3.29.2009

killed for blogging?

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 8.38 am

“Reporters Without Borders calls for an independent enquiry into the death of the young blogger Omidreza Mirsayafi in detention on 18 March. Mirsayafi was hastily buried in Tehran’s Behesht Zahar cemetery on 19 March without an autopsy being carried out. In a bid to find out how he died, his family has brought a complaint against the officials in charge of Evin prison, where he was held. “The authorities took advantage of the family’s grief and distress to bury Mirsayafi without an autopsy,” Reporters Without Borders said. “We insist on a full explanation of the circumstances of this young blogger’s death in detention. We have been told that this is a case of homicide, in which case those responsible must be brought to trial and punished. We demand the creation of an independent commission of enquiry.” Reporters Without Borders has learned that, according to the forensic doctor, the Evin prison documents detailing the time of Mirsayafi’s transfer to Loghman Hakim hospital and the time of his death contain irregularities.”

3.26.2009

good intel

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 11.15 am

from Of Two Minds Blog

Survival+ Chapter 1

The Dematerialization of America

The Return of Big Government and the (de facto) Welfare State

Has Capitalism Failed?

The Road to National Insolvency

What’s Obvious III: Some Transformations Will Be Positive

End of An Era: What’s Not Coming Back

Of Two Minds: An Interview with Charles Hugh Smith

3.22.2009

Officer Down

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 8.34 am

114pic.jpg

There is no hunting like the hunting of man, and those who have hunted armed men long enough and liked it, never care for anything else thereafter.
~Ernest Hemingway

3.16.2009

assassins..assassins…everywhere.

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 3.17 pm

“THEY got you babe!”

and now we have this….

wellstone-rall.jpg

its not just for Third World Dictatorships!

3.14.2009

dit dit dit dah dah dah dit dit dit

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 2.46 pm

us-flag-stars-top-r2.jpg

3.13.2009

Majority US stakeholder weighs in….

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 9.30 am

BEIJING (AP) — China’s premier didn’t say it in so many words, but the implied warning to Washington was blunt: Don’t devalue the dollar through reckless spending.

Premier Wen Jiabao’s message is unlikely to be misunderstood at the White House. It is counting on Beijing to help pay for its stimulus package by buying U.S. bonds. China already is Washington’s biggest foreign creditor, with an estimated $1 trillion in U.S. government debt. A weaker dollar would erode the value of those assets.

_georgewashingtonchina.jpg

“Of course we are concerned about the safety of our assets. To be honest, I’m a little bit worried,” Wen said at a news conference Friday after the closing of China’s annual legislative session. “I would like to call on the United States to honor its words, stay a credible nation and ensure the safety of Chinese assets.”

The appeal suggested the outlines of Chinese President Hu Jintao’s stance when he meets with President Barack Obama at an April 2 summit in London of the Group of 20 major economies on possible remedies for the global crisis.

Wen gave no indication whether Beijing wants changes in U.S. policy. But economists said his comments reflect fears that higher U.S. budget deficits from Washington’s $787 billion stimulus package could drive down the dollar and the value of China’s Treasury notes.

“China is telling the U.S. to be careful, not to overspend and keep an eye on the dollar,” said Kelvin Lau, regional economist at Standard Chartered in Hong Kong. “There are risks that China cannot control, so they’re depending on the U.S. to maintain fiscal prudence and keep the dollar reasonably stable.”

Analysts estimate China keeps nearly half of its $2 trillion in foreign currency reserves in U.S. Treasuries and notes issued by other government-affiliated agencies.

“Inside China there has been a lot of debate about whether they should continue to buy Treasuries,” said Frank Gong, chief China economist for JP Morgan.

Beijing is trying to increase its leverage at the London G-20 meeting by reminding its partners of its role in financing U.S. spending, Gong said.

“Without China’s buying (Treasuries) and continuing to fund U.S. deficit spending, interest rates could have been much higher. That could be very destabilizing in this very recessionary environment,” he said. “By attracting a lot of attention to this issue, China is already increasing its influence ahead of the G-20 meeting.”

Finance officials from the G-20 meet this weekend. U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner is pressing for a new coordinated global stimulus. Japan is supportive but European governments are reluctant to make expensive commitments before they see how current plans are working.

Wen also offered an unqualified defense Friday of his government’s policies in Tibet, ignoring questions about a massive security buildup in the Himalayan region.

Tensions have spiked ahead of two key anniversaries this week — the 50th anniversary of a failed Tibetan uprising that sent the Dalai Lama into exile and Saturday’s one-year anniversary of violent anti-Chinese riots in Lhasa that sparked the largest protests in decades.

Asked whether the massive security presence pointed to failings in Beijing’s policies, Wen said: “The situation in Tibet is on the whole peaceful and stable. The Tibetan people hope to work in peace and stability.

“Tibet’s continuous progress (has) proven the policies we have adopted are right,” he said.

china_us_talk_money.jpg

Wen expressed confidence the world’s third-largest economy can meet its official growth target of 8 percent this year and emerge from the crisis “at an early date.” But he said Beijing is ready to expand its 4 trillion yuan ($586 billion) stimulus if needed.

