Biodiesel can be used for this car. Why didnt FORD produce this for the USA?
Clipped from www.dailytech.com
Monday, April 11, 2011
Thursday, April 7, 2011
History of American Empire #teaparty
Some common themes can be seen in many of these U.S. military interventions.
First, they were explained to the U.S. public as defending the lives and rights of civilian populations. Yet the military tactics employed often left behind massive civilian "collateral damage." War planners made little distinction between rebels and the civilians who lived in rebel zones of control, or between military assets and civilian infrastructure, such as train lines, water plants, agricultural factories, medicine supplies, etc. The U.S. public always believe that in the next war, new military technologies will avoid civilian casualties on the other side. Yet when the inevitable civilian deaths occur, they are always explained away as "accidental" or "unavoidable."
Second, although nearly all the post-World War II interventions were carried out in the name of "freedom" and "democracy," nearly all of them in fact defended dictatorships controlled by pro-U.S. elites. Whether in Vietnam, Central America, or the Persian Gulf, the U.S. was not defending "freedom" but an ideological agenda (such as defending capitalism) or an economic agenda (such as protecting oil company investments). In the few cases when U.S. military forces toppled a dictatorship--such as in Grenada or Panama--they did so in a way that prevented the country's people from overthrowing their own dictator first, and installing a new democratic government more to their liking.
Third, the U.S. always attacked violence by its opponents as "terrorism," "atrocities against civilians," or "ethnic cleansing," but minimized or defended the same actions by the U.S. or its allies. If a country has the right to "end" a state that trains or harbors terrorists, would Cuba or Nicaragua have had the right to launch defensive bombing raids on U.S. targets to take out exile terrorists? Washington's double standard maintains that an U.S. ally's action by definition "defensive," but that an enemy's retaliation is by definition "offensive."
Fourth, the U.S. often portrays itself as a neutral peacekeeper, with nothing but the purest humanitarian motives. After deploying forces in a country, however, it quickly divides the country or region into "friends" and "foes," and takes one side against another. This strategy tends to enflame rather than dampen a war or civil conflict, as shown in the cases of Somalia and Bosnia, and deepens resentment of the U.S. role.
Fifth, U.S. military intervention is often counterproductive even if one accepts U.S. goals and rationales. Rather than solving the root political or economic roots of the conflict, it tends to polarize factions and further destabilize the country. The same countries tend to reappear again and again on the list of 20th century interventions.
Sixth, U.S. demonization of an enemy leader, or military action against him, tends to strengthen rather than weaken his hold on power. Take the list of current regimes most singled out for U.S. attack, and put it alongside of the list of regimes that have had the longest hold on power, and you will find they have the same names. Qaddafi, Castro, Saddam, Kim, and others may have faced greater internal criticism if they could not portray themselves as Davids standing up to the American Goliath, and (accurately) blaming many of their countries' internal problems on U.S. economic sanctions.
One of the most dangerous ideas of the 20th century was that "people like us" could not commit atrocities against civilians.
German and Japanese citizens believed it, but their militaries slaughtered millions of people.
British and French citizens believed it, but their militaries fought brutal colonial wars in Africa and Asia.
Russian citizens believed it, but their armies murdered civilians in Afghanistan, Chechnya, and elsewhere.
Israeli citizens believed it, but their army mowed down Palestinians and Lebanese.
Arabs believed it, but suicide bombers and hijackers targeted U.S. and Israeli civilians.
U.S. citizens believed it, but their military killed hundreds of thousands in Vietnam, Iraq, and elsewhere.
Clipped from academic.evergreen.edu
Some common themes can be seen in many of these U.S. military interventions.
First, they were explained to the U.S. public as defending the lives
and rights of civilian populations. Yet the military tactics employed often
left behind massive civilian "collateral damage." War planners
made little distinction between rebels and the civilians who lived in rebel
zones of control, or between military assets and civilian infrastructure,
such as train lines, water plants, agricultural factories, medicine supplies,
etc. The U.S. public always believe that in the next war, new military
technologies will avoid civilian casualties on the other side. Yet when
the inevitable civilian deaths occur, they are always explained away as
"accidental" or "unavoidable."
Second, although nearly all the post-World War II interventions were
carried out in the name of "freedom" and "democracy,"
nearly all of them in fact defended dictatorships controlled by pro-U.S.
elites. Whether in Vietnam, Central America, or the Persian Gulf, the U.S.
was not defending "freedom" but an ideological agenda (such as
defending capitalism) or an economic agenda (such as protecting oil company
investments). In the few cases when U.S. military forces toppled a dictatorship--such
as in Grenada or Panama--they did so in a way that prevented the country's
people from overthrowing their own dictator first, and installing a new
democratic government more to their liking.
