Please watch the following video on the "NAFTA Superhighway".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cQ0YyepLgA
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
War on Global Warming
Weather Channel Founder Wants To Sue Al Gore For Global Warming Fraud Coleman says man-made climate change advocates would lose landmark court case
Paul Joseph Watson / Prison Planet March 14, 2008
digg_url = 'http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2008/031408_warming_fraud.htm';
A landmark court case that would destroy the so-called "consensus" behind man-made global warming could be in the works after Weather Channel founder John Coleman expressed his intention to sue Al Gore for fraud.
Companies that sell "carbon credits" on the basis that they offset carbon emissions could also be in the firing line as Coleman stated his conviction that man-made advocates would lose the case if a fair debate, something that the establishment is loathe to allow, was allowed to take place.
"Since we can't get a debate, I thought perhaps if we had a legal challenge and went into a court of law, where it was our scientists and their scientists, and all the legal proceedings with the discovery and all their documents from both sides and scientific testimony from both sides, we could finally get a good solid debate on the issue," Coleman said. "I'm confident that the advocates of 'no significant effect from carbon dioxide' would win the case."
Coleman said that any degree of warming that has taken place over the last 25 years is beginning to be offset by a recent cooling trend. China, the largest emitter of carbon dioxide, has just experienced its coldest winter for 100 years.
"I think if we continue the cooling trend a couple of more years, the general public will at last begin to realize that they've been scammed on this global-warming thing," said Coleman.
Coleman questioned whether carbon dioxide caused temperature increase, a point borne out by ice core samples that show increases in carbon dioxide in the environment are a result and not a cause of higher temperatures, lagging behind by as much as 800 years.
"Does carbon dioxide cause a warming of the atmosphere? The proponents of global warming pin their whole piece on that," he said.
"The compound carbon dioxide makes up only 38 out of every 100,000 particles in the atmosphere."
"That's about twice as what there were in the atmosphere in the time we started burning fossil fuels, so it's gone up, but it's still a tiny compound," Coleman said. "So how can that tiny trace compound have such a significant effect on temperature?
"My position is it can't," he continued. "It doesn't, and the whole case for global warming is based on a fallacy."
Coleman's call for a court case to take on the global warming orthodox comes in the same week that the Carnegie Institute urged the need to reduce carbon emissions to zero within decades, a move that would devastate the third world and likely end human civilization as we know it, returning man back to the stone age.
Paul Joseph Watson / Prison Planet March 14, 2008
digg_url = 'http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2008/031408_warming_fraud.htm';
A landmark court case that would destroy the so-called "consensus" behind man-made global warming could be in the works after Weather Channel founder John Coleman expressed his intention to sue Al Gore for fraud.
Companies that sell "carbon credits" on the basis that they offset carbon emissions could also be in the firing line as Coleman stated his conviction that man-made advocates would lose the case if a fair debate, something that the establishment is loathe to allow, was allowed to take place.
"Since we can't get a debate, I thought perhaps if we had a legal challenge and went into a court of law, where it was our scientists and their scientists, and all the legal proceedings with the discovery and all their documents from both sides and scientific testimony from both sides, we could finally get a good solid debate on the issue," Coleman said. "I'm confident that the advocates of 'no significant effect from carbon dioxide' would win the case."
Coleman said that any degree of warming that has taken place over the last 25 years is beginning to be offset by a recent cooling trend. China, the largest emitter of carbon dioxide, has just experienced its coldest winter for 100 years.
"I think if we continue the cooling trend a couple of more years, the general public will at last begin to realize that they've been scammed on this global-warming thing," said Coleman.
Coleman questioned whether carbon dioxide caused temperature increase, a point borne out by ice core samples that show increases in carbon dioxide in the environment are a result and not a cause of higher temperatures, lagging behind by as much as 800 years.
"Does carbon dioxide cause a warming of the atmosphere? The proponents of global warming pin their whole piece on that," he said.
"The compound carbon dioxide makes up only 38 out of every 100,000 particles in the atmosphere."
"That's about twice as what there were in the atmosphere in the time we started burning fossil fuels, so it's gone up, but it's still a tiny compound," Coleman said. "So how can that tiny trace compound have such a significant effect on temperature?
"My position is it can't," he continued. "It doesn't, and the whole case for global warming is based on a fallacy."
Coleman's call for a court case to take on the global warming orthodox comes in the same week that the Carnegie Institute urged the need to reduce carbon emissions to zero within decades, a move that would devastate the third world and likely end human civilization as we know it, returning man back to the stone age.
Campaign Finance
When politicians and big donors get cozy, the rest of us end up paying for their sweetheart deals.
By Michael Crowley
A landmark court case that would destroy the so-called "consensus" behind man-made global warming could be in the works after Weather Channel founder John Coleman expressed his intention to sue Al Gore for fraud.Companies that sell "carbon credits" on the basis that they offset carbon emissions could also be in the firing line as Coleman stated his conviction that man-made advocates would lose the case if a fair debate, something that the establishment is loathe to allow, was allowed to take place."Since we can't get a debate, I thought perhaps if we had a legal challenge and went into a court of law, where it was our scientists and their scientists, and all the legal proceedings with the discovery and all their documents from both sides and scientific testimony from both sides, we could finally get a good solid debate on the issue," Coleman said. "I'm confident that the advocates of 'no significant effect from carbon dioxide' would win the case."Coleman said that any degree of warming that has taken place over the last 25 years is beginning to be offset by a recent cooling trend. China, the largest emitter of carbon dioxide, has just experienced its coldest winter for 100 years."I think if we continue the cooling trend a couple of more years, the general public will at last begin to realize that they've been scammed on this global-warming thing," said Coleman.Coleman questioned whether carbon dioxide caused temperature increase, a point borne out by ice core samples that show increases in carbon dioxide in the environment are a result and not a cause of higher temperatures, lagging behind by as much as 800 years."Does carbon dioxide cause a warming of the atmosphere? The proponents of global warming pin their whole piece on that," he said."The compound carbon dioxide makes up only 38 out of every 100,000 particles in the atmosphere.""That's about twice as what there were in the atmosphere in the time we started burning fossil fuels, so it's gone up, but it's still a tiny compound," Coleman said. "So how can that tiny trace compound have such a significant effect on temperature?"My position is it can't," he continued. "It doesn't, and the whole case for global warming is based on a fallacy."Coleman's call for a court case to take on the global warming orthodox comes in the same week that the Carnegie Institute urged the need to reduce carbon emissions to zero within decades, a move that would devastate the third world and likely end human civilization as we know it, returning man back to the stone age.
From rd.com
By Michael Crowley
A landmark court case that would destroy the so-called "consensus" behind man-made global warming could be in the works after Weather Channel founder John Coleman expressed his intention to sue Al Gore for fraud.Companies that sell "carbon credits" on the basis that they offset carbon emissions could also be in the firing line as Coleman stated his conviction that man-made advocates would lose the case if a fair debate, something that the establishment is loathe to allow, was allowed to take place."Since we can't get a debate, I thought perhaps if we had a legal challenge and went into a court of law, where it was our scientists and their scientists, and all the legal proceedings with the discovery and all their documents from both sides and scientific testimony from both sides, we could finally get a good solid debate on the issue," Coleman said. "I'm confident that the advocates of 'no significant effect from carbon dioxide' would win the case."Coleman said that any degree of warming that has taken place over the last 25 years is beginning to be offset by a recent cooling trend. China, the largest emitter of carbon dioxide, has just experienced its coldest winter for 100 years."I think if we continue the cooling trend a couple of more years, the general public will at last begin to realize that they've been scammed on this global-warming thing," said Coleman.Coleman questioned whether carbon dioxide caused temperature increase, a point borne out by ice core samples that show increases in carbon dioxide in the environment are a result and not a cause of higher temperatures, lagging behind by as much as 800 years."Does carbon dioxide cause a warming of the atmosphere? The proponents of global warming pin their whole piece on that," he said."The compound carbon dioxide makes up only 38 out of every 100,000 particles in the atmosphere.""That's about twice as what there were in the atmosphere in the time we started burning fossil fuels, so it's gone up, but it's still a tiny compound," Coleman said. "So how can that tiny trace compound have such a significant effect on temperature?"My position is it can't," he continued. "It doesn't, and the whole case for global warming is based on a fallacy."Coleman's call for a court case to take on the global warming orthodox comes in the same week that the Carnegie Institute urged the need to reduce carbon emissions to zero within decades, a move that would devastate the third world and likely end human civilization as we know it, returning man back to the stone age.
From rd.com
China, Mexico Partner on Port.
The following was found at utu.org. Pay attention, folks! Kinda goes along with the NAFTA Superhighway. How long do you think any of us will have jobs?
Plans have been finalized by Mexico to develop Punta Colonet as a West Coast Mexican alternative to the U.S. ports in Los Angeles and Long Beach, reports Jerome Corsi at worldnetdaily.com.
The proposal includes a deep-water Pacific Ocean port on Mexico's Baja California peninsula about 150 miles south of Tijuana that could serve as a destination for the 30 million containers headed to North America from China and the Far East each year.
The on-again, off-again plan to develop Punta Colonet has been discussed before as the number of containers from China grows and multi-national corporations out-sourcing their North American manufacturing to China are looking for cuts in transportation costs.
The lure of Punta Colonet is the cheaper Mexican transportation labor available if Chinese containers arrive there to be moved into the interior of the United States, rather than the more expensive U.S. labor in Los Angeles and Long Beach.
The model to develop Punta Colonet is based on Manzanillo and Lazaro Cardenas, two Mexican ports on the Pacific south of Texas, which have been developed by Hutchison Ports Holdings, a Chinese port operations firm with close ties to the communist Chinese government and military.
As WND has reported, containers from China off-loaded at Manzanillo and Lazaro Cardenas bypass the labor costs of the U.S. Longshoreman Union dock workers, United Transportation Union railroad workers, and U.S. truck drivers.
Manuel Rodriguez Arregui, Mexico's Secretary of Transportation, announced in February his intention to publish in June a request for proposals for the operation of a deep-water port at Punta Colonet. His goal is to see work on the port begin next year so the port could open for business in 2010 and be completed no later than 2015.
The plans are to take advantage of a public-private partnership, or PPP, in which private developers would work with government officials to use government powers to acquire whatever land or other rights were needed for the port to be developed. The capital for the project would be provided by the private developers, who in turn would seek long-term contracts to operate and derive revenue from the port.
In turn, the proposals submitted by private development companies can be expected to pay the government of Mexico one-time up-front seven-figure sums for the rights to develop the project and operate it for as long as 45 years after completion.
The project, which may take as much as $9 billion in private capital to develop, will involve some 7,000 acres at Punta Colonet, about as large as the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach combined.
The goal is to construct a modern port capable of handling annually eight million containers or 20-foot equivalent units, according to a report published by the San Diego Union-Tribune, which was based on an interview the newspaper conducted with Eugenio Elorduy Walther, the governor of Baja California in Mexico.
The containers will then move to the interior of the United States on a 180-mile rail line that is expected to connect the port at Punta Colonet with existing rail systems at Yuma, Ariz. The San Diego Union-Tribune also reported Hutchison Port Holdings has now bought property at Punta Colonet and Union Pacific is seeking options on a railroad right-of-way in Yuma.
The Los Angeles Times said a competitive bid may be organized by Mexican Carlos Slim Helu, the world's second-richest man with a net worth Forbes estimated in 2006 at over $30 billion.
The consortium would involve teaming up with Miguel Favela, the general director of Mexican operations for cargo terminal operator MTC Holdings of Oakland.
Favela told the Los Angeles Times Slim's IDEAL infrastructure company, Impulsora del Desarrollo y el Empleo en America Latina SA de CV, and the Mexican mining and railroad giant Grupo Mexico could team up to grab the deal.
WND has previously reported plans being implemented in China to ship millions more containers to North America every year.
The Chinese are investing $15 billion to develop Yangshan, a reclaimed island the size of 470 soccer fields that lies in the East China Sea off Shanghai, with a plan by 2010 to operate 30 berths accommodating post-Panamex megaships, each capable of carrying up to 12,500 containers, three or four times the size of the typical container ships now operating.
Currently handling 20 million containers a year, Yangshan is expected by 2010 to export up to 30 million containers a year, with the vast majority destined for North America.
WND has also reported the Canadian government is developing plans to open West Coast ports including Vancouver and Prince Rupert as part of Canada's publicly declared "Asia-Pacific Gateway and Corridor Initiative" transportation policy.
Plans have been finalized by Mexico to develop Punta Colonet as a West Coast Mexican alternative to the U.S. ports in Los Angeles and Long Beach, reports Jerome Corsi at worldnetdaily.com.
The proposal includes a deep-water Pacific Ocean port on Mexico's Baja California peninsula about 150 miles south of Tijuana that could serve as a destination for the 30 million containers headed to North America from China and the Far East each year.
The on-again, off-again plan to develop Punta Colonet has been discussed before as the number of containers from China grows and multi-national corporations out-sourcing their North American manufacturing to China are looking for cuts in transportation costs.
The lure of Punta Colonet is the cheaper Mexican transportation labor available if Chinese containers arrive there to be moved into the interior of the United States, rather than the more expensive U.S. labor in Los Angeles and Long Beach.
The model to develop Punta Colonet is based on Manzanillo and Lazaro Cardenas, two Mexican ports on the Pacific south of Texas, which have been developed by Hutchison Ports Holdings, a Chinese port operations firm with close ties to the communist Chinese government and military.
As WND has reported, containers from China off-loaded at Manzanillo and Lazaro Cardenas bypass the labor costs of the U.S. Longshoreman Union dock workers, United Transportation Union railroad workers, and U.S. truck drivers.
Manuel Rodriguez Arregui, Mexico's Secretary of Transportation, announced in February his intention to publish in June a request for proposals for the operation of a deep-water port at Punta Colonet. His goal is to see work on the port begin next year so the port could open for business in 2010 and be completed no later than 2015.
The plans are to take advantage of a public-private partnership, or PPP, in which private developers would work with government officials to use government powers to acquire whatever land or other rights were needed for the port to be developed. The capital for the project would be provided by the private developers, who in turn would seek long-term contracts to operate and derive revenue from the port.
In turn, the proposals submitted by private development companies can be expected to pay the government of Mexico one-time up-front seven-figure sums for the rights to develop the project and operate it for as long as 45 years after completion.
The project, which may take as much as $9 billion in private capital to develop, will involve some 7,000 acres at Punta Colonet, about as large as the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach combined.
The goal is to construct a modern port capable of handling annually eight million containers or 20-foot equivalent units, according to a report published by the San Diego Union-Tribune, which was based on an interview the newspaper conducted with Eugenio Elorduy Walther, the governor of Baja California in Mexico.
The containers will then move to the interior of the United States on a 180-mile rail line that is expected to connect the port at Punta Colonet with existing rail systems at Yuma, Ariz. The San Diego Union-Tribune also reported Hutchison Port Holdings has now bought property at Punta Colonet and Union Pacific is seeking options on a railroad right-of-way in Yuma.
The Los Angeles Times said a competitive bid may be organized by Mexican Carlos Slim Helu, the world's second-richest man with a net worth Forbes estimated in 2006 at over $30 billion.
The consortium would involve teaming up with Miguel Favela, the general director of Mexican operations for cargo terminal operator MTC Holdings of Oakland.
Favela told the Los Angeles Times Slim's IDEAL infrastructure company, Impulsora del Desarrollo y el Empleo en America Latina SA de CV, and the Mexican mining and railroad giant Grupo Mexico could team up to grab the deal.
WND has previously reported plans being implemented in China to ship millions more containers to North America every year.
The Chinese are investing $15 billion to develop Yangshan, a reclaimed island the size of 470 soccer fields that lies in the East China Sea off Shanghai, with a plan by 2010 to operate 30 berths accommodating post-Panamex megaships, each capable of carrying up to 12,500 containers, three or four times the size of the typical container ships now operating.
Currently handling 20 million containers a year, Yangshan is expected by 2010 to export up to 30 million containers a year, with the vast majority destined for North America.
WND has also reported the Canadian government is developing plans to open West Coast ports including Vancouver and Prince Rupert as part of Canada's publicly declared "Asia-Pacific Gateway and Corridor Initiative" transportation policy.
SCHOOL DAZE
A 6th-grade teacher in Jackson, Miss., asked her class to take a survey to determine which of their classmates were most likely to get pregnant, die and contract AIDS before graduation from high school.
Now the father of the honor student selected as most likely to get pregnant wants the teacher fired, according to local station WAPT.
Curtis Lyons said he found out about the survey when his daughter came home from Chastain Middle School Monday.
"She was humiliated," Lyons said. "She's an honor student."A 6th-grade teacher in Jackson, Miss., asked her class to take a survey to determine which of their classmates were most likely to get pregnant, die and contract AIDS before graduation from high school.
Now the father of the honor student selected as most likely to get pregnant wants the teacher fired, according to local station WAPT.
Curtis Lyons said he found out about the survey when his daughter came home from Chastain Middle School Monday.
"She was humiliated," Lyons said. "She's an honor student."
According to the father, students were given a survey in science class that asked them to select students they thought were most likely to die, get pregnant, or contract AIDS.
The names of all students were included on the survey and the class associated the names with the scenarios.
Once the results were tallied, Lyons said, the teacher told his daughter that the statistics showed that her classmates believed that she was one of four girls most likely to become pregnant.
"I don't think she should be teaching kids," Lyons said. "Those questions were out of place and inappropriate. I want to know what was the lesson in that?"
"What happened to most likely to succeed?" he asked. "Do you feel this is what should be done in schools? How would you feel if the teacher told your son he would DIE before 19 or daughter she would have a baby before she finish high school? We should all be outraged."
School officials said they are investigating the matter.
Lyons said he wants the teacher fired and he wants an apology from the school board.
The previous article can be found at worldnetdaily.com.
Now the father of the honor student selected as most likely to get pregnant wants the teacher fired, according to local station WAPT.
