There is no question that American public schools are despicable. They're unionized monopolies. I also question their federal curriculum. Instead of going on about this, just watch the latest 20/20 report about the whole situation.
Sunday, August 26, 2007
Stupid in America
There is no question that American public schools are despicable. They're unionized monopolies. I also question their federal curriculum. Instead of going on about this, just watch the latest 20/20 report about the whole situation.
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Little Update
Most of you know about Wikipedia. Basically, an ever growing encyclopedia which anyone can add to, or delete information. Now there are company's looking at their Wiki sites, and deleting "negative" information. Disney is one. And guess who another is? Diebold! Hm! I found that absolutely great! An excerpt from Techdirt:
This will probably come as a surprise to absolutely no one, but a new Wikipedia scanner service is matching the IP address of Wikipedia edits to the organizations the IPs are associated with -- and it's turning up some interesting matches. For example, there's the person coming from a Diebold IP who deleted paragraphs and paragraphs of Wikipedia content that highlighted Diebold's ongoing security problems. Then there's the Disney employee who tried to pull a link to Cory Doctorow's speech on why DRM is bad for business from the DRM entry. Wired is actually keeping a running tally of some of the most interesting edits. Now, before people use this as more evidence as to Wikipedia's trust problems, it doesn't look like those edits did much damage, as they were quickly changed back to the more appropriate entries by those watching out for vandalism.
Wired is actually keeping track of who is editing what. Go check it out! Thought it was worth posting, considering yesterdays post about the Iowa Straw Poll and faulty Diebold machines.
Monday, August 13, 2007
Voter Fraud
Well, Ron Paul came in 5th at the Iowa Straw Poll. Not bad, and also in my eyes, not real great. For those of you who don't know, the Iowa Straw Poll is basically a mock vote. Doesn't count for anything. I think it's mostly used for fund raising, and getting their word out. Of course the Ron Paul supporters were very disappointed (as was I). Something did come up though, a couple of the diebold machines malfunctioned. Which diebold machines a notorious for doing. I mean just do a google search for diebold malfunction and you'll see what I'm talking about. These things are highly unrelyable. However, at least they still have a paper trail. So they tallied up the paper votes. Guess who was in charge of that? Apparently it was one of Mitt Romney's campaign staff (specifically Romney for President Leadership Team)! Now, is that conflict of interest or is it just me?
Also, theres some issues with the attendees of the Iowa Straw Poll. According to "WhatReallyHappended.com" 26,000 Tickets were sold and only 14,302 votes were counted. As Mr. Rivero put it,
" Now think about that for a minute. 26,000 people purchase tickets to go to a Straw Poll event, and yet we are to believe that 12,000 of those people couldn’t even care less about the voting part? Just what were they there for?
I don't buy it. This is not believable. An Investigation is needed here.
I don't need an investigation."
I think there should be an in depth look into this. Nothing terribly drastic. One of Ron Paul's supporters actually threatened to sue! I don't think it should come to that. Nonetheless action should be taken.
Here's some more links on the issue: KCCI Des Moines, Iowa; Malfunctioning Diebold Voting Machines Run By Romney Team Member At Iowa Poll ; Romney Leadership Team Member Overseeing Straw Poll
Wednesday, August 08, 2007
China Owns America
It's as simple as that.
[Original Link]
Uncle Sam, Your Banker Will See You Now
By Paul Craig Roberts
08/08/07 "ICH" --- - Early this morning China let the idiots in Washington, and on Wall Street, know that it has them by the short hairs. Two senior spokesmen for the Chinese government observed that China’s considerable holdings of US dollars and Treasury bonds “contributes a great deal to maintaining the position of the dollar as a reserve currency.”
Should the US proceed with sanctions intended to cause the Chinese currency to appreciate, “the Chinese central bank will be forced to sell dollars, which might lead to a mass depreciation of the dollar.”
If Western financial markets are sufficiently intelligent to comprehend the message, US interest rates will rise regardless of any further action by China. At this point, China does not need to sell a single bond. In an instant, China has made it clear that US interest rates depend on China, not on the Federal Reserve.
The precarious position of the US dollar as reserve currency has been thoroughly ignored and denied. The delusion that the US is “the world’s sole superpower,” whose currency is desirable regardless of its excess supply, reflects American hubris, not reality. This hubris is so extreme that only 6 weeks ago McKinsey Global Institute published a study that concluded that even a doubling of the US current account deficit to $1.6 trillion would pose no problem.
