Over 16,540,688 people are on fubar.
What are you waiting for?

amber NO MEN's blog: "my blog"

created on 04/23/2007  |  http://fubar.com/my-blog/b76294
Immediate Congressional investigation demanded, media oversight of clear and deliberate psychological warfare against American population non-existent Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | October 5 2006 Revelations that the US government had been in possession of footage released on Sunday depicting alleged Al-Qaeda hijackers and Osama Bin Laden since 2001 and evidence that the footage itself was filmed by security agencies, went unquestioned by the media - who blindly towed the official line that the tape was released by Al-Qaeda. This is smoking gun proof that the U.S. government is staging the release of alleged Al-Qaeda tapes and it demands an immediate Congressional investigation. Segments of the video that were interspersed with footage of the "laughing hijackers," Jarrah and Atta, showing Bin Laden giving a speech to an audience in Afghanistan on January 8 2000, were culled from what terror experts describe as surveillance footage taken by a "security agency." This explains the lack of a soundtrack in the video and the fact that the tape does not focus solely on Bin Laden but pans around and shows the attendees in the audience. Furthermore, film of the Bin Laden speech, reported by the dominant media as new footage, was previously broadcast in the UK docudramaThe Road to Guantanamo, which was first seen on British television nearly seven months ago in March. News reports over the weekend contained the admission that the U.S. government had been in possession of the footage since 2002, while others said it was found when the United States invaded Afghanistan in 2001, and yet it was still bizarrely reported that the tape, bearing all the hallmarks of having been filmed and edited by undercover US intelligence and having admittedly been in US possession for five years, was released over the weekend by Al-Qaeda. Either Al-Qaeda has been given access to US intelligence surveillance tapes of its own organization or the tape was released by the US intelligence apparatus. The evidence provides no other explanation. The fact that the same footage was used in The Road to Guantanamo is startling because the context of the clip in which it is seen portrays British and American intelligence agents showing doctored footage to detainees, whereby their likeness has been edited in with CGI to the Bin laden rally scene, using it to intimidate them into confessing to being Al-Qaeda members. The latest video tape hoax is only the most recent of a dirty laundry list of past examples where old, re-hashed, or outright faked footage of Bin Laden and his followers was mysteriously obtained and released at the most politically expedient time. These examples are all referenced in our original investigation. Recall that the Pentagon's stated intention to artificially magnify Musab Al-Zarqawi's role in Iraq was followed by the release of a video tape of Al-Zarqawi threatening the infidels. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "The DVD of the resistance!" Get TerrorStorm on DVD today! Subscribe to Prison Planet.tv and see it in high quality or watch it for free at Google Video. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The target of this leaked propaganda campaign to boost Al-Qaeda's profile was said to be the "U.S. home audience," and included planting fake stories in newspapers - one of which was later splashed on the front page of the New York Times. The agenda dovetails with the necessity of the torture program - there are very few real terror cells in existence outside of the puppet mastery of the U.S. and British intelligence apparatus. To maintain a state of fear and obedience amongst the target "home audience," there need to be regular "two minutes of hate" intervals and the artificial creation of supposed terrorist networks and plots. The tapes are also a desperate attempt to prop up the official version of 9/11 as its credibility crumbles globally and a firestorm of awakening to the fact that the attack was an inside job rages. I encourage everyone to fully imbue themselves of our original investigation and make it a viral story across the Internet. Click here to get the original story and lobby for mainstream media to pay attention. We need to demand higher standards from our media starting with a proper investigation as to who the true source of this tape was and an immediate skepticism towards all such future alleged "Al-Qaeda" video tape releases. A press that lazily dismisses the origins of these tapes as a side-issue is playing a central role in disseminating unchecked war propaganda and violating every code of journalistic ethical conduct. The U.S. government's role in obtaining and carefully stage-managing the dissemination of these tapes, many of them old footage re-released over and over again, is now without a doubt manifestly obvious and demands immediate Congressional investigation as part of a wider probe into the admitted fake news scandal that has characterized the Bush White House as the most duplicitous and manipulative administration in history and befits a regime that is engaging in psychological warfare against the American people.
Americans have officially been living under a dictatorship since at least 1933 Paul Joseph Watson, Steve Watson & Alex Jones Prison Planet Wednesday, May 23, 2007 President George W. Bush has sparked much alarm by openly declaring himself to be a dictator in the event of a national emergency under new provisions that will effectively nullify the U.S. constitution, but such an infrastructure has been in place for over 70 years and this merely represents a re-authorization of the infrastructure of martial law. New legislation signed on May 9, 2007, declares that in the event of a "catastrophic event", the President can take total control over the government and the country, bypassing all other levels of government at the state, federal, local, territorial and tribal levels, and thus ensuring total unprecedented dictatorial power. The National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive, which also places the Secretary of Homeland Security in charge of domestic "security", was signed earlier this month without the approval or oversight of Congress and seemingly supercedes the National Emergency Act which allows the president to declare a national emergency but also requires that Congress have the authority to "modify, rescind, or render dormant" such emergency authority if it believes the president has acted inappropriately. Journalist Jerome Corsi, who has studied the directive also states that it makes no reference to Congress and "its language appears to negate any requirement that the president submit to Congress a determination that a national emergency exists." In other words the new directive excludes Congress altogether from governance in a state of emergency. While alluding to the "enduring constitutional government", the directive actually ensures the end of constitutional government as each branch, the executive, legislative and judicial, are stripped of equal authority and must answer directly and solely to the President. The mainstream media has not reported on the directive and the White House has refused to comment. Earlier this month it was reported that a high-level group of government and military officials has been quietly preparing an emergency survival program named "The Day After," which would effectively end civil liberties and implement a system of martial law in the event of a catastrophic attack on a U.S. city. Though anathema to any notion of liberty or freedom, this new legislation has not come out of the blue, it is merely an open declaration of the infrastructure of martial law that the federal government has been building since the turn of the last century, which was first publicly codified in the 1933 war powers act under Franklin D. Roosevelt. Senate Report 93-549, which was presented at the first session of the 93rd Congress, outlines just a handful of the declared national emergencies or martial law declarations that preceded the latest one. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Internet leader in activist media - Prison Planet.tv. Get access to hundreds of special video reports, audio interviews, books and documentary films. Subscribers also get instant access to our hugely popular forum where you can network with like-minded people, meet up and get active! Click here to subscribe. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Since March 9, 1933, the United States has been in a state of declared national emergency. In fact, there are now in effect four presidentially-proclaimed states of national emergency: In addition to the national emergency declared by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1933, there are also the national emergency proclaimed by President Harry S. Truman on December 16, 1950, during the Korean conflict, and the states of national emergency declared by President Richard M. Nixon on March 23, 1970, and August 15, 1971." In alliance with these open declarations of martial law and the 1947 National Security Act, bills such as the Patriot Act, the John Warner Defense Authorization Act and the Military Commissions Act have all put the final jigsaw pieces in place to complete an infrastructure of dictatorship since 9/11. We're already living under an infrastructure of martial law and have been since 1933, all that remains for it to be fully implemented is a big enough natural disaster, mass terror attack or other catastrophe that will cause the necessary carnage and panic that affords the federal government enough leeway to implement open dictatorship with the least possible resistance. New revelations that Bush has openly declared himself to be a dictator are both shocking and demand immediate attention, but they only represent a re-authorization of the tyranny that Americans have been living under for at least the past 74 years.
