Net the Truth Online

PA State Legislators Who Sign On to KOZ Tax Exemptions for Gas Industry Need Booted

2012-01-28T06:48:00.000-08:00

It's not so astonishing that Pennsylvania state legislators are formulating yet another tax-exemption special for somebody other than the citizen-taxpayers. Residents, homeowners, property owners, and small businesses are still awaiting action on the promise of many who years ago vowed during campaigns for election to "eliminate" real estate property taxes for all once and for all.

Meanwhile, the Keystone Opportunity Zones that began to be designated back in 1999, so-necessary for a limited time - only ten years according to advocates - have been expanded and extended several times since. Many existing sites are so-designated as tax-free zones beyond 2015.

When will the Keystone Opportunity Zones be gone? Apparently, never. The program never quite fufils its goal, does it? That is, Pennsylvania will always need to enable tax forgiveness for some period of time to attract some small business and big business to PA, that's what proponents apparently believe.

Meanwhile, the local municipalities, school districts, and counties that choose to waive property taxes for the KOZ inhabitants, and more, for up to 15 years have yet to decrease spending for the same amount of years, thus, the taxation is spread to the same citizen-taxpayers and small businesses who are barely making headway.

But the Gas Industry and Marcellus Shale ventures - tax-free for 15 years?

One has to wonder. It's election time. Who are these legislators courting? Not the little home and property owner. They've broken promises to totally eliminate property taxes for all.

It is time to throw them all out of office this time around in Primary Elections across Pennsylvania.

Legislative Detail: PA Senate Bill 1237 - 2011-2012 Regular Session

http://e-lobbyist.com/gaits/PA/SB1237

Senate Bill 1237

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&sessYr=2011&sessInd=0&billBody=S&billTyp=B&billNbr=1237&pn=1518

November 3, 2011 In the News, Newsroom
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review: Gas drillers’ supply chain drives jobs Joe Napsha

The latest is Valerus Compression Services LP of Houston, Texas, which opened a $4 million service center on Wednesday at the Fayette Business Park off Route 43 in Smithfield.

Valerus is one of about 175 companies in 10 counties that are part of the region’s natural gas supply chain, said Dewitt Peart, president of the Pittsburgh Regional Alliance, an economic development group that is working to get more of those companies to move permanently to the region.

Valerus Compression worked in the region’s gas fields for two years before deciding it needed a local home. Valerus looked at about 10 sites before selecting the Smithfield location, which is close to drilling activity, said Daniel Cannon, senior vice president of North American operations. Its new center in Smithfield industrial park is in a Keystone Opportunity Zone, which offers businesses reduced state and local taxes.

http://marcelluscoalition.org/2011/11/pittsburgh-tribune-review-gas-drillers-supply-chain-drives-jobs/

Pennsylvania, two neighbors neighbors vie to procure 'cracker' - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review By Timothy Puko, PITTSBURGH TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Sunday, January 29, 2012

There's a whirlwind of competition swirling among Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia for the chance to start a new generation of industry and manufacturing.

Governors jetting off to Houston. State legislation on the fast track. Big tax breaks to be offered for 15 years in one state and 25 years in another.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/regional/s_778969.html

Pennsylvania eyes tax deals to lure Shell's 'ethane cracker' - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review By Timothy Puko, PITTSBURGH TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Saturday, January 28, 2012

Big businesses could be in line for millions of dollars in new tax breaks in Pennsylvania under legislation that may be critical in the state's bid to best Ohio and West Virginia for a petrochemicals plant.

The bill has quietly moved toward passage as state officials court Royal Dutch Shell plc, which plans to spend as much as $4 billion to build an "ethane cracker" in the tri-state area. The plant would create several hundred jobs.

Senate Bill 1237 would expand Keystone Opportunity Zones, special areas that grant businesses broad tax cuts, credits and exemptions to spur economic development. Businesses that invest at least $1 billion and create at least 400 permanent, full-time jobs would get an extra five years of tax breaks -- 15 years in all -- with more breaks for manufacturing and processing businesses, under provisions in the bill.

"By far, (Keystone Opportunity Zones are) a huge competitive advantage for the commonwealth when companies are looking at Pennsylvania," said Steve Kratz, spokesman for the state Department of Community and Economic Development. "The first thing they say to our program office is that 'we're interested in Keystone Opportunity Zones.' "

The Corbett administration supports the legislation because it generally supports the Keystone Opportunity Zones as a way to pump investment into struggling areas that otherwise might not attract it, Kratz said. He declined to discuss what the state has offered Shell.

State leaders have closely guarded their talks with Shell. Offering a sweetened Keystone Opportunity Zone is probably the best way to compete with Ohio and West Virginia, several former state economic officials said.

SB 1237 would allow for 15 new zone expansions statewide. Billion-dollar investors would get an extra five years of no taxes, and manufacturing and processing businesses would get new breaks on state corporate income and capital stock franchise taxes.

Read more: Pennsylvania eyes tax deals to lure Shell's 'ethane cracker' - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/business/s_778868.html#ixzz1klKeCmM7

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/business/s_778868.html

Newt Gingrich National Security Advisor Former CFR Program Director

2011-12-23T06:06:00.000-08:00

As he'll do with other such appointments, Newt Gingrich has made a revealing selection in his choice of Kiron Skinner as national security advisor to his presidential campaign.

Bio Carnegie Mellon University

Monday, November 7, 2011

Media Advisory: CMU's Kiron K. Skinner, Renowned National Security and Political Strategy Expert, Available To Discuss GOP Campaign

... Skinner, an associate professor of social and decision sciences and director of CMU's Center for International Relations and Politics, serves on the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Executive Panel and is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. From 2001-2007, she was a member of the U.S. Defense Department's Defense Policy Board as an adviser on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Additionally, she is the coauthor, along with political scientists Serhiy Kudelia, Bruce Bueno de Mesquita and Condoleezza Rice, of "The Strategy of Campaigning: Lessons from Ronald Reagan and Boris Yeltsin," which is now used in political science courses at leading research universities. Skinner is currently advising Newt Gingrich's presidential campaign on national security issues.

http://www.cmu.edu/news/stories/archives/2011/november/nov7_kironskinner.html

Gingrich taps CMU expert on foreign relations
By Salena Zito, PITTSBURGH TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Friday, December 2, 2011

Foreign policy expert Kiron Skinner, the director of Carnegie Mellon University's International Relations and Politics department, has joined Republican Newt Gingrich's presidential campaign as a national security adviser.

Read more: Election coverage in Southwestern Pennsylvania - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/election/?record=10#ixzz1hMoKCJvO

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/s_770006.html

CFR Experts GuideThe Council on Foreign Relations' David Rockefeller Studies Program—CFR's "think tank"—is home to more than seventy full-time, adjunct, and visiting scholars and practitioners (called "fellows"). Their expertise covers the world's major regions as well as the critical issues shaping today's global agenda. Download the CFR Experts Printable Guide.

Roundtable on General Foreign Policy Topics
Director: Kiron Skinner

September 1, 2000 - June 30, 2002

http://www.cfr.org/projects/world/roundtable-on-general-foreign-policy-topics/pr287

Newt Gingrich Political Ringer Pro Centralized FEMA Homeland Security

2011-12-20T04:03:00.000-08:00

Newt Gingrich, in his own words, "centalized" government...

Alex Jones Infowars Nightly News 2011-12-05 video introduction of topic of Newt Gingrich hand in central role of government's FEMA and Homeland Security... at 2:02

... he's a ringer sent in to pose as a libertarian constitutionalist... but his actions, his fruits say the opposite here is Newt Gingrich just after 911... about how he had gotten Homeland Security set up...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayMpJfKz-xI&feature=related

U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century
Hart-Rudman Commission

...The United States Commission on National Security/21st Century, also know as the Hart-Rudman Commission, was chartered to review in a comprehensive way U.S. national security requirements for the next century. It began in Phase I by describing the future security environment this nation should anticipate, and in Phase II it delineated a strategy to address that future—to cope with the challenges and seize the opportunities that will constantly confront this great nation. Phase III was focused on changes to the national security apparatus, its structures and process, with an aim toward redesigning it as necessary to succeed in the security environment that lies ahead.

The Commission anticipated that it could not make credible recommendations to improve the national security apparatus without first understanding how that apparatus functioned. This document, Road Map for National Security: Addendum on Structure and Process Analyses, provides a thorough description of this country's national security organizations and processes as they existed in mid-2000.

Before institutional redesigns could occur, or before road maps could be constructed to get the national security apparatus headed in the appropriate direction, the Commission needed to understand how the government was structured and how it went about the business of national security. The seven volumes contained in the Addendum analyze key organizations and processes throughout the Federal government, to include the interagency and inter-branch levels. This Addendum provided a "baseline" of the national security apparatus, and was completed in draft form by the summer of 2000 as the Commission's main Phase III effort began in earnest. It thus laid much of the groundwork for Phase III. The first volume was updated and reedited in February and March 2001. The other volumes remain as originally written.To our knowledge no product has been previously produced that describes the national security structures and processes of the U.S. government in such detail. It should be useful to researchers and professionals seeking a detailed analysis of the national security system.

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/nssg/

Following is an excerpt from archives FEMAtraining.fema.gov

In 1998, President Clinton and House Speaker Newt Gingrich petitioned Congress to form a 14-member panel called the United States Commission on National Security/21st Century (USCNS/21), also known as the Hart-Rudman Commission, to make strategic recommendations on how the U.S. Government could ensure the nation’s security in the coming years. The independent panel, created by Congress, was tasked with conducting a comprehensive review of American security with the goal of designing a national security strategy.

The Commission’s report, “Road Map for National Security: Imperative for Change,” dated January 31, 2001, recommended the creation of a new independent National Homeland Security Agency (NHSA) with responsibility for planning, coordinating, and integrating various U.S. Government activities involved in homeland security. This agency would be built upon the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), with the Coast Guard, the Customs Service, and U.S. Border Patrol (now part of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) within the DHS) transferred into it. NHSA would assume responsibility for the safety of the American people as well as oversee the protection of critical infrastructure, including information technology. Obviously, the Commission’s recommendations were not heeded before 2001, but many of its findings would later be integrated into the justification and legislation behind the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

Two other commissions were established to study the terrorist threat during these years: The Gilmore Commission and the Bremer Commission. The Gilmore Commission, also known as the Advisory Panel to Assess Domestic Response Capabilities for Terrorism Involving Weapons of Mass Destruction, produced a series of annual reports beginning in 1999 (with the final report released in 2003). Each of these reports presented a growing base of knowledge concerning the WMD risk faced by the United States, and a recommended course of action required to counter that risk.

The Bremer Commission, also known as the National Commission on Terrorism, addressed the issue of the international terrorist threat. The commission was mandated by Congress to evaluate the nation’s laws, policies, and practices for preventing terrorism, and for punishing those responsible for terrorist events. Its members drafted a report titled “Countering the Changing Threat of International Terrorism.” This report, issued in the year 2000, arrived at the following conclusions:

· International terrorism poses an increasingly dangerous and difficult threat to America
· Countering the growing danger of the terrorist threat requires significantly stepping up U.S. efforts
· Priority one is to prevent terrorist attacks. U.S. intelligence and law enforcement communities must use the full scope of their authority to collect intelligence regarding terrorist plans and methods
· U.S. policies must firmly target all states that support terrorists
· Private sources of financial and logistical support for terrorists must be subjected to the full force and sweep of U.S. and international laws
· A terrorist attack involving a biological agent, deadly chemicals, or nuclear or radiological material, even if it succeeds only partially, could profoundly affect the entire nation. The government must do more to prepare for such an event
· The President and Congress should reform the system for reviewing and funding departmental counterterrorism programs to ensure that the activities and programs of various agencies are part of a comprehensive plan

Each of these conclusions and recommendations would take on great new meaning in the aftermath of the September 11th attacks, and would guide many of the changes incorporated into the Homeland Security Act of 2002. However, in the absence of a greater recognition of a terrorist threat within the borders of the United States, no major programs were initiated to combat the growing risk.

Presidential Decision Directives 62 & 63

As these commissions were conducting their research, President Clinton was addressing other recognized and immediate needs through the passage of several Presidential Decision Directives (PDDs). Terrorist attacks continued to occur throughout the world, aimed at US Government, Military, and private interests. In 1996, terrorists carried out a suicide bombing at the US Military (Khobar Towers) barracks in Saudi Arabia, and in 1998, simultaneous bombings were carried out at the U.S. diplomatic missions in Kenya and Tanzania.

In May of 1998, President Clinton issued Presidential Decision Directive 62 (PDD-62): Combating Terrorism, which called for the establishment of the Office of the National Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection and Counterterrorism. The directive’s primary goal was to create a new and more systematic approach to fighting the terrorist threat. PDD-62 reinforced the mission of many U.S. agencies involved in wide array of counterterrorism activities. The new National Coordinator was tasked with overseeing a broad variety of relevant policies and programs including counterterrorism, critical infrastructure protection, Weapons of Mass Destructions (WMD) preparedness and consequence management.

Soon after this directive, President Clinton issued Presidential Decision Directive 63 (PDD-63): Protecting America’s Critical Infrastructure. This directive tasked all of the departments of the Federal Government with assessing the vulnerabilities of their cyber and physical infrastructures, and to work to reduce their exposure to new and existing threats.

Attorney General’s Five-Year Interagency Counterterrorism and Technology Crime Plan

In December 1998, as mandated by Congress, the Department of Justice (DOJ), through the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), began a coordinated project with other agencies to develop the Attorney General’s Five-Year Interagency Counterterrorism and Technology Crime Plan. The FBI emerged as the Federal Government's principal agency for responding to and investigating terrorism. Congress had intended the plan to serve as a baseline for the coordination of a national strategy and operational capabilities to combat terrorism. This plan represented a substantial interagency effort, including goals, objectives, performance indicators and recommended specific agency actions to help resolve interagency problems. It clearly did not, however, tear down the walls that prevented interagency sharing of information, as evidenced by the failures that resulted in the success of the 9/11 terrorists.

General Accounting Office (GAO) Findings

The Department of Justice (DOJ) asserted that the Attorney General’s Five-Year Interagency Counterterrorism and Technology Crime Plan, considered together with related PDDs as described above, represented a comprehensive national strategy to address the terrorist threat. However, after a thorough review, the General Accounting Office (GAO), Congress’s investigative arm, concluded that additional work remained, that would build upon the progress that the plan represented. The GAO contended that a comprehensive national security strategy was lacking.

In the GAO report GAO-01-55T: ‘Combating Terrorism: Comments on Counterterrorism Leadership and National Strategy,’ released March 27, 2001, it is stated that the DOJ plan did not have measurable outcomes and suggested, for example, it should include goals that improve state and local response capabilities. The report argued that without a clearly defined national strategy, the nation would continue to miss opportunities to focus and shape counterterrorism programs to meet the impending threat. It also made the criticism that the DOJ plan lacked a coherent framework to develop and evaluate budget requirements for combating terrorism since there was no signal focal point. The report claimed that no single entity was acting as the Federal Government’s top official accountable to both the President and Congress for the terrorism hazard, and that fragmentation existed in both coordination of domestic preparedness programs and in efforts to develop a national strategy.

The GAO released another report in early September of 2001 (GAO-01-822) entitled ‘Combating Terrorism: Selected Challenges and Related Recommendations,’ which it finalized in the last days before the terrorist attacks occurred in Washington and New York. The report stated that the Federal Government was ill-equipped and unprepared to counter a major terrorist attack, claiming also that from sharing intelligence to coordinating a response, the government had failed to put in place an effective critical infrastructure system. It further stated that,

“Federal efforts to develop a national strategy to combat terrorism...have progressed, but key challenges remain. The initial step toward developing a national strategy is to conduct a national threat and risk assessment...at the national level (agencies) have not completed assessments of the most likely weapon-of-mass destruction agents and other terrorist threats...”

To prevent terrorist attacks, the GAO recommended:

· A national strategy to combat terrorism and computer-based attacks
· Better protection for the nation's infrastructure
· A single focal point to oversee coordination of Federal programs
· Completing a threat assessment on likely WMD and other weapons that might be used by terrorists
· Revising the Attorney General’s Five-Year Interagency Counterterrorism and Technology Crime Plan to better serve as a national strategy
· Coordinating research and development to combat terrorism

In a later report regarding Homeland Security, (GAO-02-610) ‘Key Elements to Unify Efforts Are Underway but Uncertainty Remains,’ the GAO called for more of the same in terms of needing central leadership and an overarching strategy that identifies goals and objectives, priorities, measurable outcomes, and state and local government roles in combating terrorism since the efforts of more than 40 federal entities and numerous state and local governments were still fragmented. It also called for the term Homeland Security to be defined properly since to date it had not.

September 11, 2001

The attacks on the World Trade Center in New York City, and the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia, could arguably be considered the first national disaster event, outside of wartime, in the history of the United States. It is the first disaster in this country that impacted all Americans, leaving all citizens and communities with an unrelenting sense of vulnerability. The economic consequences of these attacks, felt in all parts of our country and, in fact, around the world, make this disaster event truly global in scope.

The attacks involved the hijacking of 4 commercial airliners by 19 trained terrorists. Three of the four planes were flown into major American landmarks – the two World Trade Center Twin Towers, and the headquarters of the United States military. The fourth, whose target may never be conclusively known, was prevented from reaching its target by passengers on the plane that overpowered its four terrorist hijackers. Almost 3,000 people were killed, and billions of dollars in property damage resulted. The full economic impacts, which include everything from lost revenues to increased spending on terrorism preparedness, may never be known.

This was not a simple act, but one that required years of surveillance, funding, training, intelligence gathering, practice, and breaching of United States immigration law. There were many instances during this time, as were evidenced in the report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (9/11 Commission) (created to investigate the causes of the 9/11 attacks and means to prevent similar attacks from occurring the future), where individual agencies involved in counter-terrorist activities recognized one or more of these activities. However, insufficient coordination between the agencies prevented the Federal Government system of preventing terrorist attacks from piecing together the larger picture of what exactly was occurring, and as such, the terrorists were ultimately successful in their mission.

excerpt from:
[DOC]
Case 7 - FEMAtraining.fema.gov/.../ ...
You +1'd this publicly. Undo
File Format: Microsoft Word - Quick View
Case 7.2: The Homeland Security Act of 2002: A New Emergency Management ... In 1998, President Clinton and House Speaker Newt Gingrich petitioned Congress to ...... but President Carter created FEMA to centralize this Federal emergency

Interesting

FEMA FOIA Requesters

http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/foia/fema_foia_log_second_quarter_2011.pdf

New-t World Order

2011-11-28T19:53:00.000-08:00

thinking about New-t for President? You must not have been aware of - so much that makes him the most dangerous of dangers to our "republic" - including, but not limited to, his cozy relationship with the Tofflers.

