Dear Lord Romney,
It appears that during this cycle we refer to the government control model of feudalism as "democracy". We pretend that we vote for our noble leaders and you pretend to give up power every 4 years and pass it on to our next master.
Either way, I must beg your involvement in my little quagmire. Apparently this credit driven state-run economic model of yours have some bad data. Somehow my personal data has been corrupted, you will have to check with the Oracle to clarify. I was supposed to be serving as your 2nd class nobility, within reach of the one percent. Instead, I am living the life of an immigrant pauper.
Somehow my FICO score got screwed up and now all your banking friends are robbing me blind.
Saturday, October 27, 2012
Friday, October 26, 2012
A Project Manager's View of a Revolution
Ever thoughts about the stages of a revolution? Wouldn't they be just like a typical project?
Inception, Development, Testing, Deployment, and Maintenance.
More on this later...
Inception, Development, Testing, Deployment, and Maintenance.
More on this later...
Thursday, October 25, 2012
Is Peak Oil a Myth to Scare Up High Oil and Gas Prices?
Let me start off by saying that I first learned about peak oil from the documentary "Collapse" starring Michael C Ruppert. The movie was a bomb that knocked me out of a stupor and awakened me to the way the world really works. It started me on an educational journey that led me to write this blog. I completely believe what is stipulated in the documentary; that the world is running out of cheap oil. Ruppert states that the easy to get oil is gone and only extremely expensive and high tech methods exist to get to the remaining oil reserves. In that scenario, only high oil prices will provide the profitability to the oil companies to continue digging. That's why companies like BP are drilling in 10,000 feet of water and not just sticking a pipe in the ground somewhere in Texas. And we know what can happen at 10,000 feet.
Many credible scientists believe peak oil is real and just as many military and financial historians proclaim that crises and war are purposefully engineered by the Establishment to drive the price of oil up, permitting greater profits for ever more expensive drilling and fracking, at greater depths at sea and in more and more dangerous locations at home and abroad. Living near an oil production site or refinery is not only dangerous for your short term health, but also dangerous for the long term prosperity of your people, your culture, your land, and your quality of life.
Look at these articles that have come out recently.
U.S. Poised To Become World's Top Oil Producer; May Soon Overtake Saudi Arabia By JONATHAN FAHEY 10/23/12 04:10 PM ET EDT, NEW YORK --
U.S. oil output is surging so fast that the United States could soon overtake Saudi Arabia as the world's biggest producer. Driven by high prices and new drilling methods, U.S. production of crude and other liquid hydrocarbons is on track to rise 7 percent this year to an average of 10.9 million barrels per day. This will be the fourth straight year of crude increases and the biggest single-year gain since 1951. The boom has surprised even the experts.
Exciting right? The "USA, the #1 Producer of Petroleum in the World" It goes on to say that the Energy Department forecasts that U.S. production of crude and other liquid hydrocarbons, which includes biofuels, will average 11.4 million barrels per day next year and that the U.S. has been increasing oil production since Obama took office. Be proud America! You've done it! You've finally gotten back your 1970's mojo. Meanwhile the rest of the world, has moved on to other energy sources, not only because it makes more financial sense, but because their lives depend on it.
Looking back at the article, the total production described is referring to all oil, liquid hydrocarbons (such as natural gas that you get from fracking), biofuels (such as the corn and hemp ethanol and biodiesel), not just petroleum. If you really want to compare apples to apples, you have to go to the source of the data. Never rely on corporate or government funded media. Never rely on private media. Just always do your own homework and make your own decisions.
Looking at the U.S. Energy Administration Department's website, we see that indeed, U.S. oil production has been rising, but after a very long decline starting in 1970.
Yet, according to this data, the U.S. has been producing just over 5 millions barrels a day since 2009, but nowhere near the 10.9 millions barrels described in the article. You see the title is misleading. It suggests that the USA is increasing its oil production above and beyond what other countries are doing, when in reality, we are not producing that much nor are other countries focused on petroleum production. They are moving to more efficient, more cost effective renewable energy sources.
Before I go any further, let me ask you 2 questions which you can answer yourself later after doing some homework.
1. What makes more sense from the perspective of the government and its constituents, to use the borrowed money with interest from the Federal Reserve or to print your own money interest free, backed by the faith and trust of the American government?
2. What makes more sense, to continue down the path set by the industrial revolution to continue using petroleum, coal, and liquid hydrocarbons pumped out of the earth from more and more dangerous corners of the earth, or generate energy from the waves, sun, wind, and plants, and heat from the earth?
Moving on. Looking at indexmundi, which source 2012 CIA World Factbook data, suggest we are close to producing 10,000,000 barrels of oil now.
So how could two U.S. government entities be working off of two different sets of data? How can the numbers differ so much?