Curtis Lyons said he found out about the survey when his daughter came home from Chastain Middle School Monday.
"She was humiliated," Lyons said. "She's an honor student."A 6th-grade teacher in Jackson, Miss., asked her class to take a survey to determine which of their classmates were most likely to get pregnant, die and contract AIDS before graduation from high school.
Now the father of the honor student selected as most likely to get pregnant wants the teacher fired, according to local station WAPT.
Curtis Lyons said he found out about the survey when his daughter came home from Chastain Middle School Monday.
"She was humiliated," Lyons said. "She's an honor student."
According to the father, students were given a survey in science class that asked them to select students they thought were most likely to die, get pregnant, or contract AIDS.
The names of all students were included on the survey and the class associated the names with the scenarios.
Once the results were tallied, Lyons said, the teacher told his daughter that the statistics showed that her classmates believed that she was one of four girls most likely to become pregnant.
"I don't think she should be teaching kids," Lyons said. "Those questions were out of place and inappropriate. I want to know what was the lesson in that?"
"What happened to most likely to succeed?" he asked. "Do you feel this is what should be done in schools? How would you feel if the teacher told your son he would DIE before 19 or daughter she would have a baby before she finish high school? We should all be outraged."
School officials said they are investigating the matter.
Lyons said he wants the teacher fired and he wants an apology from the school board.
The previous article can be found at worldnetdaily.com.
Thursday, March 6, 2008
Watching in Chicago
Taken from breibart.com, an article by the AP. How long until they have these in every city? It SOUNDS like a good thing, but how long until someone (or some organization) abuses the privacy policies?
CHICAGO (AP) - A car circles a high-rise three times. Someone leaves a backpack in a park. Such things go unnoticed in big cities every day. But that could change in Chicago with a new video surveillance system that would recognize such anomalies and alert authorities to take a closer look.
On Thursday, the city and IBM Corp. are announcing the initial phase of what officials say could be the most advanced video security network in any U.S. city. The City of Broad Shoulders is getting eyes in the back of its head.
"Chicago is really light years ahead of any metropolitan area in the U.S. now," said Sam Docknevich, who heads video-surveillance consulting for IBM.
Chicago already has thousands of security cameras in use by businesses and police—including some equipped with devices that recognize the sound of a gunshot, turn the cameras toward the source and place a 911 call. But the new system would let cameras analyze images in real time 24 hours a day.
"You're talking about creating (something) that knows no fatigue, no boredom and is absolutely focused," said Kevin Smith, spokesman for the city's Office of Emergency Management and Communications.
For example, the system could be programmed to alert the city's emergency center whenever a camera spots a vehicle matching the description of one being sought by authorities.
The system could be programmed to recognize license plates. It could alert emergency officials if the same car or truck circles the Sears Tower three times or if nobody picks up a backpack in Grant Park for, say, 30 seconds.
IBM says this approach might be more effective than relying on a bleary-eyed employee to monitor video screens. "Studies have shown people fall asleep," Docknevich said.
It is unclear when the system will be fully operational. Existing cameras could be equipped with the new software, but additional cameras probably will be added as well, Smith said.
"The complexity of the software is going to define how quickly we are able to do this," he said.
Chicago's announcement comes as it is vying to bring the 2016 games to town. A purportedly security-enhancing surveillance system is something city officials could trumpet to International Olympic Committee.
"The eventual goal is to have elaborate video surveillance well in advance of the 2016 Olympics," said Bo Larsson, CEO of Firetide Inc., the company providing the wireless connectivity for the project.
Neither Smith nor IBM would reveal the cost of the network, but Smith said much of it would be paid by the Department of Homeland Security. The cost of previous surveillance efforts has run into the millions of dollars. Just adding devices that allow surveillance cameras to turn toward the sound of gunfire was as much as $10,000 per unit.
Some critics question whether such systems are effective and whether they could lead to an unwarranted invasion of privacy.
Jonathan Schachter, a public policy lecturer at Northwestern University, said there are no studies that show cameras reduce crime. And the idea that placing cameras near "strategic assets" would prevent a terrorist attack is "absurd," he said.
Ed Yohnka, spokesman for the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois, said he was concerned that more cameras and more sophisticated technology would lead to abuses of authority.
"It is incumbent on the city to ensure that there are practices and procedures in place to sort of watch the watchers," he said.
CHICAGO (AP) - A car circles a high-rise three times. Someone leaves a backpack in a park. Such things go unnoticed in big cities every day. But that could change in Chicago with a new video surveillance system that would recognize such anomalies and alert authorities to take a closer look.
On Thursday, the city and IBM Corp. are announcing the initial phase of what officials say could be the most advanced video security network in any U.S. city. The City of Broad Shoulders is getting eyes in the back of its head.
"Chicago is really light years ahead of any metropolitan area in the U.S. now," said Sam Docknevich, who heads video-surveillance consulting for IBM.
Chicago already has thousands of security cameras in use by businesses and police—including some equipped with devices that recognize the sound of a gunshot, turn the cameras toward the source and place a 911 call. But the new system would let cameras analyze images in real time 24 hours a day.
"You're talking about creating (something) that knows no fatigue, no boredom and is absolutely focused," said Kevin Smith, spokesman for the city's Office of Emergency Management and Communications.
For example, the system could be programmed to alert the city's emergency center whenever a camera spots a vehicle matching the description of one being sought by authorities.
The system could be programmed to recognize license plates. It could alert emergency officials if the same car or truck circles the Sears Tower three times or if nobody picks up a backpack in Grant Park for, say, 30 seconds.
IBM says this approach might be more effective than relying on a bleary-eyed employee to monitor video screens. "Studies have shown people fall asleep," Docknevich said.
It is unclear when the system will be fully operational. Existing cameras could be equipped with the new software, but additional cameras probably will be added as well, Smith said.
"The complexity of the software is going to define how quickly we are able to do this," he said.
Chicago's announcement comes as it is vying to bring the 2016 games to town. A purportedly security-enhancing surveillance system is something city officials could trumpet to International Olympic Committee.
"The eventual goal is to have elaborate video surveillance well in advance of the 2016 Olympics," said Bo Larsson, CEO of Firetide Inc., the company providing the wireless connectivity for the project.
Neither Smith nor IBM would reveal the cost of the network, but Smith said much of it would be paid by the Department of Homeland Security. The cost of previous surveillance efforts has run into the millions of dollars. Just adding devices that allow surveillance cameras to turn toward the sound of gunfire was as much as $10,000 per unit.
Some critics question whether such systems are effective and whether they could lead to an unwarranted invasion of privacy.
Jonathan Schachter, a public policy lecturer at Northwestern University, said there are no studies that show cameras reduce crime. And the idea that placing cameras near "strategic assets" would prevent a terrorist attack is "absurd," he said.
Ed Yohnka, spokesman for the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois, said he was concerned that more cameras and more sophisticated technology would lead to abuses of authority.
"It is incumbent on the city to ensure that there are practices and procedures in place to sort of watch the watchers," he said.
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
About Blackwater
From democracynow.org's website....
The company that most embodies the privatization of the military industrial complex—a primary part of the Project for a New American Century and the neoconservative revolution is the private security firm Blackwater. Blackwater is the most powerful mercenary firm in the world, with 20,000 soldiers, the world’s largest private military base, a fleet of twenty aircraft, including helicopter gunships, and a private intelligence division. The firm is also manufacturing its own surveillance blimps and target systems. Blackwater is headed by a very right-wing Christian-supremist and ex-Navy Seal named Erik Prince, whose family has had deep neo-conservative connections. Bush’s latest call for voluntary civilian military corps to accommodate the “surge” will add to over half a billion dollars in federal contracts with Blackwater, allowing Prince to create a private army to defend Christendom around the world against Muslims and others. One of the last things Dick Cheney did before leaving office as Defense Secretary under George H. W. Bush was to commission a Halliburton study on how to privatize the military bureaucracy. That study effectively created the groundwork for a continuing war profiteer bonanza. During the Clinton years, Erik Prince envisioned a project that would take advantage of anticipated military outsourcing. Blackwater began in 1996 as a private military training facility, with an executive board of former Navy Seals and Elite Special Forces, in the Great Dismal Swamp of North Carolina. A decade later it is the most powerful mercenary firm in the world, embodying what the Bush administration views as “the necessary revolution in military affairs”—the outsourcing of armed forces. In his 2007 State of the Union address Bush asked Congress to authorize an increase in the size of our active Army and Marine Corps by 92,000 in the next five years. He continued, “A second task we can take on together is to design and establish a volunteer civilian reserve corps. Such a corps would function much like our military reserve. It would ease the burden on the Armed Forces by allowing us to hire civilians with critical skills to serve on missions abroad when America needs them.” This is, however, precisely what the administration has already done—largely, Jeremy Scahill points out, behind the backs of the American people. Private contractors currently constitute the second-largest “force” in Iraq. At last count, there were about 100,000 contractors in Iraq, 48,000 of which work as private soldiers, according to a Government Accountability Office report. These soldiers have operated with almost no oversight or effective legal constraints and are politically expedient, as contractor deaths go uncounted in the official toll. With Prince calling for the creation of a “contractor brigade” before military audiences, the Bush administration has found a back door for engaging in an undeclared expansion of occupation. Blackwater currently has about 2,300 personnel actively deployed in nine countries and is aggressively expanding its presence inside US borders. They provide the security for US diplomats in Iraq, guarding everyone from Paul Bremer and John Negroponte to the current US ambassador, Zalmay Khalilzad. They’re training troops in Afghanistan and have been active in the Caspian Sea, where they set up a Special Forces base miles from the Iranian border. According to reports they are currently negotiating directly with the Southern Sudanese regional government to start training the Christian forces of Sudan. Blackwater’s connections are impressive. Joseph Schmitz, the former Pentagon Inspector General, whose job was to police the war contractor bonanza, has moved on to become the vice chairman of the Prince Group, Blackwater’s parent company, and the general counsel for Blackwater. Bush recently hired Fred Fielding, Blackwater’s former lawyer, to replace Harriet Miers as his top lawyer; and Ken Starr, the former Whitewater prosecutor who led the impeachment charge against President Clinton, is now Blackwater’s counsel of record and has filed briefs with Supreme Court to fight wrongful death lawsuits brought against Blackwater. Cofer Black, thirty-year CIA veteran and former head of CIA’s counterterrorism center, credited with spearheading the extraordinary rendition program after 9/11, is now senior executive at Blackwater and perhaps its most powerful operative. Prince and other Blackwater executives have been major bankrollers of the President, of former House Majority Leader, Tom DeLay, and of former Senator, Rick Santorum. Senator John Warner, the former head of the Senate Armed Services Committee, called Blackwater, “our silent partner in the global war on terror.”
The company that most embodies the privatization of the military industrial complex—a primary part of the Project for a New American Century and the neoconservative revolution is the private security firm Blackwater. Blackwater is the most powerful mercenary firm in the world, with 20,000 soldiers, the world’s largest private military base, a fleet of twenty aircraft, including helicopter gunships, and a private intelligence division. The firm is also manufacturing its own surveillance blimps and target systems. Blackwater is headed by a very right-wing Christian-supremist and ex-Navy Seal named Erik Prince, whose family has had deep neo-conservative connections. Bush’s latest call for voluntary civilian military corps to accommodate the “surge” will add to over half a billion dollars in federal contracts with Blackwater, allowing Prince to create a private army to defend Christendom around the world against Muslims and others. One of the last things Dick Cheney did before leaving office as Defense Secretary under George H. W. Bush was to commission a Halliburton study on how to privatize the military bureaucracy. That study effectively created the groundwork for a continuing war profiteer bonanza. During the Clinton years, Erik Prince envisioned a project that would take advantage of anticipated military outsourcing. Blackwater began in 1996 as a private military training facility, with an executive board of former Navy Seals and Elite Special Forces, in the Great Dismal Swamp of North Carolina. A decade later it is the most powerful mercenary firm in the world, embodying what the Bush administration views as “the necessary revolution in military affairs”—the outsourcing of armed forces. In his 2007 State of the Union address Bush asked Congress to authorize an increase in the size of our active Army and Marine Corps by 92,000 in the next five years. He continued, “A second task we can take on together is to design and establish a volunteer civilian reserve corps. Such a corps would function much like our military reserve. It would ease the burden on the Armed Forces by allowing us to hire civilians with critical skills to serve on missions abroad when America needs them.” This is, however, precisely what the administration has already done—largely, Jeremy Scahill points out, behind the backs of the American people. Private contractors currently constitute the second-largest “force” in Iraq. At last count, there were about 100,000 contractors in Iraq, 48,000 of which work as private soldiers, according to a Government Accountability Office report. These soldiers have operated with almost no oversight or effective legal constraints and are politically expedient, as contractor deaths go uncounted in the official toll. With Prince calling for the creation of a “contractor brigade” before military audiences, the Bush administration has found a back door for engaging in an undeclared expansion of occupation. Blackwater currently has about 2,300 personnel actively deployed in nine countries and is aggressively expanding its presence inside US borders. They provide the security for US diplomats in Iraq, guarding everyone from Paul Bremer and John Negroponte to the current US ambassador, Zalmay Khalilzad. They’re training troops in Afghanistan and have been active in the Caspian Sea, where they set up a Special Forces base miles from the Iranian border. According to reports they are currently negotiating directly with the Southern Sudanese regional government to start training the Christian forces of Sudan. Blackwater’s connections are impressive. Joseph Schmitz, the former Pentagon Inspector General, whose job was to police the war contractor bonanza, has moved on to become the vice chairman of the Prince Group, Blackwater’s parent company, and the general counsel for Blackwater. Bush recently hired Fred Fielding, Blackwater’s former lawyer, to replace Harriet Miers as his top lawyer; and Ken Starr, the former Whitewater prosecutor who led the impeachment charge against President Clinton, is now Blackwater’s counsel of record and has filed briefs with Supreme Court to fight wrongful death lawsuits brought against Blackwater. Cofer Black, thirty-year CIA veteran and former head of CIA’s counterterrorism center, credited with spearheading the extraordinary rendition program after 9/11, is now senior executive at Blackwater and perhaps its most powerful operative. Prince and other Blackwater executives have been major bankrollers of the President, of former House Majority Leader, Tom DeLay, and of former Senator, Rick Santorum. Senator John Warner, the former head of the Senate Armed Services Committee, called Blackwater, “our silent partner in the global war on terror.”
Cheap Labor Hits a New High (Or Low)
This article originally appeared in Newsweek. I can see now how big business is getting even bigger, while Americans' jobs are in jeopardy.
Wal-Mart prides itself on cutting costs at home and abroad, and its Mexican operations are no exception. That approach has helped the Arkansas-based retail giant set a track record of spectacular success in the 16 years since it entered Mexico as a partner of the country's then-leading retail-store chain. But some of the company's practices have aroused concern among some officials and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) that Wal-Mart is taking advantage of local customs to pinch pennies at a time when its Mexican operations have never been more profitable. Wal-Mart is Mexico's largest private-sector employer in the nation today, with nearly 150,000 local residents on its payroll. An additional 19,000 youngsters between the ages of 14 and 16 work after school in hundreds of Wal-Mart stores, mostly as grocery baggers, throughout Mexico-and none of them receives a red cent in wages or fringe benefits. The company doesn't try to conceal this practice: its 62 Superama supermarkets display blue signs with white letters that tell shoppers: OUR VOLUNTEER PACKERS COLLECT NO SALARY, ONLY THE GRATUITY THAT YOU GIVE THEM. SUPERAMA THANKS YOU FOR YOUR UNDERSTANDING. The use of unsalaried youths is legal in Mexico because the kids are said to be "volunteering" their services to Wal-Mart and are therefore not subject to the requirements and regulations that would otherwise apply under the country's labor laws. But some officials south of the U.S. border nonetheless view the practice as regrettable, if not downright exploitative. "These kids should receive a salary," says Labor Undersecretary Patricia Espinosa Torres. "If you ask me, I don't think these kids should be working, but there are cultural and social circumstances [in Mexico] rooted in poverty and scarcity." In a country where nearly half of the population scrapes by on less than $4 a day, any income source is welcome in millions of households, even if it hinges on the goodwill of a tipping customer. And Wal-Mart did not invent the bagger program that, as a written statement from the company notes, pre-dates the firm's arrival in Mexico, nor is it alone within the country's retail sector in benefiting from the toil of unpaid adolescents. But in Mexico City, for example, the 4,300 teenagers who work in Wal-Mart's retail stores free of charge dwarf similar numbers laboring unpaid for Mexican competitors like Comercial Mexicana (715) and Gigante (427). Although Wal-Mart's worldwide code of ethics expressly forbids any "associate" from working without compensation, the company's Mexican subsidiary asserts that the grocery baggers "cannot be considered workers." The Mexico City government's top labor official dismisses that contention as so much corporate hogwash. "To my mind, that is not an accurate description because the bagger is providing a service on the store's premises that benefits the company by serving the customer better," argues Federal District Labor Secretary Benito Mirón Lince. "In economic terms, Wal-Mart does have the capability to pay the minimum wage [of less than $5 a day], and this represents an injustice." Certainly, Wal-Mart's bottom line is healthy. Wal-Mart de Mexico reported net earnings of $1.148 billion in 2006 and $280 million in profits in the second quarter of this year, a 7 percent increase in real terms over the same period last year. Buoyed by the handsome bottom-line results of the preceding 12 months, Wal-Mart de Mexico Chief Executive Eduardo Solórzano announced plans in February to add 125 new stores and restaurants to its existing network of 893 retail establishments during the course of 2007. That ambitious expansion plan will represent new investment totaling nearly a billion dollars, according to company spokesmen. And in its defense, Wal-Mart says it fully complies with a 1999 agreement covering the teenaged baggers that the Mexico City municipal government negotiated with the Supermarkets and Department Stores Association of Mexico. The company also says it goes beyond the obligations of that accord, awarding bonuses twice a year to baggers who maintain high grades in school and also providing accident insurance that covers the kids not only when they are on duty, but also when they are en route between home and workplace. The company's written statement cited a study conducted by the Mexican government and a U.N. agency that found that teenagers participating in the baggers' program were less likely to use illegal drugs than peers who panhandled or hawked merchandise on city streets. Wal-Mart says the bagger program was designed "in accordance with the International Labor Organization's (ILO) guidelines." That's questionable: Article 2 of the ILO's Convention 138 specifically prohibits the employment of 14-year-old children. (When asked by NEWSWEEK specifically about this clause, a Wal-Mart spokesman said in a written response: "With respect to your questions about the ILO, I repeat that we subscribe to an agreement signed between the Supermarkets and Department Stores Association of Mexico and Mexican labor officials. I suggest you share your doubts with Mexican authorities as to whether the [1999] accord [with the Mexico City municipal government] is in line with ILO guidelines.") A study conducted by three student researchers at the Autonomous University of Mexico documented violations of the 1999 agreement at a Wal-Mart Supercenter store in southern Mexico City. These included inadequate training and forcing youngsters to work a double shift, thereby exceeding the six-hour limit per day established by the accord. Then again, things could be a lot worse. In February 2005, Wal-Mart agreed to pay the U.S. Labor Department $135,540 in civil money penalties to settle charges of 24 child-labor violations. Some of the accusations involved minors who operated forklifts, chain saws and other potentially dangerous equipment. Stuffing groceries into plastic bags would seem considerably less hazardous.