Net the Truth Online Post Newt Watch March 17, 2007

After Words: Alvin Toffler interviewed by Newt Gingrich
Watch

Description: In 1970, the book "Future Shock" put Alvin Toffler on the map as a serious futurologist. His new book, "Revolutionary Wealth" -- written with his wife Heidi -- takes a look at the 21st century. The Tofflers argue that the United States is spearheading a new civilization, but that corporations, government, and social institutions left over from an era of mass production are not keeping up in this rapidly changing world. Alvin Toffler discusses his book with former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich. As a young assistant professor at West Georgia State College in the early 70s, Newt Gingrich began working with the Tofflers. He often referred to their work during his political career and even put Toffler books on his required reading list for members of Congress and all Americans.

http://www.booktv.org/General/index.asp?segID=7127&schedID=424&category=After+Words

http://netthetruthonline.blogspot.com/2007/03/chris-hedges-author-american-fascists.html

Creating A New Civilization: The Politics Of The Third Wave
Alvin Toffler and Heidi Toffler and
2 1995
Volume 1, Number 2

Gingrich's Gurus
Summer 1995

CREATING A NEW CIVILIZATION: THE POLITICS OF THE THIRD WAVE
Alvin and Heidi Toffler
Foreword by Newt Gingrich
Turner Publishing, 1995, 112 pp.

Newt Gingrich claims that "Alvin and Heidi Toffler have given us the key to viewing current disarray within the positive framwork of a dynamic, exciting future" (p. 14). The book, he thinks, "is an effort to empower citizenslike yourself to truly take the leap and begin to invent a Third Wave civilization" (p. 17).

http://mises.org/misesreview_detail.aspx?control=69

http://mises.org/misesreview_detail.aspx?control=69

Newt Gingrich: Mr. New World Order

Establishment throws its weight behind the ultimate RINO globalist

Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
Infowars.com
Monday, November 28, 2011

Desperate to derail Ron Paul’s momentum in New Hampshire, the key early primary state in which polls show Paul has a very real chance of winning, the establishment has thrown its weight behind Newt Gingrich, the ultimate RINO globalist who in reality is about as conservative as Mao Tse-tung.

With the campaigns of Mitt Romney and Rick Perry collapsing, the editorial board of the New Hampshire Union Leader chose to endorse Gingrich on Sunday, a move that the mainstream press immediately hailed as all-important, attempting to bestow kingmaker status on a relatively irrelevant newspaper in the grand scheme of things.

The anointment of Gingrich as Republican frontrunner is just the latest desperate bid to fool voters into supporting anyone other than Ron Paul. From Perry, to Romney, to Cain – the establishment has attempted to crown all of them as top dog – failing every time as each campaign subsequently crashes and burns.

Gingrich will inevitably follow suit because he has more skeletons in the closet than a halloween costume shop. Newt Gingrich is Mr. New World Order – a committed globalist who has publicly made clear his contempt for American sovereignty and freedom on a plethora of occasions, not least when he joined forces with Nancy Pelosi to push the Obama administration’s cap and trade agenda that would have completely bankrupted the country.

“I think if you have mandatory carbon caps combined with a trading system, much like we did with sulfur, and if you have a tax-incentive program for investing in the solutions, that there’s a package there that’s very, very good,” Gingrich told PBS Frontline in February 2007.

And if you think that doesn’t sound bad enough, just wait until you read what Gingrich had to say about mandatory health insurance.

“Personal responsibility extends to the purchase of health insurance. Citizens should not be able to cheat their neighbors by not buying insurance, particularly when they can afford it, and expect others to pay for their care when they need it,” he wrote in a 2007 OpEd for the Des Moines Register.

That’s right – self-proclaimed “conservative” Gingrich is an aggressive supporter of Obamacare, just like his rival Mitt Romney.

Gingrich has also been instrumental in pushing political frameworks with the goal of accomplishing global governance.

As Attorney Constance Cumbey writes, Gingrich worked feverishly with his buddy Al Gore back in the mid-90′s to help create the embryonic architecture of a global parliamentary authority.

Gingrich’s support for NAFTA, GATT, and the WTO entrenched his position as an enthusiastic advocate of globalism and sending American jobs abroad, the “giant sucking sound,” as Ross Perot labeled it It was Gingrich who helped Bill Clinton and the Democrats garner enough votes from Republicans to pass the North American Free Trade Agreement, which is now quickly evolving into the North American Union.

Gingrich’s Council on Foreign Relations membership and his close relationship with his mentor Henry Kissinger cements his role as a key agitator for the destruction of U.S. sovereignty. Indeed, during a July 1995 speech, he openly decried the constitution as being a roadblock to a UN-managed global government.

“The American challenge in leading the world is compounded by our Constitution,” he said. “Under our [constitutional system] – either we’re going to have to rethink our Constitution, or we’re going to have to rethink our process of decision-making.” He went on to profess an oxymoronic belief in “very strong but limited federal government,” and pledged, “I am for the United Nations.”

“In order to understand just how dedicated Gingrich is to destroying the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, consider that he described himself as a “conservative futurist” who enthusiastically recommended as Speaker of the House his colleagues read Alvin Toffler’s 1980 book The Third Wave,” writes Kurt Nimmo.

“In the book, Toffler wrote a letter to America’s “founding parents,” in which he said: “The system of government you fashioned, including the very principles on which you based it, is increasingly obsolete, and hence increasingly, if inadvertently, oppressive and dangerous to our welfare. It must be radically changed and a new system of government invented – a democracy for the 21st century.” According to Toffler, our constitutional system is one that “served us so well for so long, and that now must, in its turn, die and be replaced.””http://www.infowars.com/newt-gingrich-mr-new-world-order/

Retrial Potential for PA Wrongfully Convicted Munchinki

2011-08-09T04:20:00.000-07:00

This is huge news coming down the Pike after decades. More to the story that is for certain than is being reported.

For now, Tribune-Review coverage looks to summarize with just a few key lines.

Prosecutors weigh retrial of 'Bear Rocks Murders' defendant
By Liz Zemba, TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Tuesday, August 9, 2011
Prosecutors have not yet decided whether they will retry a Latrobe man who has served 25 years in prison in a double homicide.

A federal judge on Friday granted David Munchinski, 59, a new trial in the shooting deaths of Raymond Gierke, 28, and James "Petey" Alford, 22, during a drug deal gone wrong at Gierke's Bear Rocks chalet on Dec. 2, 1977.

Prosecutors have up to 120 days to retry the case, but a decision on whether to proceed has not been made.

"We are still considering our options," said Deputy Attorney General Gregory J. Simatic of the state attorney general's Pittsburgh office.

Munchinski and the late Leon Scaglione of New Alexandria were convicted in 1986 in the double homicide. A 1983 trial ended in a mistrial.

On Friday, Chief Magistrate Lisa Pupo Lenihan said Munchinski is entitled to a new trial in the case, known as the Bear Rocks Murders, because prosecutors withheld evidence that would have cast doubts on the man's guilt.

Jack Heneks, district attorney for Fayette County, said he does not expect the case to be referred back to his office for possible prosecution. He said the state Attorney General's Office was brought in to handle appeals in the case because of conflicts of interest that existed before he took over as district attorney from Nancy Vernon, who is now a county judge.

"I would think that those reasons are still in place, for Nancy not handling it," Heneks said, adding he likely has his own conflicts because he was in the public defender's office at the time Munchinski was tried.

Simatic said he will read Lenihan's decision and consult with prosecutors in Harrisburg before deciding whether to proceed to trial.

Noah Geary, a Washington County attorney who represents Munchinski, said prosecutors could decide to appeal, as well, but he feels that Lenihan's order should put an end to the case.

"My hope is they will acknowledge the fact the man was wrongfully convicted and not file an appeal," Geary said. "And due to the fact there was no evidence to support bringing him to trial, that they would acknowledge that and let him be released. He's done 25 years."
As for a retrial, Geary said "there is no evidence" to support one.

More than three decades later, several key players in the case have died. Scaglione died in prison in 1996. A star witness, Richard Bowen, who testified that he drove Munchinski and Scaglione to the murder site, only to later recant in an interview with FBI agents, is also dead.

Read more: Prosecutors weigh retrial of 'Bear Rocks Murders' defendant - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/fayette/s_750652.html#ixzz1UWt5V4nA

Impact Obama Healthcare Plan Firms to Cut

2011-06-07T18:00:00.001-07:00

June 6, 2011, 6:54 p.m. EDT

Firms to cut health plans as reform starts: survey
30% of companies say they’ll stop offering coverage
LOS ANGELES (MarketWatch) — Once provisions of the Affordable Care Act start to kick in during 2014, at least three of every 10 employers will probably stop offering health coverage, a survey released Monday shows.

While only 7% of employees will be forced to switch to subsidized-exchange programs, at least 30% of companies say they will “definitely or probably” stop offering employer-sponsored coverage, according to the study published in McKinsey Quarterly.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/firms-halting-coverage-as-reform-starts-survey-2011-06-06

Gas Drilling Study Baseline Not Used, But Strong Claim Made

2011-05-12T08:52:00.000-07:00

Gas Drilling Technique Contaminates Drinking Water, Study Finds

Published May 10, 2011 Associated Press

New research is providing some of the first scientific evidence that a controversial gas drilling technique can contaminate drinking water.

The study published Monday found potentially dangerous concentrations of methane gas in water from wells near drilling sites in northeastern Pennsylvania, although not in central New York, where gas drilling is less extensive.

But in an unexpected finding, the team of Duke University scientists did not find any trace of the chemicals used in the hydraulic fracturing process in 68 wells tested in Pennsylvania and Otsego County in central New York.

In hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, water, sand and chemicals are injected underground to crack the rock and get natural gas to flow into a well. Critics of the technique have worried more about the chemicals since companies have refused to make public the proprietary blends used and some of the ingredients can be toxic.

On average, water from wells located less than a mile from drilling sites had 17 times more methane than water tested from wells farther away, according to the study published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Methane is not known to be toxic, but in high concentrations it can be explosive and cause unconsciousness and even death, since it displaces oxygen needed to breathe.

Of the 60 wells tested for methane gas, 14 had levels of methane within or above a hazard range set by the Department of Interior for gas seeping from coal mines — all but one of them near a gas well. In nine wells, concentrations were so high that the government would recommend immediate action to reduce the methane level.

Methane is released naturally by bacteria as they break down organic matter. The researchers' analysis shows that the type of methane in the wells with the highest concentrations is coming from deep in the earth, the same place tapped by companies in search of natural gas.

In the most severe case, a homeowner in Bradford County, Pa., who leased her property to a gas company, has so much methane coming out of her tap she can light her water on fire. A natural gas well is located 800 feet from her house.

"Not every homeowner within a kilometer (of a drilling site) will have high methane concentrations," said Stephen Osborn, a postdoctoral associate at Duke University's Center on Global Change. "If you are a homeowner within a kilometer, and our study shows this, I would be a little bit concerned."

What the study does not say is how exactly the methane is getting into drinking water sources, and what part of the drilling is potentially involved. While wells closer to drilling sites had more methane, most of the wells in the study — 85 percent — had some.

Industry groups on Monday faulted the research, saying it did not show that fracking itself was behind the methane contamination, nor did the researchers conduct before-and-after tests to prove the contamination occurred after drilling. The authors themselves suspect that the methane is likely flowing up the sides of the gas well — rather than down pathways created by hydraulic fracturing.

"The authors admit they have no baseline data at all, which makes it impossible to characterize the state of those water wells prior to recent development," said Chris Tucker, a spokesman for Energy in Depth, a national coalition of independent gas producers.

The industry also was critical of the paper's editor, William H. Schlesinger, who selected the study's outside reviewers. Schlesinger, a biogeochemist and president of the Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies in Millbrook, N.Y, has supported moratoriums in New York on hydraulic fracturing permits until its effects are completely understood.

Gas drilling has expanded in Pennsylvania and other states where shale formations are thought to hold lots of natural gas, a clean-burning energy source. To get it, companies need to fracture the rock.

As the technique has proliferated, so too has concern among homeowners, and local, state and federal governments about its potential toll on underground drinking water sources which are unregulated and untested. Two federal agencies have launched their own studies, and the state of Pennsylvania — where numerous homeowners are suing drilling companies over water contamination — views methane as among the most serious risks of gas drilling.

In that state, an investigation into an explosion and fire at a house in December, and another at a home in February, is looking at natural gas drilling as the culprit. And a natural gas drilling company last year agreed to pay $4.1 million to 19 homeowners whose water was contaminated by methane gas, even though the company denies causing the pollution.

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/05/10/gas-drilling-technique-contaminates-drinking-water-study-finds/

Hold the MSG: Food Triggers for Epilepsy and Other Neurological Illnesses

2011-05-10T18:38:00.000-07:00

Alison Rose Levy.Health journalist, coach, and
Posted: October 26, 2009
Hold the MSG: Food Triggers for Epilepsy and Other Neurological Illnesses

Last week, 60 Minutes reported on David and Susan Axelrod's search for a cure for epilepsy prompted by their two decade plus experience of the ailment, which their adult daughter has suffered since infancy. But while Katie Couric admiringly covered the researchers seeking to find "the Cure," ie. new anti-convulsive drugs, once again proactive, preventive health care strategies that might help to reduce incidence of epileptic attacks were overlooked.

How ironic it is that in the midst of the health care reform debate, Axelrod, a key Obama aide, is so poorly informed about integrative strategies that could help his own daughter.

For neurological illnesses, including Parkinson's Disease, epilepsy, and others, a body of scientific research demonstrates that certain food additives, singly and in combination with each other, contribute to excessive nerve cell firing; and thus, may be a possible trigger for epileptic attacks and other neurological incidents. In keeping with that, limiting or altogether avoiding these ingredients is a strategy that some integrative physicians recommend, though many who could benefit are unaware of the dangers these common food additives pose.

Because of their activity--stimulating nerve cells to rapidly fire and burn out, ultimately resulting in nerve cell death, the food additives are considered to be "excitotoxins." While some naturally occur in the body, people who consume processed foods are exposed to a much greater amount than ever before since industrial food scientists regularly add them to processed foods to enhance the food's flavor. The most widely used food ingredients that have excitotoxic activity are monosodium glutamate, aspartame, hydrolyzed vegetable protein, and other additives that stimulate the taste buds and mask the flavor of many processed foods, Fresh, natural foods don't require this form of flavor enhancement. The artificial sweetener, aspartame, marketed as NutraSweet, Equal, and under several other brand names, is one of most widely consumed of the food additives with excitotoxic activity.

Nearly all food items sold in convenience stores are full of them, as are many processed, or packaged foods. If you read labels, you will discover that they are listed under many different names; and flavorings such as those in soups, soup mixes, and even many spices will often contain them as well.

With the increase in incidence of neurological illness, including Alzheimer's Disease, a basic proactive health strategy that many integrative practitioners recommend is to limit intake of these food ingredients. More information on excitotoxins can be found in Russell Blaylockm MD's book, Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills. Food Additives: A Shopper's Guide To What's Safe & What's Not by Christine Farlow is a shopper's guide to ingredient names.

For health information, science, and action, get the free ezine, the Health Outlook at www.health-journalist.com

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alison-rose-levy/hold-the-msg-food-trigger_b_333404.html

O'Reilly: Native American Community Don't be Offended Geroninmo Just a Code Name for Bin Laden

2011-05-07T02:52:00.000-07:00

Has O'Reilly any kind of sense? Our government can do NO wrong by using Geronimo as a code name for the most-wanted TERRORIST the world has ever sought?

His two guests agreed with him. Arthelle Neville and Greg Gutfield. The government did no wrong, the military did no wrong by using a Native American name as a code for a slaughterer, murderer, claimed by the government to be responsible for the loss of 3,000 lives on United States soil (how many jumped out of World Trade Center building there's a good question on history tests)?

I could understand Gutfield and O'Reilly. Neocons, apparently. Stong-g hand.

Neville? No empathy, no common sense, no sympatico?

Why the hell wasn't the code name an acronym? Aim To Kill. ATK. Or anything benign.

Why select the name of a well known defender of his people? Geronimo.

Our government should apologize profusely. And whoever came up with the code should be out of a job. We're sure it wasn't President Barack Obama. And if he had any authorization of the code name - oh ok - I agree to Geronimo - he should be looked at even far more closely than he has been per his early childhood teaching.

Net the Truth Online

Official Narrative bin Laden Kill Change We Can Believe Now?

2011-05-05T14:16:00.000-07:00

The Slippery Story of the bin Laden Kill
Garance Franke-Ruta senior editor at The Atlantic
May 3 2011
The early narrative of the assault on Osama bin Laden had him using his wife as a human shield and firing from behind her. Now we learn he wasn't armed.

http://www.theatlantic

.com/politics/archive/2011/05/the-slippery-story-of-the-bin-laden-kill/238261/

Glenn Beck: Destabilization Following Osama bin Laden's (days ago) Death

2011-05-03T14:18:00.000-07:00

What more can be said? Glenn Beck spent many minutes dismissing any questioning surrounding the shooting of Osama bin Laden, such as was it really him since according to several experts, it takes days to obtain results from DNA testing, but somehow, "they" according to Dr. Baden as we noted in an earlier piece, "knew (from DNA) within 5 hours."

Beck then presented his - not a conspiracy theory - that destabilization would occur in the region due to bin Laden's death. He went on at length using his charts indicating he could accept such was intentional destabilization and even used lack of a quick U.S. response concerning Egypt's protests and turmoil as an example of such intentional destabilization!

Next, Beck introduced a guest and says he has few guests on he doesn't agree with many and it's usually just bull-crap - but this guest does not give us any bull-crap.

Michael Scheuer says it's going to be a long war and we're going to be fighting it for a very long time.

The pair move on to the Muslim Brotherhood... then in the final minutes Schaer said exactly what Beck had been angling for:

The Pakistan government is corrupt...

Beck made some comment just before that concerning destabilation.

"no matter if intentional or unintentional destabilization, it will happen..."

Goodbye Glenn. may you dream of butterflies along with dreaming up your own conspiracy uh not conspiracy theories.

Net the TRUTH Online

Khan: Pakistan has 'our most corrupt government'
Print Email
Australian Broadcasting Corporation

Broadcast: 02/09/2010

Reporter: Tony Jones

Politician and cricketing great Imran Khan says Pakistan has a bigger problem with corruption than with Islamic extremism.

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2010/s3001222.htm

Interview Michael Scheuer by CFR

http://www.cfr.org/terrorism/winning-losing-inside-look-war-terror/p7771

CIA Veteran Michael Scheuer ‘Only the Taliban Are Not Corrupt’

Interview conducted by Marc Hujer
Der Speigel online

SPIEGEL: The US now has to face accusations that it is financing the very corruption it is promising to fight.