Strategic thinkers, if any remain who have not been purged by neocons, will quickly conclude that China’s power over the value of the dollar and US interest rates also gives China power over US foreign policy. The US was able to attack Afghanistan and Iraq only because China provided the largest part of the financing for Bush’s wars.
If China ceased to buy US Treasuries, Bush’s wars would end. The savings rate of US consumers is essentially zero, and several million are afflicted with mortgages that they cannot afford. With Bush’s budget in deficit and with no room in the US consumer’s budget for a tax increase, Bush’s wars can only be financed by foreigners.
No country on earth, except for Israel, supports the Bush regimes’ desire to attack Iran. It is China’s decision whether it calls in the US ambassador, and delivers the message that there will be no attack on Iran or further war unless the US is prepared to buy back $900 billion in US Treasury bonds and other dollar assets.
The US, of course, has no foreign reserves with which to make the purchase. The impact of such a large sale on US interest rates would wreck the US economy and effectively end Bush’s war-making capability. Moreover, other governments would likely follow the Chinese lead, as the main support for the US dollar has been China’s willingness to accumulate them. If the largest holder dumped the dollar, other countries would dump dollars, too.
The value and purchasing power of the US dollar would fall. When hard-pressed Americans went to Wal-Mart to make their purchases, the new prices would make them think they had wandered into Nieman Marcus. Americans would not be able to maintain their current living standard.
Simultaneously, Americans would be hit either with tax increases in order to close a budget deficit that foreigners will no longer finance or with large cuts in income security programs. The only other source of budgetary finance would be for the government to print money to pay its bills. In this event, Americans would experience inflation in addition to higher prices from dollar devaluation.
This is a grim outlook. We got in this position because our leaders are ignorant fools. So are our economists, many of whom are paid shills for some interest group. So are our corporate leaders whose greed gave China power over the US by offshoring the US production of goods and services to China. It was the corporate fat cats who turned US Gross Domestic Product into Chinese imports, and it was the “free trade, free market economists” who egged it on.
How did a people as stupid as Americans get so full of hubris?
Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.
[Original Link]
Uncle Sam, Your Banker Will See You Now
By Paul Craig Roberts
08/08/07 "ICH" --- - Early this morning China let the idiots in Washington, and on Wall Street, know that it has them by the short hairs. Two senior spokesmen for the Chinese government observed that China’s considerable holdings of US dollars and Treasury bonds “contributes a great deal to maintaining the position of the dollar as a reserve currency.”
Should the US proceed with sanctions intended to cause the Chinese currency to appreciate, “the Chinese central bank will be forced to sell dollars, which might lead to a mass depreciation of the dollar.”
If Western financial markets are sufficiently intelligent to comprehend the message, US interest rates will rise regardless of any further action by China. At this point, China does not need to sell a single bond. In an instant, China has made it clear that US interest rates depend on China, not on the Federal Reserve.
The precarious position of the US dollar as reserve currency has been thoroughly ignored and denied. The delusion that the US is “the world’s sole superpower,” whose currency is desirable regardless of its excess supply, reflects American hubris, not reality. This hubris is so extreme that only 6 weeks ago McKinsey Global Institute published a study that concluded that even a doubling of the US current account deficit to $1.6 trillion would pose no problem.
Strategic thinkers, if any remain who have not been purged by neocons, will quickly conclude that China’s power over the value of the dollar and US interest rates also gives China power over US foreign policy. The US was able to attack Afghanistan and Iraq only because China provided the largest part of the financing for Bush’s wars.
If China ceased to buy US Treasuries, Bush’s wars would end. The savings rate of US consumers is essentially zero, and several million are afflicted with mortgages that they cannot afford. With Bush’s budget in deficit and with no room in the US consumer’s budget for a tax increase, Bush’s wars can only be financed by foreigners.
No country on earth, except for Israel, supports the Bush regimes’ desire to attack Iran. It is China’s decision whether it calls in the US ambassador, and delivers the message that there will be no attack on Iran or further war unless the US is prepared to buy back $900 billion in US Treasury bonds and other dollar assets.
The US, of course, has no foreign reserves with which to make the purchase. The impact of such a large sale on US interest rates would wreck the US economy and effectively end Bush’s war-making capability. Moreover, other governments would likely follow the Chinese lead, as the main support for the US dollar has been China’s willingness to accumulate them. If the largest holder dumped the dollar, other countries would dump dollars, too.
The value and purchasing power of the US dollar would fall. When hard-pressed Americans went to Wal-Mart to make their purchases, the new prices would make them think they had wandered into Nieman Marcus. Americans would not be able to maintain their current living standard.
