As corporate media continues to ignore the building presence in Manhattan to protest against the corrupt banking system, activists have gathered to document this Tahrir-square style gathering. Below are videos that illustrate the growing unrest, as well as a link to the current livestream of the area. The nature of the protests also has laid bare the absolute police state that has become entrenched in America. In the first video we hear the reporter conclude by saying, "As of now it's still unclear if the police will allow protesters to stay here..." As if that is a normal response to peaceful assembly for a redress of grievances in a free society. Madison Ruppert has detailed this oppression in his intro article to the Day of Rage entitled: No right to protest in America: Occupation of Wall Street thwarted thanks to ignorant police. Additionally, we have received comments about social networks and e-mail programs blocking discussions centered on the term "Occupy Wall Street." If you are encountering this type of censorship, please drop us a note in the comments section.
19 September 2011
Obama Bucks Can't Save Solyndra
"Solyndra was the first company to receive a loan guarantee from the Department of Energy as part of the 2009 stimulus package. This wasn't small potatoes. The loan guarantee was for $535 million. ... As my Washington Examiner colleague David Freddoso reported, an audit of the company performed by PriceWaterhouseCoopers two months before Obama's visit noted that the firm had accumulated losses of $558 million in its five years of existence. The auditor noted that Solyndra 'has suffered recurring losses from operations, negative cash flows since inception and has a net stockholders' deficit that, among other factors, raises substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern.' One of the original investors in Solyndra was Oklahoma billionaire George Kaiser, who was also a major contributor to Obama's 2008 campaign. In early 2011, Kaiser and other investors provided an additional $75 million in financing to Solyndra. They did so on condition, approved by the Energy Department, that they receive priority over previous creditors, including the government. ... But let's assume for the time being that there was no criminal conduct here, no violation of government procedures, no fraud. Let's assume everyone in the administration acted with good faith. There's still a scandal -- the scandal of the government handing out hundreds of millions of dollars to unproven and speculative businesses. ... The real scandal is the 'green jobs' loan guarantee program itself. And the ones getting scammed are American taxpayers." --political analyst Michael Barone
How can we stop crony capitalism?
More
Rahm Emanuel Playing Stupid on Solyndra
Chicago mayor and former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel said he doesn’t recall anything about the Obama administration’s $535 million loan to the recently bankrupt solar company Solyndra.
Speaking to Chicago radio station WLS 890AM at a news conference about a new wellness initiative, Emanuel said he didn’t remember anything about the failed investment loan by the Department of Energy, which critics say was fast-tracked to fit the White House’s political agenda.
“Ya know, I’m focusing on a major announcement today for the City Of Chicago,” Emanuel said. “I don’t actually remember that or know about it. So, what I’m dealing is with what I’m dealing with here today.”
Emanuel was Obama’s chief of staff during the administration’s green energy initiative in 2009, when the Solyndra loan was finalized.
E-mail communications from the White House obtained by the House Energy and Commerce Committee point to more involvement in the deal than perhaps Emanuel would care to remember.
The vice president was scheduled to announce the closure of the Solyndra deal on Sept. 4, and several e-mails show pressure from the White House to approve the loan.
In one e-mail, an assistant to Emanuel wrote on Aug. 31, 2009 to the Office of Management and Budget about the administration’s upcoming announcement on Solyndra and asked whether “there is anything we can help speed along on OMB side.”
Solyndra | Rahm Emanuel | Don't Remember | The Daily Caller
18 September 2011
Oil Rigs and Energy Sustainability
Off-shore oil drilling is a massive system that few people truly can wrap their heads around. We can go down to the coast and look out and see an occasional oil rig in the distance, thinking that there are a few out there. The reality is that oil companies are in high gear, working to extract every last drop they can from the Earth to feed consumer wants (not needs). Deepwater Horizon was a horrible tragedy, but the odds that something like it was going to happen were in it's favor.
There were around 3,700 oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico alone in the early part of last year. The volume of oil being extracted is as far from sustainable as you can imagine. One of the things that the majority of people do not understand is how energy from natural resources is interconnected to population growth and global economies. Without cheap energy, our way of life is not sustainable. Being able to recognize the stark reality of this situation is what is driving so many people and companies to find alternative solutions for energy that are sustainable as well as reduce the negative impact on our environment. If our collective energy needs can be reduced and those sources replaced with more practical solutions for future efficiencies, our survival and way of life can be assured.