“We already have our plans ready to tackle even more difficult times, and to do that we have reserved adequate ammunition,” he said. “That means that at any time we can introduce new stimulus policies.”

Communist leaders worry about rising job losses and possible unrest amid a trade slump that saw Chinese exports fall 25.7 percent in February from a year earlier. They have promised to spend heavily to create jobs and boost exports.

Chinese bank lending and power demand have risen, suggesting the stimulus is taking effect. But growth in retail sales is weakening, indicating it has yet to spur private sector spending and investment, which analysts say will be key to its success.

Private sector economists expect growth as low as 5 percent this year. That would be the strongest of any major country but could lead to more waves of job cuts.

“I really believe we will be able to walk out of the shadow of the financial crisis at an early date,” Wen said. “After this trial, I believe the Chinese economy will show greater vitality.”

Wen also said Beijing wants the G-20 summit in April focus on helping the poorest countries.

The premier said Beijing has met its own commitments to help developing countries by erasing a total of $40 billion in debt owed by 46 countries and giving out 200 billion yuan ($29 billion) of aid to developing countries.”

“We must see to it that we show concern for developing countries,” he said.

citx say- JUST DON’T MENTION TIBET AGAIN.

3.12.2009

GO ABOUT YOUR BUSINESS

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 2.52 pm

1046945245_ee451601ba.jpg

3.6.2009

The Faust Obama

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 5.58 pm

There has been a flutter of congratulatory noise in some quarters about the recent “compromise” brokered by the White House regarding Karl Rove’s criminal refusal to heed Congressional subpoenas requiring his testimony on the Bush Administration’s transformation of the Justice Department into a goon squad targeting — and imprisoning — political opponents.

40518941_4455ccce74.jpg

Whereas mere mortals can go to prison for ignoring a Congressional summons, Rove has been allowed to roam free, appearing on national television, writing for national publications, and carrying on his life’s work of polluting and degrading the nation’s political culture. This unelected, porcine bullshit-slinger is apparently so powerful that the new President of the United States felt compelled to step in and negotiate the very gentle terms under which said porcine polluter would deign to appear before Congress.

This whole spectacle, by the way, is yet another stunning example of what a completely lawless state the United States of American Empire has become — at least for those in the bosom of imperial power. Think of it: a legally binding subpoena from the Congress of the United States is blithely ignored — a clear act of criminal contempt. But the scofflaw suffers not the slightest penalty. Instead, he is serviced by the most powerful institution in the land, which intervenes to make sure his appearance before Congress holds no dangers for him. He is to appear in private, will not have to answer any questions about the most important point at issue — George Bush’s involvement in the Justice Department scandal — and he will not be required to testify under oath. (It is all very much like the remarkable conditions under which his former boss “testified” to the 9/11 Commission.)

This is the deal brokered by the current administration, with Obama’s hand-picked White House counsel, Gregory Craig, and his aides playing a “critical role,” as Newsweek reports. But while the venerable newsmag found time to address the ever-burning question of who “won” in the negotiations — Did Rove’s lawyers make the most concessions? Who’s on top of the Beltway food chain today? — they entirely omitted a very pertinent fact, reported by Glynn Wilson at the Locust Fork News-Journal: Obama’s White House Counsel has worked for Rove. Wilson writes:

“In what appears to be a clear conflict of interest, Craig represented Rove in his recent book deal, while Craig’s law partner, close associate and mentor, Emmet Flood, is representing Bush in executive privilege matters before the Washington D.C. Court of Appeals, where Bush administration officials have been charged with the political firings of U.S. attorneys for failing to act on orders to prosecute Democrats prior to elections.”

But that’s not all. As Wilson notes, Craig also engaged in what seems to be a clear act of subterfuge to get Republican whistleblower Jill Simpson — who courageously stood up against the travesty of justice in the Bush gang’s political imprisonment of former Alabama governor Don Siegelman — to spill all the details of her case against Rove and the other Justice Department conspirators. Wilson writes:

“Furthermore, Craig had been in contact with Ms. Simpson on the pretense of possibly representing her in her testimony before the House Judiciary Committee legal team a year and a half ago, but declined to represent her only after getting her to reveal her entire case against Mr. Rove.

“‘You had a duty to disclose your relationship with Rove to Ms. Simpson before she revealed the details of her involvement, because you knew from initial contacts that you had a conflict,’ Duncan writes in the letter.”

Simpson’s attorney, Priscilla Black Duncan, set out the details in a recent letter she wrote to Obama’s White House Counsel, citing his violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct and asking him “to step down from your position as White House Counsel, at least in all matters dealing with the Bush administration.” In her letter, printed in full by Wilson, Duncan writes:

“2.) According to Ms. Simpson, you called her up to four times on or about March 16-17, 2007, and you faxed her your resume.

3.) She initially asked, “Before we really start this, do you have any contacts with George Bush, Karl Rove, Don Siegelman or Bob Riley?”