Wal-Mart prides itself on cutting costs at home and abroad, and its Mexican operations are no exception. That approach has helped the Arkansas-based retail giant set a track record of spectacular success in the 16 years since it entered Mexico as a partner of the country's then-leading retail-store chain. But some of the company's practices have aroused concern among some officials and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) that Wal-Mart is taking advantage of local customs to pinch pennies at a time when its Mexican operations have never been more profitable. Wal-Mart is Mexico's largest private-sector employer in the nation today, with nearly 150,000 local residents on its payroll. An additional 19,000 youngsters between the ages of 14 and 16 work after school in hundreds of Wal-Mart stores, mostly as grocery baggers, throughout Mexico-and none of them receives a red cent in wages or fringe benefits. The company doesn't try to conceal this practice: its 62 Superama supermarkets display blue signs with white letters that tell shoppers: OUR VOLUNTEER PACKERS COLLECT NO SALARY, ONLY THE GRATUITY THAT YOU GIVE THEM. SUPERAMA THANKS YOU FOR YOUR UNDERSTANDING. The use of unsalaried youths is legal in Mexico because the kids are said to be "volunteering" their services to Wal-Mart and are therefore not subject to the requirements and regulations that would otherwise apply under the country's labor laws. But some officials south of the U.S. border nonetheless view the practice as regrettable, if not downright exploitative. "These kids should receive a salary," says Labor Undersecretary Patricia Espinosa Torres. "If you ask me, I don't think these kids should be working, but there are cultural and social circumstances [in Mexico] rooted in poverty and scarcity." In a country where nearly half of the population scrapes by on less than $4 a day, any income source is welcome in millions of households, even if it hinges on the goodwill of a tipping customer. And Wal-Mart did not invent the bagger program that, as a written statement from the company notes, pre-dates the firm's arrival in Mexico, nor is it alone within the country's retail sector in benefiting from the toil of unpaid adolescents. But in Mexico City, for example, the 4,300 teenagers who work in Wal-Mart's retail stores free of charge dwarf similar numbers laboring unpaid for Mexican competitors like Comercial Mexicana (715) and Gigante (427). Although Wal-Mart's worldwide code of ethics expressly forbids any "associate" from working without compensation, the company's Mexican subsidiary asserts that the grocery baggers "cannot be considered workers." The Mexico City government's top labor official dismisses that contention as so much corporate hogwash. "To my mind, that is not an accurate description because the bagger is providing a service on the store's premises that benefits the company by serving the customer better," argues Federal District Labor Secretary Benito Mirón Lince. "In economic terms, Wal-Mart does have the capability to pay the minimum wage [of less than $5 a day], and this represents an injustice." Certainly, Wal-Mart's bottom line is healthy. Wal-Mart de Mexico reported net earnings of $1.148 billion in 2006 and $280 million in profits in the second quarter of this year, a 7 percent increase in real terms over the same period last year. Buoyed by the handsome bottom-line results of the preceding 12 months, Wal-Mart de Mexico Chief Executive Eduardo Solórzano announced plans in February to add 125 new stores and restaurants to its existing network of 893 retail establishments during the course of 2007. That ambitious expansion plan will represent new investment totaling nearly a billion dollars, according to company spokesmen. And in its defense, Wal-Mart says it fully complies with a 1999 agreement covering the teenaged baggers that the Mexico City municipal government negotiated with the Supermarkets and Department Stores Association of Mexico. The company also says it goes beyond the obligations of that accord, awarding bonuses twice a year to baggers who maintain high grades in school and also providing accident insurance that covers the kids not only when they are on duty, but also when they are en route between home and workplace. The company's written statement cited a study conducted by the Mexican government and a U.N. agency that found that teenagers participating in the baggers' program were less likely to use illegal drugs than peers who panhandled or hawked merchandise on city streets. Wal-Mart says the bagger program was designed "in accordance with the International Labor Organization's (ILO) guidelines." That's questionable: Article 2 of the ILO's Convention 138 specifically prohibits the employment of 14-year-old children. (When asked by NEWSWEEK specifically about this clause, a Wal-Mart spokesman said in a written response: "With respect to your questions about the ILO, I repeat that we subscribe to an agreement signed between the Supermarkets and Department Stores Association of Mexico and Mexican labor officials. I suggest you share your doubts with Mexican authorities as to whether the [1999] accord [with the Mexico City municipal government] is in line with ILO guidelines.") A study conducted by three student researchers at the Autonomous University of Mexico documented violations of the 1999 agreement at a Wal-Mart Supercenter store in southern Mexico City. These included inadequate training and forcing youngsters to work a double shift, thereby exceeding the six-hour limit per day established by the accord. Then again, things could be a lot worse. In February 2005, Wal-Mart agreed to pay the U.S. Labor Department $135,540 in civil money penalties to settle charges of 24 child-labor violations. Some of the accusations involved minors who operated forklifts, chain saws and other potentially dangerous equipment. Stuffing groceries into plastic bags would seem considerably less hazardous.
Wonder Why People Can't Afford Healthcare?
The New York attorney general said his office plans to sue UnitedHealth Group Inc. as part of a broader investigation into the way the health-insurance industry sets payment rates for hospitals and doctors outside of their networks.
The move takes aim at a common practice among health insurers that can result in higher medical-bill payments for many consumers. While insurers typically pay in-network hospitals and physicians a negotiated fee for medical claims, out-of-network providers are reimbursed "usual and customary" or "reasonable" charges. These charges are set according to what insurers have determined is the going rate for a given procedure or service in a specific area.
When the usual and customary payment is much lower than what the provider charged, patients are often billed for the difference. Doctors and hospitals have long complained that the methodology is opaque and sets reimbursement artificially low.
As part of the probe, Andrew Cuomo, the New York attorney general, issued subpoenas to 16 health insurers, including Aetna Inc., Cigna Corp. and Wellpoint Inc.'s Empire Blue Cross Blue Shield unit. UnitedHealth is at the center because it owns, through its unit Ingenix, the database that much of the rest of the industry uses to determine usual and customary charges.
Called the Prevailing Healthcare Charges System, the database contains price information from more than one billion medical claims collected from more than 100 health plans nationwide. Health insurers typically compare out-of-network claims against the database and automatically reduce the bill to a "reasonable" size before reimbursing the patient or doctor.
Linda Lacewell, who heads Mr. Cuomo's health-care industry task force, characterized the Ingenix database as "garbage in, garbage out," with insurers sometimes manipulating data and knocking out price information from doctors with higher charges.
A UnitedHealth spokesman disputed claims that the Ingenix database might be excluding higher physician fees in coming up with a usual and customary charge. Instead, the outliers that are excluded tend to be on the lower spectrum of physician charges, he said. UnitedHealth said it is in discussions with Mr. Cuomo's office and will continue to cooperate fully.
In a typical scenario, Mr. Cuomo said an out-of-network doctor might charge $200 for an office visit but is told that the going rate is $77. The insurer then usually pays only 80% of that, leaving the patient responsible for the difference of about $138. His office's six-month investigation so far, however, showed that such rates generated by Ingenix were much lower than the actual cost of typical medical expenses.
The patients most often left paying such differences are those with indemnity insurance or in preferred-provider organizations, which is roughly half of people who have private health plans. These give them more freedom in choosing doctors and hospitals than health maintenance organizations, or HMOs, but typically hold them responsible for 20% to 30% of the bill and charge them a higher premium.
"We believe there was an industrywide scheme perpetrated by some of the nation's largest health insurance companies to defraud consumers," Mr. Cuomo said at a news conference. He said he plans to sue UnitedHealth and Ingenix within five days. He added that the health insurer's ownership of the billing-data provider was "a gross conflict of interest."
"Real people get stuck with excessive bills and are less likely to seek the care they need," Mr. Cuomo said.
UnitedHealth licenses use of the database to other insurers, who say that without the practice, physicians could charge whatever they wanted, particularly since there is virtually no price competition among hospitals and physicians.
"It's unfortunate that today's media event ignored these facts and failed to address the appropriateness of charging out-of-network patients $200 for 'simple doctor visits' lasting '15 minutes' -- which equates to a billing rate of at least $800 an hour," said Karen Ignagni, president of America's Health Insurance Plans, the main health-insurance industry lobby.
This isn't the first time the database or practice has triggered legal action. The American Medical Association sued UnitedHealth in March 2000 alleging the database is inaccurate. The suit is still pending in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
UnitedHealth, in a statement, said it is using dependable database tools, with reference data that are "rigorously developed, geographically specific, comprehensive and organized using a transparent methodology that is very common in the health-care industry."
With $75.4 billion in revenue last year and 26 million health-plan members, UnitedHealth is the country's largest insurer in terms of revenue and the second largest in medical-plan members.
Mr. Cuomo's inquiry could intensify the rancorous relationship between insurers and health-care providers. Shortly after the press conference, health plans accused his office of having an "inadequate understanding" of health-care reimbursement and said that, rather than singling out insurers, it should also examine how doctors decide what to charge patients. "Physicians routinely and grossly inflate their out-of-network charges, and have been doing so for years," the New York Health Plan Association said in a statement.
The above article was taken from The Wall Street Journal Online. No wonder the Healthcare Industry needs reformed.
The move takes aim at a common practice among health insurers that can result in higher medical-bill payments for many consumers. While insurers typically pay in-network hospitals and physicians a negotiated fee for medical claims, out-of-network providers are reimbursed "usual and customary" or "reasonable" charges. These charges are set according to what insurers have determined is the going rate for a given procedure or service in a specific area.
When the usual and customary payment is much lower than what the provider charged, patients are often billed for the difference. Doctors and hospitals have long complained that the methodology is opaque and sets reimbursement artificially low.
As part of the probe, Andrew Cuomo, the New York attorney general, issued subpoenas to 16 health insurers, including Aetna Inc., Cigna Corp. and Wellpoint Inc.'s Empire Blue Cross Blue Shield unit. UnitedHealth is at the center because it owns, through its unit Ingenix, the database that much of the rest of the industry uses to determine usual and customary charges.
Called the Prevailing Healthcare Charges System, the database contains price information from more than one billion medical claims collected from more than 100 health plans nationwide. Health insurers typically compare out-of-network claims against the database and automatically reduce the bill to a "reasonable" size before reimbursing the patient or doctor.
Linda Lacewell, who heads Mr. Cuomo's health-care industry task force, characterized the Ingenix database as "garbage in, garbage out," with insurers sometimes manipulating data and knocking out price information from doctors with higher charges.
A UnitedHealth spokesman disputed claims that the Ingenix database might be excluding higher physician fees in coming up with a usual and customary charge. Instead, the outliers that are excluded tend to be on the lower spectrum of physician charges, he said. UnitedHealth said it is in discussions with Mr. Cuomo's office and will continue to cooperate fully.
In a typical scenario, Mr. Cuomo said an out-of-network doctor might charge $200 for an office visit but is told that the going rate is $77. The insurer then usually pays only 80% of that, leaving the patient responsible for the difference of about $138. His office's six-month investigation so far, however, showed that such rates generated by Ingenix were much lower than the actual cost of typical medical expenses.
The patients most often left paying such differences are those with indemnity insurance or in preferred-provider organizations, which is roughly half of people who have private health plans. These give them more freedom in choosing doctors and hospitals than health maintenance organizations, or HMOs, but typically hold them responsible for 20% to 30% of the bill and charge them a higher premium.
"We believe there was an industrywide scheme perpetrated by some of the nation's largest health insurance companies to defraud consumers," Mr. Cuomo said at a news conference. He said he plans to sue UnitedHealth and Ingenix within five days. He added that the health insurer's ownership of the billing-data provider was "a gross conflict of interest."
"Real people get stuck with excessive bills and are less likely to seek the care they need," Mr. Cuomo said.
UnitedHealth licenses use of the database to other insurers, who say that without the practice, physicians could charge whatever they wanted, particularly since there is virtually no price competition among hospitals and physicians.
"It's unfortunate that today's media event ignored these facts and failed to address the appropriateness of charging out-of-network patients $200 for 'simple doctor visits' lasting '15 minutes' -- which equates to a billing rate of at least $800 an hour," said Karen Ignagni, president of America's Health Insurance Plans, the main health-insurance industry lobby.
This isn't the first time the database or practice has triggered legal action. The American Medical Association sued UnitedHealth in March 2000 alleging the database is inaccurate. The suit is still pending in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
UnitedHealth, in a statement, said it is using dependable database tools, with reference data that are "rigorously developed, geographically specific, comprehensive and organized using a transparent methodology that is very common in the health-care industry."
With $75.4 billion in revenue last year and 26 million health-plan members, UnitedHealth is the country's largest insurer in terms of revenue and the second largest in medical-plan members.
Mr. Cuomo's inquiry could intensify the rancorous relationship between insurers and health-care providers. Shortly after the press conference, health plans accused his office of having an "inadequate understanding" of health-care reimbursement and said that, rather than singling out insurers, it should also examine how doctors decide what to charge patients. "Physicians routinely and grossly inflate their out-of-network charges, and have been doing so for years," the New York Health Plan Association said in a statement.
The above article was taken from The Wall Street Journal Online. No wonder the Healthcare Industry needs reformed.
Spoils Of War
The following was taken from Vanity Fair, and I think it shows just how corrupt the "Private Contracting" going on in the War On Terror is. Please read by clicking on the link below.
by Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele, Vanity FairOctober 1st, 2007
by Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele, Vanity FairOctober 1st, 2007
War Profiteering
The following was taken from the Chicago Tribune. It's a little long to put on here, so just click the link to read the article.
by David Jackson and Jason GrottoTribune reporters, Chicago TribuneFebruary 21st, 2008
by David Jackson and Jason GrottoTribune reporters, Chicago TribuneFebruary 21st, 2008
I Always Feel Like Somebody's Watching Me (And I Have No Privacy)
The following was taken from http://www.corpwatch.org/, an article written by Tim Shorrock. It's lengthy, so I'll get right to it...
