There was an error in this gadget
0
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
- ASIA NEWS
- AUGUST 11, 2011
China Flexes Naval Muscle
By JEREMY PAGE
BEIJING—China sent its first aircraft carrier to sea, a defining moment in its effort to become a top-tier naval power that seeks to challenge U.S. military supremacy in Asia and protect Chinese economic interests that now span the globe.
China's first aircraft carrier has begun its inaugural sea trial, the defence ministry said Wednesday, a move likely to stoke concerns about the nation's rapid military expansion. Video courtesy of AFP.
The carrier, based on an empty hull bought from Ukraine, sounded its horn three times as it plowed through fog around the northeastern port of Dalian early Wednesday to begin its first sea trials, according to a Twitter-like service by the state-run Xinhua news agency.
The vessel, nearly 1,000 feet long, is far from fully operational: It has a new engine, radar, guns and other equipment, but has limited combat potential without backup from other carriers and an array of support ships. For the moment, it will be used mainly for training personnel, especially fighter pilots who must learn to take off from and land on a moving deck.
China's carrier, designed to carry about 2,000 people and 50 fighter jets, is dwarfed by the nuclear-powered U.S. Nimitz-class "supercarrier," which can carry 6,250 people and launch planes with more fuel and weaponry thanks to a catapult system and longer runway. China's carrier, which isn't nuclear powered, is thought to have a gas-turbine or marine-diesel engine.
China has yet to name its carrier, and tried to play down its significance Wednesday, saying in a Xinhua commentary: "There should be no excessive worries or paranoid feelings on China's pursuit of an aircraft carrier, as it will not pose a threat to other countries."
The vessel nonetheless sends a powerful message both to China's domestic audience, for whom a carrier has for decades been equated with national strength, and to the U.S. and its regional allies, many of whom are embroiled in territorial disputes with Beijing.
It is the most potent symbol yet of China's long-term desire to develop the power both to deny U.S. naval access to Asian waters and to protect its global economic interests, including shipping lanes in the Indian Ocean and oil sources in the Middle East.
China Real Time Report
Its launch is thus seen as a milestone in relations between an ascendant China, bent on reclaiming its historical role as a global power, and a debt-ridden U.S. that wants to retain the military supremacy it has wielded in Asia since 1945.
China denies trying to match the might of the U.S. Navy, which now has 11 carriers, including one, the George Washington, that is based in Japan. Even Chinese experts admit it could take a decade to master the intricate choreography of a carrier group, which typically involves frigates, destroyers, submarines and satellites, all using an integrated command and control system.
But serving and retired Chinese officers make no secret of their country's aspiration to develop up to four larger, indigenous carriers by around 2020.
China has also alarmed the U.S. and its regional allies in the past year with a more combative stance on territorial disputes in the East and South China Seas.
The Pentagon is also playing down the carrier's significance. Some U.S. officials privately question the quality of Chinese engineering, which came into sharp relief last month with a deadly train crash on the country's high-speed rail network.
At the same time, the U.S. is countering China's military build-up by shoring up defense ties with old Asian allies Japan and South Korea as well as new partners like India and Vietnam.
Several Asian nations, including Japan and Australia, are beefing up their arsenals too, fearing that the U.S. security umbrella is being eroded by China's enhanced capabilities and possible U.S. defense budget cuts.
For Beijing, however, the carrier's short-term capabilities are less important than its symbolic significance, especially for Communist Party leaders courting military support ahead of a leadership change next year.
As if to exaggerate the achievement for a fiercely nationalistic audience, China's state television featured no images of the sea trials, and instead used footage of what appeared to be fighter jets taking off from Russian or U.S. carriers.
"From the Opium War in 1840 to the founding of the People's Republic of China in 1949, China suffered more than 470 offenses and invasions that came from the seas," the Xinhua commentary said.
Chinese officials say their country's naval power is now expanding in tandem with its economic interests, and has benefited the rest of the world by taking part in antipiracy patrols in the Gulf of Aden.
They also point out that of the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council—China, the U.S., Britain, France and Russia—China has been the only one without an operational carrier. India and Thailand have a carrier each, while Japan has one that carries helicopters.
"China is a big country and we have quite a large number of ships, but they are only small ships," said Chen Bingde, the chief of the General Staff of the People's Liberation Army, at a July news conference with Adm. Mike Mullen, the visiting U.S. chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. "This is not commensurate with the status of a country like China."
Plans to develop a Chinese carrier, first proposed in 1928, intensified after Adm. Liu Huaqing, China's naval chief, toured a U.S. carrier—the Kitty Hawk—in 1980. Adm. Liu, who died in January, wrote in his autobiography that he was "deeply impressed by its imposing magnificence and modern fighting capacity."
China purchased a decommissioned Australian carrier for scrap in 1985. Chinese companies also acquired two small Russian carriers in 1998 and 2000, both of which are now used in amusement parks.
