http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081125/bs_nm/us_financial_usa_credit
Fed throws fresh lifeline to financial system
By Mark Felsenthal
Tue Nov 25, 2008
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Federal Reserve threw a massive life-line to consumers on Tuesday with two new programs aimed at making it easier for them to obtain loans for homes, cars and on credit cards.
Under the new mortgage program, the Fed will buy up to $100 billion of debt issued by government-sponsored mortgage enterprises Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Home Loan Banks. It will also buy up to $500 billion of mortgage securities backed by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and Ginnie Mae.
The central bank also launched a $200 billion facility to support consumer finance, including student, auto, and credit card loans and loans backed by the federal Small Business Administration. This will lend to investors who hold securities backed by this debt.
The launch of the two programs lifted investor spirits and drove up the blue chip Dow Jones industrial average more than 100 points, or about 1.3 percent, within minutes of its open.
"One of the big problems we have is that there has been a lack of demand for debt. You have seen the market for securitized debt such as credit cards or student loans dry up completely," said Scott Brown, chief economist at Raymond James & Associates in St. Petersburg, Florida.
"Here is the Fed taking a bunch of debt out of the market," he said. "It should help unblock the credit markets."
The new mortgage-support facility was intended to strike at the collapsed housing market, the core of the United States' economic woes.
"This action is being taken to reduce the cost and increase the availability of credit for the purchase of houses, which in turn should support housing markets and foster improved financial conditions more generally," the Fed said.
Investor appetite for both the debt issued by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the mortgage-backed securities they guarantee has dried up since the government seized the companies in September, and the Fed hopes to fill that void.
TAPPING TARP
"They are getting to the heart of the problem, it's clean, it's quick, it's direct," said Todd Abraham, co-head of government and mortgage bonds at Federated Investors in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. "It's a good way to bring down mortgage rates."
Under the consumer-finance facility, the Treasury will help cover any losses the Fed might face by providing $20 billion of credit protection from its $700 billion financial bailout fund, which Congress approved last month.
A Treasury spokeswoman said the $20 billion will come from the remaining unallocated $40 billion in the first tranche of the $700 billion financial rescue fund. That leaves Treasury with $20 billion, and once that is used it must ask Congress for access to the remaining $350 billion in the fund.
The Treasury noted that issuance of asset-backed securities in consumer lending categories such as credit cards, auto loans and student loans had essentially ground to a halt in October. Last year, issuance was roughly $240 billion.
"Continued disruption in the ABS market could further deteriorate credit availability for consumers and increase the prospects for further deterioration in the economy generally," the Treasury said in a statement.
The Fed's twin announcements marked the latest in a series of emergency measures by U.S. authorities to try to keep the economy from falling into a deep and prolonged recession. Late Sunday, the government stepped in to prop up the second largest U.S. bank Citigroup.
Most economists say the emergency steps represent a necessary, if ad hoc, response to the greatest financial shock the United States has experienced since the Great Depression.
Some, however, are worried the mounting costs of the measures, which have the potential to reach several trillion dollars, could eventually fuel a troubling inflation.
"It may mean (a) longer-run issue with inflation and inflation concerns," said John Silvia, chief economist at Wachovia Securities in Charlotte, North Carolina. "It may be too much of a good thing is a bad thing. We may be overpaying for bad assets."
Policy-makers, however, have signaled a willingness to do whatever it takes to try to tamp down the risk of a severe recession.
(Additional reporting by David Lawder in Washington and Al Yoon in New York, Editing by Chizu Nomiyama)
Friday, November 28, 2008
Sex Act Tax 2009
From FlashNews.com:
Sex Act Tax 2009
Tax On Sex Could Help Limp Economy
ALEXANDRIA, Minn. (Wireless Flash - FlashNews) – Sex can be a taxing act at times, so why not try taxing it?
Minnesota-based visionary Jaye Beldo proposes tackling the spiraling national debt by taxing every single act of sexual activity whether it be masturbation, heterosexual, or homosexual.
He argues, “The national debt is $10 trillion – that’s nearly $36,000 per citizen. If we levy a ‘sex tax,’ we could bring that down to zero in no time.”
Beldo suggests a sliding scale of taxation so that the rich pay more for their poontang than the poor.
However, he doesn’t trust Americans to report their sex acts via the honor system.
Instead, he’s proposing Congress make it mandatory that each citizen have a sub-dermal implant installed in their genitalia that’ll report every single act of intercourse directly to the Internal Revenue Service.
Beldo says the implants will post all sex acts online, so people can peep other Americans’ romps, and admits he’s particularly interested in watching Christina Aguilera do her patriotic duty.
He says those with erectile dysfunction need not worry because they’ll be waived from the tax.
Sex Act Tax 2009
Tax On Sex Could Help Limp Economy
ALEXANDRIA, Minn. (Wireless Flash - FlashNews) – Sex can be a taxing act at times, so why not try taxing it?
Minnesota-based visionary Jaye Beldo proposes tackling the spiraling national debt by taxing every single act of sexual activity whether it be masturbation, heterosexual, or homosexual.
He argues, “The national debt is $10 trillion – that’s nearly $36,000 per citizen. If we levy a ‘sex tax,’ we could bring that down to zero in no time.”
Beldo suggests a sliding scale of taxation so that the rich pay more for their poontang than the poor.
However, he doesn’t trust Americans to report their sex acts via the honor system.
Instead, he’s proposing Congress make it mandatory that each citizen have a sub-dermal implant installed in their genitalia that’ll report every single act of intercourse directly to the Internal Revenue Service.
Beldo says the implants will post all sex acts online, so people can peep other Americans’ romps, and admits he’s particularly interested in watching Christina Aguilera do her patriotic duty.
He says those with erectile dysfunction need not worry because they’ll be waived from the tax.
Thursday, November 27, 2008
While Leftists Celebrate “Change”
http://www.prisonplanet.com/the-imperialism-you-can-believe-in.html
While Leftists Celebrate “Change,” Obama Appointees Suggest Massive Expansion Of Bush War Doctrine
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Thursday, November 20, 2008
While naive, giddy and myopic establishment leftists have been celebrating the great “change” heralded by the election of Barack Obama, the President elect has been busy appointing people to key positions who advocate the same Neo-Con imperialist foreign policy crafted during eight years of the Bush administration.
The New York Times, widely recognized as the voice of the establishment Democratic left, set the tone of what we can expect from an Obama foreign policy in a lead editorial last Sunday entitled, “A military for a dangerous new world.”
The editorial calls for U.S. military imperialism not to be scaled back under Obama, but to be vastly expanded both in terms of budget and scope.
Iran, China, Somalia, Russia and Pakistan are all listed as potential targets of U.S. military aggression and the paper echoes what Obama himself has said he will implement - an addition of nearly 100,000 more soldiers and marines to American ground forces, bringing the total to 759,000 active duty forces, at a cost of $100 billion dollars over the next six years.
Does this sound like a “change” from the Project For a New American century framework of endless “multi-theatre warfare,” the inspiration for eight years of Bush administration militarism, or an expansion of that very doctrine?
Obama’s announced appointees and those that are expected to follow differ only from their Bush administration contemporaries in proficiency and competence, their zeal for military adventurism is coequal, while others that shaped eight awful years of spying, torture, eviscerations on freedom and unprovoked military attacks on sovereign nations will merely stay on in their roles.
Welcome to the “change that you can believe in”.
Obama’s likely selection of Hillary Clinton for the position of Secretary of State highlights the brazen hypocrisy with which the “change” agenda has begun to be implemented since Obama won the election two and a half weeks ago.
Hillary Clinton
Clinton voted for the invasion of Iraq, a point on which she was attacked by Obama during the phony punch and judy show of the debates. Obama also denounced Clinton for voting in favor of a Senate resolution branding the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization. Clinton promised to “obliterate” Iran if it attacked Israel, a mantra echoed by Obama when he assured AIPAC, the notorious Israeli lobby, that military strikes against Iran were very much on the table.
Does this sound like the language of diplomacy or a change from eight years of the Bush doctrine?
Likewise, one of the favorites to become Obama’s Defense Secretary is Michèle A. Flournoy, deputy assistant secretary of defense in the Clinton administration and president of the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) think tank.
As Alex Lantier writes, “Members of CNAS, a rather small Washington think tank with a staff of 30 employees founded in 2003 by (John) Podesta and Flournoy, play an outsized role in the Obama transition team.”
“So many CNAS members are likely to join the Obama administration that CNAS officials told the (Wall Street) Journal they were concerned the think tank might fold after Obama’s inauguration.”
CNAS has opposed a set timeline for withdrawal from Iraq, has advocated the deployment of more troops in Afghanistan and has called for U.S. troops to be stationed in Pakistan. CNAS has also urged military spending to be beefed up in order to compete with China’s growing Navy.
“CNAS publications, many of which are publicly available on its web site, make it clear that the Obama administration’s foreign policy will have a thoroughly imperialist character,” notes Lantier.
How does this represent a “change” from eight years of Bush administration foreign policy? How does this represent a shift from a strategy of diplomacy based on intimidation, invasion and occupation?
Robert Gates
Obama’s advisors have also been floating the likelihood of Robert Gates remaining as Obama’s Secretary of Defense, so it looks like we’re either going to have a warmonger or a warmonger in the position - what a choice!
The Financial Times reported this week, “President-Elect Barack Obama and Robert Gates are negotiating terms under which the defense secretary would remain as Pentagon chief in the new administration.”
Gates of course has a history of entanglement with the military-industrial complex having pushed for the U.S. bombing of Nicaragua when he was deputy director of the CIA and later being indicted for his involvement in covering up the Iran Contra scandal.
Gates was the primary advocate for the Iraq “surge” which increased the U.S. military presence in the country.
Obama’s decision to appoint Eric Holder as Attorney General caused a flutter of controversy considering Holder’s involvement in ensuring billionaire fugitive investor Marc Rich received a presidential pardon at the end of Bill Clinton’s term, but the real dirt on Holder is far more shocking.
Eric Holder
After leaving the Clinton administration, Holder, who played a key role in the 2005 re-authorization of the Patriot Act, which Obama voted for, set up the legal and lobbying firm of Covington & Burling. The firm’s most high-profile case was its defense of Chiquita Brands International, Inc, whose executives were facing charges of aiding terrorists for bankrolling and arming right-wing death squads in Colombia.
As Bill Van Auken writes, “Using his longstanding ties at the Justice Department, Holder managed to get Chiquita off the hook with a fine that amounted to 0.55 percent of its annual revenue. This was despite the overwhelming evidence—and the company’s own admission—that it had paid out millions of dollars to the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (known by its Spanish acronym AUC), as its gunmen carried out the massacre, assassination, kidnapping and torture of tens of thousands of Colombian workers, peasants, trade union officials and left-wing political activists.”
“Holder’s record is not that of a champion of civil and democratic rights or a defender of the oppressed, but rather a legal servant of the corporations and the state, complicit in their criminality and repression.”
Holder’s law enforcement deputy in the Obama administration is likely to be Robert Mueller, who will remain as FBI Director despite his involvement in the use of National Security Letters to illegally spy on American citizens via the collection of email, telecommunications and financial records.
Robert Mueller
Obama’s head of the CIA transition team is none other than John Brennan, an aide to former CIA director George Tenet and a key participant in the formulation of policies that led to the torture scandal, extraordinary renditions and secret prisons.
Van Auken notes, “Brennan, like Tenet, deserves to confront a war crimes tribunal, yet he is shaping intelligence policy for Obama.”
“Given these appointments, a report published Monday by the Associated Press that the incoming Obama administration “is unlikely to bring criminal charges against government officials who authorized or engaged in” torture hardly comes as a surprise.”
Then we have Rahm Emanuel, “the enforcer”, and Obama’s new chief of staff.
Emanuel is the son of a member of the Zionist terrorist group Irgun, which was responsible for bombing hotels, marketplaces as well as the infamous Deir Yassin massacre, in which hundreds of Palestinian villagers were slaughtered.
Upon news of his appointment, Emanuel’s father, Dr. Benjamin Emanuel, told the Jerusalem Post, “Obviously he will influence the president to be pro-Israel. Why wouldn’t he be? What is he, an Arab? He’s not going to clean the floors of the White House.”
But forget sins of the father, Rahm Emanuel himself is a former Israeli IDF soldier who has a penchant for making death threats against his political enemies while crazily slamming a knife into a dinner table. Sounds like a diplomatic kind of guy.
Rahm Emanuel
When Emanuel’s appointment was confirmed, top Israeli newspaper the Maariv Daily hailed the news with the headline, “Our man in the White House.”
Another Israeli news outlet, Y Net, reported, “Emanuel is pro-Israeli, and would not be willing to consider accepting the job unless he was convinced that President-elect Obama is pro-Israel.”
Recall that President elect Barack Obama’s first act of “change” upon winning the Democratic presidential nomination back in June was to don a joint US-Israeli label pin, head on over to AIPAC and prostrate himself in front of the Israeli lobby, vowing to keep military action in mind for Iran and promising to hand over another $30 billion of American taxpayers’ money in military assistance to the Zionist state.
It seems that Obama has already answered the question of whether he can be a more hardcore Israel hard-liner than George W. Bush - ‘yes he can’!
When are left-wing establishment liberals going to overcome their inane idolatry for Obama and realize that the people he is putting into positions of power are the same and in some cases worse than the Neo-Cons who ran eight years of Bush foreign policy?
When are leftists going to get over their petty power trips and understand that the mantra of “change” is a mere illusion to provide left cover for a massive expansion in U.S. imperialism the likes of which the Bush administration could never have accomplished?
When are liberals going to stop behaving like gloating children and understand that Obama’s exalted messiah status and political capital, allied with his publicly stated agenda and the nature and track record of those he has appointed to key positions, is a recipe for a new wave of militarism and an expansion of the pre-emptive Bush foreign policy doctrine that Obama himself campaigned against with his rhetorical and empty promises of “change”?
——————————————————-
Over the last few days, unlike scores of other left-wing websites who are still in a zombiefied trance over their new “ObaMassiah”, WSWS.org have put out a series of excellent articles concerning the “change” illusion and we encourage you to read them.
While Leftists Celebrate “Change,” Obama Appointees Suggest Massive Expansion Of Bush War Doctrine
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Thursday, November 20, 2008
While naive, giddy and myopic establishment leftists have been celebrating the great “change” heralded by the election of Barack Obama, the President elect has been busy appointing people to key positions who advocate the same Neo-Con imperialist foreign policy crafted during eight years of the Bush administration.
The New York Times, widely recognized as the voice of the establishment Democratic left, set the tone of what we can expect from an Obama foreign policy in a lead editorial last Sunday entitled, “A military for a dangerous new world.”
The editorial calls for U.S. military imperialism not to be scaled back under Obama, but to be vastly expanded both in terms of budget and scope.
Iran, China, Somalia, Russia and Pakistan are all listed as potential targets of U.S. military aggression and the paper echoes what Obama himself has said he will implement - an addition of nearly 100,000 more soldiers and marines to American ground forces, bringing the total to 759,000 active duty forces, at a cost of $100 billion dollars over the next six years.
Does this sound like a “change” from the Project For a New American century framework of endless “multi-theatre warfare,” the inspiration for eight years of Bush administration militarism, or an expansion of that very doctrine?
Obama’s announced appointees and those that are expected to follow differ only from their Bush administration contemporaries in proficiency and competence, their zeal for military adventurism is coequal, while others that shaped eight awful years of spying, torture, eviscerations on freedom and unprovoked military attacks on sovereign nations will merely stay on in their roles.
Welcome to the “change that you can believe in”.
Obama’s likely selection of Hillary Clinton for the position of Secretary of State highlights the brazen hypocrisy with which the “change” agenda has begun to be implemented since Obama won the election two and a half weeks ago.
Hillary Clinton
Clinton voted for the invasion of Iraq, a point on which she was attacked by Obama during the phony punch and judy show of the debates. Obama also denounced Clinton for voting in favor of a Senate resolution branding the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization. Clinton promised to “obliterate” Iran if it attacked Israel, a mantra echoed by Obama when he assured AIPAC, the notorious Israeli lobby, that military strikes against Iran were very much on the table.
Does this sound like the language of diplomacy or a change from eight years of the Bush doctrine?
Likewise, one of the favorites to become Obama’s Defense Secretary is Michèle A. Flournoy, deputy assistant secretary of defense in the Clinton administration and president of the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) think tank.
As Alex Lantier writes, “Members of CNAS, a rather small Washington think tank with a staff of 30 employees founded in 2003 by (John) Podesta and Flournoy, play an outsized role in the Obama transition team.”
“So many CNAS members are likely to join the Obama administration that CNAS officials told the (Wall Street) Journal they were concerned the think tank might fold after Obama’s inauguration.”
CNAS has opposed a set timeline for withdrawal from Iraq, has advocated the deployment of more troops in Afghanistan and has called for U.S. troops to be stationed in Pakistan. CNAS has also urged military spending to be beefed up in order to compete with China’s growing Navy.
“CNAS publications, many of which are publicly available on its web site, make it clear that the Obama administration’s foreign policy will have a thoroughly imperialist character,” notes Lantier.