Scheuer: Not really. President Obama knew about this. His intelligence advisors knew about this. If he’s smart I’m sure the president would want to have somebody close to Karzai to know what’s going on. The US government and other governments are lying when they say that they can clean up corruption and win the war.

SPIEGEL: Is Washington being energetic enough in trying to fight corruption?

Scheuer: We’re really not in a position to push these people. Who’s going to replace them? There isn’t anyone less corrupt. Probably the only incorrupt people in Afghanistan are the Taliban. If you want no corruption, give the government back to the Taliban.

http://theislamicstandard.wordpress.com/2010/09/02/cia-veteran-michael-scheuer-only-the-taliban-are-not-corrupt/

How is a President to look when viewing real time assassination?

2011-05-03T10:05:00.000-07:00

President Barack Obama leans forward with interest as Sec. of State Hillary Clinton covers her mouth while viewing real-time live feed of Osama bin Laden assassination

Meanwhile, according to Chicago Sun Time's Lynn Sweet's column which includes a photo of the onlookers, a classified document has been obscured.

Obama, Bill Daley, Hillary, War cabinet watching live feed of Bin Laden raid
By Lynn Sweet on May 2, 2011 5:30 PM

http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2011/05/obama_bill_daley_hillary_war_c.html

Revealed at this site for the first time is the title of the obscured document...

Classified Document Obscured in Real-Time bin Laden Kill Watch Photo

(How to look Presidential and Strong when viewing a real-time assassination)

http://dirtline.tripod.com/talkacrosstown/

Guess Hillary's book covered her copy of the document before she could read it.

Net the Truth Online

National Journal Maggie Fox: Did DNA Finger bin Laden

2011-05-03T04:36:00.000-07:00

Worth a read, Maggie Fox, National Journal piece: Did DNA Finger bin Laden?

The article reads like an opinion piece to us, so we're posting in its entirety.

We can't help but wonder why Dr. Baden, a guest on Monday morning programming Fox 'n Friends, did not highlight the technique noted in the article to obtain and analyze DNA data, within hours? PCR, or polymerase chain reaction...

Wouldn't Dr. Baden know the exact amount of time such could be compared to known DNA (in this case not DNA previously obtained from the subject and in storage, but from relatives)?

Why did Dr. Baden appear to be skeptical on Monday's Fox 'n Friends regarding the ability to obtain results from an analysis not only within 5 hours (when news broke Osama bin Laden was dead), but sooner than 24 hours?

Surely, Dr. Baden is aware...

The FBI has lots of ways to use DNA fingerprinting to identify culprits.

It can be done in hours using what is called PCR, or polymerase chain reaction, to amplify the tiny bits of DNA and then look for a specific part of the genetic code called short tandem repeats.

Although human beings share 99.9 percent of their DNA, these short tandem repeats, or STRs, tend to be very different from one person to another. The United States uses an agreed-upon set of 13 places for STRs in the genome, and the odds that two individuals will have the same DNA profile are about one in a billion, according to the Energy Department lab taking part in the Human Genome Project.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/tech/did-dna-finger-bin-laden--20110502

Dr. Baden's comments remain puzzling. Others have questioned as well How do we know, or how was it known so early from DNA evidence, this was indeed Osama bin Laden?

Net the Truth Online

Did DNA Finger bin Laden?
By Maggie Fox

May 2, 2011 | 5:13 p.m

His face is one of the most recognizable in the world, but in the end, could it have been DNA fingerprinting that proved to U.S. officials that they had finally nailed Osama bin Laden?

Maybe – but the Obama administration had better be saving some evidence.

U.S. officials have told various news sources that CIA facial-recognition technology was used to identify bin Laden, and that his wife – apparently also killed in the attack – called him by name during the firefight that ended his life.

But they say that DNA was the final piece of evidence.

Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., chairman of the House Intelligence Committee told the AP that more than one DNA sample was used to identify bin Laden.

One problem – whose DNA did they compare it to?

According to several reports, U.S. intelligence experts have been collecting DNA from Osama’s many relatives for years. Hospital officials in Boston have been unable to confirm reports that one source of DNA was bin Laden’s half-sister, who allegedly died of brain cancer at a Harvard-affiliated hospital.

Bin Laden had plenty of half-brothers and half-sisters to offer DNA samples. He was the 17th child of Mohammed bin Awad bin Laden, who had 54 children with 22 wives. Bin Laden’s father died when he was 10.

The FBI has lots of ways to use DNA fingerprinting to identify culprits.

It can be done in hours using what is called PCR, or polymerase chain reaction, to amplify the tiny bits of DNA and then look for a specific part of the genetic code called short tandem repeats.

Although human beings share 99.9 percent of their DNA, these short tandem repeats, or STRs, tend to be very different from one person to another. The United States uses an agreed-upon set of 13 places for STRs in the genome, and the odds that two individuals will have the same DNA profile are about one in a billion, according to the Energy Department lab taking part in the Human Genome Project.

But does the government have earlier DNA that, for certain, came from bin Laden? Not likely, and so the next-best source is a sibling.

And in that case, says Stephen Quake, a Howard Hughes Medical Institute professor of applied physics and bioengineering at Stanford University, all the DNA analysis will say for sure is that the dead person is one of the many sons of Osama bin Laden’s father.

One factor could make things easier: Osama bin Laden was the only child whom his mother, Alia Ghanem, had with his father. That could make it easier to triangulate any tissue samples with samples from half-siblings.

It is not an exact science, however. DNA was used to establish that Thomas Jefferson was related to the descendants of his former slave, Sally Hemings. In that case the Y chromosome, which is passed down with very little change from father to son over the generations, was used. But all that the DNA indicated in the end was that descendants of Jefferson’s paternal uncle have the same Y chromosome as a male-line descendant of Eston Hemings, the youngest son of Sally Hemings. The research could never finger Jefferson individually with complete accuracy.

“You are still dealing with probabilities,” Quake said.

The best bet, Quake said, will be whole-genome analysis, which takes a week or more using current technology and will produce a complete map of the corpse’s DNA.

“They got the sample, Quake said. “They can take as much time as they want to do the analysis.”

If bin Laden’s mother, now known as Hamida al-Attas, could be persuaded to give some of her DNA, that might provide compelling evidence. She was last reported to be living in Saudi Arabia, and ABC News reported that U.S. officials had asked bin Laden’s relatives for DNA samples after they thought they might have killed him in a missile strike last February.

The White House says that bin Laden was buried at sea. One can only hope they kept some tissue and blood samples to back up the DNA claims.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/tech/did-dna-finger-bin-laden--20110502

Fox 'n Friends Guest: What DNA Evidence?

2011-05-03T03:40:00.000-07:00

Fox 'n Friends still allowing DNA has already been processed that would prove U.S. forces indeed captured and killed the right man, not just a look-a-like, Osama Bin Laden.

Monday, Dr. Baden commented in two ways to the trio's question:

How do we know it was Osama Bin Laden? Facial recognition, fingerprints, DNA?

Dr. Baden seemed to wonder about facial recognition (not 100% proof), noted fingerprinting could be utilized (but after all wouldn't they have to have his fingerprints on record, duh, we question), and Dr. Baden said DNA can be processed in 24 hours... "they" did it in 5 hours."

Nobody raised any further questions about how the DNA could have been processed long before 24 hours had passed.

Today, Chuck Boone was hot on the trail of proof this was Osama Bin Laden. He wondered why the Obama Administration had already buried the body at sea. Why not bring Osama Bin Laden here, and release the pictures of his demise.

Boone specifically posed: "what was the hurry?" He added further: How do we know this wasn't an operation in the style of Jack Bauer of TV'S "24" fame. Capture and torture, and Boone implied leaving evidence of it with bruising and eye-swelling, or absence of an eye altogether. (yes we were avid 24 viewers, almost all episodes, the sillier episodes we just swtiched channels, screaming at the unbelievability)

Boone then let out pretty much what had been on the 'trio's' minds Monday morning.

How do we know this was Osama Bin Laden?

Ellen Ratnor quickly responded: "... there's DNA evidence..."

Boone as quickly responded: "What DNA evidence."

Just when things were really heating up at that precise point, Steve Doocy ended the exchange.

Net the Truth Online

Sky News: Can US Offer Final Proof of Osama's Death?

2011-05-02T14:47:00.000-07:00

US: DNA Test Match Proves Bin Laden Death
Can US Offer Final Proof Of Osama's Death?
Sky News 2011
The circumstances surrounding Osama bin Laden's reported death raise urgent questions over how the US is so sure it got its man.

US officials have said DNA testing has proved the al Qaeda leader was killed in a villa in Pakistan.

They have also identified him by facial recognition.

But photographs of Bin Laden after his reported death have not been released.

The fact his body was buried at sea has so far only added to the speculation, although as a Muslim, he had to be laid to rest as quickly as possible.

Under Islamic law, people can only be buried at sea if they died there, or if there is a risk their body will be exhumed or dug up if buried in the ground.

The release of a photograph purporting to show bin Laden's corpse - which was later confirmed to be a fake - added to the confusion.

Journalists have not yet had the opportunity to ask more than a few questions of the Obama administration about details of Bin Laden's death.

A former British ambassador to the US, Sir Christopher Meyer, told Sky News: "I imagine we will see proof.

"I can't concede the US president would go out to make a statement to the world that bin Laden is dead without being able to produce evidence that he is dead.

"I think we will see some evidence - DNA or photographic - to prove there is not still some phantom Osama bin Laden riding the Tora Bora mountains."

The announcement is not the first time the world has heard of Bin Laden's death. Claims that the US and Britain kept up a pretence he was alive in order to continue their war on terror have been dismissed as conspiracy theories.

It has been suggested that bin Laden died nearly 10 years ago during the battle for Tora Bora in Afghanistan, either from a US bomb or from kidney disease.

And as for his audio and video statements, their authenticity has continually been questioned.

One of his video statements, released just days before the October 2004 US presidential election, was said to have been crucial in helping George Bush secure a second term in office.

But his statement from December 2001, when he was seen to confess to the 9/11 attacks, has attracted the most attention.

Bin Laden had insisted numerous times, through the Arab press and in video statements, that he had no involvement with the atrocities. His sudden confession was picked up on by doubters.

Additionally, his appearance in the December 2001 video was markedly different. He sported a black beard, not his usual grey one, his pale skin had become darker and he had a different shaped nose.

He also looked in good health - a contrast to his earlier gaunt appearance - and critics have pointed to the fact he is seen writing a note with his right hand, although he was left-handed

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/5/20110502/twl-can-us-offer-final-proof-of-osama-s-3fd0ae9.html

Is it really Osama Bin Laden? Dr. Baden Answers Raise Questions

2011-05-02T05:35:00.000-07:00

Reportedly, Osama Bin Laden has been killed in Pakistan by CIA intel with the help of Navy Seals.

Osama bin Laden is killed by U.S. forces in Pakistan

Fox New: Osama bin Laden killed

Matt Drudge headline

SHOT IN HEAD; BIN LADEN IS DEAD.....

Yahoo News

US kills Osama bin Laden decade after 9/11 attacks

This morning, just before before 9 am EST, with several guests one after the other, Fox 'n Friends discussed the reports that Osama Bin Laden had been killed in Pakistan, then with guest Dr. Baden, the trio specifically raised the question:

(At this early time) How do we know it is really Osama Bin Laden who has been killed.

They bantered for a while with Dr. Baden, facial recognition, fingerprints, bio-data, DNA?

The question arose again: How do we know this was Osama Bin Laden specifically through DNA?

The discussion was really fascinating.

Dr. Baden's comments were hesitant on facial recognition (especially if the reports are true and Osama Bin Laden had been shot in the head, duh) a little more clear on the potential for fingerprinting confirming identity, but certainly not 100% (that on site testing again), then Dr. Baden proposed the following regarding bio-data/DNA:

"DNA can be determined within about 24 hours. They (meaning medical professionals on scene in Pakistan) must have done it in less than 5 hours"

Nobody on Fox 'n Friends asked follow-up questions after Dr. Baden's thought-provoking pronouncements.

The matter that was on the Fox 'n Friends trio's minds, how is it known for sure that was Osama Bin Laden who was killed, was no longer of any importance.

Why didn't anybody press Dr. Baden on the odd comment after Baden noted DNA can be determined within 24 hours - "they must have done it in less than 5 hours."

Then we find these two interesting headlines

Drudge headline DNA tests won't be complete for days...

Yahoo news headline, U.S. tests bin Laden's DNA, used facial ID: official

U.S. tests bin Laden's DNA, used facial ID: official
Mon May 2, 2:20 am ET

The United States is conducting DNA testing on slain al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and used facial recognition techniques to help identify him, a U.S. official said on Monday.

Bin Laden was identified by the assault force that killed him in a firefight in Pakistan in which he resisted and was shot in the head, the official said on condition of anonymity.

Results of the DNA tests should be available in the next few days, the official told Reuters.

The strike force was on the ground for less than 40 minutes and the operation was watched real-time by CIA Director Leon Panetta and other intelligence officials in a conference room at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, the official said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110502/ts_nm/us_binladen_dna_1

the problem is the headline of the Yahoo piece makes it seem as though the word official applies to the DNA test (and facial recognition) and thus it has already been confirmed by DNA tests Osama Bin Laden is dead.

The Drudge headline read accurately per the Yahoo News text within the body of the article:

Results of the DNA tests should be available in the next few days, the official told Reuters.

We are just puzzled by Dr. Baden's comment "they must have done it in 5 hours."

We're wondering why it was so important for Dr. Baden to allow that DNA testing had confirmed Osama Bin Laden is dead especially when he had just explained a 24-hour time period was possible.

Could it be that Dr. Baden's two divergent answers revealed the real potential for the military and President Barack Obama to be jumping the gun so to speak on the announcement Osama Bin Laden is dead, has indeed been killed by U.S. forces?

Why not wait the 24 hours at least to confirm DNA tests are accurate and this was Osama Bin Laden who was killed by U.S. forces? Or even a few days, because according to the noted prominent Drudge Report headline, DNA test results wouldn't be known, for days!

The Fox 'n Friends group also discussed whether Osama Bin Laden's remains would be 'buried' at sea. Will they use weights so the body doesn't wash back up on shore? Dr. Baden agreed it would be gruesome if body parts washed up onto shore.

We kid you not, the discussion was FASCINATING!

We couldn't help but wonder why Osama Bin Laden's body would not be brought back to the United States to make absolutely certain it is Osama Bin Laden and not yet another potential 'double?'

Notice, too, when speaking, the trio used the name Osama Bin Laden.

The ticker-tape running across the screen reads Usama bin Laden, however.

Maybe it's because the ticker-tape message changes periodically to President Obama or just Obama.

It is interesting as well that reports are Osama Bin Laden has 'already' been buried at sea.

Finally, now we find this headline

AP publishes, retracts photo of bin Laden's dead body

Wire service admits it cannot independently verify identity of person in picture
--Pasadena Star-News, California

Net the Truth Online

UPDATED 12:33 a.m.: AP retracts photo purporting to show Osama bin Laden's dead bodyPosted: 05/01/2011 11:14:26 PM PDT

The Associated Press has retracted a photograph released late Sunday night purporting to show the dead body of terror mastermind Osama bin Laden.
AP announced that it cannot independently verify that the person in the photo is Osama bin Laden nor can it confirm the source.

Read more: http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/news/ci_17972189#ixzz1LCpRMAOD

Obama Birth Certificate Corsi's Forger's Joke Ukulele vs Net the Truth Online Vick Lee

2011-04-30T07:30:00.000-07:00

The only thing at this point we feel inclined to address concerning the recent release of the "long-form" birth certificate by President Barack Obama is World Net Daily's Jerome Corsi (in "A tale of two birth certificates" suggesting the name of the local registrar on the Obama birth certificate is "ukulele."

WND's Corsi looks at the signature and reads a twisting of: ukulele

As he sees it, Corsi comments further on the registrar's name:

"...appears remarkably like a forger's signature joke on the word "ukulele"..."

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=292717#ixzz1L11AQk1y

We look at the signature and read Vick Lee.

Seriously, folks, all the professional document analysts, forensic document analysts, and researchers a phone call - email - or text message away and available to Corsi, and not one has pointed out the registrar's name could be as short and sweet as Vick Lee?

Unfortunately, not surprisingly, Corsi, the author of the WND article, also has a book coming out in late May, entitled: Where's The Birth Certificate...

But if Dr. Corsi misses a more than equally viable observation of the registrar's name on the Obama birth certificate, (Vick Lee vs ukulele) what else has Corsi missed?

We are simply after the truth. We're not playing politics or games.

Corsi may believe that by using the word "appears" before the claim "a forger's signature joke" gives one room to be wholly inaccurate will pass the smell test (in this case the buy and buy more test), but it shouldn't.

Fortunately, we never buy books other than used and discarded ones from second hand bookstores, or charitable organizations selling used books, where we're sure we'll find Corsi's latest sooner rather than later for about 15 cents.

Exactly what Corsi's Where's the Birth Certificate will be worth should Vick Lee turn out to be the local registrar who penned signature to Barack Obama's long-form birth certificate back when in August, 1961.

Pondering and dismissing the noted "ukulele" assertion as made by Dr. Corsi by no means negates the serious questions that that are to be pursued regarding the meaning of the Constitution's 'natural born citizen' clause as it pertains to qualification requirements pertaining to a President of the United States.

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#A2Sec1

The issue of a President-to-be's citizenship status could crop up in the near future, with a scenario arising such as a candidate seeking the office of the President of the United States having been born in the U.S. but found to be the child of an "undocumented" (illegal) immigrant and potentially one parent being a legal citizen.

With the federal Moter Voter Act Law (making it difficult to remove names from state Voter Registration Lists/local voter registries for years after an elector may have been deceased, or moved out of the voting jurisdiction), and many states issuing applicants driver's licenses based on sketcy documentation, (making it easier for illegals to gain access to the election process)(for instance, see Georgia requirments), and lax or non-existent review precesses to cull local and state voter registration lists (challenges to purges abound), it is not out of the realm of possibility down the road that such a scenario may arise.

The United States also may have precedents of sorts with presidents after the adoption of the original Constitution being born on other than United States soil.

Questions arose, not only with Barack Obama (initiated during the Democratic Primary campaign by supporters of Hillary Clinton) (use search features), but as well with Senator John McCain (use search features).

Moreover, legitimate questions arise out of our history textbooks. That is if such even contain any highlights of former 'Founding' presidents as the trend seems to be veering away from Foundational principles in our political history textbooks.