Chuck Baldwin Tuesday, May 22, 2007 One of Shakespeare's most oft-quoted phrases comes from Romeo and Juliet, where Juliet asks Romeo: "What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet." Accordingly, President Bush and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid can call their immigration bill by any name they want to, but it is still amnesty, and it still stinks! Hopefully, readers are aware that the Bush/Kennedy amnesty bill is being debated in the U.S. Senate this week with both the White House and senate leaders hopeful of quick passage. If it passes, the proposed immigration bill would immediately give all 12-20 million illegal aliens already in the United States "probationary" citizenship. It would also put an estimated 60 million immigrants on the path to citizenship over the next 20 years. In exchange for granting U.S. citizenship to tens of millions of illegals, the bill promises to better protect America's borders. However, what is abundantly clear is that the federal government's idea of border enforcement is totally without meaning or merit. Consider the fact that the United States already has copious laws against illegal immigration, including punishment for businesses that hire illegals. So, what good have these laws done? Very little. No one with any sense of objective truth believes that the Bush administration is serious about border enforcement. No one. Therefore, how can anyone believe that more promises of border enforcement will accomplish any more than with existing laws? The plain truth is, President George W. Bush, Senators Ted Kennedy, John McCain, et al., are simply hell-bent to provide amnesty to tens of millions of illegal aliens, and this bill will give them the power to do it. Do I need to convince readers that any kind of amnesty will put America on the fast track to ruin? The United States simply cannot absorb upwards of 60 million, mostly unskilled, non-English-speaking, migrants in the next few years. It just is not possible. Already, America is reaping the consequences of unbridled illegal immigration. Americans are being squeezed out of work by illegal immigrants who will work at significantly reduced wages. Of course our unemployment is low: Americans are working two or three jobs just to make ends meet. Add to the strain of the loss of good paying jobs the strain of an ever-growing financial burden to taxpayers. For example, Heritage Foundation scholar Robert Rector recently released a new study entitled, "The Fiscal Cost of Low-Skill Households to the U.S. Taxpayer." In the report, Rector notes that two-thirds of the millions of illegal aliens in this country fall into the category of "low-skill" households. Contrast that with just 10% of native-born Americans falling into that category. Writing for National Review Online, Byron York states, "Rector found that in 2004, the most recent year for which figures are available, low-skill households received an average of $32,138 per household--the great majority in the form of means-tested aid and direct benefits.... Against that, Rector found that low-skill households paid an average of $9,689 in taxes.... In the final calculation, he found, the average low-skill household received $22,449 more in benefits than it paid in taxes..." According to World Net Daily, "If the lower figure of 12 million illegal aliens is used for estimation purposes, the [current] total tax burden translates to $2.2 trillion." It doesn't take a mathematical genius to calculate that with an added 60 million mostly unskilled immigrants moving into the country, the financial cost would be more than taxpayers could possibly pay for. Consider also the toll upon America's safety and security. Already, law enforcement agencies are very much cognizant of a surge of Latin American "ultra-violent" gangs that have sprung up in more than 40 U.S. states. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), one gang called MS-13 has been identified in 42 states. Another group called the 18th Street Gang is in 37 states. According to FBI MS-13 National Gang Task Force director Brian Truchon, "When the gang migrates throughout the U.S., there is always a road back to L.A. From L.A., there is always a road back to Central America." Retired lawman Jim Kouri recently wrote, "According to Lt. Steve Rogers, a decorated cop and award-winning writer, there are tens of thousands of murderers, rapists, child predators, robbers and drug dealers who are illegally in the United States. One study shows over 200,000 criminal aliens are preying on U.S. citizens." As I have previously noted in this column, illegal aliens already murder at least 12 Americans every day. Think of the potential violence that another 60 million aliens will bring. Not to mention the threat of potential terrorism. America's law enforcement communities are keenly aware of the probability that international terrorists have already infiltrated the United States due to our lack of border control. For example, William Gheen, President of Americans for Legal Immigration Political Action Committee (ALIPAC), recently said, "MS-13 and other illegal immigrant gangs are bringing in the illegals, drugs, heavy weapons, and possibly terrorists. The biggest threat from their members is contained in the multiple intelligence reports provided to Congress indicating that Al-Qaeda and MS-13 are now working together to smuggle terrorist operatives and materials into the U.S." In light of all of the above, how in the world can President Bush and senate leaders proceed with plans to explode the growth of unskilled immigrants into the United States? Perhaps the answer lies within the details of the bill. According to World Net Daily, "The controversial 'Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007,' which would grant millions of illegal aliens the right to stay in the U.S. under certain conditions, contains provisions for the acceleration of the Security and Prosperity Partnership, a plan for North American economic and defense integration, WND has learned. "The bill, as worked out by Senate and White House negotiators, cites the SPP agreement signed by President Bush and his counterparts in Mexico and Canada March 23, 2005--an agreement that has been criticized as a blueprint for building a European Union-style merger of the three countries of North America. "'It is the sense of Congress that the United States and Mexico should accelerate the implementation of the Partnership for Prosperity to help generate economic growth and improve the standard of living in Mexico, which will lead to reduced migration,' the draft legislation states on page 211 on the version time-stamped May 18, 2007 11:58 p.m." Aw! There is the underlying reason President Bush is willing to incur the wrath of his conservative constituents: he is determined to implement the SPP and pave the way for the emerging North American Union before he leaves office. The amnesty bill being pushed through the Senate this week is absolutely essential to this end. As Juliet said, "What's in a name?" Bush, Kennedy, McCain and Company are playing word games with us. They know this is amnesty. You know this is amnesty. And millions of illegal aliens know this is amnesty. If it walks like amnesty, talks like amnesty, looks like amnesty, and smells like amnesty, it's amnesty! Now, the question is, Will the American people sit back and let it happen? Dear Reader, this might be our last chance to stop the push for amnesty for millions of illegal aliens. If you have never voiced your protest to your civil leaders, I urge you to do so now! Here are two links for information on how you can make your voice heard in Washington, D.C. Don't delay! We must act TODAY! Tell the Senate, No Amnesty for Illegals here: http://www.grassfire.org/19042/offer.asp Call the D.C. switchboard here: http://www.eagleforum.org/alert/2007/05-18-07.html