How can the U.S. be producing more oil under a Democratic president that has given all his energy production attention in public to green technologies? This is the president who doubled fuel efficiency standards, and put a stop to the domestic pipeline project. Remember all Republicans jab Obama for not allowing drilling on public land. How could he allow oil production to rise domestically and no one noticed or even gave him praise? Why wouldn't he tote this as an achievement to help him win the election? Is he too humble or is he afraid for his life? Does he feel threatened? Watched? Under control by forces so powerful that he dare not speak of them above a whisper? No way. That's crazy. he is the President of the United States of America and the most powerful man in the world. Right?
How could the U.S. nearly double its oil production in less than 5 years in a declining economy with growing unemployment, a crippled banking, manufacturing, agricultural, energy, and housing market, a shrinking workforce, and an aging population and still be going further and further into debt each year? The only thing the U.S. has going for it is technology and defense. Oh that combines well. The last time those two were dominant in one country for too long we ended up with Hitler and the Nazis.
So why can't he convince Americans to make the economy more efficient? Even Saudi Arabia is going to 100% renewable energy.
Top Oil-Producing Country Intends to Focus '100 Percent' On Renewable EnergyPrince says move 'very good for the world' Posted: Oct 24, 2012 | By: AOL Autos Staff
Saudi Arabia, , our puppet State in the Middle East that we protect so valiantly, the land with the world's largest petroleum reserves, second only to Venezuela, is going to go to 100% renewable energy for power generation, and save its petroleum for a later day. More decisive than a democracy manipulated by private interests, a monarchy ruled by oil greedy oil tycoons is going to give up using oil for it's own consumption and move to renewable energy. Meanwhile they will continue to produce enough for us at ever so slightly higher prices every year and if we ever forget who holds the bull by the balls, they will cut us off again.
But if you believe the story and took the story for face value, you could do the math and calculate what would happen next. If the U.S. produces more oil domestically, it is sold at the WTI price, typically $10-20 lower than the $110 Brent crude price, which is what we pay for foreign oil. If we then consume 18.7 million barrels a day, we have a deficit problem. Meanwhile, the world will trade fewer and fewer barrels of oil in U.S. dollars and our currency will become more and more worthless on the international market. The next thing you know, the Federal Reserve will be the only ones buying our Treasuries, to provide the Congress with an open checkbook for its authoritarian police and war state.
Wouldn't it make sense for us to pursue a more fuel efficient economy as quickly as possible? Like Saudi Arabia, China, Germany, and other European countries. Otherwise we will run up a net import surplus that throws off our GDP calculation and counters any investment, government spending, and consumption. Our economy would slow down and be burdened with higher debt in the private and public sector. Doesn't that seem to describe where we are now, after the 2008 financial crisis? We are getting awefully close to bankrtupcy and State Capitalism of Fascism. For god's sake the Federal Reserve, a privately held central bank that has a monopoly on printing U.S. currency, is supposed to be a regulator of the banks that control it. At the same time, we somehow, magically, cannot recover from this economic recession and we become more and more desperate to accept anything and anyone whoi will just promise to get us out of this mess.
If we stick to this dinosaur model based on petroleum trading, fractional banking, and debt based fiat currency, we will not only fall behind global progress in energy and economic efficiency, we will decline as a nation. Our culture will cease to exist. We will become a nation of slaves and victims, indebted to the State and its corporate masters. We will begin to suffer the same fate as third world countries all over the world, our nation will get raped, pillaged, and plundered by outside forces.
But hey, that's life. We probably deserve it, after all the plundering we've done around the world since 1898, First Blood. Go USS Maine!
Back to oil production, according to this chart Saudi Arabia has been producing between 8 million and 10 million barrels of oil a day since 1980, with the esception of the Reagan years, when oil was cheap.
Then read this:
The last year the U.S. was the world's largest producer was 2002, after the Saudis drastically cut production because of low oil prices in the aftermath of 9/11. Since then, the Saudis and the Russians have been the world leaders. The United States will still need to import lots of oil in the years ahead. Americans use 18.7 million barrels per day. But thanks to the growth in domestic production and the improving fuel efficiency of the nation's cars and trucks, imports could fall by half by the end of the decade.
But the numbers don't match. The U.S. was nowhere near able to produce 8,000,000 barrels a day in 2002. According to the EIA data quoted above, the U.S. was producing a little over 5,000,000 at that time.
So without a doubt, the Huffington Post article above, that is releasing Associated Press content is misleading at a minimum and an outright lie in my opinion.
Could this be Obama propaganda to boost his image before the election? But if Obama wanted to appeal to Republicans, all he would have to do is share the U.S. increased oil production statistics from the EIA with the world. So that doesn't make sense.
Why would AP release an article that clearly attempts to mislead its audience? Certainly the U.S. government isn't fooled by this misinformation. Oil companies have done the studies and know exactly where the oil is and what it would cost to get out. They wouldn't buy this propaganda. So that leaves us. The sheeple in the general population.
So here we are duped by bad data and political theatrics rather than seriously working on efficiencies all across the country. As Ruppert says in the documentary, we are spending as if that oil is there, bankrupting our country driving gas guzzlers.