A few postings in the comments section to Newsbusters piece,
CBS and MSNBC Both Falsely Claim Obama First President to Have Citizenship Questioned" caught our attention recently as well and are deserving of scrutiny.

I seem to remember reading,
Submitted by irishguy on Fri, 04/29/2011 - 9:52pm.

I seem to remember reading, years ago, that there were questions of whether or not Andrew Jackson was born at sea and therefore would not have been eligible to be POTUS. If memory serves, it was a book by Allen W. Eckert, perhaps "the Frontiersman"

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/kyle-drennen/2011/04/28/cbs-and-msnbc-both-falsely-claim-obama-first-president-have-citizenshi#ixzz1L1Ds9J00

#11 No. It was real people talking about a real issue.
Submitted by The Vet on Fri, 04/29/2011 - 12:44am.

Here is the thing. Real people look at this issue and they come to a conclusion. The term "natural born citizen" was mentioned in the Constitution but was never defined in the Constitution nor by any Congress since. And the issue has never been adjudicated before the Supreme Court. So there is still some interpretation open as to exactly what is a "natural born citizen". It is not settled. It will not be settled until either the Supreme Court rules on it or there is an Amendment to define the term.

This is the way real people look at it. Real honest people. John McCain had two American parents but he was born on foreign soil. Barack Obama had only one American parent but was born on American soil. Both ran for the Presidency. The issue was brought up. But was largely ignored. Why? Because the weight of the argument is "natural born citizen" is that you were born into citizenship. And you gained that born citizenship by way of one or more of your parents citizenship. The question was asked. People looked. Said, eh, not that big a deal and we had an election.

And yes. Real people. Honest people had a duty, a right, to look and deem it not a big deal. They look, and say, OK, not completely settled but it is not worth the big national debate to settle this once and for all during a campaign fight. No. It was not racist. But it was worth looking at both of these candidates. The question was brought up and the question was found wanting.

That leads to why, why these birther trolls come here, going on 28 months after the fact, and look honest people, real people in the face and act as though the matter of the definition of "natural born citizen" is settled law. Look at these people. Every single one. Every single act as though their definition of the term IS A FACT. And they will argue and argue and argue as though they have the 11th commandment in stone and the 11th commandment is their definition of "natural born citizen". It is enough to make a grown man cry. The stupidity. The crassness. The rudeness of acting as though this is settle law when in fact it is not.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/kyle-drennen/2011/04/28/cbs-and-msnbc-both-falsely-claim-obama-first-president-have-citizenshi#ixzz1L1IN1Lx1

What we need is the truth. In order to be taken absolutely seriously on legitimately questioning the meaning of "natural born citizen" internet musings must sort fact from fiction as quickly as possible.

In fact, we're pondering as well the Framers' placement of a comma after "No person except a natural born Citizen," and before, "or a Citizen of the United States" and rather than using the word "and" use of the word "or" with the word Citizen.

Pondering that will be left to another day.

No matter whom the truth hurts, it must be told, and accuracy must reign.

The saying "one rotten apple spoils the bunch" is as true anywhere and no less than in the case of journalism, and citizen-journalism as well, and we contributing to, using, and consuming from the Internet must ensure the truth doesn't become spoiled by the rot.

No matter where the rot appears to be found.

Net the Truth Online

A tale of two birth certificates
'Rosetta Stone' documents provide comparison

By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2011 WorldNetDaily

That Obama's birth certificate lists a registrar that appears remarkably like a forger's signature joke on the word "ukulele" is not the only peculiarity observed in comparing the president's record with other long-form Hawaiian birth certificates that have been fully authenticated.

The question is whether the Obama birth record the White House released Wednesday is an authentic photocopy of an original 1961 vital record or a modern-day forgery.
Read more: A tale of two birth certificates http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=292717#ixzz1L0xZaPtf

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=292717

PA Marcellus Shale (Gov. Corbett) Gas Fee vs Severance Tax

2011-04-29T05:27:00.000-07:00

We lean with Governor Tom Corbett in considering a fee on the Oil and Gas industry/drillers vs a new gas severance tax. We don't think the latter would pass Constitutional review, and years and years would go by before anything is determined from litigation.

Gas fee proposed by state to benefit locals

By Brad Bumsted and Andrew Conte
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Friday, April 29, 2011

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/regional/s_734427.html#ixzz1Kun9kmCs

In the meantime, drillers are willing - it appears - to the imposition of a fee to be imposed and its proceeds to be kept at the local level.

That makes far more sense than having any revenues from the tax go first to the state (in part to cover the state budget deficits created by past Administration) then some to the localities where the drilling occurs.

We urge as well that the Governor review the potential any of the gas itself go to China, rather than wholly being distributed across Pennsylvania, and held in reserve for future generations of Pennsylvanians.

No gas to China and energy independence should be the slogans for a renewed Pennsylvania.

Net the Truth Online

Gas fee proposed by state to benefit locals
By Brad Bumsted and Andrew Conte
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Friday, April 29, 2011 Last updated: 7:14 am

HARRISBURG -- A much-anticipated proposal by the Senate's top Republican to levy a fee on Marcellus shale gas drilling touched off debate on Thursday among supporters and opponents over the industry assessment and who would get the money.

Senate President Pro Tempore Joe Scarnati, R-Jefferson County, said his bill -- to be introduced in a week or so -- gives 60 percent of the collected fees to counties and municipalities with deep wells, as well as townships and boroughs that neighbor drilling production sites. The bill splits the other 40 percent between conservation districts statewide and environmental funds for cleanup and infrastructure, although he said that's up for negotiation.

The fee would be retroactive for 2010 and would raise $45 million for last year. It would bring in $76 million this year and would rise to at least $150 million by 2014, Scarnati said.

"I have to believe this is in the sweet spot of where I believe most legislators will be," Scarnati said.

The senator said it was an attempt to meet the parameters of fellow Republican Gov. Tom Corbett, who opposes a severance tax but has said he would consider such an impact fee if the revenue remains in local hands and does not go into the state general fund.

"It's the beginning of a discussion," said Kevin Harley, Corbett's press secretary.

Governments would use the fee to help cover damage to roads and bridges, for maintenance and improvement costs for water and sewage systems, and for emergency responder costs, Scarnati said.

Scarnati said it is a fee and not a tax because the money does not go to the state general fund.

"What's the difference between a fee and tax? Gov. Corbett's pen," Scarnati said. "That will be the ultimate test."

The Pennsylvania Independent Oil and Gas Association, which has opposed a severance tax in the past, issued a statement saying its members are open to discussing an impact fee that raises money to offset problems caused by the industry.

Drillers are open to an impact fee that provides money for local communities as long as it's "clear, straightforward and competitive," Kathryn Klaber, president of the Cecil-based Marcellus Shale Coalition trade group, said in a statement.

"Our industry understands that while there are tremendous financial opportunities in Marcellus shale development, there also can be impacts felt by our host communities," Klaber said.

Read more: Gas fee proposed by state to benefit locals - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/regional/s_734427.html#ixzz1KulMY5zc

Report Flawed Representation without taxation: how natural gas producers escape taxes in PA

2011-04-29T04:46:00.000-07:00

We came across the report Representation without Taxation: How Natural Gas Producers Escape Taxes in Pennsylvania the other day as no doubt it had been used by PA state representatives touting a new tax on Marcellus Shale drillers. We saw no indication on the site of any admission of errors!

Now, we learn in Group admits errors in energy tax report the report is flawed, with errors.

Of course, the error and biased (and potentially unsubstantiated) title of the report Representation without Taxation: How Natural Gas Producers Escape Taxes in Pennsylvania won't matter to the representatives claiming some tax or other is needed on Marcellus Shale drillers...

It is worth noting, a spokesman for the Marcellus Shale Coalition, according to the Tribune-Review article, said of the report:

PBPC used "blatantly wrong and faulty information" to drive its political agenda

Meanwhile, according to the Tribune-Review article, PBPC denies the charge.

We also wonder whether all the talk about imposing an extraction tax is just that, talk, since there will be years and years of litigation should legislation be passed, litigation that goes to the heart of the Constitutionality of the tax and how it could pass Constitutional review.

Net the Truth Online

The following is an informative article, Real Property Taxation of the Marcellus Shale and Other Mineral Interests in Pennsylvania Oil & Gas/Real Estate Alert by Raymond P. Pepe . April 17, 2009

Real Property Taxation of the Marcellus Shale and Other Mineral Interests in Pennsylvania Oil & Gas/Real Estate Alert by Raymond P. Pepe . April 17, 2009
This Alert reviews Pennsylvania’s current assessment laws pertaining to mineral interests and improvements made to land to extract and process minerals; summarizes pending legislative proposals to modify the state’s assessment laws to tax real property interests in gas reserves; and discusses critical issues that should be considered by businesses engaged in the extraction of natural gas and other mineral resources in Pennsylvania, property owners and local governments relating to the assessment of natural gas reserves and other mineral rights.

The Alert also considers whether it is permissible for real property tax purposes to assess mineral interests severed from fee-simple title to property, but to exempt from taxation equivalent mineral interests retained by the surface owners of properties in order to minimize the extent to which taxes will be imposed upon Pennsylvania residents...

CLIPPED EXCERPT

Proposed Legislation
House Bill 10 of 2009, sponsored by Representative Bill DeWeese and 27 other members of the General Assembly, provides that rights held pursuant to a lease or other agreement to extract, remove or recover gas, oil or coal bed methane shall be subject to taxation as real estate and assessed and taxed separately from the surface property in the name of the holder of such rights. The legislation further provides that these mineral interests will be assessed utilizing the discounted income approach to value as supplemented by the sales comparison data.

To facilitate the assessment of mineral interests, House Bill 10 requires a lessee or operator to provide annually to the county assessor “such nonproprietary lease and lease income information as the assessor determines is reasonably needed to determine value.” Using this information, the legislation would allow counties to change the assessed value of gas, oil, and coal bed methane mineral rights whenever “information becomes available that would significantly affect the valuation” of the property, including the “commencement of production on or near the property,” or the “depletion of the hydrocarbon gas subject to the lease and related production.”

CLIPPED EXCERPT

D. Avoiding Constitutional Litigation
The Uniformity Clause of the Pennsylvania Constitution requires all taxes to be uniform upon the same class of subjects within the territorial limits of the authority levying the tax. The Pennsylvania Constitution further specifies circumstances in which exemptions or special provisions for taxation of property are permissible, and provides that all laws exempting property from taxation other than those specifically enumerated by the Constitution “shall be void.” Various provisions of the U.S. Constitution further impose limitations upon state taxes, including the due process and equal protection requirements of the 14th Amendment and the Commerce Clause.

House Bill 10 would allow counties to change the value of oil, gas, and coal bed methane mineral interests whenever events significantly affect the valuation of the property. This procedure contrasts with existing Pennsylvania law that authorizes the reassessment of properties only pursuant to countywide reassessments or in the event of subdivisions, the construction of new improvements, or as necessary to correct errors and omissions in a county’s assessment records. As a result, significant questions will arise regarding whether, in the context of tax assessments statutorily required to be determined based upon a common base year, establishing different reassessment schedules for certain types of property violates uniformity and equal protection requirements.

Similarly, House Bill 10 deviates substantially from existing law by taxing mineral interests severed from fee-simple title by a lease or other agreement, but exempting the same mineral interests if retained by the landowner. It is difficult to identify a rational basis for exempting from taxation mineral interests held by fee-simple landowners, but imposing taxes on identical mineral interests severed from the remaining interests in the property, other than a patently discriminatory intent to impose taxes primarily upon businesses engaged in interstate commerce that focus their efforts upon mineral development and to confer benefits upon the owner occupants of properties located within Pennsylvania...

http://www.klgates.com/newsstand/detail.aspx?publication=5553

Representation without Taxation: How Natural Gas Producers Escape Taxes in Pennsylvania

State Budget and Tax Policy
April 25, 2011

Download Full Report

Natural gas drillers in Pennsylvania pay very little in state and local taxes, despite industry claims to the contrary. In tax year 2008, the oil and gas industry[1] paid $38.8 million in Pennsylvania state business taxes.[2]
Of the 783 companies to file corporate net income tax returns, only 15% owed any tax. A significantly larger number of drillers — including nine of the top 10 permit holders in the Marcellus Shale — structure their businesses as limited liability companies (LLCs) or limited partnerships (LPs). This allows them to avoid the corporate net income tax altogether and pay the much lower personal income tax on company profits.

In 2008, 120 companies paid $17.8 million in corporate net income taxes. 51% of companies had capital stock and franchise tax liability, paying $8 million. While a greater proportion (56%) of LLCs and partnerships had tax liability, they paid in total $13 million in personal income taxes.

http://www.pennbpc.org/gas-drillers-escape-taxes

By Jeremy Boren
PITTSBURGH TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Friday, April 29, 2011

A Harrisburg group said on Thursday there are flaws in its report on corporate income taxes paid by energy companies drilling for natural gas in Pennsylvania's mile-deep Marcellus shale formation.

The Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center's report, "Representation without Taxation: How Natural Gas Producers Escape Taxes in Pennsylvania," overestimated how frequently firms use their status as limited-liability companies to pay the state's 3.07 percent personal income tax, instead of the much higher 9.99 percent net corporation income tax, a center spokesman said.
"As soon as we realized there was a problem, we corrected it, and we posted it to our website," said spokesman Chris Lilienthal.

The correction notes that individuals and corporations receive profits through an energy company limited liability corporation or limited partnership, meaning a mix of personal and corporate taxes are paid. The original version said energy companies could avoid paying corporate income tax "altogether" as an LLC or LP.

Errors in the report, which relies on 2008 tax data collected by the state Department of Revenue, go deeper than that, said Elizabeth Brassell, a spokeswoman for the Department of Revenue.

The center's researchers relied on flawed mathematical calculations, Brassell said.

She said because of high interest, the department plans to release a report soon about tax revenues generated by Marcellus shale drilling operations. That report, however, likely won't pinpoint how much energy companies pay in corporate and personal income taxes.

Travis Windle, a spokesman for the Marcellus Shale Coalition, an industry group, said PBPC used "blatantly wrong and faulty information" to drive its political agenda, a charge PBPC denies.

The board of directors that runs the center is made up of labor union and public university officials. It is advocating for state lawmakers to impose a severance tax on natural gas drillers, which has been controversial.

Read more: Group admits errors in energy tax report - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/s_734569.html#ixzz1KuaWkk75

PA State Rep. Daryl Metcalfe Addresses Proof Citizenship Residency Requirements for Candidates

2011-04-28T06:21:00.000-07:00

It's worth noting state Rep. Daryl Metcalfe's necessary legislation as noted in "Document release adds paper to 'birther' fire" Mike Wereschagin Thursday, April 28, 2011

Our state legislators have an obligation to measure up to their own Constitutional duties. What could be a more proper duty than vetting Pennsylvania election contenders before the formal election process begins.

We've all seen incidents in the state and our own localities wherein candidates have been challenged by opponents to determine whether residency requirements have been met. Usually such challenges are mounted by opponents, with a few challenges arising from district or precinct voters.

Most times, such efforts are successful. A judicial determination is made the challenged candidate does not meet residency requirements. These requirements are enveloped into the PA Election Laws, often, however, there are areas of grey in the law, and one is usually pretty certain before bringing a challenge that the challenge is legitimate.

Not all challenges regarding residency requirements are successful, and many simply are not brought due to the blowback inherent in such a challenge to an opponent.

Rarely do citizens bring a challenge forth because of the huge cost of such, and such must pretty much have strong grassroots support or the publicity of the effort will be a detriment.

Metcalfe's bill will go a long way to enabling voters to have an assurance that candidates who present themselves for election have met all of the state's requirements including citizenship, age, residency, and the broader other constitutional requirements.

We'd be remiss if we also didn't mention the legislator should also look into crafting a bill that forces local county board of elections to ensure the voter registration list for the county is as accurate as is possible. Every voting district and precinct should have completed a full review of the voter registry list at some point within so many years, say 5, and from then on be required to annually review the voter registry and remove any names (throught the proper process) that are not qualified to be on the voter registry.

Karl Rove has his nerve. Previously and recently, Rove was convinced it was only the "fringe" of conservatives who questioned President Barack Obama's birth location. He more than just chastised Donald Trump for seeking President Obama finally just release a copy of the sought-after long-form. Trump noted Hillary Clinton's campaign had raised questions about Obama's standing to be elected for just that reason though that was hush-hush among the mainstream media.

Rove was nearly livid that Trump would make such a huge issue of Obama's birth certificate, charging the request drew conservatives deeper into the insanity.

Now, after Obama released his long-form birth certificate, Rove still dismisses the effort as silly.

So all that Rove admits is more fringe-type people/conservatives were participating in an effort Rove tags as 'fringe.'

Rove's simply trying to make Trump look like the kind of candidate who only draws the 'fringe' to his causes and positions because they've been drawn to Trump on the "birther" issue.

We've said before we don't mind being lumped in with 'fringe' especially when the goal is to seek the truth and nothing but the truth, no matter what the revelations, no matter whom the truth hurts in its enlightenment and information.

If we're among the fringe because we want Pennsylvania to initiate a bill that imposes vetting of candidates at any level before the election process begins, so be it.

Net the Truth Online

As many as two-thirds of Republicans question Obama's birth in the United States, according to recent polls, including a New York Times/CBS poll released last week that found 45 percent of Republicans -- and 25 percent of all Americans -- believe Obama was not born in this country. That showed the claims were gaining traction beyond the fringe, said Karl Rove, President George W. Bush's chief strategist.

"He was happy to use it for his benefit, until it no longer benefited him," Rove said.

Releasing Obama's birth certificate "really doesn't affect the legislation I've introduced" to require similar documentation for all candidates in Pennsylvania, said state Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, R-Cranberry. He said the bill never targeted Obama.

"It was really kind of alarming that the state was not being responsible in (vetting candidates), from local to state to federal, to ensure that all of us meet the citizenship, age, residency and other constitutional requirements," Metcalfe said

Read more: Document release adds paper to 'birther' fire - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/breaking/s_734212.html#ixzz1Kp8MX8qR

Shale Drilling Faces EPA Crackdown

2011-04-27T08:50:00.000-07:00

Wall Street journal
Shale Drilling Faces Crackdown
BY RYAN TRACY
The Environmental Protection Agency will more closely regulate the use of diesel fuel in a drilling process used to recover natural gas, Administrator Lisa Jackson said Tuesday.

The EPA until recently hasn't moved to regulate hydraulic fracturing, a process that involves injecting various types of drilling fluids into wells to free oil and natural gas trapped in shale formations deep underground.