Eagle Forum Wednesday May 23, 2007 WASHINGTON - New polling shows a strong preference for enforcing U.S. Immigration laws that cause illegal aliens to go home. Advocacy groups and even some media outlets have released surveys showing support for legalizing illegals. However, those polls often gave voters a very limited choice between large-scale deportations or "earned legalization," or simply asked about conditional legalization without any alternative. When given the across-the-board enforcement option, with the goal of causing illegals to go home, the public strongly favors the enforcement approach over legalization with conditions. Contrary to the new Senate bill, most Americans want less and not more immigration. When told the number of immigrants here and the number coming, 70 percent of voters said the level is too high, 19 percent said it is about right, and 5 percent said too low. * 75% of Republicans said immigration is too high, 5% said too low. * 69% of Democrats said immigration is too high, 6% said too low. * 71% of self described moderates said immigration is too high, 4% said too low. Public prefers that illegals go home, rather than be legalized. 58 percent of voters said they wanted illegals to go home, compared to 30 percent who favored legalization. The public still overwhelmingly supported enforcement over legalization even when many conditions are imposed on illegals like paying a fine, learning English and undergoing a background check. Americans support enforcement to make illegals go home. When presented by itself, 79 percent of the public said they supported reducing the illegal immigrant population by increasing border enforcement, penalizing employers, and increasing cooperation with local law enforcement, while 15 percent were opposed. No other proposal had near this level of support. "Many polls give only the false choice of legalization or mass deportations. Some even give legalization as an option in isolation without other alternatives. But when given across-the-board enforcement that causes illegals to go home as an option, the public overwhelmingly supports it rather than legalization with conditions," said Jessica Echard, Executive Director of Eagle Forum. "This poll shows why Senators who support the Kennedy-Kyl amnesty are facing such a firestorm of opposition from constituents." This National Survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC on May 15, 2007. The margin of sampling error for the survey is 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Pulse Opinion Research, LLC is an independent public opinion research firm using automated polling methodology and procedures licensed from Rasmussen Reports, LLC. * Eagle Forum Immigration Poll Summary (PDF) * Eagle Forum Immigration Poll Detailed Results (PDF)
Jim Capo JBS Wednesday, May 23, 2007 It must be true. The editors of the Washington Post would never lie to us would they? Yesterday, while whining over lawmakers in the U.S. House having the temerity to re-assert their Constitutional authority to "regulate trade with foreign nations," the pro-globalist editors of the Washington Post made it official that as far as their paper of record is concerned, NAFTA is a treaty. Post editors let their willful ignorance of the Constitution slip while they were explaining their disdain for the elected representatives of the people, who last week passed the Safe American Roads Act of 2007. The act effectively blocks Mexican trucking companies from having free access to all U.S. highways until they can verify that they are in compliance with all Federal regulations that have to be met by U.S. trucking companies. The act is in direct defiance of the already postponed timetable set out in NAFTA for opening up all U.S. roads to Mexican trucking. Never mind that the U.S. Congress itself was effectively blocked from making any changes to the NAFTA deal as it was being shoved down their throats by Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich in 1993. The Post hung out this jewel as its main bone of contention with our momentarily less prostrate House: With action seven years overdue, will U.S. policymakers ever follow through on this country's clear treaty obligations? "Clear treaty bligations?" Check all the records you want, but the North American Free Trade Agreement was never submitted to or passed as a treaty before the representatives of the people. The elitists running the Washington Post do find it hard to swallow apparently that the pesky Constitution is still nominally in effect. While Congress indeed cannot just willy-nilly abrogate legitimate treaties, agreements passed on simple majority votes can likewise be changed on simple majority votes. Better yet, for all those who are fed up being told NAFTA is such a great deal for our country, agreements like NAFTA can be outright repealed by simple majority votes. Thus, the Constitutional viability of The John Birch Society's campaign to Repeal NAFTA.... Pitch in and do your part now. Endnotes: Further indicating how out of touch the elites at the Washington Post are with We the People, the Safe American Roads Act of 2007 passed on a vote of 411-3. When you are shilling for the ruling oligarchy, 411 out of 435 must look like the lackeys of a "Special Interest" group that is "stalling," as they titled their article. The only Republican voting against the act was Jeff Flake of Arizona. The two Democrats voting against the act, Henry Cuellar and Charles Gonzales, represent districts in Texas along the Mexican border.

Deadly immunity

When a study revealed that mercury in childhood vaccines may have caused autism in thousands of kids, the government rushed to conceal the data -- and to prevent parents from suing drug companies for their role in the epidemic. Salon.com | June 16, 2005 By Robert F. Kennedy Jr. In June 2000, a group of top government scientists and health officials gathered for a meeting at the isolated Simpsonwood conference center in Norcross, Ga. Convened by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the meeting was held at this Methodist retreat center, nestled in wooded farmland next to the Chattahoochee River, to ensure complete secrecy. The agency had issued no public announcement of the session -- only private invitations to 52 attendees. There were high-level officials from the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration, the top vaccine specialist from the World Health Organization in Geneva, and representatives of every major vaccine manufacturer, including GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Wyeth and Aventis Pasteur. All of the scientific data under discussion, CDC officials repeatedly reminded the participants, was strictly "embargoed." There would be no making photocopies of documents, no taking papers with them when they left. The federal officials and industry representatives had assembled to discuss a disturbing new study that raised alarming questions about the safety of a host of common childhood vaccines administered to infants and young children. According to a CDC epidemiologist named Tom Verstraeten, who had analyzed the agency's massive database containing the medical records of 100,000 children, a mercury-based preservative in the vaccines -- thimerosal -- appeared to be responsible for a dramatic increase in autism and a host of other neurological disorders among children. "I was actually stunned by what I saw," Verstraeten told those assembled at Simpsonwood, citing the staggering number of earlier studies that indicate a link between thimerosal and speech delays, attention-deficit disorder, hyperactivity and autism. Since 1991, when the CDC and the FDA had recommended that three additional vaccines laced with the preservative be given to extremely young infants -- in one case, within hours of birth -- the estimated number of cases of autism had increased fifteenfold, from one in every 2,500 children to one in 166 children. Even for scientists and doctors accustomed to confronting issues of life and death, the findings were frightening. "You can play with this all you want," Dr. Bill Weil, a consultant for the American Academy of Pediatrics, told the group. The results "are statistically significant." Dr. Richard Johnston, an immunologist and pediatrician from the University of Colorado whose grandson had been born early on the morning of the meeting's first day, was even more alarmed. "My gut feeling?" he said. "Forgive this personal comment -- I do not want my grandson to get a thimerosal-containing vaccine until we know better what is going on." But instead of taking immediate steps to alert the public and rid the vaccine supply of thimerosal, the officials and executives at Simpsonwood spent most of the next two days discussing how to cover up the damaging data. According to transcripts obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, many at the meeting were concerned about how the damaging revelations about thimerosal would affect the vaccine industry's bottom line. "We are in a bad position from the standpoint of defending any lawsuits," said Dr. Robert Brent, a pediatrician at the Alfred I. duPont Hospital for Children in Delaware. "This will be a resource to our very busy plaintiff attorneys in this country." Dr. Bob Chen, head of vaccine safety for the CDC, expressed