So Obama set out a policy to get the U.S. auto fleet to an average fuel efficiency of 54 miles per gallon by 2025. That's a good step right? The U.S. Energy department website is clearly promoting fuel efficient automobiles. So are we just ignorant to continue paying an arm and a leg for gasoline when there are cars out there that get over 100 miles per gallon?
Why do Americans continue buying gas guzzling 4x4 and luxury sedans when it is obvious that we go to war to get oil for the four horsemen? Wouldn't a knowledgeable and informed public chose a more efficient and economic solution?
It sure seems like peak oil and peak debt, boom and bust cycles, and the prices of a barrel of oil are all related.
There are of course, other ways to skin a cat and stir up high oil prices. Read this excerpt from Freedom Force International:
On June 19, 2006, Alex interviewed Greg Palast on his radio show. Greg is author of Big Oil and the Armed Madhouse. It is an excellent interview because it exposes one of the greatest myths of our time. The myth is that the United States, under the influence of the large oil companies, has invaded the Middle East to capture its vast oil reserves with the goal of lowering the price of oil to America. The reality is just the opposite. It is true that the United Sates has invaded the Middle East to capture its vast oil reserves, but the goal is, not to hold down the price of oil, but to limit its production so that the price can rise. Palast produces documents proving that the official government policy is to strengthen the oil cartel known as OPEC so it can limit production and increase profit margins. Saddam had violated OPEC production limits and had to be eliminated. The public must be made aware of these facts because, otherwise, even those Americans who are not happy with the war in the Middle East will tolerate it on the false assumption that, at least, their government is acting in their best interest.
Here is another post from the most excellent site Zerohedge with another angle explaining peak oil. Pay attention to EROEI.
Guest Post: Why Energy May Be Abundant But Not Cheap
Submitted by Charles Hugh-Smith of OfTwoMinds blog,
It doesn’t matter how abundant liquid fossil fuels might be; it’s their cost that impacts the economy.
Many people think “peak oil” is about the world is “running out of oil."
Actually, “peak oil” is about the world running out of cheap, easy-to-get oil. That means fossil fuels might be abundant (supply exceeds demand) for a time but still remain expensive.
The abundance or scarcity of energy is only one factor in its price. As the cost of extraction, transport, refining, and taxes rise, so does the “cost basis” or the total cost of production from the field to the pump. Anyone selling oil below its cost basis will lose money and go out of business.
We are trained to expect that anything that is abundant will be cheap, but energy is a special case: it can be abundant but costly, because it’s become costly to produce.
EROEI (energy returned on energy invested) helps illuminate this point. In the good old days, one barrel of oil invested might yield 100 barrels of oil extracted and refined for delivery. Now it takes one barrel of oil to extract and refine 5 barrels of oil, or perhaps as little as 3 barrels of unconventional or deep sea oil.
In the old days, oil would shoot out of the ground once a hole was drilled down to the deposit. All the easy-to-find, easy-to-get oil has been consumed; now even Saudi Arabia must pump millions of gallons of water into its wells to push the oil up out of the ground. Recent discoveries of oil are in costly locales deep offshore or in extreme conditions. It takes billions of dollars to erect the platforms and wells to reach the oil, so the cost basis of this new oil is high.
It doesn’t matter how abundant liquid fossil fuels might be; it’s their cost that impacts the economy. High energy costs mean households must spend more of their income on energy, leaving less for savings and consumption. High energy costs act as a hidden “tax” on the economy, raising the price of everything that uses energy.
As household incomes drop and vehicles become more efficient, demand for gasoline declines. Normally, we would expect lower demand to lead to lower prices. But since the production costs of oil have risen, there is a “floor” for the price of gasoline. As EROEI drops, the price floor rises, regardless of demand.
This decrease in real incomes and ratcheting-higher energy costs could lead to a situation where energy is abundant but few can afford to buy much of it.
The relative abundance of fracked natural gas and low-energy density fossil fuels like tar sands and shale has led to a media frenzy that confuses abundance with low cost. This article (via correspondent Steve K.) illustrates the tone and breezy selection of data to back up the "no worries, Mate" forecast of abundant cheap liquid fuels: An economy awash in oil. (MacLeans)
Not so fast, reports Rex Weyler of the Deep Green Blog. Here is Rex's response to the above article.
