power of the given server at once and thereby causing a huge ‘traffic jam’.
ANONYMOUS PRESS RELEASE
January 27, 2011
It is clear then, that arresting somebody for taking part in a DDoS attack
is exactly like arresting somebody for attending a peaceful demonstration
in their hometown. Anonymous believes this right to peacefully protest
is one of the fundamental pillars of any democracy and should not be
restricted in any way. Moreover, we have noted that similar attacks have
also been carried out against Wikileaks itself, yet so far, nobody has been
arrested in connection with these attacks, nor are there even any signs
of an investigation into this issue at all. Yet, we know exactly who was
responsible for that attack. Anonymous believes it is unfair and hypocritical
to attempt to put these 5 arrested anons to trial without even attempting to
find those who DDoS’ed a website which you oppose. We can therefore
only assume that these arrests are politically motivated, and were being
carried out under pressure from the US government. Anonymous can not,
and will not, stand idle while this injustice is being done.
Furthermore, the maximum sentence these 5 anons could be given under
the Computer Misuse Act is 10 years imprisonment and a fine of up to
£5000. We want you to realize just how ridiculous these sentences are,
especially given the exact nature of a DDoS attack and its lack of permanent
damage to the target website. To hand out these kinds of harsh sentences
(even to minors!) would effectively ruin their life, taking away their chance
at higher education or even any kind of proper future, simply because they
participated in a peaceful cyber-protest and stood up for their rights. A fine
as high as £5000 would also put an incredible strain on the minors’ families.
We hope that you consider changing the legal framework for what is, at
worst, a minor offense.
And last but not least: The fact that thousands of people from all over the
world felt the need to participate in these attacks on organisations targeting
Wikileaks and treating it as a public threat, rather than a common good,
should be something that sets you thinking. You can easily arrest individuals,
but you cannot arrest an ideology. We are united by a common objective
and we can and WILL cross any borders to achieve that. So our advice to
you, the UK government, is to take this statement as a serious warning from
the citizens of the world. We will not rest until our fellow anon protesters
have been released.
Awaiting your action,
Anonymous
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anony_Ops
Attention all media: OPEN LETTER FROM ANONYMOUS TO THE UK GOVERNMENT 27-01-2011 http://bit.ly/fWfioF #AnonymousOPEN LETTER FROM ANONYMOUS TO THE UK GOVERNMENT
Dear UK government,
We are... more
-
-
Former House majority leader Tom Delay leaves the Travis County Jail after being sentenced to three years in prison with probation and posting $20,000 bail bond on January 10, 2011 in Austin, Texas. Delay was convicted of charges money laundering and conspiracy. By Ben Sklar/Getty Images.
I wonder who the former"Dancing with the Stars"celebrity, next dancing partner will be?
I'm sure Mr. Delay's dance moves will be a real plus-!... in Prison!Former House majority leader Tom Delay leaves the Travis County Jail after being... more
-
-
Julian Assange in conversation with John Pilger
-
-
Vanity Fair's Sarah Ellison has a comprehensive piece online detailing the relationship between WikiLeaks and The Guardian. The story gives an up-close look at how Julian Assange provided his leaked cache of classified documents on Afghanistan, Iraq, and U.S. diplomacy to the British newspaper and other news organizations last year.
The alliance between the old-media outlet and the Web-driven document clearinghouse proved rocky at times. It grew particularly strained recently after the paper turned its lens on Assange. (This was pretty much the same dynamic that upended WikiLeaks' relationship with the New York Times.)
What's more, Ellison notes, the Guardian and WikiLeaks were by no means committed to a shared agenda or pursuing common journalistic aims just because each organization wanted to make information public:
The partnership between The Guardian and WikiLeaks brought together two desperately ambitious organizations that happen to be diametric opposites in their approach to reporting the news. One of the oldest newspapers in the world, with strict and established journalistic standards, joined up by one of the newest in a breed of online muckrakers, with no standards at all except fealty to an ideal of 'transparency'—that is, dumping raw material into the public square for people to pick over as they will. It is very likely that neither [Guardian editor-in-chief] Alan Rusbridger nor Julian Assange fully understood the nature of the other's organization when they joined forces."