But the real breakthrough came when a Chinese company acquired the vessel, then called Varyag, for $20 million in 1998, on the understanding that it would be towed to the gambling enclave of Macao and used as a floating casino.
The plan to use it for the navy soon became an open secret because it was visible from much of Dalian, and military enthusiasts posted regular reports, photographs and videos of its refurbishment. Still, China officially confirmed its existence only last month, when it tried to ease regional concerns by saying it would be used for "research, experiments and training."
China's Defense Ministry didn't respond to a request to comment on the sea trials Wednesday, and Xinhua said only that they "would not take a long time." "After returning from the sea trial, the aircraft carrier will continue refit and test work," Xinhua said.
Analysts say Chinese pilots are unlikely to try flying from the carrier yet, though are thought to have practiced on a land-based mock-up of the deck.
Andrei Chang, Hong Kong editor of Kanwa Defense Review, which monitors China's military, said the first tests were probably designed to check the engines—a potential weak point—and that sea trials would continue sporadically for another year or two.
Once basic tests are concluded, however, analysts said the carrier could be used for limited patrols around China's territorial waters, as well as for conducting visits to foreign countries to present China's newfound naval strength in a nonthreatening manner.
"U.S. carriers come to Hong Kong, so why shouldn't ours go to California or New York?" said Xu Guangyu, a retired Chinese general.
Most importantly, however, the carrier will give China experience to develop indigenous carriers, the first of which some defense experts say is already under construction at a shipyard in Shanghai and could be completed as soon as 2012.
China, like most countries, considers at least three carriers necessary to be effective, so that one can be in action, one in transit and one in port for repairs and resupplies, according to Maj. Gen. Luo Yuan. But each active one requires its own carrier group, which could take at least 10 years to develop, according to retired Chinese navy Rear Adm. Yin Zhuo.
"China's 'starter carrier' is of very limited military utility, and will primarily serve to confer prestige on a rising great power, help the military master basic procedures, and to project a bit of power," wrote Andrew Erickson, an associate professor in the U.S. Naval War College's Strategic Research Department, in a research note.
Write to Jeremy Page at jeremy.page@wsj.com
SOURCE: www.wsj.com
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
SENSENBRENNER: European tax on American travel
Climate-change levy is cover for EU money-grubbing
7 Comments and 13 Reactions|ShareTweet|Email|Print|
By Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner
-
The Washington Times
Thursday, August 11, 2011
Illustration: Air travel tax by Linas Garsys for The Washington Times
Bottom of Form
While Republicans have been fighting new taxes in Washington, Americans may face a new tax from an unlikely source - the European Union (EU). Beginning Jan. 1, 2012, the E U will extend its cap-and-trade system (aka cap-and-tax) to all airlines entering or leaving its airports. Americans flying to and from Europe will begin paying higher fares to cover the EU's new tax.
The EU's emissions tax will cover the entire flight. For example, if a U.S. carrier is flying from San Francisco to London, the tax will take effect when the aircraft begins to taxi on the runway in California. The bill will continue to accrue throughout the entire flight, even though only a small portion actually occurs in the EU's airspace. The airlines estimate that the EU's new tax will cost them $3.1 billion by 2020 and they project a potential fare increase of more than $50 on a trans-Atlantic flight.
The environmental benefits of these actions will be, at best, negligible. The entire U.S. aviation industry is responsible for just 2 percent of our total emissions. In 2012, the EU will require a 3 percent reduction from the average emissions from 2004-06 on all flights into, out of or within the EU. Carriers that fail to meet this standard will have to buy emissions credits from and pay fines to the EU.
European countries have no obligation to use collected funds for climate-related programs. It is simply revenue straight from U.S. pockets to European coffers.
The EU argues that it is creating incentives for airlines to reduce their fuel consumption and that airlines can avoid fines by simply increasing their efficiency. Airlines, however, already have this incentive. According to the Air Transport Association (ATA), a one-penny-per-gallon increase in the cost of jet fuel results in an additional cost to airlines of $175 million per year.
These cost realities have driven airlines to make great strides in fuel efficiency. The commercial aviation industry has improved fuel efficiency by approximately 110 percent from 1978 to 2008. It continues to improve, but given costs and safety considerations, technological innovations necessarily move at a slow pace. As a result, it is simply impossible for airlines to avoid the EU's fines.
The EU's actions are a blatantly illegal affront to U.S. sovereignty. Article 1 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation, known as the Chicago Convention, provides that individual countries may only regulate their own airspace. The ATA has filed suit in EU courts, but legal experts agree that the EU courts are highly unlikely to overturn an EU law.
The EU has offered two preposterous arguments in its defense. First, it has argued that a cap-and-trade system is not a tax because the purpose is emissions reduction, not revenue collection. Proponents of climate legislation in the United States made similar arguments in support of cap-and-tax, but the reality remains that an obligatory financial transfer from a private party to the government is, by definition, a tax, regardless of the government's purported purpose.
