https://twitter.com/That_Hawaii_Guy
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Horseman #2: Demopublican Political Control
One of the most popular ideas taught in American civics classes is that the strength of the American political system lies in the fact that we have a two-party political process. This, I maintain, is akin to teaching that babies come from storks. It's a fairy tale we spin out to avoid messy details of reality we prefer not to face. The reality is that the Democratic and Republican parties, as distinctive parties, are shams. They have become nothing but two divisions of the Central Leviathan Party. This has been our political reality ever since Dwight Eisenhower defeated the "old guard" individualist Republicans under Robert Taft in 1952 and made the Republicans into a big government welfare-state party like the New Deal Democrats of Roosevelt and Truman. From that year on, there has been no voice in the world of politics for the original Founders' vision. The last vestiges of limited, decentralized government died with Eisenhower's capitulation to Keynes and the New Deal.
In the ensuing decades, the collectivists have skillfully established a deceptive ONE-PARTY dictatorial system, which their media lackeys spin to the public as "two parties" and which the collectivist power elites maintain by waging phony battles every four years, all of which the gullible public buys into. Yet every year no matter who wins at the polls, government grows larger and more fascistic. Therefore, all talk about which of these Tweedledum and Tweedledee institutions is better than the other is a game of "nonsense on stilts" (to borrow a phrase from the 19th century philosopher, Jeremy Bentham). Because both parties subscribe to the same fundamental premises, which manifest in the dictatorial paradigm of fascism, they both end up tyrannizing our lives.
To those Republican sympathizers who still hold out hope that the GOP can be some kind of a solution to the runaway lunacy of today's spendaholics on the Potomac, I offer exhibit A, Mr. Republican himself, President George W. Bush. Remove the scales from your eyes America! This man's spending proclivities (as a percentage of GNP) far exceed those of Bill Clinton's, or Jimmy Carter's, or LBJ's -- all prototypical "big spenders" that preceded him and set the standard for fiscal irresponsibility. George Bush Jr. is as Big Government as you can get! Socialism (or actually fascism) has come to America via a "conservative" administration! But this is the inevitable result when both parties subscribe to the SAME flawed fundamental premises. Those flawed premises are: 1) Government needs to be centralized and highly interventionist to be effective. And 2) it is permissible for political legislation to violate individual rights in order to convey special privileges to groups. It is upon these two dictatorial premises that both Democrats and Republicans structure the entirety of their policies. Arbitrary law has trumped objective law as a policy tool for each of them. Both have abandoned belief in a higher natural law. Both endorse the wholesale violation of rights. Consequently they both are driving us toward economic fascism and dictatorship.
This Demopublican "one-party system" has given us an insufferably oppressive Leviathan that now takes 50% of our earnings every year to disgorge on monstrous personal entitlements and welfare handouts, multi-million dollar congressional pensions, egregious pork barrel projects, farm subsidies, corporation bailouts, foreign aid giveaways, World Bank loans, energy industry subsidies, artistic grants, mass busing programs, regional development programs, revenue sharing programs, and hundreds of other needless projects and regimental bureaucracies. It has brought us a national debt of over $6 TRILLION that requires $300 billion yearly to service. It has saddled us with $43 TRILLION in unfunded liabilities that will need to be paid in future years. It has bankrupted us as a nation. It has eroded our will as a people. It has transformed a resplendent Constitutional system where power resides in the states and localities into a contemptible "majoritarian despotism" where all power now resides in a coterie of ruthless Washington power elites who buy the allegiance of millions of voting dupes every year with bread and circuses.
What a far cry all this overweening prodigality is from the Founders' original intent. Such a system is insanity incarnate. If not radically reformed, it will continue to consume our freedom and earnings like a swarm of locusts consumes a wheat field until we in America are no better off than the simple serfs of feudal times. If we do not gather the forces to stand up to this beast, it will swallow everything in its path until it has created a wasteland of irredeemable death. Demopublicanism's ultimate denouement is apocalypse.
There is only one solution. Americans must form a viable third (or actually second) political party that is capable of competing with the tyrannical monopoly of Demopublicanism. I have outlined an innovative workable strategy for this in my article, "Gold Money and Equal Tax Rates!" that appeared earlier on this website. Without a competitive political vision that exposes the nakedness of the Demopublican emperor, there can be no reprieve from the path to disaster upon which we are now traveling.
Read the rest it gets better:
http://www.321gold.com/editorials/hultberg/hultberg090303.html
Still not home yet...whatever happened to slojon? He emailed me that he had joined up as a lifer and then haven't heard boo since.
I've been playing here but the place I'm staying has no net access...should be back on Maui Thursday.
Got a chance to surf so I'm gonna take it...
Well, off to party...in the land of LA.
Why Hasn’t “IT” Happened Yet?
edit
is a financial disruption. IT is an irreversible downward spiral that takes everything down with it. IT will be started by a catalyst, a spark that will get everybody’s attention. But IT is already built into the economy prior to the spark, like a bunch of oil rags waiting for a match. Some of the candidates for the catalyst include the following:
Ø Crash of the Dollar
Ø Stock Market Crash
Ø Credit Crunch
Ø Derivative meltdown at a major bank (JP Morgan/Citicorp…)
Ø Nuclear War
Ø Major terrorist attack on the US (Nuke, Bio, Chem)
Ø Major Corporate Debt Default
Ø Major Municipal Default
Ø Foreign Dumping of Bonds
Ø Interest rate spike
Above are the matches. By themselves, most can be weathered. But when combined with the poor fundamentals of the economy and market, they can turn into an inferno. Below are some of the oily rags, waiting to ignite when a lit matches drop on them.
ü Massive amounts of derivatives
ü Devaluation of the Dollar
ü Overvalued stock market
ü Massive build up of corporate debt
ü Massive build up of personal debt
ü Under-funded pensions
ü Housing bubble
ü Low cash levels in mutual funds
ü Poor earnings
ü Deflation
ü Municipal deficits
But IT may not happen as many expect. Many investors are waiting for something sudden, a market crash or a geo-political event. They want to see the fire before they believe there is danger. If you were to ask most people, they would tell you that things haven’t really changed that much for them over the past 3 years. Yes, their 401k is down “but it’ll come back” is their attitude. Investor attitudes are much too complacent. They see nothing to worry about.
http://www.cornerstoneri.com/comments/why_hasn%27t_it_happened.htm
Plenty of Gold?
Don Stott
Last week, I attended the annual Eris Society get together, which is a libertarian think tank. One of the featured speakers, was Jim Rogers, a TV star on some show or other, and a superb speaker. He and his wife had just completed a 3 year, 156,000 mile trip around the world in their custom Mercedes. The rich can afford it. In the question segment, someone asked him about gold. He said that the world's governments had a lot of it, and he didn't think it would go up too much. I disagreed, and gave my reasons, but they were ignored, and other questions answered. I say, so what? So what if governments do have thousands of tonnes of gold in their vaults? Does this mean gold will stay down, because they will keep selling, to keep it so?
No, and the reason is simple. First of all, these so called smart bankers and bureaucrats, have been selling and leasing their gold for years now, and they are now beginning to realize that their paper currencies are just that, and have no tangible value. The selling and leasing, have virtually stopped, and the banks and governments are keeping the gold, because they want something of value. It is estimated that governments, central banks, etc, hold about 16,000 tonnes of gold in their vaults, which is about half of what they held a few years ago. (A metric tonne is 32,150 troy ounces.) This means that there is in the various vaults, about 514 million ounces of gold. Mine production around the world, is about 2,600 tonnes (83 million troy ounces) a year. Consumption is very close to mine production. Not only are central banks and governments selling and leasing very little, or none, but they will eventually want their gold back.
Those who borrowed gold at 1% interest, promptly sold it and re-invested the proceeds in 5% bonds or other paper, thereby making a 4% profit. As long as gold didn't go up in price, the gold could be re-purchased to repay the loans, and all would be well. That leased and sold gold, is un-recoverable, as it is in private hands. When repayment is demanded by lenders, it will have to be bought from the marketplace, and the more purchased to fulfill the lease obligations, the higher it will go. If I borrowed some gold from you, would you want me to pay you back in greenbacks?
I do not think there is any question as to whether there is anything in Ft, Knox, or any other U.S. Government vault, other than storing it for someone else, with someone else's name on it. This has been proven over and over again, so I will not rehearse it here. Uncle Sam has none. He buys it on the open market every month, to make Gold Eagles. The UK was selling 25 tonnes a month, till the populace revolted, and threatened to throw the bums out of office. Switzerland was supposed to sell, but I am not certain it happened. Portugal supposedly sold 25 tonnes. In other words, the idea that all the gold will be liquidated from government vaults or central banks, is highly unlikely. For decades, gold was earning no interest in central bank and government vaults, and was looked on as being a dreg. Now, magically, those bankers and bureaucrats have discovered that this is real money and important to have. They sold and leased something of real value, and will want it back. It isn't around, but will have to be bought at whatever the market price is, by the borrowers, when demand is made.
India still consumes the most gold, last year buying 547 tonnes. America is second, buying 410 tonnes, with the middle-east third, consuming 370 tonnes. Southeast Asia fourth, using 256 tonnes, and Europe fifth, buying 236 tonnes. China used 238 tonnes, Japan 141 tonnes, and Turkey 128 tonnes. Lots of gold, huh?
True, there is a lot of gold in the world, but the supply of paper currencies is increasing every day, by millions of pieces, thereby driving the price of everything, "up." Just last week, the fed increased the dollar supply by $50 billion! Just because there is a lot of gold, it doesn't mean that those holding it want to sell, or will forgive the debts of those who borrowed. Jim Rogers said he would rather invest in zinc or lead, than gold. I think this is wrong, because the only use for lead is in storage batteries, and zinc is good for galvanizing. Big deal. Bought a new battery or galvanized bucket or gutter pipe recently? Not many have. If one did invest in lead or zinc, where would one store it? Who would want it? Zinc and lead are not historic money. Prices are low, because of low demand, and zinc and lead are not in much demand of any kind, so their prices are low, and likely to remain so. Want to fill up your safe with zinc or lead? Not many do.
Now think of what will be the mindset of those lenders of gold, when prices go up, and the dollars continue to increase at astronomical rates, as they are now. "Hey, we want our gold back," will be the norm. The higher gold goes, the greater will be the demand. That is always true, just like the stock market. When the NASDAQ hit 5,000, the phones were ringing off the hooks. When gold hit $850, the phones were also ringing madly. If you have loaned hundreds of thousands of ounces to someone at a 1% interest rate, and the gold is going skyward, you will want your gold back, and the hell with the 1% interest. The borrowers sold it, and no longer have it. Gold is going to go up far faster than any interest earned, and this places the borrowers in a deep hole, and they are already in one, I believe. To repay the loans, they will simply have to buy it on the market and at current market prices, and this is why they try so hard to keep the price down.
Unlike silver, gold never disappears, be it in King Tut's Tomb, at the bottom of an ocean, or in a bank vault. So, in spite of the fact that gold is being continually mined, it is also being continually bought and used for jewelry, coins, or bullion bars. When the demand for gold becomes more than is being mined or sold, the price will go up. As the price goes up, a certain number of mines will re-open and people will sell, because higher prices places them in a profit position. When gold was being sold and leased by the hundreds of tonnes, this kept the price down to $260, or thereabouts. Now, with gold at $365, this is a sure indication that the leasing and selling has virtually ceased. The demand is increasing, and soon will surpass the supply. This means the price can go to? Some say gold will go to $3,000, and pass the Dow as it goes down. I don't know, but I do admire Richard Russell, who made the prediction.
I only know that the world is being flooded with worthless scrip, and it is losing value. For the first time in history, there is not a single currency in the entire world, which is backed by anything. In other words, there is no refuge in paper money denominated things. The only refuge, is to get into different measurements, such as ounces, gallons, acres, square feet, or whatever turns you on. The dollar is a decreasing measuring device, which makes it silly to measure one's wealth in it. They keep talking about preserving the dollar's value and status. What value and status? It has already lost 98% of its value, and the nation that issues them, America, has more debt than any nation on earth by a long shot. I'd rather be in ounces. Protect yourself.
We are leaving on vacation Saturday, till Sept 15th, but all calls will be forwarded to my cell phone, which I will keep with me at all times. I cannot maintain my web site, but can service my customers while cruising on the Mississippi Queen!
Don Stott
August 22, 2003
Don Stott has been a precious metals broker since 1977, has written five books, hundreds of columns, and his web site is www.coloradogold.com
http://www.gold-eagle.com/gold_digest_03/stott082203.html
Homeownership in a Bubble: The Fast Path to Poverty?
http://www.cepr.net/homeownership_in_a_bubble.htm
Gold to prove its mettle soon
Sangita Shah
Published : August 21, 2003
Those who have kept the faith in the yellow metal can expect decent returns in the near future. The price of gold, which was more or less stable in the past decade, is now moving northwards.
Unlike stocks, gold prices shoot up with every negative event across the globe. Based on the centuries old fact that gold demand shoots up in war-like scenarios, the new threat of global terrorism is expected to spawn a similar effect on the precious metal.
Gold prices are expected to zoom up to as high as $420-450 per ounce in the next couple of years from the current $360. Besides, gold demand is at a near record level of 4,000 tonne a year, while mine production has been steady at 2,250 tonne a year, according to World Gold Council (WGC).
Several studies by the World Bank and Beacon Group advisors point towards a declining production of more than 30 per cent over the next seven years. This means that gold output will drop to 2,000 tonne a year by 2010
Notwithstanding all these price drivers, China’s entry is expected to match India’s thirst for gold. Chinese citizens now have permission to invest in gold and estimates are that this oriental market will fuel gold demand by another 300 tonne a year.
According to Deccan Gold Mines, customers lined up to buy investment grade bullion when it went on sale in China on 27 December 2002 for the first time since 1949.
Retailers ran out of stocks within a few hours of the bars going on sale. India itself is the largest importer of gold with no domestic production.
The wedding customs and the habitual savings by farmers in gold in the agrarian country is expected to bolster demand. Add to the fact that the rupee is strengthening.
Recently, a strong inverse relationship between dollar and gold has strengthened like never before. The US dollar is expected to languish owing to extreme debt levels and deficit spending, foreigners withdrawing investments, a weak economy and negative real interest rates.
Further, gold is slowly crawling back into the monetary system. The strong desire for a dollar independent currency has seen Malaysian introduce a new currency made of gold.
The gold dinar is 100 per cent backed by gold. If the move is successful and aped by other countries, then the future will be nothing less that bright for gold.