Instead, the EPA relied on state regulators, in part because Congress in 2005 exempted hydraulic fracturing from regulation under the federal ...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703778104576287430280004342.html?mod=rss_Politics_And_Policy

Local Planning Offices Implementing United Nations Agenda 21

2011-04-23T06:41:00.000-07:00

Very little doubt about it, local planning offices are implementing the United Nations Agenda 21

Case in point. Standard Building Codes, that's right. State-wide mandated local building codes. Municipalities or counties handling such planning were required to adopt the regulations. Those municipalites that didn't adopt the planning codes forfeited these duties to the county which had a planning office. In turn, the county board of commissioners adopted the state regulations for planning.

Of course, officials would deny there's anything in the planning code that comports with the United Nations Agenda 21. Even if they admitted such, they'd ask you to prove there is something 'nefarious' about the United Nations Agenda 21.

The primary comeback to that is what business is it of an unelected body - the United Nations - to offer regulations - which our federal representatives have signed on to by participating in the United Nations - and in turn states later adopt and then localities adopt the measures in such as local planning codes.

Most citizens have a hard enough time keeping track of how our elected officials ignore their oaths of office on any number of issues.

Continuously, one measure or another is simply unconstitutional, such as free trade agreements on the federal level (these should be treated as treaties as the effect on U.S. law is as if the agreements are treaties) and in Pennsylvania, Keystone Opportunity Zones.

We have long questioned how it is uniform taxation for local officials to waive taxes to businesses or residents locating in a KOZ for some specified amount of years, usually 10 or 12, and some with extensions after extensions? Meanwhile, other property owners locally who don't have property in a KOZ suffer fear of fines, fees, or loss of property for failure to pay their annual tax bills to the local jurisdictions or the state.

There is much wrong with the Agenda 21 coming to your local community. Be aware and hold your local officials accountable.

Net the Truth Online

U.N.'s Agenda 21 is in your community
Henry Lamb
World Net Daily Posted: April 23, 2011

Editor's note: Listen to this column online.

Anyone who reads Chapter 7 of Agenda 21 and then reads his local comprehensive land-use plan will immediately recognize that most of the provisions of the local land-use plan come directly from Agenda 21. More often than not, the elected officials who adopt these plans have never read Agenda 21, and many have never even heard of the U.N. document, signed by President George H.W. Bush in 1992.

The facilitators and professional planners have heard about Agenda 21, but frequently claim that the plan they are working on has nothing to do with the U.N. or Agenda 21. Don't believe it for one minute.

Gary Lawrence, former director of the Center for Sustainable Communities at the University of Washington, and chief planner for the city of Seattle, told an audience in London:

In the case of the U.S., our local authorities are engaged in planning processes consistent with LA21 [Local Agenda 21], but there is little interest in using the LA21 brand. … So, we call our processes something else, such as comprehensive planning, growth management or smart growth.
In community after community, the same scenario is repeated. The federal government, through the EPA or the Department of Commerce or the Department of Interior, offers special grants to communities for the purpose of developing a vision for a greener future and a plan to convert the vision into reality.

Typically, the local government will find a private consultant to "facilitate" the process. The facilitator will identify a local "steering committee," carefully chosen from people who represent various segments of the community, all of whom are known in advance to be sympathetic to the goals of Agenda 21.

Typically, the advisory group will meet in private to lay out the framework for the process and the goals for the finished product. When this is achieved, public meetings are scheduled to give the appearance of public input and ownership. Rarely are these meetings ever publicized adequately to attract the private-property owners who are most directly affected. Care is taken to see that members of local environmental organizations and social-justice organizations constitute the majority of attendees.

These public meetings are said to be "the visioning process." The procedures vary slightly from community to community, depending upon the facilitator. Remarkably, however, the "vision" in every community contains essentially the same elements: restricted auto traffic; bike trails; walkable neighborhoods; integrated housing; high-density urban boundary zones; conservation areas; green belts; and much more – directly from Agenda 21.

Once the vision document is complete, the next step is to convert it into a comprehensive land-use plan, adopted by local elected officials in the form of an ordinance that is enforceable with fines and other penalties. The plans are necessarily so long and complex that few people ever read them, other than the professional planners and enforcement officials. Many, if not most, of these comprehensive plans incorporate many, if not most, of the codes developed by the International Codes Council. Here are some of the codes:

International Building Code
International Residential Code
International Fire Code
International Energy Conservation Code
International Private Sewage Disposal Code
International Mechanical Code
International Fuel Gas Code
International Wildland-Urban Interface Code
ICC Performance Code
International Existing Building Code
International Property Maintenance Code
International Zoning Code
International Green Construction Code
Here's a sample of what to expect. From Chapter 2 of the International Green Construction Code:

CONSERVATION AREA. Land designated by the jurisdiction or by state or federal government, as a result of a community planning process, as appropriate for conservation from development because of the land possessing natural values important to the community including, but not limited to wildlife habitat, forest or other significant vegetation, steep slopes, ground water recharge area, riparian corridor or wetland.
DAYLIGHT SATURATION. The percentage of daytime hours throughout the year when not less than 28 foot-candles (300 lux) of natural light is provided at a height of 30 inches (762 mm) above the floor.

DEMAND RESPONSE, AUTOMATED (AUTO-DR). Fully Automated Demand Response initiated by a signal from a utility or other appropriate entity, providing fully-automated connectivity to customer energy end-use control strategies.

This is a tiny sample of the rules and regulations buried deep within the innocent-sounding comprehensive land-use plans adopted by unaware local officials to achieve the politically correct label of "sustainable community."

Read more: U.N.'s Agenda 21 is in your community http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=290225#ixzz1KLyiFFnH

Where Will PA Gamelands Gas Go? China?

2011-04-22T07:22:00.000-07:00

the most sickening aspect of leasing state gamelands in PA for Marcellus Shale drilling is it is very likely the gas obtained will go directly to China.

Something needs to be done about that.

Meanwhile, what benefit to residents of the state have on cost of energy, and how updated are government properties to provide buildings with natural gas.

We'd go further and recommend all PA municipalites convert to natural gas and be funded with any shale fees and/or taxes.

Net the Truth Online

Agency OKs more gas drilling on state game lands
Friday, April 22, 2011
By Marc Levy, The Associated Press
HARRISBURG -- The Pennsylvania Game Commission has expanded the scope of leasing state-owned hunting lands for harvesting natural gas from the lucrative Marcellus Shale formation, this time netting more than $18 million.

The money helps a financially strapped agency that has cut back programs, such as raising pheasants for small-game hunting, while going a dozen years without an increase in the hunting license fees that are its primary source of support.

About two-thirds of the lease money is payment for the extraction of natural gas from beneath game lands in Bradford and Lycoming counties in Northern Pennsylvania by way of wells that would be drilled on adjacent, privately owned land. Another lease on game lands in adjoining Tioga County will allow up to three well pads -- each of which can host multiple wells -- and pipeline construction.

Marcellus Shale drilling involves blasting chemical-laced water into the ground, a procedure called hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. Critics say fracking could poison water supplies, but the gas drilling industry says it has been used safely for decades.

Ted Onufrak, president of the 90,000-member Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs, said most of his members are comfortable with the expansion of Marcellus Shale drilling as long as the Legislature and the governor's office give the game commission the resources to stay on top of the activity.

"If you've got one [commission] land manager in charge of two counties, and first there's 20 wells and then there's 60 wells, that's a lot to ride herd on," Mr. Onufrak said. "They are going to need some additional staff."

The new leases bring the agency's haul from the Marcellus Shale to at least $19 million, game commission officials said. Royalties are also beginning to trickle in from the first Marcellus Shale wells that are producing gas, commission officials said.

The money stays with the game commission, which can use it to buy land or pay for its day-to-day operations. A large chunk of the more than $300 million raised by leasing Pennsylvania's state forest land for Marcellus Shale drilling has been tapped by the Legislature to help wipe out state government deficits.

The commission does not view gas drilling income as a replacement for increasing the $20.70 adult resident hunting license fee, which the agency has sought from the Legislature since 2004, spokesman Jerry Feaser said Wednesday.

Mr. Feaser also said the commission is not under additional pressure to lease game land because of the Legislature's refusal to raise fees. He pointed out that when the energy industry's pursuit of the Marcellus Shale began in earnest in 2008, companies asked the commission to lease its entire land holdings in the northeastern corner of the state, which it has not done.

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11112/1141071-113-0.stm?cmpid=healthscience.xml#ixzz1KGIZJZHw

Big Flop Bill O'Reilly Homeland Security Janet Napolitano

2011-04-21T04:33:00.000-07:00

The Factor's Bill O'Reilly as loud as is his norm as he faced Homeland Security director Janet Napolitano failed to deliver even one question that would bust Napolitano's all-is-better than-ever at the border lies.

O'Reilly Factor Wed. April 20, 2011

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRoYQ2G678Q

Better than when and what??? That question would have been a natural, but O'Reilly didn't ask it.

Napolitano's statement "border security is better than ever" is nothing new.

Janet Napolitano: Border security better than ever

By JENNIFER EPSTEIN | 3/25/11 6:41 AM EDT Updated: 3/25/11 4:16 PM EDT
While the U.S.-Mexico border region has developed a reputation for danger, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano stressed Thursday that protection of the border “is better now than it ever has been” and violence has not spilled into the United States.

Speaking in El Paso at the Bridge of the Americas, which connects Texas to Ciudad Juarez, Napolitano said that border is safe and that her department is working to further secure it. The department is planning to deploy 250 new border agents, and the agency’s proposed 2012 budget includes a request for funding an additional 300, The Associated Press reported.

“There is a perception that the border is worse now than it ever has been,” Napolitano said. “That is wrong. The border is better now than it ever has been.”

It’s also “wrong,” Napolitano said, that the drug-related violence in northern Mexico is spilling over into U.S. border cities. Violent crime rates in cities in the Southwest have stayed flat or fallen, she said. At the same time, she acknowledged, “there is much to do with colleagues in Mexico in respect to the drug cartels.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/51925.html#ixzz1K9rTQO1s

O'Reilly has had quite a while to delve into its truthfulness and gather property owners, alive, but living in fear and armed for self-protection, to face-off on camera with Napolitano.

Napolitano might have claimed "unfair" but hey citizens of the United States are dying at or near their own property at the hands of criminals in drug cartels and human trafficking networks with no curtailment in sight.

While O'Reilly highlighted one such rancher armed for self-protection, the spot was taped, with no ability for the rancher, and others, to smack Napolitano with the clear truth.

O'REILLY: -- are you winning down there? Are you guys -- are you going to tell that rancher, look, we're winning this war against the Mexican intrusion of narcotics and human trafficking? We're winning it so you just hold on a little bit down there? Keep your shotgun handy but things are going to get better? Is that what you are going to tell him?

NAPOLITANO: Well, what I would say is not only are we putting more into that border but that more is on its way and we are very committed to a safe and secure border for a lot of reasons.

O'REILLY: All right. Now, ...

http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100007214&docId=l:1403050571&isRss=true

O'Reilly followed that with a question about violence moving further south into the United States.

Napolitano went on at length, basically saying nothing.

O'REILLY: All right. Now, the cartels obviously have got to be a concern to you because of all the tremendous violence that they -- that they cause and now we're getting reports that some cartels are moving into the south and southwest United States to set up shop. Are you hearing that?

NAPOLITANO: Well, let me -- you know, the cartels have always had distribution networks in the United States. I mean, that's where they make their money. They distribute drugs, you know, through virtually every state in the -- in the country.

What we are focused on in with Mexico right now is seeing if we can root out the cartels themselves and -- and really dismantle them. And that is what is causing a lot of the violence that's going on in Mexico right now.

http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100007214&docId=l:1403050571&isRss=true

Which of the two are brain dead?

Both.

Addressing Napolitano's 'border security is better than ever before' theme, O'Reilly's parting comment to Napolitano was this:

"I'm hoping that you are right."

O'REILLY: All right. Good. You're painting a very optimistic picture, madam secretary. And I'm just hoping that you're right --

http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100007214&docId=l:1403050571&isRss=true

O'Reilly is hoping Napolitano is right?

Wouldn't she continue to claim she is right?

And doesn't O'Reilly presume in the remark that Napolitano has not convinced him she is right and the 'border security is better than ever before?'

The man could see for himself in his own investigative team's video, which preceded Napolitano's appearance, Janet Napolitano was not right.

She lied, and O'Reilly let her off the hook with his offering of hope on a platter.

SHOW: THE O'REILLY FACTOR 8:12 PM EST

April 20, 2011 Wednesday

O'REILLY: So you say you're winning --

NAPOLITANO: So our goal is to have a safe and secure --

O'REILLY: -- are you winning down there? Are you guys -- are you going to tell that rancher, look, we're winning this war against the Mexican intrusion of narcotics and human trafficking? We're winning it so you just hold on a little bit down there? Keep your shotgun handy but things are going to get better? Is that what you are going to tell him?

NAPOLITANO: Well, what I would say is not only are we putting more into that border but that more is on its way and we are very committed to a safe and secure border for a lot of reasons.

(CROSSTALK)

O'REILLY: All right. Now, the cartels obviously have got to be a concern to you because of all the tremendous violence that they -- that they cause and now we're getting reports that some cartels are moving into the south and southwest United States to set up shop. Are you hearing that?

NAPOLITANO: Well, let me -- you know, the cartels have always had distribution networks in the United States. I mean, that's where they make their money. They distribute drugs, you know, through virtually every state in the -- in the country.

What we are focused on in with Mexico right now is seeing if we can root out the cartels themselves and -- and really dismantle them. And that is what is causing a lot of the violence that's going on in Mexico right now.

(CROSSTALK)

O'REILLY: Do you -- do you -- would you advice President Calderon down there to allow U.S. agents, drug agents and the Homeland Security agents, ICE agents to go into Mexico armed and help his guys? Because that's always the problem, he doesn't allow American agents armed down there.

NAPOLITANO: Well, I think we're getting into areas where we work on a case by case basis with President Calderon. And we are actually doing a lot together with the federal government of Mexico with ICE agents, with DEA agents and at times and in coordination with and at the request of Mexico even with some military assets.

O'REILLY: All right. Good. You're painting a very optimistic picture, madam secretary. And I'm just hoping that you're right --

(CROSSTALK)

NAPOLITANO: Right.

O'REILLY: -- on both the border intrusion and the more cartels.

http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100007214&docId=l:1403050571&isRss=true

PA Allowed Wastewater from Drilling into Unequipped City Treatment Plants

2011-04-20T09:11:00.000-07:00

what do we get from the recent action by PA DEP to request drillers stop using municipal water treatment facilities to take in wastewater from Marcellus Drillers?

Heads should roll from previous administrations which enabled the treatment facilities to accept the wastewater when it was known such facilities were not able to properly deal with the wastewater.

Heads should roll from any previous legislators who supported this travesty.

Net the Truth Online

Drilling water ban a boon?
Official: EPA ruling could mean more volume at plant
April 20, 2011
It's too early to tell if Warren might benefit from a decision Tuesday by Pennsylvania to ban cities from accepting natural gas drilling wastewater, a Warren official said.

Tom Angelo, director of the Warren Water Pollution Control department, said revenues could rise if wastewater shipped from Pennsylvania wells consistently reaches a higher concentration level of salt.

The city's treatment system, which is legally capped at 100,000 gallons a day, has been handling 30,000 gallons to 80,000 gallons a day of brine water sent from Patriot Water Treatment in Warren, Angelo said.

That volume may change "very quickly," he said, following the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection's order that companies drilling in the Marcellus Shale rock formation stop taking wastewater to 15 treatment plants by May 19.

"They'll be scrambling quickly. We'll probably see 700,000 gallons a week," he said.

The department is paid both by volume of water and the water's salt level. The Warren treatment plant will see more revenue if the salt content consistently reaches the allowed ceiling of 50,000 milligrams per liter of water, he said.

He pointed out Warren is better prepared than Pennsylvania cities to accept the polluted water, which drillers pump into 5,000-foot deep wells to shatter the shale rock and release natural gas.

"The biggest problem Pennsylvania had was they were allowing gas and oil companies to go directly to a (city) wastewater treatment plant and discharge with no limit on volume of water or level of salt," he said.

CLIP CONTINUES

Other major gas-drilling states require wastewater to be injected it deep underground into disposal wells. But in Pennsylvania, some wastewater is treated by sewer authorities, largely in western Pennsylvania, and discharged into rivers from which communities draw drinking water.

Environment regulators cited elevated levels of bromide in rivers in western Pennsylvania in its announcement.

Officials at Pittsburgh-area drinking water authorities in Beaver Falls and Fredericktown say their facilities have flunked tests for trihalomethanes in the past couple years.

Complicating the matter is that, in addition to gas drilling, Pennsylvania's multitude of acid-leaching, abandoned coal mines and other industrial sources are also a major factor in the high salt levels that lead to trihalomethanes in drinking water.

Pennsylvania imposed tougher wastewater treatment standards for drilling wastewater in August, although it still allowed facilities that had been permitted to accept drilling wastewater before August to continue accepting limited amounts under the same treatment standards. Fifteen of those 27 facilities that were grandfathered under the August rules were still accepting the wastewater, the DEP said.

http://www.tribtoday.com/page/content.detail/id/555860/Drilling-water-ban-a-boon-.html?nav=5021

Matt Pitzarella: Supports DEP action says we can treat the water without sending it to grandfathered treatment plants

2011-04-20T08:08:00.000-07:00

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
10:58 p.m. EDT, April 19, 2011
mc-pa-shale-water-pollution-20110419

HARRISBURG—
_ Citing a concern about the safety of drinking water, state environmental officials have called on natural gas drillers working in the burgeoning Marcellus shale formation to stop taking wastewater to 15 treatment plants by May 19.

The action Tuesday by acting Environmental Protection Secretary Michael Krancer came the same day that the Marcellus Shale Coalition, an industry trade group, acknowledged for the first time that wastewater discharges into rivers and streams were partly responsible for higher levels of pollutants that had been found in western Pennsylvania waterways.

Drillers have been criticized by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and by environmentalists for the practice, which the DEP had allowed at some facilities despite tighter water discharge standards that were passed in December.

In a statement, the DEP said the state had found elevated levels of bromide in surface water samples from rivers in western Pennsylvania, where the majority of gas drilling is taking place.

Bromide is a non-toxic salt compound that, when it reacts with disinfectants used by municipal treatment plants, turns into a substance known as "Total Trihalomethanes," or "THMs." Studies have shown a link between the ingestion of, and exposure to, THMs, and certain birth defects and cancer types.

"Now is the time to take action to end this practice," Krancer said in a statement.

In other gas-producing states, such as Texas, wastewater is pumped deep underground into so-called "injection wells," keeping it out of streams and rivers. But in Pennsylvania, some drilling wastewater is treated by sewer authorities and then discharged into rivers.