Fair point about the volume of unconventional – deepwater, shale gas & oil, tar sands, etc. – hydrocarbons. These reserves may even produce peakies and/or sustain the plateau longer than some observers believe. However, biophysical restraints remain real; peak oil remains real; peak net energy appears imminent, and the impact on economies is already being felt globally. Points to consider:The dregs: In spite of huge shale & tar reserve discoveries, peak discoveries remain well behind us, in the 1960s. My father, a petroleum geologist his entire life (and still, in Houston, Kazakstan...), knew about shale and tar deposits when I was a teenager in the 1960s. He called them "the dregs." These deposits are not really news within the oil industry. And they are the dregs because of high cost, low EROI and rapid depletion.EROI: The volume of these low-net-energy reserves could extend peak oil production for decades, but at fast-declining net energy returned to society. We high-graded Earth’s hydrocarbons, just as we high-graded the forests, fish, copper, tin, water, and so forth. We’ve taken the best, highest EROI hydrocarbons, the 100:1 free-flowing wells of the 1930s and 40s. We’re now into the 3:1 and 2:1 tar sands.For example: damming rivers in Northern BC, to send electricity to the fracking fields, to send shale gas to Alberta, to cook the boreal substrate, and mix the black sludge with gas condensate shipped in from California and by pipeline from Kitimat to Fort McMurray, to mix with the bitumen, to pipe to Vancouver Harbour, to ship to China, to burn in a power plant, to supply electricity to their manufacturing empire.By the time any of this energy gets used to actually make something useful to someone in society, and by the time that user puts that usefulness to work to feed, clothe, house, or heal anyone, there is no net-energy left.Our food in North America is already negative net energy by1:10 at best, up to 1:17 or worse for much of the crap we eat. This matters. EROI at well-head, EROI at the consumer pump, and EROI at the point of society’s actual service all matter.Well-head EROI, counting all public subsidies, is now in the 5:1 to 1:1 range for all these “non-conventional” (meaning the dregs) hydrocarbon deposits. Money can be made. Some energy can be delivered to Society, but this is already way below the well-head EROI that could likely run the current complexity of the human society, much less “grow” economies.The degrading reserves take us down along the EROI curve, in which Net Energy returned to society falls off a cliff around 6:1, and is in freefall by 3:1. Net-energy alone kills the idea of much economic growth from a booming hydrocarbon bonanza (other than some great stock plays along the way). Furthermore, depletion renders the idea ever more unlikely:Depletion: Depletion rates on these gas fields have arrived quickly and appear drastic by historic industry standards. The fracking fields peak early and decline swiftly. In the Bakken shale field – one of the great North American saviour fields – the average well has produced ~ 85k barrels in its first year and then declined at about 40% per year. The newer average wells peak earlier and decline faster, so the overall trend is down.The depletion moves the production process along a function that approaches zero net energy... Down we go along the EROI curve... 5:1 .. 4:1 .. 3 .. 2 ... and then really complex society breaks down. An Amish farmer gets 10:1.The Bakken break-even oil price is $85, so there is no profit in any of this right now, but of course there will be if global depletion exceeds demand from crashing economies.Depletion – both in volume and quality – and depletion for all industrial materials and energy stores, EROI, and economic stagnation all work as feedback loops. No one knows the bifurcation points in this complex system. We try to predict those, but miss by a longshot sometimes. Complex societies crash in this manner, declining returns on investments in complexity, from Babylon to London and Washington. See J. Tainter, H. Odum, N. Georgescu-Roegen, Hall, Cleveland, et al.Here are some depletion data on The Oil Drum: Is Shale Oil Production from Bakken Headed for a Run with “The Red Queen”?.See A Review of the Past and Current State of EROI Data (PDF) by Hall, Cleveland, et al. (source: www.mdpi.com)There is a lot of EROI data here: Obstacles Facing US Wind Energy. (The Oil Drum)Below is the EROI curve, only the “We are here” point at 10:1 is the modern average, and from a few years ago. The new conventional stuff is coming in lower and and the enhanced recovery, shale and tar fields are already over the falls at 6 or 5:1 for the better stuff (best dregs), and 3:1 to 1:1 for the dregs of the dregs, the deeper shale and tar sands.So yes, our friends are correct about the great volume of tar, shale, deep, heavy hydrocarbons, but increasing production of world liquid hydrocarbons much beyond the current 85mb/d is not likely, and increasing net productionis even less likely. As you may know, net production per capita peaked in 1979. Actual net production is peaking now. This is the figure that counts: Actual current Net Production Delivered to Society.Growing this figure is technically possible, and may happen with some massive production bonanzas, i.e. we may see actual production push above 90mb/day, or higher, and may even see net production increase, but a major glut of hydrocarbons? No. Not remotely.When settlers first came to North America, they found copper nuggets the size of horses exposed in river beds. China just bought the best known, last, huge, moderate-to-low-grade, strip-minable, high-cost copper field in the world, in Afghanistan, for $billions over the western bids. There will be others, but rest assured: They will be lower grade, higher cost, and the competition will be more intense. When was the last time you bought a “copper” fitting at the hardware store. They’re crap. The alloys are crap. Because the ore quality is in decline and the costs of extraction are rising. Same with oil, trees, tin, coal....Make no mistake: The war for the dwindling materials and energy flow is well underway.
Friday, October 19, 2012
Would a Coalition of Occupy and TeaParty Make Sense? #GlassSteagall #PublicBanking #EndtheFed
Have you ever heard of the strategy of war called divide and conquer? The Romans used it to conquer in Europe and the British used it to conquer China during the Opium wars. Now it is being used on us in the United States, as well as in Mexico, Canada, Europe, Russia, Africa, the whole damn world is on fire because we are being played like pawns in a global game of chess.
