Breaking News!

Reality Hits at Least 1009 Americans!

Bush's 'Schrodinger's Email'

EPA Determines that Carbon Pollution Threatens Health

Historic Step Will Allow Agency to Address Cause of Global Warming

WASHINGTON (December 7, 2009) -- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson is expected to announce a final determination today that carbon pollution, which causes global warming, is a danger to public health and welfare. This will enable the EPA to move forward with implementing the 2007 Supreme Court ruling, which found that carbon pollution can be curbed under the Clean Air Act.

Following is a statement by David Doniger, Policy Director of the Climate Center at the Natural Resources Defense Council:

“This is a concrete sign that we need to address the rising impact of carbon pollution, which threatens our health -- and is causing glaciers to melt, sea levels to rise and more extreme weather to occur. Today’s announcement shows that the U.S. government is serious about tackling this problem and putting limits on the largest sources of carbon pollution, including vehicles and coal-fired plants. The Obama administration is prepared to use existing laws, even as it works with Congress on new ones, to move our country toward cleaner energy that will protect the health of people and of future generations."
“As world leaders gather in Copenhagen, this action is an important piece of the puzzle that will move the nation -- and the world -- toward a cleaner future.” NRDC Press Release

We could have had a year to work on this, had our last president not decided to apply whatever twisted lesson he might have learned regarding the Schrodinger's Cat theory to the quandary of whether or not to open an email containing this very information in 2008.

White House Refused to Open Pollutants E-Mail
By FELICITY BARRINGER
Published: June 25, 2008

The White House in December refused to accept the Environmental Protection Agency’s conclusion that greenhouse gases are pollutants that must be controlled, telling agency officials that an e-mail message containing the document would not be opened, senior E.P.A. officials said last week.

The document, which ended up in e-mail limbo, without official status, was the E.P.A.’s answer to a 2007 Supreme Court ruling that required it to determine whether greenhouse gases represent a danger to health or the environment, the officials said.

This week, more than six months later, the E.P.A. is set to respond to that order by releasing a watered-down version of the original proposal that offers no conclusion. Instead, the document reviews the legal and economic issues presented by declaring greenhouse gases a pollutant. Read the whole story Here.

Controversial Bush-Era EPA E-mail Released WASHINGTON, Oct. 13, 2009

Message Buried by Bush Administration Because of Its Conclusions on Global Warming Surfaces

(AP) A controversial e-mail message buried by the Bush administration because of its conclusions on global warming surfaced Tuesday, nearly two years after it was first sent to the White House and never opened.The e-mail and the 28-page document attached to it, released Tuesday by the Environmental Protection Agency, show that back in December of 2007 the agency concluded that six gases linked to global warming pose dangers to public welfare, and wanted to take steps to regulate their release from automobiles and the burning of gasoline.

Adora Andy, a spokeswoman for EPA administrator Lisa Jackson, said Tuesday that the science in 2007 was as clear as it is today. "The conclusions reached then by the EPA scientists should have been made public and should have been considered," she said. Read the whole story Here.

McCain - Palin

These videos sum it all up for me. If you are polling, data gathering or simply keeping track...

See more Hayden Panettiere videos at Funny or Die

>

$100k Reward for Info Tying Rove to Election Rigging

A non-profit organization has offered a $100,000 reward to anyone who can supply information tying Republican strategist Karl Rove and computer expert Michael Connell to illegally manipulated elections, according to a Friday press release.

The group is called Velvet Revolution and is looking for evidence of criminal activity and Connell's relationship with Rove. Citing testimony from another technology expert named Stephen Spoonamore, Velvet Revolution accuses the Republican Party of rigging elections for years by using Connell to exploit electronic voting systems.

Spoonamore filed an affidavit warning that the coming presidential election will be stolen by the GOP unless it is exposed. A colleague of Connell, Spoonamore gives evidence explaining Connell's involvement with past election rigging. "Mr. Connell is a devout Catholic," Spoonamore wrote.

"He has admitted to me that in his zeal to 'save the unborn' he may have helped others who have compromised elections. "The statement by Spoonamore also ridicules the Diebold voting system as "riddled with exploitable errors." The system was created by Diebold Election Systems Inc. and has been used in several elections accused of illegal meddling.

Connell was subpoenaed September 22 to testify under oath in a federal lawsuit in Ohio regarding election rigging and vote manipulation in past elections as well as the upcoming presidential race, according to Raw Story.

Continue Reading the Raw Story.

This won't be the first attempt to bring the treasonous Rove to justice, but it may possibly be the most organized.

"Four Iowans were arrested today while attempting to make a Citizens’ Arrest of Karl Rove in Des Moines, Iowa. Citing Iowa Code provisions for making Citizen’s Arrests as well as citing Federal Statute violations they claimed Rove had violated, the four were stopped at the gate of the Wakonda Country Club in Des Moines where Rove was scheduled to speak at a Republican Fundraiser.
The four arrested were retired Methodist minister and Peace and Justice Advocate, Rev. Chet Guinn, 80, as well as three Des Moines Catholic Workers, Edward Bloomer, 61, Kirk Brown, 25, and Mona Shaw, 57. All four were cited for trespassing and released.
The four maintained that they were acting within the guidelines of Iowa Code that obligate private citizens to make such an arrest if they believe a felony has been committed and turn Rove over to police officials to bring Rove before a judge for formal indictment. By law, a federal judge should consider the charges and determine if an indictment should be made.
window.google_render_ad();
Brown and Shaw made a similar attempt last March when Rove spoke at the University of Iowa, Iowa City. Brown and Shaw were arrested and released without charges following that attempt."

And this doesn't appear to be any surprise to Karl, considering this quote ‘I Fully Expect To Be Indicted By The End Of The Year’.

"During the lecture, Rove lashed out at hostile questioners, telling one man his comment showed “a simple, stupid mind” and chastised what he said were “stupid statements” from the audience. Rove also said that former Amb. Joseph Wilson “lied” about his 2002 trip to Niger and accused an audience member of “perpetuating libel” on the U.S. military for asking about the real number of deaths in the Iraq war"

"Responding to a question about CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson’s outing, Rove, seemingly joking, added:

'I haven’t been indicted yet, but I fully expect to be by the end of the year.'

At the end of the talk, an audience member shouted at Rove: “Can we have our $40,000 back?” Rove replied: “No, you can’t.”

Perhaps Rove needs to keep the $40,000 in expectation of substantial legal fees."

Now Is the Time to Resist Wall Street's Shock Doctrine

While the collapse of this country’s financial system continues to send shock waves around the world, we speak to the bestselling author of The Shock Doctrine. Naomi Klein says the public should be wary of the Bush administration trying to use the crisis to push through more of the radical pro-corporate policies that helped cause it in the first place." Naomi Klein with Amy Goodman - Democracy Now!