A new intelligence institution to be inaugurated soon by the Bush administration will allow government spying agencies to conduct broad surveillance and reconnaissance inside the United States for the first time. Under a proposal being reviewed by Congress, a National Applications Office (NAO) will be established to coordinate how the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and domestic law enforcement and rescue agencies use imagery and communications intelligence picked up by U.S. spy satellites. If the plan goes forward, the NAO will create the legal mechanism for an unprecedented degree of domestic intelligence gathering that would make the U.S. one of the world's most closely monitored nations. Until now, domestic use of electronic intelligence from spy satellites was limited to scientific agencies with no responsibility for national security or law enforcement. The intelligence-sharing system to be managed by the NAO will rely heavily on private contractors including Boeing, BAE Systems, L-3 Communications and Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). These companies already provide technology and personnel to U.S. agencies involved in foreign intelligence, and the NAO greatly expands their markets. Indeed, at an intelligence conference in San Antonio, Texas, last month, the titans of the industry were actively lobbying intelligence officials to buy products specifically designed for domestic surveillance. The NAO was created under a plan tentatively approved in May 2007 by Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell. Specifically, the NAO will oversee how classified information collected by the National Security Agency (NSA), the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) and other key agencies is used within the U.S. during natural disasters, terrorist attacks and other events affecting national security. The most critical intelligence will be supplied by the NSA and the NGA, which are often referred to by U.S. officials as the “eyes” and “ears” of the intelligence community. The NSA, through a global network of listening posts, surveillance planes, and satellites, captures signals from phone calls, e-mail and Internet traffic, and translates and analyzes them for U.S. military and national intelligence officials. The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), which was formally inaugurated in 2003, provides overhead imagery and mapping tools that allow intelligence and military analysts to monitor events from the skies and space. The NSA and the NGA have a close relationship with the super-secret National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), which builds and maintains the U.S. fleet of spy satellites and operates the ground stations where the NSA’s signals and the NGA’s imagery are processed and analyzed. By law, their collection efforts are supposed to be confined to foreign countries and battlefields. The National Applications Office was conceived in 2005 by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), which Congress created in 2004 to oversee the 16 agencies that make up the U.S. intelligence community. The ODNI, concerned that the legal framework for U.S. intelligence operations had not been updated for the global “war on terror,” turned to Booz Allen Hamilton of McLean, Virginia -- one of the largest contractors in the spy business. The company was tasked with studying how intelligence from spy satellites and photoreconnaissance planes could be better used domestically to track potential threats to security within the U.S.. The Booz Allen study was completed in May of that year, and has since become the basis for the NAO oversight plan. In May 2007, McConnell, the former executive vice president of Booz Allen, signed off on the creation of the NAO as the principal body to oversee the merging of foreign and domestic intelligence collection operations. The NAO is "an idea whose time has arrived," Charles Allen, a top U.S. intelligence official, told the Wall Street Journal in August 2007 after it broke the news of the creation of the NAO. Allen, the DHS's chief intelligence officer, will head the new program. The announcement came just days after President George W. Bush signed a new law approved by Congress to expand the ability of the NSA to eavesdrop, without warrants, on telephone calls, e-mail and faxes passing through telecommunications hubs in the U.S. when the government suspects agents of a foreign power may be involved. "These [intelligence] systems are already used to help us respond to crises," Allen later told the Washington Post. "We anticipate that we can also use them to protect Americans by preventing the entry of dangerous people and goods into the country, and by helping us examine critical infrastructure for vulnerabilities." Donald Kerr, a former NRO director who is now the number two at ODNI, recently explained to reporters that the intelligence community was no longer discussing whether or not to spy on U.S. citizens: “Our job now is to engage in a productive debate, which focuses on privacy as a component of appropriate levels of security and public safety,'' Kerr said. ''I think all of us have to really take stock of what we already are willing to give up, in terms of anonymity, but [also] what safeguards we want in place to be sure that giving that doesn't empty our bank account or do something equally bad elsewhere.'' What Will The NAO Do? The plan for the NAO builds on a domestic security infrastructure that has been in place for at least seven years. After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the NSA was granted new powers to monitor domestic communications without obtaining warrants from a secret foreign intelligence court established by Congress in 1978 (that warrant-less program ended in January 2007 but was allowed to continue, with some changes, under legislation passed by Congress in August 2007). Moreover, intelligence and reconnaissance agencies that were historically confined to spying on foreign countries have been used extensively on the home front since 2001. In the hours after the September 11th, 2001 attacks in New York, for example, the Bush administration called on the NGA to capture imagery from lower Manhattan and the Pentagon to help in the rescue and recovery efforts. In 2002, when two deranged snipers terrified the citizens of Washington and its Maryland and Virginia suburbs with a string of fatal shootings, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) asked the NGA to provide detailed images of freeway interchanges and other locations to help spot the pair. The NGA was also used extensively during Hurricane Katrina , when the agency provided overhead imagery -- some of it supplied by U-2 photoreconnaissance aircraft -- to federal and state rescue operations. The data, which included mapping of flooded areas in Louisiana and Mississippi, allowed residents of the stricken areas to see the extent of damage to their homes and helped first-responders locate contaminated areas as well as schools, churches and hospitals that might be used in the rescue. More recently, during the October 2007 California wildfires, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) asked the NGA to analyze overhead imagery of the fire zones and determine the areas of maximum intensity and damage. In every situation that the NGA is used domestically, it must receive a formal request from a lead domestic agency, according to agency spokesperson David Burpee. That agency is usually FEMA, which is a unit of DHS. At first blush, the idea of a U.S. intelligence agency serving the public by providing imagery to aid in disaster recovery sounds like a positive development, especially when compared to the Bush administration’s misuse of the NSA and the Pentagon’s Counter-Intelligence Field Activity (CIFA) to spy on American citizens. But the notion of using spy satellites and aircraft for domestic purposes becomes problematic from a civil liberties standpoint when the full capabilities of agencies like the NGA and the NSA are considered. Imagine, for example, that U.S. intelligence officials have determined, through NSA telephone intercepts, that a group of worshippers at a mosque in Oakland, California, has communicated with an Islamic charity in Saudi Arabia. This is the same group that the FBI and the U.S. Department of the Treasury believe is linked to an organization unfriendly to the United States. Imagine further that the FBI, as a lead agency, asks and receives permission to monitor that mosque and the people inside using high-resolution imagery obtained from the NGA. Using other technologies, such as overhead traffic cameras in place in many cities, that mosque could be placed under surveillance for months, and -- through cell phone intercepts and overhead imagery -- its suspected worshipers carefully tracked in real-time as they moved almost anywhere in the country. The NAO, under the plan approved by ODNI’s McConnell, would determine the rules that will guide the DHS and other lead federal agencies when they want to use imagery and signals intelligence in situations like this, as well as during natural disasters. If the organization is established as planned, U.S. domestic agencies will have a vast array of technology at their disposal. In addition to the powerful mapping and signals tools provided by the NGA and the NSA, domestic agencies will also have access to measures and signatures intelligence (MASINT) managed by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the principal spying agency used by the secretary of defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. (MASINT is a highly classified form of intelligence that uses infrared sensors and other technologies to “sniff” the atmosphere for certain chemicals and electro-magnetic activity and “see” beneath bridges and forest canopies. Using its tools, analysts can detect signs that a nuclear power plant is producing plutonium, determine from truck exhaust what types of vehicles are in a convoy, and detect people and weapons hidden from the view of satellites or photoreconnaissance aircraft.) Created By Contractors The study group that established policies for the NAO was jointly funded by the ODNI and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), one of only two domestic U.S. agencies that is currently allowed, under rules set in the 1970s, to use classified intelligence from spy satellites. (The other is NASA, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.) The group was chaired by Keith Hall, a Booz Allen vice president who manages his firm’s extensive contracts with the NGA and previously served as the director of the NRO. Other members of the group included seven other former intelligence officers working for Booz Allen, as well as retired Army Lieutenant General Patrick M. Hughes, the former director of the DIA and vice president of homeland security for L-3 Communications, a key NSA contractor; and Thomas W. Conroy, the vice president of national security programs for Northrop Grumman, which has extensive contracts with the NSA and the NGA and throughout the intelligence community. From the start, the study group was heavily weighted toward companies with a stake in both foreign and domestic intelligence. Not surprisingly, its contractor-advisers called for a major expansion in the domestic use of the spy satellites that they sell to the government. Since the end of the Cold War and particularly since the September 11, 2001 attacks, they said, the “threats to the nation have changed and there is a growing interest in making available the special capabilities of the intelligence community to all parts of the government, to include homeland security and law enforcement entities and on a higher priority basis.” Contractors are not new to the U.S. spy world. Since the creation of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the modern intelligence system in 1947, the private sector has been tapped to design and build the technology that facilitates electronic surveillance. Lockheed, for example, built the U-2, the famous surveillance plane that flew scores of spy missions over the Soviet Union and Cuba. During the 1960s, Lockheed was a prime contractor for the Corona system of spy satellites that greatly expanded the CIA’s abilities to photograph secret military installations from space. IBM, Cray Computers and other companies built the super-computers that allowed the NSA to sift through data from millions of telephone calls, and analyze them for intelligence that was passed on to national leaders. Spending on contracts has increased exponentially in recent years along with intelligence budgets, and the NSA, the NGA and other agencies have turned to the private sector for the latest computer and communications technologies and for intelligence analysts. For example, today about half of staff at the NSA and NGA are private contractors. At the DIA, 35 percent of the workers are contractors. But the most privatized agency of all is the NRO, where a whopping 90 percent of the workforce receive paychecks from corporations. All told the U.S. intelligence agencies spend some 70 percent of their estimated $60 billion annual budget on contracts with private companies, according to documents this reporter obtained in June 2007 from the ODNI. The plans to increase domestic spying are estimated to be worth billions of dollars in new business for the intelligence contractors. The market potential was on display in October at GEOINT 2007, the annual conference sponsored by the U.S. Geospatial Intelligence Foundation (USGIF), a non-profit organization funded by the largest contractors for the NGA. During the conference, which took place in October at the spacious Henry B. Gonzalez Convention Center in downtown San Antonio, many companies were displaying spying and surveillance tools that had been used in Afghanistan and Iraq and were now being re-branded for potential domestic use. BAE Systems Inc. On the first day of the conference, three employees of BAE Systems Inc. who had just returned from a three-week tour of Iraq and Afghanistan with the NGA demonstrated a new software package called SOCET GXP. (BAE Systems Inc. is the U.S. subsidiary of the UK-based BAE, the third-largest military contractor in the world.) GXP uses Google Earth software as a basis for creating three-dimensional maps that U.S. commanders and soldiers use to conduct intelligence and reconnaissance missions. Eric Bruce, one of the BAE employees back from the Middle East, said his team trained U.S. forces to use the GXP software “to study routes for known terrorist sites” as well as to locate opium fields. “Terrorists use opium to fund their war,” he said. Bruce also said his team received help from Iraqi citizens in locating targets. “Many of the locals can’t read maps, so they tell the analysts, ‘there is a mosque next to a hill,’” he explained. Bruce said BAE’s new package is designed for defense forces and intelligence agencies, but can also be used for homeland security and by highway departments and airports. Earlier versions of the software were sold to the U.S. Army’s Topographic Engineering Center, where it has been used to collect data on more than 12,000 square kilometers of Iraq, primarily in urban centers and over supply routes. Another new BAE tool displayed in San Antonio was a program called GOSHAWK, which stands for “Geospatial Operations for a Secure Homeland – Awareness, Workflow, Knowledge.” It was pitched by BAE as a tool to help law enforcement and state and local emergency agencies prepare for, and respond to, “natural disasters and terrorist and criminal incidents.” Under the GOSHAWK program, BAE supplies “agencies and corporations” with data providers and information technology specialists “capable of turning geospatial information into the knowledge needed for quick decisions.” A typical operation might involve acquiring data from satellites, aircraft and sensors in ground vehicles, and integrating those data to support an emergency or security operations center. One of the program’s special attributes, the company says, is its ability to “differentiate levels of classification,” meaning that it can deduce when data are classified and meant only for use by analysts with security clearances. These two products were just a sampling of what BAE, a major player in the U.S. intelligence market, had to offer. BAE’s services to U.S. intelligence -- including the CIA and the National Counter-Terrorism Center -- are provided through a special unit called the Global Analysis Business Unit. It is located in McLean, Virginia, a stone’s throw from the CIA. The unit is headed by John Gannon, a 25-year veteran of the CIA who reached the agency’s highest analytical ranks as deputy director of intelligence and chairman of the National Intelligence Council. Today, as a private sector contractor for the intelligence community, Gannon manages a staff of more than 800 analysts with security clearances. A brochure for the Global Analysis unit distributed at GEOINT 2007 explains BAE’s role and, in the process, underscores the degree of outsourcing in U.S. intelligence. “The demand for experienced, skilled, and cleared analysts – and for the best systems to manage them – has never been greater across the Intelligence and Defense Communities, in the field and among federal, state, and local agencies responsible for national and homeland security,” BAE says. The mission of the Global Analysis unit, it says, “is to provide policymakers, warfighters, and law enforcement officials with analysts to help them understand the complex intelligence threats they face, and work force management programs to improve the skills and expertise of analysts.” At the bottom of the brochure is a series of photographs illustrating BAE’s broad reach: a group of analysts monitoring a bank of computers; three employees studying a map of Europe, the Middle East and the Horn of Africa; the outlines of two related social networks that have been mapped out to show how their members are linked; a bearded man, apparently from the Middle East and presumably a terrorist; the fiery image of a car bomb after it exploded in Iraq; and four white radar domes (known as radomes) of the type used by the NSA to monitor global communications from dozens of bases and facilities around the world. The brochure may look and sound like typical corporate public relations. But amid BAE’s spy talk were two phrases strategically placed by the company to alert intelligence officials that BAE has an active presence inside the U.S.. The tip-off words were “federal, state and local agencies,” “law enforcement officials” and “homeland security.” By including them, BAE was broadcasting that it is not simply a contractor for agencies involved in foreign intelligence, but has an active presence as a supplier to domestic security agencies, a category that includes the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the FBI as well as local and state police forces stretching from Maine to Hawaii. ManTech, Boeing, Harris and L-3 ManTech International, an important NSA contractor based in Fairfax, Virginia, has perfected the art of creating multi-agency software programs for both foreign and domestic intelligence. After the September 11th, 2001 attacks, it developed a classified program for the Defense Intelligence Agency called the Joint Regional Information Exchange System. DIA used it to combine classified and unclassified intelligence on terrorist threats on a single desktop. ManTech then tweaked that software for the Department of Homeland Security and sold it to DHS for its Homeland Security Information Network. According to literature ManTech distributed at GEOINT, that software will “significantly strengthen the exchange of real-time threat information used to combat terrorism.” ManTech, the brochure added, “also provides extensive, advanced information technology support to the National Security Agency” and other agencies. In a nearby booth, Chicago, Illinois-based Boeing, the world’s second largest defense contractor, was displaying its “information sharing environment” software, which is designed to meet the Office of the Director of National Intelligence’s new requirements on agencies to stop buying “stovepiped” systems that can’t talk to each other. The ODNI wants to focus on products that will allow the NGA and other agencies to easily share their classified imagery with the CIA and other sectors of the community. “To ensure freedom in the world, the United States continues to address the challenges introduced by terrorism,” a Boeing handout said. Its new software, the company said, will allow information to be “shared efficiently and uninterrupted across intelligence agencies, first responders, military and world allies.” Boeing has a reason for publishing boastful material like this: In 2005, it lost a major contract with the NRO to build a new generation of imaging satellites after ringing up billions of dollars in cost-overruns. The New York Times recently called the Boeing project “the most spectacular and expensive failure in the 50-year history of American spy satellite projects.” Boeing’s geospatial intelligence offerings are provided through its Space and Intelligence Systems unit, which also holds contracts with the NSA. It allows agencies and military units to map global shorelines and create detailed maps of cities and battlefields, complete with digital elevation data that allow users to construct three-dimensional maps. (In an intriguing aside, one Boeing intelligence brochure lists among its “specialized organizations” Jeppesen Government and Military Services. According to a 2006 account by New Yorker reporter Jane Mayer, Jeppesen provided logistical and navigational assistance, including flight plans and clearance to fly over other countries, to the CIA for its “extraordinary rendition” program.) Although less known as an intelligence contractor than BAE and Boeing, the Harris Corporation has become a major force in providing contracted electronic, satellite and information technology services to the intelligence community, including the NSA and the NRO. In 2007, according to its most recent annual report, the $4.2 billion company, based in Melbourne, Florida, won several new classified contracts. NSA awarded one of them for software to be used by NSA analysts in the agency’s “Rapidly Deployable Integrated Command and Control System,” which is used by the NSA to transmit “actionable intelligence” to soldiers and commanders in the field. Harris also supplies geospatial and imagery products to the NGA. At GEOINT, Harris displayed a new product that allows agencies to analyze live video and audio data imported from UAVs. It was developed, said Fred Poole, a Harris market development manager, “with input from intelligence analysts who were looking for a video and audio analysis tool that would allow them to perform ‘intelligence fusion’” -- combining information from several agencies into a single picture of an ongoing operation. For many of the contractors at GEOINT, the highlight of the symposium was an “interoperability demonstration” that allowed vendors to show how their products would work in a domestic crisis. One scenario involved Cuba as a rogue nation supplying spent nuclear fuel to terrorists bent on creating havoc in the U.S.. Implausible as it was, the plot, which involved maritime transportation and ports, allowed the companies to display software that was likely already in use by the Department of Homeland Security and Naval Intelligence. The “plot” involved the discovery by U.S. intelligence of a Cuban ship carrying spent nuclear fuel heading for the U.S. Gulf Coast; an analysis of the social networks of Cuban officials involved with the illicit cargo; and the tracking and interception of the cargo as it departed from Cuba and moved across the Caribbean to Corpus Christi, Texas, a major port on the Gulf Coast. The agencies involved included the NGA, the NSA, Naval Intelligence and the Marines, and some of the key contractors working for those agencies. It illustrated how sophisticated the U.S. domestic surveillance system has become in the six years since the 9/11 attacks. L-3 Communications, which is based in New York city, was a natural for the exercise: As mentioned earlier, retired Army Lt. General Patrick M. Hughes, its vice president of homeland security, was a member of the Booz Allen Hamilton study group that advised the Bush administration to expand the domestic use of military spy satellites. At GEOINT, L-3 displayed a new program called “multi-INT visualization environment” that combines imagery and signals intelligence data that can be laid over photographs and maps. One example shown during the interoperability demonstration showed how such data would be incorporated into a map of Florida and the waters surrounding Cuba. With L-3 a major player at the NSA, this demonstration software is likely seeing much use as the NSA and the NGA expand their information-sharing relationship. Over the past two years, for example, the NGA has deployed dozens of employees and contractors to Iraq to support the “surge” of U.S. troops. The NGA teams provide imagery and full-motion video -- much of it beamed to the ground from Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) -- that help U.S. commanders and soldiers track and destroy insurgents fighting the U.S. occupation. And since 2004, under a memorandum of understanding with the NSA, the NGA has begun to incorporate signals intelligence into its imagery products. The blending technique allows U.S. military units to track and find targets by picking up signals from their cell phones, follow the suspects in real-time using overhead video, and direct fighter planes and artillery units to the exact location of the targets -- and blow them to smithereens. That’s exactly how U.S. Special Forces tracked and killed Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the alleged leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq, the NGA’s director, Navy Vice Admiral Robert Murrett, said in 2006. Later, Murrett told reporters during GEOINT 2007, the NSA and the NGA have cooperated in similar fashion in several other fronts of the “war on terror,” including in the Horn of Africa, where the U.S. military has attacked Al Qaeda units in Somalia, and in the Philippines, where U.S. forces are helping the government put down the Muslim insurgent group Abu Sayyaf. “When the NGA and the NSA work together, one plus one equals five,” said Murrett. Civil Liberty Worries For U.S. citizens, however, the combination of NGA imagery and NSA signals intelligence in a domestic situation could threaten important constitutional safeguards against unwarranted searches and seizures. Kate Martin, the director of the Center for National Security Studies, a nonprofit advocacy organization, has likened the NAO plan to “Big Brother in the Sky.” The Bush administration, she told the Washington Post, is “laying the bricks one at a time for a police state.” Some Congress members, too, are concerned. “The enormity of the NAO’s capabilities and the intended use of the imagery received through these satellites for domestic homeland security purposes, and the unintended consequences that may arise, have heightened concerns among the general public, including reputable civil rights and civil liberties organizations,” Bennie G. Thompson, a Democratic member of Congress from Mississippi and the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, wrote in a September letter to Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff. Thompson and other lawmakers reacted with anger after reports of the NAO and the domestic spying plan were first revealed by the Wall Street Journal in August. “There was no briefing, no hearing, and no phone call from anyone on your staff to any member of this committee of why, how, or when satellite imagery would be shared with police and sheriffs’ officers nationwide,” Thompson complained to Chertoff. At a hastily organized hearing in September, Thompson and others demanded that the opening of the NAO be delayed until further studies were conducted on its legal basis and questions about civil liberties were answered. They also demanded biweekly updates from Chertoff on the activities and progress of the new organization. Others pointed out the potential danger of allowing U.S. military satellites to be used domestically. “It will terrify you if you really understand the capabilities of satellites,” warned Jane Harman, a Democratic member of Congress from California, who represents a coastal area of Los Angeles where many of the nation’s satellites are built. As Harman well knows, military spy satellites are far more flexible, offer greater resolution, and have considerably more power to observe human activity than commercial satellites. “Even if this program is well-designed and executed, someone somewhere else could hijack it,” Harman said during the hearing. The NAO was supposed to open for business on October 1, 2007. But the Congressional complaints have led the ODNI and DHS to delay their plans. The NAO "has no intention to begin operations until we address your questions," Charles Allen of DHS explained in a letter to Thompson. In an address at the GEOINT conference in San Antonio, Allen said that the ODNI is working with DHS and the Departments of Justice and Interior to draft the charter for the new organization, which he said will face “layers of review” once it is established. Yet, given the Bush administration’s record of using U.S. intelligence agencies to spy on U.S. citizens, it is difficult to take such promises at face value. Moreover, the extensive corporate role in foreign and domestic intelligence means that the private sector has a great deal to gain in the new plan for intelligence-sharing. Because most private contracts with intelligence agencies are classified, however, the public will have little knowledge of this role. Before Congress signs off on the NAO, it should create a better oversight system that would allow the House of Representatives and the Senate to monitor the new organization and to examine how BAE, Boeing, Harris and its fellow corporations stand to profit from this unprecedented expansion of America’s domestic intelligence system.