The EU also argues that it is not a signatory to the Chicago Convention. Technically, this is right. Every single country in the EU, however, is a signatory. The implications here are staggering. European countries are asking a European court to sanction their ability to pick and choose their international obligations. Under this logic, individual countries in the EU can sign treaties and benefit from their protections, but can then hide behind the EU to avoid their obligations.
As EU courts are not expected to uphold international law, it will be up to Congress and the administration to protect U.S. carriers and passengers from illegal taxation.
Congress' option s are frankly limited. Congress has already introduced legislation to bar U.S. carriers from paying the EU's tax. The legislation is, however, a blunt fix. If passed, airlines would face conflicting legal obligations. EU law would require airlines to pay fees, but U.S. law would bar them from paying them - forcing a standoff. Only the administration has the ability to negotiate a diplomatic solution.
The Obama administration opposes the EU's new tax, but with the Jan. 1 deadline looming, it must work quickly before the illegal fees take effect.
Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner is a Republican member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Wisconsin.
© Copyright 2011 The Washington Times, LLC.
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
Friday, August 12, 2011
Karl Rove: Ron Paul May Do Very Well in Iowa
Posted by Robert Wenzel at 6:58 PM
Get a load of this from establishment political operative Karl Rove:
- While [Ron Paul] has no chance of winning the Republican presidential nomination, he may do well at the Straw Poll.
The truth is that if Ron Paul wins in Iowa, Romney, Bachmann, Pawlenty, Gingrich and Cain didn't.
Rove can spin that anyway he likes, but what the poll really proves is that voters aren't listening to spinsters like Rove and voting for the person they think can bring real change.
http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2011/08/karl-rove-ron-paul-may-do-very-well-in.html
The results of the welfare state
Why I Riot: A View on the London Riots
Written by Richard Jackson 11 August 2011
What must it be like in the minds of the rioters who looted, burned, and tore parts of London, and other English cities to shreds in the August riots? A personal opinion follows, written by Richard Jackson in the persona of a 'rioter'.
Richard Jackson is Professor of International Politics at Aberystwyth University. His latest book is Terrorism: A Critical Introduction (2011; Palgrave Macmillan; co-authored with Lee Jarvis, Jeroen Gunning and Marie Breen Smyth). He blogs regularly on issues of terrorism, war and conflict resolution.People are saying I am just a violent hooligan, a mindless thug, a criminal, an anarchist. They're saying I lack proper respect for authority and for people's property. They say I am engaging in wanton destruction and causing mayhem just because I'm wicked. People are saying I am part of a small, criminally-minded minority who should be locked up. Maybe they're right. Maybe I am just a worthless piece of shit. Maybe I should be locked away forever, punished, excluded. But what do I really care what 'people' think?There are reasons why I riot. You might not like them, but they're mine.I riot because I'm angry. Anger envelopes me like a blanket every day of my life. I'm angry because I'm poor, I've always been poor, and I know I will never be able to afford all those nice things people are supposed to have. I'm angry because my life is shit and I know it's always going to be shit. I'm angry because I know that there's no future for me; no one will ever give me a decent job or a hand-up in life. I will live in the same shitty housing that my family have always lived in, drawing down the same shitty benefits. I'm angry because I live in a shit place full of poverty, crime, vandalism, gangs, garbage, grime and neglect. Most days I take my anger out on myself; I engage in a wide and creative array of self-destructive behavior. But sometimes, like last night, I direct my anger outwards. I let my rage take over, and for a brief moment, I feel a profound sense of release.I riot because I hate the police, and because I know that the police hate me. They're racist and brutal, and they treat me like scum every day of my life, always coming around blaming me for everything bad that happens, harassing me when I walk down the street. I hate them because they think they're God and they don't have to answer to anyone for what they do. I hate them because they show me no respect. In a riot, you can fight back against the police; you can stand up to them and tell them how you really feel.I riot because I am nobody, nothing, less than nothing. I am invisible, a ghost in this city, this country, this world. People don't see me, and don't give a shit about me or what's going to happen to me. My parents don't care, my teachers don't care, the politicians don't care, the police don't care; no one gives a fuck about me and my life. If people do ever see me, they don't really see me; they just see an anti-social, worthless, feral teenager; they see a danger to society, a threat to the peace. If no one cares about me, why should I care about anyone else?I riot because no one ever listens to me. No one has ever really listened to me; nobody hears what I have to say. But when I riot, it seems the whole world stops and listens. My riot is my voice. It is the expression of my feelings, the sound of inarticulate rage which I cannot express any other way. I don't expect anyone will understand what I'm saying, I cannot put it into nice words; but I feel the need to say it anyway. I have to let it out somehow, and right now, music, or drugs, or vandalism is not enough.I riot because I feel powerless every day of my life. I'm not in control of what happens to me; other people are always deciding about my life, telling me what's right for me – teachers, cops, social workers, pastors, politicians, media commentators. When I riot, I feel powerful, I feel in control. It may only last a few hours, but for those brief moments when I smash something or burn something, I feel like a free person in control of my own destiny. I feel like somebody. When I riot, I feel like a real man.I riot because it is the most exciting thing that has happened to me in forever. It's like being high, but way better: the adrenaline, the sheer thrill and terror of fighting with the police, burning shit down, smashing and stealing, running, hiding. What would I be doing otherwise? Watch the TV? Studying? Hanging out with my friends on the corner? Smoking dope? Fuck off! This is so much better than the mind-numbing tedium of my regular life where I simply exist from day to day with nothing to look forward to. In my usual life, I am like the walking dead, a real zombie; there's absolutely nothing exciting to do around here, especially when you have no money. I will live on this excitement for ages.I riot because when I'm in a group with my friends, we sometimes egg each other on. I've done things with them that I would never have done on my own. It's a group thing; I feel braver and stronger when we're together. We try to impress each other; we give each other respect. It's how I get my esteem, the only way I get some respect.I riot because it might allow me to loot a few shops. I know I could never afford all those beautiful things everyone else seems to have, but in a riot, you can just take them. I need some new trainers, a new phone, a laptop, clothes, money, games. It's a consumer society, my friend. We have all got to have these things, otherwise we won't be happy. I just want to be happy.I riot because I have absolutely nothing to lose. You want to lock me up for it? Go ahead. It means nothing to a nothing like me.