Moreover, an interesting aspect has raised by the US-based Gold Anti Trust Action Committee (GATA), which believes that gold prices have been artificially stifled over the last many years.
Given these facts, it will be prudent to say that gold prices can only go up and no other way. Indians have been the beneficiaries of the gold price suppression (if proved) as the country has been a consistent buyer for decades.
Investors willing to wait for a year can expect hefty returns from gold amid declining interest rates. Moreover, India is all set to begin futures trading in gold by October and this will provide a hedging alternative.
A WORD OF CAUTION
Investors need to invest in pure gold bars, as jewellery may not ring in equivalent gains. Jewellery entails hefty making charges which cannot be recovered on sale. It also loses the intrinsic value of bullion as various metals are added for jewellery formation.
http://www.business-standard.com/today/story.asp?Menu=91&story=21161
Prepare to Punt
by Rick Ackerman
The Dow Industrials are inching toward the 9582 rally target first flagged here more than two months ago, so we need to be prepared to jump off the bullish bandwagon at any time. I’ve allowed for a move to as high as 9807.25 if the lower number should be exceeded even slightly, but we should be open to the possibility that a top of intermediate- to long-term importance is imminent.
What might cause stocks to fall thereafter? The main risk, I think, is from the further unwinding of bond hedges, a process that has roiled Treasury and mortgage markets over the last two months. (Note the very disquieting weakness of Citi and Fannie shares during this rally cycle!) Keep in mind that mortgage lenders typically hedge by shorting Treasury paper and that, by one estimate, for every 25-basis-point rise in yields, lenders must sell $40B of T-notes to keep their portfolios in balance. With yields up more than 150 basis points since mid-June, that is a lot of hedging to do. The fact that yields surged last week following a Fed announcement that was intended to dampen rates, strongly suggests that the carnage may not yet be over.
U.S. Dealers ‘Bag-Holders’
One Denver area subscriber, Dave K., wrote to say that Wall Street dealers were bag-holders at the last Treasury auction, absorbing 45% of the offering when foreign buyers stayed away in droves. Is it possible to quantify this development, which could be the beginning of an unsettling new trend? We might also ask whether the Fed is likely to step up its dollar-support operations if foreigners become increasingly reluctant to buy Treasury paper. We posed these questions to our Denver correspondent, who replied as follows:
“Assuming dealers are long, if potential foreign buyers are on the sidelines because they are worried about the dollar, the Fed would arguably help Wall Street move long positions by ramping the dollar (that assumes you believe the Fed intervenes). A stable to rising dollar might incentivize some foreign buyers whereas a plummeting dollar will send them running for the foxholes. Another interesting statistic to note is that, as of the first week of August, as per the Fed website, the Fed's holdings of Treasury paper was up quite a bit.
Foreigners Worth 50 Basis Points
“In terms of what a lack of foreign participation might have cost us, look at where bond yields were a month ago and where they are now: The 10-year bond was at 3.99 and now it is at 4.47. What that tells me is they had to adjust bond yields by that amount in order to induce buyers. If it is true that dealers took down 45% of the auction, and I'm now hearing it may have been even more, then it cost roughly 1/2%, or 50 basis points, to get this auction done, at least on the 10-year.
“The talking heads are blaming the dramatic rise in yields on Treasuries on mortgage hedging and strong economic numbers. That's complete b_s. The rise in yields is at least 90% attributable, in my opinion, to the market finding the appropriate yield needed to clear that bond auction. We already know that PIMCO, the largest domestic bond manager, has publicly stated that they are a net seller of Treasuries, so the smart money is flowing away from treasury debt.”
http://www.marketwise.com/MW_WiseG/BBF_Archive/20030818.htm
WE DON'T NEED INCOME TAX THE FEDERAL RESERVE FRAUD
By: Alan Stang
Last week, we looked at the shattering ruling by a Memphis court of appeals that the Internal Revenue Code does not require an American in one of these United States to pay income tax. Now that ruling will percolate through the national consciousness; more and more people will ask IRS the same thing Vernice Kuglin did – Where is the proof that I’m required to pay? – and our friends at IRS still won’t be able to prove it.
Like a dying monster that in the throes of death is more dangerous than it ever was alive, IRS will become even more vindictive, as our dear friends there contemplate well-deserved unemployment. Communist world government traitor George W. Bush will as always come to their rescue. Either everyone will be locked up, or the income tax will be replaced by some other extortion, such as a national sales tax.
Loyal Americans hate the income tax, but they continue to love America – despite what Bush and Clinton and other traitors have done to it – and they worry: Without the income tax, would the government they love collapse? I believe that if enough Americans knew it would not collapse, they would force an end to the putrid, totalitarian monster the income tax has predictably become.
Last week, I offered some proof that the income tax never has been needed to run the government. Today, let’s nail that fact down with a question: If the true purpose of the income tax really is to pay for government services, why doesn’t the government just print what it needs? My readers include some of the most knowledgeable people in this country; many of you already know the answer. For those of you who don’t, this simple, devastating question no doubt causes considerable wonderment. Yes, why doesn’t it?
When your paper currency is backed by gold, you must have more gold to print more paper. If the law requires an ounce of gold behind each paper "dollar," then you must deposit that much gold before you print that "dollar." And you can’t speak that gold into existence. God did that on one of those memorable six days. Now you need to find it.
On the contrary, when there is nothing behind your currency but the promises of the politicians, you can print as much as you like. And today there is nothing behind our currency. If you take it to the government and ask them to redeem it, they will give you another, newer piece of paper, not gold. So, again, the question asks itself: To raise the money to pay for government, why not just print it? Why subject the people to the horror of the income tax, which has turned them into spies on each other.
Because printing it would cause inflation and the inflation would destroy it. There were terrible financial problems in Germany after World War I. The head of the central bank "solved" them by printing paper "money." He had three shifts working around the clock. Every day, he would report to the legislature how much he had printed in the preceding twenty-four hours. The members would applaud. You are a financial genius! You are the savior of Germany! It lasted two years. In 1923, it collapsed and paved the way for Adolf Hitler.
Which brings us back to the income tax. What is it for? Beardsley Ruml spent his entire life as a Rockefeller factotum. He was in and out of their foundations. For ten years, he was a director and then chairman of the New York Fed, far and away the most powerful bank in the system. He was the author of """"""temporary"""""" World War II withholding, known originally as the "Ruml pay-as-you-go plan." If there has ever been a horse’s mouth, Beardsley Ruml certainly was one.
During the last year of World War II, Ruml read a paper before the American Bar Association. A magazine called American Affairs published it in January, 1946, under the title, "Taxes for Revenue Are Obsolete." In the introduction to the paper, the editor said this: ". . . His thesis is that given (1) control of a central banking system and (2) an inconvertible currency, a sovereign national government is finally free of money worries and need no longer levy taxes for the purpose of providing itself with revenue. All taxation, therefore, should be regarded from the point of view of social and economic consequences. . . ." (emphasis added)
Before you write a check, you need to deposit "money" to back it. If you don’t deposit "money" your check will bounce. What would happen if the bank said you could keep writing checks, but no longer need to make deposits? Yee Haa!!! That is what the government arranged for itself when it stopped depositing gold (and silver) to back the "dollar." The "dollars" it printed thenceforth were tantamount to your rubber checks.
Beardsley Ruml himself put it this way: "The necessity for a government to tax in order to maintain both its independence and its solvency is true for state and local governments, but it is not true for a national government. . . ." Ruml says two historic changes have made that possible. "The first of these changes is the gaining of vast new experience in the management of central banks. The second change is the elimination, for domestic purposes, of the convertibility of the currency into gold."
Ruml was talking about the creation of the Federal Reserve, the nation’s central bank, and about the theft of the people’s gold by mass murderer Franklin Roosevelt (Pearl Harbor). So, if we don’t need taxes to run the government, why do we have them? What are they for? Under the heading, "What Taxes Are Really For," the Ruml article lists four purposes:
1.As an instrument of fiscal policy to help stabilize the purchasing power of the dollar; 2. To express public policy in the distribution of wealth and of income, as in the case of the progressive income and estate taxes; 3. To express public policy in subsidizing or in penalizing various industries and economic groups; 4. To isolate and assess directly the costs of certain national benefits, such as highways and social security.
According to Ruml, the first of these purposes is by far the most important, his explanation of which deserves quotation at length: "By all odds, the most important single purpose to be served by the imposition of federal taxes is the maintenance of a dollar which has stable purchasing power over the years. Sometimes this purpose is stated as ‘the avoidance of inflation’ . . . .
". . . If federal taxes are insufficient or of the wrong kind, the purchasing power in the hands of the public is likely to be greater than the output of goods and services with which this purchasing demand can be satisfied. If the demand becomes too great, the result will be a rise in prices and there will be no proportionate increase in the quantity of things for sale. This will mean that the dollar is worth less than it was before – that is inflation. . . .
"The dollars the government spends become purchasing power in the hands of the people who have received them. The dollars the government takes by taxes cannot be spent by the people, and, therefore, these dollars can no longer be used to acquire the things which are available for sale. . . ."
Please go to the library and read this for yourself. Or, you will find it all in my book, TaxScam, How IRS Swindles You and What You Can Do About It, which you can read about on my website, http://www.stangbooks.com. Notice that the true purpose of the income tax, according to Ruml, is to protect the totally unbacked Federal Reserve funny "money" from collapsing like the 1923 German mark. Its true purpose is to pay the people with one hand, and to confiscate with the other; thereby inhibiting the inflationary effect of ravenous government spending.
And the scheme has worked. The income tax has delayed the inevitable collapse of the dollar by offering a safety valve through which the inflationary pressure generated by that spending can more safely be released. The income tax does that by transferring purchasing power from the people to the government. Again, the income tax has nothing to do with supporting the government.
Beardsley Ruml said all this fifty-eight years ago. Is it still true today? On November 21, 2002, Ben S. Bernanke addressed the National Economists Club in the District of Conspiracy. Bernanke is one of seven governors of the Federal Reserve, and belongs to its crucial, top-secret Open Market Committee, so he is another horse’s mouth.
Indeed at a celebration of economist Milton Friedman’s 90th birthday, Bernanke wound up his accolade as follows: "Let me end my talk by abusing slightly my status as an official representative of the Federal Reserve. I would like to say to Milton . . . regarding the Great Depression: You’re right, we did it."
Last November 21st, in the District of Conspiracy, Bernanke told the economists: "Like gold, U.S. dollars have value only to the extent that they are strictly limited in supply. But the U.S. government has a technology, called a printing press (or, today, its electronic equivalent), that allows it to produce as many U.S. dollars as it wishes at essentially no cost. By increasing the number of U.S. dollars in circulation, or even by credibly threatening to do so, the U.S. government can also reduce the value of a dollar in terms of goods and services, which is equivalent to raising the prices in dollars of those goods and services. We conclude that, under a paper-money system, a determined government can always generate higher spending and hence positive inflation."
In other words, nothing has changed. The Federal Reserve – the billionaire totalitarian socialist conspirators who illegally force us to pay interest to use our own money – needs the income tax. Americans don’t.
Related Articles
Federal Income Tax - Proof of Conspiracy
"Published originally at EtherZone.com : republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact."
http://www.etherzone.com/2003/stang082203.shtml
Hidden Sources Of MSG In Foods
From the book 'Excitotoxins - The Taste That Kills'
By Dr. Russell Blaylock, MD
3-6-3
What if someone were to tell you that a chemical (MSG) added to food could cause brain damage in your children, and that this chemical could effect how your children's nervous systems formed during development so that in later years they may have learning or emotional difficulties?
What if there was scientific evidence that these chemicals could permanently damage a critical part of the brain known to control hormones so that later in life your child might have endocrine problems? How would you feel?
Suppose evidence was presented to you strongly suggesting that the artificial sweetener in your diet soft drink may cause brain tumors to develop, and that the number of brain tumors reported since the introduction of this widespread introduction of this artificial sweetener has risen dramatically? Would that affect your decision to drink these products and especially to allow your children to drink them? What if you could be shown overwhelming evidence that one of the main ingredients in this sweetener (aspartate) could cause the same brain lesions as MSG? Would that affect your buying decisions?
And finally, what if it could be demonstrated that all of these types of chemicals, called excitotoxins, could possibly aggravate or even precipitate many of today's epidemic neurodegenerative brain diseases such as Parkinson's disease, Huntington's disease, ALS, and Alzheimer's disease? Would you be concerned if you knew that these excitotoxin food additives are a particular risk if you have diabetes, or have ever had a stroke, brain injury, brain tumor, seizure, or have suffered from hypertension, meningitis, or viral encephalitis?
Would you also be upset to learn that many of the brain lesions caused by these products in your children are irreversible and can result from a SINGLE exposure of these products in sufficient concentration?
How would you feel when you learn the food industry hides and disguises these excitotoxin additives (MSG and Aspartate) so they can't be recognized? Incredulous? Enraged? The fact is many foods are labeled as having "No MSG" but in fact not only contain MSG but also are laced with other excitotoxins of equal potency and danger.
All of the above are true. And all of these well known brain toxins are poured into our food and drink by the thousands of tons to boost sales. These additives have NO OTHER purpose other than to enhance to TASTE of food and the SWEETNESS of various diet products.
Hidden Sources Of MSG
As discussed previously, the glutamate (MSG) manufacturers and the processed food industries are always on a quest to disguise the MSG added to food. Below is a partial list of the most common names for disguised MSG. Remember also that the powerful excitotoxins, aspartate and L-cystine, are frequently added to foods and according to FDA rules require NO LABELING AT ALL.
* Food Additives that ALWAYS contain MSG *
Monosodium Glutamate
Hydrolyzed Vegetable Protein
Hydrolyzed Protein
Hydrolyzed Plant Protein
Plant Protein Extract
Sodium Caseinate
Calcium Caseinate
Yeast Extract
Textured Protein (Including TVP)
Autolyzed Yeast
Hydrolyzed Oat Flour
Corn Oil
* Food Additives That FREQUENTLY Contain MSG *
Malt Extract
Malt Flavoring
Bouillon
Broth
Stock
Flavoring
Natural Flavors/Flavoring
Natural Beef Or Chicken Flavoring
Seasoning
Spices
* Food Additives That MAY Contain MSG Or Excitotoxins *
Carrageenan
Enzymes
Soy Protein Concentrate
Soy Protein Isolate
Whey Protein Concentrate
Also: Protease Enzymes of various sources can release excitotoxin amino acids from food proteins.