How does this represent a “change” from eight years of Bush administration foreign policy? How does this represent a shift from a strategy of diplomacy based on intimidation, invasion and occupation?
Robert Gates
Obama’s advisors have also been floating the likelihood of Robert Gates remaining as Obama’s Secretary of Defense, so it looks like we’re either going to have a warmonger or a warmonger in the position - what a choice!
The Financial Times reported this week, “President-Elect Barack Obama and Robert Gates are negotiating terms under which the defense secretary would remain as Pentagon chief in the new administration.”
Gates of course has a history of entanglement with the military-industrial complex having pushed for the U.S. bombing of Nicaragua when he was deputy director of the CIA and later being indicted for his involvement in covering up the Iran Contra scandal.
Gates was the primary advocate for the Iraq “surge” which increased the U.S. military presence in the country.
Obama’s decision to appoint Eric Holder as Attorney General caused a flutter of controversy considering Holder’s involvement in ensuring billionaire fugitive investor Marc Rich received a presidential pardon at the end of Bill Clinton’s term, but the real dirt on Holder is far more shocking.
Eric Holder
After leaving the Clinton administration, Holder, who played a key role in the 2005 re-authorization of the Patriot Act, which Obama voted for, set up the legal and lobbying firm of Covington & Burling. The firm’s most high-profile case was its defense of Chiquita Brands International, Inc, whose executives were facing charges of aiding terrorists for bankrolling and arming right-wing death squads in Colombia.
As Bill Van Auken writes, “Using his longstanding ties at the Justice Department, Holder managed to get Chiquita off the hook with a fine that amounted to 0.55 percent of its annual revenue. This was despite the overwhelming evidence—and the company’s own admission—that it had paid out millions of dollars to the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (known by its Spanish acronym AUC), as its gunmen carried out the massacre, assassination, kidnapping and torture of tens of thousands of Colombian workers, peasants, trade union officials and left-wing political activists.”
“Holder’s record is not that of a champion of civil and democratic rights or a defender of the oppressed, but rather a legal servant of the corporations and the state, complicit in their criminality and repression.”
Holder’s law enforcement deputy in the Obama administration is likely to be Robert Mueller, who will remain as FBI Director despite his involvement in the use of National Security Letters to illegally spy on American citizens via the collection of email, telecommunications and financial records.
Robert Mueller
Obama’s head of the CIA transition team is none other than John Brennan, an aide to former CIA director George Tenet and a key participant in the formulation of policies that led to the torture scandal, extraordinary renditions and secret prisons.
Van Auken notes, “Brennan, like Tenet, deserves to confront a war crimes tribunal, yet he is shaping intelligence policy for Obama.”
“Given these appointments, a report published Monday by the Associated Press that the incoming Obama administration “is unlikely to bring criminal charges against government officials who authorized or engaged in” torture hardly comes as a surprise.”
Then we have Rahm Emanuel, “the enforcer”, and Obama’s new chief of staff.
Emanuel is the son of a member of the Zionist terrorist group Irgun, which was responsible for bombing hotels, marketplaces as well as the infamous Deir Yassin massacre, in which hundreds of Palestinian villagers were slaughtered.
Upon news of his appointment, Emanuel’s father, Dr. Benjamin Emanuel, told the Jerusalem Post, “Obviously he will influence the president to be pro-Israel. Why wouldn’t he be? What is he, an Arab? He’s not going to clean the floors of the White House.”
But forget sins of the father, Rahm Emanuel himself is a former Israeli IDF soldier who has a penchant for making death threats against his political enemies while crazily slamming a knife into a dinner table. Sounds like a diplomatic kind of guy.
Rahm Emanuel
When Emanuel’s appointment was confirmed, top Israeli newspaper the Maariv Daily hailed the news with the headline, “Our man in the White House.”
Another Israeli news outlet, Y Net, reported, “Emanuel is pro-Israeli, and would not be willing to consider accepting the job unless he was convinced that President-elect Obama is pro-Israel.”
Recall that President elect Barack Obama’s first act of “change” upon winning the Democratic presidential nomination back in June was to don a joint US-Israeli label pin, head on over to AIPAC and prostrate himself in front of the Israeli lobby, vowing to keep military action in mind for Iran and promising to hand over another $30 billion of American taxpayers’ money in military assistance to the Zionist state.
It seems that Obama has already answered the question of whether he can be a more hardcore Israel hard-liner than George W. Bush - ‘yes he can’!
When are left-wing establishment liberals going to overcome their inane idolatry for Obama and realize that the people he is putting into positions of power are the same and in some cases worse than the Neo-Cons who ran eight years of Bush foreign policy?
When are leftists going to get over their petty power trips and understand that the mantra of “change” is a mere illusion to provide left cover for a massive expansion in U.S. imperialism the likes of which the Bush administration could never have accomplished?
When are liberals going to stop behaving like gloating children and understand that Obama’s exalted messiah status and political capital, allied with his publicly stated agenda and the nature and track record of those he has appointed to key positions, is a recipe for a new wave of militarism and an expansion of the pre-emptive Bush foreign policy doctrine that Obama himself campaigned against with his rhetorical and empty promises of “change”?
——————————————————-
Over the last few days, unlike scores of other left-wing websites who are still in a zombiefied trance over their new “ObaMassiah”, WSWS.org have put out a series of excellent articles concerning the “change” illusion and we encourage you to read them.
South Texas county indicts Cheney, Gonzales
http://wsws.org/articles/2008/nov2008/chen-n20.shtml
South Texas county indicts Cheney, Gonzales
By Alex Lantier
20 November 2008
A grand jury in southern Texas' Willacy County has indicted US Vice President Dick Cheney and former US attorney general Alberto Gonzales on state charges of misconduct involving private prisons. The indictment, brought by District Attorney Juan Angel Guerra, also names several local officials.
The indictment alleges conflict of interest stemming from an $85 million investment by Cheney in the Vanguard Group, a company that holds shares in private companies running federal detention centers, noting that Cheney had influence over the federal contracts awarded to the prison companies held by the Vanguard Group. The indictment also names Cheney as responsible for "at least misdemeanor assaults" at these prisons. The indictment accuses Gonzales of intervening, as US Attorney General in 2006, to stop an investigation into abuses at private prisons.
As of this writing, the presiding judge has declined to sign the indictment, halting any further action on the case.
Willacy County hosts a series of federal, state and county prisons, some of which are outsourced to private prison companies such as MTC and the GEO Group (formerly Wackenhut). These prisons have a long history of corruption and misconduct. In 2005 Guerra obtained guilty pleas from three former county commissioners while investigating bribery charges related to MTC's federal prison contracts.
In 2006, a Willacy County jury ordered GEO Group to pay a $47.5 million fine in a civil judgment on a 2001 case, when Wackenhut guards allowed other inmates to beat inmate Gregorio de la Rosa Jr. to death with padlocks stuffed into socks.
Guerra told the Associated Press the current indictment is a "national issue" and that experts from around the country had testified before the grand jury. The indictment reportedly refers to the de la Rosa case.
The indicted officials brushed off the charges. Agence France-Presse wrote, "Cheney's spokeswoman [Megan Mitchell] declined to comment because his office had not yet received a copy of the indictment." Mitchell arrogantly added, "Let's wait and see if we even receive one."
Gonzales' attorney George Terwilliger III said, "This is obviously a bogus charge on its face, as any good prosecutor can recognize," adding that he hoped Texas authorities would stop "this abuse of the criminal justice system."
Michael Cowen--the attorney for State Senator Eddie Lucio, who is also named in the indictment--issued a statement declaring, "It is a shame that Guerra has chosen to dedicate his energy to fighting with his fellow public servants, rather than actually prosecuting criminals." In a revealing comment, Cowen added that Guerra dismissed so many cases that local officials disparagingly called him "The Great Emancipator"--a common name of respect for President Abraham Lincoln, whose Emancipation Proclamation freed the slaves after the US Civil War. Cowen added that his office was planning to file a motion to quash the indictment.
The pose of incredulity and aggrieved innocence struck by Cheney and Gonzales reeks of hypocrisy and bad faith. Far from clearing them, their record as members of the Bush administration suggests that accusations of misconduct directed against them deserve due consideration.
Cheney is hated in the US and around the world for framing and executing the Bush administration's policy of aggressive war, most notably in Iraq, in flagrant violation of international law. His longstanding policy is to shield himself from public oversight, notably evading Congressional attempts to obtain records of his 2001 Energy Task Force meetings on Iraq with the grotesque claim that his office is not part of the executive branch.
As for Gonzales, he resigned as Attorney General in disgrace last year, after refusing to answer Congressional inquiries into the Department of Justice's improper firings of US attorneys. As White House counsel during the first Bush administration, he played a key role in promoting the National Security Agency's warrantless wiretapping program and helped draft legal memoranda arguing that the Geneva Convention's provisions were "quaint" and need not be applied to Taliban and al-Qaeda prisoners. Gonzales also requested the "torture memo" that defined torture so narrowly as to permit US forces to use abusive interrogation methods banned by US and international law.
District Attorney Guerra, on the other hand, has been the continuing target of a campaign of official harassment, facing bogus charges of extorting money from a bail bond company and using his office for personal business.
In March 2007 Guerra was jailed during a grand jury investigation of these charges. Two special prosecutors were appointed in the investigation: former US attorney Mervyn Mosbacker and Gus Garza, who ran against and lost to Guerra for the position of District Attorney in 1992. Since 1996, notes the Harlingen, Texas Valley Morning Star, "Guerra has won three elections, largely drawing support from working-class residents." However, Guerra lost the 2008 Democratic primary elections.
An appeals court later ruled that the special prosecutors were improperly appointed to investigate Guerra, and last month Judge Manuel Banales dismissed the indictments altogether.
South Texas county indicts Cheney, Gonzales
By Alex Lantier
20 November 2008
A grand jury in southern Texas' Willacy County has indicted US Vice President Dick Cheney and former US attorney general Alberto Gonzales on state charges of misconduct involving private prisons. The indictment, brought by District Attorney Juan Angel Guerra, also names several local officials.
The indictment alleges conflict of interest stemming from an $85 million investment by Cheney in the Vanguard Group, a company that holds shares in private companies running federal detention centers, noting that Cheney had influence over the federal contracts awarded to the prison companies held by the Vanguard Group. The indictment also names Cheney as responsible for "at least misdemeanor assaults" at these prisons. The indictment accuses Gonzales of intervening, as US Attorney General in 2006, to stop an investigation into abuses at private prisons.
As of this writing, the presiding judge has declined to sign the indictment, halting any further action on the case.
Willacy County hosts a series of federal, state and county prisons, some of which are outsourced to private prison companies such as MTC and the GEO Group (formerly Wackenhut). These prisons have a long history of corruption and misconduct. In 2005 Guerra obtained guilty pleas from three former county commissioners while investigating bribery charges related to MTC's federal prison contracts.
In 2006, a Willacy County jury ordered GEO Group to pay a $47.5 million fine in a civil judgment on a 2001 case, when Wackenhut guards allowed other inmates to beat inmate Gregorio de la Rosa Jr. to death with padlocks stuffed into socks.
Guerra told the Associated Press the current indictment is a "national issue" and that experts from around the country had testified before the grand jury. The indictment reportedly refers to the de la Rosa case.
The indicted officials brushed off the charges. Agence France-Presse wrote, "Cheney's spokeswoman [Megan Mitchell] declined to comment because his office had not yet received a copy of the indictment." Mitchell arrogantly added, "Let's wait and see if we even receive one."
Gonzales' attorney George Terwilliger III said, "This is obviously a bogus charge on its face, as any good prosecutor can recognize," adding that he hoped Texas authorities would stop "this abuse of the criminal justice system."
Michael Cowen--the attorney for State Senator Eddie Lucio, who is also named in the indictment--issued a statement declaring, "It is a shame that Guerra has chosen to dedicate his energy to fighting with his fellow public servants, rather than actually prosecuting criminals." In a revealing comment, Cowen added that Guerra dismissed so many cases that local officials disparagingly called him "The Great Emancipator"--a common name of respect for President Abraham Lincoln, whose Emancipation Proclamation freed the slaves after the US Civil War. Cowen added that his office was planning to file a motion to quash the indictment.
The pose of incredulity and aggrieved innocence struck by Cheney and Gonzales reeks of hypocrisy and bad faith. Far from clearing them, their record as members of the Bush administration suggests that accusations of misconduct directed against them deserve due consideration.
Cheney is hated in the US and around the world for framing and executing the Bush administration's policy of aggressive war, most notably in Iraq, in flagrant violation of international law. His longstanding policy is to shield himself from public oversight, notably evading Congressional attempts to obtain records of his 2001 Energy Task Force meetings on Iraq with the grotesque claim that his office is not part of the executive branch.
As for Gonzales, he resigned as Attorney General in disgrace last year, after refusing to answer Congressional inquiries into the Department of Justice's improper firings of US attorneys. As White House counsel during the first Bush administration, he played a key role in promoting the National Security Agency's warrantless wiretapping program and helped draft legal memoranda arguing that the Geneva Convention's provisions were "quaint" and need not be applied to Taliban and al-Qaeda prisoners. Gonzales also requested the "torture memo" that defined torture so narrowly as to permit US forces to use abusive interrogation methods banned by US and international law.
District Attorney Guerra, on the other hand, has been the continuing target of a campaign of official harassment, facing bogus charges of extorting money from a bail bond company and using his office for personal business.
In March 2007 Guerra was jailed during a grand jury investigation of these charges. Two special prosecutors were appointed in the investigation: former US attorney Mervyn Mosbacker and Gus Garza, who ran against and lost to Guerra for the position of District Attorney in 1992. Since 1996, notes the Harlingen, Texas Valley Morning Star, "Guerra has won three elections, largely drawing support from working-class residents." However, Guerra lost the 2008 Democratic primary elections.
An appeals court later ruled that the special prosecutors were improperly appointed to investigate Guerra, and last month Judge Manuel Banales dismissed the indictments altogether.
Demand jitters push crude below $50
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f621914a-b6e9-11dd-8e01-0000779fd18c.html
Demand jitters push crude below $50
By Esther Bintliff and Javier Blas
November 20 2008
Oil sank below $50 a barrel, reaching its lowest point since May 2005 amid fears over the outlook for demand in the face of a global recession.
The drop in oil prices led a broader retreat in raw materials, with the Reuters-Jefferies CRB commodity index, a global benchmark, falling to a five-year low.
January WTI traded $4.68 lower at $49.42 a barrel. ICE January Brent dropped $3.64 to $48.08.
“Oil prices are searching for an elusive bottom,” said Antoine Halff of Newedge brokerage in New York. “Demand destruction today rivals that caused by the oil shocks of the 1970s.”
The options market is pricing in a growing likelihood that oil prices could sink as low as $40-$45 a barrel before the end of the year, with the cost of insuring against such an event jumping more than 90 per cent overnight.
In a further sign of the problems being suffered across the oil industry by falling demand, StatoilHydro of Norway announced on Thursday that it would shut oil products trading operations in Singapore, the world’s third largest energy hub.
Oil trading volumes in Singapore have declined in the past three months as concerns over counterparty risk have pummelled the over-the-counter market. Trading volumes fell about 44 per cent in September.
Jan Karlsen, a senior vice-president at StatoilHydro, said product trading would now be concentrated around its European refining assets.
“The decision will not affect any of our trading activities in crude or gas liquids, the key trading areas for StatoilHydro,” Mr Karlsen said.
Gold was a rare bright spot as investors sought its safe haven status. It rose 2.1 per cent to $748 an ounce.
Base metals extended their retreat, with copper breaking the $3,500 level to touch a three-year low of $3,430 a tonne, before recovering to $3,467 a tonne, down 3.6 per cent on the day.
Rising copper inventories at London Metal Exchange warehouses put pressure on prices, with stocks climbing 1,575 tonnes to 281,625 tonnes, the highest level since February 2004.
Meanwhile, Codelco, the world’s largest copper producer, cut its surcharge on sales to China by 32 per cent, in a bid to lure buyers into long-term contracts even as demand and prices slide.
One analyst at Antaike, the Chinese state-run information provider, said that fewer long-term contracts were expected from China next year, as consumers would look to the spot market for supplies, given the high levels of price volatility.
The price of copper has fallen 60 per cent since its all-time high of $8,940 a tonne set in July.
Aluminium shed 4.7 per cent to $1,78 a tonne, under pressure from a surge in LME stocks, up 20,850 tonnes.
Lead dropped 3.5 per cent to $1,187 a tonne. One of China’s lead producers, Xinling Refining Company, said it was mothballing 60 per cent of its 100,000 tonne capacity.
Zinc was 0.4 per cent lower at $1,175 a tonne and nickel lost 4.3 per cent to $10,000 a tonne.
Agricultural commodities also fell on the day, with CBOT December corn down 3.7 per cent to $3.64¾ a bushel. Wheat and soyabean prices dropped.
Demand jitters push crude below $50
By Esther Bintliff and Javier Blas
November 20 2008
Oil sank below $50 a barrel, reaching its lowest point since May 2005 amid fears over the outlook for demand in the face of a global recession.