Here in the USA, we are all aware of the Tea Party and the Occupy Wall Street movements. But do we know what they stand for and whether or not there have been people revolting like them in the past?
Let's look at right now for example. Both movements are fired up about crime, corruption, coercion, taxes, economic conditions, and the quality of life in our communities. We just disagree about who's responsible (who to blame) and how we should fix the problem (social engineering).
Ever heard of United We Stand, Divided We Fall? Do you think the tactics still work today? You'd better because we are split up like fools, allowing the manipulation to continue. We don't even know it but the misery we feel today inflicted on us from outside forces and what we call the boom bust cycle or just life these days, is not happenstance. You could not purposefully screw up government and finance any more if you tried.
Both Occupy and TeaParty want a better quality of life and to be left alone to live it. Some blame government, some blame large corporations, some blame not so secret societies working like organized criminals. Either way you look at it, things are fairly screwed up and we are not getting any younger.
It's about damn time we work together. Put our heads together and think of ways to make a difference, pronto.
Writing for the Huffington Post, Bob Edgar suggests this is a good idea.
Writing for Fox Business, Dunstall Prial wrote something similar, and quoted several others who thought the same.
Comedy Central comedian and serious thinker Jon Stewart demonstrated the stark differences between how the media portrayed the two movements in a segment on his show.
We definitely have our differences, and that is how the powers that be split us up and that is how they continue to pilfer at our expense.
Until we put aside our differences and stand up for a common cause, we will be sidelined.
I say again, Would a Coalition of Occupy and TeaParty Make Sense?
I'd like to hear your thoughts. Add comments below.
Here in the USA, we are all aware of the Tea Party and the Occupy Wall Street movements. But do we know what they stand for and whether or not there have been people revolting like them in the past?
Let's look at right now for example. Both movements are fired up about crime, corruption, coercion, taxes, economic conditions, and the quality of life in our communities. We just disagree about who's responsible (who to blame) and how we should fix the problem (social engineering).
Ever heard of United We Stand, Divided We Fall? Do you think the tactics still work today? You'd better because we are split up like fools, allowing the manipulation to continue. We don't even know it but the misery we feel today inflicted on us from outside forces and what we call the boom bust cycle or just life these days, is not happenstance. You could not purposefully screw up government and finance any more if you tried.
Both Occupy and TeaParty want a better quality of life and to be left alone to live it. Some blame government, some blame large corporations, some blame not so secret societies working like organized criminals. Either way you look at it, things are fairly screwed up and we are not getting any younger.
It's about damn time we work together. Put our heads together and think of ways to make a difference, pronto.
Writing for the Huffington Post, Bob Edgar suggests this is a good idea.
Left, right and center, Republican, independent, and Democrat, pretty much everyone agrees that our system has been corrupted. Big money, from banks and insurance companies, the medical lobby, defense contractors, the trial lawyers, the big unions and a boatload of other special interests, is in control.
The power of big money is why our tax laws allow some of our largest corporations and richest citizens to pay less than their fair share of our national expenses. It's why our military invests in high-tech weapons that are of little use to our troops in the Afghan mountains and Iraqi deserts. It's why the financial "wizards" who've nearly run our economy aground can get away with collecting fat bonuses drawn from government bailout funds. It's why we grow ever more dependent on energy purchased overseas from people who don't like us. It's why we can't get our act together to tackle the challenge of climate change. It's why Congress never seems able to do much of anything.
Writing for Fox Business, Dunstall Prial wrote something similar, and quoted several others who thought the same.
Virtually without exception, protesters who are willing to share their specific grievances inevitably connect their anger to the bailouts of the big Wall Street banks.
The image below was taken from Paul Hastings posting. it shows how we started out the same and ended up different. We should recognize that both movements have suffered from the Divide and Conquer efforts of billionaires that benefit from the status quo.
Comedy Central comedian and serious thinker Jon Stewart demonstrated the stark differences between how the media portrayed the two movements in a segment on his show.
We definitely have our differences, and that is how the powers that be split us up and that is how they continue to pilfer at our expense.
Until we put aside our differences and stand up for a common cause, we will be sidelined.
I say again, Would a Coalition of Occupy and TeaParty Make Sense?
I'd like to hear your thoughts. Add comments below.
GDP or GNH? Monopoly Capitalism vs. the Peace Revolution
GDP = C + I + G + (X-M)
This is the equation for calculating gross domestic product, the measurement the global elite use to control us in their new world order.
So what is the equation for GNH or Gross National Happiness?
Are we even using the right metrics to measure progress as a civilization? That's what GDP is right? We use it to judge how well a given sovereign nation is doing on a financial scale. So how do we measure happiness, quality of life or social, environmental, and financial equilibrium?
Does it even matter? Are these central planning indicators a standardized scientific regimen placed on the masses to keep their minds distracted from life and focused on work? Remember the rat race?
Don't we each need to worry about our own lives in isolation? Or should we care what goes on in the rest of the world? Why should we care if our governments are playing mortal combat with a few pawns? We are not them. We are employed and good citizens. That will never happen to us.
