wikileaks – 10, American would-be murderers – 1

As of this evening (December 4th 2010)I could still get wikileaks here:

It seems there is a meme out there that wikileaks founder Julian Assange should be hunted down and killed. This noise is being spouted by US right-wing hate groups, as well as some semi-mainstream press figures (although the difference between those two groups is getting paper thin), and they seem to forget that freedom of speech is, like, in the Constitution. I won’t link to any of the pundits that are out there brazenly advocating murder, except to make the very obvious comment that they are very evil, and if anything should happen to Julian, they would obviously bear a great deal of the responsibility and should therefore also bear some punishment if Julian were to be harmed. Of course I am only advocating legal punishment, not extra-judicial killing or anything like that. That would be wrong.

But before anyone goes out and kills Julian they should take note of how very popular he is. Look at the comments from the BBC sound-off board. Pro-wikileaks comments are running about 10 to 1. And I feel quit certain that of the 10% of the population that doesn’t like what wikileaks has done, the majority would not favor his extra-judicial killing.

So, think before you sic your goons on Julian.

Don’t believe me? Just check below…

Continue reading “wikileaks – 10, American would-be murderers – 1”

wikileaks – 10, American would-be murderers – 1

It’s War, or it should be

Wikileaks has been the victim of several attempts by those who don’t like it to kill it.  First, there was Bank Julius Baer who tried to suppress it, but lost.  Then there was the raid by the German Police.  Then there were the allegations of rape by Julian Assange, soon proven to be false. We have the high point of the war against wikileaks: Marc Thiessen’s suggestion in the Op-Ed page of the Washington Post that Julian should be killed.  Then there was the smear campaign to imply that wikileaks was funded by the Chinese government.  Now, the U.S. Government has put wikileaks on a list that makes it difficult to make donations to them. There funding may be blocked, but not for long.  And when it is unblocked, there will be even more funding than there was before the blocking.

It is clear that the Golden Rule is operative: he who has the gold makes the rules.  Democracy doesn’t exist, the Free Market does not exist.   If you think wikileaks is doing a good job and want to support them: too bad, because they will destroy your freedom to vote with your dollars and give them money.  Never mind that you have no choice at the polls because because any candidate that stands for real change is shut out of any public forum and arrested.

Well, guess what.  We’re not gonna take take.  I will and have given money to wikileaks again and again and again. If I have to fly to Sweden with my donation in my carry-on luggage, that will be how wikileaks will get their donation from me.  The U.S. government cannot and will not stop me.

The cowards who are hiding behind these repressive and anti-democratic actions need to be exposed as the hypocrites that they are.

Insurance has a purpose, and a time.  I hope that time is soon. But, when wikileaks publishes its next round of leaks, we should remember all those who suffer everyday because of an unjust war, and hope that this release will bring end of the war closer, and the chances of the start of another war that much more remote. The mandatory focus in the mainstream media just after the last leak–the possible use of the data to orchestrate retaliations–is very odd when one considers there was nothing hypothetical about the war crimes documented in the first leak. Thousands of people were killed who shouldn’t have been. Maybe there should be more questions on the perpetrators, rather than those who have exposed the wrong-doing.

Continue reading “It’s War, or it should be”

It’s War, or it should be

Stock Markets Fall sharply on . . . Bankster’s Manipulation of the News

The media is in the hands of the Banksters, obviously. There’s a financial crises, car plants are closing right and left, employment is way down, home prices are at a nadir, and what causes a downturn in the stock market, according to Wall Street Journal and Reuters..?

Obama. Right.  How can they getting away with this completely unproven assertion?  Simple: Americans are sheep.

Shares fall on Obama bank plans

Stock markets have fallen sharply in response to far-reaching plans by Barack Obama to curb the activities of the biggest US banks.

The Dow Jones closed down 2%, its worst fall since October, while Japan’s Nikkei was down early on Friday.

Shares in major US banks Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan and Bank of America all fell.

Mr Obama – who said he was “ready for a fight” with banks – plans to limit the size of banks and impose restrictions on risky trading.

“Never again will the American taxpayer be held hostage by banks that are too big to fail,” Mr Obama said.