Erika Staaf, of the advocacy group PennEnvironment, said Tuesday that while the plants can dilute the wastewater, they are not equipped to fully treat it, resulting in partially treated wastewater being discharged into waterways from which communities draw their water supplies.

"That was our concern," she said. "You don't necessarily know the quantities of materials that could come from many different wells," said Staaf, who called Tuesday's action by the state "an incredibly positive step forward."

"While there are "several possible sources for bromide other than shale drilling wastewater," Krancer said the state believes that if drilling "operators would stop giving wastewater to facilities that continue to accept it … bromide concentrations would quickly and significantly decrease."

Matt Pitzarella, a spokesman for driller Range Resources, said the company supports the DEP's action.

"One of the criticisms of the Marcellus industry is that we aren't thinking long-term," he said. "This shows our concern."

Pitzarella added that the industry believes "these issues are manageable and we were going to rely on science to solve them. At this point, I think the science is clear that it's causing a problem and we can treat the water without sending it to grandfathered treatment plants."

http://www.mcall.com/news/breaking/mc-pa-shale-water-pollution-20110419,0,4278373.story

Pa.: Marcellus wastewater shouldn't go to treatment plants
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
By Don Hopey and Sean D. Hamill, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11109/1140412-100-0.stm#ixzz1K59V5kzWBecause of high levels of dissolved solids and bromide in rivers and streams used for public drinking water sources, the state Department of Environmental Protection has asked all Marcellus Shale operations to voluntarily stop disposal of drilling wastewater at 15 municipal sewage treatment plants.

The request -- specifically not a departmental "order" that carries legal weight -- asks drillers to halt a wastewater disposal practice that had been criticized by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and environmental groups but that the DEP had allowed at the select facilities despite tighter water discharge standards passed in December.

The DEP requested, with Gov. Tom Corbett's approval, that drillers stop taking Marcellus Shale drilling wastewater to municipal "grandfathered" treatment facilities after May 19.

Those facilities are, the Clairton City Municipal Authority and McKeesport City Municipal Authority, both in Allegheny County; Johnstown Redevelopment Authority, Cambria County; Ridgway Borough, Elk County; Franklin Township Sewage Authority, Greene County; Tunnelton Liquids Co. and Hart Resource Technologies Inc., both in Indiana County; Brockway Area Sewage Authority, Punxsutawney Borough Municipal Authority and Reynoldsville Borough Authority, all in Jefferson County; New Castle City Sanitation Authority, Lawrence County; Sunbury Generation, Snyder County; Franklin Brine Treatment Corp., Venango County; Waste Treatment Corp., Warren County; and the Kiski Valley Water Pollution Control Authority, Westmoreland County.

"We believe we can achieve voluntary compliance," said Katy Gresh, a DEP spokeswoman. "At 30 days we will revisit this and see how many comply. We could then use our authority to take the next step with the treatment facilities or drilling industry or both."

At about the same time the DEP made its request Tuesday morning, the Marcellus Shale Coalition said for the first time that drilling wastewater discharges into rivers and streams were partly responsible for higher levels of certain pollutants that have been measured in public waterways in Western Pennsylvania.

"Research by Carnegie Mellon University and Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Authority experts suggests that the natural gas industry is a contributing factor to elevated levels of bromide in the Allegheny and Beaver Rivers," said Kathryn Klaber, president and executive director of the coalition of Marcellus Shale drilling industry companies. "We are committed to leading efforts, and working alongside DEP and other stakeholders, to address these issues quickly and straightforwardly, and support the appropriate action taken by DEP today."

The drilling wastewater contains high concentrations of dissolved solids, including bromides, a non-toxic salt compound that reacts with disinfectants used by municipal treatment plants to create brominated trihalomethanes, also known as THMs. Studies show a link between ingestion of and exposure to THMs and several types of cancer and birth defects.

"While the prior administration allowed certain facilities to continue to take this wastewater, conditions have changed since the implementation of the TDS regulations," DEP Secretary Michael Krancer said today. "We now have more definitive scientific data, improved technology and increased voluntary wastewater recycling by industry."

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11109/1140412-100-0.stm#ixzz1K597xPGI

The Independent State vs PA Ludicrous: Export Marcellus Shale Gas to China

2011-04-20T05:51:00.001-07:00

Pa. Congressman backs export of shale gas - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review
Congressman Glenn "GT" Thompson

says he favors exporting Marcellus shale natural gas to countries like China that do not have free trade agreements with the United States.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/regional/s_733052.html#ixzz1K4Ick5U2

Wow. That's an astonishing statement in and of itself. What do we have free trade agreements with other countries for if not to 'open up' trade with our own country?

China hasn't exactly opened up its economy to our products for some time now. Meanwhile, the United States permits any number of products from China into our country which has accomplished one thing and one thing only. A huge trade deficit between China and the United States.

The United States fares no better with countries with which it has engaged in so-called free trade agreements. Massive trade deficits!

Yet this U.S. Congressman not only wants to export our gas from Marcellus Shale drilling based on a projected 'probable' 'surplus,' he wants to do so with China because it has not entered into any free trade agreement with the United States.

If this isn't the most ludicrous train of thought what is?

a major problem with the idea to export any surplus is the way in which issues have been handled or rather a lack of handling of issues such as the absolute, not probable, safety of Marcellus Shale drilling in the state.

In addition, according to a local (Carmichaels, Fayette County, PA) Municipal Water Authority (unelected) board official, there are far more than an acknowledged seven water treatment plants across the state that are reportedly unable to handle any potential or real contamination situations that occur with the hydrolic fracturing after-flow.

Now one of our illustrious FEDERAL legislators is willing to publicly announce exporting to China is the way to go because, because... there "probably" will be a 'surplus' of gas that we need to sell and sell elsewhere to China. the reason to sell to China, he says: they are not a free trade participant!

Is this man out of his mind?

So our infrastructure is lacking, now.

Yet, any surplus drilling in the state produces will be shipped off to China, rather than held in reserves for our own state.

Oh what is the slogan of our state: State of Independence

There is a ray of hope as noted in comments by Two major industry groups cited in the article.

CLIP

The American Public Gas Association, with over 700 members in 36 states, wrote the Department of Energy that "the export of natural gas is inconsistent with a policy of energy independence."

And the Industrial Energy Consumer of America, which represent manufacturing companies with a combined $800 billion in annual sales word the DOE that exporting gas "has the potential" of increasing manufacturing costs which could "result in loss of manufacturing jobs."

Read more: Pa. Congressman backs export of shale gas - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/regional/s_733052.html#ixzz1K4PIeUwT

Exporting of natural gas = inconsistent with a policy of energy independence

Could not be any more logical of a conclusion, something even a Fifth Grader could answer very adequately on an essay test.

What must we do to ensure this does not happen with PA gas from Marcellus Shale drilling?

1. Don't be anti-drilling or expect a moratorium on drilling
2. Hold our legislators and regulators accountable for non-enforcement of existing regulations
3. Lobby to enable localities to benefit directly from the gas production by divving up the gas to all homes and businesses within a county jurisdiction
4. Protest to stop the flow of our natural resource to China.
5. Instead of an 'export' center build a gas reserves center with any surplus.

Every home and every business should get a tax credit for converting to gas and the cost should be fair for such conversions.

While we oppose any new and burdensome gas extraction tax and support Gov. Tom Corbett's recent remarks regarding such, we cannot accept no imminent action on the part of Gov. Corbett to demonstrate the PA water treatment facilities are or will shortly be made to be able to handle any contamination situations if and when those are shown to occur.

Net the Truth Online

Pa. Congressman backs export of shale gas

By Lou Kilzer
PITTSBURGH TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Wednesday, April 20, 2011

Pennsylvania Congressman Glenn "GT" Thompson says he favors exporting Marcellus shale natural gas to countries like China that do not have free trade agreements with the United States.

Thompson -- whose Fifth District is the state's largest in area and sits squarely atop the massive Marcellus fields in northern and central Pennsylvania, acknowledges in a Tribune-Review interview that this position on exporting might appear to contradict his previous statements favoring Marcellus shale exploration so that America can secure its energy future and wean itself from foreign dependency.

But the congressman says that's only because the situation with exploration has rapidly changed. He said he now believes the United States could eventually find itself with a surplus of gas with no place to go.

"The fact is, we have a bountiful amount of it (natural gas)," he said. "We could probably be in a position to meet our energy needs and, if need be, be able to export."

Thompson and 15 other members of Congress signed a letter late last year encouraging President Barack Obama to allow exporting 16 million metric tons per year of U.S. liquefied natural gas from Sabine Pass in Louisiana to countries who don't have free trade pacts with America...

CLIP CONTINUES

Thompson said he supports a similar export facility under consideration at Dominion Energy's Cove Point LNG terminal and port in Maryland. That terminal could be used to export Marcellus shale gas.

"We are in a global economy today and exports are a part of that," Thompson said. He noted that "China will obviously be the largest consumer of energy."

Thompson's comments to the Trib appear to differ from what was displayed Tuesday on his congressional Web page. The page includes comments like these from a February press release: "Situations like that in Egypt continue to underscore the need to cease America`s reliance on foreign energy. Our prosperity as a nation is dependent upon access to sustainable, low-cost energy and I will continue to push for a comprehensive energy plan that meets these demands, promotes American energy and builds a foundation for long-term economic growth and security."

In another release, he said: "affordable energy is vital to our economy and national security. High energy costs slow job growth, increase the costs to industries and of products and squeezes household budgets."

CLIP CONTINUES

John Noel Bartlett, a retired 62-year-old from Oil City, said he "had never thought of exporting" natural gas obtained beneath the state's soil. "I think most residents of Pennsylvania believe this was being done for energy independence and didn`t think of it as exporting," he said.

Bartlet said those willing to compromise on environmental issues for America's energy independence might rethink their position if the nation becomes a mass exporter of natural gas. He added that not taxing the gas is "foolish."

There are presently no gas exporting facilities in the lower 48 states. The Department of Energy says its decision to allow or not allow the Sabine Pass port to start operating would set a precedent for the United States.

Anticipating approval, the operator of Sabine Pass, Houston-based Cheniere Energy Inc., has already signed a memorandum of understanding with a Chinese company to send it 1.5 million tons of LNG per year.

"We are excited to participate in supplying natural gas to China," said Chiniere CEO Charif Souki in a news release.

In all, six American companies are considering exporting natural gas, according to a report by Barclays Capital released last week in New York.

CLIP CONTINUES

Two major industry groups disagree with any decision to export gas.
T
he American Public Gas Association, with over 700 members in 36 states, wrote the Department of Energy that "the export of natural gas is inconsistent with a policy of energy independence."

And the Industrial Energy Consumer of America, which represent manufacturing companies with a combined $800 billion in annual sales word the DOE that exporting gas "has the potential" of increasing manufacturing costs which could "result in loss of manufacturing jobs."

Read more: Pa. Congressman backs export of shale gas - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/regional/s_733052.html#ixzz1K4EUfMvp

Gov. Tom Corbett right on no drilling taxation wrong on flow to China

2011-04-19T06:10:00.000-07:00

We side with PA Governor Tom Corbett's position to not tax Marcellus Shale drilling extraction. The Republican Governor understands taxation with representation is a jobs killer, and incentive and innovation killers, as well.

However, there are a host of concerns about the drilling process in PA and the new Gov. should be more than willing to hold state agencies and all state legislators accountable for inadequate oversight.

Gov. Corbett should initiate a complete review for instance of any former complaints which made their way to agencies regarding illegal dumping. He should do this today.

Tomorrow is too late.

Any abuses discovered should be met with more than steep fines. Probation would be in order. A grace period given to rectify any identified abuses or violations should be given, but scrutiny should follow.

Two strikes against a company and that company should be out of contention in PA. Go elsewhere.

Another situation Gov. Corbett must delve into is the potential, yes the real potential, our gas from our PA wells are going to head to China.

This is simply unacceptable. PA citizens should be the first recipients of this resource.

Corbett remains opposed to taxing natural gas producers

Gov. Tom Corbett yesterday reiterated his opposition to a tax on natural gas pulled from the Marcellus shale but made it clear he will protect the state's environment from chemical contamination by drillers, a stance urged by a new national report.

At a Pennsylvania State Association of Township Supervisors meeting in Hershey, an attendee said drillers "are poisoning our water."

"I will not let them poison the water," Corbett responded. "We have to protect the water. We must do it on science, not emotion."

The governor may look to research released over the weekend by Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives, which found shale gas drillers nationwide used 29 hazardous chemicals in drilling fluids from 2005-09. Pennsylvania wasn't among the states in which drillers were found to be widely using such chemicals in the process.

"Let's take a look at what the science is," Corbett said when asked about the report. He did not elaborate on how the state would protect water supplies. A spokeswoman at the state Department of Environmental Protection declined a request for comment.

The state should use the study — based on self-reports from drillers — to figure out which chemicals to better monitor in drilling wastewater, said Myron Arnowitt, state director of Clean Water Action.

In brief comparisons of states based on how much drillers used the most harmful chemicals, including known carcinogens and chemicals regulated by federal environmental law, Pennsylvania ranked in the bottom half or not at all.

Arnowitt noted that widespread drilling in Pennsylvania's Marcellus shale didn't start until the last two years of the study. Still, drillers' use in the state of nearly 750,000 gallons of 2-butoxyethanol, which at high exposure can destroy blood cells and damage organs, ranked sixth out of 10 states, according to the report.

Read more: Corbett remains opposed to taxing natural gas producers - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/s_732919.html#ixzz1JySqkinM

WENY-TV Asks Why Discrepancy Between States List Marcellus Shale Hydrofraking chemicals

2011-04-18T11:16:00.000-07:00

List of PA Marcellus Shale Hydrofracking Chemicals Revealed (VIDEO)
Jeevan Vittal

June 29, 2010

ELMIRA (WENY) – The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection is planning to release a complete list of chemicals used in hydro racking.

WENY-TV was able to obtain an early copy. The list contains every day substances ranging from sugar and table salt to more toxic ones like formaldehyde.

Some of the chemical compounds are associated with neurological problems and other health issues - environmental advocates are worried the chemicals are poisoning underground drinking water.

It’s believed to be the first complete catalog of natural gas drilling chemicals used to drill in the Marcellus Shale in Pennsylvania.

This DEP list only mentions about 85 chemicals.

We crosschecked this with list of known chemicals from New York State, which has about 200 more chemicals on it.

We’re working with experts to break these lists down for you, and find o0ut why the lists vary so much from state to state.

http://www.weny.com/news-local.asp?ARTICLE3864=9154484

Also see comment posting to article

Drilling water ban a boon?
Official: EPA ruling could mean more volume at plant
April 20, 2011

Apr-20-11 1:59 AM Agree | Disagree

"Drilling water ban a boon?"

Are you kidding me??? Pennsylvania bans this toxic mixture, and you're excited to welcome it here in Warren? do the research before you act like it's just "waste water", theres some bad stuff in that water & I don't want to drink it - do you? "some of the 85 fracking chemicals listed by the Pennsylvania DEP are xylene, toluene and tetramethylammonium chloride - chemicals that can lead, with prolonged exposure, to liver damage in humans and can even be fatal."

Stop killing everyone just to make a quick buck. Have a nice day!

http://www.tribtoday.com/page/content.comment/id/555860/Drilling-water-ban-a-boon-.html?nav=5021

AP: PA accused of rubber-stamping gas permits

2011-04-18T11:02:00.000-07:00

Channel 2 KTVN News Report out of Allentown

ALSO SEE PENNLIVE

Pennsylvania regulators say they spend little time reviewing Marcellus Shale drilling permits
By The Associated Press The Patriot-News | Wednesday, April 13, 2011, 2:36 PM

DEP staffers' testimony calls into question whether regulators are overburdened and merely rubber-stamping gas-well permit applications.

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/04/pennsylvania_regulators_say_th.html

Comments on Article

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/04/pennsylvania_regulators_say_th/3032/comments-2.html

AP: PA accused of rubber-stamping gas permits
Posted: Apr 13, 2011 10:19 AM EDT
Updated: Apr 15, 2011 2:25 AM EDT
By MICHAEL RUBINKAM
Associated Press
ALLENTOWN, Pa. (AP) - Pennsylvania environmental regulators say they spend as little as 35 minutes reviewing each of the thousands of applications for natural gas well permits they get each year from drillers intent on tapping the state's lucrative and vast Marcellus Shale reserves.

And the regulators say they do not give any additional scrutiny to requests to drill near high-quality streams and rivers even though the waterways are protected by state and federal law.

Staffers in the state Department of Environmental Protection testified behind closed doors last month as part of a lawsuit filed by residents and environmental groups over a permit that DEP issued for an exploratory gas well in northeastern Pennsylvania, less than a half-mile from the Delaware River and about 300 feet from a pristine stream.

Reporting by the AP suggests that applications are rubber-stamped, rushed through with little scrutiny and rarely rejected. The staffers' statements indicate that DEP regulators are overburdened - and possibly ignoring environmental laws - as they struggle to deal with an unprecedented drilling boom that has turned Pennsylvania into a major natural gas player and raised fears about polluted aquifers and air.

The agency has denied few requests to drill in the Marcellus Shale formation, the world's second-largest gas field. Of the 7,019 applications that DEP has processed since 2005, only 31 have been rejected - less than one-half of one percent.

"Even those of us who are skeptics of the DEP, I think we all want to assume that they're doing the basics. And they're really just not," said Jordan Yeager, a plaintiffs' attorney who is challenging the drilling permit awarded to Newfield Appalachia PA LLC, a unit of Houston-based Newfield Exploration Co.

The agency declined to comment about any aspect of its permit review process, even to answer general questions.

But the depositions of four DEP staffers responsible for processing permits - taken in late March and filed with a regional water agency this week - reveal that:

- The agency doesn't consider potential impacts on legally protected high-quality watersheds, beyond checking that wells meet minimum setbacks required of all gas wells in the state.

- Staffers don't consider whether proposed gas wells comply with municipal or regional zoning and planning laws.

- They don't consider the cumulative impact of wide-scale development of wells in a concentrated area.

- They appear to have a fuzzy understanding of laws that are supposed to govern their work. A supervisor was unable to define the requirements of a key anti-degradation regulation that says pristine waterways "shall be maintained and protected," while a geologist said he didn't know that streams and rivers legally designated as "high quality" or "exceptional value" are entitled to an extra layer of protection.

http://www.ktvn.com/story/14437619/ap-pa-accused-of-rubber-stamping-gas-permits?redirected=true

Also see comments

distcoach2

Anyone who is interested in knowing what chemicals are being used (well, at least those not hidden under the misused "trade secret" rock) can find same at http:///fracfocus.org Note that the list as currently set up only pertains to those used since 1/1/11 and so the list is a bit lacking at this point. But it is promised that the list will grown as more wells are drilled and that it may eventually be inclusive for those thousands of wells drilled before 1/1/11...