Ellison's account offers a great tick-tock chronology of last year's set of WikiLeaks dumps, together with several revelations regarding WikiLeaks' media strategy.
How The Guardian got involved: Reporter Nick Davies has written about his involvement with Assange before, but Ellison adds new details to the timeline. In June, Davies read a short Guardian piece on the arrest of Bradley Manning, the army private who's believed to be a principal WikiLeaks source and who's been kept in solitary confinement since his detainment. Davies was determined to track Manning down. Davies learned Assange would be in Brussels, so Brussels-based Guardian reporter Ian Traynor spoke with the WikiLeaks chief and learned he had two million documents. Davies headed to Brussels and "went to the Hotel Leopold, woke up Assange, and began a conversation that lasted for the next six hours."
How the New York Times got involved: Davies and Assange discussed bringing in the Times while in Brussels, and back in London, Rusbridger called Times executive editor Bill Keller. Times reporter Eric Schmitt flew to London to see the material, reported it was genuine, and the Times came aboard. Assange then brought in Der Spiegel on his own.
How Channel 4 got involved, and Assange split with Davies: In July, Assange provided Britain's Channel 4 network with the Afghanistan documents. Ellison writes that Davies was "livid" over the breach of Assange's presumed first-look arrangement with The Guardian and that the two haven't spoken again. (Slate's Jack Shafer has a good take on Vanity Fair piece, including the expectations reporters sometimes have for the sources they've "cultivated.")
How The Guardian got the cables from Assange: Investigative editor David Leigh agreed to a delay in publishing articles related to the Iraq documents because Assange wanted to bring in the nonprofit Bureau of Investigative Journalism to work with Channel 4 and Al Jazeera. In exchange for a six-week delay, Assange provided "package three" -- the State Dept. cables -- to the Guardian. In doing so, Assange got a letter from the Guardian agreeing not to publish anything on the leaked cables until he gave the go-ahead. But...
The Guardian got the cables from a second source: This bit of news fills in an interesting gap and explains friction between Assange and The Guardian. The British newspaper agreed to Assange's embargo on a release date for the cables, because WikiLeaks was its source. But in October, The Guardian received the full cache of cables from freelance journalist Heather Brooke. She had obtained the cables independently from an ex-WikiLeaks volunteer. (Brooke suggested on Twitter today that there's more to the story). Regardless, The Guardian now had the full database from a different source and believed it was free from the embargo agreed upon with Assange. The Guardian then provided those documents to Der Spiegel and The New York Times. These news organizations planned to published on Nov. 8--with or without Assange's input.
Why Assange threatened to sue: Assange and his lawyer met in Rusbridger's office and threatened to sue if The Guardian published anything from the cables ahead of the embargo. Ellison writes that Rusbridger, Guardian investigations editor David Leigh, and editors from Der Spiegel "spent a marathon session with Assange, his lawyer, and [WikiLeaks spokesman Kristinn] Hrafnsson, eventually restoring an uneasy calm." They agreed to delay publication a few weeks while Assange brought in two more media partners, Le Monde (France) and El Pais (Spain).
So what's next? Last week, The Cutline raised some questions for WikiLeaks in 2011. In Ellison's piece, Davies notes that Assange has discussed having files on all Guantanamo Bay prisoners. (Wired zeroes in on this detail). Assange has also spoken about having documents that could take down a bank or two. But it remains to be seen exactly what Assange has and also how he may choose to work with news organizations going forward. As Ellison explains, it hasn't always been an easy relationship.