Farron Cousins | The Ticking Time Bombs In The Gulf of Mexico
There were around 3,700 oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico alone in the early part of last year. The volume of oil being extracted is as far from sustainable as you can imagine. One of the things that the majority of people do not understand is how energy from natural resources is interconnected to population growth and global economies. Without cheap energy, our way of life is not sustainable. Being able to recognize the stark reality of this situation is what is driving so many people and companies to find alternative solutions for energy that are sustainable as well as reduce the negative impact on our environment. If our collective energy needs can be reduced and those sources replaced with more practical solutions for future efficiencies, our survival and way of life can be assured.
Farron Cousins | The Ticking Time Bombs In The Gulf of Mexico
17 September 2011
Can Ron Paul Win?: Lew Rockwell talks with Alex Jones
In this InfoWars interview, Lew and Alex analyze the media's attempts to black-out stories about Ron's surge in the polls, and deny him coverage. It's living proof that the establishment is worried and threatened by Ron and our movement. Lew goes on to discuss "Gardasil Rick" Perry's totalitarian program of forced, dangerous vaccinations of children to reap benefits for himself and BigPharma.
On the economic side, Lew recounts how, after many years of study and teaching, Ron has succeeded in exposing the secret operations of the Fed. Indeed it's become a hot topic for everyday Americans who question why our dollar is being destroyed, and who benefits. And, of course, Ron remains steadfast in his calls to end all the wars, bring the troops home from everywhere, and stop the spending. Ultimately, Lew and Alex believe that our time is coming, and that liberty will prevail.
Lew Rockwell is worth listening to just to get a better idea of how bad things really are without a big spin.
Can Ron Paul Win?: Lew Rockwell talks with Alex Jones
Is Social Security a Ponzi Scheme?
The GOP presidential race this week boiled down to two words: Social Security. Specifically, which candidates have said what about the public retirement program set up by socialist Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt during the Great Depression. The kindling has long been there for a fiery debate about the government's massive obligations to an aging population, but Texas Gov. Rick Perry's previous comments about Social Security being a "monstrous lie" and a "Ponzi scheme" lit the spark in Monday's Republican debate when several other candidates took issue with his position. So, is Social Security a Ponzi scheme?
Mitt Romney says no, and he seized the opportunity to cast the rhetoric of his main Republican rival as "over the top" and "frightful to many people." Romney warned, "If we nominate someone who the Democrats can correctly characterize as being opposed to Social Security, we would be obliterated as a party."
Frankly, both men have a point, though Romney used similar language in his own book to describe the program. Numerous figures on the Left have also over the years, dating back at least to a 1967 Newsweek column by liberal economist and Nobel laureate Paul Samuelson.
Strictly speaking, Social Security is not a Ponzi scheme, in part because it's not against the law. Indeed, it is the law. (Try notpaying payroll taxes -- i.e., "investing" in the system.) But it is structured exactly like a Ponzi scheme, and it will eventually fail for the same reasons. Today's workers are paying for the checks of today's retirees, and it has always been that way. From the start, politicians have raided the Social Security "trust fund" and spent the money on other general fund projects. What was left were worthless IOUs. Now that benefits paid exceed taxes collected, that problem has become acute. According to the Social Security board of trustees, in 1945, there were 42 workers for every retiree; the current ratio of three workers to every retiree is unsustainable.
Perry later wrote a USA Today op-ed to clarify his position. He thinks Social Security must be reformed so that it can both be saved for those in and nearing retirement, as well as for younger workers. Still, Perry's problem is exactly as Romney indicated: Democrats (and apparently other Republicans) will demonize him for wanting to "destroy" Social Security. The program is still popular, and if voters think that a politician is going to take away their money, they will object vehemently. (Of course, their money has already been taken away, but that seems to escape the notice of far too many people.) Republicans have to walk the tightrope of calling for reform without being successfully demagogued.
The GOP candidates are shying away from any mention of Medicare, however, which is in far worse fiscal condition than Social Security. Annual spending on Medicare and Medicaid is now 5.5 percent of GDP, and by 2030, the Congressional Budget Office predicts that it will reach nearly 10 percent. Medicare by itself is already the biggest spender on medical services in the U.S., and that $525 billion in 2010 is influencing the market for everyone else.
Perhaps Herman Cain said it best: "I don't care what you call it, it's broken." He's right. And no matter what we call these programs, the important thing is to recognize that they will cause the nation to go broke if we don't fix them. But they can't be fixed unless conservatives win elections, and winning elections might require a more tactful approach.