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/04/pennsylvania_regulators_say_th.html

Also see

List PA Marcellus Shale Hydrofracking Chemicals Revealed (VIDEO)
Jeevan Vittal

http://www.weny.com/news-local.asp?ARTICLE3864=9154484

Known Charade Lil Difference Between Them Worth Highlighting

2011-04-17T05:49:00.000-07:00

The Goal Is Freedom | Sheldon Richman
Saving the Warfare-Welfare State
The difference is over means not ends

...Thus we see Obama’s basic agreement with Ryan’s wing of the uniparty, though the latter would rely on the tax-funded “private” sector more than the former would. Of course each side highlights the differences to make them appear to be matters of kind rather than degree or method. This way each can keep its base rhetorically satisfied (or try). Obama’s team talks about the need for the rich to sacrifice to the middle class and poor, while Ryan’s team counters that the private sector is where the action should be. Democrats accuse Republicans of wanting to end Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid (they don’t), while Republicans accuse Democrats of being Marxian socialists (they’re not).

But here’s the thing: Both seek to retain the fundamental status quo in which the State parcels out favors to reigning interests while providing succor to the vulnerable in a combined spirit of charity and fear. Fear of what? In the case of the elderly, fear of their political clout at the ballot box; in the case of those shut out the economic system because of lousy government schools, occupational licensing, and cartelization via the subsidy and regulatory regime, fear of a frustration that could turn into unrest.

Globally the Obama side emphasizes the supposed humanitarian rationale for military intervention while his internecine rivals emphasize the security rationale. But they agree on the premise — that it is the proper job of the U.S. government to police the world, at least where there is oil and other things coveted by the ruling elite.

Thus The Charade continues.

http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/tgif/saving-warfare-welfare-state/

PA Marcellus Shale Local Zoning Not Pre-empted by Oil and Gas Act

2011-04-15T09:18:00.000-07:00

Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court Upholds Fayette County Zoning Ordinance
Posted: August 15, 2010
Outcome of a Fayette County court case involving a zoning ordinance
by Michael A. Magee, Research Assistant
On July 22, the Commonwealth Court ruled that Fayette County’s (Fayette) zoning ordinance was not preempted by Pennsylvania’s Oil and Gas Act (OGA). Penneco Oil Co., Inc. v. County of Fayette, No. 18 C.D. 2010, 2010 WL 2853639. Fayette’s ordinance allows wells in residential, industrial, and airport zones, but only by special exception upon the satisfaction of specified conditions.
OGA expressly preempts local regulation of oil and gas operations except for ordinances passed under the Municipalities Planning Code (MPC) or the Flood Plain Management Act. Further, MPC-based enactments like Fayette’s ordinance are preempted if they share OGA’s purposes or if they regulate features of oil and gas operations addressed by OGA. 58 PA. STAT. § 601.602. In 2009, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court addressed OGA preemption of municipal ordinances in Huntley & Huntley v. Borough Council, 964 A.2d 855, and Range Res. v. Salem Twp., 964 A.2d 869. These cases established the framework under which all OGA preemption issues are analyzed. In Penneco, the Commonwealth Court found Fayette’s ordinance to be generally applicable, affecting oil and gas wells only with regard to their location. Furthermore, the court found that although Fayette’s zoning ordinance overlapped with OGA’s purposes to a certain degree, its primary effect on oil and gas operations was to ensure the continued vitality of neighborhoods and to encourage compatible land use. These traditional zoning purposes, the court determined, were distinct from OGA’s purposes. For more information on this case, please visit the Case Law section of the Natural Gas Resource Area on the Agricultural Law Center Web site.
From the August 2010 edition of the Penn State Dickinson School of Law, Agricultural Law Brief

http://extension.psu.edu/naturalgas/news/2010/08/pennsylvania-commonwealth-court-upholds-fayette-county-zoning-ordinance

Ruling gives towns power over drillers Published: August 23, 2010 By Elizabeth Skrapits

http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=68202649949&topic=14121

Would local officials be powerless to stop a natural gas company from drilling a natural gas well in the middle of a housing development?

Not according to a new state court ruling, which affirms the right of municipal and county officials to limit natural gas drilling to certain districts, such as agricultural, mining or manufacturing, and out of residential neighborhoods.

Three new court decisions were outlined by attorney Jeffrey Malak during a recent meeting of the Back Mountain Community Partnership in Luzerne County.

The latest decision, Penneco Oil Co. Inc. v. the County of Fayette, "...opens up the floodgates and says municipal zoning is not pre-empted" by the state Oil and Gas Act, Mr. Malak said. The case was decided in Commonwealth Court on July 22.

Traditionally, local officials have limited say when it comes to natural gas drilling. Technical aspects, such as what kind of materials to use and how the well is drilled, are governed by the state Oil and Gas Act. But local officials are gaining more and more say in where wells can be drilled.

Two previous cases, Huntley & Huntley v. Oakmont Borough and Range Resources v. Salem Twp. (Westmoreland County) set precedents allowing local officials some leeway in regulating where natural gas companies can drill.

Now the Penneco Oil Co. Inc. v. the County of Fayette decision says the state Oil & Gas Act does not trump local zoning ordinances, and that local officials can take steps to protect the residential character of neighborhoods, Mr. Malak said.

In the case, Penneco, Range Resources Appalachia LLC and the Independent Oil and Gas Association of Pennsylvania took Fayette County office of planning, zoning and community development to court, saying it did not have to follow the county's zoning ordinance because the state Oil and Gas Act made it invalid. The court ruled in favor of the county.

The Penneco case allows that gas wells cannot be located within the flight path of an airport runway; that they must be at least 200 feet from a residential dwelling; and that officials can require fencing and shrubs around the well site. It also allows zoning hearing boards to impose any other provisions to protect the health, safety and welfare of residents.

Mr. Malak also said local officials can require a land development plan from natural gas companies, and they can require special exceptions, meaning there has to be a hearing in front of the zoning hearing board to grant permission and to impose any standard planning and zoning fees, in response to another question.

But, he said, there are still aspects of natural gas drilling that will have to be decided in court, such as whether there can be restrictions on hours drillers can operate and whether they can be barred from using roads at certain times.

http://thetimes-tribune.com/news/ruling-gives-towns-power-over-drillers-1.968103

Contact the writer: eskrapits@citizensvoice.com

ZONING AND OIL & GAS ACT PREEMPTION
Penneco Oil Company, Inc. v. County of Fayette, 2010 WL
2853639 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2010)
Background
On November 1, 2006, Fayette County adopted a Zoning Ordinance.
On or about August 7, 2007, Penneco filed a complaint against
Fayette County and on or about May 5, 2008, Penneco filed, by
consent, an amended complaint primarily alleging that the Zoning
Ordinance is preempted by the Oil & Gas Act and requesting that the
trial court declare the Zoning Ordinance invalid.

Penneco Oil Company, Inc. v. County of Fayette
• Fayette’s Zoning Ordinance allowed oil and gas wells by “special exception” in
five zoning districts. The extent of Zoning Ordinance provisions that dealt
specifically with the granting of a special exception for oil and gas wells were the
following:
A. An oil or gas well shall not be located within the flight path of a runway
facility of an airport.
B. An oil or gas well shall not be located closer than two-hundred (200) feet
from residential dwelling or fifty-(50) feet from any property line or right-ofway.
C. An oil or gas well shall provide fencing and shrubbery around perimeter of
the pump head and support frame.
D. The Zoning Hearing Board may attach additional conditions pursuant to
this section, in order to protect the public's health, safety, and welfare. These
conditions may include but are not limited to increased setbacks.

Penneco Oil Company, Inc. v. County of Fayette
Penneco and its co-plaintiffs, Range Resources – Appalachia, LLC
and the Independent Oil and Gas Association of Pennsylvania,
argued that the Zoning Ordinance was pre-empted.

Penneco Oil Company, Inc. v. County of Fayette
Rulings
• The Fayette Zoning Ordinance did not pertain to the technical aspects
of well functioning and ancillary matters, but rather to “preserving
the character of residential neighborhoods, and encouraging
beneficial and compatible land uses.”
• “The fact that the zoning hearing board may attach additional
conditions to a grant of a special exception does not result in the
conclusion that the Zoning Ordinance provides arbitrary authority to
deny permission to drill.”
• “[T]hat the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance do not reflect an
attempt by Fayette County to enact a comprehensive regulatory
scheme relative to the oil and gas development within the county but
instead reflect traditional zoning regulations that identify which uses
are permitted in different areas of the locality. The Zoning Ordinance,
on its face, is clearly a zoning ordinance of general applicability like
the ordinance in Huntley.

Therefore, the Zoning Ordinance is not preempted by the Act.”

http://www.pbi.org/resources/extras/6753_oil_gas/Burcat.pdf

Pennsylvania Proposes Oil & Gas Well Casing and Cementing Rules

2011-04-15T09:07:00.000-07:00

Pennsylvania Proposes Oil & Gas Well Casing and Cementing Rules
This post was written by Nicolle Snyder Bagnell and Ariel Nieland.
On July 10, 2010, the Pennsylvania Environmental Quality Board (EQB) published its proposed rulemaking measures to update existing state requirements for drilling, casing, cementing, testing, monitoring and plugging of oil and gas wells. The proposed rulemaking, originally adopted by the EQB in May, is now open for public comment until August 9, 2010. Once the period for public comment is over, the proposal will go before the Pennsylvania Independent Regulatory Review Commission for review and final publication.
According to the EQB, a large portion of the updates contained in the proposal are already employed as part of best management practices among operators. However, the new regulations are said to further decrease any risk of gas migration from well sites to neighboring water supplies. The proposed rulemaking was prompted, in part, by public concern over the potential impact that the increasing number of Marcellus Shale wells could have on groundwater and drinking water supplies. Although the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection's review of current well site construction and operation practices revealed that "many, if not all, Marcellus well operators met or exceeded the current well casing and cementing regulations[,] . . . the current regulations were not specific enough" in detailing guidelines for proper well construction or requirements for operators to respond to complaints over gas migration. The current updates would provide for more specificity in these areas, as well as establish a requirement that well operators conduct quarterly inspections of the structural integrity of all wells in operation.

http://www.environmentallawresource.com/tags/marcellus-shale/

EPA announces scope of new hydraulic fracturing study

2011-04-15T09:02:00.000-07:00

EPA announces scope of new hydraulic fracturing study

http://energyforumonline.com/2950/epa-announces-scope-of-new-hydraulic-fracturing-study/

Congress
Former Bush EPA official says fracking exemption went too far; Congress should revisit by Abrahm Lustgarten
ProPublica, March 9, 2011
When Benjamin Grumbles was assistant administrator for water at the Environmental Protection Agency in the George W. Bush administration, he oversaw the release of a 2004 EPA report that determined that hydraulic fracturing was safe for drinking water. Then he watched as Congress used those findings to bolster the case for passing a law that prohibited the EPA from regulating fracking under the Safe Drinking Water Act.

Q: In the 2004 EPA study, which examined hydraulic fracturing in coalbed methane gas wells, a commission of experts concluded that the process "poses little or no threat" to underground sources of drinking water. That study has since been criticized. Where do you stand?

I saw that there were accusations, by Congressman (Henry) Waxman and Congresswoman (Diana) DeGette, that somehow politics were involved in that commission, or that it was too heavily slanted towards an industry perspective and that there were not enough environmental groups on that commission. There was also an employee in Denver who claimed whistle-blower status and felt that there was a greater risk to groundwater than was being acknowledged. Honestly, I never felt that the claims had much merit.

The career employees reviewing the report were quite comfortable with the integrity and product of that commissioned report. So, they recommended to me that hydraulic fracturing was not the type of threat that should be as high a priority as other types of threats to drinking water supplies. They took great offense to some of the other accusations that were made that the commission was biased in some way.

Q: You've said the study was never intended to be a "clean bill of health." Can you explain?

When we got the report, it was a snapshot in time. It was a thorough review describing the issues. Whether it's hydraulic fracturing or any other type of practice that can have an impact on the environment, one single report shouldn't be the basis for a perpetual, never-ending policy decision.

It wasn't meant to be a bill of health saying 'well, this practice is fine. Exempt it in all respects from any regulation.' I'm sure that wasn't the intent of the panel of experts, and EPA never viewed it that way. That's one reason why we were urging Congress to say 'look, if you are going to issue an exemption, ensure that it is not perpetual.'

Q: You're referring to the exemption passed by Congress as part of the 2005 Energy Policy Act, which prohibited the regulation of fracturing under the Safe Drinking Water Act. What did you think about the idea of an exemption?

The career staff and I felt that when Congress provides a permanent exemption in an environmental statute, they need to be very careful about that and they need to have some built-in review process or safeguards so that if there is a risk presented, either the states or the EPA can then revisit it.

Q: The EPA's 2004 report did find that diesel fluid in fracturing presented a risk to groundwater. How was this addressed?

The former administrator [of water] Tracy Mehan recognized that under current law the agency was not regulating or prohibiting diesel fluids from being used in the hydraulic fracturing process, so he signed, on behalf of the EPA, an MOU [memo of understanding] with major companies that have a major stake in this, voluntarily getting them to commit not to use diesel fluids for the hydraulic fracturing process.

Based on current law and what tools we had, I felt this was a positive step. And it was a sincere step forward for us to make sure that we were engaged with the industry and engaged in the sense that they knew we were watching this and knew that it could be a problem if they used this sort of a process.

Q: And now we learn from some members of Congress that diesel use continued despite those efforts ...

It's disappointing, and the agency needs to follow up and ensure that the industry is providing accurate and timely information.

I think if the information is true that industry withheld information or misled regulators or the policy makers, then that is serious, and they need to provide all the relevant information they have.

http://www.propublica.org/article/former-bush-epa-official-says-fracking-exemption-went-too-far

Sen. Inhofe
The Safe Drinking Water Act was enacted in 1974 to establish drinking water standards and to control permanent disposal of waste by underground injection. By 1974, hydraulic fracturing had been in commercial operation for 25 years. This law was not designed nor intended to regulate the practice and the legislative history demonstrates that. The 1974 conference report states that none of the Act’s underground injection provisions are to “needlessly interfere with oil or gas production.” In fact, the 1980 amendments were probably the most significant until 2005 for clarifying the Act’s application to oil and gas operations. The 1980 amendments created a new section 1425 to allow States to regulate underground injection from two types of oil and gas operations known as injection wells and disposal wells. However, given the chance to additionally address hydraulic fracturing, Congress declined. In the 2005 Energy Bill, Congress specifically clarified the Act is not intended to apply to hydraulic fracturing.
There are a myriad of federal statutes such as federal workplace rules, the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act, among others which regulate the storage and disposal, transporting, handling, and reporting of chemical use. Federal law requires disclosure of any release to the environment. Those statutes overlay state laws which also include extensive rules permitting oil and gas drilling and production. No state has been required to regulate hydraulic fracturing under the Safe Drinking Water Act with the exception of Alabama. The 11th Circuit issued an opinion in 1997 ignoring legislative history, oil and gas industry practices, and the clear text of the law, finding that Alabama should subject hydraulic fracturing in coal bed methane production to the Safe Drinking Water Act. However, hydraulic fracturing has not been subject to the Safe Drinking Water Act and is not correctly governed by the Act.
I am not alone in this opinion. President Obama’s Energy Czar agrees with me. In 1995, as EPA Administrator, Carol Browner wrote in response to litigation that federal regulation is not necessary for hydraulic fracturing. She correctly made the point that the practice was closely regulated by the states and, “EPA is not legally required to regulate hydraulic fracturing.” Most importantly, she further wrote that there was “no evidence that hydraulic fracturing resulted in any drinking water contamination” in the litigation involved…
… As early as 1998, the Ground Water Protection Council conducted the first survey of the 25 states in which hydraulic fracturing for oil and natural gas production occurs for any complaints of groundwater contamination. The survey reported no instance of contamination from the practice. In 2002, the IOGCC representing 37 states conducted its own survey making the same findings. On June 12, the Oklahoma Corporation Commission addressed the issue of hydraulic fracturing again in correspondence with the IOGCC. The Corporation Commission wrote that it has been regulating oil and gas drilling and production for 90 years which has included tens of thousands of hydraulic fracturing operations over the past 60 years. The Commission wrote, “You asked whether there has been a verified instance of harm to groundwater in our state from the practice of hydraulic fracturing. The answer is no.”
States have been regulating oil and gas exploration and production for years. The Department of Energy and Ground Water Protection Council released a report in May titled, “State Oil and Natural Gas Regulations Designed to Protect Water Resources” where it described state regulations which require multiple barriers, casings, and cement reinforcement to protect against groundwater contamination. Fracturing involves removing thousands of gallons of water from the well which includes the fracturing fluids. Once these fluids are returned to the surface, regulations require they are treated, stored, and isolated from ground water zones. All these processes together work to significantly reduce risk to groundwater. This DOE and GWPC report ultimately concluded that federal regulations on fracturing would be “costly, duplicative of state regulations, and ultimately ineffective because such regulations would be too far removed from field operations.” Equally interesting, the report also concluded that the “only alternative to fracturing in reservoirs with low permeability such as shale would be to simply have to drill more wells.” These findings mirror the EPA’s 2004 report of hydraulic fracturing in CMB production. EPA noted that fracturing involves the removal of thousands of gallons of ground water. This removal includes the fracturing fluids and the possibility that fracturing chemicals effect groundwater. EPA also concluded that the low permeability of rock where hydraulic fracturing is used acts as a barrier to any remnant of fracturing chemicals moving out of the rock formation. None of these findings are new. In the 1980 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act, Congress acknowledged, “32 states that regulate underground injection related to production of oil and gas believe they have programs already in place to meet the requirements of this Act….States should be able to continue these programs unencumbered with additional federal requirements.”

http://inhofe.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=be41bb58-802a-23ad-4d98-221b947cb212

PA: Timothy Kearney: Taxing Marcellus Shale Drillers Mistake

2011-04-15T08:43:00.000-07:00

Taxing Marcellus Shale drillers would be a mistake for PA
Timothy Kearney December 11, 2010

Marcellus Shale has fractured existing societal fissures along the back country roads of Pennsylvania and chambers of government in Harrisburg. Debates have flared over drilling's impact on clean water, the proper level (if any) of taxation, pollution and disruptions in traditional lifestyles. It is an understandable result of a transformational discovery: the development of what could be one of the world's largest gas fields.

The management of a natural resource like Marcellus Shale requires capital-intensive investment in a market where prices are unpredictable. This built-in business risk means that companies want as much cost certainty as possible, especially in the areas of taxation and regulation. Leaving them with open questions can hinder the development of a valuable natural resource.