Since readers have asked me about neglecting specific revelations from the WikiLeaks docs, just a reminder: this is a media blog so the focus is on the media relationships and strategy. For more on WikiLeaks revelations, check out The Guardian, New York Times, a very good new CBS round-up or WikiLeaks itself. And for daily updates on all-things-WikiLeaks, The Nation's Greg Mitchell is a must-read.Vanity Fair's Sarah Ellison has a comprehensive piece online detailing the... more
-
-
A higher stock market is of little comfort to the millions who don't have jobs, are facing foreclosure, fraudulent or otherwise, or have no health coverage.
January 3, 2011 |
There are two potential ways to measure the economic performance of a political leader. One is by the profitability, stock prices and executive bonuses of a nation’s corporations. The other is by the financial condition of the majority of its population. Since he came to power, President Obama and his economic team have propped up the former and failed miserably to aid the latter. (For the record, ever since the first paragraph of Obama’s pre-primary website economics plan put free markets before people, this is where we were going, but it still hurts to get there.)
The S&P 500 index is up 50% since Obama took office. But unemployment remains higher than it was when he entered the White House, home foreclosures continue to mount to the detriment of borrowers and entire neighborhoods, health insurance companies responded to his health care “reform” bill by raising premiums, and the financial system’s largest banks continue to prosper in the wake of a multi-trillion dollar bailout with no strings attached to share their subsidizations with the rest of American citizens. To top it all off, as he approaches the midpoint of his first, and likely last, term, Obama bowed to the pressure of the Republican Party and extended tax cuts for the richest Americans in order to be able to also extend them for everyone else more sorely in need. There’s only so long you can blame another administration for your actions.
Obama’s economic policies have either been continuations of his predecessor’s, as in the case of taxes and bank bailouts, or bills so watered down to appease corporations, notably banks and insurance companies, that they are ineffective. In the process, he continues to alienate his supporters—individual voters, not the companies that funded his candidacy—leaving their economy in shambles. Here’s the recap.
Taxes
Just in time for Christmas, we got Obama’s big tax-cut compromise. Obama’s reverse Robin Hood deal with the Republicans disproportionally takes from the poor to give to the rich. The plan adds another $1 trillion to the record United States deficit, $700 billion of which would be the cost of extending tax breaks to the wealthiest 2 percent of the country, the rest going toward jobless benefits—necessary to help those victims of the wider economic problems, but not complemented with a job-creation program.
According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, American millionaires would get 22 percent (or $200 billion over two years) of the benefits of the deal, while the bottom 20 percent of American workers would get less than one-half of one percent. According to David Cay Johnston, the 45 million households that make less than $20,000 a year will be slapped with a tax increase of $150 to $200.
Even though the majority of his own Democratic Party supported extending cuts only to Americans making less than $250,000 a year (on TV anyway, apparently not at their seats once the compromise was inked, notables with balls like Sen. Bernie Sanders aside), Republican “all-or-nothing” pressure was met by Obama’s capitulation. He could have bargained harder—say by suggesting that tax cuts not be extended for people making more than a million dollars, rather than punting the tax cut issue into the 2012 presidential election period.
What Obama effectively did was adopt George W. Bush’s tax policy in total rather than come up with a better deal, even though the Bush tax cuts increased the net worth of the wealthiest Americans while the wages of the rest of Americans (the ones that had jobs) stagnated or decreased per hour worked. The Republicans obviously considered the deal a victory, to hell with any Republican voters in the bottom 98 percent of the country. Wall Street thought it was better than expected. Jamie Dimon was all but salivating. Even though the majority of Americans wanted to end tax breaks for the wealthiest, plus extend unemployment benefits, Obama couldn’t pull it off.
To go to the next page:
http://www.alternet.org/news/149394/obama's_economic_report_card:_a%2B_for_helping_the_wealthy_--_failing_the_rest_of_us/A higher stock market is of little comfort to the millions who don't have jobs,... more
-
-
Obama Should Read WikiLeaks Documents
Monday 03 January 2011
by: Ray McGovern | Consortium News | Op-Ed
Perhaps President Barack Obama should give himself a waiver on the ban prohibiting U.S. government employees from downloading classified cables released by WikiLeaks, so he can better understand the futility of his Afghan War strategy.