The drop in oil prices led a broader retreat in raw materials, with the Reuters-Jefferies CRB commodity index, a global benchmark, falling to a five-year low.
January WTI traded $4.68 lower at $49.42 a barrel. ICE January Brent dropped $3.64 to $48.08.
“Oil prices are searching for an elusive bottom,” said Antoine Halff of Newedge brokerage in New York. “Demand destruction today rivals that caused by the oil shocks of the 1970s.”
The options market is pricing in a growing likelihood that oil prices could sink as low as $40-$45 a barrel before the end of the year, with the cost of insuring against such an event jumping more than 90 per cent overnight.
In a further sign of the problems being suffered across the oil industry by falling demand, StatoilHydro of Norway announced on Thursday that it would shut oil products trading operations in Singapore, the world’s third largest energy hub.
Oil trading volumes in Singapore have declined in the past three months as concerns over counterparty risk have pummelled the over-the-counter market. Trading volumes fell about 44 per cent in September.
Jan Karlsen, a senior vice-president at StatoilHydro, said product trading would now be concentrated around its European refining assets.
“The decision will not affect any of our trading activities in crude or gas liquids, the key trading areas for StatoilHydro,” Mr Karlsen said.
Gold was a rare bright spot as investors sought its safe haven status. It rose 2.1 per cent to $748 an ounce.
Base metals extended their retreat, with copper breaking the $3,500 level to touch a three-year low of $3,430 a tonne, before recovering to $3,467 a tonne, down 3.6 per cent on the day.
Rising copper inventories at London Metal Exchange warehouses put pressure on prices, with stocks climbing 1,575 tonnes to 281,625 tonnes, the highest level since February 2004.
Meanwhile, Codelco, the world’s largest copper producer, cut its surcharge on sales to China by 32 per cent, in a bid to lure buyers into long-term contracts even as demand and prices slide.
One analyst at Antaike, the Chinese state-run information provider, said that fewer long-term contracts were expected from China next year, as consumers would look to the spot market for supplies, given the high levels of price volatility.
The price of copper has fallen 60 per cent since its all-time high of $8,940 a tonne set in July.
Aluminium shed 4.7 per cent to $1,78 a tonne, under pressure from a surge in LME stocks, up 20,850 tonnes.
Lead dropped 3.5 per cent to $1,187 a tonne. One of China’s lead producers, Xinling Refining Company, said it was mothballing 60 per cent of its 100,000 tonne capacity.
Zinc was 0.4 per cent lower at $1,175 a tonne and nickel lost 4.3 per cent to $10,000 a tonne.
Agricultural commodities also fell on the day, with CBOT December corn down 3.7 per cent to $3.64¾ a bushel. Wheat and soyabean prices dropped.
Chinese Want To Buy the Big 3 Automakers
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jane-hamsher/chinese-want-to-buy-the-b_b_144920.html
Chinese Want To Buy the Big 3 Automakers
Jane Hamsher
Huffington Post
Thursday, Nov 20, 2008
It appears that the Chinese car makers SAIC and Dongfeng have plans to acquire the Big 3:
A take-over of a large overseas auto maker would fit perfectly into China’s plans. As reported before, China has realized that its export chances are slim without unfettered access to foreign technology. The brand cachet of Chinese cars abroad is, shall we say, challenged. The Chinese could easily export Made-in-China VWs, Toyotas, Buicks. If their joint venture partner would let them. The solution: Buy the joint venture partner. Especially, when he’s in deep trouble.
At current market valuations (GM is worth less than Mattel) the Chinese government can afford to buy GM with petty cash. Even a hundred billion $ would barely dent China’s more than $2t in currency reserves. For nobody in the world would buying GM and (while they are at it) Chrysler make more sense than for the Chinese. Overlap? What overlap? They would gain instant access to the world’s markets with accepted brands, and proven technology.
All the Shock Doctrine fanatics cheering to drive the the Big 3 into bankruptcy “restructuring” (like Mitt Romney, who can kiss future hopes of electoral victory in Michigan goodbye) might want to think about the implications of this.
Of course the same legislators clamouring for bankruptcy could block the sale. (This assumes they have the fortitude to stare down the Chinese, who currently hold a whopping portion of US debt, and deny them something they really want). But in doing so, and at the same time refusing a bridge loan to the automakers, they are basically legislating the destruction of the Big 3. They will be forcing them to stiff all their creditors and stockholders and tear up their union contracts by refusing to let the “free market” they love to bang on about step in and assume the company’s legitimate debts. Or were all those insufferable lectures about “personal responsibility” when the bankruptcy bill was going through just so much claptrap?
Because selling the company would be far preferable to the Big 3 and those who are dependent on them than Chapter 7. But long-term it would not be without peril for the US. As one FDL commener noted:
With no big three making cars what to stop Toyota and Honda from moving the plants to Mexico where costs are really low. Its only the threat of being shut out of the American market that keeps the Japanese building cars here. If we no longer have cars made in America by American companies we will have no choice but to buy their cars no matter where they are made.
I know long-term thinking isn’t his forte. But as Richard Shelby is salivating at the prospect of yet another BMW SUV plant in his right-to-work state, it might be something for him to consider.
Chinese Want To Buy the Big 3 Automakers
Jane Hamsher
Huffington Post
Thursday, Nov 20, 2008
It appears that the Chinese car makers SAIC and Dongfeng have plans to acquire the Big 3:
A take-over of a large overseas auto maker would fit perfectly into China’s plans. As reported before, China has realized that its export chances are slim without unfettered access to foreign technology. The brand cachet of Chinese cars abroad is, shall we say, challenged. The Chinese could easily export Made-in-China VWs, Toyotas, Buicks. If their joint venture partner would let them. The solution: Buy the joint venture partner. Especially, when he’s in deep trouble.
At current market valuations (GM is worth less than Mattel) the Chinese government can afford to buy GM with petty cash. Even a hundred billion $ would barely dent China’s more than $2t in currency reserves. For nobody in the world would buying GM and (while they are at it) Chrysler make more sense than for the Chinese. Overlap? What overlap? They would gain instant access to the world’s markets with accepted brands, and proven technology.
All the Shock Doctrine fanatics cheering to drive the the Big 3 into bankruptcy “restructuring” (like Mitt Romney, who can kiss future hopes of electoral victory in Michigan goodbye) might want to think about the implications of this.
Of course the same legislators clamouring for bankruptcy could block the sale. (This assumes they have the fortitude to stare down the Chinese, who currently hold a whopping portion of US debt, and deny them something they really want). But in doing so, and at the same time refusing a bridge loan to the automakers, they are basically legislating the destruction of the Big 3. They will be forcing them to stiff all their creditors and stockholders and tear up their union contracts by refusing to let the “free market” they love to bang on about step in and assume the company’s legitimate debts. Or were all those insufferable lectures about “personal responsibility” when the bankruptcy bill was going through just so much claptrap?
Because selling the company would be far preferable to the Big 3 and those who are dependent on them than Chapter 7. But long-term it would not be without peril for the US. As one FDL commener noted:
With no big three making cars what to stop Toyota and Honda from moving the plants to Mexico where costs are really low. Its only the threat of being shut out of the American market that keeps the Japanese building cars here. If we no longer have cars made in America by American companies we will have no choice but to buy their cars no matter where they are made.
I know long-term thinking isn’t his forte. But as Richard Shelby is salivating at the prospect of yet another BMW SUV plant in his right-to-work state, it might be something for him to consider.
Charts Predict: Dow 6,400 in Less than a Month
http://www.cnbc.com/id/27799264
Charts Predict: Dow 6,400 in Less than a Month
CNBC.com 19 Nov 2008
The Dow Jones Industrial Average is set to sink to 6,400 within the next few weeks, Nicole Elliott, technical analyst at Mizuho Corporate Bank told CNBC.
"Any moment now I think we're going to break lower," Elliott told "Europe Tonight."
"I expect this to be possibly before the end of November or very early December, I mean we're almost on our way now and it's just a question of how far down do we go," she said.
The Dow managed to close above its October low of 8,175.77 on Tuesday, but slipped below that level during the trading session. Market watchers are divided on whether the recent lows mark a base from which to rally, or a pit stop on the way lower.
"This is not a base at all, we're nowhere near bottom yet," Elliott said.
After the initial sharp slump the index could fall further, but in a more gradual decline, according to Elliott.
Charts Predict: Dow 6,400 in Less than a Month
CNBC.com 19 Nov 2008
The Dow Jones Industrial Average is set to sink to 6,400 within the next few weeks, Nicole Elliott, technical analyst at Mizuho Corporate Bank told CNBC.
"Any moment now I think we're going to break lower," Elliott told "Europe Tonight."
"I expect this to be possibly before the end of November or very early December, I mean we're almost on our way now and it's just a question of how far down do we go," she said.
The Dow managed to close above its October low of 8,175.77 on Tuesday, but slipped below that level during the trading session. Market watchers are divided on whether the recent lows mark a base from which to rally, or a pit stop on the way lower.
"This is not a base at all, we're nowhere near bottom yet," Elliott said.
After the initial sharp slump the index could fall further, but in a more gradual decline, according to Elliott.
Consumer prices drop record 1 percent in October
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/081119/economy.html
Consumer prices drop record 1 percent in October
Wednesday November 19, 2008
By Martin Crutsinger, AP Economics Writer
Consumer prices drop by largest amount in past 61 years as energy prices see record plunge
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Consumer prices plunged by the largest amount in the past 61 years in October as gasoline pump prices dropped by a record amount.
The Labor Department said Wednesday that consumer prices fell by 1 percent last month, the biggest one-month decline on records that go back to February 1947. The drop was twice as large as the 0.5 percent decline analysts expected.
In other economic news, the Commerce Department reported that construction of new homes and apartments fell by 4.5 percent in October to an annual rate of 791,000 units. That was the slowest construction pace on records going back to 1959 and underscored that housing remains caught in a severe slump.
The big drop in inflation reflected not only a huge fall in gasoline and other energy costs, but widespread declines in other areas. Core consumer prices, which exclude food and energy, fell by 0.1 percent last month, the first drop in core prices in more than a quarter-century.
There were price declines for clothing, new and used cars, and airline fares. Analysts predicted further declines in the months ahead as retailers struggle to attract consumers who are being battered by rising unemployment and the weak economy.
"This report clearly reflects the crunch in discretionary consumers' spending which is likely to persist for the foreseeable future," said Ian Shepherdson, chief U.S. economist at High Frequency Economics.
The big retreat in consumer prices represented a remarkable turnaround from just a few months ago when a relentless surge in energy prices raised concerns that inflation could get out of control.
Since that time, the economy has been jolted by the most serious financial crisis in seven decades with all the turbulence expected to push the country into a severe and prolonged recession.
The U.S. troubles have quickly spread overseas, depressing growth around the world and cutting into demand for oil and other products, a development that has resulted in sharp declines in the price of crude oil and other commodities.
While some are worried that the price retreat could raise the prospect of a deflation, a prolonged bout of falling prices, most economists believe that current conditions are not likely to set the stage for such a development, which last occurred in the U.S. during the Great Depression.
Over the past 12 months, consumer prices have risen by 3.7 percent. That is substantially below the 17-year high of a 12-month price increase of 5.6 percent set this summer. Core prices are up 2.2 percent over the past 12 months.
This price moderation is giving the Federal Reserve the room it needs to cut interest rates to battle the economic slump. The central bank is expected to cut the federal funds rate, the interest that banks charge each other, down to 0.5 percent at its December meeting, even lower than the 1 percent where the funds rate stands currently. The 1 percent funds rate ties the record low for the past half century.
For October, energy prices fell by a record 8.6 percent, led by a record 14.2 percent drop in gasoline prices. Since prices at the pump have continued to fall this month, analysts are looking for a big decline in energy costs in November as well.
The nationwide average for regular gasoline now stands at $2.07, down 33 cents since the start of the month, according to the Energy Information Agency, and well below record-highs above $4 per gallon this summer.
Food costs rose 0.3 percent in October, just half the increase of September, as dairy products and fruit showed declines. Food prices are still 6.1 percent above where they were a year ago, reflecting big increases in past months as grocery stores hiked costs to reflect the higher cost of transportation.
Excluding food and energy, consumer prices fell by 0.1 percent, the first decline in core prices since a similar drop in December 1982 as the country was battling the effects of a severe recession.
Many analysts believe the current downturn will be the worst recession since the 1981-82 slump.
The big drop in inflation meant workers got a break in their discretionary incomes although average weekly earnings, after adjusting for inflation, were still down by 0.9 percent from a year ago. However, that was smaller than the 2.5 percent decrease seen in the prior two months.
G’day! Hugh Jackman is new Sexiest Man Alive
All this talk of economic collapse is exhausting. Here's something to cheer up your day...http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27800751/
People.com
G’day! Hugh Jackman is new Sexiest Man Alive
A romantic in a hard body, the Aussie star leaves women saying ‘Oh my’
People.com
Wed., Nov. 19, 2008
He's a triple threat: a star who can sing, dance and wield a weapon.
At 6-foot-2, all scruff and biceps, Hugh Jackman looms large in the epic “Australia,” which he says kept him “dirty 95 percent of the time” and left people stammering, “Oh ... my ... God,” according to costar Nicole Kidman, who adds, "Women's jaws drop when Hugh walks into a room."
Jackman's wife of 12 years, Deborra-Lee Furness, calls his perfect form “the Body of Doom — but I like what's inside”: a romantic who sings ballads at home and makes pancakes for Oscar, 8, and Ava, 3. A hard body with a soft center — 2008's Sexiest Man Alive sat down with PEOPLE to reveal most of his secrets.
“You turned 40 Oct. 12 and now you're the Sexiest Man Alive. What was your wife's response?”
God bless her, she said, “I could've told them that years ago!” And then she said, “Obviously, Brad wasn't available this year.” And I said, “That was a joke, right?”
“Your marriage is a success story.”
In my early 20s, I didn't have a regular girlfriend. I was single and really happy about it. And then when I was 26, I met Deb on (the Australian TV show) “Correlli.” She was my leading lady. It was just undeniable. I started planning to propose to her at about three months. We are happy. Deb and my kids have been the best things that have ever happened to me, without a doubt.
“How do you keep the passion alive?”
It's easy with my wife. She loves the idea of me coming home in costume because it makes her feel like she's having an affair in a good way. When we met, I was cast as a prisoner with tattoos and she'd say, “Don't take your tattoos off tonight!” and I'd be like, “All right!” But what works best with her is the stockbroker look. She also says, “Do your sexy dance for me,” (an '80s-like, hip-swiveling number) and that works for me.
“Are you self-conscious about any body part?”
When I was younger, I had chicken legs. My nickname was Sticks.
“What part do people like best?”
My smile. Lately my pecs. I'm being honest!
“What do you wear to bed?”
I didn't wear anything until my daughter was born and we had a night nanny because I was working. I walked out stark naked, and she was reading a book. Now I like boxer briefs.
For more of Hugh's interview, pick up PEOPLE's Sexiest Man Alive issue, on stands Friday.
Obama and the Great Depression
http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_4029.shtml
Obama and the Great Depression
By Mickey Z.
Online Journal Contributing Writer
Nov 20, 2008
No, I don’t mean that Great Depression. I’m talking about the inevitable moment -- maybe next week, maybe next year -- when the Kool Aid wears off and the Obamatrons wake up to realize their hero offers nothing even approximating hope or change.
The carefully calculated speeches -- which have always been filled with empty, hollow phrases -- will no longer soothe a battered and desperate populace and the Obamabots will suddenly recognize that the Pope of Hope has never been anything more than a human marketing strategy, a product. This year’s iPhone.
“Yes we can”? Merely the first three words of a longer phrase: “Yes we can continue to work, consume, and obey authority without question.”
A great depression, so to speak, will set in. According to Depression.com, some people say this condition feels “like a black curtain of despair . . . Many people feel like they have no energy and can’t concentrate. Others feel irritable all the time.” Other common symptoms include “empty” feelings and a sense of hopelessness.
Hopelessness: how frighteningly appropriate for the inescapable post-Obama comedown. Change we can bereave in.
Yes, a great and unpreventable depression will set in . . . but, you betcha, the damage is already done.
As for that other Great Depression looming on the horizon, well, here’s my short-term economic recovery plan:
Cut the military budget by 75 percent
Eliminate corporate welfare
Return the corporate tax rate back to where it was in the 1950s
Hey, what can I say? I’m a maverick . . .
Mickey Z. can be found on the Web at www.mickeyz.net.
Obama and the Great Depression
By Mickey Z.
Online Journal Contributing Writer
Nov 20, 2008
No, I don’t mean that Great Depression. I’m talking about the inevitable moment -- maybe next week, maybe next year -- when the Kool Aid wears off and the Obamatrons wake up to realize their hero offers nothing even approximating hope or change.
The carefully calculated speeches -- which have always been filled with empty, hollow phrases -- will no longer soothe a battered and desperate populace and the Obamabots will suddenly recognize that the Pope of Hope has never been anything more than a human marketing strategy, a product. This year’s iPhone.
