tMoA

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
tMoA

~ The only Home on the Web You'll ever need ~

3 posters

    U.S. NOW

    Carol
    Carol
    Admin
    Admin


    Posts : 32911
    Join date : 2010-04-07
    Location : Hawaii

    U.S. NOW Empty U.S. NOW

    Post  Carol Sun Dec 26, 2010 9:47 am

    U.S. NOW 2539334956_5446b33610_o_blog_main_horizontal
    2010, the Year of Foreclosure
    Of the two dozen "Words of the Year" cited by the New York Times the other day, two of them -- "robo-signer" and "put-back" -- were spawned by the foreclosure crisis. (See this link for the Gray Lady's definitions.) One could, in fairness, describe 2010 economically as the "Year of Foreclosure," a phenomenon we've been covering since 2009.

    The end of the year seemed a good time to look back at the crisis and its breadth, from Hoover to Obama; Bedford-Stuyvesant to Boston; the Bank of America operation in Simi Valley, Calif., to the dean of the bankruptcy bar in Shelby, N.C.; the Brooklyn judge who first doubted the paperwork to the Foreclosures-R-Us tour in Cape Coral, Fla.

    You'll see a second look at several of our Making Sense pieces on the crisis during the week of Dec. 27 on the NewsHour.

    One overall comment: I've never, in all my decades of economic reporting, interviewed so many frustrated people -- often frustrated to the point of tears. Few saw the housing crash coming. Almost no one was prepared for its consequences. And it may not be over yet.
    link: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2010/12/of-the-two-dozen-words.html


    Last edited by Carol on Sun Dec 26, 2010 3:52 pm; edited 1 time in total


    _________________
    What is life?
    It is the flash of a firefly in the night, the breath of a buffalo in the wintertime. It is the little shadow which runs across the grass and loses itself in the sunset.

    With deepest respect ~ Aloha & Mahalo, Carol
    Carol
    Carol
    Admin
    Admin


    Posts : 32911
    Join date : 2010-04-07
    Location : Hawaii

    U.S. NOW Empty Re: U.S. NOW

    Post  Carol Sun Dec 26, 2010 9:54 am

    Economist Yasheng Huang on China and Dollars
    MIT professor Yasheng Huang talks with Paul about whether or not it's fair to blame China for holding so many dollars.

    link: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/video/flv/generic.html?s=news01s4555q87f

    Misleading Messages in the Fight for Financial Reform Economist Simon Johnson reveals his anger at how corporate money is being used to mislead the public about the need for financial reform.
    Paul Solman: On Thursday's NewsHour, we speak to Simon Johnson about his new book, 13 Bankers: The Wall Street Takeover and the Next Financial Meltdown. A great benefit of this website is that we can share intriguing angles to a story that don't quite fit with the main theme as independent sidebars here.

    Without further ado, then, the ever-eloquent and near-ubiquitous Johnson, on his recent brush with "identity theft" -- and his anger at how corporate money is being used to mislead the public about the need for financial reform
    link: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/businessdesk/2010/05/simon-johnson-on-misleading-me.html


    _________________
    What is life?
    It is the flash of a firefly in the night, the breath of a buffalo in the wintertime. It is the little shadow which runs across the grass and loses itself in the sunset.

    With deepest respect ~ Aloha & Mahalo, Carol
    Carol
    Carol
    Admin
    Admin


    Posts : 32911
    Join date : 2010-04-07
    Location : Hawaii

    U.S. NOW Empty Re: U.S. NOW

    Post  Carol Sun Dec 26, 2010 11:08 am

    Democrats Seek Changes to Senate Procedures
    By CARL HULSE
    Published: December 24, 2010

    WASHINGTON — Frustrated by routine filibusters and other procedural blockades, Senate Democrats are urging their leadership to negotiate with Republicans to change the rules that govern how the Senate does business.

    Mary F. Calvert for The New York Times
    Senator Tom Udall is among Democrats who want rules changes.
    The Democrats would leave intact the ability of the minority party to filibuster legislation and nominations, meaning that in most cases it would still take 60 votes to get anything done. But they want to require senators to be on the floor if they intend to try to debate a bill to death and would make other changes to streamline the Senate’s operations, including ending the practice of secret “holds” by a single senator on legislation or nominees.

    Republicans are likely to resist, and should no compromise be found, some Democrats are prepared to propose their own package of rules changes on the first day of the session. Doing so could touch off a bitter floor fight, escalate the already high partisan tensions in the chamber and hinder President Obama’s ability to advance legislation.

    In a letter to Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, Democratic senators expressed “strong sentiment” for ending what they see as Republican misuse of Senate process.

    “We believe the current abuse of the rules by the minority threatens the ability of the Senate to do the necessary work of the nation, and we urge you to take steps to bring these abuses of our rules to an end,” said the Dec. 18 letter signed by 56 Democrats and independents, including all the other Democratic senators remaining in the Congress that opens Jan. 5.

    link: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/25/us/politics/25rules.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1293361217-RAsEAYmoUF+eDOY8/ox/sQ


    _________________
    What is life?
    It is the flash of a firefly in the night, the breath of a buffalo in the wintertime. It is the little shadow which runs across the grass and loses itself in the sunset.

    With deepest respect ~ Aloha & Mahalo, Carol
    Carol
    Carol
    Admin
    Admin


    Posts : 32911
    Join date : 2010-04-07
    Location : Hawaii

    U.S. NOW Empty Re: U.S. NOW

    Post  Carol Sun Dec 26, 2010 11:11 am

    The Looming Crisis in the States
    Published: December 25, 2010

    For most of this year, the state of Illinois has lacked the money to pay its bills. Some of its employees have been evicted from their offices for nonpayment of rent, social service groups have laid off hundreds of workers while waiting for checks, pharmacies have closed for lack of Medicaid payments. Faced with $4.5 billion in overdue payments, Illinois has proposed a precarious plan to sell its delinquent bills to Wall Street investors in exchange for cash, calculating that the interest it must pay the investors will be less than the late fees it owes.

    It is no way to run the nation’s fifth largest state, and it is not even clear that investors will agree, but these kinds of shaky deals are likely to become increasingly common as the states try to cope with the greatest fiscal drought since the Great Depression. Starved for revenue and accustomed to decades of overspending, many states have been overwhelmed. They are facing shortfalls of $140 billion next year. Even before the downturn, states jeopardized their futures by accumulating trillions in debt that they swept into some far-off future.

    But that future is not so distant, and the crushing debt has made recovery far more difficult to achieve. As The Times reported, Illinois, California and several other states are at increasing risk of being the first states to default since the 1930s. The city of Prichard, Ala., has stopped sending out its pension checks, breaking state law and shocking its employees.

    A state or city unable to make its bond payments would send harmful ripples through the financial system that could cause damage even to healthier governments. But if states act quickly to deal with their revenue losses and address their debt — and receive sufficient aid from Washington — there is still time to avoid a crisis.

    The most immediate cause of the states’ problems is the decline in tax revenue caused by the downturn, just as the demand for services has increased.

    Over the last two years, combined sales, personal and corporate taxes have fallen by more than 10 percent. Although revenue is likely to tick up slightly in 2011, federal stimulus money — which has been keeping many states afloat — is largely scheduled to expire. Renewing a portion of that aid would be one of the most effective ways to assist the economy.

    link: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/26/opinion/26sun1.html?hp


    _________________
    What is life?
    It is the flash of a firefly in the night, the breath of a buffalo in the wintertime. It is the little shadow which runs across the grass and loses itself in the sunset.

    With deepest respect ~ Aloha & Mahalo, Carol
    Carol
    Carol
    Admin
    Admin


    Posts : 32911
    Join date : 2010-04-07
    Location : Hawaii

    U.S. NOW Empty Re: U.S. NOW

    Post  Carol Sun Dec 26, 2010 11:19 am

    Californians Are Smoking Less and Less
    By IAN LOVETT
    Published: December 25, 2010 - LOS ANGELES — Californians are smoking less than most other Americans.

    According to a study released last week by the California Department of Public Health, just 13.1 percent of California residents reported smoking last year, compared with 20.6 percent nationally.

    California now has the second-lowest smoking rate in the country, trailing only Utah.