Tim Shorrock has been writing about U.S. foreign policy and national security for nearly 30 years. His book, Spies for Hire: The Secret World of Outsourced Intelligence, will be published in May 2008 by Simon & Schuster. He can be reached at timshorrock@gmail.com.
This article was made possible in part by a generous grant from the Hurd Foundation.
A new intelligence institution to be inaugurated soon by the Bush administration will allow government spying agencies to conduct broad surveillance and reconnaissance inside the United States for the first time. Under a proposal being reviewed by Congress, a National Applications Office (NAO) will be established to coordinate how the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and domestic law enforcement and rescue agencies use imagery and communications intelligence picked up by U.S. spy satellites. If the plan goes forward, the NAO will create the legal mechanism for an unprecedented degree of domestic intelligence gathering that would make the U.S. one of the world's most closely monitored nations. Until now, domestic use of electronic intelligence from spy satellites was limited to scientific agencies with no responsibility for national security or law enforcement. The intelligence-sharing system to be managed by the NAO will rely heavily on private contractors including Boeing, BAE Systems, L-3 Communications and Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). These companies already provide technology and personnel to U.S. agencies involved in foreign intelligence, and the NAO greatly expands their markets. Indeed, at an intelligence conference in San Antonio, Texas, last month, the titans of the industry were actively lobbying intelligence officials to buy products specifically designed for domestic surveillance. The NAO was created under a plan tentatively approved in May 2007 by Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell. Specifically, the NAO will oversee how classified information collected by the National Security Agency (NSA), the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) and other key agencies is used within the U.S. during natural disasters, terrorist attacks and other events affecting national security. The most critical intelligence will be supplied by the NSA and the NGA, which are often referred to by U.S. officials as the “eyes” and “ears” of the intelligence community. The NSA, through a global network of listening posts, surveillance planes, and satellites, captures signals from phone calls, e-mail and Internet traffic, and translates and analyzes them for U.S. military and national intelligence officials. The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), which was formally inaugurated in 2003, provides overhead imagery and mapping tools that allow intelligence and military analysts to monitor events from the skies and space. The NSA and the NGA have a close relationship with the super-secret National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), which builds and maintains the U.S. fleet of spy satellites and operates the ground stations where the NSA’s signals and the NGA’s imagery are processed and analyzed. By law, their collection efforts are supposed to be confined to foreign countries and battlefields. The National Applications Office was conceived in 2005 by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), which Congress created in 2004 to oversee the 16 agencies that make up the U.S. intelligence community. The ODNI, concerned that the legal framework for U.S. intelligence operations had not been updated for the global “war on terror,” turned to Booz Allen Hamilton of McLean, Virginia -- one of the largest contractors in the spy business. The company was tasked with studying how intelligence from spy satellites and photoreconnaissance planes could be better used domestically to track potential threats to security within the U.S.. The Booz Allen study was completed in May of that year, and has since become the basis for the NAO oversight plan. In May 2007, McConnell, the former executive vice president of Booz Allen, signed off on the creation of the NAO as the principal body to oversee the merging of foreign and domestic intelligence collection operations. The NAO is "an idea whose time has arrived," Charles Allen, a top U.S. intelligence official, told the Wall Street Journal in August 2007 after it broke the news of the creation of the NAO. Allen, the DHS's chief intelligence officer, will head the new program. The announcement came just days after President George W. Bush signed a new law approved by Congress to expand the ability of the NSA to eavesdrop, without warrants, on telephone calls, e-mail and faxes passing through telecommunications hubs in the U.S. when the government suspects agents of a foreign power may be involved. "These [intelligence] systems are already used to help us respond to crises," Allen later told the Washington Post. "We anticipate that we can also use them to protect Americans by preventing the entry of dangerous people and goods into the country, and by helping us examine critical infrastructure for vulnerabilities." Donald Kerr, a former NRO director who is now the number two at ODNI, recently explained to reporters that the intelligence community was no longer discussing whether or not to spy on U.S. citizens: “Our job now is to engage in a productive debate, which focuses on privacy as a component of appropriate levels of security and public safety,'' Kerr said. ''I think all of us have to really take stock of what we already are willing to give up, in terms of anonymity, but [also] what safeguards we want in place to be sure that giving that doesn't empty our bank account or do something equally bad elsewhere.'' What Will The NAO Do? The plan for the NAO builds on a domestic security infrastructure that has been in place for at least seven years. After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the NSA was granted new powers to monitor domestic communications without obtaining warrants from a secret foreign intelligence court established by Congress in 1978 (that warrant-less program ended in January 2007 but was allowed to continue, with some changes, under legislation passed by Congress in August 2007). Moreover, intelligence and reconnaissance agencies that were historically confined to spying on foreign countries have been used extensively on the home front since 2001. In the hours after the September 11th, 2001 attacks in New York, for example, the Bush administration called on the NGA to capture imagery from lower Manhattan and the Pentagon to help in the rescue and recovery efforts. In 2002, when two deranged snipers terrified the citizens of Washington and its Maryland and Virginia suburbs with a string of fatal shootings, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) asked the NGA to provide detailed images of freeway interchanges and other locations to help spot the pair. The NGA was also used extensively during Hurricane Katrina , when the agency provided overhead imagery -- some of it supplied by U-2 photoreconnaissance aircraft -- to federal and state rescue operations. The data, which included mapping of flooded areas in Louisiana and Mississippi, allowed residents of the stricken areas to see the extent of damage to their homes and helped first-responders locate contaminated areas as well as schools, churches and hospitals that might be used in the rescue. More recently, during the October 2007 California wildfires, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) asked the NGA to analyze overhead imagery of the fire zones and determine the areas of maximum intensity and damage. In every situation that the NGA is used domestically, it must receive a formal request from a lead domestic agency, according to agency spokesperson David Burpee. That agency is usually FEMA, which is a unit of DHS. At first blush, the idea of a U.S. intelligence agency serving the public by providing imagery to aid in disaster recovery sounds like a positive development, especially when compared to the Bush administration’s misuse of the NSA and the Pentagon’s Counter-Intelligence Field Activity (CIFA) to spy on American citizens. But the notion of using spy satellites and aircraft for domestic purposes becomes problematic from a civil liberties standpoint when the full capabilities of agencies like the NGA and the NSA are considered. Imagine, for example, that U.S. intelligence officials have determined, through NSA telephone intercepts, that a group of worshippers at a mosque in Oakland, California, has communicated with an Islamic charity in Saudi Arabia. This is the same group that the FBI and the U.S. Department of the Treasury believe is linked to an organization unfriendly to the United States. Imagine further that the FBI, as a lead agency, asks and receives permission to monitor that mosque and the people inside using high-resolution imagery obtained from the NGA. Using other technologies, such as overhead traffic cameras in place in many cities, that mosque could be placed under surveillance for months, and -- through cell phone intercepts and overhead imagery -- its suspected worshipers carefully tracked in real-time as they moved almost anywhere in the country. The NAO, under the plan approved by ODNI’s McConnell, would determine the rules that will guide the DHS and other lead federal agencies when they want to use imagery and signals intelligence in situations like this, as well as during natural disasters. If the organization is established as planned, U.S. domestic agencies will have a vast array of technology at their disposal. In addition to the powerful mapping and signals tools provided by the NGA and the NSA, domestic agencies will also have access to measures and signatures intelligence (MASINT) managed by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the principal spying agency used by the secretary of defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. (MASINT is a highly classified form of intelligence that uses infrared sensors and other technologies to “sniff” the atmosphere for certain chemicals and electro-magnetic activity and “see” beneath bridges and forest canopies. Using its tools, analysts can detect signs that a nuclear power plant is producing plutonium, determine from truck exhaust what types of vehicles are in a convoy, and detect people and weapons hidden from the view of satellites or photoreconnaissance aircraft.) Created By Contractors The study group that established policies for the NAO was jointly funded by the ODNI and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), one of only two domestic U.S. agencies that is currently allowed, under rules set in the 1970s, to use classified intelligence from spy satellites. (The other is NASA, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.) The group was chaired by Keith Hall, a Booz Allen vice president who manages his firm’s extensive contracts with the NGA and previously served as the director of the NRO. Other members of the group included seven other former intelligence officers working for Booz Allen, as well as retired Army Lieutenant General Patrick M. Hughes, the former director of the DIA and vice president of homeland security for L-3 Communications, a key NSA contractor; and Thomas W. Conroy, the vice president of national security programs for Northrop Grumman, which has extensive contracts with the NSA and the NGA and throughout the intelligence community. From the start, the study group was heavily weighted toward companies with a stake in both foreign and domestic intelligence. Not surprisingly, its contractor-advisers called for a major expansion in the domestic use of the spy satellites that they sell to the government. Since the end of the Cold War and particularly since the September 11, 2001 attacks, they said, the “threats to the nation have changed and there is a growing interest in making available the special capabilities of the intelligence community to all parts of the government, to include homeland security and law enforcement entities and on a higher priority basis.” Contractors are not new to the U.S. spy world. Since the creation of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the modern intelligence system in 1947, the private sector has been tapped to design and build the technology that facilitates electronic surveillance. Lockheed, for example, built the U-2, the famous surveillance plane that flew scores of spy missions over the Soviet Union and Cuba. During the 1960s, Lockheed was a prime contractor for the Corona system of spy satellites that greatly expanded the CIA’s abilities to photograph secret military installations from space. IBM, Cray Computers and other companies built the super-computers that allowed the NSA to sift through data from millions of telephone calls, and analyze them for intelligence that was passed on to national leaders. Spending on contracts has increased exponentially in recent years along with intelligence budgets, and the NSA, the NGA and other agencies have turned to the private sector for the latest computer and communications technologies and for intelligence analysts. For example, today about half of staff at the NSA and NGA are private contractors. At the DIA, 35 percent of the workers are contractors. But the most privatized agency of all is the NRO, where a whopping 90 percent of the workforce receive paychecks from corporations. All told the U.S. intelligence agencies spend some 70 percent of their estimated $60 billion annual budget on contracts with private companies, according to documents this reporter obtained in June 2007 from the ODNI. The plans to increase domestic spying are estimated to be worth billions of dollars in new business for the intelligence contractors. The market potential was on display in October at GEOINT 2007, the annual conference sponsored by the U.S. Geospatial Intelligence Foundation (USGIF), a non-profit organization funded by the largest contractors for the NGA. During the conference, which took place in October at the spacious Henry B. Gonzalez Convention Center in downtown San Antonio, many companies were displaying spying and surveillance tools that had been used in Afghanistan and Iraq and were now being re-branded for potential domestic use. BAE Systems Inc. On the first day of the conference, three employees of BAE Systems Inc. who had just returned from a three-week tour of Iraq and Afghanistan with the NGA demonstrated a new software package called SOCET GXP. (BAE Systems Inc. is the U.S. subsidiary of the UK-based BAE, the third-largest military contractor in the world.) GXP uses Google Earth software as a basis for creating three-dimensional maps that U.S. commanders and soldiers use to conduct intelligence and reconnaissance missions. Eric Bruce, one of the BAE employees back from the Middle East, said his team trained U.S. forces to use the GXP software “to study routes for known terrorist sites” as well as to locate opium fields. “Terrorists use opium to fund their war,” he said. Bruce also said his team received help from Iraqi citizens in locating targets. “Many of the locals can’t read maps, so they tell the analysts, ‘there is a mosque next to a hill,’” he explained. Bruce said BAE’s new package is designed for defense forces and intelligence agencies, but can also be used for homeland security and by highway departments and airports. Earlier versions of the software were sold to the U.S. Army’s Topographic Engineering Center, where it has been used to collect data on more than 12,000 square kilometers of Iraq, primarily in urban centers and over supply routes. Another new BAE tool displayed in San Antonio was a program called GOSHAWK, which stands for “Geospatial Operations for a Secure Homeland – Awareness, Workflow, Knowledge.” It was pitched by BAE as a tool to help law enforcement and state and local emergency agencies prepare for, and respond to, “natural disasters and terrorist and criminal incidents.” Under the GOSHAWK program, BAE supplies “agencies and corporations” with data providers and information technology specialists “capable of turning geospatial information into the knowledge needed for quick decisions.” A typical operation might involve acquiring data from satellites, aircraft and sensors in ground vehicles, and integrating those data to support an emergency or security operations center. One of the program’s special attributes, the company says, is its ability to “differentiate levels of classification,” meaning that it can deduce when data are classified and meant only for use by analysts with security clearances. These two products were just a sampling of what BAE, a major player in the U.S. intelligence market, had to offer. BAE’s services to U.S. intelligence -- including the CIA and the National Counter-Terrorism Center -- are provided through a special unit called the Global Analysis Business Unit. It is located in McLean, Virginia, a stone’s throw from the CIA. The unit is headed by John Gannon, a 25-year veteran of the CIA who reached the agency’s highest analytical ranks as deputy director of intelligence and chairman of the National Intelligence Council. Today, as a private sector contractor for the intelligence community, Gannon manages a staff of more than 800 analysts with security clearances. A brochure for the Global Analysis unit distributed at GEOINT 2007 explains BAE’s role and, in the process, underscores the degree of outsourcing in U.S. intelligence. “The demand for experienced, skilled, and cleared analysts – and for the best systems to manage them – has never been greater across the Intelligence and Defense Communities, in the field and among federal, state, and local agencies responsible for national and homeland security,” BAE says. The mission of the Global Analysis unit, it says, “is to provide policymakers, warfighters, and law enforcement officials with analysts to help them understand the complex intelligence threats they face, and work force management programs to improve the skills and expertise of analysts.” At the bottom of the brochure is a series of photographs illustrating BAE’s broad reach: a group of analysts monitoring a bank of computers; three employees studying a map of Europe, the Middle East and the Horn of Africa; the outlines of two related social networks that have been mapped out to show how their members are linked; a bearded man, apparently from the Middle East and presumably a terrorist; the fiery image of a car bomb after it exploded in Iraq; and four white radar domes (known as radomes) of the type used by the NSA to monitor global communications from dozens of bases and facilities around the world. The brochure may look and sound like typical corporate public relations. But amid BAE’s spy talk were two phrases strategically placed by the company to alert intelligence officials that BAE has an active presence inside the U.S.. The tip-off words were “federal, state and local agencies,” “law enforcement officials” and “homeland security.” By including them, BAE was broadcasting that it is not simply a contractor for agencies involved in foreign intelligence, but has an active presence as a supplier to domestic security agencies, a category that includes the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the FBI as well as local and state police forces stretching from Maine to Hawaii. ManTech, Boeing, Harris and L-3 ManTech International, an important NSA contractor based in Fairfax, Virginia, has perfected the art of creating multi-agency software programs for both foreign and domestic intelligence. After the September 11th, 2001 attacks, it developed a classified program for the Defense Intelligence Agency called the Joint Regional Information Exchange System. DIA used it to combine classified and unclassified intelligence on terrorist threats on a single desktop. ManTech then tweaked that software for the Department of Homeland Security and sold it to DHS for its Homeland Security Information Network. According to literature ManTech distributed at GEOINT, that software will “significantly strengthen the exchange of real-time threat information used to combat terrorism.” ManTech, the brochure added, “also provides extensive, advanced information technology support to the National Security Agency” and other agencies. In a nearby booth, Chicago, Illinois-based Boeing, the world’s second largest defense contractor, was displaying its “information sharing environment” software, which is designed to meet the Office of the Director of National Intelligence’s new requirements on agencies to stop buying “stovepiped” systems that can’t talk to each other. The ODNI wants to focus on products that will allow the NGA and other agencies to easily share their classified imagery with the CIA and other sectors of the community. “To ensure freedom in the world, the United States continues to address the challenges introduced by terrorism,” a Boeing handout said. Its new software, the company said, will allow information to be “shared efficiently and uninterrupted across intelligence agencies, first responders, military and world allies.” Boeing has a reason for publishing boastful material like this: In 2005, it lost a major contract with the NRO to build a new generation of imaging satellites after ringing up billions of dollars in cost-overruns. The New York Times recently called the Boeing project “the most spectacular and expensive failure in the 50-year history of American spy satellite projects.” Boeing’s geospatial intelligence offerings are provided through its Space and Intelligence Systems unit, which also holds contracts with the NSA. It allows agencies and military units to map global shorelines and create detailed maps of cities and battlefields, complete with digital elevation data that allow users to construct three-dimensional maps. (In an intriguing aside, one Boeing intelligence brochure lists among its “specialized organizations” Jeppesen Government and Military Services. According to a 2006 account by New Yorker reporter Jane Mayer, Jeppesen provided logistical and navigational assistance, including flight plans and clearance to fly over other countries, to the CIA for its “extraordinary rendition” program.) Although less known as an intelligence contractor than BAE and Boeing, the Harris Corporation has become a major force in providing contracted electronic, satellite and information technology services to the intelligence community, including the NSA and the NRO. In 2007, according to its most recent annual report, the $4.2 billion company, based in Melbourne, Florida, won several new classified contracts. NSA awarded one of them for software to be used by NSA analysts in the agency’s “Rapidly Deployable Integrated Command and Control System,” which is used by the NSA to transmit “actionable intelligence” to soldiers and commanders in the field. Harris also supplies geospatial and imagery products to the NGA. At GEOINT, Harris displayed a new product that allows agencies to analyze live video and audio