relief that "given the sensitivity of the information, we have been able to keep it out of the hands of, let's say, less responsible hands." Dr. John Clements, vaccines advisor at the World Health Organization, declared flatly that the study "should not have been done at all" and warned that the results "will be taken by others and will be used in ways beyond the control of this group. The research results have to be handled." In fact, the government has proved to be far more adept at handling the damage than at protecting children's health. The CDC paid the Institute of Medicine to conduct a new study to whitewash the risks of thimerosal, ordering researchers to "rule out" the chemical's link to autism. It withheld Verstraeten's findings, even though they had been slated for immediate publication, and told other scientists that his original data had been "lost" and could not be replicated. And to thwart the Freedom of Information Act, it handed its giant database of vaccine records over to a private company, declaring it off-limits to researchers. By the time Verstraeten finally published his study in 2003, he had gone to work for GlaxoSmithKline and reworked his data to bury the link between thimerosal and autism. Vaccine manufacturers had already begun to phase thimerosal out of injections given to American infants -- but they continued to sell off their mercury-based supplies of vaccines until last year. The CDC and FDA gave them a hand, buying up the tainted vaccines for export to developing countries and allowing drug companies to continue using the preservative in some American vaccines -- including several pediatric flu shots as well as tetanus boosters routinely given to 11-year-olds. The drug companies are also getting help from powerful lawmakers in Washington. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, who has received $873,000 in contributions from the pharmaceutical industry, has been working to immunize vaccine makers from liability in 4,200 lawsuits that have been filed by the parents of injured children. On five separate occasions, Frist has tried to seal all of the government's vaccine-related documents -- including the Simpsonwood transcripts -- and shield Eli Lilly, the developer of thimerosal, from subpoenas. In 2002, the day after Frist quietly slipped a rider known as the "Eli Lilly Protection Act" into a homeland security bill, the company contributed $10,000 to his campaign and bought 5,000 copies of his book on bioterrorism. Congress repealed the measure in 2003 -- but earlier this year, Frist slipped another provision into an anti-terrorism bill that would deny compensation to children suffering from vaccine-related brain disorders. "The lawsuits are of such magnitude that they could put vaccine producers out of business and limit our capacity to deal with a biological attack by terrorists," says Andy Olsen, a legislative assistant to Frist. Even many conservatives are shocked by the government's effort to cover up the dangers of thimerosal. Rep. Dan Burton, a Republican from Indiana, oversaw a three-year investigation of thimerosal after his grandson was diagnosed with autism. "Thimerosal used as a preservative in vaccines is directly related to the autism epidemic," his House Government Reform Committee concluded in its final report. "This epidemic in all probability may have been prevented or curtailed had the FDA not been asleep at the switch regarding a lack of safety data regarding injected thimerosal, a known neurotoxin." The FDA and other public-health agencies failed to act, the committee added, out of "institutional malfeasance for self protection" and "misplaced protectionism of the pharmaceutical industry." The story of how government health agencies colluded with Big Pharma to hide the risks of thimerosal from the public is a chilling case study of institutional arrogance, power and greed. I was drawn into the controversy only reluctantly. As an attorney and environmentalist who has spent years working on issues of mercury toxicity, I frequently met mothers of autistic children who were absolutely convinced that their kids had been injured by vaccines. Privately, I was skeptical. I doubted that autism could be blamed on a single source, and I certainly understood the government's need to reassure parents that vaccinations are safe; the eradication of deadly childhood diseases depends on it. I tended to agree with skeptics like Rep. Henry Waxman, a Democrat from California, who criticized his colleagues on the House Government Reform Committee for leaping to conclusions about autism and vaccinations. "Why should we scare people about immunization," Waxman pointed out at one hearing, "until we know the facts?" It was only after reading the Simpsonwood transcripts, studying the leading scientific research and talking with many of the nation's preeminent authorities on mercury that I became convinced that the link between thimerosal and the epidemic of childhood neurological disorders is real. Five of my own children are members of the Thimerosal Generation -- those born between 1989 and 2003 -- who received heavy doses of mercury from vaccines. "The elementary grades are overwhelmed with children who have symptoms of neurological or immune-system damage," Patti White, a school nurse, told the House Government Reform Committee in 1999. "Vaccines are supposed to be making us healthier; however, in 25 years of nursing I have never seen so many damaged, sick kids. Something very, very wrong is happening to our children." More than 500,000 kids currently suffer from autism, and pediatricians diagnose more than 40,000 new cases every year. The disease was unknown until 1943, when it was identified and diagnosed among 11 children born in the months after thimerosal was first added to baby vaccines in 1931. Some skeptics dispute that the rise in autism is caused by thimerosal-tainted vaccinations. They argue that the increase is a result of better diagnosis -- a theory that seems questionable at best, given that most of the new cases of autism are clustered within a single generation of children. "If the epidemic is truly an artifact of poor diagnosis," scoffs Dr. Boyd Haley, one of the world's authorities on mercury toxicity, "then where are all the 20-year-old autistics?" Other researchers point out that Americans are exposed to a greater cumulative "load" of mercury than ever before, from contaminated fish to dental fillings, and suggest that thimerosal in vaccines may be only part of a much larger problem. It's a concern that certainly deserves far more attention than it has received -- but it overlooks the fact that the mercury concentrations in vaccines dwarf other sources of exposure to our children. What is most striking is the lengths to which many of the leading detectives have gone to ignore -- and cover up -- the evidence against thimerosal. From the very beginning, the scientific case against the mercury additive has been overwhelming. The preservative, which is used to stem fungi and bacterial growth in vaccines, contains ethylmercury, a potent neurotoxin. Truckloads of studies have shown that mercury tends to accumulate in the brains of primates and other animals after they are injected with vaccines -- and that the developing brains of infants are particularly susceptible. In 1977, a Russian study found that adults exposed to much lower concentrations of ethylmercury than those given to American children still suffered brain damage years later. Russia banned thimerosal from children's vaccines 20 years ago, and Denmark, Austria, Japan, Great Britain and all the Scandinavian countries have since followed suit. "You couldn't even construct a study that shows thimerosal is safe," says Haley, who heads the chemistry department at the University of Kentucky. "It's just too darn toxic. If you inject thimerosal into an animal, its brain will sicken. If you apply it to living tissue, the cells die. If you put it in a petri dish, the culture dies. Knowing these things, it would be shocking if one could inject it into an infant without causing damage." Internal documents reveal that Eli Lilly, which first developed thimerosal, knew from the start that its product could cause damage -- and even death -- in both animals and humans. In 1930, the company tested thimerosal by administering it to 22 patients with terminal meningitis, all of whom died within weeks of being injected -- a fact Lilly didn't bother to report in its study declaring thimerosal safe. In 1935, researchers at another vaccine manufacturer, Pittman-Moore, warned Lilly that its claims about thimerosal's