    The declining rate here reflects a culture that is especially conscious of health and the environment, and it was hailed by state officials as evidence of the success of a strategy to demonize smoking.

    In 1988, the state increased the tax on cigarettes, using part of the proceeds to finance an antitobacco campaign, and began instituting bans on smoking in public places — first on planes and buses, then in indoor workplaces and bars.

    The health department has also used media campaigns, including graphic antismoking advertisements, like a 1997 television commercial that showed a woman smoking a cigarette through the laryngectomy hole in her throat.

    “In California, we are very proud of our leading role in this revolution of how people view smoking,” said Colleen Stevens, the chief of the state’s Tobacco Control Media Campaign. “People are coming to the realization that smoking is not part of a healthy lifestyle.”

    Since 1988, California’s smoking rate has dropped from 22.7 percent to its current level, and the campaign has become a model for many other states.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/26/us/26smoking.html?ref=health


    _________________
    What is life?
    It is the flash of a firefly in the night, the breath of a buffalo in the wintertime. It is the little shadow which runs across the grass and loses itself in the sunset.

    With deepest respect ~ Aloha & Mahalo, Carol
    Carol
    Carol
    Admin
    Admin


    Posts : 32911
    Join date : 2010-04-07
    Location : Hawaii

    U.S. NOW Empty Re: U.S. NOW

    Post  Carol Sun Dec 26, 2010 4:07 pm

    NAPOLITANO DEFENDS INTEL DIRECTOR’S IGNORANCE: ‘THOSE OF US WHO NEEDED TO KNOW, KNEW’
    http://www.breitbart.tv/napolitano-defends-intel-directors-ignorance-as-pr-failure/

    Homeland Security chief defends airport security - Napolitano Defends Intel Directors Ignorance as PR Failure

    WASHINGTON (AP) - The use of full-body scanners and invasive pat-downs at airports around the country will not change for the "foreseeable future," Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said in an interview broadcast Sunday.

    While saying that she is always looking to improve the security systems in place, Napolitano added that the new technology and the pat-downs were "objectively safer for our traveling public."

    Napolitano dismissed a recent news report about major airports failing secrets tests designed to get contraband such as guns and knives past security screeners. The report said some airports had a 70 percent failure rate.

    "Many of them are very old and out of date and there were all kinds of methodology issues with them. Let's set those aside," she said on "State of the Union" on CNN. "We pick up more contraband with the new procedures and the new machinery."

    Napolitano defended the director of national intelligence, James Clapper, who didn't know about a roundup of terrorist suspects in Britain when asked about the arrests on ABC News earlier this week. The gaffe created an awkward moment for the man in charge of the nation's intelligence community.

    Napolitano and President Barack Obama's homeland security adviser, John Brennan, appeared on the show with Clapper. They said Clapper had been preoccupied with handling problems on the Korean peninsula and passage of a nuclear weapons treaty with Russia.

    Napolitano said in the CNN interview that homeland security officials were fully aware what was happening in Britain.

    "Well, let's be fair," she said. "I knew. John Brennan knew ... So one of the things I think that should be very clear to the American people is that those of us in homeland security who needed to know, we knew."

    Officials have said that Clapper hadn't been briefed on the headline-making arrests before being interviewed on ABC News.
    http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9KBLAKO0&show_article=1

    worth the read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Napolitano


    _________________
    What is life?
    It is the flash of a firefly in the night, the breath of a buffalo in the wintertime. It is the little shadow which runs across the grass and loses itself in the sunset.

    With deepest respect ~ Aloha & Mahalo, Carol
    TRANCOSO
    TRANCOSO


    Posts : 3930
    Join date : 2010-04-10
    Location : AMSTERDAM

    U.S. NOW Empty Re: U.S. NOW

    Post  TRANCOSO Tue Dec 28, 2010 8:22 pm

    The Pentagon’s Christmas Present: Largest Military Budget Since World War II
    by Rick Rozoff
    28-12-2010

    On December 22 both houses of the U.S. Congress unanimously passed a bill authorizing $725 billion for next year’s Defense Department budget.

    The bill, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011, was approved by all 100 senators as required and by a voice vote in the House.

    The House had approved the bill, now sent to President Barack Obama to sign into law, five days earlier in a 341-48 roll call, but needed to vote on it again after the Senate altered it in the interim.

    The proposed figure for the Pentagon’s 2011 war chest includes, in addition to the base budget, $158.7 billion for what are now euphemistically referred to as overseas contingency operations: The military occupation of Iraq and the war in Afghanistan.

    The $725 billion figure, although $17 billion more than the White House had requested, is not the final word on the subject, however, as supplements could be demanded as early as the beginning of next year, especially in regard to the Afghan war that will then be in its eleventh calendar year.

    Even as it currently is, the amount is the highest in constant dollars (pegged at any given year’s dollar and adjusted for inflation) since 1945, the final year of the Second World War. With recent U.S. census figures at 308 million, next year the Pentagon will spend $2,354 for every citizen of the country at the $725 billion price tag alone.

    Last year’s Pentagon budget, by way of comparison, was $680 billion, a base budget of $533.8 billion and the remainder for operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. In July of this year Congress approved the 2010 Supplemental Appropriations Act which contained an additional $37 billion for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

    Next year’s defense authorization of $725 billion compares to, according to the Center for Defense Information, a Pentagon budget of $444.6 billion in 1946; $460.4 billion in 1968, the highest yearly amount during the Vietnam War; and $443.4 billion in 1988, the highest during the eight years of the Ronald Reagan administration’s massive military buildup. (Numbers in 2004 constant dollars.) [1]

    The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates American military spending for 2009 to have accounted for 43 percent of the world total. Carl Conetta, co-director of the Project on Defense Alternatives, earlier this year estimated the 2010 U.S. defense budget to constitute 47 percent of total worldwide military expenditures and to amount to 19 percent of all American federal spending.

    In addition, Pentagon spending has increased by 100 percent since 1998 and “the Obama budget plans to spend more on the Pentagon over eight years than any administration has since World War II.” [2]

    With 2.25 million full-time civilian and military personnel, excluding part-time National Guard and Reserve members, the Defense Department is the U.S.’s largest employer, outstripping Walmart with 1.4 million employees and the U.S Post Office with 599,000. [3]

    “Add in what Homeland Security, Veterans Affairs, and the Energy departments spend on defense and total US military spending will reach $861 billion in fiscal 2011, exceeding that of all other nations combined,” according to Todd Harrison, senior fellow for Defense Budget Studies at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. [4]

    In April Robert Higgs of The Independent Institute advocated that the budgets – in part or in whole – of the departments of Veterans Affairs, Homeland Security, Energy, State and Treasury and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) should be calculated in the real military budget, which would in 2009 would have increased it to $901.5 billion.

    “Adding [the] interest component to the previous all-agency total, the grand total comes to $1,027.8 billion, which is 61.5 percent greater than the Pentagon’s outlays alone.”

    His numbers are:

    National Security Outlays in Fiscal Year 2009
    (billions of dollars)

    Department of Defense 636.5

    Department of Energy (nuclear weapons and environmental cleanup) 16.7

    Department of State (plus international assistance) 36.3

    Department of Veterans Affairs 95.5

    Department of Homeland Security 51.7

    Department of the Treasury (for the Military Retirement Fund) 54.9

    National Aeronautics and Space Administration (1/2 of total) 9.6

    Net interest attributable to past debt-financed defense outlays 126.3

    Total 1,027.5 [5]

    The above-cited Carl Conetta stated at the beginning of this year that the 2011 Pentagon budget will mark a milestone in that “the inflation-adjusted rise in spending since 1998 will probably exceed 100% in real terms by the end of the fiscal year.

    “Taking the 2011 budget into account, the Defense Department has been given about $7.2 trillion since 1998, when the post-Cold War decline in defense spending ended. Approximately $2.5 trillion of this total is due to spending above the annual level set in 1998. This added amount constitutes the post-1998 spending surge.”

    Based on constant 2010 dollars, Conetta further details that the Ronald Reagan administration spent $4.1 trillion on the Defense Department, the Georgia W. Bush administration spent $4.65 trillion and “Barack Obama plans to spend more than $5 trillion.”