“Yes we can”? Merely the first three words of a longer phrase: “Yes we can continue to work, consume, and obey authority without question.”
A great depression, so to speak, will set in. According to Depression.com, some people say this condition feels “like a black curtain of despair . . . Many people feel like they have no energy and can’t concentrate. Others feel irritable all the time.” Other common symptoms include “empty” feelings and a sense of hopelessness.
Hopelessness: how frighteningly appropriate for the inescapable post-Obama comedown. Change we can bereave in.
Yes, a great and unpreventable depression will set in . . . but, you betcha, the damage is already done.
As for that other Great Depression looming on the horizon, well, here’s my short-term economic recovery plan:
Cut the military budget by 75 percent
Eliminate corporate welfare
Return the corporate tax rate back to where it was in the 1950s
Hey, what can I say? I’m a maverick . . .
Mickey Z. can be found on the Web at www.mickeyz.net.
Russ Kick – Architect of Memory
Disinformation News Special Bulletin:Disinformation Editor Russ Kick has been named one of Utne Reader's "50 Visionaries Who Are Changing Your World":
Russ Kick – Architect of Memory:
"I don't foresee a day when there is true government transparency," says Russ Kick, editor of TheMemoryHole.org. "It's just not in the nature of government." So, in lieu of the end of secrecy, Kick tenaciously ticks off small victories, such as finding an IRS guide to prosecuting money laundering, buried in the Federal Depository Library, and using the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to unearth photographs of U.S. military prisons.
Since 2002, Kick has preserved hundreds of cultural artifacts, including that five-minute clip of President Bush reading to schoolchildren on 9/11 after an aide whispered to him that the nation was under siege. Kick edits a series of anthologies for Disinformation, a radical media organization. [This year] look for an updated edition of 2001's You Are Being Lied To, called (appropriately) You Are STILL Being Lied To.
The best you hope for, Kick says, is that an inspired citizen files an FOIA request of his or her own.
AVAILABLE FOR INTERVIEW: RUSS KICK
Russ Kick is the author of 50 Things You're Not Supposed To Know, Volumes 1 and 2, and The Disinformation Book of Lists. He is the editor of Everything You Know Is Wrong, Abuse Your Illusions, Everything You Know About Sex Is Wrong, and Everything You Know About God Is Wrong. His next anthology You Are STILL Being Lied To will be available in December 2008.
Russ Kick assembles an unprecedented group of researchers — investigative reporters, political dissidents, academics, media watchdogs, scientist-philosophers, social critics, and rogue scholars — to paint a picture of a world where crucial stories are ignored or actively suppressed and the official version of events has more holes in it than Swiss cheese.
Featuring essays from Howard Zinn, Noam Chomsky, Howard Bloom, Sydney Schanberg, Michael Parenti, Riane Eisler, Jim Marrs, and many others!
YOU ARE STILL BEING LIED TO:
The NEW Disinformation Guide to Media Distortion, Historical Whitewashes and Cultural Myths
Edited by Russ Kick
Published by The Disinformation Company Ltd.
December 2008 * ISBN: 978-1934708-07-1
Oversized Softcover * US$24.95 * 448 pages
About The Disinformation Company Ltd:
The Disinformation Company was founded in 1997 on the strength of the ever-popular Disinformation website (www.disinfo.com). The company is active in television and film production, book publishing, theatrical releasing, home entertainment, and is currently developing its first video game.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
The SEC by Mark Cuban
http://blogmaverick.com/2008/11/17/the-sec/
The SEC
Mark Cuban
Nov 17th 2008
I wish I could say more, but I will have to leave it to this, and let the judicial process do its job.
November 17, 2008
RE: SEC Civil Action in the United States District
for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division
Mark Cuban today responded to a civil complaint filed by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission in the United States District for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. In its complaint, the Commission charges that Mr. Cuban engaged in violations of the federal securities laws in connection with transactions in the securities of Mamma.com Inc.
This matter, which has been pending before the Commission for nearly two years, has no merit and is a product of gross abuse of prosecutorial discretion. Mr. Cuban intends to contest the allegations and to demonstrate that the Commission’s claims are infected by the misconduct of the staff of its Enforcement Division.
Mr. Cuban stated, “I am disappointed that the Commission chose to bring this case based upon its Enforcement staff’s win-at-any-cost ambitions. The staff’s process was result-oriented, facts be damned. The government’s claims are false and they will be proven to be so.”
——————————
——————————
Ralph C. Ferrara, Esq.
Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP
1101 New York Avenue, N.W., Suite 1100
Washington, D.C. 20005
The SEC
Mark Cuban
Nov 17th 2008
I wish I could say more, but I will have to leave it to this, and let the judicial process do its job.
November 17, 2008
RE: SEC Civil Action in the United States District
for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division
Mark Cuban today responded to a civil complaint filed by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission in the United States District for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. In its complaint, the Commission charges that Mr. Cuban engaged in violations of the federal securities laws in connection with transactions in the securities of Mamma.com Inc.
This matter, which has been pending before the Commission for nearly two years, has no merit and is a product of gross abuse of prosecutorial discretion. Mr. Cuban intends to contest the allegations and to demonstrate that the Commission’s claims are infected by the misconduct of the staff of its Enforcement Division.
Mr. Cuban stated, “I am disappointed that the Commission chose to bring this case based upon its Enforcement staff’s win-at-any-cost ambitions. The staff’s process was result-oriented, facts be damned. The government’s claims are false and they will be proven to be so.”
——————————
——————————
Ralph C. Ferrara, Esq.
Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP
1101 New York Avenue, N.W., Suite 1100
Washington, D.C. 20005
Uncle John "JT" Tully on Mark Cuban
11-18-8
Website: http://broadcatching.wordpress.com
Yesterday, Mark Cuban gets hit with the insider trading charge - the charge that eventually sent Martha Stewart to jail.
On October 17th, Cuban announced on his personal blog that he was starting a new website called Bailout Sleuth. From his blog, he says:
Quote:
Its job is simple, keep an eye on our taxpayer dollars and call Bullshit when necessary.
if you take a trip over to Bailoutsleuth you can see that its already time to call BS. In the first contract handed out, in this case to Bank of NY Mellon Corp, the compensation section is blacked out.
Sad. So very sad, that we couldnt make it a week without being afraid of the very taxpayers who are footing the tab for all of this.
Bailoutsleuth will try to publish every day in keeping up with how our taxdollars are spent and the people and companies that are impacted by this program. We are still a work in progress and look forward to your comments , feedback and tips.
Don't wonder why Cuban has the SEC knocking on his door.
Website: http://broadcatching.wordpress.com
Yesterday, Mark Cuban gets hit with the insider trading charge - the charge that eventually sent Martha Stewart to jail.
On October 17th, Cuban announced on his personal blog that he was starting a new website called Bailout Sleuth. From his blog, he says:
Quote:
Its job is simple, keep an eye on our taxpayer dollars and call Bullshit when necessary.
if you take a trip over to Bailoutsleuth you can see that its already time to call BS. In the first contract handed out, in this case to Bank of NY Mellon Corp, the compensation section is blacked out.
Sad. So very sad, that we couldnt make it a week without being afraid of the very taxpayers who are footing the tab for all of this.
Bailoutsleuth will try to publish every day in keeping up with how our taxdollars are spent and the people and companies that are impacted by this program. We are still a work in progress and look forward to your comments , feedback and tips.
Don't wonder why Cuban has the SEC knocking on his door.
Insider Trading, or Political Persecution?
http://norris.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/17/insider-trading-or-political-persecution/
November 17, 2008
Insider Trading, or Political Persecution?
By Floyd Norris
Did Mark Cuban, the Internet entrepreneur turned owner of the Dallas Mavericks basketball team, and would-be buyer of the Chicago Cubs, violate insider trading laws in a particularly egregious fashion?
Or is he the victim of a political hit job because he helped finance a movie that was scathingly critical of President Bush?
Either way, the insider trading complaint from the Securities and Exchange Commission today arouses a lot more interest than most enforcement actions.
I’ll get to the facts of the complaint in a minute, but first here is Mr. Cuban’s reaction. His lawyers issued a statement saying:
This matter, which has been pending before the commission for nearly two years, has no merit and is a product of gross abuse of prosecutorial discretion. Mr. Cuban intends to contest the allegations and to demonstrate that the commission’s claims are infected by the misconduct of the staff of its enforcement division.
Mr. Cuban stated, “I am disappointed that the commission chose to bring this case based upon its enforcement staff’s win-at-any-cost ambitions. The staff’s process was result-oriented, facts be damned. The government’s claims are false and they will be proven to be so.”
A person close to Mr. Cuban provided me with a copy of an e-mail message said to have been sent by Jeffrey Norris, an S.E.C. lawyer in the Fort Worth regional office (and no known relation to me.) This e-mail message seems to have been sent after an exchange in which Mr. Norris complained that Mr. Cuban had financed a movie called “Loose Change” that discusses the president’s actions relating to Sept. 11.
From: Norris, Jeffrey B. [mailto:NorrisJ@SEC.GOV]
Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2007 2:27 PM
To: Mark Cuban
Cc: Cox, Christopher
Subject: RE: “Lose Change”
I AM SHARING THIS WITH CHAIRMAN COX. NEITHER HE NOR THE COMMISSION ENDORSE MY OPINIONS, BUT IN LIGHT OF YOUR THREAT, I THOUGHT SHOULD SEND THIS TO HIM.
Mark:
If this upsets you, I wonder how George Bush feels. I assume that Mr. Cox would view your involvement with “Loose Change” much as I do. After all, he served his country as a Republican Congressman from Orange County for nearly 20 years and was appointed by President Bush. If you feel like sharing my thoughts with Chairman Cox, be my guest.
Previously, I thought you were merely foolish and naïve. Now, however, I see that you are also a hypocrite. I guess your belief in free speech has severe limitations. If someone else is the victim of an absurd conspiracy theory, you defend your right to participate in smearing the good name of a patriot like President Bush. But, when you are the subject of a parody of the attack you have endorsed, you suddenly issue threats.
I think I will e-mail this to Chairman Cox myself. I think he will enjoy it. I’m sure he is also a Laker fan.
Since Chairman Cox may not know the background, I will explain. Mark Cuban is the owner of the Dallas Mavericks and has participated in distributing the vicious and absurd documentary, “Loose Change,” which posits that President Bush planned the demolition of the World Trade Center as a pretext for going to war against Iraq. We have had some past exchanges about my opinion the Mr. Cuban’s support for this project is irresponsible and immoral. Below, I parodied his position that every opinion, no matter how absurd and vicious, deserves to be broadly disseminated.
The copy sent to me does not include the previous parody.
John Nester, an S.E.C. spokesman, said this afternoon that the investigation was conducted by the S.E.C.’s Washington office, and that Mr. Norris was not involved in it. He added:
“Chairman Cox has never met the individual who corresponded with Mr. Cuban, nor has he spoken or corresponded with him in any way. After those communications came to light, the matter was referred for disciplinary action against the individual. To avoid any potential appearance issues, Chairman Cox recused himself from the Commission vote, and he has not been involved in this investigation at any time.”
The vote he refers to was the commission’s vote to file the case.
Mr. Norris has not returned a call left for him at his office.
Now for the facts of the insider trading case.
Mr. Cuban made a substantial profit from a quick trade in an Internet company that, oh-so-briefly, was a hot stock in 2004. It is not clear from public records just how much money he made, but even if the S.E.C. succeeds in its efforts to take about $750,000 in profits from him, he will still be one of the few public shareholders to rank as having made a lot of money from the company.
Mamma.com was, and is, an Internet search engine. In late February 2004, it was trading for around $4 a share. Then it announced earnings and announced new advertising features and the stock took off, aided by some stock tip sheets. (That trading brought on an S.E.C. investigation, which ended without charges being filed.)
The trading was crazy. A company with 10.5 million shares outstanding was trading more than 60 million shares a day while the stock ran up. There was heavy short-selling.
Mr. Cuban disclosed that he had acquired 600,000 shares, a 6.3 percent stake, by March 15, 2004. He did not disclose a purchase price or say when he had acquired the shares.
According to the S.E.C., on June 28, 2004, the company’s chief executive asked Mr. Cuban if he would like to participate in a planned new offering of the company’s stock. After being warned that he was receiving confidential information, Mr. Cuban is said to have expressed dismay about the offering. “At the end of the call, Cuban told the C.E.O. ‘Well, now I’m screwed. I can’t sell.’ ”
But a few minutes later he did sell 10,000 shares in after-hours trading. He sold the rest the next day. He took in $7.9 million, realizing an average of $13.24 per share. After the close on June 29, the offering was announced, and the stock opened the next day at $11.89. The S.E.C. figures that is a measure of his illicit gain.
Mamma.com is still around. In fact, I did all the searches connected to this blog using that search engine, and it performed quite adequately. But it has not prospered. The corporate name has changed to Copernic and the current stock price is 28 cents. At that price, Mr. Cuban’s former holding would be worth $168,000.
Mr. Cuban disclosed that sale, as required for a major holder. It is not clear what caused the S.E.C. to begin its investigation in early 2007, two and a half years after the sale. But if Mr. Cuban had waited to sell, he still would have gotten a very good price for the stock — at least from the perspective of 2008 — and the S.E.C. would have had no case.
As it is, there appears to be no question about when Mr. Cuban sold the stock. The S.E.C. cites phone company records and company memos about the timing and content of the call. If those memos were accurate, it appears that Mr. Cuban knew he had a duty not to sell until the information about the offering was made public.
But even if all that is true, the Norris e-mail, sent from an S.E.C. e-mail address, indicates the commission has a lawyer with, at best, very poor judgment.
November 17, 2008
Insider Trading, or Political Persecution?
By Floyd Norris
Did Mark Cuban, the Internet entrepreneur turned owner of the Dallas Mavericks basketball team, and would-be buyer of the Chicago Cubs, violate insider trading laws in a particularly egregious fashion?
Or is he the victim of a political hit job because he helped finance a movie that was scathingly critical of President Bush?
Either way, the insider trading complaint from the Securities and Exchange Commission today arouses a lot more interest than most enforcement actions.
I’ll get to the facts of the complaint in a minute, but first here is Mr. Cuban’s reaction. His lawyers issued a statement saying:
This matter, which has been pending before the commission for nearly two years, has no merit and is a product of gross abuse of prosecutorial discretion. Mr. Cuban intends to contest the allegations and to demonstrate that the commission’s claims are infected by the misconduct of the staff of its enforcement division.
Mr. Cuban stated, “I am disappointed that the commission chose to bring this case based upon its enforcement staff’s win-at-any-cost ambitions. The staff’s process was result-oriented, facts be damned. The government’s claims are false and they will be proven to be so.”
A person close to Mr. Cuban provided me with a copy of an e-mail message said to have been sent by Jeffrey Norris, an S.E.C. lawyer in the Fort Worth regional office (and no known relation to me.) This e-mail message seems to have been sent after an exchange in which Mr. Norris complained that Mr. Cuban had financed a movie called “Loose Change” that discusses the president’s actions relating to Sept. 11.
From: Norris, Jeffrey B. [mailto:NorrisJ@SEC.GOV]
Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2007 2:27 PM
To: Mark Cuban
Cc: Cox, Christopher
Subject: RE: “Lose Change”
I AM SHARING THIS WITH CHAIRMAN COX. NEITHER HE NOR THE COMMISSION ENDORSE MY OPINIONS, BUT IN LIGHT OF YOUR THREAT, I THOUGHT SHOULD SEND THIS TO HIM.
Mark:
If this upsets you, I wonder how George Bush feels. I assume that Mr. Cox would view your involvement with “Loose Change” much as I do. After all, he served his country as a Republican Congressman from Orange County for nearly 20 years and was appointed by President Bush. If you feel like sharing my thoughts with Chairman Cox, be my guest.
Previously, I thought you were merely foolish and naïve. Now, however, I see that you are also a hypocrite. I guess your belief in free speech has severe limitations. If someone else is the victim of an absurd conspiracy theory, you defend your right to participate in smearing the good name of a patriot like President Bush. But, when you are the subject of a parody of the attack you have endorsed, you suddenly issue threats.
I think I will e-mail this to Chairman Cox myself. I think he will enjoy it. I’m sure he is also a Laker fan.
Since Chairman Cox may not know the background, I will explain. Mark Cuban is the owner of the Dallas Mavericks and has participated in distributing the vicious and absurd documentary, “Loose Change,” which posits that President Bush planned the demolition of the World Trade Center as a pretext for going to war against Iraq. We have had some past exchanges about my opinion the Mr. Cuban’s support for this project is irresponsible and immoral. Below, I parodied his position that every opinion, no matter how absurd and vicious, deserves to be broadly disseminated.
The copy sent to me does not include the previous parody.
John Nester, an S.E.C. spokesman, said this afternoon that the investigation was conducted by the S.E.C.’s Washington office, and that Mr. Norris was not involved in it. He added:
“Chairman Cox has never met the individual who corresponded with Mr. Cuban, nor has he spoken or corresponded with him in any way. After those communications came to light, the matter was referred for disciplinary action against the individual. To avoid any potential appearance issues, Chairman Cox recused himself from the Commission vote, and he has not been involved in this investigation at any time.”