Solyndra, an Example of Corruption on Both Sides of the Aisle
The point that the blogger is presenting is quite valid, but does little to defend the current administration, or differentiate them from the previous one. Obama's reign has been as damaging as Bush's, doing little to undo previous damage, or to make strides to restore sanity in government. It's hard to defend an administration that continues the same big business efforts as the last few, regardless of their political or social affiliations. Obama and Co. are just the latest in a series of representatives-in-name-only continuing to sell the rights to taxpayer resources to the highest bidder in big business circles. Obama's failure was signing a check that Bush filled out before considering what he was doing. By pushing ahead, the public sees less differentiation between the two parties, and begins to see how both parties push agendas through at the expense of the public, to the benefit of big business. Things need to change.
WordPress.com
 | Solyndra |
Solyndra has become known as a boondoggle in the US. If you haven't heard, it's the solar power company that got $500 million in Recovery Act loans from the Department of Energy and then went belly up a couple of weeks ago.
Conservatives have been trying to paint this as a big scandal of some kind, despite the fact that: the company had plenty of private investors too, it's the only DOE loan that has failed so far, and there's no real evidence that anyone in the White House did anything worse than push OMB to speed up their decision-making process a bit in 2009.
It's often claimed that the Solyndra loan guarantee was "rushed through" by the Obama Administration for political reasons. In fact, the Solyndra loan guarantee was a multi-year process that the Bush Administration launched in 2007.
You'd never know from the media coverage that:
- The Bush team tried to conditionally approve the Solyndra loan just before President Obama took office.
- The company's backers included private investors who had diverse political interests.
- The loan comprises just 1.3% of DOE's overall loan portfolio. To date, Solyndra is the only loan that's known to be troubled.
The loan guarantee has been attacked as being political in nature because one of the Solyndra investors, Argonaut Venture Capital, is funded by George Kaiser, a man who donated money to the Obama campaign. What critics don't mention is that one of the earliest and largest investors, Madrone Capital Partners, is funded by the family that started Wal-Mart, the Waltons and the Waltons have donated millions of dollars to Republican candidates over the years.
Climate Progress is publishing this timeline, verified by Department of Energy officials, that shows how the loan guarantee came together under both administrations to set the record straight. In fact, rather than rushing the loan for Solyndra through, the Obama Administration restructured the original Bush-era deal to further protect the taxpayers' investment:
May 2005: Just as a global silicon shortage begins driving up prices of solar photovoltaics [PV], Solyndra is founded to provide a cost-competitive alternative to silicon-based panels.
July 2005: The Bush Administration signs the Energy Policy Act of 2005 into law, creating the 1703 loan guarantee program.
February 2006 – October 2006: In February, Solyndra raises its first round of venture financing worth $10.6 million from CMEA Capital, Redpoint Ventures, and U.S. Venture Partners. In October, Argonaut Venture Capital, an investment arm of George Kaiser, invests $17 million into Solyndra. Madrone Capital Partners, an investment arm of the Walton family, invests $7 million. Those investments are part of a $78.2 million fund.
December 2006: Solyndra Applies for a Loan Guarantee under the 1703 program.
Late 2007: Loan guarantee program is funded. Solyndra was one of 16 clean-tech companies deemed ready to move forward in the due diligence process. The Bush Administration DOE moves forward to develop a conditional commitment.
October 2008: Then Solyndra CEO Chris Gronet touted reasons for building in Silicon Valley and noted that the "company's second factory also will be built in Fremont, since a Department of Energy loan guarantee mandates a U.S. location."
November 2008: Silicon prices remain very high on the spot market, making non-silicon based thin film technologies like Solyndra's very attractive to investors. Solyndra also benefits from having very low installation costs. The company raises $144 million from ten different venture investors, including the Walton-family run Madrone Capital Partners. This brings total private investment to more than $450 million to date.
January 2009: In an effort to show it has done something to support renewable energy, the Bush Administration tries to take Solyndra before a DOE credit review committee before President Obama is inaugurated. The committee, consisting of career civil servants with financial expertise, remands the loan back to DOE "without prejudice" because it wasn't ready for conditional commitment.
March 2009: The same credit committee approves the strengthened loan application. The deal passes on to DOE's credit review board. Career staff (not political appointees) within the DOE issue a conditional commitment setting out terms for a guarantee.