safety "did not check with ours." Half the dogs Pittman injected with thimerosal-based vaccines became sick, leading researchers there to declare the preservative "unsatisfactory as a serum intended for use on dogs." In the decades that followed, the evidence against thimerosal continued to mount. During the Second World War, when the Department of Defense used the preservative in vaccines on soldiers, it required Lilly to label it "poison." In 1967, a study in Applied Microbiology found that thimerosal killed mice when added to injected vaccines. Four years later, Lilly's own studies discerned that thimerosal was "toxic to tissue cells" in concentrations as low as one part per million -- 100 times weaker than the concentration in a typical vaccine. Even so, the company continued to promote thimerosal as "nontoxic" and also incorporated it into topical disinfectants. In 1977, 10 babies at a Toronto hospital died when an antiseptic preserved with thimerosal was dabbed onto their umbilical cords. In 1982, the FDA proposed a ban on over-the-counter products that contained thimerosal, and in 1991 the agency considered banning it from animal vaccines. But tragically, that same year, the CDC recommended that infants be injected with a series of mercury-laced vaccines. Newborns would be vaccinated for hepatitis B within 24 hours of birth, and 2-month-old infants would be immunized for haemophilus influenzae B and diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis. The drug industry knew the additional vaccines posed a danger. The same year that the CDC approved the new vaccines, Dr. Maurice Hilleman, one of the fathers of Merck's vaccine programs, warned the company that 6-month-olds who were administered the shots would suffer dangerous exposure to mercury. He recommended that thimerosal be discontinued, "especially when used on infants and children," noting that the industry knew of nontoxic alternatives. "The best way to go," he added, "is to switch to dispensing the actual vaccines without adding preservatives." For Merck and other drug companies, however, the obstacle was money. Thimerosal enables the pharmaceutical industry to package vaccines in vials that contain multiple doses, which require additional protection because they are more easily contaminated by multiple needle entries. The larger vials cost half as much to produce as smaller, single-dose vials, making it cheaper for international agencies to distribute them to impoverished regions at risk of epidemics. Faced with this "cost consideration," Merck ignored Hilleman's warnings, and government officials continued to push more and more thimerosal-based vaccines for children. Before 1989, American preschoolers received only three vaccinations -- for polio, diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis and measles-mumps-rubella. A decade later, thanks to federal recommendations, children were receiving a total of 22 immunizations by the time they reached first grade. As the number of vaccines increased, the rate of autism among children exploded. During the 1990s, 40 million children were injected with thimerosal-based vaccines, receiving unprecedented levels of mercury during a period critical for brain development. Despite the well-documented dangers of thimerosal, it appears that no one bothered to add up the cumulative dose of mercury that children would receive from the mandated vaccines. "What took the FDA so long to do the calculations?" Peter Patriarca, director of viral products for the agency, asked in an e-mail to the CDC in 1999. "Why didn't CDC and the advisory bodies do these calculations when they rapidly expanded the childhood immunization schedule?" But by that time, the damage was done. Infants who received all their vaccines, plus boosters, by the age of 6 months were being injected with levels of ethylmercury 187 times greater than the EPA's limit for daily exposure to methylmercury, a related neurotoxin. Although the vaccine industry insists that ethylmercury poses little danger because it breaks down rapidly and is removed by the body, several studies -- including one published in April by the National Institutes of Health -- suggest that ethylmercury is actually more toxic to developing brains and stays in the brain longer than methylmercury. Officials responsible for childhood immunizations insist that the additional vaccines were necessary to protect infants from disease and that thimerosal is still essential in developing nations, which, they often claim, cannot afford the single-dose vials that don't require a preservative. Dr. Paul Offit, one of CDC's top vaccine advisors, told me, "I think if we really have an influenza pandemic -- and certainly we will in the next 20 years, because we always do -- there's no way on God's earth that we immunize 280 million people with single-dose vials. There has to be multidose vials." But while public-health officials may have been well-intentioned, many of those on the CDC advisory committee who backed the additional vaccines had close ties to the industry. Dr. Sam Katz, the committee's chair, was a paid consultant for most of the major vaccine makers and shares a patent on a measles vaccine with Merck, which also manufactures the hepatitis B vaccine. Dr. Neal Halsey, another committee member, worked as a researcher for the vaccine companies and received honoraria from Abbott Labs for his research on the hepatitis B vaccine. Indeed, in the tight circle of scientists who work on vaccines, such conflicts of interest are common. Rep. Burton says that the CDC "routinely allows scientists with blatant conflicts of interest to serve on intellectual advisory committees that make recommendations on new vaccines," even though they have "interests in the products and companies for which they are supposed to be providing unbiased oversight." The House Government Reform Committee discovered that four of the eight CDC advisors who approved guidelines for a rotavirus vaccine laced with thimerosal "had financial ties to the pharmaceutical companies that were developing different versions of the vaccine." Offit, who shares a patent on the vaccine, acknowledged to me that he "would make money" if his vote to approve it eventually leads to a marketable product. But he dismissed my suggestion that a scientist's direct financial stake in CDC approval might bias his judgment. "It provides no conflict for me," he insists. "I have simply been informed by the process, not corrupted by it. When I sat around that table, my sole intent was trying to make recommendations that best benefited the children in this country. It's offensive to say that physicians and public-health people are in the pocket of industry and thus are making decisions that they know are unsafe for children. It's just not the way it works." Other vaccine scientists and regulators gave me similar assurances. Like Offit, they view themselves as enlightened guardians of children's health, proud of their "partnerships" with pharmaceutical companies, immune to the seductions of personal profit, besieged by irrational activists whose anti-vaccine campaigns are endangering children's health. They are often resentful of questioning. "Science," says Offit, "is best left to scientists." Still, some government officials were alarmed by the apparent conflicts of interest. In his e-mail to CDC administrators in 1999, Paul Patriarca of the FDA blasted federal regulators for failing to adequately scrutinize the danger posed by the added baby vaccines. "I'm not sure there will be an easy way out of the potential perception that the FDA, CDC and immunization-policy bodies may have been asleep at the switch re: thimerosal until now," Patriarca wrote. The close ties between regulatory officials and the pharmaceutical industry, he added, "will also raise questions about various advisory bodies regarding aggressive recommendations for use" of thimerosal in child vaccines. If federal regulators and government scientists failed to grasp the potential risks of thimerosal over the years, no one could claim ignorance after the secret meeting at Simpsonwood. But rather than conduct more studies to test the link to autism and other forms of brain damage, the CDC placed politics over science. The agency turned its database on childhood vaccines -- which had been developed largely at taxpayer expense -- over to a private agency, America's Health Insurance Plans, ensuring that it could not be used for additional research. It also instructed the Institute of Medicine, an advisory organization that is part of the National Academy of Sciences, to produce