The vote he refers to was the commission’s vote to file the case.
Mr. Norris has not returned a call left for him at his office.
Now for the facts of the insider trading case.
Mr. Cuban made a substantial profit from a quick trade in an Internet company that, oh-so-briefly, was a hot stock in 2004. It is not clear from public records just how much money he made, but even if the S.E.C. succeeds in its efforts to take about $750,000 in profits from him, he will still be one of the few public shareholders to rank as having made a lot of money from the company.
Mamma.com was, and is, an Internet search engine. In late February 2004, it was trading for around $4 a share. Then it announced earnings and announced new advertising features and the stock took off, aided by some stock tip sheets. (That trading brought on an S.E.C. investigation, which ended without charges being filed.)
The trading was crazy. A company with 10.5 million shares outstanding was trading more than 60 million shares a day while the stock ran up. There was heavy short-selling.
Mr. Cuban disclosed that he had acquired 600,000 shares, a 6.3 percent stake, by March 15, 2004. He did not disclose a purchase price or say when he had acquired the shares.
According to the S.E.C., on June 28, 2004, the company’s chief executive asked Mr. Cuban if he would like to participate in a planned new offering of the company’s stock. After being warned that he was receiving confidential information, Mr. Cuban is said to have expressed dismay about the offering. “At the end of the call, Cuban told the C.E.O. ‘Well, now I’m screwed. I can’t sell.’ ”
But a few minutes later he did sell 10,000 shares in after-hours trading. He sold the rest the next day. He took in $7.9 million, realizing an average of $13.24 per share. After the close on June 29, the offering was announced, and the stock opened the next day at $11.89. The S.E.C. figures that is a measure of his illicit gain.
Mamma.com is still around. In fact, I did all the searches connected to this blog using that search engine, and it performed quite adequately. But it has not prospered. The corporate name has changed to Copernic and the current stock price is 28 cents. At that price, Mr. Cuban’s former holding would be worth $168,000.
Mr. Cuban disclosed that sale, as required for a major holder. It is not clear what caused the S.E.C. to begin its investigation in early 2007, two and a half years after the sale. But if Mr. Cuban had waited to sell, he still would have gotten a very good price for the stock — at least from the perspective of 2008 — and the S.E.C. would have had no case.
As it is, there appears to be no question about when Mr. Cuban sold the stock. The S.E.C. cites phone company records and company memos about the timing and content of the call. If those memos were accurate, it appears that Mr. Cuban knew he had a duty not to sell until the information about the offering was made public.
But even if all that is true, the Norris e-mail, sent from an S.E.C. e-mail address, indicates the commission has a lawyer with, at best, very poor judgment.
SEC accuses Mavs owner Cuban of insider trading
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3708124
SEC accuses Mavs owner Cuban of insider trading
ESPN.com news services
November 18, 2008
Cuban Accused Of Insider Trading WASHINGTON -- Federal regulators have accused billionaire Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban of insider trading for allegedly using confidential information on a stock sale to avoid more than $750,000 in losses.
The Securities and Exchange Commission filed a civil lawsuit against Cuban on Monday in federal court in Dallas. The agency said that in June 2004, Cuban was invited to get in on the coming stock offering by Mamma.com Inc. after he agreed to keep the information private.
The SEC said Cuban knew his stake -- pegged at 600,000 shares, or 6 percent ownership in the company -- would be sold below the current market price after learning that Mamma.com was raising money through a private investment in a public entity (also known as a PIPE).
A few hours after receiving the information, Cuban told his broker to sell all shares in the search engine company, according to the suit.
After the stock sale
In his own words, Mark Cuban mentioned Mamma.com in a March 2005 entry on his own blog, blogmaverick.com, explaining his decision to sell off his stock in the company.
Finally, and this has nothing to do with Naked Shorting, I wanted to reference Mamma.com. I had purchased stock in Mamma.com in hope that it could be an up and coming search engine. I thought I had done some level of due diligence. Talked to the company management. Talked to some employees who worked in sales. Read the SEC Filings. I knew that they had a checkered past and had been linked to stock promoter Irving Kott, and that their law firm still handled some of Kotts business, but the CEO, Chairman, lawyers all said that things were reformed and the company was focused on its business.
Then the company did a PIPE financing. Im not going to discuss the good or bad of PIPE financing other than to say that to me its a huge red flag and I dont want to own stock in companies that use this method of financing . Why? Because I dont like the idea of selling in a private placement, stock for less than the market price, and then to make matters worse, pushing the price lower with the issuance of warrants. So I sold the stock.
I bring all of this up now, because in one of the comments in the Naked Shorting thread, a poster mentioned Lines Overseas Management of Bermuda and how there had been allegations made against them . That rang a bell. Turns out this was the same company that Mamma.com's current CFO used for a private placement for Mamma.
I said at the top that I found out some interesting things in this thread, this was probably the most interesting. I will leave you to make your own decision as to whether this connection matters or not. Im glad I sold my stock.
The Commission is seeking to impose financial penalties and confiscate gains from the trades. It is up to the U.S. Attorney in Dallas to determine whether Cuban should face criminal charges.
"As we allege in the complaint, Mamma.com entrusted Mr. Cuban with nonpublic information after he promised to keep the information confidential. Less than four hours later, Mr. Cuban betrayed that trust by placing an order to sell all of his shares," Scott W. Friestad, deputy director of the SEC's Division of Enforcement, said in a statement. "It is fundamentally unfair for someone to use access to nonpublic information to improperly gain an edge on the market."
According to the Wall Street Journal, Christopher Clark, a lawyer for Cuban, said, "We're shocked. We find it incredible that given all the important issues that the SEC has to address with regard to today's economy they've sought to bring a $750,000 case relating to a he-said she-said about one trade against a person whose integrity has never been questioned before with regard to the securities markets."
Clark also said he was "further shocked because the whole enforcement process was tainted by express bias by enforcement officials and certain other misconduct that we will happily detail to the judge in this case."
In a statement posted on Cuban's blog, blogmaverick.com, attorney Ralph C. Ferrara said Cuban would challenge the suit.
"This matter, which has been pending before the Commission for nearly two years, has no merit and is a product of gross abuse of prosecutorial discretion," Ferrara said. "Mr. Cuban intends to contest the allegations and to demonstrate that the Commission's claims are infected by the misconduct of the staff of its Enforcement Division."
In the same statement, Cuban said, "I am disappointed that the Commission chose to bring this case based upon its Enforcement staff's win-at-any-cost ambitions. The staff's process was result-oriented, facts be damned. The government's claims are false and they will be proven to be so."
According to the SEC, the complaint seeks to permanently enjoin Cuban from future violations of the federal securities laws, disgorgement (with prejudgment interest), and a financial penalty.
"Insider trading cases are a high priority for the Commission," Linda Chatman Thomsen, director of the SEC's Division of Enforcement, said in the statement. "This case demonstrates yet again that the Commission will aggressively pursue illegal insider trading whenever it occurs."
Cuban's situation is drawing comparisons to Martha Stewart's involvement in insider trading in 2001. Stewart was also charged with obstruction for lying to FBI investigators. She was convicted in March 2004 on charges of conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and two counts of making false statements and was sentenced to prison.
Mamma.com, a Canadian company, merged with Copernic Technologies in December 2005. Copernic also offers search software and online advertising services. Mamma.com now trades under Copernic's ticker, CNIC.
The NBA had no comment.
Information from The Associated Press was used in this report.
Related Topics: NBA, Dallas Mavericks
SEC accuses Mavs owner Cuban of insider trading
ESPN.com news services
November 18, 2008
Cuban Accused Of Insider Trading WASHINGTON -- Federal regulators have accused billionaire Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban of insider trading for allegedly using confidential information on a stock sale to avoid more than $750,000 in losses.
The Securities and Exchange Commission filed a civil lawsuit against Cuban on Monday in federal court in Dallas. The agency said that in June 2004, Cuban was invited to get in on the coming stock offering by Mamma.com Inc. after he agreed to keep the information private.
The SEC said Cuban knew his stake -- pegged at 600,000 shares, or 6 percent ownership in the company -- would be sold below the current market price after learning that Mamma.com was raising money through a private investment in a public entity (also known as a PIPE).
A few hours after receiving the information, Cuban told his broker to sell all shares in the search engine company, according to the suit.
After the stock sale
In his own words, Mark Cuban mentioned Mamma.com in a March 2005 entry on his own blog, blogmaverick.com, explaining his decision to sell off his stock in the company.
Finally, and this has nothing to do with Naked Shorting, I wanted to reference Mamma.com. I had purchased stock in Mamma.com in hope that it could be an up and coming search engine. I thought I had done some level of due diligence. Talked to the company management. Talked to some employees who worked in sales. Read the SEC Filings. I knew that they had a checkered past and had been linked to stock promoter Irving Kott, and that their law firm still handled some of Kotts business, but the CEO, Chairman, lawyers all said that things were reformed and the company was focused on its business.
Then the company did a PIPE financing. Im not going to discuss the good or bad of PIPE financing other than to say that to me its a huge red flag and I dont want to own stock in companies that use this method of financing . Why? Because I dont like the idea of selling in a private placement, stock for less than the market price, and then to make matters worse, pushing the price lower with the issuance of warrants. So I sold the stock.
I bring all of this up now, because in one of the comments in the Naked Shorting thread, a poster mentioned Lines Overseas Management of Bermuda and how there had been allegations made against them . That rang a bell. Turns out this was the same company that Mamma.com's current CFO used for a private placement for Mamma.
I said at the top that I found out some interesting things in this thread, this was probably the most interesting. I will leave you to make your own decision as to whether this connection matters or not. Im glad I sold my stock.
The Commission is seeking to impose financial penalties and confiscate gains from the trades. It is up to the U.S. Attorney in Dallas to determine whether Cuban should face criminal charges.
"As we allege in the complaint, Mamma.com entrusted Mr. Cuban with nonpublic information after he promised to keep the information confidential. Less than four hours later, Mr. Cuban betrayed that trust by placing an order to sell all of his shares," Scott W. Friestad, deputy director of the SEC's Division of Enforcement, said in a statement. "It is fundamentally unfair for someone to use access to nonpublic information to improperly gain an edge on the market."
According to the Wall Street Journal, Christopher Clark, a lawyer for Cuban, said, "We're shocked. We find it incredible that given all the important issues that the SEC has to address with regard to today's economy they've sought to bring a $750,000 case relating to a he-said she-said about one trade against a person whose integrity has never been questioned before with regard to the securities markets."
Clark also said he was "further shocked because the whole enforcement process was tainted by express bias by enforcement officials and certain other misconduct that we will happily detail to the judge in this case."
In a statement posted on Cuban's blog, blogmaverick.com, attorney Ralph C. Ferrara said Cuban would challenge the suit.
"This matter, which has been pending before the Commission for nearly two years, has no merit and is a product of gross abuse of prosecutorial discretion," Ferrara said. "Mr. Cuban intends to contest the allegations and to demonstrate that the Commission's claims are infected by the misconduct of the staff of its Enforcement Division."
In the same statement, Cuban said, "I am disappointed that the Commission chose to bring this case based upon its Enforcement staff's win-at-any-cost ambitions. The staff's process was result-oriented, facts be damned. The government's claims are false and they will be proven to be so."
According to the SEC, the complaint seeks to permanently enjoin Cuban from future violations of the federal securities laws, disgorgement (with prejudgment interest), and a financial penalty.
"Insider trading cases are a high priority for the Commission," Linda Chatman Thomsen, director of the SEC's Division of Enforcement, said in the statement. "This case demonstrates yet again that the Commission will aggressively pursue illegal insider trading whenever it occurs."
Cuban's situation is drawing comparisons to Martha Stewart's involvement in insider trading in 2001. Stewart was also charged with obstruction for lying to FBI investigators. She was convicted in March 2004 on charges of conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and two counts of making false statements and was sentenced to prison.
Mamma.com, a Canadian company, merged with Copernic Technologies in December 2005. Copernic also offers search software and online advertising services. Mamma.com now trades under Copernic's ticker, CNIC.
The NBA had no comment.
Information from The Associated Press was used in this report.
Related Topics: NBA, Dallas Mavericks
Oil groups expect $40 barrel – CNOOC head
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a7aae3a0-b5ad-11dd-ab71-0000779fd18c.html
Oil groups expect $40 barrel – CNOOC head
By Alan Beattie in Barcelona
Published: November 18 2008
The world’s national oil companies expect oil prices to fall further and will cancel most planned investment projects even at current levels, according to the head of a Chinese state-owned group.
A recent meeting of the national oil companies in Beijing had predicted oil prices would fall to about $40 a barrel, Fu Chengyu, chief executive of China National Offshore Oil Corporation, told a conference in Barcelona.
“The consensus at the time was that everybody realised the oil price would be even lower,” Mr Fu told the Global China Business meeting. “Nobody knew where it would be but most of them said around $40.”
Mr Fu said that about 27 companies from 23 countries attended the meeting in Beijing, which he said was on October 17 or 18, though he declined to name those present. He described the tone of the meeting as one of “panic” at falling prices.
Executives thought that the oil price would soon rebound to about $50-$55, he said, but even at those levels, investment in new production would be cut back heavily.
“If the oil price remained around $50 or $55, that would mean cutting at least 60 per cent of budgeted projects for the next one or two years from the national oil companies,” Mr Fu said.
Of the new extraction projects planned by state-owned oil companies in deep-sea areas, the lowest break-even oil price was about $60 a barrel and the highest about $90 per barrel, he said.
“When most of the oil companies budgeted their projects, they were using $70, $80, even $100 a barrel for their cash flow calculations,” he said. “For those projects that have started, certainly they will try to complete them, but for those projects that have not started yet they will delay or cancel. Simply, they don’t have enough cash to do all of those that they budgeted.”
Mr Fu also said that any cut in production by Opec, the cartel of oil exporting countries, was regarded as likely to be ineffectual. “Most of the consensus said that if Opec cut production, it might not be as effective as they thought,” said Mr Fu.
Even when Opec had previously announced an output reduction of 1.5m barrels a day, the global oil price still went down, Mr Fu added.
Oil groups expect $40 barrel – CNOOC head
By Alan Beattie in Barcelona
Published: November 18 2008
The world’s national oil companies expect oil prices to fall further and will cancel most planned investment projects even at current levels, according to the head of a Chinese state-owned group.
A recent meeting of the national oil companies in Beijing had predicted oil prices would fall to about $40 a barrel, Fu Chengyu, chief executive of China National Offshore Oil Corporation, told a conference in Barcelona.
“The consensus at the time was that everybody realised the oil price would be even lower,” Mr Fu told the Global China Business meeting. “Nobody knew where it would be but most of them said around $40.”
Mr Fu said that about 27 companies from 23 countries attended the meeting in Beijing, which he said was on October 17 or 18, though he declined to name those present. He described the tone of the meeting as one of “panic” at falling prices.
Executives thought that the oil price would soon rebound to about $50-$55, he said, but even at those levels, investment in new production would be cut back heavily.
“If the oil price remained around $50 or $55, that would mean cutting at least 60 per cent of budgeted projects for the next one or two years from the national oil companies,” Mr Fu said.
Of the new extraction projects planned by state-owned oil companies in deep-sea areas, the lowest break-even oil price was about $60 a barrel and the highest about $90 per barrel, he said.
“When most of the oil companies budgeted their projects, they were using $70, $80, even $100 a barrel for their cash flow calculations,” he said. “For those projects that have started, certainly they will try to complete them, but for those projects that have not started yet they will delay or cancel. Simply, they don’t have enough cash to do all of those that they budgeted.”
Mr Fu also said that any cut in production by Opec, the cartel of oil exporting countries, was regarded as likely to be ineffectual. “Most of the consensus said that if Opec cut production, it might not be as effective as they thought,” said Mr Fu.
Even when Opec had previously announced an output reduction of 1.5m barrels a day, the global oil price still went down, Mr Fu added.
10 Stories Behind Dr. Seuss Stories
http://blogs.static.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/20266.html
10 Stories Behind Dr. Seuss Stories
by Stacy Conradt - November 16, 2008
1. The Lorax. In case you haven’t read The Lorax, it’s widely recognized as Dr. Seuss’ take on environmentalism and how humans are destroying nature. The logging industry was so upset about the book that some groups within the industry sponsored The Truax, a similar book—but from the logging point of view. Another interesting fact: the book used to contain the line, “I hear things are just as bad up in Lake Erie,” but 14 years after the book was published, the Ohio Sea Grant Program wrote to Seuss and told him how much the conditions had improved and implored him to take the line out. Dr. Seuss agreed and said that it wouldn’t be in future editions.
2. Horton Hears a Who! Somehow, Geisel’s books find themselves in the middle of controversy. The line from the book, “A person’s a person, no matter how small,” has been used as a slogan for pro-life organizations for years. It’s often questioned whether that was Seuss’ intent in the first place, but I would say not: when he was still alive, he threatened to sue a pro-life group unless they removed his words from their letterhead. Karl ZoBell, the attorney for Dr. Seuss’ interests and for his widow, Audrey Geisel, says that she doesn’t like people to “hijack Dr. Seuss characters or material to front their own points of view.”