NAOMI KLEIN: "Well, the thesis of my book, what I mean by the “shock doctrine,” is that it is in times of crisis, it is in times when people are panicked, when we've seen again and again the right push through radical pro-corporate policies, what they call “free market reforms,” precisely because it is in a crisis where the space for debate rapidly closes, and you can invoke this state of emergency to say we have no choice.
And I think we’re seeing a very dramatic example of this tactic right now with this really extortionist kind of tactics playing out in Washington. You know, “Sign this blank check, or we’re all going down, or Main Street is going down, or taxpayers—you know, the sky will fall in on them.”
I’m also arguing that this is only stage one of the shock doctrine. They’re getting this—they’re lobbying for this huge bailout, obviously, but this bailout is a kind of a time bomb, because it’s all these bad debts, and they are going to explode on the next administration. I mean, we know that the Bush administration has already left the next administration with huge debt and deficit problems. They’vejust exploded those, expanded them. And what that means is that whoever the next president is is going to be inheriting this economic crisis that is being exacerbated by this bailout. "

"Yeah. I mean, there is pressure being put on Congress from Democrats who—you know, we’ve heard the proposals to cap executive pay and to have a moratorium on foreclosures. It’s coming not from all Democrats, but from some. But there’s something going on on the Republican side, where you have people like Newt Gingrich, and you also have the Republican Study Committee, which is a group of very influential Republican lawmakers who are saying that they’re opposed to the bailout, and they also have their wish list. And I think it is that it’s not that they’re going to oppose a bailout completely; it’s that they want economic changes, right-wing, pro-corporate economic changes, attached to a bailout. So, Newt Gingrich has his list. He’s got eighteen demands. But I think even more important than that is the Republican Study Committee, and I raise this because they’ve just issued their ransom list. It starts with suspending the capital gains tax, privatizing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, suspending mark-to-market accounting, which is the rule that requires companies to assess their assets at current market values."

"So, what’s so stunning about this, Amy, is that here you have a crisis that everyone seems to agree is borne of deregulation, and they’re actually calling for more deregulation. We have a situation where the debt is exploding on American taxpayers, and they want to suspend corporate profits—sorry, corporate taxes, which is actually what might defray some of those costs from regular taxpayers. So it’s an incredible display of opportunism. And this is what I mean by stage two of the shock doctrine. The first stage is just the bailout, but the second stage are all of these radical reforms that are going to be invoked in the name of the crisis that the bailout is creating, whether it’s pushed through right now or whether it’s pushed through later. "

AMY GOODMAN: "You see this happen right after 9/11 with the USA PATRIOT Act being pushed through. You saw it with the vote in October of 2002 for the invasion of Iraq. It’s speed and the idea of an imminent threat."

Please click through and read the entire common sense filled article, or listen to the interview.


I'm of the opinion that this is actually stage 2, with stage one having supposed to have been war with Iran. In the face of that failure to launch thanks to cooler heads, stage 1b was the Georgia- Russia debacle. It seems even that non-starter has been doused by more reasonable minds. Perhaps the planmakers underestimated the damage a 7 year war based on lies, thrown at the American people like propaganda against an enemy, would do to the credibility of the people needed to push through the remaining stages of the plan.

"Well, uh.. crap....uh... plan A didn't work. Er uh.. and plan 2 didn't work either... but those money people.. uh.. they're expecting.. I mean, we promised to bail them out at the end.. uh.. what should.. move ahead with stage 2.. well.. what's... OH! yeah.. hehe.. stage 1, stage 1b, yeah. Stage 2, move ahead!"

Bush Family Cleaning Up and Cleaning Us Out

Bush family cleaning up on transfer of public lands to private hands

By Wayne Madsen - Online Journal Contributing Writer - Sep 16, 2008, 00:26

(WMR) -- WMR has learned from a senior Democratic congressional source that the Bush family, most notably former President George H. W. Bush, is reaping windfall profits from the transfer of title of public federal and state lands to private hands. The elder Bush, according to our sources, has a vested financial interest in land title companies that specialize in the transfer of public lands to private interests.

The revelations represent the first evidence that the elder Bush has benefited from the transfer of public lands to private hands in a giant scheme to defraud federal and state governments, as well as the American taxpayers and Native Americans.

The land-grabbing scheme primarily involves the transfer of federal lands, including Native American lands and national forest system lands, in the Rocky Mountain West, state lands in Texas, and both federal and state lands in California, Mississippi, and Florida to private entities. The scheme is also at the center of the scandal surrounding jailed GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff who conspired to privatize federal lands and assets around the country to benefit his corporate clients.

Click on the photo for a look back in time at the Bush's perceived financial woes in March. You can find another take on it Here. Be sure to head to the bottom of the page for a fun filled playlist of videos I refer to simply as "Impeach"

Cheap Drills - Deception to Triumph?

Update: Here is the link to contact your representatives, originally to be included at the end of the posting. http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml 091208

"The American News Project has put together a great video highlighting how little drilling would do to lower gas prices, as well as the amount of money the oil industry has given to Republican candidates. It features regular Grist contributor Joe Romm, and provides some good insight into the current energy debate on the Hill:"





Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) and other Democratic leaders in the House have outlined a new energy plan that proposes allowing drilling 100 miles off the Atlantic coast and Florida's Gulf coast. The buffer zone could be reduced to 50 miles if a state's governor and legislature consent (which is a big "if"). The plan, which hasn't yet been formally released, also contains increased funding for renewable energy. They're calling it the "Comprehensive American Energy Security & Taxpayer Protection Act," and it includes a number of measures that have stalled previously -- curbing energy speculators, establishing a renewable electricity standard, and repealing subsidies to Big Oil.

Continue reading at Grist


It has become very, very clear that unless you personally and directly profit from the increased cost of gas or oil, such as stockholder, then opening up sensitive areas for drilling and decreasing the current regulations in place to keep us safe would not benefit you at all. By the time the pennies worth of savings trickle down to you (if they do) they won't be worth what it took to get them there. Our belief in this lie will keep the funding from flowing into alternative, locally produced, clean energy that will truly free us of our dependence on foreign powers. At the price oil is selling for today, the fact that our oil industries still receive the subsidies and special tax incentives they do, and the millions they spend lobbying to keep them, is disgusting as well as standing in the way of our energy independence. The oil companies couldn't have gotten where they are are today, an embedded part of our infrastructure, without that public support and neither can Alternative Energy. When you have a leg to stand on, when you are on the side of the science and the people, you don't resort to propaganda and lies. That's what big oil has done, and are still doing. The time to stop them is now.

Below find just a few of the thousands of articles and blogs, scientists and professionals from all walks screaming and waving flags in the air in an attempt to warn you and I. This is a VERY important, time sensitive issue, please schedule some time to review and consider them carefully. Further down, you will find links to contact your elected officials, and ideas about what to say to convey what you feel and what you've learned and how you would like them to represent you on the matter.

Drill here, drill now: a pipe dream
12,954 Nuclear Power Plants - That's how many nuclear plants the world would need to build to replace its current fossil-fuel-based energy.

Newt Gingrich-led 527 group behind 'drill baby drill'
The slogan “Drill here. Drill now. Pay less.” is fueling Gingrich’s American Solutions for Winning the Future, a so-called 527 group not subject to federal campaign finance law and its limits on donations. So far this election cycle, it has raised $13.1 million.

Study links oil prices to investor speculation
"We have clear evidence the fund flow pushed prices up and the fund flow pushed prices down," said Michael Masters of Masters Capital Management. (perhaps you remember Michael Masters from a previous posting of his testimony before congress on the matter ,"McCain Not Helping". here's the link to the testimony)

Exposing the Big Oil Lie
The Center for Economic and Policy Research found that the news media has mindlessly amplified that lie. The hundreds of broadcasts on “proposed drilling for oil in environmentally sensitive zones in the United States” almost completely ignored the EIA report.