June 2009: As more silicon production facilities come online while demand for PV wavers due to the economic slowdown, silicon prices start to drop. Meanwhile, the Chinese begin rapidly scaling domestic manufacturing and set a path toward dramatic, unforeseen cost reductions in PV. Between June of 2009 and August of 2011, PV prices drop more than 50%.
September 2009: Solyndra raises an additional $219 million. Shortly after, the DOE closes a $535 million loan guarantee after six months of due diligence. This is the first loan guarantee issued under the 1703 program. From application to closing, the process took three years – not the 41 days that is sometimes reported. OMB did raise some concerns in August not about the loan itself but how the loan should be "scored." OMB testified Wednesday that they were comfortable with the final scoring.
January – June 2010: As the price of conventional silicon-based PV continues to fall due to low silicon prices and a glut of solar modules, investors and analysts start questioning Solyndra's ability to compete in the marketplace. Despite pulling its IPO (as dozens of companies did in 2010), Solyndra raises an additional $175 million from investors.
November 2010: Solyndra closes an older manufacturing facility and concentrates operations at Fab 2, the plant funded by the $535 million loan guarantee. The Fab 2 plant is completed that same month — on time and on budget — employing around 3,000 construction workers during the build-out, just as the DOE projected.
February 2011: Due to a liquidity crisis, investors provide $75 million to help restructure the loan guarantee. The DOE rightly assumed it was better to give Solyndra a fighting chance rather than liquidate the company – which was a going concern – for market value, which would have guaranteed significant losses.
March 2011: Republican Representatives complain that DOE funds are not being spent quickly enough.
House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI): "despite the Administration's urgency and haste to pass the bill [the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act] … billions of dollars have yet to be spent."
And House Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Chairman Cliff Stearns (R-FL): "The whole point of the Democrat's stimulus bill was to spend billions of dollars … most of the money still hasn't been spent."
June 2011: Average selling prices for solar modules drop to $1.50 a watt and continue on a pathway to $1 a watt. Solyndra says it has cut costs by 50%, but analysts worry how the company will compete with the dramatic changes in conventional PV.
August 2011: DOE refuses to restructure the loan a second time.
September 2011: Solyndra closes its manufacturing facility, lays off 1,100 workers and files for bankruptcy. The news is touted as a failure of the Obama Administration and the loan guarantee office. However, as of September 12, the DOE loan programs office closed or issued conditional commitments of $37.8 billion to projects around the country. The $535 million loan is only 1.3% of DOE's loan portfolio. To date, Solyndra is the only loan that's known to be troubled.
Meanwhile, after complaining about stimulus funds moving too slowly, Congressmen Fred Upton and Cliff Stearns are now claiming that the Administration was pushing funds out the door too quickly: "In the rush to get stimulus cash out the door, despite repeated claims by the Administration to the contrary, some bets were bad from the beginning."
What critics fail to mention is that the Solyndra deal is more than three years old, started under the Bush Administration, which tried to conditionally approve the loan right before Obama took office. Rather than "pushing funds out the door too quickly," the Obama Administration restructured the original loan when it came into office to further protect the taxpayers' investment.
What actually happened, how it could have been prevented and who's responsible, are these things are orthogonal to the battle taking place in political circles. That battle has nothing to do with the facts.
For a mix of financial and ideological reasons, U.S. conservative movement activists, operators, and politicos hate clean energy. They don't believe in climate change, they love fossil fuels and fossil-fuel campaign donations, and they think, or want the U.S. public to think, that clean energy is weak, unreliable, marginal, and dependent on government subsidies. They have been trying to make that case for a long while.
What Solyndra gives them is a symbol, something to use as a stand-in to discredit not just the DOE loan program, but all government support for clean energy and indeed clean energy itself.
Cons understand post-truth politics. They understand that truth is utterly inert in an era when mainstream institutions are viewed with hostility and skepticism, the media is fractured, and there are no shared norms or referees to enforce them. The side that wins is the side that plays to its audience's existing preconceptions with a simple message repeated over and over and over again in multiple venues.
That's what is happening now around Solyndra. The right is going after this whole hog, trying to make the name synonymous with clean energy boondoggle. And the left is flailing around, throwing out this fact and that fact with no coherent message. Additionally, the right pretty much has a lock on the US media so that the message that this was yet another Obama and environmentalist failure is repeated over and over.