__._,_.___
.
__,_._,___
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
http://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/2011/08/12/facebook-stole-every-number-in-your-phone-heres-how-to-undo-damage/
Facebook Stole Every Number in Your Phone; Here's How to Undo the Damage
By Zach Epstein
Published August 12, 2011
| BGR
This may come as a shock considering how seriously Facebook takes your privacy, but if you're a Facebook user with one of Facebook's mobile applications installed on your iPhone or one of several other smartphones, you've been robbed. Each and every contact stored on your phone is probably now also stored on Facebook's servers, as was re-re-rediscovered by Facebook users this past week.
Whether or not people in your contact list even have Facebook accounts, their names and phone numbers are likely now in Facebook's possession.
There is probably a clause buried deep within Facebook's terms and conditions that makes this invasion of your privacy OK on paper, but odds are still pretty good that it's not OK with you.
Complete instructions outlining how to remove all of your contacts' phone numbers from your Facebook account can be found below. Whether or not the data will be completely wiped from Facebook's servers is unclear, but we'll leave that for the lawyers to figure out.
. Visit facebook.com from a PC and log in
2. in the top-right corner of the screen, click on Account and then Edit Friends
3. In the menu on the left side of the screen, click on Contacts
4. Here, you will see that each and every one of your contacts in Address Book are listed along with their phone numbers… wipe the look of shock and disgust from your face
5. On the right side of the screen, click on the "this page" link
6. Follow the instructions on this page — you'll have to disable contact-sync in Facebook's mobile app if it's enabled — and click the Remove button
Note: Many users note that Facebook's mobile apps now carry disclaimers that mention the fact that Facebook is taking your data. Of course Facebook does currently include a disclaimer, though the wording makes no mention of this data being stored on its servers. Even still, this has not been the case with all versions of the app, and there are also numerous reports from users who claim to have never synchronized their contacts with Facebook's mobile apps, yet still find all of their contact data stored on Facebook's servers.
This content was originally published on BGR.com
More news from BGR:
- Samsung to appeal EU Galaxy Tab 10.1 ban on August 25th
- Samsung to unveil U.S. Galaxy S II models on August 29th
- Android steals 20% of tablet market from iPad over past year
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
The PATRIOT Act in the Crosshairs Again
by James Bovard, Posted August 11, 2011
The most controversial provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act are coming up for renewal this year. There is hope that Americans will finally learn more about how the feds have been prying into their lives with this law for almost a decade. Some members of Congress are fighting tooth and nail to avoid giving the Justice Department an extension of its sweeping PATRIOT Act powers.
The soul of the PATRIOT Act is blind trust in the arbitrary power of federal agents and federal officials. The act treats every American like a suspected terrorist and every federal agent like a proven angel. When the law was originally considered in the weeks after 9/11, the Bush administration's steamroller persuaded the legislative branch of government to largely cede both its own role and that of the judicial branch in the American system of checks and balances. An ACLU report issued just after George W. Bush signed the law noted that PATRIOT Act provisions "create the illusion of judicial review while transforming judges into mere rubber stamps. Under many of these provisions the judge exercises no review function whatsoever; the court must issue an order granting access to sensitive information upon mere certification by a government official." The ACLU warned that the PATRIOT Act "misunderstands the role of the judicial branch of government; it treats the courts as an inconvenient obstacle to executive action rather than an essential instrument of accountability."