For instance, if Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has hidden from him Ambassador Karl Eikenberry’s cables from Kabul, he might wish to search out KABUL 001892 of July 13, 2009, in which Eikenberry reports that Afghan President Hamid Karzai is “unable to grasp the most rudimentary principles of state building.”
And, while he’s at it, he should dig out the September 2009 cable from the U.S. Ambassador in Pakistan, Anne Patterson, in which she warns: “There is no chance that Pakistan will view enhanced assistance … as sufficient compensation for abandoning support to these [Taliban and similar] groups in Pakistan.”
The same conclusion is contained in the recent National Intelligence Estimates on Afghanistan and Pakistan. My advice to Obama would be: Don’t let anyone gist them for you; read at least the Key Judgments.
Yet, in his recent defense of his Afghanistan-Pakistan policy, Obama acted as if he didn’t know or understand the full import of these disclosures. Instead, he simply reiterated the “three areas of our strategy” in Afghanistan:
“To break the Taliban’s momentum and train Afghan forces so they can take the lead; to promote effective governance and development; and regional cooperation, especially with Pakistan, because our strategy has to succeed on both sides of the border.”
But the Taliban’s momentum has not been broken nor is it likely to be, Mr. President. And good luck with President Karzai on that “effective governance” thing, not to mention the part about getting cooperation from Pakistan.
Indeed, the real Achilles heel of Obama’s strategy, the true showstopper, is the forlorn hope of stronger cooperation with Pakistan.
Other WikiLeaks cables make Pakistan’s deep concern about the encroachment of India in Afghanistan unmistakably clear. In one cable, for example, Pakistani Army chief Gen. Ashfaq Kayani is reported to have been “utterly frank” about the consequences of a pro-India government coming to power in Kabul.
Kayani: “The Pakistani establishment will dramatically increase support for Taliban groups in Pakistan and Afghanistan … as an important counterweight.”
Go to the next Page:
http://www.truth-out.org/ray-mcgovern-obama-should-read-wikileaks-docs66524Obama Should Read WikiLeaks Documents
Monday 03 January 2011
by: Ray McGovern |... more
-
-
Posted on January 4, 2011 by Crushing Bastards
Crew photo from my first deployment. The plane is a RC-135 "Rivet Joint."
I am a US Air Force Intelligence veteran of the war in Afghanistan and I support Wikileaks.
During my service I held a Top Secret security clearance and worked as an Afghan-Pashto linguist; my duties included consuming and producing a large number of intelligence reports. After reading many of the Iraq/Afghan/Cablegate logs I am compelled to inform my fellow citizens that I saw nothing in these logs that could endanger our troops or public servants.
Here’s what I did see: I saw Iraq war logs that painted a very bleak picture of the situation there which doesn’t match up with the “improved security” that’s been reported by the “Defense” Department for years. I saw proof of public officials acting dishonestly and abusing their posts. Overall, I saw an out of control government that is in over its head and does more to endanger the lives of its people than any publishing organization ever could.
I volunteered to protect this country under the impression that my government followed the will of the American People and adhered to the US Constitution. As it turns out, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were never constitutionally declared and despite public opinion being against the two wars they continue to grow more destructive. My experiences in these wars differed greatly from the propaganda the American people were sold by America’s mainstream media outlets; many times I would return from a mission to see wild inaccuracies being reported on Fox/CNN/MSNBC about the very operation I had just been supporting. Wikileaks has helped shine light on the true nature of these illegal wars and the policymakers that perpetuate them, for this I am thankful.
Speaking of policy makers that perpetuate war… Apparently, this nation is bankrupt. The US dollar, under the custodianship of Ben Bernanke’s Federal Reserve System, continues to lose its purchasing power as new dollars are printed to pay for warfare and corporate welfare (in the form of bailouts for bankers). We must recognize that printing more money will not solve our problems, it will only make Americans increasingly poorer. The foundation of America’s financial system is corrupt and dishonest; Wikileaks is also working to unmask this corrupt central-banking system.