Third, the U.S. always attacked violence by its opponents as "terrorism,"
"atrocities against civilians," or "ethnic cleansing,"
but minimized or defended the same actions by the U.S. or its allies. If
a country has the right to "end" a state that trains or harbors
terrorists, would Cuba or Nicaragua have had the right to launch defensive
bombing raids on U.S. targets to take out exile terrorists? Washington's
double standard maintains that an U.S. ally's action by definition "defensive,"
but that an enemy's retaliation is by definition "offensive."
Fourth, the U.S. often portrays itself as a neutral peacekeeper, with
nothing but the purest humanitarian motives. After deploying forces in
a country, however, it quickly divides the country or region into "friends"
and "foes," and takes one side against another. This strategy
tends to enflame rather than dampen a war or civil conflict, as shown in
the cases of Somalia and Bosnia, and deepens resentment of the U.S. role.
Fifth, U.S. military intervention is often counterproductive even if
one accepts U.S. goals and rationales. Rather than solving the root political
or economic roots of the conflict, it tends to polarize factions and further
destabilize the country. The same countries tend to reappear again and
again on the list of 20th century interventions.
Sixth, U.S. demonization of an enemy leader, or military action against
him, tends to strengthen rather than weaken his hold on power. Take the
list of current regimes most singled out for U.S. attack, and put it alongside
of the list of regimes that have had the longest hold on power, and you
will find they have the same names. Qaddafi, Castro, Saddam, Kim, and others
may have faced greater internal criticism if they could not portray themselves
as Davids standing up to the American Goliath, and (accurately) blaming
many of their countries' internal problems on U.S. economic sanctions.
One of the most dangerous ideas of the 20th century was that "people
like us" could not commit atrocities against civilians.
- German and Japanese citizens believed it, but their militaries slaughtered
millions of people.
- British and French citizens believed it, but their militaries fought
brutal colonial wars in Africa and Asia.
- Russian citizens believed it, but their armies murdered civilians in
Afghanistan, Chechnya, and elsewhere.
- Israeli citizens believed it, but their army mowed down Palestinians
and Lebanese.
- Arabs believed it, but suicide bombers and hijackers targeted U.S.
and Israeli civilians.
- U.S. citizens believed it, but their military killed hundreds of thousands
in Vietnam, Iraq, and elsewhere.
presentation.
Below the list is a Briefing on the History
of U.S. Military Interventions.
Carlyle Group Owns 28% of Vivendi->NBC
Hmmm. Military and defense portfolio heavy Carlyle owns one of the 5 major media channels in the USA. And they capitulated completely to Bush and the Iraq War....
NBC Universal...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBC_Universal
Comcast now owns 51% of NBC Universal while GE owns 49%
GE also owns MSNBC
Clipped from www.sourcewatch.org
Carlyle Group
- Although the majority of the firm's money is in North America, it is also pushing more intensely overseas, launching funds aimed at Asia, Europe, Latin America, and Russia. The firm (along with [[[Apax Partners]] and UK-based Cinven) bought a 28% share of France-based health care and business publisher Vivendi Universal Publishing. One of the company's larger moves overseas is the purchase of the transportation business of The Daiei, Japan's #2 retailer in which the company has a 90 percent stake, worth $28 million.[7]
US Defense Spending 01-09 DOUBLED!
Wow. Crash a few airplanes into the Pentagon, important skyscrapers, and in a field in PA and you can give CARTE BLANCHE to the Pentagon to spend as much as possible.
Cut Military Spending & Tax the Wealthy
Meanwhile, a majority of Americans prefer cutting defense spending to reduce the deficit rather than stealing retirees’ funds or axing health programs. Another poll conducted by 60 Minutes and Vanity Fair shows that 61 percent of Americans want taxes for the wealthy increased as a first step to addressing the deficit. The next most popular strategy is cutting defense spending.
US Spends More on Education Than Defense
$900B spent on education in 2011. How many does that employ?
Clipped from www.usgovernmentspending.com
Education Spending Chart
US Defense: $765B Budget, Employs 600k
Defense budget of $765B employs 600000 Americans. Hmm. Thats $1,275,000 per person. Those are GOOD paying jobs!!! I wonder what the comparison is in other industries...
Clipped from www.dailykos.com
Stephen Colbert again had a masterful segment last night focusing on the out-of-control defense spending.