Yet, when he signed the PATRIOT Act into law on October 26, 2001, Bush proclaimed, "Today, we take an essential step in defeating terrorism, while protecting the constitutional rights of all Americans.... This bill met with an overwhelming overwhelming agreement in Congress, because it upholds and respects the civil liberties guaranteed by our Constitution." His assertion was ludicrous: the vast majority of the PATRIOT Act's avid supporters never showed any interest in civil liberties. Almost all those members outspoken on civil liberties opposed the bill. Bush's ritual invocation of freedom was merely an attempt to consecrate the new federal powers.
The Bush administration carried off the biggest bait and switch in U.S. constitutional history. Rather than targeting terrorists, Bush and Congress awarded new powers to federal agents to use against anyone suspected of committing any one of the thousands of federal crimes on the books. The PATRIOT Act is being used to target people accused of money laundering, corruption, and other white-collar criminal violations, as well as those accused of violating various porn or drug laws.
The PATRIOT Act gave the feds the authority to financially strip-search every American. Banks are now required to gather far more information on their clients their background, their sources of income, their financial behavior, et cetera. All of these new roundups of info caused by the PATRIOT Act should come with a formal warning to citizens: any information the government gathers can and will be used against you.
National Security Letters
In February, when Congress first debated the reauthorization of the PATRIOT Act, one of the hot issues was Section 215. The advocates of renewing the Act said that section dealt with "business information." That claim was full of hokum even by Washington standards.
Section 215 is similar to the PATRIOT Act provisions that empower the FBI to use National Security Letters (NSLs) to compel private citizens, businesses, nonprofits, and other entities to surrender information upon demand. NSLs empower the FBI to seize records that reveal "where a person makes and spends money, with whom he lives and lived before, how much he gambles, what he buys online, what he pawns and borrows, where he travels, how he invests, what he searches for and reads on the Web, and who telephones or emails him at home and at work," the Washington Post noted.
The FBI is issuing up to 50,000 NSLs a year a hundredfold increase in the rate of such secret searches over the pre–9/11 era. Each NSL can lasso the records of thousands of people. Every NSL is backed up by an FBI badge, and every badge is backed up by a gun and by the world's largest law firm, the Justice Department.
National Security Letters turn the Fourth Amendment on its head by creating a presumption that the government is entitled to personal or confidential information unless the citizen or business can prove to a federal judge that the Letter should not be enforced against him.
The Founding Fathers placed the Fourth Amendment in the Constitution so that the federal government would have to provide specific information suggesting criminal wrongdoing by a specific person prior to the granting of a search warrant. The standard for these National Security Letters is simply that an FBI agent fill out a form certifying that he is seeking information that is relevant to an authorized investigation. That is a "standard' that almost any authoritarian government in the world could meet. The FBI has a push-button to seize practically any information it pleases.
But some FBI officials were not satisfied with the reach of the NSL vacuum cleaner. Instead, beginning in 2004, they contrived other ways to commandeer Americans' personal information simply by promising that they would eventually send National Security Letters for the telephone records or other information they demanded. They often didn't even bother sending such letters after snaring private information. A 2007 Inspector General report revealed that almost one-fourth of all NSLs tens of thousands of such letters may have violated federal law.
If a private citizen hacked into the FBI computer database and snared personal data on hundreds of FBI agents, he would be sentenced to prison for several years. If a private citizen used false threats to gain other citizens' personal financial information from a bank, he could be sent up the river for years.
However, no crimes were committed when FBI agents violated the law and seized citizens' personal data.
Why? Because every federal violation of Americans' privacy is by definition a harmless error.
Let's keep in mind what happened when the PATRIOT Act's most controversial provisions were extended in 2006. The Bush administration kept insisting that almost zero abuses had occurred, so there was no reason not to extend the law. It turned out that thousands of abuses had occurred and top White House and Justice Department officials simply lied to Congress about it.
Congressional failure
Back when the PATRIOT Act was first considered, we were told that it was safe to vest all that power in federal agencies because Congress would keep a close eye on how the power was used.
Congress has not brought honor upon itself in its dealings with the Act. On the Senate side, Russ Feingold the only senator to vote against the Act tried to keep an eye on how the powers were being used and that was a major factor in his defeat last November. Sen. Patrick Leahy has worked for some oversight, but has been thwarted by both parties in the Senate.
One of the big mysteries is that it is the Republican congressional members who are pushing hardest for the PATRIOT Act to be extended. You have the GOP stampeding to make sure that federal agencies under Obama continue to have such vast surveillance powers. Why? Are the congressmen simply in the habit of groveling every time some FBI official snaps his fingers?
One reason federal agencies cannot be trusted with PATRIOT Act powers is that congressmen simply don't give a damn when federal agencies violate Americans' privacy. As long as federal agents are not flogging mothers on Main Street, Congress is not going to pay attention. Don't forget: the first reaction that congressmen had right after Waco was to line up to have their photos taken with Janet Reno when she came to testify on Capitol Hill.
Some people might say that that is ancient history. Only five years ago, George W. Bush gave his State of the Union address a few weeks after the New York Times had exposed warrantless wiretapping of thousands of Americans. When he went up to Capitol Hill and bragged about his "terrorist surveillance program," almost all the GOP members gave him a standing ovation.