For too long, bastards (using Julian Assange’s definition) have been able to use America’s good reputation as a cover for their misdeeds. These days, it seems that powerful interests wield more influence in Washington than the whole of the American electorate. These interests see the American people as nothing more than sheep to be fleeced and so they use their influence to make it easier for us to be held down. I support Wikileaks because I want to see these insidious influences exposed. My hope is that the 21st Century will be one of liberty and transparency, not of greater secrecy and slavish submission to authority.
Let it be known that there are many of us who will resist any attempts to stifle 1st Amendment protections; that America’s veterans take seriously their oaths to the US Constitution and will demand transparency and honesty from government officials; that America’s veterans stand ready to defend the ideals of a free society in the 21st century.
http://crushingbastards.org/blog/2011/01/04/i-am-a-us-air-force-intelligence-veteran-of-the-war-in-afghanistan-and-i-support-wikileaks/Posted on January 4, 2011 by Crushing Bastards
Crew photo from my first... more
-
-
Wikileaks has shown that our government and military form a 'vast lying machine' that perpetrates mass murder in our name.
January 3, 2011
Do you believe that it is in Americans' interest to allow a small group of U.S. leaders to unilaterally murder, maim, imprison and/or torture anyone they choose anywhere in the world, without the knowledge let alone oversight of their citizens or the international community? And, despite their proven record of failure to protect America -- from Indochina to Iran to Iraq -- do you believe they should be permitted to clandestinely expand their war-making without informed public debate? If so, you are betraying the principles upon which America was founded, endangering your nation, and displaying a distinctly "unamerican" subservience to unaccountable authority. But if you oppose autocratic power, you are called to support Wikileaks and others trying to limit U.S. Executive Branch mass murder abroad and failure to protect Americans at home.
These two issues became officially linked for the first time when former U.S. Afghan commander General Stanley McChrystal explicitly stated that the murder of civilians increases rather than decreases the numbers of those committed to killing Americans, and actually implemented policies -- since reversed by General Petraeus -- to reduce U.S. murder of civilians. McChrystal said that “for every innocent person you kill, you create 10 new enemies." By so doing he made it clear that killing civilians is not only a moral and war crimes issue, but -- in today's interdependent world -- also threatens U.S. national security.
As important as is the issue of free speech, it is the question of whether the U.S. Executive is in fact protecting the American people through its mass murder abroad that really lies at the heart of the Wikileaks controversy. Executive Branch officials justify persecuting and threatening to murder Assange on the grounds that he has damaged U.S. "national security." If McChrystal is right, however, it is the past decade of U.S. Executive mass murder in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, now revealed beyond any doubt by Wikileaks, that is the real threat to U.S. national security.
The chilling fact is this: whether you believe that September 11, 2001 was due to incomprehensible fanaticism or genuine grievances, it seems likely that U.S. leaders’ murder of countless Muslims since 2001 will cause the next 9/11 should, God forbid, it occur, The recent suicide-bomber in Sweden who came perilously close to succeeding taped a message saying "so will your children, daughters, brothers, and sisters die, like our brothers, sisters, and children die." Similar sentiments were voiced by the Times Square bomber, and it is likely that those responsible for future American deaths will also be motivated by revenge for the hundreds of thousands of Muslims for whose deaths U.S. leaders are responsible since 2001.
This is not, of course, to justify such attacks. Any attacks on civilians, whether by the Taliban or General Petraeus, are totally unjustified and crimes of war. But if the issue is how best to enhance U.S. national security, it is critical to rationally discuss the most prudent and sensible means of preventing further attacks -- which in this case is to stop creating huge numbers of people who want to kill Americans. If General McChrystal is correct, every American should tremble at the long-term danger to America caused by the last decade of U.S. war-making in the Muslim world. If only 1/100th of 1% of the world's 1.6 billion Muslims are moved to want to attack America because of America's post-9/11 killing of Muslim civilians, for example, the U.S. Executive will have created a pool of 160,000 Muslims devoted to murdering Americans.