You see, we give the Defense Department billions to develop new weapons to protect us from potential enemies. A few years later, we sell those weapons to countries all over the world, including potential enemies. Then, we have no choice but to manufacture newer, better weapons to protect ourselves from what we just sold. (The Circle Of Taking Life)
You know, that reminds me. This year's defense budget was only $725 billion. That's not nearly enough! I hear Saudi Arabia has F-15s now! They're going to use them to come after our strategic reserve of scrap and trash! (Oh No! Not Baltimore!)
US Defense: $765B Budget, Employs 600000
A view is often expressed that the military budget is a cornerstone of the U.S. economy. The Pentagon is often said to be a major underwriter of, and stimulus to, important technical innovations.
It is also often cited as a major employer, providing good jobs—jobs that are stable and at least decently paid—to millions of Americans.
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Neocons destroying democracy @maddow
It takes one to know one. They are accusing Democrats of the VERY thing they are doing, in order to AVOID scrutiny for their own voter fraud - Neocons are scrubbing the voter records of left-leaning voters - Blacks, latinos, immigrants, ex-cons, STUDENTS!!!
Clipped from www.guardian.co.uk
The Republican voter fraud hoax
Donald Duck and the Dallas Cowboys won't steal the election for Obama. Acorn's only crime is registering Democratic voters
Barack Obama and the Democrats are stealing the election. Massive voter fraud is being carried out, even as we speak, by their henchmen, known by the innocuous sounding Association for Community Organisations for Reform Now, or Acorn. Clever bastards.
The only problem? Despite the screaming wall-to-wall coverage of "Democratic voter fraud in 11 swing states" as seen on Fox News and even the once-respectable CNN, none of it's true. None of it.
left-leaning voters have been scrubbed
This is exactly what happened in Florida in 2000 and what is happening AGAIN throughout the USA in 2011 in preparation for 2012.
Do not let the Necons take control of this country AGAIN!! We dont need more war, debt, financial crisis, Katrina's BP oil spills, and thousands of other countless corporate welfare programs to enrich the few.
Clipped from www.guardian.co.uk
There is evidence that left-leaning voters have been scrubbed from key electoral lists in Latin America
Just before the 2000 balloting in Florida, I reported in the Guardian that its governor, Jeb Bush, had ordered the removal of tens of thousands of black citizens from the state's voter rolls. He called them "felons", but our investigation discovered their only crime was Voting While Black. And that little scrub of the voter rolls gave the White House to his brother George.
GOP Skimming Off Voters for 2012 @maddow
Have we not seen this crap before? THIS MUST BE STOPPED!!
We cannot let the mainstream media simply capitulate to the Neocons while they strip legitimate voters from their civil rights because they know they will vote DEMOCRATIC.
Clipped from washingtonindependent.com
Florida 2000 Redux?
You know it’s going to be a heated election when a state attorney general sues his own state agency for not cracking down on voter fraud. But that’s just what’s happened in Wisconsin. It’s indicative of the kinds of legal challenges now being brought in hotly contested states around the country. The outcomes of those challenges will decide whose votes get counted and whose don’t — and in a race as close as this one, that could make all the difference.
In each case, Republicans claim voter fraud is rampant and the government has to crack down on it. Democrats, meanwhile, argue it’s rare – and far less of a problem than intimidation and harassment of voters at the polls.
GOP Rigging Democracy @maddow
Clipped from articles.sfgate.com
'Stealing America': Voting-fraud documentary
The numbers don't add up.
$3.8 billion: The initial Help America Vote Act allocation that California Secretary of State Deborah Bowen said "pushed many counties into buying electronic systems that ... were not properly reviewed or tested."
18,000: Votes that did not register in a 2006 Sarasota County, Fla., local election using touch-screen machines, in a Democratic stronghold that the Republican challenger won by 368 votes.
GOP destroying democracy in USA @maddow
Clipped from old.nationalreview.com
EDITOR'S NOTE:This is the introduction of John Fund's new book, Stealing Elections: How Voter Fraud Threatens Our Democracy, released today from Encounter Books.
Our nation may be on the brink of repeating the 2000 Florida election debacle, but this time in several states, with allegations of voter fraud, intimidation and manipulation of voting machines added to the generalized chaos that sent our last presidential contest into overtime. There is still time to reduce the chance of another electoral meltdown, both this year and in future years. But this will not happen unless we acknowledge that the United States has a haphazard, fraud-prone election system befitting an emerging Third World country rather than the world's leading democracy.