And how do we know that the people who were wiretapped were actually terrorists? The proof is in the fact that they were wiretapped.
The only way to reconcile a law like the PATRIOT Act with freedom is to assume that unjustified government intrusions into people's lives are irrelevant to freedom and that the government has not violated anyone's rights until it secretly arrests him, strips him of his constitutional rights, and tosses him into Gitmo or maybe Bagram.
The PATRIOT Act is symptomatic of a government out of control. A democratic government that respects no limits on its own power is a ticking time bomb, waiting to destroy the rights it was created to protect.
America needs a higher grade of patriotism. It is not patriotic to ignore violations of the Constitution. It is not patriotic to "look the other way" when politicians ravage rights. It is not patriotic to pretend that politicians are entitled to all the power they can grab, at least until they get impeached or indicted. It is not patriotic to give the benefit of the doubt to people trying to shackle you.
Getting rid of the PATRIOT Act is a small step towards making government less dangerous and making Washington less noxious. We might not be able to win this fight this year, but we can sure make it hot for the rascals.
http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd1105c.asp
Friday, August 12, 2011
Fox News Ignores and Pulls Post Debate Poll That Ron Paul Wins
Posted by Wake Up 1776 at 12:18 AM
The Fox News commentator tells everyone who just got done watching the Republican Presidential debate in Iowa to go on FoxNews.com and vote. So then Hannity comes on and brings his hired propagandist Frank Luntz and then interviews several candidates except Ron Paul. I don't even remember Hannity showing a video clip of Ron Paul during the entire show.
The announcement of the poll results was supposed to be done during the hour long Hannity post-debate show. The entire show was a propaganda piece saying nice things about everyone but Ron Paul.
Well, it turns out Ron Paul won the FoxNews.com poll handily. He won it by several thousand votes. Here is a screenshot and a breakdown of the poll results shortly after 12 am ET (after Hannity's show concluded).
![[]](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-hHzG8H97F9I/TkSoBpbMWoI/AAAAAAAAAPE/HJnJ34-8dd0/s1600/Poll.png)
1st Place: Paul with 7,796 votes
2nd Place: Gingrich with 4,751 votes
3rd Place: Cain with 2,425 votes
4th Place: Romney (the supposed front-runner) with 1,870 votes
5th Place: Bachmann (the other so-called front-runner) with 1,818 votes
6th Place: Santorum with 835 votes
7th Place: Huntsman with 303 votes
Last Place: Pawlenty with 250 votes
Here is a state breakdown of the poll. Ron Paul takes almost every state in the union except Utah, Wyoming, Arizona, Georgia, and Mississippi.
![[]](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-_o4Mz4f1qjk/TkSopvZoYZI/AAAAAAAAAPI/ZePVBYyzQaU/s1600/USA+Poll.png)
Shortly after Hannity's show, Fox News pulled the poll off their website:
![[]](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ujdiB_pZG7M/TkSo3uh39OI/AAAAAAAAAPM/Ahd3X8jk_n8/s1600/Fox+Poll+Missing.png)
It was somewhere in the yellow area before it was pulled down.
So what does this mean? This means that Ron Paul got over 7,000 votes in less than an hour from all 50 states from an audience that is mostly conservative that watched Fox News. It also shows that he almost doubled the 2nd place contender's votes. It also shows he won Iowa -- the main purpose for the Iowa debate and an early primary state. It shows that Fox News is scared and that Frank Luntz is a liar. It shows that Ron Paul has a real good shot at winning this election.
http://www.wakeup1776.com/2011/08/fox-news-ignored-their-own-poll-because.html
 | Mark of the beast? I'm just saying that's all.Steve | August 12, 2011 at 7:20 am | Tags: China, Electronics, Materials science, Singapore, technology, United States, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign, Video game | Categories: Crazy Politicians, Idiot Law Makers, Idiot U.S. Presidents, Idiots In General, Just Plain Nuts, Religion, The Powers That Be | URL: http://wp.me/pKuKY-8FQ |
Hmm, I wonder..
I don't know about you guy's , but this is kinda scary. Creepy stuff. Then again so is the guy above. :D
Electronic skin tattoo has medical, gaming, spy uses.
The micro-electronics technology, called an epidermal electronic system (EES), was developed by an international team of researchers from the United States, China and Singapore, and is described in the journal Science.
"It's a technology that blurs the distinction between electronics and biology," said co-author"It's a technology that blurs the distinction between electronics and biology," said co-author John Rogers, a professor in materials science and engineering at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
"Our goal was to develop an electronic technology that could integrate with the skin in a way that is mechanically and physiologically invisible to the user."
The patch could be used instead of bulky electrodes to monitor brain, heart and muscle tissue activity and when placed on the throat it allowed users to operate a voice-activated video game with better than 90 percent accuracy.
For Rest of Creepy Story, Pls go HERE!!