Aspartame - An Intense Source Of Excitotoxins
Aspartame is a sweetener made from two amino acids, phenylalanine and the excitotoxin aspartate. It should be avoided at all costs. Aspartame complaints accounts for approximately 70% of ALL complaints to the FDA. It is implicated in everything from blindness to headaches to convulsions. Sold under dozens of brand names such as NutraSweet and Equal, aspartame breaks down within 20 minutes at room temperature into several primary toxic and dangerous ingredients:
1. DKP (diketopiperazine) (When ingested, converts to a near duplicate of
a powerful brain tumor causing agent)
2. Formic Acid (ant venom)
3. Formaldehyde (embalming fluid)
4. Methanol (causes blindness...extremely dangerous substance)
Common Examples:
Diet soft drinks, sugar free gums, sugar free Kool Aid, Crystal Light, childrens' medications, and thousands of other products claiming to be 'low calorie', 'diet', or 'sugar free'.
A Final Note...
Dr. Blaylock recounted a meeting with a senior executive in the food additive industry who told him point blank that these excitotoxins are going to be in our food no matter how many name changes are necessary...
http://www.rense.com/general35/hidd.htm
LA still sucks as hard as it used to, just the way I remember it...
Why Americans should celebrate Ashcroft's tour to defend Patriot Act
Posted on: 8/21/2003 1:34:00 PM - Columnist
WASHINGTON, DC -- Americans should celebrate the fact that Attorney General John Ashcroft has launched a public relations campaign to defend the USA Patriot Act, Libertarians say, because it proves that public opposition to the measure is growing.
"Let's roll out the red, white and blue carpet for John Ashcroft and force him to explain this un-American legislation," said Libertarian Party Executive Director Joe Seehusen. "The more the nation learns about the misnamed Patriot Act, the less they're going to like it."
Rushed through Congress within weeks of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, the legislation grants the government sweeping new surveillance and arrest powers. As a result, legislatures in three states and 165 communities have passed resolutions either condemning the law or refusing to help federal agents enforce its provisions.
To counter the growing public opposition, Ashcroft launched a public relations blitz on Wednesday in which he will address law-enforcement groups in more than a dozen cities.
"Americans are waking up to the fact that the federal government used September 11 as an excuse to declare a jihad against their civil rights," Seehusen said. "Ashcroft's tour could be a great opportunity to assess the damage inflicted by politicians whose first impulse is to blame the Constitution for the crimes of terrorists."
The attorney general has much to defend, Seehusen said.
For one thing, the law is patently unconstitutional.
"The Patriot Act clearly violates the Fourth Amendment by allowing federal agents to conduct searches and seizures without proper court authority," he said.
"For example, the government can now install the Carnivore e-mail snooping system without obtaining a court order. It can conduct secret 'sneak-and-peak' searches and seize bank and credit records upon the mere say-so of an FBI agent.
"The legislation also expands the definition of terrorism to include nonviolent crimes such as computer fraud; allows the collection of DNA samples from people convicted of offenses having nothing to do with terrorism; permits the detention of legal immigrants for seven days based on a mere accusation of terrorist activity; and permits dozens of other unconstitutional activities.
"Let's ask John Ashcroft why a nation founded on the values of individual freedom and limited government should tolerate such a law."
For another, the legislation was written in secret by Department of Justice bureaucrats and voted on so quickly that several Representatives and Senators admitted they never read it.
"As Rep. C. L. Otter, R-Idaho, recently put it: 'The smoke was still coming out of the rubble' of the World Trade Centers when this legislation was passed," Seehusen said. "If Ashcroft actually believes the Patriot Act is necessary and constitutional, why didn't he want Congress to debate it before the vote rather than after?"
Unfortunately, questioning the attorney general will be difficult, Seehusen pointed out, because his "public relations tour" will be closed to the public.
"While Ashcroft will preach to the law enforcement choir, he is afraid to take questions from ordinary Americans -- the very people whose freedom he is trampling," Seehusen said. "But if the Patriot Act is really worth defending, why won't the attorney general defend it in a public forum?"
The truth is that Ashcroft understands that there's a mini-rebellion underway against the Patriot Act -- and he's trying to counter it with a few speeches and photo opportunities, Seehusen said.
"The good news is that the more Americans learn about the so-called Patriot Act, the more suspicious they'll be of pro-government extremists like John Ashcroft.
"If resistance to this law continues to spread, perhaps Ashcroft will kick off his next road show in a location more receptive to his anti- freedom message, such as Iran, Cuba, or North Korea."
http://www.lewisnews.com/article.asp?ID=62288
Gold: Pierre Lassonde Has Identified The Real Reason For A Continuing Rise In The Price Of Gold.
On the first day of the Diggers’n’Dealers Conference in Kalgoorlie at the beginning of August Pierre Lassonde, one of the brains of the gold industry who built up Franco Nevada and is now at the top of Newmont, tipped gold to hit US$450/ounce within 18 months. While the bulls in the audience all said "right on mate" the bears need to remember that 12 months ago when gold was trading at US$280/ounce, Pierre tipped it to hit US$350/ounce within 18 months.and it did. His second prediction was that China would outstrip India in its demand for gold. This is hugely interesting and very logical given that the industrial economy of China is leading the world. A degree of affluence is bound to be felt by the workers who, before Communism removed that right, traditionally looked to gold as a premier method of saving.
Last October , however, the Shanghai Gold Exchange formally opened for business after a gap of 50 years and in March the State Council altered the rules governing both domestic and international participation in the gold fabrication market within China.This has opened the door for the Chinese to buy gold once again and demand is reported to be growing fast as realisation of the new freedom spreads through this vast country. Last year, according to the World Gold Council, Chinese demand per capita was a lowly 0.16 grammes against a world average of 0.7 grammes. This compares with Hong Kong where the offtake was recorded as 2.7 grammes.
Working on the basis that these statistics cover the amount of gold owned per head and that platinum rather than gold is the favoured metal for jewellery in Hong Kong and China, it is still perfectly possible that the population of China will have caught up with their more affluent neighbours within the next five years and have 2.7 grammes of gold salted away. Remember that at a gold price of US$360/ounce 2.7 grammes of gold will cost only US$30.4 and that eleven years ago, at the time of the Tiananmen Square massacre, no one would have dreamed that China would become this progressive. There are 1,288 million people in China compared with only 8 million in teeming, tiny Hong Kong. If they all buy 2.7 grammes of gold within the next five years it would amount to 109 million ounces or 3,516 tonnes. This is well over the world’s annual production of gold and if the Chinese are to withdraw this amount from circulation over the next five years there is only one direction for the gold price and that is up.
The demand / supply ratio has to be the key to its future movement. Pierre Lassonde has put his finger on it and the argument is much more solid than the conspiracy theories spouted by Jim Sinclair and others. They are still wrapped up in their dream that the US will continue to rule the world financially and physically. But things are moving on and the geopolitical axis is moving inexorably from west to east. The guerilla war now being waged against the west in Iraq will blaze away for many a year as the pent-up resentment of the Muslim world against the US and the dollar makes itself felt. It should be remembered that the time may come when the dollar is no longer accepted as payment for oil from the Middle East and gold will be demanded.
This brings us full circle to the Malaysian gold dinar which was launched this month. The coins are not envisaged as currency at this stage,but the chairman of the Malaysian Islamic Chamber of Commerce in Kuala Lumpur, Tan Sri Elyas Omar, told an International Convention on the Gold Dinar recently that he believed it could eventually be used as an instrument for international trade. He claimed that the gold dinar in such a role would benefit third world countries."When international trade is stable and export rates stabilise, the third world countries, especially those in the Asean region, could gain from this stability." Tan Sri Elyas Omar went on to claim that it could also help the economic development of third world countries including Islamic countries worldwide. This is the key to the interest now being shown by a number of countries in the idea of an Islamic gold dinar. Many resent their dependence on the dollar and all that it represents in terms of third world debt, US trade protectionism and military aggression.The gold dinar could therefore become a symbol for unity among Islamic countries.
Doubtless China will be watching its development with interest. Pressure is building on the Chinese government to abandon its currency peg to the US dollar and float the renminbi with Alan Greenspan adding his voice to the chorus in July. Such advice is self-serving as floating exchange rates tend to be very volatile and destabilising in countries with weak banking sectors and under –developed financial markets. China suffers from both and its inscrutable leaders will also have noticed the mess that the US is in as a result of constantly printing more paper. The possibility therefore has to be considered that China might eventually launch a gold based trading currency. If this was linked to the Islamic gold dinar the power of gold would be back to centre stage as it was before Franklin Roosevelt’s ‘New Deal’ killed off the gold standard. Maybe these thoughts were also at the back of Pierre Lassonde’s mind when he spoke in Kalgoorlie.
http://www.minesite.com/archives/news_archive/2003/aug-2003/lassonde220803.htm
Way up here in a beautiful place called Bonner's Ferry, been riding horses till I'm sore. Got on a horse 17 1/2 hands tall...quite the animal. Couple of the horses that hadn't been ridden for a while have gotten to like it.
Last night one of the more unruly ones tamed down and after his second outing decided he'd show me he could run...that was a thrill and a half and then some. Word seems to have gotten around the coral because several of the horses seem to want to get out and show what they can do too.
There's 42 horses, 3 stallions...I'd say 30 are ride-able, but I haven't got that much time (or that much ass left) but I think we'll get out one more time before I bip-bop off to LA.
Right now we're about to go Kiyaking on the Kootenai river at a place called Twin Rivers...
No spell check no grammer check no time...
"Yep, I got me one of them internet aplliances ya can use if ya wanna...never did see much use fer it..." NI Cow Poke 76 years old.
"Be sure ta have some apple pie before ya go picked the apples myself..."
Hate to leave but always happy to get home.
Speaking of flying:
http://www.msnbc.com/news/950176.asp?cp1=1
FEDERAL INCOME TAX
PROOF OF CONSPIRACY
By: Alan Stang
For many weeks, we have been looking at what we realistically might do to save our country from the totalitarian dictatorship that is rapidly suppressing it. We have seen that to have any hope of doing so we must recognize the cause: the conspiracy for world government. Presently, we are demonstrating why that recognition is so important, and we chose an issue for the purpose: the sodomite explosion.
We chose that issue because it is so much in the news. We could just as well have chosen the federal income tax. A few days ago, the income tax was in the news again, or, rather, it should have been. It should have been banner headlines across the country - but it wasn’t. Because you are reading these profundities at Etherzone.com, you probably already know what I am talking about, but my guess is that few other Americans do, because it goes without saying that the Communist News Network, the Communist Broadcasting System, all the news that’s print to fit and so on, have not given it the coverage it deserves.
I refer of course to the fact that, in Memphis, the federal government tried a lady named Vernice Kuglin on charges of tax evasion - filing false W-4 forms - and lost. Miss Kuglin is a pilot for Federal Express. Some years ago, she began wondering what law required her to pay income tax. She couldn’t find it in the Internal Revenue Code, so, in 1995, she wrote IRS and asked them to tell her.
The Internal Revenue Service refused. They did not respond. The more she studied, the more she became convinced that the reason they failed to respond was that the law did not require her to pay. So, she put 99 allowances on her W-4, and took home (almost) all her wages.
Our friends at IRS said she had lied, and charged her with six felony counts of tax evasion on $920,000 of income, enough to put Miss Kuglin away for as long as 30 years. She is 58 now, so in effect she faced a life sentence, and could have had to pay $1.5 million in fines. It is important to note that our friends at IRS prepare these cases very carefully. They don’t take one into court unless they know they will win. In a case like this, involving serious money, they do everything they can to incite the jurors’ envy. They constantly refer to the defendant’s "fair share."
On August 8, 2003, in Memphis, despite all this, the jury acquitted Miss Kuglin of all charges. They said IRS had not proved the lady was required to pay the tax. After the verdict, frustrated prosecutor Joe Murphy asked the judge to order Miss Kuglin to pay it. The judge replied, "Sir, I don’t work for IRS." By then Murphy may have been too mentally taxed to remember that, after the verdict, there was no legal basis for the judge to issue such an order, even if he does work for IRS.
Notice that there are many taxes in the Internal Revenue Code. Our friends at IRS have no trouble citing the Code section - the law - that requires a "taxpayer" to pay each one. Except the income tax. With regard to the income tax alone, they are tongue-tied. Why? Wouldn’t they quash the controversy and kamikaze pilots like Miss Kuglin, simply by stating the Code section that applies?
Yes, they would; they don’t ‘cause there ain’t. There is no such section. That doesn’t mean the income tax is illegal or unconstitutional. It doesn’t mean there is no such tax. There is, and the people it applies to need to pay it, but it applies to very few people, like most of the taxes in the Internal Revenue Code.
What the law requires you to do every year - and our friends at IRS say so themselves - is determine whether you are one of those people. You alone know that, because you alone know what you did last year. Did you make and sell liquor last year? Then you must pay the liquor tax. If you made and sold no liquor, forget it. You don’t owe the tax.
To conceal that fact, litigious prevaricators (lawyers) with advanced degrees in obfuscation have deliberately written the income tax into the Code in as confusing a manner as possible, to make it incomprehensible to the normal mind; and our dear friends at IRS use the uncertainty that confusion engenders to intimidate and literally to threaten Americans into voluntarily paying a tax the law does not require them to pay.
What does the law say? There are two kinds of federal taxes, only two: direct and indirect. There is no third kind of federal tax. The law - the Constitution - says that all federal taxes must be one or the other. In Brushaber v. Union Pacific (240 US 1), in 1915, the US Supreme Court ruled that the income tax is legal (constitutional), but that it is an indirect tax.
Indeed, in Stanton v. Baltic Mining (240 US 103), just a year later, the same judges said the same thing and added that their previous ruling, in Brushaber, created "no new power of taxation." In other words, Brushaber limited the federal government’s power to tax rather than expand it; limited it by forcefully explaining where that power could not reach. Nothing had changed since the Court ruled the income tax unconstitutional in 1894, in Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan & Trust (158 US 601).
The trouble with the tax today is that our friends at IRS are administering it illegally as a direct tax, which the Supreme Court forbade. That is the secret they don’t want you to know. Because I am trying to inform, not obfuscate, I am happy to add that this explanation is necessarily quite simplified, maybe even oversimplified, because of space - but it is true.
For more information, one of many things you could look at is my book, TaxScam: How IRS Swindles You and What You Can Do About It, which your Intrepid Correspondent wrote as a guest of the federal government, all expenses paid, without the help of Matthew Lesko. Go to www.stangbooks.com and click on non-fiction.