GOP Voter Fraud Again & Again @maddow
HELP! We cannot let the Neocons sabotage the national elections again like they did in 2000. They are doing it now in various states across the US. Republican Governors are destroying the the essence of democracy RIGHT NOW in 2011, preparing for 2012.
We cannot let this happen. Watch this film!
Clipped from movies.netflix.com
XXI Century
An in-depth exploration into the state of our society at the start of the 21st century, this probing set of documentaries examines the 2000 U.S. presidential elections, repercussions of the 9/11 attacks, the build-up to the Iraq War and more. Through hard-hitting interviews with experts such as Noam Chomsky, Angela Davis and Howard Zinn, the series also showcases compelling perspectives on mainstream media, patriotism and human rights.
Media Capitulated to Hitler
Clipped from movies.netflix.com
Independent Intervention
(Independent Intervention: Breaking Silence)
This penetrating documentary stresses the need for an independent media, free from political bias and corporate ideologies, by examining how various media outlets have crafted the information we've been given about the war in Iraq since 2003. Footage from independent sources is compared with that from mainstream media, which often focuses on technology rather than people. Interviews with experts Noam Chomsky and Amy Goodman are included.
Lower Taxes 4 Wealthy Cut Prgrm 4 Poor
Yes, because this is exactly what we need right now. More tax breaks for the wealthy and fewer support programs for those lazy poor people.
Clipped from www.nytimes.com
G.O.P. Budget Proposal Cuts $5.8 Trillion in Spending
Monday, April 4, 2011
Antitrust laws redistribute wealth
Use Antitrust to break up oligopolies, make distributed small business expansion the end goal, small businesses pay less taxes than employees and teaparty might back it
Privatization of Medicare? @chrislhayes
How is it possible that some perceive private corporations as being able to offer cost reductions for key government functions?
Corporations must produce profits and improve them over time. that is the nature of capitalism. They will underestimate the cost initially to get the business and then slowly increase the cost once the options are null.
What about all the military (Boeing, Halliburton) and health insurance industry projects that have costs Billions more than originally planned? The Federal government has been screwed over the past 60 years by the military industrial complex and citizens have been screwed since the 1970's by the health care industry.
How about the prison system? We spend more on incarceration than education at the State level. Privatized.
Why would we want to do this to our future generations for medicare?
Clipped from www.bloomberg.com
Ryan’s Budget Would Cut Medicare, Medicaid and Trim $4 Trillion
Phasing Out Medicare
Ryan’s proposal will call for phasing out the traditional
Medicare health-care program for the elderly, with new
beneficiaries starting in 2022 instead being provided subsidies
to buy private health insurance.
It would cap spending on Medicaid, the health-care plan for
the poor, and give states more discretion over how to run the
joint federal-state program.
US Total Spending - Drill Down @maddow
This is a handy little site that has all the US spending at Federal and State levels.
Clipped from www.usgovernmentspending.com
United States Total Spending Pie Chart
Sugarcane vs Corn Ethanol
Clipped from en.wikipedia.org
Brazil's sugar cane-based industry is more efficient than the U.S. corn-based industry. Sugar cane ethanol has an energy balance seven times greater than ethanol produced from corn.[3] Brazilian distillers are able to produce ethanol for 22 cents per liter, compared with the 30 cents per liter for corn-based ethanol.[118] U.S. corn-derived ethanol costs 30% more because the corn starch must first be converted to sugar before being distilled into alcohol.[78] Despite this cost differential in production, the U.S. does not import more Brazilian ethanol because of U.S. trade barriers corresponding to a tariff of 54-cent per gallon, first imposed in 1980, but kept to offset the 45-cent per gallon blender's federal tax credit that is applied to ethanol no matter its country of origin.[5][90][91][92]
Sugarcane cultivation requires a tropical or subtropical climate, with a minimum of 600 mm (24 in) of annual rainfall. Sugarcane is one of the most efficient photosynthesizers in the plant kingdom, able to convert up to 2% of incident solar energy into biomass. Sugarcane production in the United States occurs in Florida, Louisiana, Hawaii, and Texas. The first three plants to produce sugarcane-based ethanol are expected to go online in Louisiana by mid 2009. Sugar mill plants in Lacassine, St. James and Bunkie were converted to sugar cane-based ethanol production using Colombian technology in order to make possible a profitable ethanol production. These three plants will produce 100 million gallons of ethanol within five years.[119] By 2009 two other sugarcane ethanol production projects are being developed in Kauai, Hawaii and Imperial Valley, California.[120]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)