Drill drill drill, then sell to Japan
Dear Secretary Bodman,
On June 3, 2008 and July 30, 2008 respectively, your Department issued and affirmed an order pursuant to Section 3 of the Natural Gas Act that will allow two major integrated oil companies – ConocoPhillips and Marathon Oil – to export 98.1 billion cubic feet of Alaskan natural gas to Japan and other Pacific Rim countries. This order, which will allow the export of as much natural gas as is used by 1.4 million American families in a year, comes at a time when the President had demanded that the moratoria on oil and gas drilling along our environmentally-sensitive coastal areas be lifted and Americans are being warned that their winter heating bills are going to be dramatically higher.

Pimping for Oil
Currently the crisis is energy, and with the Bush administration’s expenses on military security topping 500 billion dollars this year only 1 percent is being spent on energy security. The grim prospect of Thomas Fingar who is the top US Intelligence analyst predicts military strength will be the least important goal compared to the acquisition of water, food and energy.

Prices are Down, not due to drilling
There are arguments that much of the price movement is due to speculation. But the driving public also forced gasoline prices down all by themselves, and they did it in quick fashion. They did it by reducing their demand for gasoline. They simply drove less; they took public transportation; they shared car pools and yes, they inflated their tires. And where they had a choice, they chose more fuel efficient vehicles and got rid of their gas guzzlers (or used them less)

Alaska drilling will have little effect on Prices
The opening of the ANWR 1002 Area to oil and natural gas development is projected to increase domestic crude oil production starting in 2018. In the mean ANWR oil resource case, additional oil production resulting from the opening of ANWR reaches 780,000 barrels per day in 2027 and then declines to 710,000 barrels per day in 2030. (we use 21 million barrels per day currently, according to this same site)

Drill baby drill is a Lie

• It'll take 10 years at a minimum to get outer continental shelf (OCS) oil to market.
• there’s not enough deep sea drilling rigs to punch more holes in the OCS for something like 5 years.
• A RAND Corporation study says that the savings from making shale-based oil available is only 3-5% and that it’ll be 2020 at the earliest before any oil could be available. And More....

Exxonmobil Spent Nearly $16 Million to Fund Skeptic Groups, Create Confusion.
Honestly, if you want to boil it all down to business, does a corporation spend this kind of cash to fund skeptics and risk bad press and shareholder backlash (they did, actually, get pummeled by their investors) if they had science and environmental groups behind them for free?

You can re-visit my other postings by clicking on any of the pertinent tags below, or along the right side of the blog for further study before you reach out to your representatives and local media.

You will want to keep your messages brief and to the point, but clear. For recorded messages on answering systems, think along these lines:

"Hi, my name is xxx xxx, I live in Xcounty, State (or other area designation, so they know you are their constituent) and continuing the current ban on drilling is important to me. I have looked into the details and am convinced it will not result in enough of a benefit in the long or short term and considering our current level of technology, combined with the current global energy situation. Please vote to continue restrictions on drilling, and stand firm in your vote to support funding and incentives for alternative energy. Thank you, xxx."

You can use a form of this, personalized of course, in email and written correspondence. In emails, include links to the postings that made the most impressions on you. In my case, the governments own EIA website, Micheal Masters testimony to congress and the report from the union of concerned scientists regarding the money spent by Exxon to confuse us really stand out. When sending written correspondence, include a page for each bit of information you find critical and remember not to send a book that will simply be set aside. If you can make the time, try to schedule an appointment with your local representatives. Get your family involved, give them each a piece of the information and let them work out a bit to say on it. It will make a strong statement to your representative and be a fabulous community action activity for your family. The same goes for your friends, co-workers and neighbors. A well thought out, well planned, informative, respectful presentation will be well appreciated and your concerns will be heard even more loudly than in email. Dropping a line to local media advising them of your appointment and the topic of your meeting may garner you some publicity and further support.

One Week Left to Stop One of Bush's Worst Environmental Attacks

A simple redefinition of terms will destroy the Endangered Species Act in less than a week if we don't act now.

Bring up this page, or print out the following to have it available when you follow the link below to document your position on this matter when and where it counts. After that, visit http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml and tell your local representatives in Washington the same thing in email, voice mail and regular mail.

• You are against the proposed rule changes because they weaken the Endangered Species Act nearly to the point of nonexistence.
• Environmental systems mostly work by systemic causation, with many indirect causes, not by "essential causation." The change to "essential causation" opens the door to an indefinitely large number of projects that can jointly put endangered species in jeopardy.
• The change in "consultation" rules will de facto eliminate the gathering of information relevant to protecting species.

Go to http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&o=09000064806df423
To see the proposed changes, click on "Views". Click on "Add Comments" to write your comment.
Note that plain e-mails will not be considered. This is another way public input is being limited.

Write your comments before September 15, 2008.

Impeach the President?

I've thought about it a lot. It sure does seem to me there are far more and better reasons to consider it than were put forward to actually complete the deed with Clinton. Nancy Pelosi insists we need to put forward proof of a crime. Since I'm not an attorney, and in the past things I've felt sure were crimes turned out not to be (wow, is that frustrating), I began looking for other more qualified information.

As I'm sure you can imagine, everyone has an opinion on the matter. Some seemingly qualified sources, some... not so much, but compelling none the less. I've read or listened to or watched opinions ranging from dark cultish ritual based conspiracies to ... well, only slightly less dark conspiracies. I click, read, listen, watch and repeat. Possibly, in the back of my TVgen mind, I think some 'Chuck' like answer will come over me and everything will become clear.
Below is a playlist, a collection of some of the video I've viewed and considered relevant to my search somehow. A few of them may seem off key, but in some strange way it relates to my thoughts and feelings about impeaching the president.

Also, click below to review some of the articles I've reviewed. There are quite a few listed here, so don't hurt yourself. The top listings under 'impeach' are the goal, but feel free to browse the full list.

Scientists' Report Documents ExxonMobil's Tobacco-like Disinformation Campaign on Global Warming Science

Oil Company Spent Nearly $16 Million to Fund Skeptic Groups, Create Confusion

ExxonMobil Report
Full Report (PDF)
Appendix C (hi-resolution PDFs)
Part 1 (hi-resolution PDF)
Part 2 (hi-resolution PDF)
Part 3 (hi-resolution PDF)

WASHINGTON, DC, Jan. 3–A new report from the Union of Concerned Scientists offers the most comprehensive documentation to date of how ExxonMobil has adopted the tobacco industry's disinformation tactics, as well as some of the same organizations and personnel, to cloud the scientific understanding of climate change and delay action on the issue. According to the report, ExxonMobil has funneled nearly $16 million between 1998 and 2005 to a network of 43 advocacy organizations that seek to confuse the public on global warming science.
"ExxonMobil has manufactured uncertainty about the human causes of global warming just as tobacco companies denied their product caused lung cancer," said Alden Meyer, the Union of Concerned Scientists' Director of Strategy & Policy. "A modest but effective investment has allowed the oil giant to fuel doubt about global warming to delay government action just as Big Tobacco did for over 40 years."

Smoke, Mirrors & Hot Air: How ExxonMobil Uses Big Tobacco's Tactics to "Manufacture Uncertainty" on Climate Change details how the oil company, like the tobacco industry in previous decades, has :

• raised doubts about even the most indisputable scientific evidence
• funded an array of front organizations to create the appearance of a broad platform for a tight-knit group of vocal climate change contrarians who misrepresent peer-reviewed scientific findings
• attempted to portray its opposition to action as a positive quest for "sound science" rather than business self-interest
• used its access to the Bush administration to block federal policies and shape government communications on global warming

Click here to continue reading original article

U.S., Israel and Iran: A Clear View

A fellow blogger Payvand has published a very direct and to the point article, re-stating what many lesser media friendly faces have been telling us for a while.