    He also compares the two previous largest post-World War Two surges in U.S. military spending to the current one:

    From 1958-1968: 43 percent

    From: 1975-1985 57 percent

    In regards to which he said, “the 1998-2011 surge is as large as these two predecessors combined.”

    His calculations also include a growth in Pentagon contract employees of 40 percent since 1989, thereby freeing up uniformed service members for more direct combat roles.

    The U.S. share of global military spending grew from 28 percent during the Cold War to 41 percent by 2006 and that of North Atlantic Treaty Organization member states, including the U.S., from 49 percent to 70 percent in the same period.

    Contrariwise, the “group of potential adversary and competitor states has gone from claiming a 42% share to just 16% in 2006.

    “Had Ronald Reagan – who is generally regarded a hawkish president – wanted to achieve in the 1980s the ratio between US and adversary spending that existed in 2006, he would have had to quadruple his defense budgets.

    “And, of course, since 2006, the US defense budget has not receded, but instead grown by another 20% in real terms.

    “By 2011, the United States will probably account for more than half of all global military spending calculated in terms of ‘purchasing power parity’ (which corrects for differences between national economies).” [6]

    The defense authorization bill passed on December 22, despite its monumental and unprecedented size, has been routinely described in the American press as stripped-down, scaled-down and pared-down because an arms manufacturer or two, their lobbyists and obedient congresspersons didn’t get every new defense contract and weapons project they desired three days before Christmas.

    The December 22 vote in the House was, as Associated Press accurately described it, conducted without debate or discussion – and “without major restrictions on the conduct of operations” – particularly in regards to the $158.7 billion for the military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, $75 million to train and equip the armed forces of Yemen for the counterinsurgency campaign in that country and $205 million more to fund Israel’s Iron Dome missile shield.

    Regarding the first vote on December 17: “This year’s bill is mostly noteworthy for its broad bipartisan support during wartime….Unlike during the height of the Iraq War when anti-war Democrats tried to use the legislation to force troops home, the House passed the defense bill Friday with almost no debate on Afghanistan.” [7]

    Aside from voting for the repeal of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy as a stand-alone measure, excising an amendment to allow abortions to be performed on military bases, and refusing reparations to victims of the World War Two Japanese occupation of the U.S. Pacific territory of Guam (apparently $100 million for the purpose was considered excessive in the $725 billion authorization), there was no meaningful dissent in either house of Congress.

    Increasing the U.S. war budget to the highest level it’s been since the largest and deadliest war in history while no nation or group of nations poses a serious threat to the country, and to a degree where it effectively exceeds the defense spending of the rest of the world combined, is all in the proper order of things for the world’s sole military superpower.

    Notes
    1) Center for Defense Information
    http://www.cdi.org/news/mrp/us-military-spending.pdf

    2) Christian Science Monitor, March 29, 2010
    http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/David-R.-Francis/2010/0329/Defense-budget-After-Afghanistan-and-Iraq-withdrawal-a-peace-dividend

    3) Christian Science Monitor, June 28, 2010
    http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/David-R.-Francis/2010/0628/Cuts-to-US-defense-budget-look-inevitable

    4) Ibid

    5) Robert Higgs, Defense Spending Is Much Greater than You Think The Independent Institute, April 17, 2010
    http://www.independent.org/blog/index.php?p=5827

    6) Carl Conetta, Trillions to Burn? A Quick Guide to the Surge in Pentagon Spending Project on Defense Alternatives, February 5 2010
    http://www.comw.org/pda/1002BudgetSurge.html

    7) Associated Press, December 17, 2010

    Rick Rozoff is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

    SOURCE: http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=22533
    TRANCOSO
    TRANCOSO


    Posts : 3930
    Join date : 2010-04-10
    Location : AMSTERDAM

    U.S. NOW Empty Re: U.S. NOW

    Post  TRANCOSO Wed Dec 29, 2010 12:13 pm

    Towards a North American Union? Removed from the Public Eye, Top Level Consultations behind Closed Doors
    by Jerome R. Corsi
    29-12-2010

    Hillary attends 'North American Union' meeting Trilateral process with Mexico, Canada proceeds with little notice

    With little attention from mainstream media, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met with the foreign ministers of Canada and Mexico in a North American Foreign Ministers Meeting in Quebec, Canada.

    The Dec. 13 meeting is a prelude to the next North American Summit Leaders meeting in 2011, a yet unscheduled trilateral summit that is the continuation of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America. Under the low-key format, the continental meetings have been carried out with little fanfare and outside of congressional oversight.

    The Canadian government website detailed that the Quebec meeting identified as important areas of trilateral cooperation" the following:

    - Engagement with the countries of Central America, with a view to creating a North America-Central America dialogue to strengthen regional cooperation and efforts against trans-national criminal organizations;

    - Trilateral cooperation on natural disaster reduction, prevention/mitigation, preparedness and response in the Americas;

    - A commitment to Haiti, specifically, that it remains a mutual priority and the subject of continued monitoring, including on the political transition and related democratic process. Also mentioned on the website of the Canadian government was "the importance of an integrated North American approach to climate change, clean energy, and environmental issues writ large," as well as trilateral cooperation cyber security, Internet freedom and privacy.

    Finally, the Canadian government noted that trilateral public health and safety officials had worked to revise the North American Plan for Avian and Pandemic Influenza, although changes to the agreement were not specified.

    WND previously reported that the United States, under SPP, had agreed with Mexico and Canada to a "North American Plan for Avian Flu and Pandemic Influenza" that establishes U.N. law along with regulations by the World Trade Organization and World Health Organization as supreme over U.S. law during a pandemic. The agreement sets the stage for militarizing the management of continental health emergencies.

    Published on the U.S. Department of State website, the comments of Mexican ForeignSecretary Patricia Espinosa made clear the Quebec North American Foreign Ministersmeeting covered a wide range of policy areas, including "a relevant agenda with regard to the environment, energy, and in creating a common basis to fight climate change among our countries."

    Espinosa also stressed "the importance of strengthening North America's competitiveness to consolidate our economic recovery," echoing the competitiveness theme of the "Prosperity Agenda" under SPP.

    According to the State Department website, Clinton stated, "I want to say first and foremost that the partnership between Canada, Mexico, and the United States is of critical importance."

    Clinton said the U.S., Canada and Mexico work together every day, "whether it is to drive economic progress, or strengthen our security, or address urgent problems such as climate change or violent extremism in places like Afghanistan, or narco-traffickers or pandemic disease," producing a profound impact on every level, "locally, regionally and globally."

    Building on the theme of "North American citizens," Clinton stressed, "No partnership means more to the United States and to the hundreds of millions of North American citizens whose lives and futures are increasingly intertwined."

    In a report on the Quebec meeting, the Boston Globe made clear that diplomats in attendance were not authorized to speak publicly about the talks.

    The trilateral communiqués coming from the North American Foreign Ministers suggested there would be another North American Leaders Summit in 2011, although no specific location or date appeared to have been set for the meeting.

    SOURCE: http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=22545
    TRANCOSO
    TRANCOSO


    Posts : 3930
    Join date : 2010-04-10
    Location : AMSTERDAM

    U.S. NOW Empty Re: U.S. NOW

    Post  TRANCOSO Wed Dec 29, 2010 12:21 pm

    16 U.S. Cities Could Face Bankruptcy in 2011
    Global Research, December 29, 2010
    The Business Insider

    2011 will be the year of the municipal default. At least that's what analysts like Meredith Whitney predict, as do bond investors that have been fleeing the muni market.

    There are many reasons to be worried. First, the expiration of Build America Bonds will make it harder for cities to raise funds.

    Second, city revenues are crashing and keep getting worse. Property taxes haven't reflected the total damage from the housing crash. High joblessness is cutting into city revenues, while increasing costs for services.

    The next default could be a major city like Detroit, or it could be one of hundreds of small cities that are on the brink. Did we leave off your ailing city? Let us know in the comments.

    San Diego, Ca.

    Deficit through June 2012 : $73 million

    Budget in FY2011: $2.85 billion

    Annualized gap: 1.7%

    The city's official have tried curbing the deficit by increasing sales taxes, but residents of the city strongly oppose this and have voted it down.

    San Diego already cut over $200 million over the past two years, so these cuts won't come easy.