data imported from UAVs. It was developed, said Fred Poole, a Harris market development manager, “with input from intelligence analysts who were looking for a video and audio analysis tool that would allow them to perform ‘intelligence fusion’” -- combining information from several agencies into a single picture of an ongoing operation. For many of the contractors at GEOINT, the highlight of the symposium was an “interoperability demonstration” that allowed vendors to show how their products would work in a domestic crisis. One scenario involved Cuba as a rogue nation supplying spent nuclear fuel to terrorists bent on creating havoc in the U.S.. Implausible as it was, the plot, which involved maritime transportation and ports, allowed the companies to display software that was likely already in use by the Department of Homeland Security and Naval Intelligence. The “plot” involved the discovery by U.S. intelligence of a Cuban ship carrying spent nuclear fuel heading for the U.S. Gulf Coast; an analysis of the social networks of Cuban officials involved with the illicit cargo; and the tracking and interception of the cargo as it departed from Cuba and moved across the Caribbean to Corpus Christi, Texas, a major port on the Gulf Coast. The agencies involved included the NGA, the NSA, Naval Intelligence and the Marines, and some of the key contractors working for those agencies. It illustrated how sophisticated the U.S. domestic surveillance system has become in the six years since the 9/11 attacks. L-3 Communications, which is based in New York city, was a natural for the exercise: As mentioned earlier, retired Army Lt. General Patrick M. Hughes, its vice president of homeland security, was a member of the Booz Allen Hamilton study group that advised the Bush administration to expand the domestic use of military spy satellites. At GEOINT, L-3 displayed a new program called “multi-INT visualization environment” that combines imagery and signals intelligence data that can be laid over photographs and maps. One example shown during the interoperability demonstration showed how such data would be incorporated into a map of Florida and the waters surrounding Cuba. With L-3 a major player at the NSA, this demonstration software is likely seeing much use as the NSA and the NGA expand their information-sharing relationship. Over the past two years, for example, the NGA has deployed dozens of employees and contractors to Iraq to support the “surge” of U.S. troops. The NGA teams provide imagery and full-motion video -- much of it beamed to the ground from Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) -- that help U.S. commanders and soldiers track and destroy insurgents fighting the U.S. occupation. And since 2004, under a memorandum of understanding with the NSA, the NGA has begun to incorporate signals intelligence into its imagery products. The blending technique allows U.S. military units to track and find targets by picking up signals from their cell phones, follow the suspects in real-time using overhead video, and direct fighter planes and artillery units to the exact location of the targets -- and blow them to smithereens. That’s exactly how U.S. Special Forces tracked and killed Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the alleged leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq, the NGA’s director, Navy Vice Admiral Robert Murrett, said in 2006. Later, Murrett told reporters during GEOINT 2007, the NSA and the NGA have cooperated in similar fashion in several other fronts of the “war on terror,” including in the Horn of Africa, where the U.S. military has attacked Al Qaeda units in Somalia, and in the Philippines, where U.S. forces are helping the government put down the Muslim insurgent group Abu Sayyaf. “When the NGA and the NSA work together, one plus one equals five,” said Murrett. Civil Liberty Worries For U.S. citizens, however, the combination of NGA imagery and NSA signals intelligence in a domestic situation could threaten important constitutional safeguards against unwarranted searches and seizures. Kate Martin, the director of the Center for National Security Studies, a nonprofit advocacy organization, has likened the NAO plan to “Big Brother in the Sky.” The Bush administration, she told the Washington Post, is “laying the bricks one at a time for a police state.” Some Congress members, too, are concerned. “The enormity of the NAO’s capabilities and the intended use of the imagery received through these satellites for domestic homeland security purposes, and the unintended consequences that may arise, have heightened concerns among the general public, including reputable civil rights and civil liberties organizations,” Bennie G. Thompson, a Democratic member of Congress from Mississippi and the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, wrote in a September letter to Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff. Thompson and other lawmakers reacted with anger after reports of the NAO and the domestic spying plan were first revealed by the Wall Street Journal in August. “There was no briefing, no hearing, and no phone call from anyone on your staff to any member of this committee of why, how, or when satellite imagery would be shared with police and sheriffs’ officers nationwide,” Thompson complained to Chertoff. At a hastily organized hearing in September, Thompson and others demanded that the opening of the NAO be delayed until further studies were conducted on its legal basis and questions about civil liberties were answered. They also demanded biweekly updates from Chertoff on the activities and progress of the new organization. Others pointed out the potential danger of allowing U.S. military satellites to be used domestically. “It will terrify you if you really understand the capabilities of satellites,” warned Jane Harman, a Democratic member of Congress from California, who represents a coastal area of Los Angeles where many of the nation’s satellites are built. As Harman well knows, military spy satellites are far more flexible, offer greater resolution, and have considerably more power to observe human activity than commercial satellites. “Even if this program is well-designed and executed, someone somewhere else could hijack it,” Harman said during the hearing. The NAO was supposed to open for business on October 1, 2007. But the Congressional complaints have led the ODNI and DHS to delay their plans. The NAO "has no intention to begin operations until we address your questions," Charles Allen of DHS explained in a letter to Thompson. In an address at the GEOINT conference in San Antonio, Allen said that the ODNI is working with DHS and the Departments of Justice and Interior to draft the charter for the new organization, which he said will face “layers of review” once it is established. Yet, given the Bush administration’s record of using U.S. intelligence agencies to spy on U.S. citizens, it is difficult to take such promises at face value. Moreover, the extensive corporate role in foreign and domestic intelligence means that the private sector has a great deal to gain in the new plan for intelligence-sharing. Because most private contracts with intelligence agencies are classified, however, the public will have little knowledge of this role. Before Congress signs off on the NAO, it should create a better oversight system that would allow the House of Representatives and the Senate to monitor the new organization and to examine how BAE, Boeing, Harris and its fellow corporations stand to profit from this unprecedented expansion of America’s domestic intelligence system.
Tim Shorrock has been writing about U.S. foreign policy and national security for nearly 30 years. His book, Spies for Hire: The Secret World of Outsourced Intelligence, will be published in May 2008 by Simon & Schuster. He can be reached at timshorrock@gmail.com.
This article was made possible in part by a generous grant from the Hurd Foundation.
Monday, March 3, 2008
President Kennedy Speech, April 1961
The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know...
...It requires a change in outlook, a change in tactics, a change in missions--by the government, by the people, by every businessman or labor leader, and by every newspaper. For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence--on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations. Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. It conducts the Cold War, in short, with a war-time discipline no democracy would ever hope or wish to match...
...Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed-and no republic can survive. That is why the Athenian law-maker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy. And that is why our press was protected by the First Amendment--the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution--not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and the sentimental, not to simply "give the public what it wants"--but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold, educate and sometimes even anger public opinion.
This means greater coverage and analysis of international news--for it is no longer far away and foreign but close at hand and local. It means greater attention to improved understanding of the news as well as improved transmission. And it means, finally, that government at all levels, must meet its obligation to provide you with the fullest possible information outside the narrowest limits of national security--and we intend to do it...
...And so it is to the printing press--to the recorder of man's deeds, the keeper of his conscience, the courier of his news--that we look for strength and assistance, confident that with your help man will be what he was born to be: free and independent.
...It requires a change in outlook, a change in tactics, a change in missions--by the government, by the people, by every businessman or labor leader, and by every newspaper. For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence--on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations. Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. It conducts the Cold War, in short, with a war-time discipline no democracy would ever hope or wish to match...
...Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed-and no republic can survive. That is why the Athenian law-maker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy. And that is why our press was protected by the First Amendment--the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution--not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and the sentimental, not to simply "give the public what it wants"--but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold, educate and sometimes even anger public opinion.
This means greater coverage and analysis of international news--for it is no longer far away and foreign but close at hand and local. It means greater attention to improved understanding of the news as well as improved transmission. And it means, finally, that government at all levels, must meet its obligation to provide you with the fullest possible information outside the narrowest limits of national security--and we intend to do it...
...And so it is to the printing press--to the recorder of man's deeds, the keeper of his conscience, the courier of his news--that we look for strength and assistance, confident that with your help man will be what he was born to be: free and independent.
Run To The Border, Part 2
If you haven't watched the first post yet, be sure to check it out FIRST. This is just a slightly different aspect of the North American Union. Click the link below for the "Amero" video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hiPrsc9g98
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hiPrsc9g98
Sunday, March 2, 2008
Run To The Border (If There is One)
The following originally aired on cnn. I think the video pretty much speaks for itself. Notice how we are being forced into a recession, and that the American Dollar is losing value against the Euro. It would seem convenient if this is part of a larger plan.
Notice also, that I said we are being "forced" into a recession. More on that another time. Please, please watch the video by clicking on the link below.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T74VA3xU0EA
Notice also, that I said we are being "forced" into a recession. More on that another time. Please, please watch the video by clicking on the link below.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T74VA3xU0EA
Friday, February 29, 2008
REAL ID
The following was taken from cnn.com, and remember, this goes into effect May 11, 2008. I especially liked the part where the information can be sold to retailers. Notice the second paragraph where it mentions that this hasn't gotten very much press coverage...
(FindLaw) -- In May 2005, Congress passed the "Real ID" Act, which requires states - starting in May 2008 -- to issue federally approved driver's licenses or identification (ID) cards to those who live and work in the United States.
Unlike the USA Patriot Act and other politically sensitive pieces of legislation, Real ID has not made many headlines. Last fall, it was voted down. But then it was reintroduced, and tacked onto the 2005 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Defense, the Global War on Terror and Tsunami Relief. (Real ID hence superseded conflicting portions of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004.)
It would have been a serious political liability for a congressperson to vote against funding for the war on terror and tsunami relief. So it is not surprising that there were no debates, hearings or public vettings of the act.
Hearings might have revealed that Real ID is going to create many headaches and nightmares for U.S. citizens, lawful permanent residents and state governments, which already labor under an unfunded mandate.
More than 600 organizations have expressed concern over the Real ID Act. Organizations such as the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, the American Library Association the Association for Computing Machinery, the National Council of State Legislatures, the American Immigration Lawyers Association and the National Governors Association are among them.
'Real' requirements
The Real ID Act's identity cards will be required if one wants to drive, visit a federal government building, collect Social Security, access a federal government service or use the services of a private entity (such as a bank or an airline) that is required under federal law to verify customer identity.
It will be nearly impossible to live without such an ID. That creates a huge incentive for citizens and residents to get IDs and for states to comply with this unfunded mandate: If they didn't, their citizens and residents wouldn't be able to get access to any of the services or benefits listed above. Estimates of the cost of compliance range from $80 to $100 million -- and states will have to pay.
To get a new approved license, or conform an old one to Real ID, people will have to produce several types of documentation. Those records must prove their name, date of birth, Social Security number, principal residence and that they are lawfully in the United States.
Addresses cannot be P.O. boxes. That will predictably cause problems for people who may fear for their personal safety -- including judges, police officers or domestic violence victims -- or people who may not have a permanent home, such as the homeless, who may be urgently in need of Medicare or other benefits. There needs to be a procedure to ensure these persons' safety and welfare. The Real ID Act has none.
States will be responsible for verifying these documents. That means that, when it comes to birth certificates and other documents, they probably will have to make numerous, onerous confirming calls to state and municipal officials or companies to verify the documents authenticity since it's easy to fake paperwork. In addition, they will have to cross-check Social Security numbers, birthdates,and more against federal databases.
Once created, the IDs must include the information that appears on state-issued driver's licenses and non-driver ID cards -- name, sex, addresses and driver's license or other ID number and a photo.
The act requires photos to be digital so authorities can include them in the multi-state database, which I discuss below. But the IDs must also include additional features that drivers' licenses and non-driver ID cards do not incorporate.
For instance, the ID must include features designed to thwart counterfeiting and identity theft. Unfortunately, while including such features may sound appealing, on the whole, these IDs may make our identities less safe.
Once Real ID is in effect, all 50 states' DMVs will share information in a common database and may also verify information given to them against various federal databases. In addition, it's very possible that such data will be sold to commercial entities: Some states already allow driver's license data to be sold to third parties.
Even with current, unlinked databases, thieves increasingly have turned their attention to DMVs. Once databases are linked, access to the all-state database may turn out to be a bonanza for identity thieves.
Finally, the IDs must include a "common machine-readable technology" that must meet requirements set out by the Department of Homeland Security. And, somewhat ominously, Homeland Security is permitted to add additional requirements -- which could include "biometric identifiers" such as our fingerprints or a retinal scan.
Privacy violations risks
It's that "machine-readable technology" requirement, along with the possibility of Homeland Security add-ons, that raises the most serious risk that the Real ID Act will cause privacy violations. (The fact that the technology must be "common" also raises the already-high risk of identity theft.)
Many commentators predict that radio frequency identification (RFID) tags will be placed in our licenses. (Other alternatives include a magnetic strip or enhanced bar code). In the past, the Department of Homeland Security has indicated it likes the concept of RFID chips.
RFID tags emit radio frequency signals. Significantly, those signals would allow the government to track the movement of our cards and us.
Private businesses may be able to use remote scanners to read RFID tags too, and add to the digital dossiers they may already be compiling. If different merchants combine their data -- you can imagine the sorts of profiles that will develop. And unlike with a grocery store checkout, we may have no idea the scan is even occurring; no telltale beep will alert us.
The State Department -- which is going to be use RFID devices in our passports -- is including some safeguards, but the Real ID Act requires none. At a minimum, the Real ID Act ought to be amended to ensure that -- as will be the case with passports -- national IDs have covers that will prevent them from being scanned when closed, and that the data inside will be encrypted so that it cannot be read until, and unless, it has been swiped and activated through a reader.
Act amendments
The Real ID Act ought to include the same privacy measures -- encryption, and some sort of metallic covers -- that the State Department uses to protect the privacy of passports.
And the Real ID Act ought to be amended to allow persons in danger to give only a P.O. box address; to accommodate the reality that homeless people may have neither an address nor a P.O. box.
In addition, Congress should appropriate funding to help the states in what will be a massive compliance effort -- rather than leaving them with this expensive, unfunded mandate. Lack of funding will only encourage the states to cut corners, defeating the act's purpose.
Finally, states should be able to choose to provide licenses to undocumented immigrants. Otherwise, such immigrants may end up driving without licenses or insurance. If they have accidents, their victims will have no recourse. And it's likely they will have accidents -- for there will be no reason for them to take driving lessons or tests, since a license will be out of the question.
(FindLaw) -- In May 2005, Congress passed the "Real ID" Act, which requires states - starting in May 2008 -- to issue federally approved driver's licenses or identification (ID) cards to those who live and work in the United States.
Unlike the USA Patriot Act and other politically sensitive pieces of legislation, Real ID has not made many headlines. Last fall, it was voted down. But then it was reintroduced, and tacked onto the 2005 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Defense, the Global War on Terror and Tsunami Relief. (Real ID hence superseded conflicting portions of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004.)
It would have been a serious political liability for a congressperson to vote against funding for the war on terror and tsunami relief. So it is not surprising that there were no debates, hearings or public vettings of the act.
Hearings might have revealed that Real ID is going to create many headaches and nightmares for U.S. citizens, lawful permanent residents and state governments, which already labor under an unfunded mandate.
More than 600 organizations have expressed concern over the Real ID Act. Organizations such as the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, the American Library Association the Association for Computing Machinery, the National Council of State Legislatures, the American Immigration Lawyers Association and the National Governors Association are among them.
'Real' requirements
The Real ID Act's identity cards will be required if one wants to drive, visit a federal government building, collect Social Security, access a federal government service or use the services of a private entity (such as a bank or an airline) that is required under federal law to verify customer identity.
It will be nearly impossible to live without such an ID. That creates a huge incentive for citizens and residents to get IDs and for states to comply with this unfunded mandate: If they didn't, their citizens and residents wouldn't be able to get access to any of the services or benefits listed above. Estimates of the cost of compliance range from $80 to $100 million -- and states will have to pay.
To get a new approved license, or conform an old one to Real ID, people will have to produce several types of documentation. Those records must prove their name, date of birth, Social Security number, principal residence and that they are lawfully in the United States.
Addresses cannot be P.O. boxes. That will predictably cause problems for people who may fear for their personal safety -- including judges, police officers or domestic violence victims -- or people who may not have a permanent home, such as the homeless, who may be urgently in need of Medicare or other benefits. There needs to be a procedure to ensure these persons' safety and welfare. The Real ID Act has none.