That works with the Low Information Voters who believe that global warming is a hoax, or in some way a disputed theory. Unfortunately, they are the people who need to be reached with better information rather than fed more of the corporatocratic propaganda.
See also:
Global Benefits of Collapse on Resource Usage
My thoughts regarding population impact and consumption of resources are supported in a recent text I have been reading; Visualizing Environmental Science. A developed nation has a much greater responsibility to maintain sustainability than a developing one, as those developed nations have a significantly greater impact on the use of resources.
People in highly developed countries are extravagant and wasteful consumers; their use of resources is greatly out of proportion to their numbers. A single child born in a highly developed country such as the United States causes a greater impact on the environment and on resource depletion than perhaps 20 children born in a developing country. Many natural resources are needed to provide the automobiles, air conditioners, disposable diapers, cell phones, DVD players, computers, clothes, newspapers, athletic shoes, furniture, books, and other “comforts” of life in highly developed nations. Thus, the disproportionately large consumption of resources by the United States and other highly developed countries affects natural resources and the environment as much as or more than the population explosion in the developing world.If the United States continues toward a financial collapse, it's ability to consume a disproportionate amount of available resources will reduce significantly, to the benefit of those developing or underdeveloped nations. A situation like this could be a positive aspect of collapse that I had not previously considered.
Ayn Rand - Western Civilization Unsustainable
Americans are acting as spoiled teens ,That money we were "promised" turns out to be nothing other than funding for a new world order. These people in Deceit Central have all but broken this country from the inside out. Hopefully once this is all over... we can start anew and learn from the past mistakes. Hopefully this time, we can get out from under outside influences and instantly execute any single entity that tries to take reign of this country as it has this time. Just remember whether you are for or against these programs -- we are forced by law to participate in these ponzi schemes. Our elected representatives essentially treated the money as general revenue and spent most of it. The SS system shows a trillion or more in the so called lock-box --- but, in actuality there is nothing there except IOUs. They are going after our 401ks next ... our whole nation will be made up of modern day serfs working for the Government.
"When you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing and when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors and when you see that these men get richer by graft and by their pull - not by their work. When your laws don't protect you against them, but protect them against you and when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice...You may now know that your society is doomed." - Ayn Rand
Peak Oil vs Sustainability
Simply recognizing that resources are limited is sometimes the first step toward creating a sustainable supply. Take oil for example. M. King Hubbert developed the idea of peak oil in the 1950's to explain how a supply can be depleted while consumption of that supply continues to increase. He predicted that we would cross this peak in the late 1960's. His theories were disregarded during his time due to the abundance of cheap oil. Fuel economy was not a consideration in many nations around the world during his time. He predicted that if oil were not conserved and it's usage reduced to a more sustainable level, we would begin to see oil shortages and sharp rises in costs related to the resource.
It is easy to recognize the impact of his observations by looking back as recent as six months prior at the cost of fuel. We may see temporary dips in prices at the pump, but in general costs rise as production decreases. Everything from fuel to plastics to costs of delivering good is directly connected back to oil consumption and production. Easy oil sources are running low, so we are now looking to reserves that are more difficult to extract from the Earth and to process into usable forms. This addiction to cheap energy puts strains on those industries and aspects of life that rely upon their availability and affordability. A paradigm shift toward sustainability may allow us to continue to utilize this resource, but a failure to recognize and make changes could lead to a much worse situation.
Peak Oil
It is easy to recognize the impact of his observations by looking back as recent as six months prior at the cost of fuel. We may see temporary dips in prices at the pump, but in general costs rise as production decreases. Everything from fuel to plastics to costs of delivering good is directly connected back to oil consumption and production. Easy oil sources are running low, so we are now looking to reserves that are more difficult to extract from the Earth and to process into usable forms. This addiction to cheap energy puts strains on those industries and aspects of life that rely upon their availability and affordability. A paradigm shift toward sustainability may allow us to continue to utilize this resource, but a failure to recognize and make changes could lead to a much worse situation.