    New York, NY

    Deficit through June 2012: $2 billion

    Budget in FY2010: $63.1 billion

    Annualized gap: 2.1%

    Estimates of the NYC deficit range from $3.6 billion according to Comptroller John Liu to around $2 billion according to the Independent Budget Office. Everyone agrees that the deficit will be worse if New York state cuts aid as part of its own deficit reduction plan.

    Mayor Bloomberg has already started to address the FY2012 deficit, calling for layoffs in all city agencies, closing 20 fire departments at night, and reducing services for seniors, libraries and cultural centers.

    San Jose, Ca.

    Deficit through June 2012: $90 million

    Budget in FY2010: $2.7 billion

    Annualized gap: 2.2%

    After an audit of the San Jose police department, city officials found it to have too many high paid supervisors, costing the city too much money. The answer to this is converting some of those upper ranked officers to patrol positions. This could reduce the city's debt by $33 million.

    Last year's deficit was $116 million, leading to brutal cuts including nearly 900 layoffs.

    Cincinnati, Oh.

    Deficit through December 2012: $60 million

    Biennial budget FY2009/2010: $2.5 billion

    Annualized gap: 2.4%

    Helping the budget in Cincinnati depends largely on changes in the police and fire departments. The city can either get $20 million in concessions from the two unions, lay off 216 firefighters, or outsource the police force to neighboring city, Hamilton.

    Honolulu, Hi.

    Deficit through June 2012: $100 million

    Budget in FY2011: $1.8 billion

    Annualized gap: 3.7%

    Mayor Peter Carlisle said police officers and fire fighters will be asked to make concessions in the upcoming budget and he will also end furloughs of two days per month for public workers. This will require the 2,900 officers to give back their 6% pay raises they have received in each of the past four years.

    Last year Honolulu raised some property taxes to fill a huge $140 million deficit.

    San Francisco, Ca.

    Deficit through June 2012: $380 million

    Budget in FY2011: $6.55 billion

    Annualized gap: 3.9%

    Mayor Gavin Newsom says this year's deficit is completely manageable. Last year's deficit approached $500 million and the city did not need to lay off any police or firemen. While Newsom's term is coming to an end, he says he and his colleagues will leave detailed options for the incoming mayor.

    Last year's cuts were even larger, eliminating a $438 million deficit. The city is down to the bone.

    Los Angeles, Ca.

    Deficit through June 2012: $438 million

    Budget in FY2011: $6.7 billion

    Annualized gap: 4.4%

    The Los Angeles City Administration Office plans to cut 225 civilian positions in the LAPD, reduce firefighting staffing, and eliminate a dozen positions in the City Attorney's Office and General Service Department. The deficit will only get worse unless an effort to privatize parking garages is approved. If not, the city will require more layoffs, furloughs, and curtailed hiring.

    Last year's deficit was even larger, totalling nearly $700,000.

    Washington, D.C.

    Deficit through September 2012: $688 million

    Budget in FY2011: $8.89 billion

    Annualized gap: 4.4%

    Council member Tommy Wells proposed tax rate increases which were voted down, but Wells says he will continue to push his proposal. Wells' proposal seems reasonable as residents making $100,000 a year would only pay $63 more in taxes per year. This is a small price to pay that would benefit the city immensely.

    Newark, NJ

    Deficit through December 2011: $30.5 million

    Budget in FY2010: $677 million

    Annualized gap: 4.5%

    Newark's deficit was $83 million before Mayor Cory Booker initiated a plan to sell city-owned buildings, raise property taxes to 16 percent and decimate the police force. Nontheless, Moody's cut Newark's rating to A3 citing its $30.5 million remaining deficit.

    Detroit, Mi

    Deficit through June 2011: $85 million

    Budget in FY2011: $3.1 billion

    Annualized gap: 5.5%

    Detroit's city government has cut costs with layoffs and by leaving currently vacant positions open. Mayor Bing's emergency fiscal plan includes demolishing houses and cutting police and trash services to 20% of the city.

    Last year the city council pushed through severe cuts to fill an over $700 million deficit.

    Reading, Pa

    Deficit through December 2011: $7.5 million

    Budget in FY2010: $120 million

    Annualized gap: 6.3%

    One of Pennsylvania's several distressed municipalities, which receive state aid, Reading has been running an operating deficit for years. In September the city council said their deficit was bigger than expected, soaring to $7.5 million for the current year, which means they will have to borrow around $17 million from the state to pay off total debts.

    Joliet, Il

    Deficit through December 2011: $21 million

    Budget in FY2010: $274 million

    Annualized gap: 7.7%

    Last year, the city increased property tax by over 12 percent and hiked water and sewer rates by 45 percent over three years to help with the deficit. The city council also cut police and public sector jobs.

    Camden, NJ

    Deficit through December 2011: $26.5 million

    Budget in FY2010: $178 million

    Annualized gap: 15%

    Despite holding title of second most dangerous city in America, Camden recently received approval to lay off half of its police force.

    Hamtramck, Mi

    Deficit through June 2012: $4.7 million

    Budget in FY2011: $18 million

    Annualized gap: 17%

    City manager Bill Cooper was denied permission to declare bankruptcy. He says the city is owed millions of dollars in tax dollars from Detroit from a shared facility. The state offered the city a loan to stave off bankruptcy.

    Cooper says he has already cut almost everything possible, going so far as to lay off the city's five crossing guards.

    Hamtramck might avoid bankruptcy, but also-broke Michigan can't afford many of these deals. That's why Gov. Rick Snyder predicts "hundreds of jurisdictions" going bankrupt in the next four years.

    Central Falls, RI

    Deficit through June 2012: $7 million

    Budget in FY2011: $21 million

    Annualized gap: 22%

    Central Falls has been put in state receivership due to critical budget problems. State-appointed receiver Mark Pfeiffer thinks the best solution is for Central Falls to be annexed by its neighboring city, Pawtucket.

    Paterson, N.J.

    Deficit through December 2011: $54 million

    Budget for FY2010: $225 million

    Annualized gap: 24%

    As a "last resort," Paterson is considering laying off 30 percent of its police force, said councilman Steve Olimpio. This will put 150 police officers out of work.

    BONUS: Chicago, Il

    Deficit through December 2011: $654 million Closed

    Budget in FY2010: $6.8 billion

    Annualized gap: 9.6%

    Mayor Richard Daley has balanced the budget, but absolutely ruined Chicago finances from here on.

    His FY2011 plan uses up nearly the entire revenue from a long-term lease of the local parking system and airport, which he passed in 2008. The multi-billion lease deal was supposed to last for decades, but it only lasted two years. The best hope for the future is building a city-owned casino.

    SOURCE: http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=22547
    ClearWater
    ClearWater


    Posts : 439
    Join date : 2010-04-09
    Age : 50
    Location : Minnesota

    U.S. NOW Empty Re: U.S. NOW

    Post  ClearWater Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:54 pm

    American Cities That Are Running Out Of People
    The population of the United States has increased steadily by roughly 2.5 million people every year since World War II. Throughout prosperity and hard times, Americans continue to have families. Many of the country’s regions have expanded to accommodate this population increase. Some cities have grown faster than others as the result of being at the center of some important new technology or job market. Others have lost residents because of failing industries and migration. Nevertheless, some of these cities have continued to grow slowly, or at least remain relatively stagnant, buoyed by the rising tide of the national population.

    There are some cities, however, which have experienced such severe hardship and decline that their populations have actually decreased significantly. New Orleans has lost more than a quarter of its population in the past ten years as the result of Hurricane Katrina. The rest of the cities that have lost major parts of their population have seen their flagship industries which include coal, steel, oil, and auto-related manufacturing fall off or completely collapse. America moved away from its status as an industrial superpower in the second half of the 20th century as the services sector rose to replace it. Millions of US manufacturing jobs have moved overseas. Cities such as Rochester, Cleveland and Buffalo declined in population because they were trade hubs, and new modes of transportation removed their geographical dominance. Cities like Flint, Michigan have economies based on a single major industry. In Flint’s case, that industry is auto manufacturing. When that industry began to decline, Flint was unable to diversify to prevent a population exodus.

    All of the cities on this list experienced at least one of these devastating problems which have caused tens of thousands, and in some cases, hundreds of thousands of its residents to leave the region for other jobs and other homes. While it has been the primary focus of these cities to create new sources of employment for their residents, it may be years before people return, if they do at all.