Patriotic Americans hearing about all this for the first time, often worry. Without the income tax, would the government collapse? The answer is to ask yourself when the government began. Let’s say 1784. When did the income tax begin? Nineteen thirteen. Between 1784 and 1913, there were 129 years. For many of those years, there were no internal taxes at all! Yet, just before the illegal income tax of 1894, the big problem in Congress was the "Surplus Monster." Tax money was pouring in and Congress didn’t know what to do with it. See the cartoon from Puck, the comic weekly, in TaxScam.
Indeed, when income tax withholding took effect "temporarily" in 1942, the federal government was still collecting more in alcohol and tobacco taxes than it was in individual income taxes. Can you name a year between 1784 and 1942 when the government collapsed? I’m willing to compromise. Name a couple of months. No income tax was needed, because during most of those years the government was restricted to the few activities the Constitution allows.
Because of verdicts like Kuglin, pressure to abolish the income tax will grow. Legislators and others will devise schemes like sales taxes, guaranteed to produce the same revenue the income tax yields now. Ask yourself why the federal government should continue to receive the enormous swag it gouges from us now.
Along these lines, where did the income tax come from? Isn’t it the second step to Communism listed by Marx in the Communist Manifesto? Marx thought that the only step to Communism more important than the income tax was government control of "all property in land." Sure enough, we now can see why he thought the income tax was so crucial to Communism.
Among its purposes is the destruction of the middle class that pays it. As you will see in TaxScam from the mouth of the Conspiracy itself, the main purpose of the income tax is to reduce the destructive, inflationary effects of the funny money printed by the Federal Reserve. The income tax does that by removing purchasing power from the economy, via "temporary" withholding.
So now we know that the income tax didn’t "just happen." It isn’t just a scheme to raise funds. It’s a tool of the conspiracy for world government. Did you know all this before? If not, and if you now have a totally different take on the income tax, you now also see why it is supremely important to call it what it is: a conspiracy.
We are talking about what we can realistically do to save America. When your obedient servant went nose to nose with IRS, I was charged only with a few misdemeanors, failing to file a particular form; no big deal. Miss Kuglin laid her life on the line. She faced 30 (thirty) years in prison, plus a huge fine. Apparently she refused to take a lesser plea.
I have not yet had the honor and pleasure of meeting the lady. I am sure she is as feminine as a lady can be. So I am not talking about her when I say that to do what she did would take cojones as big as bowling balls, and I don’t know many men that brave. I certainly have nothing against Jessica Lynch. That innocent, little lady was used and abused by Iraq and the United States, which to its everlasting shame is promoting women in combat. But kamikaze pilot Vernice Kuglin is in fact the heroine the media have been trying to make poor Jessica. Banzai!
Related Articles:
Degenerate America - The Sodomite Plan (I)
Degenerate America - The Sodomite Plan (II)
Sodomite Steamroller Buggers Again - The Conspiracy Unfolds
"Published originally at EtherZone.com : republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact."
http://etherzone.com/2003/stang081503.shtml
Vote fraud, 50 links:
http://www.linkcrusader.com/vote_machines.htm
As usual, AS SOON as I take off you guys are posting like demons...
Free association post due to lack of time and slow speed of this 'puter...would post several replies but it takes to long and it's Friday night...seems there a couple good live places to go down in Couer D'Alene...(CDA)..
Busting my balls on my own board...
First off, you gotta pick you fights carefully, I have. I am. I also plan to take this one up: lets see them drag me into court for writing a note to the TSA guys about searching my luggage...see sideki's post. But not till the leg back from LA.
MDCE? That one isn't over and I will be face to face with the CEO in about a week...it will be pleasant. I will be sure to mention some of the comments I have recieved from those who got shares on my advice.
One question I'll be sure to ask : Tell me why I should invest anymore money in your company. If I liked it at a nickle I should really like it under a friggen penny, right?
Love your handle, Sloofy.
If fatmatt's reading this, I expect a comission check for all the people who've signed up over here...just kidding. Or maybe not...okay I'm kidding...
Not really a reply to the message but I couldn't stand two more clicks to post.
Going White Water Rafting tomorrow...got my boots fixed up here in Idaho for a song...and got a couple "mean" horses with my name on them that need a good galloping. Plan to take them out and show give em a good run...22 to choose from...but two in particular that I didn't get a chance to ride last year.
Got offered a pretty sweet ranch out here, but it's in Idaho...we may "do a deal" as they say up here and seal it with a handshake...but I doubt it...gotta go see at least. Small tract "only" 350 acres...two rivers running through it.
Odd to see stuff I wrote from a couple years ago; thanks for digging those out rager...
Wait till I get back home Ed, we'll have at it then you know me I love spirited debate...meantime maybe you could go at it with Mighty Afro-dite...would love to read those exchanges...
Somebody mine some articles...UFO's causing power outages again? What's the chimp up to? Huge freaking forest fires up here...smoke is impressive; makes for cool sunsets...
Lots do to little time in which to do it...
No spell check no grammar check, JFSAG
THG
Ed, that
sucks rotten donkey ass...
There were a lot of cool posts on that board...I thought it was a temporary situation...
Now I'll have to dig up a search on google or something and see if it's still there...
So for sure not for a couple weeks...
ROLFLMAO!!!!! max...you guys crack me up.
Safe and sound after three hops, in CDA about to visit CDE connected on an ancient lap top...won't be surfing much on this thing.
You really think HLSH has that much more to go? It was an awesome pick under .25...5 bagger from here seems extreme. But then again I didn't really understand it when it was at .14....why it is you thought it was such a buy that is...
For the time being about the next two weeks email me at thathawaiiguy@ragingbull.com sorry to sully the IHUB board with that address but it is the fastest easiest one to check telneting flex has a whole 'nother set of passwords etc
I'm beat...I'm going to sleep. Went to a Chinese restaurant here in CDA, actually it was Hayden just past City Hall, and due to the fact that the folks are from Hong Kong like FOB...it was great. So I am well fed tired and happy.
What a country.
Only got into one teeny tiny little tiff in LAX over having to show my ID at the gate...they let me get away with it this time...get away with being a citizen who actually reads the law and has an inkling of his rights...on the way home I may press it a little more but due to the fact that there are some flights I don't want to miss I too am turned into the sheeple...except I know it and I hate it the rest for the most part just sheeple along with barely a bleat. Only other person I overheard asking questions was a young teenager...god bless him for understanding there is something fundamentally wrong with what's going on.
rager...Bummer, I can find it but no time:
But meantime:
http://www.nexusmagazine.com/SugarBlues.html
PPT in effect! e
The cancellation of democracy
By Bob Guldin
Originally published August 8, 2003
THE RIGHT to vote is absolutely basic to the American system of free and democratic government. That's why it's strange, and more than a little disturbing, that in several states, U.S. citizens are being deprived of their opportunity to vote in a 2004 presidential primary.
Because of a combination of tight budgets and partisan political maneuvering, at least three states, and probably more, will not hold presidential primaries next year. Legislators in recent months have canceled their states' primaries in Colorado, Kansas and Utah. Budget crunches were a big factor in all three states.
Colorado started the trend. On March 5, Republican Gov. Bill Owens signed a bill eliminating the 2004 primary, for a one-time savings of $2.2 million. The move was part of a major budget-cutting package that slashed $800 million from Colorado's 2002-2003 budget.
But in Colorado and elsewhere, there's also a partisan side to the drop-the-primary movement.
That's because President Bush is a shoo-in for renomination, while the Democrats have a vigorous contest with many viable candidates - nine, at the latest count. So Republican strategists figure that holding a 2004 primary will give lots of free publicity to the Democrats while their own nominating process generates close to zero excitement. Canceling the primary, especially in a year of budget austerity, begins to look like a fine idea.
About 38 states and the District of Columbia plan to hold presidential primaries in 2004. Most states without primaries will hold party caucuses. But some states, including Alaska, Nevada and Wyoming, have not yet planned to hold primaries or caucuses, according to the National Association of Secretaries of State.
Until the 1970s, most states chose delegates to the national party conventions through combinations of caucuses - local meetings of the party faithful - and statewide conventions. But primaries are clearly the most democratic and broad-based way of nominating presidential candidates. In a hotly contested primary, 20 percent of eligible voters may turn out - far more than ever show up at caucus meetings.
In Arizona, Democratic Gov. Janet Napolitano vetoed Republican-backed legislation to cancel the state's primary, which would have saved the state an estimated $3 million. "Arizona can well afford the price of democracy," Ms. Napolitano wrote in her veto message.
In Utah, the Republican-controlled legislature voted not to fund the 2004 primary, and GOP Gov. Michael O. Leavitt signed that measure. Democrats in Utah are attempting to raise money to pay for a party-funded primary while reducing its cost by using fewer polling places.
Similarly, in South Carolina, where the state does not fund presidential primaries, the Democratic Party is struggling to raise money to pay for its 2004 primary, and it's not certain whether that election will be held.
But not all decisions to eliminate primaries have been made on partisan grounds. In Kansas, Democratic Gov. Kathleen Sebelius signed a bill setting the state's next presidential primary for 2008, saving the state an estimated $1.75 million next year. And in Michigan, the legislature voted to scrap the Republican primary with no argument from either Democratic legislators or Democratic Gov. Jennifer M. Granholm. Both parties will hold caucuses in 2004.
Cancellation of the Michigan primary will be a loss both to the state's voters - who turned out in record numbers for the 2002 midterm primary - and the country generally. That's because Michigan has sometimes provided political surprises of national importance: Sen. John McCain of Arizona beat candidate George W. Bush in 2000, and on the Democratic side, both George Wallace and the Rev. Jesse Jackson won Michigan primaries.
In Missouri, the future of the primary is in doubt. The legislature adjourned in May without appropriating any money for the 2004 primary.
Besides fiscal austerity, an argument many lawmakers make in favor of abolishing primaries is the "front-loaded" primary schedule. That is, in the race to make their influence felt in the nominating process, more and more states have moved their primaries to the front of the line. A delegate selection process that once ran from February to June is now effectively over in early March. So if your state's primary isn't early, it's irrelevant.
That's why Arizona's Governor Napolitano, who vetoed the bill to cancel her state's primary, also decided to move the date of the primary up to Feb. 3. That way, the Arizona vote is early enough to make a practical difference.
No matter how you rationalize it - budget shortfalls, election schedules or partisan politics - the prospect of multiple states calling off elections is deeply disturbing. The result is that in 2004, fewer Americans will get to participate in one of their country's most important political choices.
Bob Guldin, a writer, edited the book Choosing the President 2004, to be published this fall by Lyons Press. He lives in Takoma Park.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4423.htm
Hitler: An Officer And A Gentleman?
History's warning regarding a compliant media.
by Henk Ruyssenaars
08/11/03: Foreign Press Foundation -The Netherlands - Aug. 11th-2003 - Until the Russian bullet hit officer Schultz, during the battle at Stalingrad, he really was totally convinced that Adolf Hitler was 'an Officer and a Gentleman', like himself. And he explained why, while we sat at a small round table in the wine cellar of his cozy forest hotel, where he taught us how to drink vodka like the Russians.
One side of his face was paralyzed by the bullet, so he had to pull his lips ajar to get the vodka glass in between. "It was the propaganda" he said, "because in the Army - like in the rest of the Third Reich - no other information than Reichs-propaganda was allowed".
Officer Schultz survived the long march back home, to a destroyed Germany, and started a small family hotel at the Hariksee, just across the border from Holland where my family lived. Ex-officer Schultz was trying to cope with the harsh life he for such a long time had known so little about; a reality very different from the army-propaganda in the newspapers.
The first time I met him, at age 13, on a family holiday in his hotel, was in 1955. The Second World-War just ended ten years ago, and Hitler's bloody horror had been on the front pages all over the world, for just as long.
And I still remember his explanation : " Why do you think nobody - in the by German troops occupied countries - was allowed to have a radio ? The German Supreme Command didn't want any other information than the German newspapers
and broadcasting to reach the people. It was their - and their information alone - which counted. And when I learned upon returning, in what way the facts had been forged by Goebbels* , I understood Hitler's Third Reich was a fake."
"Wir haben es nicht gewusst"
Mr. Schultz was not using the usual "Wir haben es nicht gewusst"-excuse, about 'not knowing it all', but carefully pointed out, that lack of facts and information creates disasters. "You can brainwash many people for a very long time" he said, "but you can only fool them, if you control all the information outlets; rewriting history."
And for the past decades- working abroad as a foreign correspondent - I've seen the same development in the States, but in my own country the Netherlands too. Which was a very open and progressive society before, but where also most journalism now has fallen victim to commerce and politics, and different points of view are not allowed any more.
Like the United States, the Netherlands is mainly run by the military-industrial complex (SHELL-Philips-Unilever-Amro-ING-Akzo-Nobel etc.etc.), having absorbed the politicians and media already earlier. The effect is dishonest and disastrous.
In a poll just published, it is indicated that in Holland, with it's 16 million - badly informed - inhabitants - a whopping fifty-six percent of the people is supporting the US/UK-wars ? Since it's the journalists which write, read and show the selected information - they form the opinion.
There is absolutely no question about it : all those lies, the fakes and the nonexistent evidence of this or that, is put in our ears and eyes by my 'colleagues'; trying to brainwash us. This is not a matter of 'shooting the messengers'; it's just telling them that many of them are traitors, collaborators and liars. They are selling our profession and honor, forgetting they are working for the people, and not the shareholders.
Holland, still a friend of the United States people
In Holland, still a friend of the United States people, nowadays only the people at present holding the reigns, support the Bush/Wolfowitz-junta. Afghanistan and Iraq takes its toll on Dutch-U.S. ties, because the population has a feeling of being constantly misled. Like officer Schultz. And like in the US, England or the Third Reich, the collaborating journalists are to blame.
Their 'effect' is for instance clearly shown in a poll in Germany where journalists and Government are mostly anti-war, and thus do not slide as much 'Newspeak' on the plates of the people they are working for, as is done by the collaborating media in Holland:
"Poll shows : George W. Bush; another big reason Americans not very popular in Germany right now".
By Elisabeth Noelle - Allensbach Institute of Public Opinion Research.
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung Poll, English: Link
A new survey of German public opinion leaves no doubt that the Iraq war caused serious damage to the German-U.S. relationship. Almost half the respondents in our poll, conducted on behalf of the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, said the United States and Europe have grown apart.