3. If I Ran the Zoo, published in 1950, is the first recorded instance of the word “nerd.”
4. The Cat in the Hat was written basically because Dr. Seuss thought the famous Dick and Jane primers were insanely boring. Because kids weren’t interested in the material, they weren’t exactly compelled to use it repeatedly in their efforts to learn to read. So, The Cat in the Hat was born, and I must agree: it’s definitely more interesting.
5. Green Eggs and Ham. Bennett Cerf, Dr. Seuss’ editor, bet him that he couldn’t write a book using 50 words or less. The Cat in the Hat was pretty simple, after all, and it used 225 words. Not one to back down from a challenge, Mr. Geisel started writing and came up with Green Eggs and Ham – which uses exactly 50 words. The 50 words, by the way, are: a, am, and, anywhere, are, be, boat, box, car, could, dark, do, eat, eggs, fox, goat, good, green, ham, here, house, I, if, in, let, like, may, me, mouse, not, on, or, rain, Sam, say, see, so, thank, that, the, them, there, they, train, tree, try, will, with, would, you.
6. Marvin K. Mooney Will You Please Go Now! It’s often alleged that this book was written specifically about Richard Nixon, but the book came out only two months after the whole Watergate scandal. It’s pretty unlikely that the book could have been conceived of, written, edited and mass produced in such a short time; also, Seuss never admitted that the story was originally about Nixon. That’s not to say he didn’t understand how well the two flowed together. In 1974, he sent a copy of Marvin K. Mooney to his friend Art Buchwald at the Washington Post. In it, he crossed out “Marvin K. Mooney” and replaced it with “Richard M. Nixon”, which Buchwald reprinted in its entirety. Oh, and one other tidbit: this book contains the first-ever reference to “crunk,” although its meaning is a bit different than today’s crunk.
7. Yertle the Turtle = Hitler? Yep. If you haven’t read the story, here’s a little overview: Yertle is the king of the pond, but he wants more. He demands that other turtles stack themselves up so he can sit on top of them to survey the land. Mack, the turtle at the bottom, is exhausted. He asks Yertle for a rest; Yertle ignores him and demands more turtles for a better view. Eventually, Yertle notices the moon and is furious that anything dare be higher than himself, and is about ready to call for more turtles when Mack burps. This sudden movement topples the whole stack, sends Yertle flying into the mud, and frees the rest of the turtles from their stacking duty. Dr. Seuss actually said Yertle was a representation of Hitler. Despite the political nature of the book, none of that was disputed at Random House – what was disputed was Mack’s burp. No one had ever let a burp loose in a children’s book before, so it was a little dicey. In the end, obviously, Mack burped.
8. The Butter Battle Book is one I had never heard of, perhaps with good reason: it was pulled from the shelves of libraries for a while because of the reference to the Cold War and the arms race. Yooks and Zooks are societies who do everything differently. The Yooks eat their bread with the butter-side up and the Zooks eat their bread with the butter-side down. Obviously, one of them must be wrong, so they start building weapons to outdo each other: the “Tough-Tufted Prickly Snick-Berry Switch,” the “Triple-Sling Jigger,” the “Jigger-Rock Snatchem,” the “Kick-A-Poo Kid”, the “Eight-Nozzled Elephant-Toted Boom Blitz,” the “Utterly Sputter” and the “Bitsy Big-Boy Boomeroo.” The book concludes with each side ready to drop their ultimate bombs on each other, but the reader doesn’t know how it actually turns out.
9. Oh The Places You’ll Go is Dr. Seuss’ final book, published in 1990. It sells about 300,000 copies every year because so many people give it to college and high school grads.
10. No Dr. Seuss post would be complete without a mention of How the Grinch Stole Christmas! I couldn’t find much on the book, however, so here are a few facts about the Dr. Seuss-sanctioned cartoon. Frankenstein’s Monster himself, Boris Karloff, provided the voice of the Grinch and the narration for the movie. Seuss a little wary of casting him because he thought his voice would be too scary for kids. Can you imagine the cartoon with any other voice?! If you’re wondering why they sound a bit different, it’s because the sound people went back to the Grinch’s parts and removed all of the high tones in Karloff’s voice. That’s why the Grinch sounds so gravelly.
Tony the Tiger, AKA Thurl Ravenscroft, is the voice behind “You’re a Mean One, Mr. Grinch.” He received no credit on screen, so Dr. Seuss wrote to columnists in every major U.S. newspaper to tell them exactly who had sung the song.
10 Stories Behind Dr. Seuss Stories
by Stacy Conradt - November 16, 2008
1. The Lorax. In case you haven’t read The Lorax, it’s widely recognized as Dr. Seuss’ take on environmentalism and how humans are destroying nature. The logging industry was so upset about the book that some groups within the industry sponsored The Truax, a similar book—but from the logging point of view. Another interesting fact: the book used to contain the line, “I hear things are just as bad up in Lake Erie,” but 14 years after the book was published, the Ohio Sea Grant Program wrote to Seuss and told him how much the conditions had improved and implored him to take the line out. Dr. Seuss agreed and said that it wouldn’t be in future editions.
2. Horton Hears a Who! Somehow, Geisel’s books find themselves in the middle of controversy. The line from the book, “A person’s a person, no matter how small,” has been used as a slogan for pro-life organizations for years. It’s often questioned whether that was Seuss’ intent in the first place, but I would say not: when he was still alive, he threatened to sue a pro-life group unless they removed his words from their letterhead. Karl ZoBell, the attorney for Dr. Seuss’ interests and for his widow, Audrey Geisel, says that she doesn’t like people to “hijack Dr. Seuss characters or material to front their own points of view.”
3. If I Ran the Zoo, published in 1950, is the first recorded instance of the word “nerd.”
4. The Cat in the Hat was written basically because Dr. Seuss thought the famous Dick and Jane primers were insanely boring. Because kids weren’t interested in the material, they weren’t exactly compelled to use it repeatedly in their efforts to learn to read. So, The Cat in the Hat was born, and I must agree: it’s definitely more interesting.
5. Green Eggs and Ham. Bennett Cerf, Dr. Seuss’ editor, bet him that he couldn’t write a book using 50 words or less. The Cat in the Hat was pretty simple, after all, and it used 225 words. Not one to back down from a challenge, Mr. Geisel started writing and came up with Green Eggs and Ham – which uses exactly 50 words. The 50 words, by the way, are: a, am, and, anywhere, are, be, boat, box, car, could, dark, do, eat, eggs, fox, goat, good, green, ham, here, house, I, if, in, let, like, may, me, mouse, not, on, or, rain, Sam, say, see, so, thank, that, the, them, there, they, train, tree, try, will, with, would, you.
6. Marvin K. Mooney Will You Please Go Now! It’s often alleged that this book was written specifically about Richard Nixon, but the book came out only two months after the whole Watergate scandal. It’s pretty unlikely that the book could have been conceived of, written, edited and mass produced in such a short time; also, Seuss never admitted that the story was originally about Nixon. That’s not to say he didn’t understand how well the two flowed together. In 1974, he sent a copy of Marvin K. Mooney to his friend Art Buchwald at the Washington Post. In it, he crossed out “Marvin K. Mooney” and replaced it with “Richard M. Nixon”, which Buchwald reprinted in its entirety. Oh, and one other tidbit: this book contains the first-ever reference to “crunk,” although its meaning is a bit different than today’s crunk.
7. Yertle the Turtle = Hitler? Yep. If you haven’t read the story, here’s a little overview: Yertle is the king of the pond, but he wants more. He demands that other turtles stack themselves up so he can sit on top of them to survey the land. Mack, the turtle at the bottom, is exhausted. He asks Yertle for a rest; Yertle ignores him and demands more turtles for a better view. Eventually, Yertle notices the moon and is furious that anything dare be higher than himself, and is about ready to call for more turtles when Mack burps. This sudden movement topples the whole stack, sends Yertle flying into the mud, and frees the rest of the turtles from their stacking duty. Dr. Seuss actually said Yertle was a representation of Hitler. Despite the political nature of the book, none of that was disputed at Random House – what was disputed was Mack’s burp. No one had ever let a burp loose in a children’s book before, so it was a little dicey. In the end, obviously, Mack burped.
8. The Butter Battle Book is one I had never heard of, perhaps with good reason: it was pulled from the shelves of libraries for a while because of the reference to the Cold War and the arms race. Yooks and Zooks are societies who do everything differently. The Yooks eat their bread with the butter-side up and the Zooks eat their bread with the butter-side down. Obviously, one of them must be wrong, so they start building weapons to outdo each other: the “Tough-Tufted Prickly Snick-Berry Switch,” the “Triple-Sling Jigger,” the “Jigger-Rock Snatchem,” the “Kick-A-Poo Kid”, the “Eight-Nozzled Elephant-Toted Boom Blitz,” the “Utterly Sputter” and the “Bitsy Big-Boy Boomeroo.” The book concludes with each side ready to drop their ultimate bombs on each other, but the reader doesn’t know how it actually turns out.
9. Oh The Places You’ll Go is Dr. Seuss’ final book, published in 1990. It sells about 300,000 copies every year because so many people give it to college and high school grads.
10. No Dr. Seuss post would be complete without a mention of How the Grinch Stole Christmas! I couldn’t find much on the book, however, so here are a few facts about the Dr. Seuss-sanctioned cartoon. Frankenstein’s Monster himself, Boris Karloff, provided the voice of the Grinch and the narration for the movie. Seuss a little wary of casting him because he thought his voice would be too scary for kids. Can you imagine the cartoon with any other voice?! If you’re wondering why they sound a bit different, it’s because the sound people went back to the Grinch’s parts and removed all of the high tones in Karloff’s voice. That’s why the Grinch sounds so gravelly.
Tony the Tiger, AKA Thurl Ravenscroft, is the voice behind “You’re a Mean One, Mr. Grinch.” He received no credit on screen, so Dr. Seuss wrote to columnists in every major U.S. newspaper to tell them exactly who had sung the song.
News Flash: Obama hypnotizes Zinn
http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_4017.shtml
News Flash: Obama hypnotizes Zinn
By Mickey Z.
Online Journal Contributing Writer
Nov 18, 2008
Let’s say the New York Times hired a charismatic black man in his late 40s to run the newspaper and this popular man promised change. And let’s say I wrote an article that talked about what this man should do, what I hoped he’d do. For example, reduce the business section to a page, add a labor section, start covering people’s movements and protests, refuse advertising dollars from corporations that pollute, and hire me to run the op-ed page. Justifiably, I’d be called delusional and I’d be ridiculed for even suggesting such insane expectations.
Let’s say Perdue hired a charismatic black man in his late 40s to run the company and this popular man promised change. And let’s say I wrote an article that talked about what this man should do, what I hoped he’d do. For example: renounce the chicken slaughter business, shift operations to selling organic, locally-grown vegan food, and donate vast amounts of money to farm sanctuaries. Justifiably, I’d be called delusional and I’d be ridiculed for even suggesting such insane expectations.
Let’s say America elected a charismatic black man in his late 40s to run the country and this popular man promised change. And let’s say Howard Zinn wrote an article that talked about what this man should do, what he hoped he’d do. For example, “announce the withdrawal of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan” and “renounce the Bush doctrine of preventive war as well as the Carter doctrine of military action to control Mideast oil.” Also, “radically change the direction of U.S. foreign policy, declare that the U.S. is a peace loving country which will not intervene militarily in other parts of the world, and start dismantling the military bases we have in over a hundred countries. Also, he must begin meeting with Medvedev, the Russian leader, to reach agreement on the dismantling of the nuclear arsenals, in keeping with the Nuclear Anti-Proliferation Treaty.” Then raise taxes on the rich and combine that windfall with the hundreds of billions of dollars freed from the military budget to “give free health care to everyone (and) put millions of people to work” and thus “transform” the United States and “make it a good neighbor to the world.”
Well, Howard Zinn has written such an article (“Obama’s Historic Victory,” Nov. 12, 2008) but is anyone calling him delusional and ridiculing him for even suggesting such insane expectations? The tens of thousands of readers who look to Zinn as a trusted voice of wisdom and reason are being dangerously misled by an article that omits the reality that every indication points to Barack Obama doing the exact opposite of what Zinn writes. Zinn knows as well as anyone that not an iota of evidence exists that Obama would do anything approaching what is described above. For a man of Zinn’s stature on the Left to even hint of such a possibility is a shockingly irresponsible act and one that only contributes to the misguided perception that Obama’s election is somehow a victory for the progressive Left.
Mickey Z. can be found on the Web at www.mickeyz.net.
News Flash: Obama hypnotizes Zinn
By Mickey Z.
Online Journal Contributing Writer
Nov 18, 2008
Let’s say the New York Times hired a charismatic black man in his late 40s to run the newspaper and this popular man promised change. And let’s say I wrote an article that talked about what this man should do, what I hoped he’d do. For example, reduce the business section to a page, add a labor section, start covering people’s movements and protests, refuse advertising dollars from corporations that pollute, and hire me to run the op-ed page. Justifiably, I’d be called delusional and I’d be ridiculed for even suggesting such insane expectations.
Let’s say Perdue hired a charismatic black man in his late 40s to run the company and this popular man promised change. And let’s say I wrote an article that talked about what this man should do, what I hoped he’d do. For example: renounce the chicken slaughter business, shift operations to selling organic, locally-grown vegan food, and donate vast amounts of money to farm sanctuaries. Justifiably, I’d be called delusional and I’d be ridiculed for even suggesting such insane expectations.
Let’s say America elected a charismatic black man in his late 40s to run the country and this popular man promised change. And let’s say Howard Zinn wrote an article that talked about what this man should do, what he hoped he’d do. For example, “announce the withdrawal of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan” and “renounce the Bush doctrine of preventive war as well as the Carter doctrine of military action to control Mideast oil.” Also, “radically change the direction of U.S. foreign policy, declare that the U.S. is a peace loving country which will not intervene militarily in other parts of the world, and start dismantling the military bases we have in over a hundred countries. Also, he must begin meeting with Medvedev, the Russian leader, to reach agreement on the dismantling of the nuclear arsenals, in keeping with the Nuclear Anti-Proliferation Treaty.” Then raise taxes on the rich and combine that windfall with the hundreds of billions of dollars freed from the military budget to “give free health care to everyone (and) put millions of people to work” and thus “transform” the United States and “make it a good neighbor to the world.”
Well, Howard Zinn has written such an article (“Obama’s Historic Victory,” Nov. 12, 2008) but is anyone calling him delusional and ridiculing him for even suggesting such insane expectations? The tens of thousands of readers who look to Zinn as a trusted voice of wisdom and reason are being dangerously misled by an article that omits the reality that every indication points to Barack Obama doing the exact opposite of what Zinn writes. Zinn knows as well as anyone that not an iota of evidence exists that Obama would do anything approaching what is described above. For a man of Zinn’s stature on the Left to even hint of such a possibility is a shockingly irresponsible act and one that only contributes to the misguided perception that Obama’s election is somehow a victory for the progressive Left.
Mickey Z. can be found on the Web at www.mickeyz.net.
Zinn: “I Don’t Care” If 9/11 Was An Inside Job
http://www.prisonplanet.com/howard-zinn-i-dont-care-if-911-was-an-inside-job.html
Howard Zinn: “I Don’t Care” If 9/11 Was An Inside Job
Another gatekeeper illustrates the intellectual cowardice of the establishment left
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
World renowned peace activist and left-wing anti-war icon Howard Zinn recently told an audience that he didn’t care if 9/11 was an inside job, echoing the disdainful and apathetic rhetoric of fellow liberal gatekeepers Noam Chomsky and Alexander Cockburn in dismissing the efforts of the 9/11 truth movement.
Buddy Moore, Independent Candidate for US Senate in Colorado, asked Zinn if he would join him in voicing doubts about the official 9/11 story and in particular the demolition of the twin towers and Building 7.
Zinn said he was skeptical of the official story but then stated, “I don’t know much about the situation and the truth is, I don’t care that much about it, that’s passed….that’s a diversion from what we really have to do,” adding that debating who was behind 9/11, “gets in the way of dealing with the immediate situation”.
Moore attempted to ask Zinn a follow up question about allowing the perpetrators to go free but was largely shouted down by Zinn’s fawning army of left-wing sycophants.
Zinn’s comments echo similar sentiments expressed by fellow left-wing luminary, Noam Chomsky, who has repeatedly expressed arrogance and contempt towards the 9/11 truth movement while invoking apathy towards the contention that there was government complicity in the attacks, despite the fact that the 9/11 attacks happening exactly as the government maintains was key to launching the invasions of both Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as the massive rollback in civil liberties that has occurred over the last seven years.
During a 2006 Internet forum event, Chomsky claimed that the 9/11 truth movement peddled “arcane and dubious theories” and had distracted activists from pursuing “crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC,” presumably belittling the deaths of around 2,000 Americans, along with hundreds of thousands of Afghanis and Iraqis, as well as thousands of U.S. troops in the wars that followed that could not have been launched without the pretext of 9/11.