    Unfortunately, the populations of most of the cities on this list continue to decline and the situation could get worse for years. This loss of residents has caused severe drops in the social services that many of these cities can provide. Property and other taxes have fallen so much that the support that residents of other cities take for granted is at risk in the municipalities on this list. There is no longer any guarantee that they can maintain police and fire departments at reasonable levels. Some of these cities cannot continue to manage large neighborhoods which have become almost deserted as residents have left unoccupied homes behind. Home vacancy rates tell a great deal about how much a city’s population has dropped.

    24/7 obtained its population data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s Population Division. Housing Vacancy came from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey. This is a list of the seven American cities that have lost the most people in the past decade.

    Continued... http://247wallst.com/2010/12/27/american-cities-that-are-running-out-of-people/
    ClearWater
    ClearWater


    Posts : 439
    Join date : 2010-04-09
    Age : 50
    Location : Minnesota

    U.S. NOW Empty Re: U.S. NOW

    Post  ClearWater Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:58 pm

    The Ten Biggest American Cities That Are Running Out Of Water
    Some parts of the United States have begun to run low on water. That is probably not much of a surprise to people who live in the arid parts of America that have had water shortages for decades or even centuries. No one who has been to the Badlands in South Dakota would expect to be able to grow crops there.

    The water problem is worse than most people realize, particularly in several large cities which are occasionally low on water now and almost certainly face shortfalls in a few years. This is particularly true if the change in global weather patterns substantially alters rainfall amounts in some areas of the US.

    24/7 Wall St. looked at an October, 2010 report on water risk by environmental research and sustainability group, Ceres. We also considered a comprehensive July, 2010 report from the National Resources Defense Council which mapped areas at high risk of water shortage conflict. 24/7 Wall St also did its own analysis of water supply and consumption in America’s largest cities, and focused on the thirty largest metropolitan areas. One goal was to identify potential conflicts in regions which might have disputed rights over large supplies of water and the battles that could arise from these disputes. And, 24/7 Wall St. examined geographic areas which have already been plagued by drought and water shortages off and on.

    The analysis allowed us to choose ten cities which are likely to face severe shortages in the relatively near-term future. Some of these are likely to be obvious to the reader. The area around Los Angeles was once too dry to sustain the population of a huge city. But, infrastructure was built that allowed water to be pumped in from east of the region. Las Vegas had similar problems. It was part of a great desert until Lake Meade was created by the Hoover dam built on the Colorado river.

    Severe droughts that could affect large cities are first a human problem. The competition for water could make life in some of America’s largest cities nearly unbearable for residents. A number of industries rely on regular access to water. Some people would be out of work if these industries had poor prospects for continued operation. The other important trouble that very low water supplies creates is that cities have sold bonds based on their needs for infrastructure to move, clean, and supply water. Credit ratings agencies may not have taken drought issues into account at the level that they should. Extreme disruptions of the water supply of any city would have severe financial consequences.

    The National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) report takes the following into account when assessing the likelihood of water shortages: “The risk to water sustainability is based on the following criteria: (1) projected water demand as a share of available precipitation; (2) groundwater use as a share of projected available precipitation; (3) susceptibility to drought; (4) projected increase in freshwater withdrawals; and (5) projected increase in summer water deficit.”

    The ten cities on this list are the ones with the most acute exposure to problems which could cause large imbalances of water supply and demand. There are a number of metropolitan areas which could face similar problems but their risks are not quite as high. The water problem for US cities is, although it may not be evident, one of the largest issues that faces urban areas over the next ten years.

    These are the ten largest cities by population that have the greatest chance of running out of water.

    Continued... http://247wallst.com/2010/10/29/the-ten-great-american-cities-that-are-dying-of-thirst/
    ClearWater
    ClearWater


    Posts : 439
    Join date : 2010-04-09
    Age : 50
    Location : Minnesota

    U.S. NOW Empty Re: U.S. NOW

    Post  ClearWater Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:12 pm

    The Most Important Day in America in 50 Years... It’s Coming in 2011.
    This single day could change everything about our nation and our day-to-day lives.
    Watch the eye-opening video presentation here... http://www.stansberryresearch.com/pro/1011PSIENDVD/PPSILC07/PR

    Click the red x to close the window, and you'll be offered a text version of the video.
    TRANCOSO
    TRANCOSO


    Posts : 3930
    Join date : 2010-04-10
    Location : AMSTERDAM

    U.S. NOW Empty Re: U.S. NOW

    Post  TRANCOSO Thu Dec 30, 2010 3:53 pm

    Anatomy of an Epidemic: Psychiatric Drugs and the Rise of Mental Illness in America
    by Robert Whitaker
    (Global Research/Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry, Vol. 7, Number 1, Spring 2005)
    December 30, 2010

    The percentage of Americans disabled by “mental illness” has increased dramatically since 1955, when Thorazine – remembered today as psychiatry’s first “wonder” drug – was introduced into the market.

    There are now nearly 6 million Americans disabled by “mental illness”, and this number increases by more than 400 people each day. A review of the scientific literature reveals that it is our drug-based paradigm of care that is fueling this epidemic. The drugs increase the likelihood that a person will become chronically ill, and induce new and more severe psychiatric symptoms, often psychiatric drug-induced, in a significant percentage of patients.

    E. Fuller Torrey, in his 2001 book The Invisible Plague, concluded that insanity had risen to the level of an epidemic. This epidemic has unfolded in lockstep with the ever-increasing use of prescription psychiatric drugs.

    The number of disabled “mentally ill” has increased nearly six-fold since Thorazine was introduced.

    The number of disabled “mentally ill” has also increased dramatically since 1987, the year Prozac was introduced.

    Anti-psychotics, antidepressants, and anti-anxiety drugs create perturbations in neurotransmitter functions. In response, the brain goes through a series of compensatory adaptations. Neurons both release less serotonin and down-regulate (or decrease) their number of serotonin receptors. The density of serotonin receptors in the brain may decrease by 50% or more. After a few weeks, the patient’s brain is functioning in a manner that is qualitatively as well as quantitatively different from the normal state.

    Conditions that disrupt brain chemistry may cause delusions, hallucinations, disordered thinking, and mood swings – the symptoms of insanity. Infectious agents, tumors, metabolic and toxic disorders and various diseases could all affect the brain in this manner. Psychiatric medications also disrupt brain chemistry. Psychotropic drugs also increase the likelihood that a person will become chronically ill, and they cause a significant percentage of patients to become ill in new and more severe ways.

    CAN THE “CURES” BE WORSE THAN THE “DISEASE”? - Neuroleptics (AKA Anti-psychotics, Anti-schizophrenics, Major Tranquilizers)
    In an NIMH (National Institute of Mental Health) study, short-term (6 weeks) anti-psychotic drug-treated patients were much improved compared to placebo (75% vs. 23%). However patients who received placebo treatment were less likely to be re-hospitalized over the next 3 years than were those who received any of the three active phenothiazines.

    Relapse was found to be significantly related to the dose of the tranquilizing medication the patient was receiving before he was put on placebo – the higher the dose, the greater the probability of relapse.

    Neuroleptics increased the patients’ biological vulnerability to psychosis. A retrospective study by Bockoven also indicated that the drugs were making patients chronically ill.

    There were three NIMH-funded studies conducted during the 1970s that examined this possibility (whether first-episode psychotic episodes could be treated without medications), and in each instance, the newly admitted patients treated without drugs did better than those treated in a conventional manner (i.e. with anti-psychotic drugs).

    Patients who were treated without neuroleptics in an experimental home staffed by nonprofessionals had lower relapse rates over a 2-year period than a control group treated with drugs in a hospital. Patients treated without drugs were the better functioning group as well.

    The brain responds to neuroleptics – which block 70% to 90% of all D2 dopamine receptors in the brain – as though they are a pathological insult. To compensate, dopaminergic brain cells increase the density of their D2 receptors by 30% or more. The brain is now supersensitive to dopamine and becomes more biologically vulnerable to psychosis and is at particularly high risk of severe withdrawal symptoms should he or she abruptly quit taking the drugs.