Of course when it is the auto industry that is hurting it is ascribed to the “current business environment” as if that business environment had just materialized right out of thin air, and the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Banking Act of 1933 by the business elites in 1999 had nothing whatsoever to do with the current business environment, right?

GM confirms Opel factory closure in Antwerp

General Motors (GM) has confirmed it will close a Belgian plant at its European arm Opel, cutting 2,300 jobs.

The CSC metalworkers’ union said the carmaker had told staff it would shut down its factory in Antwerp.

“It is the tough reality of the current business environment,” Opel president Nick Reilly said.

So, let’s get this straight: if an autoworker is out of a job, it is a tough business environment.*   If, though, a Bankster has his bonus threatened, he should destroy the economy. After all that is what the economy is for: generating bonuses for banksters.  Too bad if you thought the economy should provide jobs for autoworkers or universal healthcare. You see those things are evil.

* And that is probably the autoworker’s fault anyway, as he had the chutzpah to join a union.  It is an unwritten rule of journalism to always mention the word ‘union’ in the first 30 words of a story about an auto plant closing.  It is forbidden, of course, to use phrases like ‘poor management,’ ‘bad design,’ ‘poor fuel economy,’  anywhere at all in a story of a plant closing, as that might lead someone to the erroneous (and forbidden) conclusion that those failings could ever lead to a plant closing.

Stock Markets Fall sharply on . . . Bankster’s Manipulation of the News

The difference between Europe and America

The difference between Europe and America:

Rich Germans Demand Higher Taxes

A group of rich Germans has launched a petition calling for the government to make wealthy people pay higher taxes.

The group say they have more money than they need, and the extra revenue could fund economic and social programmes to aid Germany’s economic recovery.

Germany could raise 100bn euros (£91bn) if the richest people paid a 5% wealth tax for two years, they say.

The petition has 44 signatories so far, and will be presented to newly re-elected Chancellor Angela Merkel.

The group say the financial crisis is leading to an increase in unemployment, poverty and social inequality.

Simply donating money to deal with the problems is not enough, they want a change in the whole approach.

“The path out of the crisis must be paved with massive investment in ecology, education and social justice,” they say in the petition.

Those who had “made a fortune through inheritance, hard work, hard-working, successful entrepreneurship, or investment” should contribute by paying more to alleviate the crisis.

The man behind the petition, Dieter Lehmkuhl, told Berlin’s Tagesspiegel that there were 2.2 million people in Germany with a fortune of more than 500,000 euros.

The difference between Europe and America

Max Keiser on the Fringe People

Just after the last post (one minute or so ago) I stumbled upon this article by the ever-prescient Max Keiser, talking about the fringe people:

Has the ‘Republican base’ become the fringe?

Max Keiser, Intrade
Submitted: 10 12 2008

The ‘Republican base’ was very excited by the selection of bona-fide evangelical Sarah Palin. The McCain market has plunged, however, as the US voting population got a glimpse of that Republican base.

Rove’s creation has turned into a mob baying for blood and even John McCain seems downright alarmed and frightened by Palin’s supporters.

The Times reports:

WITH his electoral prospects fading by the day, Senator John McCain has fallen out with his vice-presidential running mate about the direction of his White House campaign.

McCain has become alarmed about the fury unleashed by Sarah Palin, the moose-hunting “pitbull in lipstick”, against Senator Barack Obama. Cries of “terrorist” and “kill him” have accompanied the tirades by the governor of Alaska against the Democratic nominee at Republican rallies.
The scenes from the Palin rallies remind me of that film, To Die For, in which a hot newscaster babe (played by Nicole Kidman) winks her way into the hearts of a group of young, impressionable teenagers who promptly do away with anyone standing in the way of her ambition. ‘All she wanted was a little attention’.

After hearing so much about Palin’s visciousness, it calls to mind this excellent and courteous debate.

Max Keiser on the Fringe People

In order to maintain it…

“Strictly speaking, economic liberalism is the organizing principle of a society in which industry is based on the institution of the self-regulating market…For as long as such a system is not established economic liberals will call for the intervention of the state in order to establish it, and once established, in order to maintain it.”

–Karl Polanyi, The Great Transformation

And here is the greatest intervention ever proposed in order to maintain this self-regulating market.  (It is also the largest and most brazen criminal act in history.)