View Next Page:
http://www.alternet.org/story/149393/wikileaks_most_terrifying_revelation:_just_how_much_our_government_lies_to_usWikileaks has shown that our government and military form a 'vast lying... more
-
-
It's probably the oldest question in capitalism.
Make no mistake, there are a myriad of reasons why the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, and only a few apply to any one instance. That doesn't prevent generalization from being made. The defenders of the status quo explain it as thus:
The rich get richer and the poor get poorer because the rich learn to become stewards of the talents given to them. The poor have squandered their talents and are not given more.
Clean and simple. The poor are poor because they've brought it upon themselves. The rich are just better than you. Case closed. It's a very convenient philosophy if you're rich.
In reality there is only one reason for the growing wealth disparity that applies to practically every instance, and it isn't because one group is better, or smarter, or more amoral than another group.
It's not a hidden secret. Everyone is aware of it, but few understand it as well as they think they do.
This long and information-packed movie goes into more detail.
Go to the full article:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/1/3/933143/-Why-the-rich-get-richer-and-poor-get-poorerIt's probably the oldest question in capitalism.
Make no mistake, there are a... more
-
-
Wikileaks ~ A Swedish Documentary Film About Julian Assange & Wikileaks
(60 Min / SVT)Wikileaks ~ A Swedish Documentary Film About Julian Assange & Wikileaks
(60 Min... more
-
-
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange believes he could withstand solitary confinement in a U.S. prison if the American government manages to extradite him, but he fears he would likely be killed "Jack Ruby-style" if held with others inside the U.S.
Assange told Britain's Guardian newspaper in an interview at the English mansion where he's under house arrest that the final determination as to whether he can be sent from the U.K. to Sweden or the United States would be made by British Prime Minister David Cameron, but that believed it would be "politically impossible" for Cameron to okay the move.
"Legally the U.K. has the right to not extradite for political crimes," Assange told the Guardian. "Espionage is the classic case of political crimes. It is at the discretion of the U.K. government as to whether to apply to that exception."
The U.S. government has not filed any charges against Assange, but Attorney General Eric Holder has said "there's a predicate for us to believe that crimes have been committed here and we are in the process of investigating those crimes."
It's been suggested, not least by Assange himself, that the U.S. government is trying to find a way to name the WikiLeaks founder as a co-conspirator in a case against the Army private suspected of providing the classified U.S. documents to WikiLeaks.
U.N. Checking on WikiLeaks Suspect's Treatment
"Solitary confinement is very difficult," Assange said, reflecting on the nine days he's already spent in a London prison on a Swedish warrant for questioning in a sexual misconduct case brought by two women in that country.
"But I know that provided there is some opportunity for correspondence I can withstand it. I'm mentally robust," he added, reflecting on the possibility that he could find himself in the same situation again if extradited to the U.S. "Of course it would mean the end of my life in the conventional sense."
If he was to be held in a general prison population in the U.S., however, Assange speculated there was a "high chance" he'd be killed extra-judicially by a third party actor he likened to Jack Ruby, the man who killed alleged JFK shooter Lee Harvey Oswald two days after he was arrested.
Assange claimed the legal fees incurred by WikiLeaks had already tallied up to about $770,000 -- more than the organization was able to pay from its present finances. He said the decision by several large U.S. financial companies (reportedly under political pressure from U.S. lawmakers) to halt payments to WikiLeaks had deprived his group of its $655,000 "war chest".WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange believes he could withstand solitary confinement in a... more
-
-
Government officials in both Norway and Iceland are questioning the grounds for what’s become a credit card blockade against WikiLeaks that has disrupted the non-profit whistle-blowing organization’s ability to raise funds. Norwegian-Danish finance firm Teller is also the target of a government inquiry.