Although the Bush Administration made clear its disapproval of Chancellor Gerhard Schröder's position on the conflict, this appears to have had little impact in Germany, where 68 percent of respondents backed the chancellor's definitive ³no³ to the war and his argument that there was insufficient justification for an American attack on the country."
- And here's the proof for the umpteenth time, of how journalists are 'guilty by association' :
Based upon the information distributed by the journalists, in Germany 68 percent of the people are saying 'No' to the US-wars.
If there's any truth in the Aug. 7th -Dutch poll; 56 (fifty six) percent in Holland is thus saying 'Yes' to the wars ? How come there's absolutely nobody I know, nor my friends know in the rest of the country, who supports the war ? Are all those polls faked ?
When a debate about the legitimacy of the Dutch F-16's bombing in Afghanistan erupted, on the web site of the Netherlands Journalists Association (NVJ), the Forum was closed, four days ago. None of the Dutch mainstream media even mentioned it ! ( http://www.villamedia.nl/ ). And that's a very, very bad sign in itself: the rot sits deep, and like with fishes : "Holland has started rotting at the head".
Mossad 'Headquarters Europe' in Holland ?
The Dutch are paying the second highest taxes in the world - Sweden is nr. ! - and are seeing $-billions disappear in "secret agreements", with mostly the US and Israël. The latter seems to be 'running' Holland's main airport 'Schiphol' close to Amsterdam. Where - according to US-sources - the 'Mossad', Secret Isr. Service has it's European headquarters.
Dutch Attorney General Vrakking testified on Jan. 29, 1999, that the El Al security detachment at Schiphol, was a branch of Mossad. http://www.americanfreepress.net/10_14_02/Jetliner_Crash_/jetliner_crash_.html
Holland, secretly taking part in naval blockade of North Korea.
For the bombing by the Dutch Air Force (up to 2000 missions), there is no UN-mandate, Holland was not attacked nor threatened, so the bombing is a war-crime, legal experts conclude. But also this information may not be discussed, nor is information given about Holland now secretly taking part
in the naval blockade of North Korea, to start a new war there. (The nuclear 'October Surprise?).
This information was published on the web site of the Dutch Journalists Union (NVJ), shortly before it was closed : "On July 23, 2003 a USA Today report indicated that the United States had reached an agreement with Japan, Australia, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, the Netherlands, Bulgaria, and Spain to intercept North Korean ships suspected of carrying narcotics or weapons materials."
In short : Officer Shultz saw 50 years ago what we see again : as long as many people - under the cover of journalism - collaborate instead of using their own brains, Goebbels-propaganda is triumphing. There is however hope for humanity, and punishment for the warmongers, also among the journalists:
"On December 15, 2002 the International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan (ICTA) convened its first public hearing in Tokyo to try President Bush. Four hundred participants gathered to raise the curtain with an opening declaration of the ³Culture of Peace² against "The Globalization of the Military.²
http://www.zmag.org/content/print_article.cfm?itemID=3173§ionID=49
As was seen at the Nurnberg Trial; the tide always turns.
And Goebbels and his collaborators ?
They were hanged.
Henk Ruyssenaars
FOREIGN PRESS FOUNDATION
Editor : Henk Ruyssenaars
The Netherlands
fpf@chello.nl
* GOEBBELS : Background: 1943 had seen Stalingrad, and a general series of reversals for Germany across all battlefields. Nonetheless, Goebbels finds reason for cheer as he looks forward to 1944. Goebbels' basic argument is the same from here to the end of the war: Germany must win because otherwise it will be destroyed.
* The Source: Joseph Goebbels, "Sylvesteransprache Dr. Goebbels am 31 Dezember 1943," Deutschland im Kampf , ed. A. J. Berndt and von Wedel, Nr. 101/104 (Berlin: Verlagsansalt Otto Stollberg, 1944), pp. 135-139. URL : http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/goeb63.htm
The Dutch author worked for many decades for international A/V media as foreign correspondent, of which 10 years - also during Gulf War I - in the Arab World and the Middle East. Seeing that every bullet and every bomb breeds more terrorism !
HR
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4420.htm
Silver back under 5 bucks looking for a retrace all the way back to 4.50 or so...I like silver, as has become abundantly obvious...but that may take quite a while to shape up.
This is the prestage of a bull...
http://allamericangold.com/prices.html
Like I said, whatever theory you subscribe to the chart is still ripe for a run this pull back should make the profits that much sweeter...
Still getting teased about VDOT. Even though I picked a bunce of other winners and got gold at 272..was screaming about buying it under 300...like I'm screaming about silver now...what do they remember? VDOT.
Visit Media Concepts next week CDE this week...leave tonight.
Holy Crap! That was a hell of a pick from, what? .12?
Aibull had it under a .20 I know that...I took my 36 and done run...coulda shoulda woulda had a 10 bagger...holy cow.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=HLSH.PK&d=t
Thanks you guys for those tips.
Sell all 10 baggers...laugh as you watch your brokerage account cash potion swell.
Find another wave even if it takes all year...you only need one a year to become stupidly wealthy...whats the next one?
I like silver as has become abundantly obvious...but that may take quite a while to shape up. See next post.
Beware the fury of the patient man. -John Dryden, poet and dramatist (1631-1700)
"Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us." ~ Justice William O. Douglas
"Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us." ~ Justice William O. Douglas
Important if true:
Condoleeza Rice Warned Willie Brown Not To Fly On 9-11
by Brasscheck Monday August 11, 2003 at 02:42 PM
Bush administration foreknowledge of 9-11 hijackings confirmed by condoleezza Rice herself.
August 10, 2003
Grasping a straws and closing a loop
"Condoleezza Rice, the most senior black woman in the Bush administration, has levelled a charge of racism against critics of the US drive to bring Western freedoms to the Middle East."
http://makeashorterlink.com/?O2FC34B85
That's the grasping at straws part.
But wait. There's more.
Did this former Chevron (San Francisco) employee got this new rhetorical tactic from San Francisco mayor Willie Brown, who has managed to turn every scandal there into an issue of race?
SF Election fraud? White people don't want blacks to have an expensive, disruptive, mafia owned football stadium in their overtaxed, under served neighborhood.
Off duty cops robbing and beating citizens? White people who complain don't want a black police chief to succeed.
Rice has a lot of deep official SF connections besides Chevron: Charles Schwab, San Francisco Symphony Board of Governors, Transamerica Corporation, KQED.
Trivia question: What mayor of a major west coast city claimed just hours after 9-11 that he'd been warned not to fly the week of 9-11 by what he described as his 'airport security.' None other than Willie Brown!
Details:
http://propagandamatrix.com/willie_brown_got_low_key_early_warning.html
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/09/12/MN229389.DTL
Think about it. Where else on earth would Brown get the message not to fly on a particular day? The airport says there was no advisory in place.
Note that when asked, Brown clammed up as to the source. Why?
Searching...
Turns out my hunch ain't a news flash. Just the sussing out of a significant, but very obscure piece of 9-11 trivia.
On May 17, 2002, Pacifica Radio reported that Rice was the source of the call to Brown.
See side bar: http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/02/05/Bush_knew2.html
So in case you missed it:
THE ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT FOR NATIONAL SECURITY AFFAIRS CONDOLEEZZA RICE CALLED A FRIEND THE DAY BEFORE SEPTEMBER 11TH AND TOLD HIM TO STAY OUT OF THE AIR THAT WEEK
Got that?
San Francisco historians take note. The city elite found yet another way to be involved first hand in the reaming of the Republic.
http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2003/08/1634286_comment.php#1634366
This is BY FAR one of the biggest stories of the year.
"Now pinch yourself and review this astonishing turn of events: A highly trained and educated federal prosecutor in Memphis was unable to convince 12 American citizens that Vernice Kuglin was required to pay federal income taxes. He was clearly unable to produce a single section of the Tax Code to that end, and the jury was unanimous in clearing Kuglin of all charges against her. If the foregoing was not so, Kuglin would have been convicted."
http://www.federalobserver.com/archive.php?aid=6308
http://www.federalobserver.com/archive.php?aid=6303
This is BY FAR one of the biggest stories of the year.
"Now pinch yourself and review this astonishing turn of events: A highly trained and educated federal prosecutor in Memphis was unable to convince 12 American citizens that Vernice Kuglin was required to pay federal income taxes. He was clearly unable to produce a single section of the Tax Code to that end, and the jury was unanimous in clearing Kuglin of all charges against her. If the foregoing was not so, Kuglin would have been convicted."
http://www.federalobserver.com/archive.php?aid=6308
http://www.federalobserver.com/archive.php?aid=6303
Gold bugs are gathering
By Peter Brimelow, CBS.MarketWatch.com
Last Update: 12:01 AM ET Aug 11, 2003
NEW YORK (CBS.MW) -- Gold stocks have been outpacing bullion recently, although the metal finished strong Friday, at $358.50. Has the gold bugs' hour come at last?
The Philadelphia Gold and Silver Share Index (XAU) was up almost 8 percent on the week. It closed Friday at 86.44. That's right at a critical resistance level, according to technicians like Martin Pring. He wrote recently in his Weekly Update that "the [resistance] line is currently at 84, so a daily close above the 86-88 zone would do the trick."
The Amex Gold Bugs Index (HUI) was up nearly 10 percent to the week, to 177.12. Technicians were watching a similar resistance level somewhere below 160. But that's long gone -- and, for example, Greg Weldon of Metal-montor.com is now describing it as a "launching pad."
The Hulbert Gold Sentiment Index (HGSI), which measures the average exposure to gold of all the daily-updating gold timers tracked by the Hulbert Financial Digest, is currently 57.69 percent.
That's certainly toward the high end of the historic range recorded by the HGSI.
But wait a moment before entering contrary opinion mode. Five gold timers among those followed by the Hulbert Financial Digest have beaten a buy-and-hold over the past 10 years. And they are even more enthusiastic, recommending a 90 percent exposure.
The five best:
Futures Hotline/ Mutual Fund Timer
Mutualfundstrategist.com
FundAdvice.com
Professional Timing Service
PQ Wall Forecast
All five are bullish. The only reason that the average is at 90 percent instead of 100 percent is that Professional Timing Service is recommending a 50 percent exposure to gold.
All of these services use proprietary methods. But they seem to be heavily oriented to trend following.
Right now, the trend is up.
Perhaps the most colorful: P.Q. Wall, who writes about cycles, patterns and philosophy. "Beyond Heraclitus," he says, "there can be no progress, only difference, just as poetry cannot surpass but at best equal Shakespeare." Wall has been around for a long time, but he discontinued his letter for a time in the mid-1980s, when, he reports, he temporarily went blind.
Wall is exactly the sort of editor who turns Wall Street, and many financial journalists (but not me), off investment letters. And in fact, Wall has done poorly in the stock market, according to the Hulbert Financial Digest, basically by being a premature bear.
But his method, whatever it is, has been working in gold.
Here are the precious metals stocks/funds recommended by the 5 best:
Futures Hotline/Mutual Fund Timer: Tocqueville Gold Fund. (The latest hotline also mentions positively, though does not have in model portfolio, two silver stocks: Apex Silver (SIL) and Pan American Silver (PAAS).
FundAdvice.com: Rydex Precious Metals Fund (RYPMX) Mutualfundstrategist.com: Does not currently own any gold fund in a model portfolio, though gold-timing model is positive. Latest ranking of top relative strength funds puts Scudder Gold & Precious Metals (SCGDX) on top.
Professional Timing Service: Rydex Precious Metals Fund (RYPMX), Agnico Eagle (AEM), Apex Silver (SIL), Newmont Mining (NEM), and Pan American Silver.
PQ Wall: Rydex Precious Metals Fund
http://custom.marketwatch.com/custom/earthlink-net/mw-news.asp?guid={1891BD12-BE54-464C-9E57-D88746E...
Jolted Over Electronic Voting
Report's Security Warning Shakes Some States' Trust
By Brigid Schulte
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, August 11, 2003; Page A01
The Virginia State Board of Elections had a seemingly simple task before it: Certify an upgrade to the state's electronic voting machines. But with a recent report by Johns Hopkins University computer scientists warning that the system's software could easily be hacked into and election results tampered with, the once perfunctory vote now seemed to carry the weight of democracy and the people's trust along with it.
An outside consultant assured the three-member panel recently that the report was nonsense.
"I hope you're right," Chairman Michael G. Brown said, taking a leap of faith and approving Diebold Election System's upgrades. "Because when they get ready to hang the three of us in effigy, you won't be here."
Since being released two weeks ago, the Hopkins report has sent shock waves across the country. Some states have backed away from purchasing any kind of electronic voting machine, despite a new federal law that has created a gold rush by allocating billions to buy the machines and requiring all states, as well as the District of Columbia, to replace antiquated voting equipment by 2006.
"The rush to buy equipment this year or next year just doesn't make sense to us anymore," said Cory Fong, North Dakota's deputy secretary of state.
Maryland officials, who signed a $55.6 million agreement with Diebold for 11,000 touch-screen voting machines just days before the Hopkins report came out, have asked an international computer security firm to review the system's security. If they don't like what they find, officials have said, the sale will be off.
The report has brought square into the mainstream an obscure but increasingly nasty debate between about 900 computer scientists, who warn that these machines are untrustworthy, and state and local election officials and machine manufacturers, who insist that they are reliable.
"The computer scientists are saying, 'The machinery you vote on is inaccurate and could be threatened; therefore, don't go. Your vote doesn't mean anything,' " said Penelope Bonsall, director of the Office of Election Administration at the Federal Election Commission. "That negative perception takes years to turn around."
Still, even some advocates of the new system are thinking twice. The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, which pushed for electronic machines to help visually impaired and disabled voters, says the Hopkins report has given them pause. They're calling on President Bush and members of Congress to convene a forum of experts to hash it out. "We have become concerned about these questions of ballot security," said Deputy Director Nancy Zirkin.
Her group and others supported passage of the $3.9 billion Help America Vote Act in November. Of the $1.5 billion appropriated so far to replace old machines, rewrite outdated equipment standards, encourage research to improve technology, train poll workers and update registration lists, about half has been released. And that has all gone toward buying electronic machines, which cost as much as $4,000 a piece.
"These vendors are everywhere," said David Blount, spokesman for Mississippi Secretary of State Eric Clark. "They're besieging everyone."
The remaining money is to be released once an Election Assistance Commission is appointed. By law, the board was to have begun work in February. But the names of the four commissioners, two from each major party, have yet to go to the Senate for confirmation.