a study debunking the link between thimerosal and brain disorders. The CDC "wants us to declare, well, that these things are pretty safe," Dr. Marie McCormick, who chaired the IOM's Immunization Safety Review Committee, told her fellow researchers when they first met in January 2001. "We are not ever going to come down that [autism] is a true side effect" of thimerosal exposure. According to transcripts of the meeting, the committee's chief staffer, Kathleen Stratton, predicted that the IOM would conclude that the evidence was "inadequate to accept or reject a causal relation" between thimerosal and autism. That, she added, was the result "Walt wants" -- a reference to Dr. Walter Orenstein, director of the National Immunization Program for the CDC. For those who had devoted their lives to promoting vaccination, the revelations about thimerosal threatened to undermine everything they had worked for. "We've got a dragon by the tail here," said Dr. Michael Kaback, another committee member. "The more negative that [our] presentation is, the less likely people are to use vaccination, immunization -- and we know what the results of that will be. We are kind of caught in a trap. How we work our way out of the trap, I think is the charge." Even in public, federal officials made it clear that their primary goal in studying thimerosal was to dispel doubts about vaccines. "Four current studies are taking place to rule out the proposed link between autism and thimerosal," Dr. Gordon Douglas, then-director of strategic planning for vaccine research at the National Institutes of Health, assured a Princeton University gathering in May 2001. "In order to undo the harmful effects of research claiming to link the [measles] vaccine to an elevated risk of autism, we need to conduct and publicize additional studies to assure parents of safety." Douglas formerly served as president of vaccinations for Merck, where he ignored warnings about thimerosal's risks. In May of last year, the Institute of Medicine issued its final report. Its conclusion: There is no proven link between autism and thimerosal in vaccines. Rather than reviewing the large body of literature describing the toxicity of thimerosal, the report relied on four disastrously flawed epidemiological studies examining European countries, where children received much smaller doses of thimerosal than American kids. It also cited a new version of the Verstraeten study, published in the journal Pediatrics, that had been reworked to reduce the link between thimerosal and autism. The new study included children too young to have been diagnosed with autism and overlooked others who showed signs of the disease. The IOM declared the case closed and -- in a startling position for a scientific body -- recommended that no further research be conducted. The report may have satisfied the CDC, but it convinced no one. Rep. David Weldon, a Republican physician from Florida who serves on the House Government Reform Committee, attacked the Institute of Medicine, saying it relied on a handful of studies that were "fatally flawed" by "poor design" and failed to represent "all the available scientific and medical research." CDC officials are not interested in an honest search for the truth, Weldon told me, because "an association between vaccines and autism would force them to admit that their policies irreparably damaged thousands of children. Who would want to make that conclusion about themselves?" Under pressure from Congress, parents and a few of its own panel members, the Institute of Medicine reluctantly convened a second panel to review the findings of the first. In February, the new panel, composed of different scientists, criticized the earlier panel for its lack of transparency and urged the CDC to make its vaccine database available to the public. So far, though, only two scientists have managed to gain access. Dr. Mark Geier, president of the Genetics Center of America, and his son, David, spent a year battling to obtain the medical records from the CDC. Since August 2002, when members of Congress pressured the agency to turn over the data, the Geiers have completed six studies that demonstrate a powerful correlation between thimerosal and neurological damage in children. One study, which compares the cumulative dose of mercury received by children born between 1981 and 1985 with those born between 1990 and 1996, found a "very significant relationship" between autism and vaccines. Another study of educational performance found that kids who received higher doses of thimerosal in vaccines were nearly three times as likely to be diagnosed with autism and more than three times as likely to suffer from speech disorders and mental retardation. Another soon-to-be-published study shows that autism rates are in decline following the recent elimination of thimerosal from most vaccines. As the federal government worked to prevent scientists from studying vaccines, others have stepped in to study the link to autism. In April, reporter Dan Olmsted of UPI undertook one of the more interesting studies himself. Searching for children who had not been exposed to mercury in vaccines -- the kind of population that scientists typically use as a "control" in experiments -- Olmsted scoured the Amish of Lancaster County, Penn., who refuse to immunize their infants. Given the national rate of autism, Olmsted calculated that there should be 130 autistics among the Amish. He found only four. One had been exposed to high levels of mercury from a power plant. The other three -- including one child adopted from outside the Amish community -- had received their vaccines. At the state level, many officials have also conducted in-depth reviews of thimerosal. While the Institute of Medicine was busy whitewashing the risks, the Iowa Legislature was carefully combing through all of the available scientific and biological data. "After three years of review, I became convinced there was sufficient credible research to show a link between mercury and the increased incidences in autism," says state Sen. Ken Veenstra, a Republican who oversaw the investigation. "The fact that Iowa's 700 percent increase in autism began in the 1990s, right after more and more vaccines were added to the children's vaccine schedules, is solid evidence alone." Last year, Iowa became the first state to ban mercury in vaccines, followed by California. Similar bans are now under consideration in 32 other states. But instead of following suit, the FDA continues to allow manufacturers to include thimerosal in scores of over-the-counter medications as well as steroids and injected collagen. Even more alarming, the government continues to ship vaccines preserved with thimerosal to developing countries -- some of which are now experiencing a sudden explosion in autism rates. In China, where the disease was virtually unknown prior to the introduction of thimerosal by U.S. drug manufacturers in 1999, news reports indicate that there are now more than 1.8 million autistics. Although reliable numbers are hard to come by, autistic disorders also appear to be soaring in India, Argentina, Nicaragua and other developing countries that are now using thimerosal-laced vaccines. The World Health Organization continues to insist thimerosal is safe, but it promises to keep the possibility that it is linked to neurological disorders "under review." I devoted time to study this issue because I believe that this is a moral crisis that must be addressed. 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. "The CDC is guilty of incompetence and gross negligence," says Mark Blaxill, vice president of Safe Minds, a nonprofit organization concerned about the role of mercury in medicines. "The damage caused by vaccine exposure is massive. It's bigger than asbestos, bigger than tobacco, bigger than anything you've ever seen." It's hard to calculate the damage to our country -- and to the international efforts to eradicate epidemic diseases -- if Third World nations come to believe that America's most heralded foreign-aid initiative is poisoning their children. It's not difficult to predict how this scenario will be interpreted by America's enemies abroad. The scientists and researchers -- many of them sincere, even idealistic -- who are participating in efforts to hide the science on thimerosal claim that they are trying to advance the lofty goal of protecting children in developing nations from disease pandemics. They are badly misguided. Their failure to come clean on thimerosal will come back horribly to haunt our country and the world's poorest populations.