Peak Oil
16 September 2011
Bank Of America's Backdoor Bailout - Dumping Mortgage Trash Onto Taxpayers Via Fannie Mae - BlackListedNews.com
Source: Daily Bail Despite the wishes of Sheila Bair and Chris Whalen, I don't see BAC being nationalized and restructured. They have too much political power behind their godforsaken franchise of usury. This deal with Fannie is an outrage. Now taxpayers are on the hook for any and all lawsuits associated with the fraud. This was a transfer of liability more than anything else. Details on today's taxpayer pillaging are below. --- NEW YORK (TheStreet) -- The official bailout of the financial system may be over, but the government is apparently far from finished propping up big banks, as evidenced by the news that Bank of America has struck a deal to dump a bunch of near-worthless home loans on U.S. taxpayers. According to a report in The Wall Street Journal Bank of America has sold the rights to process and collect payments on 400,000 home loans to Fannie Mae, the government-controlled mortgage giant. The loans have an unpaid principal balance of $73 billion, but are being sold for $500 million, according to the report. Doesn't sound like a bad deal for the government,unless that $500 million price tag will soon be too steep, which is what "a person familiar with the deal," told the Journal. According to the WSJ, Fannie Mae spent $500 million to buy the servicing rights to a big chunk of the "seven million loans still causing the most problems." Although the $500 million is a paper loss to BofA, in that the rights were "originally worth more," it looks like BofA is still getting a good deal because the portfolio's "value is expected to deteriorate further."
Before we get to the story from the WSJ and The Street.com, a few BofA links from today:
Gerald Celente : This is a Global Meltdown
Gerald Celente with Michael Harris on CFRA Radio - 06 September 2011
Gerald Celente : I have never seen a summer like this one before and I have been in the business for 30 years ...this is a global meltdown Michael and people should understand it , it is a global game the Greeks the Italians the Spanish the french they've this before , all they do is keeping these economies afloat by printing more fiat money , ...these are money junkies they have no bounds and the know no boundaries their fix is more money more money ....how much money could they have ...the banks have taken over the over there has been a take over ....
Gerald Celente : I have never seen a summer like this one before and I have been in the business for 30 years ...this is a global meltdown Michael and people should understand it , it is a global game the Greeks the Italians the Spanish the french they've this before , all they do is keeping these economies afloat by printing more fiat money , ...these are money junkies they have no bounds and the know no boundaries their fix is more money more money ....how much money could they have ...the banks have taken over the over there has been a take over ....
15 September 2011
KLECKNER: Obama deliberately kills jobs - Washington Times
KLECKNER: Obama deliberately kills jobs - Washington Times:
In his jobs speech last week, President Obama demanded that Congress pass his new stimulus proposals “right away.” This was his constant refrain: right away, right away, right away.
On a key proposal aimed to appeal to Republicans - free-trade agreements with South Korea, Colombia and Panama - Mr. Obama is the very person who was and still is preventing a vote.
Congress does not have the legal authority to vote on that stimulus proposal until Mr. Obama officially submits the agreements to Congress.
In his State of the Union address in 2010, Mr. Obama appealed for congressional approval of the trade deals, but it was he who chose not to allow Congress to vote for that entire year, even though he had said the agreements would create jobs.
A Legal Action Supporting Restoration of Constitutional Integrity
On the eve of Constitution Day, and the 15th anniversary of The Patriot Post, we are preparing to launch a legal battle in support of our mission to reinstate Rule of Law as enshrined in our Constitution. This legal action, unlike others before it, regards Breach of Oath -- breach of the contract established by our Constitution between the elected and appointed members of the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of our government, and We the People. It seeks remedy for the lack of any proscription against, and penalty for such breach.To enforce our Constitution's limits on the central government, we believe a formal legal action is necessary. This action, if successful, would require that all members of the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches, first and foremost, abide by their oaths "to support and defend" our Constitution, under penalty of law, and comport with its enumerated limitations on the federal government. The current scope of federal activities provides abundant evidence that many members of those three co-equal branches have long since abandoned their oaths, and, at present, there is no recourse for prosecution to enforce compliance.
This civil action is predicated on three questions concerning Rule of Law as enshrined in our Constitution:
First, are elected and appointed members of the Executive, Legislative and Judicial Branches of the central government required, under penalty of law, to abide by their oaths "to support and defend" our Constitution, as specified in its original language in Article II, Section 1 and Article VI, clause 3, as ratified?
Second, in respect to their oaths, do all members comport with our Constitution's prescribed method for amendment as specified in Article V, rather than disregard that constitutional prescription in favor of legislative actions based upon judicial diktats redefining those limits in accordance with the errant so-called "living Constitution"?