The stakes are high. The 2000 Florida presidential election showed the shortcomings of the current system.
A subsequent Cal Tech/MIT report found that of more than 100 million votes cast nationwide, as many as 6 million weren't counted because of registration errors or problems with punch-card and lever machines. One study found that of 800 lever machines tested, 200 had broken meters that stopped counting once they hit 999.
Frustrations with the old machines -- levers were invented in the 1930s and punch cards in 1904 -- have turned many local election officials into staunch supporters of the new electronic models. Advocates for the disabled say that the machines will enable the visually impaired, for the first time, to put on headphones and vote a secret ballot.
Mischelle Townsend, registrar of voters in Riverside County, Calif., said the electronic machines have saved as much as $600,000 in paper every election and, from 1996 to 2000, helped increase voter turnout to 72 percent, up 10 percent.
Any tampering would be caught, she said, in the extensive pre- and post-election testing. The best defense of the machines, she said, is that there has been no documented case of voter fraud. "If the computer scientists had one valid point, one, then why hasn't one incident of what they're saying occurred in all of these elections?"
But past is not prologue, historians and political scientists warn.
"Some of these hacking scenarios are highly improbable. But it's not completely out of the question," said Larry J. Sabato, a political scientist at the University of Virginia who has written about political corruption. "When the stakes are high enough in an election, partisans and others will do just about anything. So this is a worry."
Bugs, Glitches Can Abound
Computer scientists note that computers are unreliable, subject to bugs, glitches and hiccups as well as the more remote possibility of outright hacking and code tampering.
They warn of a hostile programmer inserting what they call Trojan horses, Easter eggs or back doors to predetermine the outcome. They point to a number of errors in the 2002 elections, from poll workers -- like some in Montgomery County -- unfamiliar with how long it takes to warm up the machines to mysterious vote tallies.
In Georgia, where Diebold machines are used, a handful of voters found that when they pressed the screen to vote for one candidate, the machine registered a vote for the opponent. Technicians were called in and the problem was fixed, state officials have said.
In Alabama, a computer glitch caused a 7,000-vote error and clouded the outcome of the gubernatorial race for two weeks. But more critically, computer scientists charge that the software that runs the machines is riddled with security flaws.
"Whoever certified that code as secure should be fired," said Avi Rubin, technical director of the Information Security Institute at Johns Hopkins and co-author of the report.
Rubin analyzed portions of Diebold software source code that was mistakenly left on a public Internet site and concluded that a teenager could manufacture "smart" cards and vote several times. Further, he said, insiders could program the machine to alter election results without detection. All machines had the same password hard-wired into the code. And in some instances, it was set at 1111, a number laughably easy to hack, Rubin said.
Because there is no paper or electronic auditing system in the machine, there would be no way to reconstruct an actual vote, he said.
In a 27-page rebuttal, Diebold dismissed the findings. Officials said that the software Rubin analyzed was old and that only a portion may have been used in an actual election. "Right now, we're very, very confident about the security of our system," said Mark Radke, a Diebold executive. "If there is a way to make it more secure, we're open to that from good, reliable, knowledgeable sources who don't have a previous agenda."
That doesn't satisfy some critics. "The most important thing about the Hopkins report is not the security holes they found, but irrefutable proof that all this stuff that the machines are secure is hot air," said David Dill, a computer scientist at Stanford University who has turned the debate over electronic machines into a national crusade.
State and local election officials, however, say the checks and balances -- the poll workers and judges, the thick manuals of procedures -- ensure the sanctity of elections.
"It's not fair to do an evaluation that doesn't talk about context," said Mary Kiffmeyer, president of the National Association of Secretaries of State. "Our voting process has all kinds of security. It's not just the box of technology."
Few Players in Game
Although free and fair elections are a central tenet of America's democracy, no one paid much attention to how they were executed for years. Not until 1990 did federal elections officials decide to write voluntary standards to certify voting machines.
Still, the atmosphere remained fairly clubby, with one lab doing the testing and a revolving door between voting machine companies and the state officials who later went to work for them. Although nearly 20 companies have had equipment certified by the FEC, only three are major players: Diebold, with 55,000 touch screens throughout the country; ES&S of Omaha; and Oakland, Calif.-based Sequoia Voting Systems.
All machines go through the FEC's testing and certification process, which can cost companies anywhere from $25,000 to $100,000. Yet a 2001 report by the General Accounting Office found that the FEC standards do not thoroughly test for security or user friendliness and that only 37 states follow them.
Doug Jones, a computer scientist in Iowa, said the testing is so secret that even he, as an insider who serves on the state board that certifies voting equipment, can't get information. Five years ago, he found the identical security flaws cited in the Hopkins report.
"They promised it would be fixed," Jones said. "The Hopkins group found clear evidence that it wasn't. Yet for five years, I had been under the impression that it was fixed."
Diebold's Radke said the code has been fixed.
Even the most vocal critics say there are workable solutions. Computer scientists say the companies should release their secret source codes for expert review, as two start-ups, VoteHere and Populex, have agreed to do. Or that states should require automatic upgrade clauses, as Santa Clara County has.
Dill, the Stanford computer scientist, and others are pushing for what are called voter-verified audit trails. By attaching a printer to every machine, voters can review the electronic ballot before it drops into a locked box.
Many solutions are already spelled out in the Help America Vote Act, which mandates tougher security, usability and accuracy standards.
In the end, however, with experts still at loggerheads and the 2004 election looming, voters are left wondering which side to trust. Howard A. Denis (R-Potomac-Bethesda), a Montgomery County Council member, was so shaken by the Hopkins report that he is considering asking for a waiver to stop using electronic machines.
"The more I look into this, the more serious I think it is," he said.
© 2003 The Washington Post Company
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A42085-2003Aug10?language=printer
Free Will, If Any: Why Goats Don't Nest In Trees
by Fred Reed
August 11, 2003
One of the funnier illusions of mankind is that our behavior is rational. This curious rejection of the obvious permeates the approximations of thought engaged in by politicians, professors, and those seeking federal grants so as to live well and improve us.
But no. Actually our behavior is largely built-in, with the software preinstalled at the factory and packed into a complex read-only file. We make the choices our instincts allow us to make, and have the freedom of choice of a bowling ball rolling down the lane. We seldom notice, because behavior in accord with instinct seems perfectly reasonable. Lemmings probably wonder why humans don't stampede over cliffs and drown themselves. (An idea worth looking into.)
"Instinct" is hard to define. Is the flowering of the sexual drive at adolescence instinctive, or is a chemical response to new hormones? Is there a difference? Since we have decided to believe that the brain is a purely chemical entity, and ignore the obvious questions regarding consciousness and the mind, one might say that instinct cannot exist. Take your choice. Here I use the word to mean behavior that is built in, however effectuated.
If we have free will, it's only within built-in constraints. We are programmed from birth. A newborn wants to suck. Nursing isn't learned behavior. It's just what babies do...
The behavior of girl babies differs slightly but unmistakably from that of boy babies. They do not learn this from other babies. Thereafter every step of the way to adulthood we do very much the same things at the same time. Babies cry when they're unhappy. The Terrible Twos come and go with children who have never seen the Terrible Twos. Talking is learned, but at the same programmed time. Blind children have never seen anyone walk, yet they walk. It's built-in.
When the hormones of puberty hit, we become obsessively interested in the other sex. This too is scripted. Young males, if not restrained, begin butting heads over girls, remarkably like the males of other mammalian species. The girls begin competing with other girls. The boys do foolish and dangerous things and, when there are risks to be taken to gain access to the girls, the boys take them.
Sex, like fighting, is a major and irrational organizing force in our lives. We are always in heat, always looking or at least considering. People spend hours thinking about sex, reading books about sex, trying to find sex, looking at pornography or reading the mandatory stories about sex in women's magazines. Dogs, more sensible, become interested only when a female is in season. It must be an easier life.
The illusion of free will is more convincing when one considers the making of what appear to be choices. Learning to walk can be regarded as purely physical. Being a libertarian or a socialist seems more the result of ratiocination. But our politics are equally instinctive. We form groups and fight other groups. What appears to be intellectually determined usually isn't.
Teenagers begin their political existence by realizing that they understand everything far better than their parents do. They join crusades to retake Jerusalem or to save the world from the International Monetary Fund. They believe they are making principled choices. Their reasons are often persuasive: The young are not necessarily stupid, despite convincing simulations. They can both learn much about the IMF, and weave arguments both subtle and sanctimonious.
But it's always something, and always at the same age. If it isn't the IMF, it's stopping the war in Vietnam, or saving the baby seals, or ending international finance capitalism. These causes may be good ones, but only accidentally. When five hundred generations do the same things, one begins to suspect that the fix is in.
Deceptively, while the ends we pursue are predetermined, the means of achieving them depend on reason. Fighting wars for example is incredibly stupid. They waste huge amounts of money that could otherwise be spent on ineffective social programs. Yet the design of an intercontinental ballistic missile is beautifully rational: the engineering elegant, the mathematics sophisticated, a thousand difficult technologies melded into a gorgeous baseball bat with a nail in the end. Our brains are the tools of our glands.
Thus the history of the species is a tale of war, rape, pillage, torture, and butchery. This is not curmudgeonly fustian (though I think highly of curmudgeonly fustian). It's how we have been, and how we are. We fight. We just do.
Savages everywhere that I know of regularly fought neighboring tribes for booty, women, horses-or so they presumably believed. I think they did it because they were-we are--wired to do it. When people became a tad more civilized, they kept on fighting, butchering, and torturing. They just had better plumbing in their houses.
The Aztecs, a brutal military empire, invented open heart surgery to the astonishment of the Spanish and practiced it with abandon. They were propitiating the gods, see, to get good weather or something. The Spanish, a civilized people who burned heretics at the stake, were horrified by the Indian's practice of human sacrifice. Civilization doesn't temper barbarity. Later the 18th century French, a truly sophisticated society, wrecked Europe under that wretched little Corsican.
Horses don't behave this way. Different wiring. They run around in herds till they get slow and the wolves eat them, but they don't butcher each other. We do. It's built-in.
The race isn't improving with time. We can't: we don't know how to change instincts. In the past, armies put cities to the sword after capturing them. More recently we've done it before capturing them, because we could: Dresden, Hamburg. Sometimes there doesn't seem to be any reason at all, as in Pol Pot's liquidation of Cambodia. It's just how we are.
The instinct to conquer accounts for the unending wars of expansion, the empires that balloon like bubbles and collapse. It also accounts I think for the rise of commercial empires like J. P. Morgan's, or Microsoft. Bill Gates could probably get by on ten billion. Yet he wants more. Not for anything. Just more.
To me, the automaticity of our larger impulses militates against faith in progress toward a peaceable world. We like to think of ourselves as more advanced than, say, the ancient Persians, and technologically we are. But recently, as in all the intervening years, we have done exactly the same things they did, only our chariots have turbines and high-velocity smooth-bores. We're act the way we always act, because it's the only way we can act.
***
[If you found this article of interest, please consider perusing the FriendsOfLiberty/SiaNews archives
Please also consider registering (free) as a FriendOfLiberty at our Front Page
http://www.sianews.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1188
Take This Jobless Recovery and Shove It
By Genevieve Roja, AlterNet
August 11, 2003
In the larger scheme of President Bush's agenda, it's people like me who don't really matter. And why would I? I'm no CEO of a big monied corporation. I'm neither a fundraiser nor a politico.
It's worse – I'm unemployed.
While the President is horseback-riding around his Crawford, Texas ranch during his month-long hiatus, my fellow unemployeds and I try to land the job of today, rather than the job of our dreams. That's what happens when you're out of work – you take the measly scraps and wait for the steak dinner.
Some of us go back to school in the hopes that the economy will recover by the time someone hands us a diploma. Or we move in with our parents, sell our cars and apply for jobs netting half what we used to make. There is no real feeling of optimism – just desperation. Our anxiety makes others around us crazy. We want jobs not just for the money, but to join the others out there who are contributing something to the world, whether it's shoveling dirt or pushing paper. Take away someone's job and you take away a sliver of that person's self-worth. Sometimes, working, whether we like our jobs or not, validates our sense of presence, of being a valued member of society.
It's too bad television news can't broadcast the life of the jobless like they do soldiers duking it out in lawless Iraq. Joblessness is rarely sexy or scary. What would the cameras capture if they could? How about roads and highways bogged down by traffic, regardless of the time of day? Try going to Whole Foods at two in the afternoon. Nightmare. Bodies abound, jostling for sale-priced baskets of raspberries and freshly cut samples of nectarines.
Ditto the scene at drycleaners, restaurants, pharmacies, coffee shops and department stores. I can't go to the library anymore to job-hunt online because there are too many people camped out at the computer stations. They're like the ghosts of employed days past who refuse to leave their haunting posts. There's the white-bearded hippie professor type with his stacks of Chicano literature by his side. Or the polo shirt-clad man with his weather-beaten briefcase sitting atop the table of his workstation. He looks quietly displaced pounding away at the keyboard; it's as if the library has become his new cubicle.
Since Bush took his cubicle, about 3.4 million Americans have lost their jobs. Last month, 470,000 Americans became discouraged and stopped looking for work. We have a 6.2 unemployment rate and the highest level of unemployment in nine years. And how does Bush respond? He signed a tax cut bill he claimed would create a million more new jobs but in actuality, did not. He recently sent three Cabinet members by bus to Wisconsin and Minnesota who reported "a positive feeling in America about our economy."
Well, what about the sentiment of the other 48 states? As a Californian, I can tell you a lot about the daily struggle of an unemployed. It is a constant period of personal re-evaulation and daily affirmation. It's learning to forgive myself, telling myself it wasn't my fault I was let go, that I'm good enough and smart enough, and by golly, someone will hire me someday. It's difficult hanging onto hope when you've been out of work for almost a year. Unemployment means readjusting to job hunting too, maybe lowering your standards in the process. I now click on part-time job postings and submit my name for marketing studies that pay $20 for my cooperation. I explore volunteer opportunities because that's always good for the soul and there's virtually no rejection – everyone loves an employee who doesn't have to be paid.
But it's still not a job. Nothing can replace that feeling of making a important contribution toward the greater good. Also irreplaceable is the feeling of waking up in the morning not in a state of panic, but in a state of employed serenity.
There is much to be done about this Bush-termed "jobless recovery." It may start with a bus ride survey, but it certainly doesn't end there. Sure, the rest of America wants to have positive feelings about the economy. But first of all they want to believe that the creation of jobs is high on the agenda, not just an empty promise on the eve of a presidential respite. Our leaders need to work hard to find real solutions the way Americans work to find jobs and retain those jobs – with integrity, intensity and with stubborn determination.