Or will it?
Let's suppose that it did happen to someone you know. They are caught up in the financial capitalism rush that puts money in their bank accounts and allows them to live the life of the rich and infamous. They could become part of the network that works to drive down others. They could end up on the wrong side. It doesn't happen to everyone that makes good money. It's not normal capitalism that is the problem.
Can we all just pretend for a moment that we all accept that there are some serious issues with our current model of the economy? I realize we are looking at the world from opposite sides of the fish bowl, but let's think outside the bowl for a moment. Divide and Conquer is a strategy used to split us up. We need to think about how to get along. Can't We All Just Get Along?
How about if the divided groups unite to define what we want and tell the establishment to piss off? What if the Occupy and TeaParty movements formed a coalition to define the laws and policies of our nation. Together, we might be able to put a stop to these idiots that run our government now. What if we formed a Peace Revolution, and reset the world clock?
Our fearless leaders are there because we allowed them to walk in the front door, but they are greedy, psychopathic liars willing to kill to continue having their way. Should just let them continue with their crime? The longer we wait, the more they will make legal and then there is no stopping them.
Just look at how they measure the value of a nation, with an economic indicator that doesn't take into effect the human or planetary factors.
GDP = C + I + G + (X-M)
Gross Domestic Product is defined as consumption (that's you and I spending money on things that last a short amount of time) plus Investment (that's when you spend money on something that lasts for longer than a year or two) plus Government (spending by the Federal Government) plus exports minus imports (things we buy and sell with other nations).
So where in that equation do we indicate the level of oppression, fear, elation, and happiness? Where do we indicate the impact of our actions on the physical earth and implications on other humans and animals?
Here is where I lost some members of the TeaParty. They just read that and muttered to themselves that I am a bleeding heart lefty liberal green environmentalist.
Not exactly. But that's the point. Stay with me. Let me finish what I am trying to say before you make your judgement. Chew on it for a day or two.
We need to figure out how to measure happiness and environmental balance or continue going through these painful economic boom and bust cycles. Otherwise the next false flag event will trigger another neocon response to obliterate the world.
What are you ideas for how this can be done? Do you have formulas? Theories? Share your ideas with @TwistedPolitix @scotthortonshow and @1lefthook.
Manipulating America Into the Left Right Paradigm
Is it possible to get the Occupy movement to cooperate with the TeaParty movement to create a formidable force against fascism and government corruption?
The definition of the Occupy Movement taken from Wikipedia is as follows:
The Occupy movement is an international protest movement against social and economic inequality, its primary goal being to make the economic structure and power relations in society fairer. Different local groups have different foci, but among the prime concerns is the claim that large corporations and the global financial system control the world in a way that disproportionately benefits a minority, undermines democracy and is unstable.
The TeaParty movement is defined as follows:
The Tea Party movement is an American political movement that advocates strict adherence to the United States Constitution, reducing U.S. government spending and taxes, and reduction of the U.S. national debt and federal budget deficit. The movement is generally considered to be partly conservative, partly libertarian, and partly populist. The movement has sponsored protests and supported political candidates since 2009.
Aren't they both groups of Americans that feel disenfranchised by government? The Occupy movement is sick and tired of corporations, lead by an un-elected elite, raping, pillaging, and plundering the world for their own benefit, and begging for bailouts, or socializing the losses, when things go wrong.
The ORIGINAL Boston TeaParty was the same thing. The TeaParty occurred when Bostonians became outraged with the corrupt and unfair trade thrusted upon them by the British Parliament vis a vis the British East India Company. So our ancestors took their chests of tea and threw them in the water. The British government gave the British East India Company an unfair advantage over local entrepreneurs through force and coercion. They did the same thing with our currency and that was the final straw that broke the camels back, the revolution was launched.
The challenge is that the two movements are focused on the social value differences while the TeaParty seems to be complacent with corporate greed and corruption yet fantastically upset about government waste. what should be pointed out here is that government is wasting our money because large corporations bribe and cajole Congress and regulatory agencies into looking the other way while corporations commit the most aggregious crimes our this century.
Think about that and continue reading the the Left Hook:
The definition of the Occupy Movement taken from Wikipedia is as follows:
The Occupy movement is an international protest movement against social and economic inequality, its primary goal being to make the economic structure and power relations in society fairer. Different local groups have different foci, but among the prime concerns is the claim that large corporations and the global financial system control the world in a way that disproportionately benefits a minority, undermines democracy and is unstable.
The TeaParty movement is defined as follows:
The Tea Party movement is an American political movement that advocates strict adherence to the United States Constitution, reducing U.S. government spending and taxes, and reduction of the U.S. national debt and federal budget deficit. The movement is generally considered to be partly conservative, partly libertarian, and partly populist. The movement has sponsored protests and supported political candidates since 2009.