Norway’s leading business newspaper, Dagens Næringsliv (DN), has reported in a series of articles this week how Visa Europe and MasterCard have effectively blocked their credit card holders’ ability to send donations to WikiLeaks. The blockade has been carried out through the Norwegian-Danish finance firm Teller, which handles credit card transactions for Visa Europe and MasterCard.
Teller officials claim they were ordered by Visa Europe to suspend yet another firm involved in the complicated chain of credit card facilitators, Datacell of Iceland, which received donations (which donors had charged to their credit cards) on behalf of WikiLeaks.
Demanding legal basis for the suspension
DN reported earlier this week that a leading Norwegian law professor believes the credit card blockade, suspected of being politically motivated because of WikiLeaks’ disclosures of classified government documents, is illegal and violates both national and EU finance agreements and directives.
Now, reports DN, the Icelandic Parliament has launched an investigation into the grounds for the actions taken by Teller, Visa Europe and MasterCard against WikiLeaks. ”Nobody has been able to clarify the judicial foundation as to why payments to Datacell, and therefore WikiLeaks, have been stopped,” Robert Marshall, who leads the Parliament’s control committee, told DN. “And that is, of course, a problem.”
Marshall called the credit card blockade “serious” and “highly dubious” and said the Icelandic parliamentarians were demanding a “legitimate reason” for it. So far, he told DN, Teller has only referred to “due diligence” undertaken to ensure that Datacell has operated in accordance with its agreement with Visa. Neither Teller nor Visa Europe has produced evidence of wrongdoing on the part of Datacell or WikiLeaks, even though they have effectively halted payments to WikiLeaks through Datacell for nearly three weeks. That, according to DN, has cost WikiLeaks an estimated USD 1.6 million in lost donations from its supporters and also is hurting Datacell, which has more than 3,000 other customers.
Norway also demands some answers
DN reports that Norwegian financial authorities at regulatory agency Finanstilsynet in Oslo are also raising questions and have asked Teller to produce a legitimate reason for turning away customers. Finanstilsynet planned to send a letter Thursday to Teller demanding a legal reason as to why Teller has effectively stopped payments to WikiLeaks by suspending Datacell.
Anders Kvam of Finanstilsynet told DN that “we’re looking into this,” and that the regulators want to know Teller’s basis for the actions taken against Datacell. Teller must answer by January 3, an unusually short deadline that means Teller officials will need to work on the issue during what otherwise is a Christmas holiday period in Norway.
“This is a current problem that must be solved,”" Kvam told DN. “It involves payment transactions, and we can’t let these types of questions remain unanswered.”
Teller sent out a press statement earlier this week saying it had concluded that Datacell had violated its agreement with Visa by turning over payments to a third party. Datacell’s officials objected immediately and legal action is pending.
Teller also claimed that it had found no violations on the part of Sunshine Press, WikiLeaks’ company in Icceland, but that it was now up to Visa to approve payments to Sunshine Press.
Views and News from Norway/Nina Berglund
Join our Forum if you’d like to comment on this story.Government officials in both Norway and Iceland are questioning the grounds for... more
-
-
Julian Assange Live Satellite UK Interview:
(1) Discussing Journalism in the USA is currently at risk as Government and Corporate powers in an attempt to cover-up wrong doings threaten the First Amendment and Freedom of the Press.
(2) Senior Political leaders demand and threaten murder and violence. Sending a message and example to their children and to the world... That fascist terrorist threats circumventing all law and due process - to cover-up wrong doings are all okay?
(3) Abuse of Private Manning... Locked in solitary confinement conditions 24X7 in a Military Brig as he continues to await trial for now over six months and counting. But in fact... is a designed as captive abuse in a clear attempt to attack Private Manning and break him psychologically before any trial takes place. > What we are witnessing here is the normal business as usual rule in the US treatment of any enemy combatants.Julian Assange Live Satellite UK Interview:
(1) Discussing Journalism in the USA is... more
-