When a critic asked Chomsky why he was so dismissive of the supposition that 9/11 was a false flag event, pointing out numerous other examples throughout history including the bombing of the Maine, the Gulf of Tonkin incident and Pearl Harbor, Chomsky merely reiterated his insolence, stating, “The concept of “false flag operation” is not a very serious one, in my opinion. None of the examples you describe, or any other in history, has even a remote resemblance to the alleged 9/11 conspiracy. I’d suggest that you look at each of them carefully.”
Chomsky actually dismissed U.S. government complicity in 9/11 a mere four months after the event, and over a year before it was again invoked as a reason to invade Iraq, when he told an audience at a FAIR event at New York’s Town Hall, 22 January 2002, “That’s an internet theory and it’s hopelessly implausible. Hopelessly implausible. So hopelessly implausible I don’t see any point in talking about it,” in response to a question about U.S. government foreknowledge.
Note that Professor Chomsky also vehemently maintains that Lee Harvey Oswald was the long gunman in the JFK assassination, even despite polls showing that around 80 per cent of the American public believe otherwise.
Chomsky was presented with convincing evidence for a wider plot by JFK assassination experts as far back as 1969 and according to Selwyn Bromberger, an MIT philosophy professor who had sit in on the discussion, Chomsky indicated that he believed there was a conspiracy, but has failed to voice his conclusion for nearly 40 years.
It’s painfully clear that the likes of Zinn and Chomsky are intellectual cowards who, despite being abundantly aware of the fact that both 9/11 and the JFK assassination represent far wider conspiracies than the official version of events dictates, they are afraid of using their prominent soapboxes to bring either subject to wider attention for fear of whatever reprisals might ensue. As Vincent Salandria enunciates, this makes them worse than disinformation agents.
“I agree that Professor Chomsky is not a CIA agent,” states Salandria, “But with respect to his pronouncements on the JFK assassination he is worse than a CIA agent. Without being an agent, with his enormous prestige as a thinker, as an independent radical, as a courageous man, he does the work of the agency.”
Indeed, at the time of the release of Oliver Stone’s JFK movie, Howard Zinn, Noam Chomsky and another liberal luminary, Alexander Cockburn, went on a seemingly orchestrated media campaign in an attempt to convince the public that the JFK assassination was not a wider conspiracy and also that it didn’t matter even if it was.
“When cornered themselves, Chomsky and Cockburn resort to rhetorical devices like exaggeration, sarcasm, and ridicule. In other words, they resort to propaganda and evasion,” notes one blogger.
The same rhetoric was utilized when questions about 9/11 reached a crescendo. Cockburn, Zinn and Chomsky not only dismiss clear evidence that the official story is demonstrably false, but in addition attempt to generate apathy around the whole issue, classic gatekeeper behavior in preventing the left from becoming active in pursuing the truth about 9/11.
Howard Zinn: “I Don’t Care” If 9/11 Was An Inside Job
Another gatekeeper illustrates the intellectual cowardice of the establishment left
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
World renowned peace activist and left-wing anti-war icon Howard Zinn recently told an audience that he didn’t care if 9/11 was an inside job, echoing the disdainful and apathetic rhetoric of fellow liberal gatekeepers Noam Chomsky and Alexander Cockburn in dismissing the efforts of the 9/11 truth movement.
Buddy Moore, Independent Candidate for US Senate in Colorado, asked Zinn if he would join him in voicing doubts about the official 9/11 story and in particular the demolition of the twin towers and Building 7.
Zinn said he was skeptical of the official story but then stated, “I don’t know much about the situation and the truth is, I don’t care that much about it, that’s passed….that’s a diversion from what we really have to do,” adding that debating who was behind 9/11, “gets in the way of dealing with the immediate situation”.
Moore attempted to ask Zinn a follow up question about allowing the perpetrators to go free but was largely shouted down by Zinn’s fawning army of left-wing sycophants.
Zinn’s comments echo similar sentiments expressed by fellow left-wing luminary, Noam Chomsky, who has repeatedly expressed arrogance and contempt towards the 9/11 truth movement while invoking apathy towards the contention that there was government complicity in the attacks, despite the fact that the 9/11 attacks happening exactly as the government maintains was key to launching the invasions of both Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as the massive rollback in civil liberties that has occurred over the last seven years.
During a 2006 Internet forum event, Chomsky claimed that the 9/11 truth movement peddled “arcane and dubious theories” and had distracted activists from pursuing “crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC,” presumably belittling the deaths of around 2,000 Americans, along with hundreds of thousands of Afghanis and Iraqis, as well as thousands of U.S. troops in the wars that followed that could not have been launched without the pretext of 9/11.
When a critic asked Chomsky why he was so dismissive of the supposition that 9/11 was a false flag event, pointing out numerous other examples throughout history including the bombing of the Maine, the Gulf of Tonkin incident and Pearl Harbor, Chomsky merely reiterated his insolence, stating, “The concept of “false flag operation” is not a very serious one, in my opinion. None of the examples you describe, or any other in history, has even a remote resemblance to the alleged 9/11 conspiracy. I’d suggest that you look at each of them carefully.”
Chomsky actually dismissed U.S. government complicity in 9/11 a mere four months after the event, and over a year before it was again invoked as a reason to invade Iraq, when he told an audience at a FAIR event at New York’s Town Hall, 22 January 2002, “That’s an internet theory and it’s hopelessly implausible. Hopelessly implausible. So hopelessly implausible I don’t see any point in talking about it,” in response to a question about U.S. government foreknowledge.
Note that Professor Chomsky also vehemently maintains that Lee Harvey Oswald was the long gunman in the JFK assassination, even despite polls showing that around 80 per cent of the American public believe otherwise.
Chomsky was presented with convincing evidence for a wider plot by JFK assassination experts as far back as 1969 and according to Selwyn Bromberger, an MIT philosophy professor who had sit in on the discussion, Chomsky indicated that he believed there was a conspiracy, but has failed to voice his conclusion for nearly 40 years.
It’s painfully clear that the likes of Zinn and Chomsky are intellectual cowards who, despite being abundantly aware of the fact that both 9/11 and the JFK assassination represent far wider conspiracies than the official version of events dictates, they are afraid of using their prominent soapboxes to bring either subject to wider attention for fear of whatever reprisals might ensue. As Vincent Salandria enunciates, this makes them worse than disinformation agents.
“I agree that Professor Chomsky is not a CIA agent,” states Salandria, “But with respect to his pronouncements on the JFK assassination he is worse than a CIA agent. Without being an agent, with his enormous prestige as a thinker, as an independent radical, as a courageous man, he does the work of the agency.”
Indeed, at the time of the release of Oliver Stone’s JFK movie, Howard Zinn, Noam Chomsky and another liberal luminary, Alexander Cockburn, went on a seemingly orchestrated media campaign in an attempt to convince the public that the JFK assassination was not a wider conspiracy and also that it didn’t matter even if it was.
“When cornered themselves, Chomsky and Cockburn resort to rhetorical devices like exaggeration, sarcasm, and ridicule. In other words, they resort to propaganda and evasion,” notes one blogger.
The same rhetoric was utilized when questions about 9/11 reached a crescendo. Cockburn, Zinn and Chomsky not only dismiss clear evidence that the official story is demonstrably false, but in addition attempt to generate apathy around the whole issue, classic gatekeeper behavior in preventing the left from becoming active in pursuing the truth about 9/11.
Will Obama Give Up the Bin Laden Ghost Hunt?
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1859354,00.htmlWhen Will Obama Give Up the Bin Laden Ghost Hunt?
By ROBERT BAER
11-18-8
In a talk to the Atlantic Council this week CIA Director Gen. Michael Hayden said Osama bin Laden is alive. I'll take his word for it. But bin Laden's strange disappearance makes one wonder what exactly happened to him. The last relatively reliable bin Laden sighting was in late 2001. A video that he appears in last year shows him with a dyed beard. More than a few Pakistani intelligence operatives who knew bin Laden scoff at the idea he would ever dye his beard. They think the tape was manipulated from old footage, and that bin Laden is in fact dead. But then again, they would have an interest in making us believe bin Laden is dead, since it would relieve American pressure to find him by any means necessary, including going into Pakistani territory.
And what about all the other audiotapes bin Laden has put out since 9/11? Experts will tell you that off-the shelf digital editing software could manipulate old bin Laden voice recordings to make it sound as if he were discussing current events. Finally, there's the mystery why bin Laden didn't pop up during the election. You would think a narcissistic mass murderer who believes he has a place in history would find it impossible to pass up an opportunity to give his opinion at such a momentous time, at least dropping off a DVD at the al Jazeera office in Islamabad. (Read "Barack Obama on Homeland Security")
I asked a half dozen of my former CIA colleagues who have been on bin Laden's trail since 9/11. What surprised me was that none would say for certain whether he is alive or dead. Half assumed he is dead, the other half assumed he is alive. I suppose a lot of their timidity has to do with the still open wounds about the CIA's missing an event like Saddam's destruction of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. It would be so much easier to miss the death of a single man.
The important point of Hayden's Atlantic talk Thursday was that Muslims have turned against bin Laden, realizing that his campaign against the West has ended up killing more Muslims than it has Islam's enemies. Al-Qaeda may be picking up adherents in North Africa and Yemen, preparing its return, but it certainly is no longer in a position to destabilize Saudi Arabia or any other Arab country. And, although Hayden didn't say it, there is no good evidence bin Laden is capable of mounting a large-scale attack. He failed to pull off an October surprise, as many in the FBI and CIA had feared he would.
Despite all this, whether bin Laden is alive or dead is actually pretty irrelevant. Obama has no real choice but to revitalize the search for him, if only for political considerations. If al-Qaeda were to attack in the United States the first months of his term, Obama would end up for the rest of it explaining why he wasn't more vigilant.
But what if bin Laden really is dead, buried under a hundred tons of rock at Tora Bora or so weakened that he might as well be dead? Indefinitely crashing around Afghanistan and Pakistan's wild, mountainous tribal region on a ghost hunt cannot serve our interests. The longer we leave troops in Afghanistan the worse the civil war there will become. One day Obama will need to give up the hunt - declare bin Laden either dead or irrelevant. He has more important enemies to deal with, from Iran to Russia.
Robert Baer, a former CIA field officer assigned to the Middle East, is TIME.com's intelligence columnist and the author of See No Evil and, most recently, The Devil We Know: Dealing with the New Iranian Superpower
Star Wars & False Flag Terror
http://www.prisonplanet.com/star-wars-false-flag-terror.html
Star Wars & False Flag Terror
Youtube
Wednesday, Nov 19, 2008
Is Obi-Wan Kenobi a Whacko Conspiracy Theorist?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_h41PEyU1w
This video summarizes the ‘Star Wars’ prequel trilogy’s political storyline, which is that of false flag war and terror.
Just as the original ‘Star Wars’ trilogy was modeled after folklore and mythology, such as the legend of King Arthur, the prequel trilogy was modeled after political history. ‘Star Wars’ creator George Lucas has said of his villain Palpatine, “It’s not the first time a politician has created a war to try to stay in office.”
There are countless examples of governments attacking their own people as happened in ‘Star Wars’, not excepting the U.S. at all. For a good documentary showing the ‘Star Wars’-esque history of false flag terror and war, check out the documentary ‘Terrorstorm’, by Alex Jones, available for free on YouTube.
Star Wars & False Flag Terror
Youtube
Wednesday, Nov 19, 2008
Is Obi-Wan Kenobi a Whacko Conspiracy Theorist?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_h41PEyU1w
This video summarizes the ‘Star Wars’ prequel trilogy’s political storyline, which is that of false flag war and terror.
Just as the original ‘Star Wars’ trilogy was modeled after folklore and mythology, such as the legend of King Arthur, the prequel trilogy was modeled after political history. ‘Star Wars’ creator George Lucas has said of his villain Palpatine, “It’s not the first time a politician has created a war to try to stay in office.”
There are countless examples of governments attacking their own people as happened in ‘Star Wars’, not excepting the U.S. at all. For a good documentary showing the ‘Star Wars’-esque history of false flag terror and war, check out the documentary ‘Terrorstorm’, by Alex Jones, available for free on YouTube.
The Original Computer!!!!
Memory was something you lost with ageAn application was for employment
A program was a TV show
A cursor used profanity
A keyboard was a piano
A web was a spider's home
A virus was the flu
A CD was a bank account
A hard drive was a long trip on the road
A mouse pad was where a mouse lived
And if you had a 3 inch floppy...
You just hoped nobody ever found out!?! Babewatch: Freida Pinto
http://buzz.yahoo.com/buzzlog/92045Meet Freida Pinto
by Mike Krumboltz
November 17, 2008
The Buzz Log has seen its share of starlets who go from "unknown" to "A-list" in the blink of an eye. However, few have charted a rise as impressive, or as sudden, as Freida Pinto's. The co-star of "Slumdog Millionaire" recently skyrocketed an astonishing 65,740% in one day. Even by our cynical standards, that's a big deal.
Why the surge? Simple — Ms. Pinto is a standout actress in a standout flick that everybody's talking about. "Slumdog Millionaire," directed by acclaimed director Danny Boyle, is generating a lot of awards buzz. Critics have called the India-based romance "heartbreaking and exhilarating" and "a masterpiece." Pinto's performance is a big reason for all the interest and acclaim. Of course, it probably doesn't hurt that the Mumbai native also happens to be drop-dead gorgeous.
Folks have clearly noticed her looks. There are already plenty of searches for "freida pinto pictures." Those queries are sure to climb further as the indie flick opens in more theaters. According to LA.com, Ms. Pinto is a full-time model and "Slumdog Millionaire" marks the first time she's acted. If the buzz is any indication, it certainly won't be the last.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Could you have passed the Eighth Grade in 1895?
Could you have passed the Eighth Grade in 1895?
Probably not . . . take a look:
This is the eighth-grade final exam from 1895 from Salina, KS. It was taken from the original document on file at the Smoky Valley Genealogical Society and Library in Salina, KS and reprinted by the Salina Journal.
8th Grade Final Exam: Salina, KS - 1895
Grammar (Time, one hour)
1. Give nine rules for the use of Capital Letters.
2. Name the Parts of Speech and define those that have no modifications.
3. Define Verse, Stanza and Paragraph.
4. What are the Principal Parts of a verb? Give Principal parts of do, lie, lay and run.
5. Define Case, Illustrate each Case.
6. What is Punctuation? Give rules for principal marks of Punctuation.
7 - 10. Write a composition of about 150 words and show therein that you understand the practical use of the rules of grammar.
Arithmetic
(Time, 1.25 hours)
1. Name and define the Fundamental Rules of Arithmetic.
2. A wagon box is 2 ft. deep, 10 feet long, and 3 ft. wide. How many bushels of wheat will it hold?
3. If a load of wheat weighs 3942 lbs., what is it worth at 50 cts. per bu., deducting 1050 lbs. for tare?
4. District No. 33 has a valuation of $35,000. What is the necessary levy to carry on a school seven months at $50 per month, and have $104 for incidentals?
5. Find cost of 6720 lbs. coal at $6.00 per ton.
6. Find the interest of $512.60 for 8 months and 18 days at 7 percent.
7. What is the cost of 40 boards 12 inches wide and 16 ft. long at $20.00 per in?
8. Find bank discount on $300 for 90 days (no grace) at 10 percent.
9. What is the cost of a square farm at $15 per acre, the distance around which is 640 rods?
10. Write a Bank Check, a Promissory Note, and a Receipt.
U.S. History (Time, 45 minutes)
1. Give the epochs into which U.S. History is divided.
2. Give an account of the discovery of America by Columbus.
3. Relate the causes and results of the Revolutionary War.
4. Show the territorial growth of the United States.
5. Tell what you can of the history of Kansas.
6. Describe three of the most prominent battles of the Rebellion.
7. Who were the following: Morse, Whitney, Fulton, Bell, Lincoln, Penn, and Howe?
8. Name events connected with the following dates: 1607, 1620, 1800, 1849, and 1865?
Orthography
(Time, one hour)
1. What is meant by the following: Alphabet, phonetic orthography, etymology, syllabication?
2. What are elementary sounds? How classified?
3. What are the following: Alphabet, phonetic orthography, etymology, syllabication?
4. Give four substitutes for caret 'u'.
5. Give two rules for spelling words with final 'e'. Name two exceptions under each rule.
6. Give two uses of silent letters in spelling. Illustrate each.
7. Define the following prefixes and use in connection with a word: Bi, dis, mis, pre, semi, post, non, inter, mono, super.
8. Mark diacritically and divide into syllables the following, and name the sign that indicates the sound: Card, ball, mercy, sir, odd, cell, rise, blood, fare, last.
9. Use the following correctly in sentences, Cite, site, sight, fane, fain, feign, vane, vain vein, raze, raise, rays.
10. Write 10 words frequently mispronounced and indicate pronunciation by use of diacritical marks and by syllabication.
Geography
(Time, one hour)
1. What is climate? Upon what does climate depend?
2. How do you account for the extremes of climate in Kansas?
3. Of what use are rivers? Of what use is the ocean?
4. Describe the mountains of N.A.
5. Name and describe the following: Monrovia, Odessa, Denver, Manitoba, Hecla, Yukon, St. Helena, Juan Fermandez, Aspinwolf and Orinoco.