And, third, if the answers to questions 1 and 2 are "no," then does breach of oath, which is not currently subject to legal redress, constitute a breach of trust with the American people -- a violation of the contract established by our Constitution between those in the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches, and the American people? Consequently, does Breach of Oath impose harm and injustice upon citizens, who are subject to the government's laying and collecting of taxes, and accumulating of debt, for expenditures not expressly authorized by our Constitution?
The first step in seeking legal remedy to restore the integrity of our Constitution is to establish whether "We, the People," have legal standing to require all members of the three branches of our central government to abide by their oaths.
To that end, please register your support for this action, and join Patriots across the nation in this effort to establish legal standing as citizens, particularly those in our Armed Services who defend their oaths with blood and life. If we are unsuccessful in our effort to seek remedy for the lack of any proscription against, and penalty for breach of oath, it is because the judiciary refuses any such accountability regarding the wanton violation of our Constitution. Such rejection would, in effect, render Americans, once again, condemned to the abuse previously characterized in American history as "Taxation Without Representation."
We are seeking to answer the question of whether "We, the People," have legal standing to require all members of the three Branches of our central government to abide by their oaths. We will determine the appropriate venue and ask the court to certify this action once we have reached a sufficient number of plaintiffs to impress upon the court, and supporting members of Congress, that The People demand recourse.We will seek to renew congressional requirements for enumeration of constitutional authority for each and every piece of legislation proposed by the Executive and Legislative branches.Our United States Constitution, as written and ratified, stipulates in its preface that it is "ordained and established" by the people to "secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity." To that end, it established a republic, not a popular democracy, which is to say it affirmed the primacy of Rule of Law over rule of men.
Those members of the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches, who have abandoned their oaths, believe they are above the mandates established by our Founders, and thus, above the law.
Our constitutional rights are being violated, and that violation is sustained by unjust taxation for purposes not expressly authorized by our Constitution. Consequently, our nation is on the precipice of insolvency, and the bill is coming due. It will most certainly be repaid in the currency of tyranny unless Liberty with its inherent Rule of Law prevail.
The time has come that all American Patriots must, "with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor," as we endeavor to restore Rule of Law and our Constitution's limits on the central government.
More
14 September 2011
In Town Near Fukushima Plant, Population One | The Jakarta Globe
Matsumura is an anomaly in a country where defiance of the government is rare and social consensus counts above everything else. Yet, Matsumura’s quiet civil disobedience speaks loudly of the dilemma facing the more than 100,000 silent “nuclear refugees” who were displaced by the March 11 disaster.
Tokyo was quick to establish evacuation zones around the plant but has been slow to settle the refugees. A government order forbids them from going back to their homes in a half dozen towns around Fukushima Daiichi that were declared off-limits after the tsunami-stricken nuclear plant started spewing radioactivity.
“We are already being forgotten,” said Matsumura, a leathery but clean-cut man with the sturdy build of a farmer. “The rest of the country has moved on. They don’t want to think about us.”
Tomioka’s city hall has been moved to a safer city in Fukushima prefecture, where thousands of its residents live in makeshift shelters. Thousands more have scattered across the country.
The town itself is sealed behind police barriers, which hide the heart of the nuclear no-go zone, an area that is officially too dangerous for human habitation.
In Town Near Fukushima Plant, Population One | The Jakarta Globe
Tomioka, Fukushima, Japan - Japan earthquake: 6 months on
Tomioka resident Naoto Matsumura believes he is the only inhabitant left in the town following the tsunami and the subsequent Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear crisis. In the image above, the 53-year-old calls cows who have been left to fend for themselves after their farm was destroyed by the disaster. Matsumura routinely drives around feeding the many abandoned stray animals who wander the town.
Tomioka, Fukushima, Japan - Japan earthquake: 6 months on
Nuke holdout resolved to stay put Says officials have neglected the evacuees
Vines creep across the empty streets of Tomioka, Fukushima Prefecture, its prim gardens overgrown with waist-high weeds and meadow flowers. Dead cows rot where they were left to starve in their pens. Chicken coops writhe with maggots, a sickening stench hanging in the air.
This once-thriving community of 16,000 people now has a population of one.
In this nuclear no-man’s land poisoned by radiation from the Fukushima No. 1 power plant, rice farmer Naoto Matsumura refuses to leave despite government orders. He says he has thought about the possibility of getting cancer but prefers to stay, with a skinny dog named Aki, his constant companion.