    Neuroleptics can produce a dopamine supersensitivity that leads to both dyskinetic and psychotic symptoms. An implication is that the tendency toward withdrawal psychosis in a patient who had developed such a supersensitivity is determined by more that just the normal course of the illness.

    With minimal or no exposure to neuroleptics, at least 40% of people who suffered a psychotic break and were diagnosed with schizophrenia would not relapse after leaving the hospital, and perhaps as many as 65% would function fairly well over the long term. However, once first-episode patients were treated with neuroleptics, a different fate awaited them. Their brains would undergo drug-induced changes that would increase their biological vulnerability to psychosis, and this would increase the likelihood that they would become chronically ill (and thus permanently disabled)

    In the mid 1990s, several research teams reported that the drugs cause atrophy of the cerebral cortex and an enlargement of the basal ganglia. The drugs were causing structural changes in the brain. The drug-induced enlargement of the basal ganglia was associated with greater severity of both negative and “positive” (schizophrenic) symptoms. Over the long term the drugs cause changes in the brain associated with a worsening of the very symptoms the drugs are supposed to alleviate.

    Antidepressants
    The story of antidepressants is a bit subtler, and it leads to the same conclusion that these drugs increase chronic illness over time. Well-designed studies, the differences between the effectiveness of antidepressant drugs and placebo are not impressive. About 61% of the drug-treated patients improved, versus 46% of the placebo patients, producing a net drug benefit of only 15%.

    At the end of 16 weeks (in a study comparing cognitive behavior therapy, interpersonal therapy, the tricyclic antidepressant imipramine and placebo) there were no significant differences among treatments, including placebo plus clinical management, for the less severely depressed and functionally impaired patients. Only the severely depressed patients fared better on a tricyclic than on placebo. However, at the end of 18 months, even this minimal benefit disappeared. Stay-well rates were best for the cognitive behavior group (30%) and poorest for the imipramine group (19%).

    Antidepressants were making people chronically ill, just like the anti-psychotics were. In 1985, a U.K. group reported that in a 2-year study comparing drug therapy to cognitive therapy, relapse was significantly higher in the pharmacotherapy group. Long-term use of antidepressants may increase the patient’s biochemical vulnerability to depression and thus worsen the course of affective disorders. An analysis of 27 studies showed that whether one treats a depressed patient for 3 months or 3 years, it does not matter when one stops the drugs. The longer the drug treatment, the higher the likelihood of relapse.

    Benzodiazepines
    Xanax (a benzodiazepine class “minor” tranquilizer) patients got better during the first four weeks of treatment; they did not improve any more in weeks 4 to 8, and their symptoms began to worsen after that. A high percentage relapsed and by the end of 23 weeks, they were worse off than patients treated without drugs on five different outcomes measures. Patients tapered off Xanax suffered nearly 4 times as many panic attacks as the non-drug patients and 25% of the Xanax patients suffered from rebound anxiety and insomnia more severe than when they began the study.

    Today’s drug-treated patients spend much more time in hospital beds and are far more likely to die from their mental illness than they were in 1896. Modern treatments have set up a revolving door and appear to be a leading cause of injury and death.

    MANUFACTURING “MENTAL ILLNESS”
    It is well-known that all of the major classes of psychiatric drugs – anti-psychotics, anti-depressants, benzodiazepines, and stimulants for ADHD – can trigger new and more severe psychiatric symptoms in a significant percentage of patients. It is easy to see this epidemic-creating factor at work with Prozac and the other SSRIs.

    Prozac quickly took up the top position as America’s most complained about drug. By 1997, 39,000 adverse-event reports about it had been sent to Medwatch. These reports are thought to represent only 1% of the actual number of such events, suggesting that nearly 4 million people in the US had suffered such problems, which included mania, psychotic depression, nervousness, anxiety, agitation, hostility, hallucinations, memory loss, tremors, impotence, convulsions, insomnia and nausea.

    The propensity of Prozac and other SSRIs to trigger mania or psychosis is undoubtedly the biggest problem with these drugs. The American Psychiatric Association warns that manic or hypomanic episodes are estimated to occur in 8% to 20 % of patients treated with anti-depressants.

    Anti-depressant-induced mania is not simply a temporary and reversible phenomenon, but a complex biochemical mechanism of illness deterioration. Yale researchers reported that 8.1% of all admissions to a psychiatric hospital they studied were due to SSRI-induced mania or psychosis.

    Thus the SSRI path to a disabling mental illness can be easily seen. A depressed patient treated with an anti-depressant suffers a manic or psychotic episode, at which time his or her diagnosis is changed to bipolar disorder. At that point, the person is prescribed an anti-psychotic to go along with the anti-depressant, and, once on a drug cocktail, the person is well along on the road to permanent disability.

    CONCLUSION
    There is an outside agent fueling this epidemic of mental illness, only it is to be found in the medicine cabinet. Psychiatric drugs perturb normal neurotransmitter function, and while that perturbation may curb symptoms over a short term, over the long run it increases the likelihood that a person will become chronically ill, or ill with new or more severe symptoms. A review of the scientific literature shows quite clearly that it is our drug-based paradigm of care that is fueling this modern-day plague.

    Robert Whitaker’s ground-breaking book, Mad In America: Bad Science, Bad Medicine and the Enduring Mistreatment of the Mentally Ill was published in 2002, That critically acclaimed book should be, but is not, required reading for everybody in the medical profession, including psychiatric patients and their loved ones. (www.madinamerica.com)

    Whitaker’s latest book (published in 2010) Anatomy of an Epidemic: Magic Bullets, Psychiatric Drugs, and the Astonishing Rise of Mental Illness in America, further documents the epidemic of “mental illness” disability (which, in many cases, are not mental illnesses at all, but rather drug-induced neurological illnesses that manifest psychological symptoms or drug-induced withdrawal both of which can be mis-diagnosed as mental illnesses).

    Each of these books have been essentially black-balled by the pharmaceutical, medical and psychiatric industries, neither book having even been reviewed in any mainstream medical journals.

    Excerpted, with minimal editing, by Gary G. Kohls, MD

    Dr. Kohls warns against the abrupt discontinuation of any psychiatric drug because of the common, often serious withdrawal symptoms that can occur with the chronic use of any dependency-inducing psychoactive drug, whether illicit or legal. Close consultation with an informed physician who is familiar with treating drug withdrawal and who is also willing to read and study the above books and become familiar with the previously poorly understood dangers of these drugs.


    SOURCE: http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=22563
    TRANCOSO
    TRANCOSO


    Posts : 3930
    Join date : 2010-04-10
    Location : AMSTERDAM

    U.S. NOW Empty Re: U.S. NOW

    Post  TRANCOSO Thu Dec 30, 2010 4:03 pm

    The percentage of Americans disabled by “mental illness” has increased dramatically since 1955, when Thorazine – remembered today as psychiatry’s first “wonder” drug – was introduced into the market.

    There are now nearly 6 million Americans disabled by “mental illness”, and this number increases by more than 400 people each day. A review of the scientific literature reveals that it is our drug-based paradigm of care that is fueling this epidemic. The drugs increase the likelihood that a person will become chronically ill, and induce new and more severe psychiatric symptoms, often psychiatric drug-induced, in a significant percentage of patients.
    Crazy Happy
    At last... an explination why the American voters support utter morons & (mis)'leaders' to become their Head of State.
    geek afro
    Carol
    Carol
    Admin
    Admin


    Posts : 32911
    Join date : 2010-04-07
    Location : Hawaii

    U.S. NOW Empty Re: U.S. NOW

    Post  Carol Thu Dec 30, 2010 4:31 pm

    Just how do you think alcoholic, cocaine head Bush with an IQ less then 100 got into office? Crazy Happy


    _________________
    What is life?
    It is the flash of a firefly in the night, the breath of a buffalo in the wintertime. It is the little shadow which runs across the grass and loses itself in the sunset.