Aren't they both groups of Americans that feel disenfranchised by government? The Occupy movement is sick and tired of corporations, lead by an un-elected elite, raping, pillaging, and plundering the world for their own benefit, and begging for bailouts, or socializing the losses, when things go wrong.
The ORIGINAL Boston TeaParty was the same thing. The TeaParty occurred when Bostonians became outraged with the corrupt and unfair trade thrusted upon them by the British Parliament vis a vis the British East India Company. So our ancestors took their chests of tea and threw them in the water. The British government gave the British East India Company an unfair advantage over local entrepreneurs through force and coercion. They did the same thing with our currency and that was the final straw that broke the camels back, the revolution was launched.
The challenge is that the two movements are focused on the social value differences while the TeaParty seems to be complacent with corporate greed and corruption yet fantastically upset about government waste. what should be pointed out here is that government is wasting our money because large corporations bribe and cajole Congress and regulatory agencies into looking the other way while corporations commit the most aggregious crimes our this century.
Think about that and continue reading the the Left Hook:
Red Scar on America
August 24, 2011 — Dean HendersonThe budding genre of left-wing conspiracy research, intuitively attractive as a unifying force to many, attempts to break imposed philosophical paradigms and to deprogram minds in a world traumatized and confused by the Illuminati’s biggest psyops program ever – the Cold War. This delicate task requires a historically-grounded progressive political framework which, while taking a backseat to realpolitik, remains pertinent.
While the mainstream left refuses to acknowledge any hint of conspiracy, no matter the number of footnotes; the Alex Jones “right/left paradigm is dead” crowd, while open to deep politics, leans right ideologically, enabling the banker cabal in its quest for global hegemony via 18th century mercantilism – the purest form of capitalism ever practiced.
It is incredibly naïve to believe that the Illuminati bankers wish to usher in communism as their economic model. The real world tells us that wealth is not being redistributed. It is being concentrated in the hands of the few at historic levels.
The left’s problem lies in naiveté and cowardice, and in its inability to deconstruct the brutal state capitalism imposed via the Soviet Union. The libertarian conspiracy crowd lacks a background in political theory – their Cato Institute is funded by the same corporations that fund the two major political parties. They too have been brainwashed since birth by the mysterious events that culminated in the Soviet Union. Read more...
Thursday, October 18, 2012
Terrorist Threat Worse Now than Before 9/11: Massive Policy Failure
This article comes courtesy of Zerohedge.
Congressman and Chairman of the House’s Homeland Security Committee: Terrorist Threat Worse Now than Before 9/11
The Washington Times notes:
U.S. Rep. Peter T. King, New York Republican and Chairman of the House’s Homeland Security Committee, said Tuesday that al Qaeda is a greater threat now than it was before the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.“That is the consensus of most intelligence experts,” he said on CNN’s “Starting Point.”
If King is right, then it shows that America’s anti-terrorism policies since 9/11 have been adismal failure1.
Why?
D’oh! We’re Supporting Terrorists
Initially – in the name of fighting our enemies – the U.S. has directly been supporting Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups for the last decade. See this, this, this, this and this.
If Al Qaeda is a greater threat now than before 9/11, maybe it’s because – oh, I don’t know – we’re supporting them?
Our Program of Torture Created Terrorists
In addition, torture creates new terrorists:
- One of the top military interrogators said that torture by Americans of innocent Iraqis is the main reason that foreign fighters started fighting against Americans in Iraq in the first place (and see this).
- Former counter-terrorism czar Richard A. Clarke says that America’s indefinite detention without trial and abuse of prisoners is a leading Al Qaeda recruiting tool
- A former FBI interrogator — who interrogated Al Qaeda suspects — says categorically that torture actually turns people into terrorists
- A 30-year veteran of CIA’s operations directorate who rose to the most senior managerial ranks, says:Torture creates more terrorists and fosters more acts of terror than it could possibly neutralize.
- A former US Air Force interrogator said that torture just creates more terrorists
- A former U.S. interrogator and counterintelligence agent, and Afghanistan veteransaid, “Torture puts our troops in danger, torture makes our troops less safe, torture creates terrorists. It’s used so widely as a propaganda tool now in Afghanistan. All too often, detainees have pamphlets on them, depicting what happened at Guantanamo.”
- The Senate Armed Services Committee unanimously stated:
“The administration’s policies concerning [torture] and the resulting controversies … strengthened the hand of our enemies.”
- Two professors of political science have demonstrated that torture increases, rather than decreases, terrorism
- General Petraeus said that torture hurts our national security
- And the reporter who broke Iran-Contra and other stories says that torture actually helped Al Qaeda, by giving false leads to the U.S. which diverted its military, intelligence and economic resources into wild goose chases
So the widespread program of torture under the Bush administration didn’t help.
Our Wars In the Middle East Have Created More Terrorists
Moreover, security experts – including both conservatives and liberals – agree that waging war in the Middle East weakens national security and increases terrorism. Seethis, this, this, this, this, this, this and this.
Ooops.