Please check out the article

• Iran is effectively surrounded by American troops which are based in Iraq, Afghanistan, Turkey and Persian Gulf.
• Iran is being threatened almost daily by American and Israeli officials. Even nuclear attacks on Iran have been contemplated and discussed.
• U.S. and Israel have nuclear weapons. Iran doesn't.
• U.S. and Israel have invaded other countries in the region. Iran hasn't.
• Israel recently conducted a massive exercise over the Mediterranean consisting of around 100 planes. This was supposed to be a dry run in preparation of a possible attack on Iran.
• A just published expose piece by investigative journalist Seymour Hersh has revealed that the Bush Administration has stepped up its secret moves against Iran by budgeting $400M to create chaos in Iran and to destabilize the regime.
• U.S. Congressional Resolution H.CON.RES 362 ( calls on the president to stop all shipments of refined petroleum products from reaching Iran. It also "demands" that the President impose "stringent inspection requirements on all persons, vehicles, ships, planes, trains and cargo entering or departing Iran." Experts say the measures called for in the resolutions amount to an act of war.
• U.S. has held many intimidating war games in Persian Gulf and just finished another one!

The fact is it is the U.S. troops that have barged in Iran's backyard and threaten to enter the house. Now why is it so upsetting if Iran fires a few missiles to say we are ready? Should we instead expect them to kneel down and submit, because that fits our interests? Iran has repeatedly stated that they will attack back if they are attacked. However, this defensive posturing is conveniently interpreted as provocation by both U.S. and Israel while ignoring their own offensive posturing!

There is no way out of this stalemate except for dialogue and diplomacy. Iran has repeatedly signaled readiness to engage in negotiations without any preconditions. U.S. has however repeatedly shunned Iran's offers and continues to insist on "verifiable uranium enrichment freeze by Iran" as a precondition to negotiations. Many analysts and experts are pressing the Bush Administration to drop the precondition and engage in dialogue. It's time to heed the advice of these experts.

War will not benefit Americans, Israelis or Iranians. In fact many experts have sounded the alarms that an attack by U.S. or Israel on Iran will engulf the whole region in fire and have global repercussions. This warning shouldn't be taken lightly. It is time to focus the world's energies on addressing important issues such as global warming, food shortages, poverty and diseases. No more killing and destroying please!

About the author: Ali Moayedian is a concerned Iranian-American. He lives in San Francisco Bay Area.
... Payvand News - 07/10/08 ...

The Good News in Iraq (Don't Count on It)

Let's not forget the last hoodwinking:




Sunday 29 June 2008 by: Tom Engelhardt, TomDispatch.com

Tom Engelhardt writes: "This cannot end well. Not for Washington. Not for the US military. Not for Americans. And, above all, not for Iraqis."

A brief video in which Engelhardt discusses American mega-bases in Iraq can be viewed by clicking here.

On March 19, 2003, as his shock-and-awe campaign against Iraq was being launched, George W. Bush addressed the nation. "My fellow citizens," he began, "at this hour, American and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger." We were entering Iraq, he insisted, "with respect for its citizens, for their great civilization and for the religious faiths they practice. We have no ambition in Iraq, except to remove a threat and restore control of that country to its own people."
Within weeks, of course, that "great civilization" was being looted, pillaged, and shipped abroad. Saddam Hussein's Baathist dictatorship was no more and, soon enough, the Iraqi Army of 400,000 had been officially disbanded by L. Paul Bremer, the head of the occupying Coalition Provisional Authority and the President's viceroy in Baghdad. By then, ministry buildings - except for the oil and interior ministries - were just looted shells. Schools, hospitals, museums, libraries, just about everything that was national or meaningful, had been stripped bare. Meanwhile, in their new offices in Saddam's former palaces, America's neoconservative occupiers were already bringing in the administration's crony corporations - Halliburton and its subsidiary KBR, Bechtel, and others - to finish off the job of looting the country under the rubric of "reconstruction." Somehow, these "administrators" managed to "spend" $20 billion of Iraq's oil money, already in the "Development Fund for Iraq," even before the first year of occupation was over - and to no effect whatsoever. They also managed to create what Ed Harriman in the London Review of Books labeled "the least accountable and least transparent regime in the Middle East." (No small trick given the competition.)

Before the Sunni insurgency even had a chance to ramp up in 2003, they were already pouring billions of U.S. tax dollars into what would become their massive military mega-bases meant to last a millennium, and, of course, they were dreaming about opening Iraq's oil industry to the major oil multinationals and to a privatized future as an oil spigot for the West.
On May 1, 2003, six weeks after he had announced his war to the nation and the world, the President landed on the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln, an aircraft carrier returning from the Persian Gulf where its planes had just launched 16,500 missions and dropped 1.6 million pounds of ordnance on Iraq. From its flight deck, he spoke triumphantly, against the backdrop of a "Mission Accomplished" banner, assuring Americans that we had "prevailed." "Today," he said, "we have the greater power to free a nation by breaking a dangerous and aggressive regime. With new tactics and precision weapons, we can achieve military objectives without directing violence against civilians." In fact, according to Human Rights Watch, the initial shock-and-awe strikes he had ordered killed only civilians, possibly hundreds of them, without touching a single official of Saddam Hussein's "regime."

Who's Counting Now?

Since that first day of "liberation," Iraqis have never stopped dying in prodigious numbers. Now, more than five years after the U.S. "prevailed" with such "precision," a more modest version of the same success story has once again taken the beaches of the mainstream media, if not by storm, then by siege. When it comes to Iraq, the good news is unavoidable. It's in the air. Not victory exactly, but a slow-motion movement toward a "stable" Iraq, a country with which we might be moderately content.

The President's surge - those extra 30,000 ground troops sent into Iraq in the first half of 2007 - has, it is claimed, proven the negativity of all the doubters and critics unwarranted. Indeed, it is now agreed, security conditions have improved significantly and in ways "that few thought likely a year ago."

You already know the story well enough. It turns out that, as in Vietnam many decades ago, the U.S. military is counting like mad. So, for instance, according to the Pentagon, attacks on American and Iraqi troops are down 70% compared to June 2007; IED (roadside bomb) attacks have dropped almost 90% over the same period; in May, for the first time, fewer Americans died in Iraq than in Afghanistan (where the President's other war, some seven-plus years later, is going poorly indeed); and, above all else, "violence" is down. ("All major indicators of violence in Iraq have dropped by between 40 and 80 percent since February 2007, when President Bush committed an additional 30,000 troops to the war there, the Pentagon reported.")
Think of this as the equivalent of Vietnam's infamous "body count," but in reverse. In a country where the U.S. generally occupies only the land its troops are on, the normal measures of military victory long ago went out the window, so bodies have to stand in. In Vietnam, the question was: How many enemy dead could you tote up? The greater the slaughter, the closer you assumedly were to obliterating the other side (or, at least, its will). As it turned out, by what the grunts dubbed "the Mere Gook Rule" - "If it's dead and it's Vietnamese, it's VC [Vietcong] " - any body would do in a pinch when it came to the metrics of victory.