PRNewswire | November 13, 2006 PORTLAND, Ore., Nov. 13 /PRNewswire/ -- As health officials step up their effort to vaccinate Americans against the flu, a new survey suggests serious concerns over the toxin mercury, an ingredient in over 90 percent of this season's flu shot supply. PutChildrenFirst.org, a parent-led organization advocating vaccine safety, commissioned a survey of over 9,000 Americans to learn their plans for getting flu shots, their knowledge of its ingredients, and who they hold responsible for making sure vaccines are safe. The survey revealed that the overwhelming majority of Americans were unaware that most flu shots contain mercury and that they would refuse a shot with mercury. (See page two for the key findings.) "More than 75 percent of Americans feel a mercury-containing flu shot should not be given to a pregnant woman or a child, despite recommendations from medical authorities to do just that," said Lisa Handley, a founding parent of PutChildrenFirst.org. Her own son, Jamison, had an adverse reaction to a flu shot containing mercury in 2003. "I know firsthand how life-changing a flu shot with mercury can be, since our son began his regression into autism after his flu shot." In 1999, government agencies called for the removal of Thimerosal, the mercury-based preservative in most vaccines. Then, in 2001, the American Academy of Pediatrics stated that, "mercury in all of its forms is toxic to the fetus and children, and efforts should be made to reduce exposure to the extent possible to pregnant women and children as well as the general population." Despite these actions, 90 percent of this season's flu vaccines still contain Thimerosal, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are recommending the vaccine for pregnant women and children six months and older. These recommendations come on the heels of recent studies that reveal new findings about the neurological effects of mercury and question the effectiveness of flu shots. Mercury, the second most toxic element after plutonium, is estimated to be 500 to 1,000 times more toxic than lead. "A common myth is that Thimerosal is added to vaccines in 'trace' amounts," said Mike Wagnitz, who has over 20 years experience evaluating materials for mercury and is employed as a senior chemist with the University of Wisconsin. "The concentration of mercury in a multi-dose flu vaccine vial is 50,000 parts per billion. To put this in perspective, drinking water cannot exceed 2 parts per billion of mercury, and waste is considered hazardous if it has only 200 parts per billion. Is it really safe then to inject pregnant women, newborns, and infants with levels of mercury 250 times higher than what is legally classified as hazardous waste?" Agreeing that mercury has no place in vaccines, seven states have passed Thimerosal bans in recent years: California, Delaware, Illinois, Iowa, Missouri, New York, and Washington. California is the first to have implemented the ban for the current flu season, but Governor Schwarzenegger temporarily overturned the ban on November 2 after a shortage of mercury-free flu shots led to pressure from state medical groups. "Parents need to be informed about all aspects of their children's healthcare, including vaccines," said Deirdre Imus, President and founder of The Deirdre Imus Environmental Center for Pediatric Oncology at Hackensack University Medical Center and co-founder and co-director, with husband Don Imus, of The Imus Cattle Ranch for Kids with Cancer. "It doesn't make common sense to inject Thimerosal, a known neurotoxin, into the bloodstream of our babies." This fall, two studies were published in leading medical journals admitting that limited data exists to support the effectiveness of flu shots. One study, in the Journal of the American Medical Association, noted that, "there is scant data on the efficacy and effectiveness of influenza vaccine in young children." "So, not only is the flu shot's effectiveness in doubt, there is plenty of evidence revealing the devastating effects of mercury," said J.B. Handley, Lisa's husband and a founder of PutChildrenFirst.org. "Our health authorities are not being forthcoming about mercury's presence in shots and its toxicity to the nervous system. Our children deserve better." "With everything we know about the dangers of mercury and the havoc it can wreak on young, developing brains, there is no excuse for any vaccine to contain mercury," said Lyn Redwood, RN, MSN, President of SafeMinds, a nonprofit committed to ending mercury-induced neurological disorders. "The survey reveals that Americans are overwhelmingly in the dark about what is in most flu shots. They do not want a known neurotoxin injected into their children, and they believe Congress and medical professionals must be more vigilant about keeping vaccines safe and mercury-free." Key findings from the poll, conducted October 27-30 by Zogby International, include: * 74 percent of respondents are unaware that most flu shots contain mercury. * After learning that mercury is an ingredient, 74 percent are less likely to get a flu shot and 86 percent of parents say they are less likely to get their child a flu shot. * 78 percent of respondents believe mercury should not be an ingredient in flu shots given to pregnant women and children. * 73 percent believe the government should warn pregnant women not to get a flu shot if it contains mercury. * More than 70 percent agree that Congress, doctors and medical groups (e.g., the American Academy of Pediatrics) should take responsibility for ensuring that vaccines do not contain mercury. * 80 percent of respondents and 82 percent of parents are willing to pay the $2.50 additional cost for a mercury-free flu shot. PutChildrenFirst.org is a parent-led initiative advocating vaccine safety and a division of Generation Rescue, a nonprofit organization providing parents with information on the relationship between mercury and its relationship to Autism Spectrum Disorders. Generation Rescue gives parents information to make informed decisions about treatment options and physicians. Generation Rescue is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit founded in 2005.
Brent Jessop / VIVELECANADA | March 13, 2007 All this trouble over the need for a passport for Canadians to enter the US. So much inconvenience and of course economic ruin. No need to worry. The government has a great solution to the problem they created. New high-tech drivers licences. Complete with all your personal information and fingerprints and a fancy new proximity RFID chip. Convenient. Exciting! Safe? Ignoring the obvious privacy and safety concerns with the tracking abilities of the RFID chip. Ignoring the fact that this is part of a North American ID card which matches up just so nicely with the new American drivers licences under the Real ID act. Ignoring all of these things there is another major problem. The database. The new ID cards come with a gigantic database that keeps track of all your personal information and biometric data. How secure are these databases? Lets first look at how well the government currently protects your data. In July of 2005 the B.C. Ministry of Labour sold high-capacity data tapes at a public auction containing medical information about sexual abuse, HIV status, mental illness and also information from 30,000 refugees. An almost identical incident also occurred in B.C. only four years previous. If you are curious, the tapes netted the government $101. Fortunately this was limited to only patients of one hospital. Another example of governments not being as responsible with your information as most assume was in September 2006. The US department of Commerce lost over 1,100 laptops including 250 from the Census Bureau containing such personal information as names, incomes and Social Security numbers. So the government has had some trouble in the past with keeping our personal data personal. But industry with all of their market motivated superiority, surely they must do better? Read the Full Article here [Proofreader's note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on March 14, 2007]