Killing innocent civilians is one of the main things which increases terrorism. As one of the top counter-terrorism experts (the former number 2 counter-terrorism expert at the State Department) told me, starting wars against states which do not pose an imminent threat to America’s national security increases the threat of terrorism because:
One of the principal causes of terrorism is injuries to people and families.
(Indeed, Al Qaeda wasn’t even in Iraq until the U.S. invaded that country.)
And top CIA officers say that drone strikes increase terrorism (and see this).
Furthermore, James K. Feldman – former professor of decision analysis and economics at the Air Force Institute of Technology and the School of Advanced Airpower Studies – and other experts say that foreign occupation is the main cause of terrorism
University of Chicago professor Robert A. Pape – who specializes in international security affairs – points out:
Extensive research into the causes of suicide terrorism proves Islam isn’t to blame — the root of the problem is foreign military occupations.***
Each month, there are more suicide terrorists trying to kill Americans and their allies in Afghanistan, Iraq, and other Muslim countries than in all the years before 2001 combined.***New research provides strong evidence that suicide terrorism such as that of 9/11 is particularly sensitive to foreign military occupation, and not Islamic fundamentalism or any ideology independent of this crucial circumstance. Although this pattern began to emerge in the 1980s and 1990s, a wealth of new data presents a powerful picture.More than 95 percent of all suicide attacks are in response to foreign occupation, according to extensive research [co-authored by James K. Feldman - former professor of decision analysis and economics at the Air Force Institute of Technology and the School of Advanced Airpower Studies] that we conducted at the University of Chicago’s Project on Security and Terrorism, where we examined every one of the over 2,200 suicide attacks across the world from 1980 to the present day. As the United States has occupied Afghanistan and Iraq, which have a combined population of about 60 million, total suicide attacks worldwide have risen dramatically — from about 300 from 1980 to 2003, to 1,800 from 2004 to 2009. Further, over 90 percent of suicide attacks worldwide are now anti-American. The vast majority of suicide terrorists hail from the local region threatened by foreign troops, which is why 90 percent of suicide attackers in Afghanistan are Afghans.Israelis have their own narrative about terrorism, which holds that Arab fanatics seek to destroy the Jewish state because of what it is, not what it does. But since Israel withdrew its army from Lebanon in May 2000, there has not been a single Lebanese suicide attack. Similarly, since Israel withdrew from Gaza and large parts of the West Bank, Palestinian suicide attacks are down over 90 percent.***The first step is recognizing that occupations in the Muslim world don’t make Americans any safer — in fact, they are at the heart of the problem.
Max Keiser's Guests on the Keiser Report
This is a MUST have for any person seeking to wake up from the Federal Reserve induced stupor.
Max Keiser's Guests
...on The Keiser Report
Episode 351 [09.10.2012]
Aston Walker
Award-winning Birmingham, UK film-maker who was sent to prison for 16 months for looting a clothes shop in the 2011 riots. At his trial, Judge Melbourne Inman QC commented: "Yours is a sad case in many ways Mr Walker." Sad, perhaps, that he does not have an equal opportunity to loot as a City banker, suggests Max...
Occupii.org
Episode 350 [06.10.2012]
William K. Black
American lawyer, academic, author, and a former bank regulator. Black's expertise is in white-collar crime, public finance, regulation, and other topics in law and economics. He developed the concept of "control fraud", in which a business or national executive uses the entity he or she controls as a "weapon" to commit fraud. He is currently an Associate Professor of Economics and Law at the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law.
University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law - Profile
Episode 349 [04.10.2012]
Dr. Michael Hudson
President of The Institute for the Study of Long-Term Economic Trends (ISLET), a Wall Street Financial Analyst, Distinguished Research Professor of Economics at the University of Missouri, Kansas City and author of Super-Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire (1968 & 2003), Trade, Development and Foreign Debt (1992 & 2009) and of The Myth of Aid (1971).
Michael-Hudson.com
Aston Walker
Award-winning Birmingham, UK film-maker who was sent to prison for 16 months for looting a clothes shop in the 2011 riots. At his trial, Judge Melbourne Inman QC commented: "Yours is a sad case in many ways Mr Walker." Sad, perhaps, that he does not have an equal opportunity to loot as a City banker, suggests Max...
Occupii.org
Episode 350 [06.10.2012]
William K. Black
American lawyer, academic, author, and a former bank regulator. Black's expertise is in white-collar crime, public finance, regulation, and other topics in law and economics. He developed the concept of "control fraud", in which a business or national executive uses the entity he or she controls as a "weapon" to commit fraud. He is currently an Associate Professor of Economics and Law at the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law.
University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law - Profile
Episode 349 [04.10.2012]
Dr. Michael Hudson
President of The Institute for the Study of Long-Term Economic Trends (ISLET), a Wall Street Financial Analyst, Distinguished Research Professor of Economics at the University of Missouri, Kansas City and author of Super-Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire (1968 & 2003), Trade, Development and Foreign Debt (1992 & 2009) and of The Myth of Aid (1971).
Michael-Hudson.com
And many many more here:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)