In Iraq today, the counting being most widely publicized runs in the opposite direction. Success now can be measured in less deaths; and, by all usual counts, Iraqi deaths have indeed been falling since the height of sectarian violence and ethnic cleansing in the early months of 2007. In part, this has occurred because millions of people have already been driven out of their homes and many neighborhoods, especially in the capital, "cleansed." At the same time, in Sunni areas, significant numbers of insurgents have joined the Awakening Movement. They have been paid off by the U.S. military to fight al-Qaeda in Iraq, while, assumedly, biding their time until the American presence ebbs to take on "the Persians" - that is, the Shiite (and Kurdish) government embedded in Baghdad's fortified, American-controlled Green Zone.
As a result, cratered Iraq - a land with at least 50% unemployment, still lacking decent electricity, potable water, hospitals with drugs (or even doctors, so many having fled), or courts with judges (40 of them having been assassinated and many more injured since 2003) or lawyers, many of whom joined the more than two million Iraqis who have gone into exile - is, today, modestly quieter. But don't be fooled. So many years later, Iraqis are still dying in prodigious numbers, and significant numbers of those dying are doing so at the hands of Americans.

It's not just the family, including possibly four children under the age of 12, who died last week when a U.S. jet blasted their house in Tikrit (after their father, evidently believing thieves were about, fired shots in the air with a U.S. patrol nearby); or the manager and two female employees of a bank at Baghdad International Airport ("three criminals," according to a U.S. military statement) killed when their car was shot up by soldiers from a U.S. convoy; or the unarmed civilian, a relative of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who died in an early morning American raid in the southern town of Janaja; or the men, woman, and child in a car "which failed to stop at a [U.S.] checkpoint on the outskirts of Mosul because, according to a U.S. military statement, the two men were armed and one man inside the car made 'threatening movements'"; or, according to the U.N., the estimated 1,000 dead in Baghdad's vast, heavily populated Shiite slum of Sadr City, mostly civilians, 60% women and children, in fighting in April and May in which U.S. troops and air power played a significant role.

In fact, one great difference between the "liberation" moment of 2003 and the "stabilization" moment of 2008 is simply that what began as "regime change" - missiles and bombs theoretically meant for that Saddamist deck of 55 leadership cards - then developed into a war against a Sunni insurgency, and is now functionally a war against Shiites as well. Particularly targeted of late has been the movement headed by cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, a fierce opponent of the American occupation, who is especially popular among the impoverished Shiite masses in Baghdad and southern Iraq. In Shiite areas, his party, according to a U.S. intelligence estimate, would probably win upwards of 60% of the votes in the upcoming provincial elections, if they were fairly conducted. In recent months, the U.S. military in "support" of its Iraqi allies in the Maliki government has fought fierce battles in both the southern oil city of Basra and Sadr City against Sadr's militia, with the usual sizeable numbers of civilian casualties.

In other words, despite all the talk about onrushing "stability," looked at another way, the U.S. faces an ever more complicated and spreading, if intermittent, war. With it has gone another, somewhat less publicized kind of body count. Consider, for instance, a small passage from a recent piece by New York Times correspondent Thom Shanker on inter-service rivalries in Iraq. The U.S. Army, he reports, is now ramping up its own air arm (just as it did in the Vietnam era). In the last year, it has launched Task Force ODIN, the name being an acronym for "observe, detect, identify and neutralize," but also the über-god of Norse mythology (and perhaps a reminder of the godlike attitudes those in the air can develop towards those being "neutralized" on the ground).

With its headquarters at a base near Tikrit, Saddam Hussein's old hometown, the unit consists of only "about 300 people and 25 aircraft." Shanker calls it "a Rube Goldberg collection of surveillance and communications and attack systems, a mash-up of manned and remotely piloted vehicles, commercial aircraft with high-tech infrared sensors strapped to the fuselage, along with attack helicopters and infantry."

Here's the money paragraph of his piece with its triumphalist body count:
"The work of the new aviation battalion was initially kept secret, but Army officials involved in its planning say it has been exceptionally active, using remotely piloted surveillance aircraft to call in Apache helicopter strikes with missiles and heavy machine gun fire that have killed more than 3,000 adversaries in the last year and led to the capture of almost 150 insurgent leaders."
We have no idea how that figure of more than 3,000 dead Iraqis was gathered (given that we're talking about an air unit), or what percentage of those dead were actually civilians, but certainly some among them died in the recent fighting in heavily populated Sadr City. In any case, consider that number for a moment: One modest-sized Army air unit/one year = 3,000+ dead Iraqis.

Now, consider that the Air Force in Iraq in that same year, according to Shanker, "quadrupled its number of sorties and increased its bombing tenfold." Consider that significant numbers of those sorties have been over heavily populated cities, or that, according to the Washington Post, between late March and late May, more than 200 powerful Hellfire missiles were fired into Baghdad (mainly, undoubtedly, into the Sadr City area); or that the unmanned aerial vehicles, the Predator (armed with two Hellfire missiles) and the larger, far more deadly Reaper (armed with up to 14 of those missiles), carried out, according to Shanker, 64 and 32 attacks, respectively, in Iraq and Afghanistan between the beginning of March and June.
And we're not even considering here U.S. military operations on the ground in Basra earlier in the year (special forces units were sent into the city when the Iraqi military and police seemed to be buckling), or in campaigns in Sunni or mixed areas to the north of Baghdad, or simply in ongoing everyday operations. Although individual body counts are now regularly announced for specific operations (not the case in the early years in Iraq), who knows what the overall carnage amounts to. One thing can be said however: The pacification campaign in Iraq really hasn't flagged since the Sunni insurgency gained strength in late 2003. Reformulated by General David Petraeus in 2007, it's just the sort of effort that occupying Great Powers have long been known to apply to rebellious possessions.

Iraq as a Surge-athon

To fully assess just what lurks beneath the "good news" from Iraq, including those 3,000 "adversaries" that Task Force ODIN "neutralized," we would have to do a different kind of counting of which we're incapable, not because no one's doing it, but because we have minimal access to the numbers. Let me try, however, to outline briefly some of what can be known - and then you can judge the good news for yourself.

American troop strength in Iraq now stands at about 146,000. That's perhaps 16,000 more than in January 2007 just before the surge began. It's also about 16,000 more than in April 2003 when Baghdad was taken. According to Lolita Baldor of the Associated Press, the latest Pentagon plans are to order about 30,000 U.S. troops into Iraq in 2009, which would keep troop levels at or above that 140,000 mark.

In addition, a vast force of private contractors, armed and unarmed, is in the country. There is no way to know how many of these hired hands and hired guns are actually there, but it's a reasonable guess that they add up to more - possibly substantially more - than the troops on hand.

Since February 2007 in the U.S., only one "surge" has been discussed, almost nonstop - those 30,000 ground troops the President ordered largely into the Baghdad area. A surprising number of other surges have, however, been underway, even if barely noted in the U.S. These add up to a remarkable Bush administration urge to surge that puts American policy in Iraq in quite a different light.

Among these surges, for instance, has been a political surge of U.S. "advisors" and "mentors" to the Iraqi government, police, and military. In another of his superb reports for the New York Review of Books, "Embedded in Iraq," Michael Massing says that the main elements of this "little known political surge were spelled out in a classified 'Joint Campaign Plan' completed in May 2007." It represented, he writes, a "sharp expansion."

"Specialists from Treasury and Justice, Commerce and Agriculture were assigned to government ministries to help draw up budgets and weed out sectarian elements. The Agency for International Development and the Army Corps of Engineers set up projects to boost nutrition and reinforce dams. Provincial Reconstruction Teams were stationed in Baghdad and elsewhere to help repair infrastructure, improve water and electrical systems, and stimulate the economy."