    With deepest respect ~ Aloha & Mahalo, Carol
    Carol
    Carol
    Admin
    Admin


    Posts : 32911
    Join date : 2010-04-07
    Location : Hawaii

    U.S. NOW Empty Re: U.S. NOW

    Post  Carol Thu Dec 30, 2010 10:54 pm

    http://ppjg.wordpress.com/2010/12/28/a-citizens-memorandum-of-understanding-mou-with-the-federal-government/

    One more time: A citizens ‘Memorandum of Understanding’ #1(MOU) with the Federal Government
    December 28, 2010 by ppjg
    Originally published in August 2009

    Greetings:

    Consider this a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to all members of the Senate, all members of the House, and to President Obama. I am sure you are fully aware of the intent and implications of MOUs, as each of you, in one way or another, uses them to establish the outlining of agreements between yourselves, collectively or individually, concerning the agreements you have made with individuals acting as state’s representatives or agencies; generally to avoid Constitutional prohibitions on your intended actions and in avoidance of the Constitution. I am using it in quite another fashion as you will see in the following text.

    For you, MOUs are the terms and agreements of what, are in fact the first step in contractual agreements. MOUs are most often accompanied by cooperative agreements and funding (bribes) to implement what generally turns out to be egregious assaults to civil rights and liberties to the benefit of the federal government, linked so inextricably to corporate interests and global agreements.

    Consider what follows a Memorandum of Understanding between me, Marti J. Oakley, and all of you, collectively cited in the above paragraph.

    To Wit:

    We (you and I) agree that each and every one of you holds your office as a result of election. And, that as a result of your victory and subsequent oath of office, you were expected to actually represent the people who put their faith and trust in you. The fact is you have violated this oath at every opportunity regardless of which party you claim allegiance to or which political philosophy you espouse at any given time.

    In light of a profound understanding of how you have used and abused this trust and faith, I need you to understand how I (we) perceive you, i.e., your activities, your betrayals of these United States of America, your pandering to corporate interests, your illegal agreements with foreign governments and interests and ultimately what appears to be a very concerted effort to destroy our country and to convert the same into a region in some coveted global plantation.

    Because the instances of your acts against the people are so numerous, in this MOU, I will address only this one issue: HR 2749 and s.510 the Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009, now the Food Modernization Act of 2010.

    Please consider this Memorandum of Understanding No. 1.

    Please be advised that no cooperative agreement with the anticipated funding (bribe money) will be forthcoming. You may consider this an “Unfunded Mandate” in the sense that I will never contribute one dime to the re-election efforts of any one of you. “We” in the following text means “WE THE PEOPLE.”

    I (We) understand:

    A) The recent passage in the House of HR 2749 and by extension s.510, euphemistically titled “Food Safety Act,” was nothing short of an assault on the food production and supply on behalf of:

    1. Illegal international harmonization agreements meant to reduce “barriers to trade,” i.e., the ability of multi-national corporate raiders to operate at the lowest standards possible to increase profits;

    2. Illegal trade agreements which are in fact inter-governmental corporate agreements and not Constitutionally recognized treaties;

    3. Corporate bio-pirates;

    4. National and international political donors involved in agriculture; and,

    5. A means to end domestic farming and ranching practiced by independent and family producers so as to allow the establishment of corporately owned and operated industrialized farm operations.

    In simpler terms: An ending of competition for your largest political donors and a centralization of the food supply, ending biodiversity and putting our national security at risk as a result.

    I (We) understand:

    B) That all provisions of HR 2749 and S510 purported to be necessary in order to secure the safety of the food supply in the U.S. will in reality, do nothing to accomplish this. We understand the purposes of this Act were and are:

    1. To facilitate the creation of yet another behemoth federal agency which will have police state powers and “rule-making” (law making) authority;

    2. That HACCP will remain in place allowing corporate interests to “inspect” themselves, while otherwise omitting them almost totally from being subject to this Act;

    3. The subjecting of independent and private family farms and ranches to surveillance and “swat team” type raids;

    4. Fines, fees and other costs, and burdensome regulations;

    5. Warrantless search and seizure of private property, with only:

    a) “a reasonable belief” by the Secretary that a problem exists; and

    b) Without any evidence, without due process;

    6. The prohibition on using the courts and judicial system as a means of redress in the aftermath of assault by the USDA/FDA/HHS on behalf of the federal government;

    7. That the actual intent of this bill is to eradicate all but corporate industrialized farming;

    8. That the final version as passed was made to appear that family and independent farms and ranches would be exempt — done by eliminating sections early on in the document only to reinsert them in later pages;

    9. That the FDA definition of what a farm is, is reflected in the bill and includes animals;

    10. That the USDA definition is also reflected;

    11. That the word “farm” has now been inserted into US Code as being a facility;

    12. That a facility (farm) now falls under the USC 7 Warehousing Act; and

    13. That an intentional and malicious redefining and reassigning of farms under US Code will subject even the smallest operation to fees, registration and subjugation to the new “food police.”

    I (We) understand:

    C) That HR 2749 and S.510 constitutes an act of terrorism, emanating from our own government against a selected and targeted segment of the nation on behalf of foreign interests, regulations, agreements, corporate interests and most especially Codex Alimentarius.

    1. That new and unique offices, officers and agents will be authorized to use force against private U.S. citizens;

    2. That any attempt to defend our homes, property or persons, even verbally, can result in the use of force and possible imprisonment;

    3. That HR 2749 and S.510 is the codifying of Codex Alimentarius into U.S. law;

    4. That Codex, where ever it has been made law, has created food shortages, famine and endangered the public safety and health;

    5. That Codex is the global overtaking of food supplies and production to benefit commerce and trade (read: corporations); and,

    6. That Codex is funded by the same corporations that funnel funding for Codex through the United Nations (where it originated) and you.

    This is surely not the full extent of Codex, or this ACT, but I (we) are sure you are already aware of the full ramifications as they apply to our Constitution, our rights and liberties, and our sovereignty. Yet, you voted by an overwhelming margin to pass it in the House.

    Concluding our Understanding:

    I (We) have had to endure one assault after another by you which are nothing less than attacks on:

    1. Our sovereignty, our rights and liberties;

    2. Our freedom to peacefully assemble, to protest, to dissent;

    3. Our right to keep and bear arms;

    4. Our right to privacy all but erased, our right to be left alone by government;

    5. Our right to be secure in our property, papers and effects; and that,

    6. The aformentioned rights shall be ours to posses, as property, as an inalienable right.

    And this is the short list. Now, as if these assaults, perpetrated by you in the name of “national security” were not enough, you intend to seize control of food production and supply and the actual intent to decide not only what we eat, but who profits from the food available.

    I (we) have come to understand “national security” in a whole new light. National security now means finding the ways to defend ourselves, our families and communities … from you.

    Speaking solely for my self in this moment, I don’t fear attacks from foreign terrorists (I will address this issue in MOU #2). I fear YOU. You, the House, the Senate and the President (past and current) represent the greatest threat to the sovereignty and safety and security of our nation, and to the preservation of America. You have betrayed us, whether out of stupidity, lack of attention, lack of knowledge, lack of due diligence, or outright greed and corruption, you have betrayed us.

    As a gentleman I spoke to recently put it: “They are interfering with our right to thrive”.

    I’ll put it another way: much less genteel: [b]You b.astards sold us out.[/b[


    _________________
    What is life?
    It is the flash of a firefly in the night, the breath of a buffalo in the wintertime. It is the little shadow which runs across the grass and loses itself in the sunset.