~Steve~ H/T May
 | WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress! |
Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.wordpress.com
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 | Ladies and Gentlemen, the Axe, Pleaselowtechgrannie | August 12, 2011 at 7:14 am | Tags: Budget, Debt Ceiling, deficit, government deficits | Categories: 2012 Election, Children, Constitution, Crazy Politicians, Economy, Idiot Law Makers, Idiot U.S. Presidents, Idiots In General, Just Plain Nuts | URL: http://wp.me/pKuKY-8FO |
Doug Parris at The Reagan Wing has posted a list of Government programs and entities for the Taxpayers' chopping block. What do you think? ~LTG
Ladies and Gentlemen, the Axe, Please.
- National Endowment for the Arts (Can't sell your art privately?)
- National Wild Horse and Burro Program (Huh?)
- Dept. of Education
- Dept of Energy
- Environmental Protection Agency
- Dept. of Transportation
- National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
- FEMA (a corrupt organization if there ever was one–leave it to charities)
- FDIC (a sham program with only a fraction of funds needed to save banks)
- Freddy Mac &
- Fannie Mae (helped cause present economic conditions)
- Administration on Aging (AoA)
- Administration for Children and Families (ACF)
- Administration on Developmental Disabilities (ADD)
- Administration for Native Americans (ANA)
- Children's Bureau (CB)
- Family and Youth Services Bureau (FYSB)
- Head Start Bureau (HSB)
- Healthy Marriage Initiative (HMI)
- Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)
- Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE)
- Office of Community Services Block Grant (OCS)
- Office of Family Assistance (OFA)
- Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)
- Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR)
- President's Committee for People with Intellectual Disabilities (PCPID)
- Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)
- Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR)
- Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS)
- Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)
- Indian Health Service (IHS)
- National Institutes of Health (NIH)
- Office for Civil Rights (OCR)
- Office of Minority Health (OMH)
- Program Support Center (PSC)
- Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Admin.(SAMHSA)
- Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONCHIT)
- Center for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives (CFBCI)
- Employees' Compensation Appeals Board (ECAB)
- Employment Standards Administration (ESA)
- The Office of Labor-Management Standards (OLMS)
- Office of Workers' Compensation Programs (OWCP)
- Wage and Hour Division (WHD)
- Employment and Training Administration (ETA)
- Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA)
- Women's Bureau (WB)
- Job Corps
- Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs
- Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs
- Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs
- Internet Access and Training Program
- Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs
- Bureau of Human Resources
- Bureau of Information Resource Management
- Bureau of Intelligence and Research
- Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs
- Bureau of International Organization Affairs
- Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation
- Bureau of Legislative Affairs
- Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs
- Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs
- Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations
- Bureau of Political-Military Affairs
- Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration
- Bureau of Public Affairs
- Bureau of Resource Management
- Bureau of South Asian Affairs
- Bureau of Verification, Compliance, and Implementation
- Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs
And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
- National Foreign Affairs Training Center (former Foreign Service Institute)
- Office of International Information Programs
- Office of the Legal Adviser
- Office of Management Policy
- Office of Protocol
- Office of the Science and Technology Adviser
- Office of War Crimes Issues
- Car Allowance Rebate System (Cash for Clunkers)
- Cash for Appliances Program
- Bureau of the Public Debt
- Community Development Financial Institution Fund (CDFI)
- FHA
- HUD
- INDEPENDENT AGENCIES Of the U.S. GOVERNMENT;
- National health and insurance system
- African Development Foundation
- Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP)
- Agency for International Development (USAID)
- American Battle Monuments Commission (ABMC)
- Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC)
- U.S. Arctic Research Commission (USARC)
- US Commission on Civil Rights (USCCR)
- Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE)
- Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS)
- Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency (CSOSA)
- Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC)
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
- Export-Import Bank of the United States (ExIm)
- Farm Credit Administration (FCA)
- Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
- Federal Maritime Commission
- Federal Mine Safety & Health Review Commission (FMSHRC)
- Federal Reserve System
- Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board
- Federal Trade Commission (FTC)
- Foreign Claims Settlement Commission of the United States (FCSC)
- General Services Administration (GSA)
- Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS)
- Inter-American Foundation (IAF)
- International Trade Commission (ITC)
- Learn and Serve America (LSA)
- National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC)
- National Credit Union Administration (NCUA)
- National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH)
- National Ice Center (NIC)
- National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)
- National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) (NRPC)
- National Science Foundation (NSF)
- National Transportation Research Center (NTRC)
- Office of Government Ethics (OGE)(LOT OF GOOD THEY DO)
- Office of Personnel Management (OPM)
- Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC)
- Selective Service System (SSS)
- Senior Corps
- Small Business Administration (SBA)
- Susquehanna River Basin Commission (SRBC)
- Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)
- United States Trade and Development Agency (TDA)
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS;
- Financial crisis inquiry commission
- Administrative Committee of the Federal Register
- American Battle Monuments Commission
- Appalachian Regional Commission
- Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board)
- Arctic Research Commission
- Arthritis and Musculoskeletal Interagency Coordinating Committee
- Barry M. Goldwater Scholarship and Excellence in Education Foundation
- Broadcasting Board of Governors
- Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board
- Chief Acquisition Officers Council
- Chief Financial Officers Council
- Chief Human Capital Officers Council
- Chief Information Officers Council
- Citizens' Stamp Advisory Committee
We're taking food out of the mouths of children to subsidize worthless, indolent and illegal bureaucracies
- Commission of Fine Arts
- Commission on International Religious Freedom
- Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (Helsinki Commission)
- Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States
- Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction
- Committee for Purchase from People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled
- Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements
- Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States
- Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
- Delaware River Basin Commission
- Denali Commission
- Endangered Species Committee
- Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board
- Federal Advisory Committees
- Federal Executive Boards
- Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council
- Federal Financing Bank
- Federal Geographic Data Committee
- Federal Interagency Committee for the Management of Noxious and Exotic Weeds (GOTTA LOVE THAT ONE!)