International Forcaster | April 27, 2007 Bob Chapman Now hear this! What we are about to tell you comes from deep within the bowels of the Illuminati. This information runs parallel with what we have been forecasting in our issues of the IF. In February, via an internal memo, the Carlyle Group said they see another 12 to 24-months or more of “excess liquidity,” which will drive further profits and growth and that the current liquidity environment cannot go on forever; and, that the longer it lasts the more money our investors will make; but also that the longer it lasts, the worse it will be when it ends” In the missive it was stated that Carlyle's fabulous profits were not solely a function of their investment genius, but have resulted in large part from a great market and the availability of enormous amounts of cheap debt. In fact, there has been and is so much liquidity in the world financial system that lenders, even their own lenders, are making very risky credit decisions. This sea of money and credit has allowed deals to be done that could never have been done otherwise. They do not expect the Fed to reduce interest rates anytime soon. What could bring this global liquidity to an end? Just that business would diminish their borrowing or could it be higher interest rates? Could it be a terrorist attack; $100 per barrel oil; trade protectionism; the absorption of excess skilled labor into the global economy; the US elections; Russian energy policies; a multi-billion dollar bankruptcy; a tightening by the Bank of Japan or the Fed; an end to the yen carry trade as a result; or perhaps the collapse of several hedge funds or a derivative collapse? All are possible and at least one is probable. The strategy should be to take lower risk deals and earn lower returns rather than higher risk deals at only small incrementally higher returns. We should redouble our focus on deals with downside protection, asset coverage, multiple and early exit paths, strategic partners, debt pay down, government protection, consumer needs, controllable capital expenditures, defensible market positions, etc. Carlyle is being careful because they know what is coming, just as we have been telling you here in the IF. Carlyle is the insider. What we have been busy doing for years is figuring out what these elitists will do before they do it. This is exactly what we have been forecasting. If we and Carlyle are correct, we can expect more than ample liquidity until February of 2009. During the year to 1-1/2 years that follow liquidity will decline and inflation will diminish. After three months of declining liquidity or declining use of liquidity we will know it is time to sell all assets except gold bullion coins, quality gold shares and for those of you who have to have some liquidity, Swiss francs. Now that foreclosures are going wild lots of crooks are defrauding homeowners. Here are some tips. Don't pay upfront fees to any person or organization promising help. Don't sign anything without have an independent lawyer review it. Seek out accredited financial counselors, using lists such as those kept by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Wild rescue offers that are too good to be true are just a scam. This week the Supreme Court stepped into the subprime lending crisis with a potentially far-reaching ruling that limits the power of individual states to regulate mortgage lending. The elitists have to control everything in our lives. The Supreme Court is allowing banks to offer new terms on mortgages in violation of the law. This will have a big impact on the ability of states to act independently on predatory lending and throws the spotlight on federal authorities. The Consumer federation of America said, “This is really disappointing news, it could work to the detriment of consumers.” Applications for mortgages fell for the 5th straight week as ARMs fell to 18.1% of applications, the lowest since 7/03. A year ago they accounted for 30%. Refis were 2.5% lower wow, but they were up 10% yoy. Refi apps fell 0.3% and accounted for 44% of applications. The volume of loan applications to buy a home fell 4.2%, but purchase loans were down 3% yoy. US home sales are off 5.5% yoy. The average 30-year fixed rate mortgage rose from 6.16% to 6.22%, the highest in nine weeks. The 15's rose 1 bps to 5.92% and the one-year ARMs rose 1 bps to 5.89%. US foreclosure filings rose 47% in March yoy. That was 149,000 as California's filings rose 31,434. Nevada and Colorado had the largest percentage gains. Those making late payments are at a four-year high and the failure of 55 subprime mortgage companies has tightened the supply of money for lending. Nevada's foreclosures were triple yoy. That is one foreclosure for every 183 households, which is four times the national average. Colorado's rate was one for every 292. Nationally it was one of every 775. California had 6 of the 10 metropolitan areas with the highest foreclosure rates, Stockton being the highest. The others were Vallejo-Fairfield, Modesto, Sacramento, Riverside-San Bernardino and Bakersfield. Greeley, Colorado and Detroit and Denver were also up near the top.
Damian Lataan | April 25, 2007 Yesterday the Australian Prime Minister John Howard and his band of fearmongering lunatics warned Australians gathering at Gallipoli for ANZAC Day to be aware of a ‘ terrorist threat' . In the UK Guardian today it is reported that the ‘head of Scotland Yard's counterterrorism command said yesterday that al-Qaida had survived the six-year long "war on terror" launched by President George Bush and Tony Blair, and its central leadership had retained the ability to order devastating attacks on Britain.' As well as Gallipoli that is. And in Iraq, where it seems the Iraqi franchise of ‘al Qaeda' has claimed responsibility for the deaths yesterday of nine US troops. So good is the ‘al Qaeda' franchise business that even the Israelis have tried to set up an ‘al Qaeda' shop in Palestine . Unfortunately the locals soon discovered that the business wasn't genuine (apparently Mossad hadn't paid bin Laden the franchise fee) so the business was quickly shut down. Of course al Qaeda exists, or at least existed, (indeed, it was set up with the assistance of the CIA as part of their covert war against the Soviets in Afghanistan before the Taliban took over there) but it doesn't exist in the way that the western neocon-dominated press would have us believe. Despite the continued references to ‘al Qaeda' everyday as we are told that they are responsible for every conceivable atrocity that occurs on our planet, there has not been any evidence whatsoever that ‘al Qaeda' per se has ever been responsible for anything beyond the borders of Afghanistan and the remoter parts of Pakistan. The western propagandists have presented to the world a picture of an ‘al Qaeda' as being a massive and extremely well disciplined international organisation that has branches everywhere. Yet nowhere is there any prima facie evidence to suggest that they even exist, let alone in such an organised and disciplined way. As the piece in today's UK Guardian demonstrates, we are expected to simply believe what we are told with the total lack of evidence being conveniently explained away as; ‘for security reasons we can't divulge the source'. In Iraq the US and their allies are currently busy trying to wedge the Sunni and Shi'ite factions by blaming ‘al Qaeda' for the friction between the two groupings. This is nothing new; they've tried it before , but now they are putting more effort into their blame game because they see it as away of polarising the rest of Islam in the Middle East and beyond thus diverting attention away from the Israelis and their efforts to subdue Palestine, Hamas and Hizbollah but, at the same time, demonising further an Iran that has a predominately Shiite population (as against the rest of the Islamic world which is around 80% Sunni). The problem for the US, Israel, and their western allies, is that all this propaganda is for consumption in the west only. The Middle Eastern peoples, Sunni or Shia, are very much aware that their relationships with each other are quite secure and have been for decades. For them the myth of ‘al Qaeda' remains just that – a myth, and that the struggles that exist between various Sunni and Shiite groups in Iraq are mainly a combination of political and criminal secular differences in a post-Saddam lawless era and that such violence, as bloody as it often is, is contained within Iraq and has nothing to do with the battles that Islamic peoples and Arabs generally are fighting against Israeli right-wing Zionism in Palestine and US hegemonic colonialism in the Middle East and Central Asia. ‘Al Qaeda' remains, as it has since the US decided that they were to blame for the events of 9/11, a myth that exists solely to perpetuate fear and the illusion that there is always an enemy to justify the continued ‘Global War on Terrorism'.
last post
16 years ago
posts
37
views
6,367
can view
everyone
can comment
everyone
atom/rss
official fubar blogs
 8 years ago
fubar news by babyjesus  
 14 years ago
fubar.com ideas! by babyjesus  
 10 years ago
fubar'd Official Wishli... by SCRAPPER  
 11 years ago
Word of Esix by esixfiddy  

discover blogs on fubar

blog.php' rendered in 0.0559 seconds on machine '189'.