Simultaneously, Americans would be hit either with tax increases in order to close a budget deficit that foreigners will no longer finance or with large cuts in income security programs. The only other source of budgetary finance would be for the government to print money to pay its bills. In this event, Americans would experience inflation in addition to higher prices from dollar devaluation.
This is a grim outlook. We got in this position because our leaders are ignorant fools. So are our economists, many of whom are paid shills for some interest group. So are our corporate leaders whose greed gave China power over the US by offshoring the US production of goods and services to China. It was the corporate fat cats who turned US Gross Domestic Product into Chinese imports, and it was the “free trade, free market economists” who egged it on.
How did a people as stupid as Americans get so full of hubris?
Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.
Great interview with 9/11 Fireman
Give this a watch. It's 45min, kinda long for most people, I know, but it cuts through the bullshit and comes from someone who was there. Any interview from the firemen that were at ground zero are great to watch.
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
ABC Dwarfs Ron Paul's Supporters
I love this! On the ABC News website, they showed a picture of Mitt Romney's Supporters, all grouped together with signs raised high. As for Ron Paul's supporters (supporter, apparently) a picture of a lone man, with his Ron Paul sign held sadly lower. ABC used its bag of tricks during the debate as well. Try as they might, Ron Paul is still gaining popularity. He IS our only hope.
FBI can't link Bin Laden to 9/11
Not one of my articles, but I think it's important to read up on.
[Original Link]
[Digg]
The FBI Can’t Link Bin Laden to 9/11? Why Is This Not News?
August 6th, 2007
According to this story the FBI had not, up through June of 2006, linked Bin Laden with 9/11.
On June 5, 2006, the Muckraker Report contacted the FBI Headquarters, (202) 324-3000, to learn why Bin Laden’s Most Wanted poster did not indicate that Usama was also wanted in connection with 9/11. The Muckraker Report spoke with Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI. When asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on Bin Laden’s Most Wanted web page, Tomb said, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.”
Ok, two questions:
1. How can they not have enough evidence?
2. Why is this not being discussed anywhere?
My first thought was of the video that was heavily brandished by the media where Bin Laden and some colleagues seemed to be gloating about their success. Wasn’t that pretty damning? The article addresses that too.
Essentially they point out the fact that the video was released in December of 2001, while the statement saying the FBI had no hard evidence linking them was released in June of 2006. The implication there is that the FBI doesn’t believe the video constitutes hard evidence of Bin Laden’s involvement.
Is this just the FBI using an unrealistic standard for “hard evidence”, or is it really possible that the main investigatory group for the attacks don’t think Bin Laden did it? And if that’s the case, who do they think did? Al Quaeda unrelated to Bin Laden? Another group?
Maybe it’s nothing, but we should damn well have the discussion.:
The Full Article at Team Liberty
Posted by Daniel Miessler
Filed in Media, America, Security, Politics
42 Responses to “The FBI Can’t Link Bin Laden to 9/11? Why Is This Not News?”
[Original Link]
[Digg]
The FBI Can’t Link Bin Laden to 9/11? Why Is This Not News?
August 6th, 2007
According to this story the FBI had not, up through June of 2006, linked Bin Laden with 9/11.
On June 5, 2006, the Muckraker Report contacted the FBI Headquarters, (202) 324-3000, to learn why Bin Laden’s Most Wanted poster did not indicate that Usama was also wanted in connection with 9/11. The Muckraker Report spoke with Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI. When asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on Bin Laden’s Most Wanted web page, Tomb said, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.”
Ok, two questions:
1. How can they not have enough evidence?
2. Why is this not being discussed anywhere?
My first thought was of the video that was heavily brandished by the media where Bin Laden and some colleagues seemed to be gloating about their success. Wasn’t that pretty damning? The article addresses that too.
Essentially they point out the fact that the video was released in December of 2001, while the statement saying the FBI had no hard evidence linking them was released in June of 2006. The implication there is that the FBI doesn’t believe the video constitutes hard evidence of Bin Laden’s involvement.
Is this just the FBI using an unrealistic standard for “hard evidence”, or is it really possible that the main investigatory group for the attacks don’t think Bin Laden did it? And if that’s the case, who do they think did? Al Quaeda unrelated to Bin Laden? Another group?
Maybe it’s nothing, but we should damn well have the discussion.:
The Full Article at Team Liberty
Posted by Daniel Miessler
Filed in Media, America, Security, Politics
42 Responses to “The FBI Can’t Link Bin Laden to 9/11? Why Is This Not News?”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)