4.) You indicated you did not and said, “Tell me who this is about.”

5.) Your initial conversation with Ms. Simpson lasted about 10 to 15 minutes.

6.) In three conversations of nearly two hours, you extracted particular details of her involvement, and you asked her specifically about the length of time and character of her contact with Karl Rove, the extent of her work with the GOP and her knowledge of U.S. District Judge Mark Fuller’s owner-interest in Doss Aviation, a major federal contractor, and matters dealing with lobbyist G. Stewart Hall’s then-Federalist Group and the steering of contracts to Fuller’s company and companies related to Gov. Bob Riley’s son, Rob Riley.

7.) After this extensive questioning, which included another session for the questions you had formulated, you announced that you couldn’t represent her because you had represented Sen. Richard Shelby during the 2004-2005 investigations of his alleged national security leaks….

9.) You failed to mention to Miss Simpson, however, that you were a friend of Karl Rove, had shared drinks with Karl Rove, that your law firm, Williams & Connolly, was representing Vice President Cheney on Scooter Libby’s role in the Valerie Plame case in which Rove was involved; that your firm has advised the White House not to turn over GOP emails regarding the firing of nine U.S. Attorneys. Nor did you disclose your firm’s involvement in defending Iran-Contra figures, which you knew or should have known play a key role in the current military contracts routed to Doss Aviation.”

Once again, we see a vivid display of the “continuity” that has been a hallmark of the new administration in so many areas. Obama’s top legal adviser and his law firm is deeply entangled with Karl Rove and George W. Bush — and specifically on the very issue of the recent “compromise”: the goonization of the Justice Department. (In addition to the firm’s involvement with Dick Cheney and the criminal outing of a CIA operative tracking weapons of mass destruction.) How hard would it have been for Barack Obama to find a reputable, respected White House Counsel who not hip-deep in the Big Muddy with Karl Rove and George Bush?

And how difficult would it have been for the President of the United States — the “most powerful man on earth,” as we are incessantly reminded — to say, simply, that Karl Rove should obey the law and testify under oath before Congress? And note well the reality — and the arrogance — at play here. Rove could still have refused to divulge specific information, citing executive privilege or the Fifth Amendment. The question here is not what he would say, but that he has refused to appear at all. And now his drinking buddy and literary rainmaker in the White House has brokered a cozy arrangement to coddle Rove even further.

To be sure, the White House deal for Rove was not just about the incestuous entanglement of Obama’s counsel with the very maw of the Bush-Cheney-Rove gang. As Newsweek notes, Obama is very anxious to preserve the hard-won powers of the imperial presidency that he has inherited from such illustrious predecessors as the George Bushes and Dick Nixon:

“As a candidate last year, Obama sharply criticized the Bush administration for making sweeping claims of executive privilege to shield testimony about the U.S. attorney firings. “This blanket notion that you can’t subpoena White House aides where there’s evidence of genuine wrongdoing I think is completely misguided,” he said last year.

But if the dispute over executive privilege hadn’t been settled by Wednesday night, Obama’s lawyers would have been put in the uncomfortable position of having to defend Rove and Miers in court. The alternative would have been to accept the possibility of a judicial ruling that might have impinged on the confidentiality of their own discussions about sensitive issues should those discussions later become the subject of congressional investigations.”

In other words, the Obama administration wants to ensure that none of its own top dogs will ever be required to testify about allegations of criminal activity by the government. And the Obama-Rove operative Craig made it clear that Obama was willing to go to court — yet again — to defend Bush’s vision of rampant executive power:

“At one point this week, [Craig] even told House Democratic lawyers he would authorize Obama’s Justice Department to oppose them in court if they didn’t back down from some of their demands to complete access to the material.”

Beyond the notion of “executive privilege,” the Obama-Rove deal upholds a principle far more important to our Beltway courtiers: their elevation above the law. While the proles are subjected to an ever-growing plethora of police powers and genuinely shocking levels of incarceration — often for profit — our intertwined elites cut special deals for each other to keep themselves living large, loose and at liberty.

Yes sir, that’s continuity for you — continuity with a vengeance!

NOTE: Speaking of elevation above the law, how about this little gem just in from AP? Panetta: No one to be punished for interrogations:

“CIA Director Leon Panetta says agency employees who took part in harsh interrogations of terrorism suspects are not in danger of being punished.

“Panetta delivered that message to CIA employees in an e-mail Thursday, reiterating what he told Congress last month. He said then that he would oppose prosecutions of any CIA employee who adhered to their legal guidance on interrogations.

“He sent the message after the Senate Intelligence Committee announced its review of the CIA’s interrogation and detention program under President George W. Bush.”

Thank God the Obama Administration has moved so swiftly to protect Bush’s torturers at the first whiff of pesky snooping from Congress! After all, they — and the architects of the torture program in the White House and Pentagon — only broke the law. And the law is just for the rubes and suckers, not the great and good, and their hired hands.

3.2.2009

ZEITGEIST

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 1.07 pm

burning_car.jpg

Powered by WordPress