States will be responsible for verifying these documents. That means that, when it comes to birth certificates and other documents, they probably will have to make numerous, onerous confirming calls to state and municipal officials or companies to verify the documents authenticity since it's easy to fake paperwork. In addition, they will have to cross-check Social Security numbers, birthdates,and more against federal databases.
Once created, the IDs must include the information that appears on state-issued driver's licenses and non-driver ID cards -- name, sex, addresses and driver's license or other ID number and a photo.
The act requires photos to be digital so authorities can include them in the multi-state database, which I discuss below. But the IDs must also include additional features that drivers' licenses and non-driver ID cards do not incorporate.
For instance, the ID must include features designed to thwart counterfeiting and identity theft. Unfortunately, while including such features may sound appealing, on the whole, these IDs may make our identities less safe.
Once Real ID is in effect, all 50 states' DMVs will share information in a common database and may also verify information given to them against various federal databases. In addition, it's very possible that such data will be sold to commercial entities: Some states already allow driver's license data to be sold to third parties.
Even with current, unlinked databases, thieves increasingly have turned their attention to DMVs. Once databases are linked, access to the all-state database may turn out to be a bonanza for identity thieves.
Finally, the IDs must include a "common machine-readable technology" that must meet requirements set out by the Department of Homeland Security. And, somewhat ominously, Homeland Security is permitted to add additional requirements -- which could include "biometric identifiers" such as our fingerprints or a retinal scan.
Privacy violations risks
It's that "machine-readable technology" requirement, along with the possibility of Homeland Security add-ons, that raises the most serious risk that the Real ID Act will cause privacy violations. (The fact that the technology must be "common" also raises the already-high risk of identity theft.)
Many commentators predict that radio frequency identification (RFID) tags will be placed in our licenses. (Other alternatives include a magnetic strip or enhanced bar code). In the past, the Department of Homeland Security has indicated it likes the concept of RFID chips.
RFID tags emit radio frequency signals. Significantly, those signals would allow the government to track the movement of our cards and us.
Private businesses may be able to use remote scanners to read RFID tags too, and add to the digital dossiers they may already be compiling. If different merchants combine their data -- you can imagine the sorts of profiles that will develop. And unlike with a grocery store checkout, we may have no idea the scan is even occurring; no telltale beep will alert us.
The State Department -- which is going to be use RFID devices in our passports -- is including some safeguards, but the Real ID Act requires none. At a minimum, the Real ID Act ought to be amended to ensure that -- as will be the case with passports -- national IDs have covers that will prevent them from being scanned when closed, and that the data inside will be encrypted so that it cannot be read until, and unless, it has been swiped and activated through a reader.
Act amendments
The Real ID Act ought to include the same privacy measures -- encryption, and some sort of metallic covers -- that the State Department uses to protect the privacy of passports.
And the Real ID Act ought to be amended to allow persons in danger to give only a P.O. box address; to accommodate the reality that homeless people may have neither an address nor a P.O. box.
In addition, Congress should appropriate funding to help the states in what will be a massive compliance effort -- rather than leaving them with this expensive, unfunded mandate. Lack of funding will only encourage the states to cut corners, defeating the act's purpose.
Finally, states should be able to choose to provide licenses to undocumented immigrants. Otherwise, such immigrants may end up driving without licenses or insurance. If they have accidents, their victims will have no recourse. And it's likely they will have accidents -- for there will be no reason for them to take driving lessons or tests, since a license will be out of the question.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Feel Better?
I read this article in Rolling Stone Magazine a few years back. It's still relevant today. I thought the section below was a good introduction, so I pasted it onto here. I urge you to follow the link at the bottom and read the entire article, however. The introduction below was taken from http://autismcoach.com.
In a ground-breaking piece of investigative journalism published in the June 30-July 14, 2005 issue of Rolling Stone magazine, the noted environmental activist, author, and radio show commentator, Robert Kennedy Jr., has written about how United States public health officials, including the Centers for Disease Control, pharmaceutical companies, members of the Bush administration, including Bill Frist, and other public officials fudged numbers and refused to release the epidemiological raw data conclusively proving that vaccines caused an epidemic of autism in the United States. Currently, all but a handful of the children and adults diagnosed with autism were born before 1989, when the number of mercury-laden vaccines given children increased and vaccinations began to be given at birth.
Kennedy also noted that the mercury-based preservative, thimerisol, is still being allowed in pediatric flu vaccines, other pharmaceutical products, and in vaccines shipped abroad, causing millions of children in around the world to develop autism (including 1.3 million children in China alone, where autism did not exist until they started receiving vaccines). In an independent study of autism amongst an Amish population in the United States which does not allow vaccinations, there is virtually no autism - of the four Amish children out of the entire population studied who were diagnosed autistic, all had been vaccinated, some prior to adoption.
There also appears to be an epidemiological link between mercury and other neurological conditions in children and adults, including ADD, ADHD, Parkinson's and Alzheimers. According to Kennedy, "If, as the evidence suggests, our public-health authorities knowingly allowed the pharmaceutical industry to poison an entire generation of American children, their actions arguably constitute one of the biggest scandals in the annals of American medicine." Kennedy's full article can be accessed on-line here.
In a ground-breaking piece of investigative journalism published in the June 30-July 14, 2005 issue of Rolling Stone magazine, the noted environmental activist, author, and radio show commentator, Robert Kennedy Jr., has written about how United States public health officials, including the Centers for Disease Control, pharmaceutical companies, members of the Bush administration, including Bill Frist, and other public officials fudged numbers and refused to release the epidemiological raw data conclusively proving that vaccines caused an epidemic of autism in the United States. Currently, all but a handful of the children and adults diagnosed with autism were born before 1989, when the number of mercury-laden vaccines given children increased and vaccinations began to be given at birth.
Kennedy also noted that the mercury-based preservative, thimerisol, is still being allowed in pediatric flu vaccines, other pharmaceutical products, and in vaccines shipped abroad, causing millions of children in around the world to develop autism (including 1.3 million children in China alone, where autism did not exist until they started receiving vaccines). In an independent study of autism amongst an Amish population in the United States which does not allow vaccinations, there is virtually no autism - of the four Amish children out of the entire population studied who were diagnosed autistic, all had been vaccinated, some prior to adoption.
There also appears to be an epidemiological link between mercury and other neurological conditions in children and adults, including ADD, ADHD, Parkinson's and Alzheimers. According to Kennedy, "If, as the evidence suggests, our public-health authorities knowingly allowed the pharmaceutical industry to poison an entire generation of American children, their actions arguably constitute one of the biggest scandals in the annals of American medicine." Kennedy's full article can be accessed on-line here.
Family Secrets
I saw this list years ago, thought it might be appropriate since wifey is running for President...
The following is a list of dead people connected with Bill Clinton:
James McDougal - Clinton's convicted Whitewater partner died of an apparent heart attack, while in solitary confinement. He was a key witness in Ken Starr's investigation.
Mary Mahoney - A former White House intern was murdered July 1997 at a Starbucks Coffee Shop in Georgetown. The murder happened just after she was to go public with her story of sexual harassment in the White House.
Vince Foster - Former White House counselor, and colleague of Hillary Clinton at Little Rock's Rose law firm. Died of a gunshot wound to the head, ruled a suicide.
Ron Brown - Secretary of Commerce and former DNC Chairman. Reported to have died by impact in a plane crash. A pathologist close to the investigation reported that there was a hole in the top of Brown's skull resembling a gunshot wound. At the time of his death Brown was being investigated, and spoke publicly of his willingness to cut a deal with prosecutors.
C. Victor Raiser II & Montgomery Raiser - major players in the Clinton fund raising organization died in a private plane crash in July 1992.
Paul Tulley - Democratic National Committee Political Director found dead in a hotel room in Little Rock, September 1992. Described by Clinton as a "Dear friend and trusted advisor".
Ed Willey - Clinton fund raiser, found dead November 1993 deep in the woods in Virginia of a gunshot wound to the head. Ruled a suicide. Ed Willey died on the same day his wife Kathleen Willey claimed Bill Clinton groped her in the oval office in the White House. Ed Willey was involved in several Clinton fund raising events.
Jerry Parks - Head of Clinton's gubernatorial security team in Little Rock. Gunned down in his car at a deserted intersection outside Little Rock. Park's son said his father was building a dossier on Clinton. He allegedly threatened to reveal this information. After he died the files were mysteriously removed from his house.
James Bunch - Died from a gunshot suicide. It was reported that he had a "Black Book" of people containing names of influential people who visited prostitutes in Texas and Arkansas.
James Wilson - Was found dead in May 1993 from an aparent hanging suicide. He was reported to have ties to Whitewater.
Kathy Ferguson - Ex-wife of Arkansas Trooper Danny Ferguson died in May 1994 was found dead in her living roon with a gunshot to her head. It was ruled a suicide even though there were several packed suitcases, as if she was going somewhere. Danny Ferguson was a co-defendant along with Bill Clinton in the Paula Jones lawsuit. Kathy Ferguson was a possible corroborating witness for Paula Jones.
Bill Shelton - Arkansas state Trooper and fiancee of Kathy Ferguson. Critical of the suicide ruling of his fiancee, he was found dead in June, 1994 of a gunshot wound also ruled a suicide at the gravesite of his fiancee.
Gandy Baugh - Attorney for Clinton friend Dan Lassater died by jumping out a window of a tall building January, 1994. His client was a convicted drug distributor.
Florence Martin - Accountant sub-contractor for the CIA related to the Barry Seal Mena Airport drug smuggling case. Died of three gunshot wounds.
Suzanne Coleman - Reportedly had an affair with Clinton when he was Arkansas Attorney General. Died of a gunshot wound to the back of the head, ruled a suicide. Was pregnant at the time of her death.
Paula Grober - Clinton's speech interpreter for the deaf from 1978 until her death December 9, 1992. She died in a one car accident.
Danny Casolaro - Investigative reporter. Investigating Mena Airport and Arkansas Development Finance Authority. He slit his wrists, apparent suicide in the middle of his investigation.
Paul Wilcher - Attorney investigating corruption at Mena Airport with Casolaro and the 1980 "October Surprise" was found dead on a toilet June 22, 1993 in his Washington DC apartment. Had delivered a report to Janet Reno 3 weeks before his death.
Jon Parnell Walker - Whitewater investigator for Resolution Trust Corp. Jumped to his death from his Arlington, Virginia apartment balcony August 15, 1993 Was investigating Morgan Guarantee scandal.
Barbara Wise - Commerce Department staffer. Worked closely with Ron Brown and John Huang. Cause of death unknown. Died November 29, 1996. Her bruised nude body was found locked in her office at the Department of Commerce.
Charles Meissner - Assistant Secretary of Commerce who gave John Huang special security clearance, died shortly thereafter in a small plane crash.
Dr. Stanley Heard - Chairman of the National Chiropractic Health Care Advisory Committee died with his attorney Steve Dickson in a small plane crash. Dr. Heard, in addition to serving on Clinton's advisory council, personally treated Clinton's mother, stepfather and brother.
Barry Seal - Drug running pilot out of Mena Arkansas, Death was no accident.
Johnny Lawhorn Jr. - Mechanic, found a check made out to Clinton in the trunk of a car left in his repair shop. Died when his car hit a utility pole.
Stanley Huggins - Suicide. Investigated Madison Guarantee. His report was never released.
Hershell Friday - Attorney and Clinton fund raiser died March 1, 1994 when his plane exploded.
Kevin Ives & Don Henry - Known as "The boys on the track" case. Reports say the boys may have stumbled upon the Mena Arkansas airport drug operation. Controversaial case where initial report of death was due to fallingasleep on railroad track. Later reports claim the 2 boys had been slain before being placed on the tracks. Many linked to the case died before their testimony could come before a Grand Jury.
The following six persons had information on the Ives/Henry case:
Keith Coney - Died when his motorcycle slammed into the back of a truck July, 1988
Keith McMaskle - Died stabbed 113 times, Nov, 1988
Gregory Collins - Died from a gunshot wound January 1989.
Jeff Rhodes - He was shot, mutilated and found burned in a trash dump in April 1989.
James Milan - Found decapitated. Coroner ruled death due to natural causes.
Jordan Kettleson - Was found shot to death in the front seat of his pickup truck in June 1990.
Richard Winters - Was a suspect in the Ives / Henry deaths. Was killed in a set-up robbery July 1989
The following Clinton bodyguards are dead:
Major William S. Barkley Jr.
Captain Scott J. Reynolds
Sgt. Brian Hanley
Sgt. Tim Sabel
Major General William Robertson
Col. William Densberger
Col. Robert Kelly
Spec. Gary Rhodes
Steve Willis
Robert Williams
Conway LeBleu
Todd McKeehan
The following is a list of dead people connected with Bill Clinton:
James McDougal - Clinton's convicted Whitewater partner died of an apparent heart attack, while in solitary confinement. He was a key witness in Ken Starr's investigation.
Mary Mahoney - A former White House intern was murdered July 1997 at a Starbucks Coffee Shop in Georgetown. The murder happened just after she was to go public with her story of sexual harassment in the White House.
Vince Foster - Former White House counselor, and colleague of Hillary Clinton at Little Rock's Rose law firm. Died of a gunshot wound to the head, ruled a suicide.
Ron Brown - Secretary of Commerce and former DNC Chairman. Reported to have died by impact in a plane crash. A pathologist close to the investigation reported that there was a hole in the top of Brown's skull resembling a gunshot wound. At the time of his death Brown was being investigated, and spoke publicly of his willingness to cut a deal with prosecutors.
C. Victor Raiser II & Montgomery Raiser - major players in the Clinton fund raising organization died in a private plane crash in July 1992.
Paul Tulley - Democratic National Committee Political Director found dead in a hotel room in Little Rock, September 1992. Described by Clinton as a "Dear friend and trusted advisor".
Ed Willey - Clinton fund raiser, found dead November 1993 deep in the woods in Virginia of a gunshot wound to the head. Ruled a suicide. Ed Willey died on the same day his wife Kathleen Willey claimed Bill Clinton groped her in the oval office in the White House. Ed Willey was involved in several Clinton fund raising events.
Jerry Parks - Head of Clinton's gubernatorial security team in Little Rock. Gunned down in his car at a deserted intersection outside Little Rock. Park's son said his father was building a dossier on Clinton. He allegedly threatened to reveal this information. After he died the files were mysteriously removed from his house.
James Bunch - Died from a gunshot suicide. It was reported that he had a "Black Book" of people containing names of influential people who visited prostitutes in Texas and Arkansas.
James Wilson - Was found dead in May 1993 from an aparent hanging suicide. He was reported to have ties to Whitewater.
Kathy Ferguson - Ex-wife of Arkansas Trooper Danny Ferguson died in May 1994 was found dead in her living roon with a gunshot to her head. It was ruled a suicide even though there were several packed suitcases, as if she was going somewhere. Danny Ferguson was a co-defendant along with Bill Clinton in the Paula Jones lawsuit. Kathy Ferguson was a possible corroborating witness for Paula Jones.
Bill Shelton - Arkansas state Trooper and fiancee of Kathy Ferguson. Critical of the suicide ruling of his fiancee, he was found dead in June, 1994 of a gunshot wound also ruled a suicide at the gravesite of his fiancee.
Gandy Baugh - Attorney for Clinton friend Dan Lassater died by jumping out a window of a tall building January, 1994. His client was a convicted drug distributor.
Florence Martin - Accountant sub-contractor for the CIA related to the Barry Seal Mena Airport drug smuggling case. Died of three gunshot wounds.
Suzanne Coleman - Reportedly had an affair with Clinton when he was Arkansas Attorney General. Died of a gunshot wound to the back of the head, ruled a suicide. Was pregnant at the time of her death.
Paula Grober - Clinton's speech interpreter for the deaf from 1978 until her death December 9, 1992. She died in a one car accident.
Danny Casolaro - Investigative reporter. Investigating Mena Airport and Arkansas Development Finance Authority. He slit his wrists, apparent suicide in the middle of his investigation.
Paul Wilcher - Attorney investigating corruption at Mena Airport with Casolaro and the 1980 "October Surprise" was found dead on a toilet June 22, 1993 in his Washington DC apartment. Had delivered a report to Janet Reno 3 weeks before his death.
Jon Parnell Walker - Whitewater investigator for Resolution Trust Corp. Jumped to his death from his Arlington, Virginia apartment balcony August 15, 1993 Was investigating Morgan Guarantee scandal.
Barbara Wise - Commerce Department staffer. Worked closely with Ron Brown and John Huang. Cause of death unknown. Died November 29, 1996. Her bruised nude body was found locked in her office at the Department of Commerce.
Charles Meissner - Assistant Secretary of Commerce who gave John Huang special security clearance, died shortly thereafter in a small plane crash.
Dr. Stanley Heard - Chairman of the National Chiropractic Health Care Advisory Committee died with his attorney Steve Dickson in a small plane crash. Dr. Heard, in addition to serving on Clinton's advisory council, personally treated Clinton's mother, stepfather and brother.
Barry Seal - Drug running pilot out of Mena Arkansas, Death was no accident.
Johnny Lawhorn Jr. - Mechanic, found a check made out to Clinton in the trunk of a car left in his repair shop. Died when his car hit a utility pole.
Stanley Huggins - Suicide. Investigated Madison Guarantee. His report was never released.
Hershell Friday - Attorney and Clinton fund raiser died March 1, 1994 when his plane exploded.
Kevin Ives & Don Henry - Known as "The boys on the track" case. Reports say the boys may have stumbled upon the Mena Arkansas airport drug operation. Controversaial case where initial report of death was due to fallingasleep on railroad track. Later reports claim the 2 boys had been slain before being placed on the tracks. Many linked to the case died before their testimony could come before a Grand Jury.
The following six persons had information on the Ives/Henry case:
Keith Coney - Died when his motorcycle slammed into the back of a truck July, 1988
Keith McMaskle - Died stabbed 113 times, Nov, 1988
Gregory Collins - Died from a gunshot wound January 1989.