We know as well that American advisers are now deeply involved with local government bodies in contested areas; that American advisers, evidently hired from private contractors, are embedded in the key interior, defense, and oil ministries; that advisers, also hired from private contractors, are helping the Iraqi police and that a new multiyear contract with DynCorp International, which already has 700 civilian police advisers in the country, will raise that number above 800. Their mission: "to advise, train and mentor the Iraqi Police Service, Ministry of Interior, and Department of Border Enforcement."

In this period, even academics have surged into Iraq as the military has embedded anthropologists, political scientists, and sociologists from the "Human Terrain System" in military units to advise on local customs and "cultural understanding." One of them, a political scientist completing her Ph.D. at Johns Hopkins University, was recently killed in a bombing in Sadr City.

We know that more than 20,000 Iraqis are now in two U.S. prisons, Camp Bucca in the south of the country and state-of-the-art Camp Cropper on the outskirts of Baghdad. Both of these have been continually upgraded. In this period, though, it seems that a surge in prison building (and assumedly prisoners) has also been underway. The Washington Post's Walter Pincus reports that a new "Theater Internment Facility Reconciliation Center" - i.e. prison - is being built near Camp Taji, 12 miles north of Baghdad. A "new contract calls for providing food for 'up to 5,000 detainees' [there] and will also cover 150 Iraqi nationals, who apparently will work at the facility." Another "reconciliation center" is to be opened at Ramadi in al-Anbar Province.
All of this is, again, being done through private contractors, including a contract for some company to "guard" the "property" of up to 60,000 Iraqi detainees. ("The contracted personnel will be responsible for the accountability, inventory, and storage of all property.") This, reports Sharon Weinberger of Wired's Danger Room blog, is evidently in anticipation of a "surge of approximately 15,000 detainees in the upcoming six months."

In addition, the Iraqi military, with its embedded American advisors, remains almost totally dependent on the U.S. military. According to a recent Government Accountability Office report, based on "a classified study of Iraqi Army battalions," just 10% of them "are capable of operating independently in counterinsurgency operations and... even then they rely on American support." For logistics, planning, supplies - almost everything that makes a military function - the Iraqi military relies on the U.S. military and would be helpless without it.

More than five years after Baghdad fell, there still is no real Iraqi air force. The Iraqi military now depends ever more on the quick and constant application of American air power - and U.S. air power in the region has surged in the last year and a half. The use of drones like the Predator and Reaper, whose pilots are stationed at Nellis Air Force Base outside Las Vegas and other distant spots, has also surged, doubling since the beginning of 2007. Meanwhile, new machines, including a "platoon" of 30 of the Army's experimental Micro Air Vehicles, which can hover "in one place [and] stare down with 'electro-optical and infrared cameras,'" are being rushed into action in Iraq, which is increasingly a laboratory for the testing of the latest U.S. weaponry.
In addition, for unknown billions of dollars, the upgrading of American bases in that country, especially the mega-bases, continues, while possibly the largest embassy on the planet, a vast citadel inside Baghdad's fortified Green Zone meant to house 1,000 "diplomats" (and large numbers of guards and support staff of every sort), is nearly finished.

Finally, among the various surges of these last 18 months, there has been a surge in Bush administration demands for an American future in Iraq. In ongoing negotiations for a Status of Forces Agreement, U.S. negotiators have demanded access to nearly 60 bases, control of Iraqi air space to 29,000 feet, the right to arrest Iraqis without explanation or permission, the right to bring troops into and out of the country without permission or notification, the right to launch military operations on the same basis, and immunity from prosecution in Iraqi courts for troops and private contractors.

In other words, wherever you might have looked over the last year or more, a surge-athon was under way. It was meant to solidify the American position in Iraq for the long term as an occupying power. Not withdrawing or drawing down, but ramping up has been the order of the day, no matter what was being debated, discussed, or written about in the United States.
That ramping up makes some sense of the "good news" and "stability" of this moment. Among other things, it's hardly surprising that weakly armed guerrilla forces (whether Shiite or Sunni), when faced with such a display of power have no desire to take it on frontally.
Given the situation of Iraq more than five years after the invasion, to speak of this urge to surge and its results as "success" or as "good news" is essentially obscene. Think of Iraq instead as a cocked gun. It's loaded, it's held to your head, and things are improving only to the extent that, recently, it hasn't gone off.

Iraq itself is wreckage beyond anything that could have been imagined back in March 2003; liberation is, by now, a black joke; the Bush administration's "benchmarks" for Iraqi success remain largely unmet, and still we keep "liberating" that land, still we keep killing Iraqis in prodigious numbers. A Vietnam-style body count, once banished by an administration that wanted no reminders of the last disastrous American counterinsurgency war, is now back with a vengeance, even if violence is down. These days, in its statements, the U.S. military is counting scalps almost everywhere there's fighting in Iraq.

A Great Lie of History

"We have no ambition in Iraq, except to remove a threat and restore control of that country to its own people." This was one of the great lies of history. And all the while, the price of oil - the one product Iraq has and, in present conditions, can't get at adequately - continues to soar. There is no "good news" in any of this, unless you happen to be an undertaker, nor is there any end to it in sight.

Of the political surge in Iraq - all those advisers and Provincial Reconstruction Teams pouring into the country - Michael Massing has written bluntly: "[I]t has been an utter failure. 'Dysfunctional' is how one visiting adviser described it, citing bitter inter-agency battles, micromanagement from Washington, and an acute mismatch between the skills of the advisers and the needs of the Iraqi government."

The same could be said - and someday undoubtedly will be - of the rest of the U.S. effort, including the much lauded recent counterinsurgency part of it.
So let me offer this bit of advice. When you read the news, skip the "good" part. The figures demonstrating "improvement" may (or may not) be perfectly real, but they also represent an effort to dominate (as well as divide and conquer) in an essentially colonial fashion; worse yet, it's an effort barely held together by baling wire and reliant on the destruction of ever more Iraqi neighborhoods.

If you want a prediction, here it is and it couldn't be simpler: This cannot end well. Not for Washington. Not for the U.S. military. Not for Americans. And, above all, not for Iraqis.
--------


Tom Engelhardt, co-founder of the American Empire Project, runs the Nation Institute's TomDispatch.com. The World According to TomDispatch: America in the New Age of Empire (Verso, 2008), a collection of some of the best pieces from his site, has just been published. Focusing on what the mainstream media hasn't covered, it is an alternative history of the mad Bush years.
[Note for readers: This piece could profitably be read in conjunction with Juan Cole's recent post, "The Real State of Iraq," for a full and thoroughly devastating picture of what American policy has meant in that country.]

Bush Administration Still Dangerous

Hooking Your Toilet to the Kitchen Tap
-Sierra Club

"Atlanta, GA -- In most states, it's illegal to connect your toilet so that it drains through your tap. But on a larger scale, the Bush EPA is prepared to declare that this is, in effect, allowed under the Clean Water Act. At least that's what the agency told a conference of water managers here will be permitted by a new agency rule.

According to a new agency rule, anyone -- an industry, water agency, municipality -- can take dirty water from any body of water, use it (as long as they don't make it dirtier), and then dump it into a clean body of water -- without applying for a Clean Water Act permit. The industry or agency dumping the water can take as much dirty water as it wants, move it as far as it wants, and dump it wherever it wants -- regardless of the impact on the body of water."