Genevieve Roja is a freelance writer living in San Francisco.
http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=16572
Homeland Security for Whom?
Are Bush, Ashcroft, and Wolfowitz Protecting America or Their Own Regime?
By DOUGLAS VALENTINE
Adapted from the July 2003 issue of Penthouse Magazine
"The implication or latent threat of terror was sufficient to insure that the people would comply."
William Colby, creator of the CIA's Phoenix Program, which targeted Vietnamese leaders for assassination during the Vietnam War
For those of you believe the war on terror and the violent occupation of Iraq will ensure world peace, you've got another thing coming; and that thing is the illegitimate Bush Regime's homeland security infrastructure.
Let me state the point of this article up front: The war on terror, and its "homeland security" counterpart, are flip sides of the same coin. They are the same ideology applied to foreign and domestic policy. But like CIA agent Alden Pyle in The Quiet American, their evil intention is wrapped in a complex matrix of transparent lies. Pointedly, that evil intention is to provide the Bush Regime with political internal security at home, thus enabling it to plunder the world with impunity.
The foreign policy aspect of this synthesis was promulgated on September 20, 2002 in the "The National Security Strategy of the United States" (a.k.a. the Bush Manifesto) in which the Bush Regime confers upon itself the divine right to devastate any nation it dislikes, or has vast oil fields or other natural resources that it covets. This first-degree-murder strategy makes about 70 percent of Americans feel good about Bush. But Bush has an insidious ulterior motive, and if these feel-good Americans were to read the fine print of his Manifesto, they would realize that by generating more human misery around the world, the eternal war on terror will create more dissenters at home, and thus provide Bush with the mandate he needs to impose a de facto military dictatorship, as prescribed in his domestic policy statements: the Homeland Security, Patriot, and Domestic Security Enhancement Acts.
Just as waging war around the world is popular, so too will be suppressing domestic dissent. For example, Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly recently had to defend himself when he said war protesters were "un-American." His producers made him do some fast backpedaling, but the Big Mouth was expressing the true feelings of most of his listeners. The airwaves and editorial columns bombard the public with the Bill Riley message, and that is how peace activists go from being bad Americans to being enemies of the state. And that is how the war on terror translates into a homeland security infrastructure that suppresses dissent.
The Shell Game
Homeland Security is a euphemism for internal security, but that phrase has the nasty ring of McCarthyism to it, and the anti-Communist witch-hunts of the 1950s, led by FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover and racist Senator James Eastland's Internal Security Subcommittee. Before the neo-cons got hooked on terror, America's hawks were obsessed with Godless Communism. Hoover devoted his life to destroying every Communist in America, while the Dulles brothers (CIA Director Allen and Secretary of State John) harnessed the mania and used it as a convenient pretext for Cold War foreign intervention, and laid the foundation stones for the American empire after World War II. In the same way, Bush's anal obsession with terror is the new contrived pretext for solidifying world domination. But as Hoover, Eastland, and the Dulles' knew, without political internal security, Bush cannot wage war abroad, with all the economic benefits that entails.
So Bush, with the help of Joe Lieberman, the Senator from Israel, created the Department Homeland Security to pacify (a euphemism for terrorize) the American people into submission through a number of ploys. This homeland security boondoggle is the biggest reorganization of the U.S. government in 50 years. It might even bankrupt the country and, perhaps intentionally, throw it into a Depression. That remains to be seen. What is certain is that at a cost of $50 billion in taxpayer's money, the homeland security infrastructure will provide Bush with 170,000 political cadres, and the internal security he needs to assure the continuity of his political power indefinitely. Except for providing Bush with political internal security, there is no need for the Department of Homeland Security; it is a Trojan Horse through which Bush will unleash his ideological storm troopers and exploit his ill-gotten power to achieve permanent political dominance.
And he is creating this police state through terror. As the Homeland Security web site assures us, the threat of terrorism "is a permanent condition" that "requires our country to design a new homeland security structure."
Terror as an Organizing Principle of Society
The underlying principle of homeland security (and the war on terror) is that terror is an organizing principle of society. This includes every type of terror, from the shock and awe bombs that liberated Baghdad, to the collective punishments Israel used to crush the Palestinian soul. It's armed propaganda in the form of National Guardsmen eye-balling us at airports, and it's the greatest psywar campaign ever waged, in the form of red white and blue color-coded warnings of terror attacks that never occur, and unsubstantiated reports brought to you by government stenographers at network news.
Terror is the underlying concept. In "Metaphoric Entrapment In Time," researcher Anthony Judge tells how the new homeland security infrastructure is actually an act of "structural violence."
"Personal violence is for the amateur in dominance," Judge notes, quoting two-time Nobel Prize winner Johan Galtung, but "structural violence is the tool of the professional. The amateur who wants to dominate uses guns; the professional uses social structure. The legal criminality of the social system and its institutions, of government, and of individuals at the interpersonal level is tacit violence. Structural violence is a structure of exploitation and social injustice."
Now that the Department of Homeland Security has been voted into law, Bush has laid the groundwork for America's new legally criminal social structure, which exploits on both personal and professional levels. This confluence blesses Bush with omnipotence. He is all-powerful. As he said before sacrificing the Iraqis on the altar of his apotheosis: "We have concluded that tomorrow is a moment of truth for the world."
Delusions of grandeur? A messiah syndrome? Penis envy? What gives?
Justice as Terror
Administrative detention is the extralegal nail upon which the forthcoming legally criminal homeland security structure hangs. It is a neat way of avoiding the Bill of Rights and the Geneva Conventions by creating "crimes of status." Administrative detention was first used by the CIA in the Vietnam War through the notorious Phoenix "assassination" Program, and was applied against Communists, Nationalists, and anyone else opposing the puppet US puppet regime, just as CIA death squads are operating now in Afghanistan and Iraq. Sympathizing with the Communists was a crime of status, as was advocating peace.
Administrative detention is structural violence for the professionals. At the personal level, the terror as an organizing principle of society relies on selective terror, which means destroying one's political opposition through acts of terror directed at individuals. It derives from the Eye of God technique, which plays on primitive fears of an all-seeing cosmic Eye of God that sees into your mind. It was used in World War One by morale officers who sent pilots in small aircraft to fly over enemy camps to call out the names of individual soldiers. CIA psywar expert Ed Lansdale, Graham Greene's model for Alden Pyle in The Quiet American, used this technique in the Philippines in the early 1950s. At night a psywar team would creep into town and paint an eye (like the one that appears atop the pyramid in the Great Seal of the United States) on the wall of a house facing a suspected Communist or Communist sympathizer.
In South Vietnam the Eye of God trick took a ghastly twist. CIA officer Pat McGarvey recalled to Seymour Hersh that "some psychological warfare [psywar] guy in Washington thought of a way to scare the hell out of villagers. When we killed the VC there, they wanted us to spread eagle the guy, put out his eye, cut a hole in the back [of his head] and put his eye in there. The idea was that fear was a good weapon." Likewise, ears were cut off corpses and nail to houses to let the people know that big brother was listening as well. When Viet Cong leaders were found, Phoenix teams murdered and mutilated them along with their families and neighbors as a means of terrorizing the neighboring population into a state of submission. Such horrendous acts were, for propaganda purposes, often made to look as if they had been committed by the enemy. To spread the word that everyone was a potential victim, CIA psywar posters pictured a Phoenix with a blacklist trailing from its beak and a snake (i.e. a Communist) grasped in one of its talons. The message was that the omnipotent CIA selectively snatches its prey, in the most hideous way.
The Bush Regime is locked into this method of selective terror. They want you to think they know everything about you: if you've been bad or good, so to speak. Just remember what happened to Uday Hussein and his brother Qusay, and all the other Iraqis featured on the CIA's popular death cards, which are advertised on the Internet.
The modern manifestation of selective terror is the computerized blacklist - the greatest blackmail scheme ever invented: if you don't do what Bush and his clique want, your name pops up and you're suppressed. Be forewarned, the Bush Regime's blacklists include the INS/State Department's TIPOFF; CAPPS II, which uses credit information and secret databases to assess a person's security risk level each time he or she flies; the "No-Fly" blacklist of peace activists, distributed to airlines by the FBI and the Transportation Security Administration; and local blacklists like the one kept by the Denver police department. You know about these lists. You just don't know about the secret ones, the Bush Regime's enemies list of its most powerful domestic political opponents.
Administrative detention and selective terror work in tandem and depend on informant and surveillance programs that identify, in homeland jargon, "terrorist surrogates" at the grass roots level of society. (Attorney General John Ashcroft's Terrorism Information and Prevention System, a.k.a TIPS, was the short-lived prototype.) This is how it happens: on the basis of a false accusation made by an anonymous homeland informant, counter terror teams will arrest a terrorist surrogate, detain the person indefinitely under administrative detention laws in an interrogation center until he or she dies or defects, or is sent to a military tribunal for disposition. Disposition means permanent detention in some perverse torture chambers like the ones in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Ultimately, the Domestic Security Enhancement Act will allow Ashcroft to secretly incarcerate and deport U.S. citizens without any thought of ensuring them due process of law. Check out what happened to Jose Padilla.
To summarize so far: Blanket surveillance, blacklists, arrests on the word of anonymous informants, the absence of due process through extralegal administrative detention procedures, military tribunals, incarceration, and deportation are the instruments of the homeland security infrastructure, which will coordinate all existing U.S. intelligence, police, and military units in the attack on terrorists and their surrogates.
Ensuring Political Security
Bush is about to devour his domestic enemies at both the tactical (personal) and strategic (professional) levels. Upper echelon enemies will be dealt with by the Homeland Security Council, which Bush chairs, and which does not appear on any organizational chart. It sets policy for a secret political warfare program. It is the greatest danger facing America today. Like the anthrax letters mailed to Democratic senators, it takes only a few "black propaganda" operations to suppress the leaders of the political opposition. Private contactors may carry out executive actions (what the Israelis fondly refer to as "targeted kills") issued by this all-powerful Board of Directors, as they are not accountable to Congress. Or Bush will employ political action squads from the Terrorist Threat Integration Center, which consists of the FBI and CIA's terror experts, and reports only to Bush.
Tactically Bush will neutralize opponents through the Department of Homeland Security, which consists of four directorates: Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection, Science and Technology, Border and Transportation Security, and Emergency Preparedness and Response. The all-important Office of Intelligence, consisting of about 1000 analysts from dozens of agencies, is cloistered within the Directorate of Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection. This Office, insofar as it will coordinate the other directorates in terror operations, is the nerve center of the DHS political internal security infrastructure.
The Office of Intelligence will manage the CIA's domestic action squads, interrogation, and informant programs, and will wag the homeland security dog by coordinating all in-coming intelligence, and then sending out warnings to state, local and private sector officials. Employees from the CIA's Counter-Terror Center will fill the most important positions within the Office of Intelligence, and will plan daily operations in conjunction with fellow CT Center officers posted within 93 Justice Department terrorism task forces run around the country. With the latest electronic surveillance gadgets available to them, they will reach into every corner of society, including our homes, workplaces, public facilities and computers, to sniff out terrorist surrogates and launch preemptive attacks to neutralize them before they activate.
If you don't believe that the blossoming homeland security infrastructure is already providing political internal security, consider that hundreds of businesses and institutions across the country have already been placed on the CIA's Watch List. According to Bob Woodward of the Washington Post, one Bush official said that merely being on the list "could destroy the livelihood of all those organizations...without a bomb being thrown or a spore of anthrax being released."
Elizabeth Becker of the New York Times reported several months ago that "the leaders of many federal departments and agencies have been scrambling to figure out... how they can influence the outcome [of the impending Department of Homeland Security] without appearing disloyal."
And James Bamford noted that "pressure has been building on the intelligence agencies to deliberately slant estimates to fit a political agenda," and "a growing number of military officers, intelligence professionals and diplomats ...charge that the administration squelches dissenting views."
This is the maximum danger of homeland security, and what it boils down to mandatory self-censorship. Already we passively permit hooded paramilitary policemen with automatic rifles to search our cars, without probable cause, for Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. These policemen are helping us, right? They would never turn their guns on us, right?
As stated in a CIA terrorist training manual that came to light almost 20 years ago, "Implicit terror always accompanies weapons, since the people are internally "aware" that they can be used against them."
This is what William Colby was talking about when he was quoted in the prologue to this article as saying, "The implication or latent threat of terror was sufficient to insure that the people would comply."
Creating the Political Cadres
Neo-con Michael Ledeen, a certified homelander, rationalized the use of terror as an organizing principle of society when he said, "New times require new people with new standards." According to Ledeen, these new people have the will power to "stamp out" the "corrupt habits of mind" manifest in the thoughts or actions of anyone who opposes Bush Regime aggression. Says Ledeen, "The entire political world will understand it and applaud it. And it will give [Homeland Security] a chance to succeed, and us to prevail."
On the international scene, these "new people" illegally invaded Iraq, formed a puppet regime of supplitiefs, stole the nation's oil and are putting the profits in their own pockets, and are now assassinating and otherwise terrorizing, through an updated Phoenix Program, any political opposition, in what amounts to mass murder.
Information management is key in creating the "new people" who will organize the new criminal homeland social structure, and make it appear legal, moral and most importantly, popular. The first step in manufacturing these robots is through motivational indoctrination, which is based on the principle that people will do a anything you ask of them if you make them feel special. In return for adopting the right attitude, a successful career is offered. Several alumni from the CIA's Phoenix Program already enjoy important top homeland security posts, like Major General Bruce Lawlor, Chief of Staff of the Department of Homeland Security, and Roger Mackin, the CIA officer in charge of the Department's counter-narcotics center. From mid-1967 until mid-1968, Mackin ran the Phoenix Program in Da Nang City, and managed its Intelligence and Operations Coordination Center - the organizational model for the Department of Homeland Security. Mackin is also touted as the CIA officer who nailed Colombian drug smuggler Pablo Escobar in a typical Phoenix assassination operation in December 1993.
CIA psywar experts like Lawlor and Mackin will motivationally indoctrinate the 170,000 some odd homeland security personnel to wage political warfare. A training manual on the subject was reprinted in the early 1980s by a former Phoenix officer who got caught up in the Reagan Regime's illegal Contra War. Titled Psychological Operations in Guerrilla Warfare, it states that "the human being should be considered the priority objective in a political war. And conceived as the military target of guerrilla war, the human being has his most critical point in his mind. Once his mind has been reached, the 'political animal' has been defeated, without necessarily receiving bullets."