Section 1. Short Title.

This Act may be cited as ____________________.

Sec. 2. Purchases of Mortgage-Related Assets.

(a) Authority to Purchase.–The Secretary is authorized to purchase, and to make and fund commitments to purchase, on such terms and conditions as determined by the Secretary, mortgage-related assets from any financial institution having its headquarters in the United States.

(b) Necessary Actions.–The Secretary is authorized to take such actions as the Secretary deems necessary to carry out the authorities in this Act, including, without limitation:

(1) appointing such employees as may be required to carry out the authorities in this Act and defining their duties;

(2) entering into contracts, including contracts for services authorized by section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, without regard to any other provision of law regarding public contracts;

(3) designating financial institutions as financial agents of the Government, and they shall perform all such reasonable duties related to this Act as financial agents of the Government as may be required of them;

(4) establishing vehicles that are authorized, subject to supervision by the Secretary, to purchase mortgage-related assets and issue obligations; and

(5) issuing such regulations and other guidance as may be necessary or appropriate to define terms or carry out the authorities of this Act.

Sec. 3. Considerations.

In exercising the authorities granted in this Act, the Secretary shall take into consideration means for–

(1) providing stability or preventing disruption to the financial markets or banking system; and

(2) protecting the taxpayer.

Sec. 4. Reports to Congress.

Within three months of the first exercise of the authority granted in section 2(a), and semiannually thereafter, the Secretary shall report to the Committees on the Budget, Financial Services, and Ways and Means of the House of Representatives and the Committees on the Budget, Finance, and Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate with respect to the authorities exercised under this Act and the considerations required by section 3.

Sec. 5. Rights; Management; Sale of Mortgage-Related Assets.

(a) Exercise of Rights.–The Secretary may, at any time, exercise any rights received in connection with mortgage-related assets purchased under this Act.

(b) Management of Mortgage-Related Assets.–The Secretary shall have authority to manage mortgage-related assets purchased under this Act, including revenues and portfolio risks therefrom.

(c) Sale of Mortgage-Related Assets.–The Secretary may, at any time, upon terms and conditions and at prices determined by the Secretary, sell, or enter into securities loans, repurchase transactions or other financial transactions in regard to, any mortgage-related asset purchased under this Act.

(d) Application of Sunset to Mortgage-Related Assets.–The authority of the Secretary to hold any mortgage-related asset purchased under this Act before the termination date in section 9, or to purchase or fund the purchase of a mortgage-related asset under a commitment entered into before the termination date in section 9, is not subject to the provisions of section 9.

Sec. 6. Maximum Amount of Authorized Purchases.

The Secretary’s authority to purchase mortgage-related assets under this Act shall be limited to $700,000,000,000 outstanding at any one time

Sec. 7. Funding.

For the purpose of the authorities granted in this Act, and for the costs of administering those authorities, the Secretary may use the proceeds of the sale of any securities issued under chapter 31 of title 31, United States Code, and the purposes for which securities may be issued under chapter 31 of title 31, United States Code, are extended to include actions authorized by this Act, including the payment of administrative expenses. Any funds expended for actions authorized by this Act, including the payment of administrative expenses, shall be deemed appropriated at the time of such expenditure.

Sec. 8. Review.

Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.

Sec. 9. Termination of Authority.

The authorities under this Act, with the exception of authorities granted in sections 2(b)(5), 5 and 7, shall terminate two years from the date of enactment of this Act.

Sec. 10. Increase in Statutory Limit on the Public Debt.

Subsection (b) of section 3101 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by striking out the dollar limitation contained in such subsection and inserting in lieu thereof $11,315,000,000,000.

Sec. 11. Credit Reform.

The costs of purchases of mortgage-related assets made under section 2(a) of this Act shall be determined as provided under the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, as applicable.

Sec. 12. Definitions.

For purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply:

(1) Mortgage-Related Assets.–The term “mortgage-related assets” means residential or commercial mortgages and any securities, obligations, or other instruments that are based on or related to such mortgages, that in each case was originated or issued on or before September 17, 2008.

(2) Secretary.–The term “Secretary” means the Secretary of the Treasury.

(3) United States.–The term “United States” means the States, territories, and possessions of the United States and the District of Columbia.

In order to maintain it…