Previously I've blogged about the blatant disregard for our environment demonstrated by our Environmental Protection Agency; EPA Missing in Action, and similar in-actions by other Bush Administration agencies; Crossing a Line and Villainous Nominee . Now we can add that the Department of Defense, under criticism during the Bush Administration for contracting out vital military tasks putting into question the nation's security, has Contracted Out Contractor Oversight. The 'Fly in your Face' attitude doesn't stop there, Bush's FCC is now being asked to probe the Bush administration's Propaganda Program! A bit like having inmates of cell block C check cell block D for paraphernalia. Let's not forget the USDA, that decided to shut down a congressional audit and advise it's employee's not to cooperate.

It seems to me there are an awful lot of 'Long Term Plans' being laid last minute by the bought and corrupted officials placed in our agencies by this administration, especially considering his 'New Rule' of 'No New Rules' from agencies after June 1st.

"While the White House called the deadlines "simply good government," some legal specialists said the policy would ensure that rules the administration wanted to be part of Mr. Bush's legacy would be less subject to being overturned by his successor. Moreover, they said, the deadlines could allow the administration to avoid thorny proposals that are likely to come up in the next few months, including environmental and safety rules that have been in the regulatory pipeline for years. "

The Administrations reach has even made it to NASA, where it's interference will not only effect Americans, but the world, and their view of us.

Considering the mounting effort to both impeach and indict Bush and Cheney;

Bush Faces Domestic Lawsuit for Illegal War

Veterans for Peace Call for Impeachment

Congressional Candidate Calls for Impeachment

Nader Calls for Immediate Impeachment

56 in Congress say Investigate Bush

Kucinich Introduces Impeachment Articles against Bush

you'd think someone would have put a stop to the actions being taken, permanent actions, detrimental actions that if implemented for even a short time will have long lasting devastating effects. In light of these slap in your face words and deeds;

Bush Misused Iraq Intelligence

Bush Wants Immunity for Mercenaries in Iraq

And the Topper: Bush Pardons Self from War Crimes

Extraordinary steps must be taken to stop the last minute actions planned by this criminal administration. A precedent needs to be set for not only the top guy, but all the little trickle down guys and gals as well. Education, communication and technology have opened up the world, we need to pay attention to the faces we present and take responsibility for our voting actions.

Passing Christianity This Way is Disrespectful

Says Abu Abdullah, a shop owner and resident of Fallujah of a coin handed out by a US Marine at a checkpoint into the city.

"At the western entrance to the Iraqi city of Fallujah Tuesday, Muamar Anad handed his residence badge to the U.S. Marines guarding the city. They checked to be sure that he was a city resident, and when they were done, Anad said, a Marine slipped a coin out of his pocket and put it in his hand.

Out of fear, he accepted it, Anad said. When he was inside the city, the college student said, he looked at one side of the coin. "Where will you spend eternity?" it asked.

He flipped it over, and on the other side it read, "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. John 3:16."

In interviews, residents of Fallujah repeated two words - "humiliation" and "weakness".
"Because we are weak this is happening," said Abu.

Do you remember being in history class and wondering 'why do I have to learn things we have already done!?' and the answer would come as 'So we don't repeat the mistakes of the past'? The stories of people's using this technique is littered through history. And while these Muslims may not be facing torture and death if they do not comply, the results will be the same. The scenery hasn't even changed that much, the Inquisition into Jerusalem comes to mind. However we do now have the education of history, a globe trotting population and a world wide web of information. One would think the folly of this tactic would be apparent. Torturing for information does not work, and neither does forcing a religion on a frightened, beleaguered people trying to rebuild their society.

Unfortunately, I have read and commented on one of our Presidential candidates enough to believe this is probably an activity that has backing within our government, no matter how they try to hide that fact. I blogged most poignantly on Mccain Disputed on 1999 Meeting, an article that details John Mccain's efforts on behalf of broadcaster Lowell "Bud" Paxson. Mr. Mccain pushed the line of ethics to influence the FCC on Paxson's behalf in a deal to purchase several local stations. The story is very interesting and concerning on several levels, however the story behind the story is a Hum Dinger. Mr. Paxson created the Christian based Pax TV. Despite it's annoyance at Mr. Mccain for his interference, the FCC did approve Mr. Paxson's request, with a stipulation:

"Five days after McCain's second letter, the FCC voted 3 to 2 to approve the deal. The commission also imposed a condition prohibiting Cornerstone from "proselytizing." Cornerstone would not agree to those terms, and the deal collapsed. "

Just to brush up:
proselytize \PROS-uh-luh-tyz\, intransitive verb:
1. To induce someone to convert to one's religious faith.
2. To induce someone to join one's institution, cause, or political party.

transitive verb: 1. To convert to some religion, system, opinion, or the like.

Proselytize is formed from proselyte, "a new convert, especially a convert to some religion or religious sect, or to some particular opinion, system, or party," from Greek proselutos, "a proselyte, a newcomer," from pros, "toward" + elutos, from eluthon, "I came."

Do you go that far, risking not only legal, but political career consequences, for a cause and plan of action you don't agree with? I fear a vote for Mr. Mccain will not only be a continuation of the current administration with a new bobblefigurehead, but simultaneously throw us backwards in time resurrecting time dishonored tactics and strategies as well as hurdle us into an equally well documented historical repeat of the past as a sad and avoidable future.

"Now we have this missionary way by these coins," he said. "We feel the Muslims are weak and we hope that we will reach a point when we are strong to let them know what is wrong and what is right. " Mohammed Jaber

The Crusaders Capture Jerusalem 1099

A much longer lasting and successful method was the Roman's, that allowed to a certain extent the people's they conquered to maintain their religions.

Here is why 'Middle of the Road' doesn't work either: "The people conquered by the Muslims usually faced a choice. They could denounce their religion and convert to Islam, pay a tax to continue practicing their beliefs, become a slave, or be executed. Most chose to convert. But many people paid the tax.
In time, the tax proved such a lucrative source of revenue that many Muslim rulers actually discouraged conversions. Those who paid the religious tax were called dhimmis. To Muslims, dhimmis were considered inferior and were treated as inferiors."

Meet Gus Puryear: Bush's Latest Villainous Nominee for a Lifetime Judgeship

Meet Gus Puryear: Bush's Latest Villainous Nominee for a Lifetime Judgeship Rights and Liberties AlterNet: "Editor's Note: In 2004, Estelle Richardson's lifeless and battered body was found on the floor of a Corrections Corporation of America prison cell. Four years later, that unsolved homicide has come back to haunt Republican stalwart 'Gus' Puryear, the nation's top private prison litigator and Bush nominee for U.S. District Court. This is Part I of an AlterNet exclusive, two-part investigative feature by Silja J.A. Talvi."

This bears repeating...

And so it was: http://www.democracynow.org/2008/5/20/meet_gus_puryear_bushs_latest_villainous
05/20/08

Mortgage Fraud on the Table But..

Resolving the mortgage fiasco is going impossibly long, and while words like 'fraud' and 'scam' have been floating since the beginning, they are really only now making big news. Unfortunately they still haven't much referenced the collusion between the lenders and appraisers, and in taking it a step further, the local assessor officials. I began blogging at the beginning of this mess, Not Rocket Science and Confessions of a Mortgage Broker, trying to illuminate the 'Big Picture' in my view regarding the chain of events and participants. Appraisers and local property assessors played a bigger role in my situation than has been discussed in any meaningful way, and as events unfold it becomes more and more clear that my situation mirrors the national situation pretty closely. That having been said, I do not suffer from a 'impending doom' adjustable mortgage, and I did manage to buy my properties before the effects of what was happening hit the actual prices.