Having been politically and motivationally indoctrinated, Critical Infrastructure and other homeland personnel will spy on colleagues who may inadvertently or maliciously serve as terrorist surrogates by publicly or privately revealing information about homeland infrastructure vulnerabilities, such as power grids or computer systems. These cadre will covertly identify and watch terrorist surrogates until it becomes necessary to expose the surrogates in the media. No one will want to be identified, even falsely, as an inadvertent or malicious terrorist surrogate, knowing that they are subject to being "stamped out," as Michael Ledeen suggests. In this way the Bush Regime is organizing its political cadre - Ledeen's "new people" who have been psychologically defeated by the implicit terror around them and, having reverted to the same infantile state of mind occupied by President George W. Bush, have embraced the Fascist principles they've been subliminally indoctrinated with for years through the corporate propaganda machine.
These "new people" are fast joining front organizations like the Freedom Corps, the Citizen Corps, Community Emergency Response Teams (which will train kids at school to prepare for the disasters the Bush Regime will surely visit upon America); the Neighborhood Watch Program that will allow the Bush Regime to detain its drunk and disorderly political opponents as terrorist surrogates; and the Medical Reserve Corps (MRC), through which enfranchised doctors will monitor patients within the faltering health care system.
Within these front groups are cadres trained "in techniques of persuasion over control of target groups" to support the Bush Regime. In the forthcoming national emergency, these cadres will be mobilized, will attend mass meetings, carry placards, shout slogans as part of a Popular Information Program, appeal to our cultural beliefs through Michael Savage-style radio shows, teach classes on correct thinking, organize subtle but massive screening operations designed to generate defectors, who will in turn to denounce former comrades who spoke ill of the Bush Regime. They will intervene with "problem individuals," and everywhere encourage their neighbors to report the activities of terrorist surrogates by dropping a note addressed to the police in local mailboxes. It's not hard to imagine a few of the most highly motivated cadres getting carried away, grabbing ropes, and forming lynch mobs.
Only five percent of the people need to be organized in this fashion for Bush to wield control over the indifferent ninety percent, and defeat the five percent that form the political resistance. This is why psychological operations are the Bush Regime's No. 1 priority. Case in point: when Bush publicly announced the Department of Homeland Security on 6 June 2002, he stated that the organization's primary mission was to "mobilize and focus... the American people "to accomplish the mission of attacking the enemy where he hides and plans." By which he means his political opponents.
Psywar experts prize "compromise and discreditation" operations like the one the FBI used against Martin Luther King before he was assassinated. Information about his extramarital affairs was leaked, and he was sent a message with the suggestion that he should commit suicide. "There is only one way out for you," the forged document read. "You better take it before your filthy, abnormal, fraudulent self is bared to the nation." Forged documents like the one used against King are an important facet of political blackmail, and are also used to justify false arrests or conceal illegal operations. We have already seen Network News broadcast "edited" videotapes of Osama bin Laden and, in the Afghanistan war, captured (perhaps forged) documents were routinely used as a form of black propaganda to justify military actions that resulted in "collateral" damage.
The greatest example, of course, is Bush's criminal an impeachable use of forged documents to justify the illegal invasion of Iraq. This was an act of treason by the President of the United States, and yet within the new legally criminal homeland security structure, it is business as usual.
We can expect a slew of false rumors from low-level homeland cadre, designed to ruin the reputations of politically incorrect families in their villages and towns, especially environmentalists who pose a threat to Critical Infrastructure corporations. The paranoia that currently infects the Arab-American community will spread until no one is sure who is a spy for the Thought Police. When the national emergency arrives, most likely the forthcoming depression, and the homeland security infrastructure goes on Red Alert, midnight arrests and disappearances into administrative detention centers will become commonplace. Amid the confusion, the CIA will form special units within the 93 terrorism task forces around the country, and other unilateral Phoenix Program-style hit teams will operate under cover of the security forces at their disposal.
The clincher is when the definition of a terrorist surrogate is expanded to include people deemed dangerous to the Public Order, at which point any person can be arrested on criminal charges for political offenses. No specific charge is required; a homelander like Ledeen or Bill O'Rilley will simply accuse someone of disturbing the peace or being un-American The definitions of sedition and treason will grow to include disseminating information about government corruption, or undermining the will of the State by challenging its authority. Calling for civil disobedience will be a really scary threat to the homeland. Cadre in the Office of Cyberspace Security will expose you as a terrorist surrogate for sending sarcastic or satirical emails. How can you prove you were only joking when you blamed Bush for the terror attacks on the World Trade Center, and said Cheney's refusal to investigate proves that Bush did it?
Ultimately, every town will form a Homeland Committee, chaired by a Bush Regime operative who will process confidential reports from concerned citizens about the activities of peaceniks, or people they don't like for personal reasons, such as business competitors. These reports will pass through an ideological filter as they work their way up to the Office of Intelligence and the Terrorist Threat Integration Center, where motivated CIA officers will gleefully pull the plug on environmentalists, people espousing national health care, and anyone challenging to the Bush Regime and the internal security forces that are firmly in its grip.
Beware. Ashcroft has vowed to "employ new tools that ease administrative burdens." However benign he might think he means this, these new tools can allow the government to wage political warfare through implicit and explicit terror. And the government can do it! The Geneva Conventions guarantee protection to civilians in time of war, but do not prohibit a state from interning civilians or subjecting them to emergency detention when such measures are necessary for the security or safety of the state. In this way indefinite detention, torture and summary execution, all carried out without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, are perfectly legal, because they are the result of "administrative procedures" and do not involve a "criminal sentence."
This is what Israel is done to the Palestinians, and this is what the Bush Regime has in store for America through its eternal war on terror: that sad obsession with dominance, itself a sad projection of Bush's feelings of inadequacy, most likely brought upon by his domineering mother Barbara.
Douglas Valentine is the author of The Hotel Tacloban, The Phoenix Program, and TDY. His new book The Strength of the Wolf: the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 1930-1968 will be published by Verso. Valentine was an investigator for Pepper on the King case in 1998-1999. For information about Valentine and his books and articles, please visit his website at www.douglasvalentine.com.
He can be reached at: redspruce@attbi.com
http://www.counterpunch.org/valentine08112003.html
From IHOP Waitress to Company President
One-Time Waitress Now Runs Company
N E W Y O R K, Jan. 7 — When Julia Stewart was a 16-year-old waitress at the International House of Pancakes, she used to take orders. Now she dishes them out.
She is the new president and chief operating officer of IHOP. It has been quite a journey from refilling cups of coffee and flavored syrup jars to winning the 1999 Woman of the Year Award in the food service industry, but Stewart puts it in simple terms.
"I am living the American dream," Stewart said on ABCNEWS' Good Morning America. "I think I always knew I wanted to run a company. I don't know if specifically at the time it was International House of Pancakes, but I always had a dream to run a restaurant company."
As the head of the 1,001-unit chain,the 46-year-old executive will be in elite company. Only 6.2 percent of the top 2,662 executive jobs in the country belong to women.
Stewart's dream started 30 years ago when she was a teenage IHOP customer, growing up in California. Fascinated by how the waitresses managed to take so many orders and keep them all straight, Stewart took a waitressing job at an IHOP in San Diego at age 16. Right away, she loved the instant feedback from customers that let her know whether she had done her job well or not. A love of the food business got into her blood and never left.
The McDonald's Masher
As a senior at San Diego State University, Stewart invented a gadget that helped jump-start her career. For her senior project in her advanced marketing class, she had to come up with a device associated with McDonald's that would cost less than $40.
Her idea: the "McDonald's masher," a tool that mashes out hamburger patties in the shape of the Golden Arches. It won the class prize, and because it was a slow news day, a local TV station picked up the story of her invention. A man who saw the TV spot offered Stewart a job running his in-house advertising, and her career was off and running.
Stewart still has the masher, buried somewhere among boxes in her basement. Despite her husband's protests, she has carried it with them on each of their 14 moves.
Donning Waitress Uniform, Again
Stewart launched a career in marketing for restaurants, and rose through the ranks in that field for 15 years, but never lost her dream of running a company. Since it was difficult to go from marketing to management, she decided to take a few steps down the corporate ladder so that she could learn how to run a company from top to bottom.
Stewart became a manager at a Taco Bell. She went from wearing business suits and working at a desk to wearing a polyester uniform and a big ring of keys as she worked nights and weekends at the fast-food restaurant.
Her former colleagues thought she was nuts.
Before long she had moved up the ranks, and eventually became the head of licensing and franchising for Taco Bell Corp., overseeing 5,600 Taco Bell restaurants. In 1998, she served as the president of the domestic division of Applebee's, a $2.6 billion corporation that is the largest casual dining chain in the United States.
When her latest job was announced, Stewart asked for 90 days to re-learn the business from the ground up.
She was always drawn to her original stint as a waitress and believes you have to go back and meet with the people in each job category to understand what they do, and what motivates them.
So as part of her tour of the chain's restaurants, she will be donning the restaurant uniform, and cooking and waitressing once again.
"I think for the rest of my life, I'll always visiting restaurants and probably, from time to time, be working in them," Stewart said. "Because you get from the ground up exactly what's going on. "
After all this time, her favorite pancake on the menu is still a traditional one: pigs in a blanket, which is four link sausages tucked into four buttermilk pancakes. Her son, who is 4, likes the chocolate chip pancakes. Stewart says he recently asked mom to pull some strings at work to get the recipe.
[Which means she had a baby at 42...]
"Mom, I love you, but why can't you learn to make that at home?" he told her.
http://more.abcnews.go.com/sections/gma/goodmorningamerica/gma020107ihop_president_waitress.html
For Sloofy.
The Disaster Market
Can Wall Street figure out the cause of a space shuttle crash faster than NASA's experts?
By Daniel Gross
Updated Friday, August 8, 2003, at 2:24 PM PT
The aborted Pentagon futures market inspired skepticism about the idea that the collective action of investors predicts the outcome of events better than professionals can. Supporters of the market have been defending themselves by citing "decision markets" that work: orange-crop markets that guess Florida weather better than meteorologists or the presidential election markets that outpoll the pollsters.
But here's a great, important example that no one has mentioned, a case when the stock market solved a complex public conundrum far more quickly than the pros. After the January 1986 Challenger space shuttle disaster, a blue-ribbon commission chaired by former Secretary of State William Rogers spent several months investigating the crash. (A similar investigation board is now trying to get to the bottom of last February's Columbia shuttle explosion.) The Rogers Commission report, issued in June 1986, laid the blame squarely on defective O-rings in booster rockets produced by Morton Thiokol.
But in an article in the forthcoming September Journal of Corporate Finance—the abstract can be seen here—Michael T. Maloney of Clemson University and J. Harold Mulherin of Claremont McKenna College argue that the market figured out which company was responsible within minutes of the disaster, and calculated how much the disaster would cost the culprit in lost profits within hours. It's either spooky coincidence or the ultimate proof of the efficiency of markets.
The crash of the Challenger on the morning of Jan. 28, 1986, was both highly visible and a complete surprise to market participants. There were four highly liquid publicly held companies that were prominent contractors on the shuttle. Rockwell International made the shuttle and its engines, Lockheed handled ground support, Martin Marietta made the external fuel tanks, and Morton Thiokol made the shuttle's solid fuel booster rockets.
As the news broke, the authors write, the stock prices of all four companies fell anywhere from 2.83 percent to 6.12 percent in the 21 minutes after the crash. But trading was halted only on the stock of Morton Thiokol. "The fact that market liquidity was available to maintain a market in Lockheed, Martin Marietta, and Rockwell while the market for Morton Thiokol dried up suggests that the stock market discerned the guilty party within minutes of the announcement of the crash," Maloney and Mulherin conclude. By the end of the day—when the cause of the accident was still a mystery—Morton Thiokol was down 11.86 percent, while the other three contractors lost 2 percent to 3 percent.
Morton Thiokol shed some $200 million in market value on the day. Over the next several months—before the release of the commission report that singled out Morton Thiokol for blame—the other contractors recovered and outperformed the market while Morton Thiokol lagged. In other words, Morton Thiokol's stock "acted" like it was at fault.
As a result of the investigation, Morton Thiokol had to pay legal settlements and perform "repair work of $409 million at no profit." It also dropped out of bidding for future business. Add it up, the authors conclude, and "the $200 million equity decline for Morton Thiokol seems in hindsight to have been a reasonable prediction of lost cash flows that came as a result of the judgment of culpability in the crash by the Rogers Commission."
At first blush, the action of Morton Thiokol's stock would seem to be a ringing affirmation of market efficiency—the notion that stock prices quickly and accurately respond to new information. But the authors correctly don't take this to mean that we should scrap commissions and instead simply look at the tickertape when disasters involving publicly held companies occur. After all, Maloney and Mulherin still can't figure out why the market knew to blame Morton Thiokol. It doesn't seem to be insider information, but they don't have any other good explanation. They conclude, quoting Maureen O'Hara (the Cornell economist, not the actress), that this may be a "perplexing situation that while markets appear to work in practice, we are not sure how they work in theory."
What's more, a look at the initial stock-market reaction to last February's Columbia disaster—discussed in this Boston Globe article—reveals that the market's response wasn't quite so rational. On Feb. 4, 2003, among the publicly traded NASA contractors, the biggest loser was Alliant Techsystems Inc., the current owner of Thiokol, which made the shuttle's booster rockets. Alliant's stock fell almost exactly the same amount that Morton Thiokol did on the previous crash—about 11.66 percent. Boeing, which now owns Rockwell International, a major NASA contractor, fell 1.5 percent, and Lockheed Martin fell about 3 percent.
The market—perhaps remembering Thiokol's implication in the prior disaster—swiftly punished Alliant. Wrongly, it seems. Thus far, attention has focused on the performance of foam insulation lining the external fuel tanks, which were made by the Michoud unit of Lockheed Martin.
The market may be efficient. But it can also (economists, avert your eyes) be emotional. Did traders with long memories rush to sell Alliant disproportionately because Morton Thiokol was deemed responsible for the Challenger disaster? Almost certainly.
We live in an age when information is disseminated more broadly and rapidly than ever before, and when more investors have the ability to act on that information than ever before. As a result, the market tends to overreact to news events. The markets may provide a reliable play-by-play, as they did in 1986, but we still need a detailed box score—compiled after the fact—to confirm what really happened.
http://slate.msn.com/id/2086811/