Jeff Rhodes - He was shot, mutilated and found burned in a trash dump in April 1989.
James Milan - Found decapitated. Coroner ruled death due to natural causes.
Jordan Kettleson - Was found shot to death in the front seat of his pickup truck in June 1990.
Richard Winters - Was a suspect in the Ives / Henry deaths. Was killed in a set-up robbery July 1989
The following Clinton bodyguards are dead:
Major William S. Barkley Jr.
Captain Scott J. Reynolds
Sgt. Brian Hanley
Sgt. Tim Sabel
Major General William Robertson
Col. William Densberger
Col. Robert Kelly
Spec. Gary Rhodes
Steve Willis
Robert Williams
Conway LeBleu
Todd McKeehan
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Highway to Hell
I picked this article out from Nexusmagazine.com's list of the 25 most censored news stories of 2008. It's interesting to think what might happen in a few years.
#9 Privatization of America’s InfrastructureSources:Mother Jones, February 2007Title; “The Highwaymen” Author: Daniel Schulman with James Ridgewayhttp://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2007/01/highwaymen.html
Human Events, June 12,2006Title: “Bush Administration Quietly Plans NAFTA Super Highway” Author: Jerome R. Corsihttp://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=15497
Student Researcher: Rachel Icaza and Ioana LupuFaculty Evaluator: Marco Calavita, Ph.D.
We will soon be paying Wall Street investors, Australian bankers, and Spanish contractors for the privilege of driving on American roads, as more than twenty states have enacted legislation allowing public-private partnerships to build and run highways. Investment firms including Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and the Carlyle Group are approaching state politicians with advice to sell off public highway and transportation infrastructure. When advising state officials on the future of this vital public asset, these investment firms fail to mention that their sole purpose is to pick up infrastructure at the lowest price possible in order to maximize returns for their investors. Investors, most often foreign companies, are charging tolls and insisting on “noncompete” clauses that limit governments from expanding or improving nearby roads. In 1956, President Eisenhower signed the Federal-Aid Highway Act, which called for the federal and state governments to build 41,000 miles of high-quality roads across the nation, over rivers and gorges, swamps and deserts, over and through vast mountain ranges, in what would later be called the “greatest public works project in human history.” Eisenhower considered the interstate highway system so vital to the public interest that he authorized the federal government to assume 90 percent of the massive cost. Fifty years later, states are selling off our nation’s enormous, and aging, infrastructure to private investors. Proponents are celebrating these transactions as a no-pain, all-gain way to off-load maintenance expenses and increase highway-building funds without raising taxes. Opponents are lambasting these plans as a major turn toward handing the nation’s valuable common asset over to private firms whose fidelity is to stockholders—not to the public transportation system or the people who use it. On June 29, 2006, Indiana’s governor Mitch Daniels announced that Indiana had received $3.8 billion from a foreign consortium made up of the Spanish construction firm Cintra and the Macquarie Infrastructure Group (MIG) of Australia. In exchange the state handed over operation of a 157-mile Indiana toll road for the next seventy-five years. With the consortium collecting the tolls, which will eventually rise far higher, the privatized road should generate $11 billion for MIG-Cintra over the course of the contract. In September 2005, Daniels solicited bids for the project, with Goldman Sachs serving as the state’s financial adviser—a role that would net the bank a $20 million advisory fee. When Goldman Sachs, one of the nation’s most active and most profitable investment banks, with deep connections to Washington, began advising Indiana on selling its toll road, it failed to mention the fact that, even as it was advising Indiana on how to get the best return, its Australian subsidiary’s mutual funds were ratcheting up their positions in MIG—becoming de facto investors in the deal. Many are suspicious that governors like Daniels across the nation are taking questionable advice from corporate investment banks—and from Washington. Despite public concerns, privatization of US transportation infrastructure has the full backing of the Bush administration. Tyler Duvall, the US Department of Transportation’s assistant secretary for transportation policy, says the DoT has raised the idea with “almost every state” government and is working on sample legislation that states can use for such projects. Across the nation, there is now talk of privatizing the New York Thruway to the Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey turnpikes, as well as of inviting the private sector to build and operate highways and bridges from Alabama to Alaska. In Texas, Governor Rick Perry still refuses to release details of a $1.3 billion contract his administration signed with Cintra for a forty-mile toll road from Austin to Seguin, or of an enormous $184 billion proposal to build a 4,000-mile network of toll roads through Texas. It is known, however, that the Bush administration is quietly advancing the plan to build a huge ten-lane NAFTA Super Highway through the heart of the US along Interstate 35, from the Mexican border at Laredo, Texas to the Canadian border north of Duluth, Minnesota, financed largely through public-private partnerships. The Texas Department of Transportation will oversee the Trans-Texas Corridor as the first leg of the NAFTA Super Highway, which will be leased to the Cintra consortium as a privately operated toll road. Construction is slated to begin in 2007. Authors Daniel Schulman and James Ridgeway warn that, just as the creation of a National Highway system promised to “change the face of America,” in Eisenhower’s words, so too could its demise.
#9 Privatization of America’s InfrastructureSources:Mother Jones, February 2007Title; “The Highwaymen” Author: Daniel Schulman with James Ridgewayhttp://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2007/01/highwaymen.html
Human Events, June 12,2006Title: “Bush Administration Quietly Plans NAFTA Super Highway” Author: Jerome R. Corsihttp://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=15497
Student Researcher: Rachel Icaza and Ioana LupuFaculty Evaluator: Marco Calavita, Ph.D.
We will soon be paying Wall Street investors, Australian bankers, and Spanish contractors for the privilege of driving on American roads, as more than twenty states have enacted legislation allowing public-private partnerships to build and run highways. Investment firms including Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and the Carlyle Group are approaching state politicians with advice to sell off public highway and transportation infrastructure. When advising state officials on the future of this vital public asset, these investment firms fail to mention that their sole purpose is to pick up infrastructure at the lowest price possible in order to maximize returns for their investors. Investors, most often foreign companies, are charging tolls and insisting on “noncompete” clauses that limit governments from expanding or improving nearby roads. In 1956, President Eisenhower signed the Federal-Aid Highway Act, which called for the federal and state governments to build 41,000 miles of high-quality roads across the nation, over rivers and gorges, swamps and deserts, over and through vast mountain ranges, in what would later be called the “greatest public works project in human history.” Eisenhower considered the interstate highway system so vital to the public interest that he authorized the federal government to assume 90 percent of the massive cost. Fifty years later, states are selling off our nation’s enormous, and aging, infrastructure to private investors. Proponents are celebrating these transactions as a no-pain, all-gain way to off-load maintenance expenses and increase highway-building funds without raising taxes. Opponents are lambasting these plans as a major turn toward handing the nation’s valuable common asset over to private firms whose fidelity is to stockholders—not to the public transportation system or the people who use it. On June 29, 2006, Indiana’s governor Mitch Daniels announced that Indiana had received $3.8 billion from a foreign consortium made up of the Spanish construction firm Cintra and the Macquarie Infrastructure Group (MIG) of Australia. In exchange the state handed over operation of a 157-mile Indiana toll road for the next seventy-five years. With the consortium collecting the tolls, which will eventually rise far higher, the privatized road should generate $11 billion for MIG-Cintra over the course of the contract. In September 2005, Daniels solicited bids for the project, with Goldman Sachs serving as the state’s financial adviser—a role that would net the bank a $20 million advisory fee. When Goldman Sachs, one of the nation’s most active and most profitable investment banks, with deep connections to Washington, began advising Indiana on selling its toll road, it failed to mention the fact that, even as it was advising Indiana on how to get the best return, its Australian subsidiary’s mutual funds were ratcheting up their positions in MIG—becoming de facto investors in the deal. Many are suspicious that governors like Daniels across the nation are taking questionable advice from corporate investment banks—and from Washington. Despite public concerns, privatization of US transportation infrastructure has the full backing of the Bush administration. Tyler Duvall, the US Department of Transportation’s assistant secretary for transportation policy, says the DoT has raised the idea with “almost every state” government and is working on sample legislation that states can use for such projects. Across the nation, there is now talk of privatizing the New York Thruway to the Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey turnpikes, as well as of inviting the private sector to build and operate highways and bridges from Alabama to Alaska. In Texas, Governor Rick Perry still refuses to release details of a $1.3 billion contract his administration signed with Cintra for a forty-mile toll road from Austin to Seguin, or of an enormous $184 billion proposal to build a 4,000-mile network of toll roads through Texas. It is known, however, that the Bush administration is quietly advancing the plan to build a huge ten-lane NAFTA Super Highway through the heart of the US along Interstate 35, from the Mexican border at Laredo, Texas to the Canadian border north of Duluth, Minnesota, financed largely through public-private partnerships. The Texas Department of Transportation will oversee the Trans-Texas Corridor as the first leg of the NAFTA Super Highway, which will be leased to the Cintra consortium as a privately operated toll road. Construction is slated to begin in 2007. Authors Daniel Schulman and James Ridgeway warn that, just as the creation of a National Highway system promised to “change the face of America,” in Eisenhower’s words, so too could its demise.
RICHARD LAMM HAS A PLAN TO DESTROY AMERICA!
The following was not written by me. This speech was made by Richard D. Lamm, former Democrat Governor of Colorado, 1975-1987.
"I have a secret plan to destroy America. If you believe, as many do, that America is too smug, too white bread, too self-satisfied, too rich, let's destroy America. It is not that hard to do. History shows that nations are more fragile than their citizens think. No nation is history has survived the ravages of time. Arnold Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and they all fall, and that 'an autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide.' Here is my plan:
I. We must first make America a bilingual-bi cultural country. History shows, in my opinion, that no nation can survive the tension, conflict, and antagonism of two competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual. One scholar, Seymour Martin Lipset, put it this way:
'The histories of bilingual and bi cultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension, and tragedy. Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, Lebanon-all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cypress have divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with it's Basques, Bretons, and Corsicans.'
II. I would then invent 'multiculturalism' and encourage immigrants to maintain their own culture. I would make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal: That there are no cultural differences that are important. I would declare it an article of faith that the Black and Hispanic dropout rate is only due to prejudice and discrimination by the majority. Every other explanation is out-of-bounds.
III. We can make the United States a 'Hispanic Quebec' without much effort. The key is to celebrate diversity rather than unity. As Benjamin Schwarz said in the Atlantic Monthly recently:
...The apparent success of our own multi ethnic and multicultural experiment might have been achieved not by tolerance but by hegemony. Without the dominance that once dictated ethnocentrically, and what it meant to be an American, we are left with only tolerance and pluralism to hold us together.
I would encourage all immigrants to keep their own language and culture. I would replace the melting pot metaphor with a salad bowl metaphor. It is important to insure that we have various cultural sub-groups living in America reinforcing their differences rather than Americans, Emphasizing their similarities.
IV. Having done all this, I would make our fastest growing demographic group the least educated-I would add a second underclass, unassimilated, undereducated, and antagonistic to our population. I would have this second underclass have a 50% drop out rate from school.
V. I would then get the big foundations and big business to give these efforts lots of money. I would invest in ethnic identity, and I would establish the cult of victimology. I would get all minorities to think their lack of success was all the fault of the majority-I would start a grievance industry blaming all minority failure on the majority population.
VI. I would establish dual citizenship and promote divided loyalties. I would 'celebrate diversity.' 'Diversity' is a wonderfully seductive word. It stresses differences rather than commonalities. Diverse people worldwide are mostly engaged in hating each other-that is, when they are not killing each other. A diverse, peaceful, or stable society is against most historical precedent. People undervalue the unity it takes to keep a nation together, and we can take advantage of this myopia. Look at the ancient Greeks. Dorf's World of History tells us:
'The Greeks believed that they belonged to the same race; They possessed a common language and literature; and they worshipped the same gods. All Greece took part in the Olympic Games in honor of Zeus and all Greeks venerated the shrine of Apollo at Delphi. A common enemy Persia threatened their liberty. Yet, all of these bonds together were not strong enough to overcome two factors...(local patriotism and geographical conditions that nurtured political divisions)...'
If we can put the emphasis on the 'pluribus', instead of the 'unum', we can Balkanize America as surely as Kosovo.
VII. Then I would place all these subjects off limits-make it taboo to talk about. I would find a word similar to 'heretic' in the 16th century-that stopped discussion and paralyzed thinking. Words like 'racist', 'xenophobe' that halts argument and conversation.
Having made America a bilingual-bi cultural country, having established multiculturalism, having the large foundations fund the doctrine of 'victimology', I would next make it impossible to enforce our immigration laws. I would develop a mantra-"that because immigration HAS BEEN good for America, it must ALWAYS be good.' I would make every individual immigrant sympatric and ignore the cumulative impact.
VIII. Lastly, I would censor Victor Hanson Davis's book Mexifornia--This book is DANGEROUS-it exposes my plan to destroy America. So please, please-if you feel that America deserves to be destroyed--please, please-don't buy this book! This guy is on to my plan.
'The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum.'--Noam Chomsky, American linguist and US Media and Foreign Policy Critic.'"
Back to me:
It should be noted that both Governor Lamm and the writer of the e-mail misidentify the author of the book MEXIFORNIA, whose correct name is Victor Davis Hanson.
Can anybody see what's going on here? It's amazing that this "plan" has already happened. The writer of the e-mail also noted that this whole thing is reminiscent of George Orwell's book "1984", in which three slogans are engraved in the Ministry of Truth Building: "War is Peace", "Freedom is Slavery", and "Ignorance is Strength". I only hope we're not too "Strong" or "Free" to catch what is destroying our country.
"I have a secret plan to destroy America. If you believe, as many do, that America is too smug, too white bread, too self-satisfied, too rich, let's destroy America. It is not that hard to do. History shows that nations are more fragile than their citizens think. No nation is history has survived the ravages of time. Arnold Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and they all fall, and that 'an autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide.' Here is my plan:
I. We must first make America a bilingual-bi cultural country. History shows, in my opinion, that no nation can survive the tension, conflict, and antagonism of two competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual. One scholar, Seymour Martin Lipset, put it this way:
'The histories of bilingual and bi cultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension, and tragedy. Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, Lebanon-all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cypress have divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with it's Basques, Bretons, and Corsicans.'
II. I would then invent 'multiculturalism' and encourage immigrants to maintain their own culture. I would make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal: That there are no cultural differences that are important. I would declare it an article of faith that the Black and Hispanic dropout rate is only due to prejudice and discrimination by the majority. Every other explanation is out-of-bounds.
III. We can make the United States a 'Hispanic Quebec' without much effort. The key is to celebrate diversity rather than unity. As Benjamin Schwarz said in the Atlantic Monthly recently:
...The apparent success of our own multi ethnic and multicultural experiment might have been achieved not by tolerance but by hegemony. Without the dominance that once dictated ethnocentrically, and what it meant to be an American, we are left with only tolerance and pluralism to hold us together.
I would encourage all immigrants to keep their own language and culture. I would replace the melting pot metaphor with a salad bowl metaphor. It is important to insure that we have various cultural sub-groups living in America reinforcing their differences rather than Americans, Emphasizing their similarities.
IV. Having done all this, I would make our fastest growing demographic group the least educated-I would add a second underclass, unassimilated, undereducated, and antagonistic to our population. I would have this second underclass have a 50% drop out rate from school.
V. I would then get the big foundations and big business to give these efforts lots of money. I would invest in ethnic identity, and I would establish the cult of victimology. I would get all minorities to think their lack of success was all the fault of the majority-I would start a grievance industry blaming all minority failure on the majority population.
VI. I would establish dual citizenship and promote divided loyalties. I would 'celebrate diversity.' 'Diversity' is a wonderfully seductive word. It stresses differences rather than commonalities. Diverse people worldwide are mostly engaged in hating each other-that is, when they are not killing each other. A diverse, peaceful, or stable society is against most historical precedent. People undervalue the unity it takes to keep a nation together, and we can take advantage of this myopia. Look at the ancient Greeks. Dorf's World of History tells us:
'The Greeks believed that they belonged to the same race; They possessed a common language and literature; and they worshipped the same gods. All Greece took part in the Olympic Games in honor of Zeus and all Greeks venerated the shrine of Apollo at Delphi. A common enemy Persia threatened their liberty. Yet, all of these bonds together were not strong enough to overcome two factors...(local patriotism and geographical conditions that nurtured political divisions)...'
If we can put the emphasis on the 'pluribus', instead of the 'unum', we can Balkanize America as surely as Kosovo.
VII. Then I would place all these subjects off limits-make it taboo to talk about. I would find a word similar to 'heretic' in the 16th century-that stopped discussion and paralyzed thinking. Words like 'racist', 'xenophobe' that halts argument and conversation.
Having made America a bilingual-bi cultural country, having established multiculturalism, having the large foundations fund the doctrine of 'victimology', I would next make it impossible to enforce our immigration laws. I would develop a mantra-"that because immigration HAS BEEN good for America, it must ALWAYS be good.' I would make every individual immigrant sympatric and ignore the cumulative impact.
VIII. Lastly, I would censor Victor Hanson Davis's book Mexifornia--This book is DANGEROUS-it exposes my plan to destroy America. So please, please-if you feel that America deserves to be destroyed--please, please-don't buy this book! This guy is on to my plan.
'The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum.'--Noam Chomsky, American linguist and US Media and Foreign Policy Critic.'"
Back to me:
It should be noted that both Governor Lamm and the writer of the e-mail misidentify the author of the book MEXIFORNIA, whose correct name is Victor Davis Hanson.
Can anybody see what's going on here? It's amazing that this "plan" has already happened. The writer of the e-mail also noted that this whole thing is reminiscent of George Orwell's book "1984", in which three slogans are engraved in the Ministry of Truth Building: "War is Peace", "Freedom is Slavery", and "Ignorance is Strength". I only hope we're not too "Strong" or "Free" to catch what is destroying our country.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)