I will blog more about my own story another day, for now I just want to re-state the chain of events as I see them:

• Interest rates drop to insulate us from the global economic decline of late '80's early '90's.
• Home mortgage rates decline a sufficient amount (8% to 6%) to spur massive refinance loans.
• Increase in refinance opportunities spawns massive increase in new lending company openings.
• Increase in new loans spawns massive increase in new appraisal company openings.
• Rate decrease lowers monthly payments on small 1st time buyer type homes enough to entice marginal buyers.
• Greed Kicks In.
• Inexperienced or questionable lenders target sub-prime market, develop/enhance 'no document' type loans.
• Above spurs 'Sellers Market' in home sales, agents take cue and raise sales prices.
• Lenders 'acquire' friendly appraisers to bump values and justify newly raised prices.
• Lenders/Underwriters accept new valuation methods from appraisers.
• Local assessors looking to boost revenue make record number of rate increases over 10 year period keeping up with market values.
• Lull in action spurs intense ads targeting sub-prime market with adjustable rates.
• Refi's and new purchases slow, huge pool of lenders look to create business, increase 'no document' type loans, rates stay low, prices continue to rise without value.
• After the first few rounds of adjustables become due, large numbers head into default causing loan qualifications to tighten. Borrowers look to refi as instructed but find qualifying tougher, and lower home values no longer match loan amounts.
• Massive defaults of sub-prime adjustable rate loans.
• Lower values make even fixed rate loans virtually un-refinanceable.
• Lenders (also the President and Mr. Mccain) blame irresponsible borrowers.

The rest, as they say, is history. A huge number of other things contributed to our situation, had all of these things happened at any other time it may not have ended with the same result. We need to clearly identify the failings in the system and make adjustments. This is a very good example of how a 'Free Market' approach with no real oversight or regulation doesn't come close to being a good idea. Free market for razor blades and cabinet doors, sure, but lets get together on things that effect our country as a whole like lending, health, transportation, energy and lets not forget military.

How Fraud Fueled the Mortgage Crisis:

"Brokers pushed borrowers to lie, lenders misled and ratings agencies looked the other way.
The debate over what caused the mortgage mess and how best to fix it is now taking a sharp turn, as new problems surrounding liar's loans and payment-option mortgages reveal the pervasive fraud, lying and deceit that permeated the market at its height.
As loans made to borrowers with decent credit begin to fail at a surprisingly rapid rate, it's becoming clear that widespread fraud helped support the entire mortgage system - from borrowers who lied on their loans, to brokers who encouraged it, to lenders who misled some low income borrowers, to the many lenders, investors and ratings agencies that conveniently and deliberately looked the other way as profits rolled in."

"Despite its widespread role, fraud hasn't yet been at the forefront of proposed rescue plans, which center on refinancing people out of loans now resetting to higher rates. That may begin to change as the mortgage market continues a meltdown that seems to have no end. As fraud becomes a focus, the question of who did most of the lying and cheating will be crucial in deciding who deserves help in any housing rescue plan. "

"Others familiar with the mortgage industry contend that pervasive fraud was, indeed, a problem - on the lender's side. At the peak of the housing boom, they say, the nation's mortgage system was set up to promote and encourage outright fraud in order to close a loan - and everyone, from brokers to loan officers to Wall Street, looked the other way. Borrowers also were put into products like payment-option arms that were unsuitable - and lenders knew it. "They were pushed like Vioxx, with very little regard for their dangers," said Kathleen Keest, senior policy counsel with the Center for Responsible Lending, a research group that investigates predatory lending. "

"Patrick Madigan, an Iowa assistant attorney general who has investigated mortgage fraud, said it makes no sense to conclude that lenders are somehow victims. Madigan's office engineered a settlement two years ago with Ameriquest over its subprime practices, including high-pressure "boiler room" sales tactics. Regardless, Madigan said, there is a movement to "blame the borrower."
"There's a perception out there that there's this hapless lender who got duped by middle class and lower income subprime borrowers," Madigan said. "It's ridiculous. Our investigations have shown that most of the fraud happens at the suggestion and direction of the loan originator, who had significant financial incentives to close the loan, no matter what misconduct was required."

"Even if fraud has become a larger part of the mortgage meltdown picture than first realized, it's not simple to figure out who should take most of the blame. Many people point the finger at investors playing the market or homeowners who bought more expensive houses than they could afford - the "irresponsible" borrowers cited by both President George W. Bush and probable Republican nominee Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). "
"But the numbers don't exactly tell that story - which proves that much in this crisis taken as fact is poorly understood. That also makes a difference, when it comes to deciding whether it makes sense to bail out the market. At the request of The Washington Independent, the trade industry publication Inside Mortgage Finance in Bethesda, Md., ran some numbers and analyzed the resulting data.
Did most people simply buy big homes they couldn't afford? In 2007, 62 percent of all securitized Alt-A loans involved refinances, and 38 percent were for home purchases. In the subprime market, 64 percent were refinances and 36 percent, home purchases. The percentages were the same in 2006. Those borrowers may have been tapping equity for reasons as varied as fancy vacations to overdue medical bills, but the majority were not buying new homes.
Were they just trying to make a quick buck? Regarding investors versus homeowners, in 2007, about 5 percent of all securitized subprime loans and 14 percent of Alt-A loans were reported as investor loans. That compares to 5 percent of subprime loans and 13 percent of Alt-A loans in 2006. These numbers don't include second homes, so the percentages are probably higher, but not significantly so.
Then there's the question of who really lied on the liar's loans. Madigan, the Iowa assistant attorney general, cites repeated cases where borrowers were encouraged by brokers to suddenly create businesses in their basements, like day care centers, to boost their incomes. If they questioned it, brokers would say that lenders required it, or not to worry. Still, borrowers signed on the bottom line, some knowing the information was false. Consider this borrower's account in the San Francisco Chronicle of a sales conversation with a broker:

" He didn't say anything illegal out loud," she said. "He didn't say 'lie,' he just made a strong suggestion. He said, 'If you made $60,000, we could get you into the lowest interest level of this loan; did you make that much?' I said, 'Um, yes, about that much.' He went clickety clack on his computer and said, 'Are you sure you don't remember any more income, like alimony or consultancies, because if you made $80,000, we could get you into a better loan with a lower interest rate and no prepayment penalty.' It was such a big differential that I felt like I had to lie, I'm lying already so what the heck. I said, 'Come to think of it, you're right, I did have another job that I forgot about.'"

" Countrywide, for example, had a loan program called "Fast and Easy" that required no pay stubs, tax forms or employment verification. The FBI investigation is finding extensive fraud on loans across the board at Countrywide that didn't require full documentation, The Wall Street Journal reported. "

Government Authority Is Crossing a Line

"Last week, Eloisa Tamez, 73, lost the latest round in her ongoing fight with the U.S. government. A judge ordered her to let Washington survey her land near Brownsville, Texas. It lies in the path of a proposed border fence. Now Tamez, heir to an original Spanish land grant dating to the 1700s, fears that her property will be seized and with good reason.
Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff recently waived more than 30 laws in order to expedite construction of the border fence. He did so with little regard for the concerns of residents, local officials and environmentalists.

And though the proposed path would cut through the properties of many citizens, it would bypass land owned by the wealthy and politically connected. The Texas Observer reported that the fence would detour around the River Bend Resort and golf course, as well as developments owned by the Hunt family, whose members are major supporters of President Bush. The fence would also cause irreparable damage to wildlife; two Texas nature preserves would wind up in Mexico. They'd likely have to close."

I simply do not know what to say about this. Like a cartoon, an image of Cheney appears within a bubble repeating over and over "So?"