    With deepest respect ~ Aloha & Mahalo, Carol
    TRANCOSO
    TRANCOSO


    Posts : 3930
    Join date : 2010-04-10
    Location : AMSTERDAM

    U.S. NOW Empty Re: U.S. NOW

    Post  TRANCOSO Mon Jan 17, 2011 10:49 am

    Thirty Little Known Facts About America
    By Stephen Lendman
    1-16-11

    1. The IRS is NOT a U.S. Government Agency. It is an Agency of the IMF. Diversified Metal Products v IRS et al. CV-93-405E-EJE U.S.D.C.I. Public Law 94-564 Senate Report 94-1148, pg 5967 Reor ganization Plan #26 Public Law 102-391

    2. The IMF is an Agency of the U.N. Black's Law Dictionary 6th Ed. Pg 816

    3. The United States has NOT had a Treasury since 1921. 41 Stat. Ch. 214 page 654

    4. The U.S. Treasury is now the IMF. Presi dential Documents Volume 29 No. 4 page 113 22 U.S.C. 285-288

    5. The U.S. does not have any employees because there is no longer a United States. No more reorganizations. After 200 years of bankruptcy it is finally over. Executive Order 12803

    6. The FCC, CIA, FBI, NSA and all of the other Alphabet Gangs were never part of the U.S. Government, even though the 'U.S. Government held stock in said 'Agencies. &n bsp; U.S. v. Strang, 254 U.S. 491 Lewis v. U.S., 680 F.2d, 1239

    7. Social Security Numbers are issued by the UN through the IMF.

    The application for an SSN is the SS5 form. The Department of the Treasury (IMF) issues the SS5, not the 'Social Security Administration. The new SS5 forms do not state who publishes them while the old form states they are Department of Treasury. 20 CFR Chap. 111 Subpart B 422.103 (b)

    8. There are NO Judicial Courts in America and have not been since 1789.
    'Judges do NOT enforce Statutes and Codes. Executive Administrators enforce Statutes and Codes. FRC v. GE, 281 U.S. 464 Keller v. Potomac Elec. Co., 261 U.S. 428 1 Stat. 138-178

    9. There have NOT been any 'Ju dges in America since 1789. There have only been Administrators. FRC v. GE, 281 U.S. 464 Keller v. Potomac Elec. Co., 261 U.S. 428 1 Stat. 138-178

    10. According to GATT you MUST have a Social Security Number. House Report 103-826

    11. New York City is defined in the Federal Regulations as the United Nations. Ru dolph Guiliani stated on C-Span that 'New York City is the Capital of the World. For once, he told the truth. 20 CFR Chap. 111 subpart B 422.103 (b) (2) (2)

    12. Social Security is NOT insurance or a contract. Nor is there a 'Trust Fund. Helvering v. Davis, 301 U.S. 619 Steward Co. v. Davis, 301 U.S. 548

    13. Your Social Security check comes directly from the IMF which is an Agency of the United Nations. Examine one: top-left should be written 'United States Treasury see 2-4 above.

    14. You own NO property. Slaves can't own property. Read carefully the Deed to the property you think is yours. You are listed as a TENANT. Often times the Mortgage Holder or the State is listed as Seised in demesne as of fee. Senate Document 43, 73rd Congress 1st Session Seised in demesne as of fee. This is the strict technical expression used to describe the ownership in 'an estate in fee-simple in possession in a corporeal hereditament. The word 'seised is used to express the 'seisin or owner's possession of a freehold property; the phrase 'in demesne, or 'in his demesne, (in dominico suo) signifies that he's seised as owner of the land itself, and not merely of the seigniory services; and the concluding words, 'as of fee, import that he is seised of an estate of inheritance in fee-simple. Where the subject is incorporeal, or the estate expectant on a precedent freehold, the words 'in his demesne are omitted. (Co. Litt. 17a; Fleta, 1.5, c. 5, 18; Bract. 1.4, tr. 5, c. 2, 2) Brown. "Black's Law Dictionary Fourth Edition, page 1523.

    15. The most powerful court in America is NOT the United States Supreme Court, but the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. 42 Pa. C.S.A. 502

    16. The King of England financially backed both sides of the Revolutionary War. Treaty of Versailles July 16, 1782 Treaty of Peace 8 Stat. 80

    17. You CANNOT use the U.S. Constitution to defend yourself because you are NOT a party to it. Padelford Fay & Co. v. The Mayor & Alderman of the City of Savannah, 14 Georgia 438, 520

    18. America is a British Colony. The 'United States is a corporation, not a land mass and it existed before the Revolutionary War and the British Troops did not leave until 1796. &n bsp; Respublica v. Sweers, 1 Dallas 43 Treaty of Commerce 8 Stat 116 Treaty of Peace 8 Stat 80 IRS Publication 6209 Articles of Association October 20, 1774

    19. Britain is owned by the Vatican. Treaty of 1213

    20. The Pope can abolish any law in the United States. Elements of Ecclesiastical Law Vol. 1, 53-54

    21. A 1040 Form is for Tribute paid to Britain. IRS Publication 6209

    22. The Pope claims to own the entire planet through the laws of Conquest and Discovery. (Ever wonder why an Attorney, who is an Agent of the Pope through the International Bar Association, wants to do 'discovery with you?) Pap al Bulls of 1495 & 1493

    23. The Pope has ordered the genocide and enslavement of Millions of people. Papal Bulls of 1455 & 1493

    24. The Pope's 'Laws are obligatory on everyone. Bened. XIV., De Syn. Dioec, lib, ix, c. vii., n.4. Prati, 1844 Syllabus prop 28, 29, 44 &nb sp;

    25. We are SLAVES and own ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Not even what we think are 'our children. Tillman v. Roberts, 108 So. 62 Van Koten v. Van Koten, 154 N.E. 146 Senate Document 43, 73rd Congress 1st Session Wynehammer v. People, 13 N.Y. Rep 378, 481

    26. Military Dictator George Washington divided up the States (Estates) into Districts. Messages and Papers of the Presidents, Volume 1 page 99 1828 Dictionary definition of 'Estate

    27. 'We, The People does NOT include the General Populace, or what you THINK is 'We, The People. Barron v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, 32 U.S. 243

    28. It is NOT the 'duty of the police to protec t you. Their job is to protect THE CORPORATION and arrest Code Breakers. Sapp v. Tallahassee, 348 So.2nd. 363 Reiff v. City of Philla., 477 F.Supp. 1262 Lynch v. NC Dept. of Justice, 376 S.E.2nd. 247

    29. Everything in the 'United States is up For Sale: Bridges, Roads, Water, Schools, Hospitals, Prisons, Airports, etc. Did anybody take time to check who bought Klamath Lake? &nb sp; Executive Order 12803

    30. 'WE are HUMAN CAPITAL. Executive Order 13037

    The U.N. has financed the operations of the 'United States Government for over 50 years and now 'owns every man, woman, and child in America. The U.N. also holds all of the land of America in Fee Simple.

    Why is the above so difficult for most people to understand? Simple: words like 'perso n, 'citizen, 'people, 'or, 'nation, 'is, 'fact, 'authority, 'truth, 'nation, 'crime, 'fraud, 'charge, 'right, 'statute, 'preferred, 'assume, 'prefer, 'constitutor, 'creditor, 'debtor, 'debit, 'discharge, 'payment, 'law, 'United States, and hundreds of others do NOT mean what you think they mean and you were never taught the 'Legal Definitions so you would 'Understand that you DON'T understand.

    Don't let this information alarm you because without it you cannot be free.

    You have to understand that all slavery and freedom originates in the mind.

    When your mind allows you to accept and understand that the United States, Great Brittan and the Vatican are Corporations which are nothing but fictional entities which have been placed in your mind, you will understand our slavery is because we believe in fictions. Stephen Ammes, author The Ultimate Delusion

    The Illusion is MUCH larger than the irrefutable 30 points above, and the 30 points above are not even the tip of the tip of the iceberg. For more information, see:

    www.atgpress.com
    www.TheAmericanVoice.com
    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=IRS+is+a+Fraud
    www.ZeitgeistMovie.com
    www.FreedomToFascism.com
    http://www.myspace. com/KC7AQK
    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=911+Truth+Movement
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klwWcp9eiPw&feature=related

    SOURCE: http://www.rense.com/general92/thit.htm
    Carol
    Carol
    Admin
    Admin


    Posts : 32911
    Join date : 2010-04-07
    Location : Hawaii

    U.S. NOW Empty Re: U.S. NOW

    Post  Carol Mon Jan 17, 2011 2:01 pm

    This is one of your more depressing posts of late Lord Trancoso.

    U.S. NOW 50313_388630600423_4434027_n


    _________________
    What is life?
    It is the flash of a firefly in the night, the breath of a buffalo in the wintertime. It is the little shadow which runs across the grass and loses itself in the sunset.

    With deepest respect ~ Aloha & Mahalo, Carol
    TRANCOSO
    TRANCOSO


    Posts : 3930
    Join date : 2010-04-10
    Location : AMSTERDAM

    U.S. NOW Empty Re: U.S. NOW

    Post  TRANCOSO Mon Jan 17, 2011 3:05 pm

    Carol wrote:This is one of your more depressing posts of late Lord Trancoso.

    U.S. NOW 50313_388630600423_4434027_n
    Crybaby Argh Ban Flowers Lmfao

      Current date/time is Mon Nov 18, 2024 5:35 pm