Nearly six months after the catastrophic quake and tsunami, the 53-year-old believes he is the only inhabitant left in this town sandwiched between the doomed nuclear complex to the north and another sprawling nuclear plant to the south.
“If I give up and leave, it’s all over,” he said. “It’s my responsibility to stay. And it is my right to be here.”
Nuke holdout resolved to stay put Says officials have neglected the evacuees(Japan TImes) | Finance GreenWatch
13 September 2011
Economic Collapse: Bank Runs, China, Peter Schiff, Gerald Celente, Max Keiser
As national debt increases and economy produces less, we came closer to an economic collapse.
The US dollar is not going to be the world reserve currency any longer. Foreign countries and lenders want US funds in other currencies now. They don't want any more US dollars. That should give everyone something to think about. Fiat currency in the US is crashing.
$13 trillion national debt probably equates to more like $30 trillion in bad debts. Debt-to-equity is much greater than the simple national debt number. More recently, our debt was increased as government spending ramped up to give a false feeling of security.
Banks are crashing around the country, but all of the big banks are going to crash hard soon enough. Looking back, stories like these were spot-on and give us a good perspective looking forward. Bank of America is on the verge, looking to kill 40,000 jobs. This is too regular of an occurrence, but is definitely a sign of the times.
The world is going to break down as nations decouple from each other to buffer the collapses of other nations.
The US dollar is not going to be the world reserve currency any longer. Foreign countries and lenders want US funds in other currencies now. They don't want any more US dollars. That should give everyone something to think about. Fiat currency in the US is crashing.
$13 trillion national debt probably equates to more like $30 trillion in bad debts. Debt-to-equity is much greater than the simple national debt number. More recently, our debt was increased as government spending ramped up to give a false feeling of security.
Banks are crashing around the country, but all of the big banks are going to crash hard soon enough. Looking back, stories like these were spot-on and give us a good perspective looking forward. Bank of America is on the verge, looking to kill 40,000 jobs. This is too regular of an occurrence, but is definitely a sign of the times.
The world is going to break down as nations decouple from each other to buffer the collapses of other nations.
The Truth About The Economy: Total Collapse
Rick Perry may make me embarrassed to be a Texan, but Ron Paul makes me proud again.
The Federal Reserve is more secretive than the CIA. That says something massive about our problems in the US. We need complete transparency in our government's actions to justify it's existence and to keep corruption at bay.
Our baseless fiat monetary system is on the way out. Our economy needs something physical to hold it up, but without a gold or silver backing it will crash. Market manipulation by the Fed is probably the only thing keeping the patient out of the morgue, but the economy is just one beat from that now.
Debt is the only thing keeping it moving forward. When our national debt collapses our economy, the house of cards will come crashing down.
Ron Paul is not the only one in politics that understands why this is happening, but he is the only one accepting reality and looking to find practical solutions that will keep us from crashing hard.
The Federal Reserve is more secretive than the CIA. That says something massive about our problems in the US. We need complete transparency in our government's actions to justify it's existence and to keep corruption at bay.
Our baseless fiat monetary system is on the way out. Our economy needs something physical to hold it up, but without a gold or silver backing it will crash. Market manipulation by the Fed is probably the only thing keeping the patient out of the morgue, but the economy is just one beat from that now.
Debt is the only thing keeping it moving forward. When our national debt collapses our economy, the house of cards will come crashing down.
Ron Paul is not the only one in politics that understands why this is happening, but he is the only one accepting reality and looking to find practical solutions that will keep us from crashing hard.
Sex tycoon turned lawmaker exposes the police corruption he used to foster
It would be nice to see more stories like this around the world. We could use some real change here in the States, where corruption is a direct result of increases in government scope and authority. Reminds me of the rise and fall of the USSR.
More
BANGKOK — When Thai voters recently elected a joke-cracking, former massage parlor tycoon to parliament, they probably did not expect him to expose police corruption and topple the country’s police chief.
All the drama is thanks to the wise-guy tactics of Chuvit Kamolvisit, who is using his status as a lawmaker to fight the same kind of crime he used to promote.
“You need an expert … to fight corruption,” Mr. Chuvit said at a recent news conference. “I can become the specialist about corruption because I know corruption.”
He has openly admitted bribing police officers when he owned several huge Bangkok massage parlors packed with prostitutes.
After winning a July election, he stunned parliament a month later by displaying an elaborate video sting operation he arranged to show that Thailand’s biggest illegal casino appeared to be protected by police.
More
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)