6. Name and locate the principal trade centers of the U.S.
7. Name all the republics of Europe and give capital of each.
8. Why is the Atlantic Coast colder than the Pacific in the same latitude?
9. Describe the process by which the water of the ocean returns to the sources of rivers.
10. Describe the movements of the earth. Give inclination of the earth.
Probably not . . . take a look:
This is the eighth-grade final exam from 1895 from Salina, KS. It was taken from the original document on file at the Smoky Valley Genealogical Society and Library in Salina, KS and reprinted by the Salina Journal.
8th Grade Final Exam: Salina, KS - 1895
Grammar (Time, one hour)
1. Give nine rules for the use of Capital Letters.
2. Name the Parts of Speech and define those that have no modifications.
3. Define Verse, Stanza and Paragraph.
4. What are the Principal Parts of a verb? Give Principal parts of do, lie, lay and run.
5. Define Case, Illustrate each Case.
6. What is Punctuation? Give rules for principal marks of Punctuation.
7 - 10. Write a composition of about 150 words and show therein that you understand the practical use of the rules of grammar.
Arithmetic
(Time, 1.25 hours)
1. Name and define the Fundamental Rules of Arithmetic.
2. A wagon box is 2 ft. deep, 10 feet long, and 3 ft. wide. How many bushels of wheat will it hold?
3. If a load of wheat weighs 3942 lbs., what is it worth at 50 cts. per bu., deducting 1050 lbs. for tare?
4. District No. 33 has a valuation of $35,000. What is the necessary levy to carry on a school seven months at $50 per month, and have $104 for incidentals?
5. Find cost of 6720 lbs. coal at $6.00 per ton.
6. Find the interest of $512.60 for 8 months and 18 days at 7 percent.
7. What is the cost of 40 boards 12 inches wide and 16 ft. long at $20.00 per in?
8. Find bank discount on $300 for 90 days (no grace) at 10 percent.
9. What is the cost of a square farm at $15 per acre, the distance around which is 640 rods?
10. Write a Bank Check, a Promissory Note, and a Receipt.
U.S. History (Time, 45 minutes)
1. Give the epochs into which U.S. History is divided.
2. Give an account of the discovery of America by Columbus.
3. Relate the causes and results of the Revolutionary War.
4. Show the territorial growth of the United States.
5. Tell what you can of the history of Kansas.
6. Describe three of the most prominent battles of the Rebellion.
7. Who were the following: Morse, Whitney, Fulton, Bell, Lincoln, Penn, and Howe?
8. Name events connected with the following dates: 1607, 1620, 1800, 1849, and 1865?
Orthography
(Time, one hour)
1. What is meant by the following: Alphabet, phonetic orthography, etymology, syllabication?
2. What are elementary sounds? How classified?
3. What are the following: Alphabet, phonetic orthography, etymology, syllabication?
4. Give four substitutes for caret 'u'.
5. Give two rules for spelling words with final 'e'. Name two exceptions under each rule.
6. Give two uses of silent letters in spelling. Illustrate each.
7. Define the following prefixes and use in connection with a word: Bi, dis, mis, pre, semi, post, non, inter, mono, super.
8. Mark diacritically and divide into syllables the following, and name the sign that indicates the sound: Card, ball, mercy, sir, odd, cell, rise, blood, fare, last.
9. Use the following correctly in sentences, Cite, site, sight, fane, fain, feign, vane, vain vein, raze, raise, rays.
10. Write 10 words frequently mispronounced and indicate pronunciation by use of diacritical marks and by syllabication.
Geography
(Time, one hour)
1. What is climate? Upon what does climate depend?
2. How do you account for the extremes of climate in Kansas?
3. Of what use are rivers? Of what use is the ocean?
4. Describe the mountains of N.A.
5. Name and describe the following: Monrovia, Odessa, Denver, Manitoba, Hecla, Yukon, St. Helena, Juan Fermandez, Aspinwolf and Orinoco.
6. Name and locate the principal trade centers of the U.S.
7. Name all the republics of Europe and give capital of each.
8. Why is the Atlantic Coast colder than the Pacific in the same latitude?
9. Describe the process by which the water of the ocean returns to the sources of rivers.
10. Describe the movements of the earth. Give inclination of the earth.
Financial Crisis Tab Already In The Trillions
http://www.cnbc.com/id/27719011
Financial Crisis Tab Already In The Trillions
CNBC.com 17 Nov 2008
Given the speed at which the federal government is throwing money at the financial crisis, the average taxpayer, never mind member of Congress, might not be faulted for losing track.
CNBC, however, has been paying very close attention and keeping a running tally of actual spending as well as the commitments involved.
Try $4.28 trillion dollars. That's $4,284,500,000,000 and more than what was spent on WW II, if adjusted for inflation, based on our computations from a variety of estimates and sources*.
Not only is it a astronomical amount of money, its' a complicated cocktail of budgeted dollars, actual spending, guarantees, loans, swaps and other market mechanisms by the Federal Reserve, the Treasury and other offices of government taken over roughly the last year, based on government data and new releases. Strictly speaking, not every cent is directed a result of what's called the financial crisis, but it arguably related to it.
Some 68-percent of the sum falls under the Federal Reserve's umbrella, while another 16 percent is the under the Treasury Asset Relief Program, TARP, as defined under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act, signed into law in early October. (The TARP alone is bigger than virtually any other US government endeavor dating back to the Louisiana Purchase. See slideshow.)
*References include US National Archive, US Dept of Defense, US Bureau of Reclamation, Library of Congress, NASA, Panama Canal Authority, FDIC, Brittanica, WSJ, Time, CNN.com, and a number of other websites.
(Editor's Note: CNBC's Steve Liesman and Sabrina Korber have been keeping a runny tally of the government's efforts, while Sean Entwistle, Yolaiki Gonzalez, Giovanny Moreano and Ariel Nelson researched and computed the data for the comparisons with other major historical events in the slideshow.)
Financial Crisis Tab Already In The Trillions
CNBC.com 17 Nov 2008
Given the speed at which the federal government is throwing money at the financial crisis, the average taxpayer, never mind member of Congress, might not be faulted for losing track.
CNBC, however, has been paying very close attention and keeping a running tally of actual spending as well as the commitments involved.
Try $4.28 trillion dollars. That's $4,284,500,000,000 and more than what was spent on WW II, if adjusted for inflation, based on our computations from a variety of estimates and sources*.
Not only is it a astronomical amount of money, its' a complicated cocktail of budgeted dollars, actual spending, guarantees, loans, swaps and other market mechanisms by the Federal Reserve, the Treasury and other offices of government taken over roughly the last year, based on government data and new releases. Strictly speaking, not every cent is directed a result of what's called the financial crisis, but it arguably related to it.
Some 68-percent of the sum falls under the Federal Reserve's umbrella, while another 16 percent is the under the Treasury Asset Relief Program, TARP, as defined under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act, signed into law in early October. (The TARP alone is bigger than virtually any other US government endeavor dating back to the Louisiana Purchase. See slideshow.)
*References include US National Archive, US Dept of Defense, US Bureau of Reclamation, Library of Congress, NASA, Panama Canal Authority, FDIC, Brittanica, WSJ, Time, CNN.com, and a number of other websites.
(Editor's Note: CNBC's Steve Liesman and Sabrina Korber have been keeping a runny tally of the government's efforts, while Sean Entwistle, Yolaiki Gonzalez, Giovanny Moreano and Ariel Nelson researched and computed the data for the comparisons with other major historical events in the slideshow.)
Cartoon film stirs Israel's conscience
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/war-death-and-animation-cartoon-film-stirs-israels-conscience-1021732.html
War, death and animation: Cartoon film stirs Israel's conscience
An acclaimed new cartoon film has stirred Israel's conscience about its responsibility for the notorious 1982 massacre of Palestinians in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps. Ben Lynfield reports from Jerusalem
Monday, 17 November 2008
Until a matter of months ago, very few Israelis realised that their army fired flares to light up Beirut's Sabra and Shatila refugee camps while Lebanese Christian militiamen committed the notorious massacre of Palestinian civilians there in 1982.
But Ari Folman, who as a 19-year-old soldier fired some of the flares, makes their descent through the sky over Beirut's beachfront one of the recurring images of Waltz With Bashir, his "animated documentary" that premiers in Britain this week.
In Israel, the film has rekindled discussion about the divisive invasion of Lebanon that was initially billed by Ariel Sharon, who was defence minister at the time, as a limited push to halt PLO rocket attacks, and the extent of Israeli responsibility for the Sabra and Shatila massacre where the estimated number of victims ranged from 700 to more than 3,000. Folman has said he had no idea the massacre was being committed when he shot the flares.
The killings by Phalangist militiamen dispatched into the camps by Israel came after their leader, Bashir Gemayel, president-elect of Lebanon, was assassinated in a bombing wrongly blamed on Palestinians. An Israeli state commission of inquiry set up as a result of a tide of public protest in the massacre's wake found that Mr Sharon, today comatose from a stroke nearly three years ago, bore "personal responsibility" for not having foreseen the danger that the Phalangists would commit the slaughter. He was forced to give up the defence portfolio, something that did not prevent him from being elected as premier in 2001 and re-elected in 2003. Lebanon, for its part, has never seriously investigated the massacre.
The film has been widely acclaimed in Israel. One reviewer, Eitan Weitz, writing for the website Parshan (Commentator), termed it "required viewing" for those aged 16 and 17 nearing their mandatory military service, for army reservists in their thirties and for mothers of soldiers. But not everyone is happy about the film's screening abroad. Gerald Steinberg, a political scientist at Bar Ilan University with right-of-centre views, voiced concern even though he has not seen the film. "The Israeli audience knows the atrocities were committed by Lebanese Christian militiamen and can sort out how much responsibility is ours and how much is theirs. Foreign audiences will be blaming Israel for everything and this could reinforce that."
A flaw in the movie is that it gives the impression that the massacre lasted only one night and was stopped the following morning. It began the evening of 16 September 1982 and ended on 18 September. Some Israeli viewers say Folman lets Israel off too easily. "The Israeli soldiers are shown as being good, as being people who are tormented by what is going on," says Ronit Shpiner, 35, a psychologist from Jerusalem. "Ultimately, the moral responsibility is taken off of them even though those who saw the slaughter should have stopped it."
She added: "The movie depicts the soldiers as the victims of the massacre because they were traumatised by it." A bartender, Lidya Ophir, 26, said: "I think the movie is saying that probably the Israeli army is just as responsible as the people with the guns inside the camps."
Folman says the movie aims to dissuade young people from fighting in wars. "I hope that young people, when they watch Waltz With Bashir will see how stupid all wars are, a useless idea, a creation of tiny little leaders with big egos," he wrote in an email response to The Independent. "They will see in Waltz With Bashir that there is no glory in war, no bravery in war, nothing. They will never want to be the guy in the movie. And that is unlike a lot of American anti-war movies, where they show you that war sucks, but the guys in the movie are so cool."
Mr Sharon is shown only briefly in the film, wolfing down steak and eggs, his nose twitching as he talks on the phone to the Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin and to a commander in Lebanon.
His former spokesman, Raanan Gissin, takes issue with the depiction. "He never gave orders while eating," he said. Mr Gissin denied Israel had any responsibility in the killings, saying they were "probably a Syrian-instigated plot" and recalled a statement by Mr Sharon that the inquiry's findings put "a mark of Cain" on Israel's forehead.
For many people, the most powerful part of the film is the recollection by an Israeli journalist Ron Ben-Ishai of a conversation he had with Mr Sharon during the massacre. Mr Ben-Ishai, stationed in Beirut as Israel Television's war correspondent, had heard from army officers at a dinner he hosted that a massacre was being committed. Disturbed by the reports, he called Mr Sharon at his ranch in southern Israel but the defence minister showed little interest and did not act to stop it. Regarding Israel's degree of responsibility, Mr Ben-Ishai says: "It is like the Allies in the Second World War who could have stopped the slaughter in the death camps but didn't."
For the Israeli historian Gershom Gorenberg, the movie brought back memories of the protest in which he participated to press Mr Begin to implement the inquiry commission's findings. "The fact that under public pressure Israel created a commission of inquiry and Sharon was dismissed indicates there was a significant degree of a country insisting on an accounting," Mr Gorenberg said. "The movie raises for us the question of whether that accounting went far enough."
War, death and animation: Cartoon film stirs Israel's conscience
An acclaimed new cartoon film has stirred Israel's conscience about its responsibility for the notorious 1982 massacre of Palestinians in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps. Ben Lynfield reports from Jerusalem
Monday, 17 November 2008
Until a matter of months ago, very few Israelis realised that their army fired flares to light up Beirut's Sabra and Shatila refugee camps while Lebanese Christian militiamen committed the notorious massacre of Palestinian civilians there in 1982.
But Ari Folman, who as a 19-year-old soldier fired some of the flares, makes their descent through the sky over Beirut's beachfront one of the recurring images of Waltz With Bashir, his "animated documentary" that premiers in Britain this week.
In Israel, the film has rekindled discussion about the divisive invasion of Lebanon that was initially billed by Ariel Sharon, who was defence minister at the time, as a limited push to halt PLO rocket attacks, and the extent of Israeli responsibility for the Sabra and Shatila massacre where the estimated number of victims ranged from 700 to more than 3,000. Folman has said he had no idea the massacre was being committed when he shot the flares.
The killings by Phalangist militiamen dispatched into the camps by Israel came after their leader, Bashir Gemayel, president-elect of Lebanon, was assassinated in a bombing wrongly blamed on Palestinians. An Israeli state commission of inquiry set up as a result of a tide of public protest in the massacre's wake found that Mr Sharon, today comatose from a stroke nearly three years ago, bore "personal responsibility" for not having foreseen the danger that the Phalangists would commit the slaughter. He was forced to give up the defence portfolio, something that did not prevent him from being elected as premier in 2001 and re-elected in 2003. Lebanon, for its part, has never seriously investigated the massacre.
The film has been widely acclaimed in Israel. One reviewer, Eitan Weitz, writing for the website Parshan (Commentator), termed it "required viewing" for those aged 16 and 17 nearing their mandatory military service, for army reservists in their thirties and for mothers of soldiers. But not everyone is happy about the film's screening abroad. Gerald Steinberg, a political scientist at Bar Ilan University with right-of-centre views, voiced concern even though he has not seen the film. "The Israeli audience knows the atrocities were committed by Lebanese Christian militiamen and can sort out how much responsibility is ours and how much is theirs. Foreign audiences will be blaming Israel for everything and this could reinforce that."
A flaw in the movie is that it gives the impression that the massacre lasted only one night and was stopped the following morning. It began the evening of 16 September 1982 and ended on 18 September. Some Israeli viewers say Folman lets Israel off too easily. "The Israeli soldiers are shown as being good, as being people who are tormented by what is going on," says Ronit Shpiner, 35, a psychologist from Jerusalem. "Ultimately, the moral responsibility is taken off of them even though those who saw the slaughter should have stopped it."
She added: "The movie depicts the soldiers as the victims of the massacre because they were traumatised by it." A bartender, Lidya Ophir, 26, said: "I think the movie is saying that probably the Israeli army is just as responsible as the people with the guns inside the camps."
Folman says the movie aims to dissuade young people from fighting in wars. "I hope that young people, when they watch Waltz With Bashir will see how stupid all wars are, a useless idea, a creation of tiny little leaders with big egos," he wrote in an email response to The Independent. "They will see in Waltz With Bashir that there is no glory in war, no bravery in war, nothing. They will never want to be the guy in the movie. And that is unlike a lot of American anti-war movies, where they show you that war sucks, but the guys in the movie are so cool."
Mr Sharon is shown only briefly in the film, wolfing down steak and eggs, his nose twitching as he talks on the phone to the Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin and to a commander in Lebanon.
His former spokesman, Raanan Gissin, takes issue with the depiction. "He never gave orders while eating," he said. Mr Gissin denied Israel had any responsibility in the killings, saying they were "probably a Syrian-instigated plot" and recalled a statement by Mr Sharon that the inquiry's findings put "a mark of Cain" on Israel's forehead.
For many people, the most powerful part of the film is the recollection by an Israeli journalist Ron Ben-Ishai of a conversation he had with Mr Sharon during the massacre. Mr Ben-Ishai, stationed in Beirut as Israel Television's war correspondent, had heard from army officers at a dinner he hosted that a massacre was being committed. Disturbed by the reports, he called Mr Sharon at his ranch in southern Israel but the defence minister showed little interest and did not act to stop it. Regarding Israel's degree of responsibility, Mr Ben-Ishai says: "It is like the Allies in the Second World War who could have stopped the slaughter in the death camps but didn't."
For the Israeli historian Gershom Gorenberg, the movie brought back memories of the protest in which he participated to press Mr Begin to implement the inquiry commission's findings. "The fact that under public pressure Israel created a commission of inquiry and Sharon was dismissed indicates there was a significant degree of a country insisting on an accounting," Mr Gorenberg said. "The movie raises for us the question of whether that accounting went far enough."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