- Federal Interagency Committee on Education
- Federal Interagency Council on Statistical Policy
- Federal Laboratory Consortium for Technology Transfer
- Federal Library and Information Center Committee
- Harry S. Truman Scholarship Foundation
- Illinois and Michigan Canal National Heritage Corridor Commission
- Indian Arts and Crafts Board
- Interagency Alternative Dispute Resolution Working Group
- Interagency Council on Homelessness
- Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin
- J. William Fulbright Foreign Scholarship Board
- James Madison Memorial Fellowship Foundation
- Japan-United States Friendship Commission
- Joint Board for the Enrollment of Actuaries
- Joint Fire Science Program
- Marine Mammal Commission
- Migratory Bird Conservation Commission
- Millennium Challenge Corporation
- Mississippi River Commission
- Morris K. Udall Foundation: Scholarship and Excellence in National Environmental Policy
- National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare
- National Indian Gaming Commission
- National Park Foundation
- Northwest Power Planning Council
- Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board
- Presidio Trust
- Regulatory Information Service Center
- Social Security Advisory Board
- Susquehanna River Basin Commission
- Taxpayer Advocacy Panel
- United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
- Veterans Day National Committee
- Vietnam Educational Foundation
- White House Commission on Presidential Scholars – "Presidential Scholars Program"
- White House Commission on the National Moment of Remembrance
Swarms of officers sent hither to harass our people, and eat out their substance.
(No wonder we're broke.)
Now what Presidential Candidate would do that??
a non-politician.
What's at stake?
Prosperity or Poverty.
only that.
| | WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress! |
Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.wordpress.com
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
| | EPA war on coal plants threatens air conditioning — and public healthSteve | August 12, 2011 at 8:05 am | Tags: Environmental Protection Agency, Fossil fuel power station, Heat wave, Mother Nature, New York Times, Rolling blackout, United States, United States Environmental Protection Agency | Categories: Idiot Law Makers, Idiot U.S. Presidents, Idiots In General, Insanity | URL: http://wp.me/pKuKY-8FY |
Nobody touchs my A/C
This is a public safety message. Do Not, and I mean Do Not Mess with my A/C. I will not be responsible for my actions. Pretty sure the Defense would hold up Too. ~ Steve~
Does "EPA" really stand for the Environmental Projection Agency?
In a surprising, off-agenda article today, the New York Times reports that the EPA jihad against coal-fired electricity threatens the availability of air conditioning during heat waves.
The Times reports,
As 58 million people across 13 states sweated through the third day of a heat wave last month, power demand in North America's largest regional grid jurisdiction hit a record high. And yet there was no shortage, no rolling blackout and no brownout in an area that stretches from Maryland to Chicago.
But that may not be the case in the future as stricter air quality rules are put in place. Eastern utilities satisfied demand that day — July 21 — with hefty output from dozens of 1950s and 1960s coal-burning power plants that dump prodigious amounts of acid gases, soot, mercury and arsenic into the air. Because of new Environmental Protection Agency rules, and some yet to be written, many of those plants are expected to close in coming years.
While the "dump prodigious amounts of acid gases, soot, mercury and arsenic into the air" is pure exaggeration (e.g., U.S. coal fired-power plants are responsible for only about 0.5% of global mercury emissions which is 99+% less than Mother Nature emits), the article's basic point is not.
Moreover, as the real threat to public health during heat waves is the lack of air conditioning (as opposed to air quality), it is the EPA that threatens public health, not coal-fired plants. As reported by USA Today in September 2003,
The death toll in France from August's blistering heat wave has reached nearly 15,000, according to a government-commissioned report released Thursday, surpassing a prior tally by more than 3,000… The bulk of the victims — many of them elderly — died during the height of the heat wave, which brought suffocating temperatures of up to 104 degrees in a country where air conditioning is rare.
For rest of story Pls Go HERE!!!
~Steve~
| | WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress! |
Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.wordpress.com
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