There is a difference between taxation for general budget purposes and taxation to cover the inevitable costs of opening the state to natural gas production. As a partner in the development of this new resource, the state will have to underwrite some essential expenses. Roads will need to be built or strengthened to handle larger vehicles and traffic volume, and some basic services will have to be increased. To the extent that boom-towns boom, there could be the need to build schools and provide other public services. Looking both back into the state's history and ahead into the future, the commonwealth will have to prepare for potential toxic clean-up costs or well reclamation.

The issue of taxation for Marcellus Shale development, though, should not be separated from the question of business taxation reform for the entire Pennsylvanian economy. Gov.-elect Corbett correctly has identified the need for the Keystone State to improve its business climate in order to generate growth and employment. Pennsylvania currently ranks 26th in the nation in terms of business tax climate, according to the Tax Foundation…

It would be a mistake to put a new tax burden on this fledgling industry, which is in competition with low-tax, gas-producing states like West Virginia and Texas among others. It's essential to remember that the market for gas is global and the advantages other states give their industry through the tax code are real. Pennsylvanians should not envision Marcellus Shale as simply a goose laying golden eggs, lest that goose fly away.

The temptation to levy special taxes - whether it's because other states have severance taxes or simply to tap the industry as a new source of revenue to address state budget woes - should be strongly resisted. Transitioning to a new business tax system does open the door to impose some sort of tax on the new industry to ease that transformation to help balance the budget. But the point of tax reform is to broaden the base to lower tax rates on all business and most importantly to generate jobs and income.

The way forward is straightforward: Overhaul Pennsylvania's business tax system to make all businesses in the commonwealth - natural gas and other mining entities, goods and service producers alike - more competitive. Capital moves to where it can be best put to use. Lower tax rates applied across all lines of business activities will increase after tax returns throughout the commonwealth

http://standardspeaker.com/taxing-marcellus-shale-drillers-would-be-mistake-for-pa-1.1075538

Corbett forms Marcellus Shale advisory commission

2011-04-15T08:21:00.000-07:00

Updated

April 15, 2011 PCN Infrastructure Issues
Governor's Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission

Broadcast Coverage Panelists

pcnc

From The Governor's office:

Governor Tom Corbett, in his March 8 budget address to the General Assembly, announced the formation of a Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission.

The purpose of the commission, Corbett said, is “to oversee how we can build around this new industry and how we can make certain we do this while protecting our lands, our drinking water, our air – all the time growing our workforce.’’

Led by Lt. Governor Jim Cawley, the commission is to report to Gov. Corbett with its findings within 120 days of its first meeting.

The commission is to address the needs and impacts of natural gas development on local communities, as well as promote the efficient, environmentally sound and cost-effect development of Marcellus Shale and other natural gas resources.

In addition to Cawley, the following individuals were invited to join the commission:

Mike Krancer, acting Secretary of Environmental Protection, Harrisburg.
George Grieg, acting Secretary of Agriculture, Harrisburg.
C. Alan Walker, acting Secretary of Community and Economic Development, Harrisburg.
Barry Schoch, acting Secretary of Transportation, Harrisburg.
Patrick Henderson, the Governor’s Energy Executive, Harrisburg.
Robert Powelson, chairman of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, Harrisburg.
Glenn Cannon, director of Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency, Harrisburg.
James W. Felmlee, president of the PA State Association of Boroughs, Harrisburg.
Clifford “Kip’’ Allen, president of the PA League of Cities and Municipalities, Harrisburg.
Gene Barr, vice president, Government & Public Affairs, Pennsylvania Chamber of Business and Industry, Harrisburg.
Terry R. Bossert, vice president, Government & Regulatory Affairs, Chief Oil & Gas, Harrisburg.
Jeff Wheeland, Lycoming County Commissioner, Williamsport.
Vincent J. Matteo, president Williamsport-Lycoming Chamber of Commerce, Williamsport.
Terry Engelder, professor of geosciences, Penn State University, Department of Geosciences, University Park.
Matthew J. Ehrhart, executive director of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation’s Pennsylvania office, Harrisburg.
Ronald L. Ramsey, senior policy advisor, the Nature Conservancy, Pennsylvania Chapter, Harrisburg.
David Porges, chief executive officer, EQT, Pittsburgh.
Christopher J. Masciantonio, general manager, State Government Affairs, U.S. Steel, Pittsburgh.
Cynthia Carrow, vice president of Government & Community Relations, Western Pennsylvania Conservancy, Pittsburgh.
David Sanko, executive director of the PA State Association of Township Supervisors, Enola.
Dave Spigelmyer, vice president, Government Relations, Chesapeake Energy, Canonsburg.
Randy Smith, U.S. Government Affairs Manager, Exxon Mobil, Fairfax, Va.
Ray Walker, chairman Marcellus Shale Coalition, Canonsburg.
Chris Helms, NiSource Gas Transmission and Storage, Houston, Texas.
Terry Pegula, Delray Beach, Fla.
Jeff Kupfer, Chevron, Washington, D.C.
Gary Slagel, chairman, PA Independent Oil & Gas Association, Wexford.
Anthony S. Bartolomeo, chairman, Pennsylvania Environmental Council, Philadelphia.
Nicholas S. Haden, vice president, Reserved Environmental Services, Mt. Pleasant.

The text of Gov. Corbett’s executive order is available online at www.oa.state.pa.us. Choose “Directives, ITBs & More,” then select “Executive orders.”

http://www.whptv.com/news/local/story/Corbett-forms-Marcellus-Shale-advisory-commission/n-vv6L4vEEyrz-HComWprg.cspx

Pennsylvania DEP website info

Hydrolic Fracturing Overview
Chemicals used by Hydrolic Fracturing Companies PA
Summary of hydrolic fracturing Solutions

Chapter 78 of DEP regulations require installation of the protective surface casing through the entire vertical length of fresh groundwater and if present coal isolation casing in the wellbore, as well. In addition, since the Marcellus Shale Formation typically is encountered at depths ranging from 5,000 to 9,000 feet, this offers thousands of feet of vertical separation between underground sources of drinking water and the deeper production/target zone, inhibiting communication between fractures in the target zone, induced during hydrofracturing operations, and overlying freshwater aquifers.

The site extensively details the prcess and additives used and chemicals including as noted:

A biocide or disinfectant, used to prevent the growing of bacteria in the well that may interfere with the fracturing operation. Biocides typically consist of bromine-based solutions a glutaraldehyde.

Previous forums etc.

Melissa Hart Hosts PCNC's "NightTalk: Get to the Point" regarding the Marcellus Shale Drilling in our Region
•Categories: Latest Events
•Date: Nov 18, 2010
We are pleased to announce that Hon. Melissa A. Hart, of Keevican Weiss Bauerle & Hirsch and member of the firm's Natural Resources group will be featured as the guest-host appearing live on Friday, November 19 at 8 p.m. EST on Pittsburgh Cable News Channel's (PCNC) "NightTalk: Get to the Point" television program. Melissa will be joined by Democratic State Representative Marc Gergley, Washington County Commissioner J. Bracken Burns, Sr. and the Director of P.R. for Range Resources, Matt Pitzarella. Melissa will host the panel discussion regarding Marcellus Shale drilling in our region, including the following topics: * Severance Tax: A Normal Cost of Doing Business * Regulating Gas Drilling: Many Municipalities, Umpteen Ordinances * Environmental Concerns: Water & Wildlife Habitat * Gains for PA: Jobs, Taxes, Industry Peripherals * Conservation Pooling: Eminent Domain's Cousin * Drilling Moratorium: Time to Plan or Waste of Time * Line N Projects: Infrastructure for Gas Transport We hope that you have the opportunity to watch the show. The program will be telecast LIVE on Friday, 11/19 from 8:00-9:00 PM; in addition there will be encores Friday late night 2:00 AM and on Monday, 11/22 from 5:00 - 6:00 PM.

http://www.kwbhlaw.com/index.php?mact=News,cntnt01,print,0&cntnt01articleid=97&cntnt01showtemplate=false&cntnt01returnid=20

Lawrence Vance: Glenn Beck’s Non-Solutions

2011-04-14T07:31:00.000-07:00

Glenn Beck’s Non-Solutions
by Laurence M. Vance

March 3, 2011

Review of Glenn Beck, Broke: The Plan to Restore Our Trust, Truth, and Treasure

BREAK IN CLIP

The other odd thing about the book is that the section "Educate Yourself" only appears at the end of the chapters in Part III (chapters 13-20). There is also no index.
So, what about the content of the book? As mentioned, the first sixteen chapters of the book are about how and why Beck thinks the country is broken. The first two chapters are introductory and can be skipped as they contribute little to the book. Chapters three through nine are a selective survey of American economic history. Chapters ten through twelve are about how bad the country is broken financially. Chapters thirteen through sixteen, although they are part of Beck’s Part III, "The Plan," offer no specific plans at all. They talk about individual rights, the role of government, the Constitution, freedom, equality, American exceptionalism, religion, socialism, decentralization, and federalism.
There are two themes found throughout what I have labeled the first part of the book: the debt crisis and the Progressives responsible for it. Although there is no question that the United States has a debt crisis, there is every reason to question labeling all those responsible as Progressives. Since Professor Paul Gottfried has recently taken Beck to task on this very subject, I defer to him:
Certainly there are features of Progressivism that anyone concerned about centralized power has every right to criticize. But there are problems with how Beck frames his critique. There were different types of Progressives who stressed diverse themes, not all of which can be subsumed under the rubric of "big government." The connection between Progressivism and modern liberalism is weak. And in truth, Fox News personalities like Beck support many federal programs vastly more intrusive than any the Progressives dared contemplate.
Beck and other Fox critics of the Progressives may be far more addicted to big government than those they demonize. Tears glaze their eyes when they talk about 1960s civil rights laws, which placed entire regions of the country that once discriminated against black voters under what is now perpetual federal surveillance.
The talk radio and television pundits who now inveigh against Progressivism have fully accepted the increased government that those they revile helped to create. And these faux conservatives celebrate the additions to it that came long after the Progressive era, amid the civil rights and sexual upheavals of the 1960s and 1970s.
I would only add that Beck foolishly makes the blanket statement that Progressives "openly mock God and religion in general" when one of the Progressives he criticizes the most – Woodrow Wilson – was a devout Presbyterian and the son of a Presbyterian minister.

Beck’s survey of American history is a mixed bag.

BREAK IN CLIP

The last chapter of the book is about Beck’s preferred tax plan: a flat tax. He opens the chapter with a call to reform the tax system, not eliminate it. But Beck doesn’t simply want to reform the disastrous system (and I agree that it is a disastrous system), he wants to "transform it into something that, by its very nature, will attract the best and brightest back to America." How this fits with his views on immigration I don’t know. Instead of abolishing income taxes, Beck wants the tax code to become "one of America’s greatest assets." We can see on the second page of this chapter why Beck opts for a flat tax and doesn’t even mention that Americans pay too much to the government in taxes. Echoing Henry George, Beck says that "how we collect taxes is almost as important as how much we collect." If Beck were starting a country from scratch (another one of his crazy examples) he says "we’d start by agreeing that the tax code should be about one thing: raising revenue efficiently and fairly." How about agreeing that we would not have a tax code in the first place – just like we didn’t have a permanent one for more than the first hundred years in this country. The problem Beck has with our income-tax system is not that it is an income-tax system, but that it is "no longer about maximizing revenue for the government: it’s about redistributing wealth to create a more just society." Beck "would like to see everyone pay at least some tax." The main problem with Beck’s beloved flat tax, as I pointed out in my review of Steve Forbes’s book on the flat tax, is that "it would basically raise the same amount of revenue as the current system." So, rather than lowering the overall tax burden of the American people, the total amount of taxes the federal government extracts would be the same as it is now. All federal programs, all federal agencies, all federal projects, all earmarks, all pork-barrel spending – they could all continue just as now. The flat tax, like its cousin the FairTax, merely allows the government to confiscate the wealth of its citizens more efficiently. But what really needs to be flattened is skyrocketing congressional spending, not the procedure used by the government to confiscate wealth.
Yes, the country is broke. But the answer is not more legislation or constitutional amendments to fix previous legislation. The answer is to cut, repeal, abolish, eliminate, and eradicate all entitlements, whole departments, entire agencies, and complete programs.
Glenn Beck gives us nothing but non-solutions. For real solutions I recommend the new book by Thomas Woods titled Rollback: Repealing Big Government before the Coming Fiscal Collapse (Regnery, 2011).

http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance232.html

http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance-arch.html

Gary North: How to end the Federal Reserve System

2011-04-14T07:23:00.000-07:00

How To End the Federal Reserve System
by Gary North
Recently by Gary North: You Could Become an Amateur Historian . . . and Get a Promotion

Things are not always as complicated as they seem. With respect to the Federal Reserve System, it is a deliberate mystery. It was deliberately designed in 1910 to deceive the public, who were opposed the idea of a central bank. The conspirators who met on Jekyll Island in November 1910 knew this. They did good work from their point of view. They concealed the beast.
The general public today knows little about the FED. Prior to Ron Paul's Presidential run in 2007-8, far fewer people understood it.
I have been asked: "How could we get rid of the Federal Reserve? What will replace it?" The answer: either the free market or Congress.
People who think of themselves as free market people often are not. The tax-funded public schools and the state-regulated and accredited university faculties have taught that the modern system of intrusive civil government is necessary for an orderly society. People cannot imagine a market-based society.
There is an old saying, "You can't beat something with nothing." But the free market social order is not nothing. It is expanding around the world, which is why the world is getting richer.
At the Federal level, a free market social order in banking existed prior to 1914. That was back when the dollar was worth over 20 times what it is worth today. On this point, see the inflation calculator of the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
We can go back to that system. We will go back to it. The question is: When? The other question is: At what price?

ENDING THE FED BY LAW

Ron Paul could introduce a bill to end the Federal Reserve System. He could call it: "The Monetary Liberty Act." It would get known as the "End the Fed Act." Here is what the text might say.

The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 is hereby repealed. So are all subsequent acts based on the Federal Reserve Act of 1913...

BREAK IN CLIP

AN END RUN AROUND THE FED

I do not expect Congress to revoke the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 in this decade. The powers that be who run this country do so by means of the Federal Reserve System more than by any other semi-private institution. It is at the center of control, because the monetary system is at the center of the economy.

But the central bank faces a problem. To maintain the boom, the FED must inflate. To cease inflating would allow the credit bubble to implode on a scale far more devastating than what happened in 2008. The FED has placed us all on the back of the tiger.

Yet if it does not reverse its policy, it must produce hyperinflation at some point. That will destroy the FED's ability to guide the economy. Hyperinflation will lead to alternative currencies. Digital technology is now international. If buying and selling digital U.S. dollars is no longer profitable, because long-term contracts are not possible under hyperinflation, then the citizens of the United States will do what citizens of Zimbabwe did. They will use other currencies.

If the FED produces a Third World economy through hyperinflation, then people will do what Third World citizens do: find reliable currencies elsewhere. This can be done on-line nearly for free. The Internet has reduced the transaction costs of using rival currencies.

The FED economists know this. They know that transaction costs for using other currencies are low. If the FED's policies undermine long-term contracts, the citizens are not helpless. They can switch.

It will not take legislation to end the FED. All it will take is the FED. If the FED continues to inflate, it will destroy its base: the monetary system based on the FED. But if it ceases to inflate, by ceasing to buy Treasury debt, it will create Great Depression 2...

BREAK IN CLIP

CONCLUSION

The Post Office looked unbeatable for over 250 years. Technology has made it peripheral. The same will happen to the Federal Reserve System. It looks unbeatable. But the Internet can beat it. There are ways out of the FED's trap.

A lot of people will pay a heavy price for Bernanke's policies. That will be the price of persuading those people with the bulk of their assets in digital dollars to sell those assets and replace them with other digits.

This is why I do not think the FED will resort to hyperinflation. The economists know that the FED's victims can escape. The FED will risk mass inflation, but at some point it must say: "We will buy no more Treasury debt." That will be the moment of truth. That will be the day it climbs off the back of the tiger.

So will we all.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north955.html

Admission Tea Party Crashed by Establishment Republicans

2011-04-14T07:16:00.000-07:00

How Dare They Crash Our Tea Party

By Kirk Shelley
Published 03/08/10

I've seen a few articles floating around the Web concerning the political class's attempt to "take over" the so-called Tea Party movement. Republican politicians are speaking at their rallies; some of their organizations are backed by establishment sources. Most critics fret for the future of the movement and offer this or that recommendation for preserving the movement's integrity.

The phenomenon unfolding should come as no surprise. The tea parties were, from the beginning, an expression of outrage toward status quo politicians. Do you really not expect politicians not to act in self defense? They manipulate events, twist words and lie. Of course they are going to take over the tea party.

In this battle for the tea party movement, there is a lesson. Why would anyone expect that a "bottom up" or "grassroots" organization is beyond being taken over? These organizations are the most vulnerable to takeover. If you want to be informal, unincorporated, and allow everyone to participate, then "everyone," including politicians, will.

BREAK IN CLIP
Also, regarding another sore point about the tea parties:

If you define "neo con" as being pro-war or pro-interventionist foreign policy then you need to realize that most Republicans hold those views. 57% of all citizens think we are doing the right thing in Iraq and Afghanistan. 71% of the GOP is all in favor of invading anyone we think is a threat. The Democratic Party is split 47/46. There shouldn't be any surprise that most people showing up at a tea party are all in favor of blowing up anyone who gets in America's way, even if they were never in our way in the first place. (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30346.html)

If you think our current foreign policy is wrong, recognize the reality going in and try to pursue those who don't agree with you, don't smash into them head on: you won't get far with this crowd. However, you can assume that most of this crowd is going to understand the principles of limited/constitutional government, so use that common frame of reference. If they can understand that the government is lying about everything else, sooner or later they will catch on that they're lying about foreign threats, too. (http://www.antiwar.com/ips/lobe080703.html) Leave the issue alone until you get to know someone well enough that you can have a civil discussion with them. Don't browbeat them at their rallies

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php?view=670

Are Sarah Palin's comments and interjections found to be unpalatable by Tea Party advocates of 'small government?'

Sarah Palin takes fight against media to India, slams Obama's 'indecisivness' over Libya situation
BY NINA MANDELL
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Saturday, March 19, 2011
Sarah Palin's taking her campaign against the 'lamestream media' worldwide.

When asked by an attendee at the India Today Conclave in New Dehli why she and John McCain were not able to beat President Obama in the 2008 election, the former vice presidential candidate blamed "the media" according to the Wall Street Journal.

The comments came after she blasted the mainsteam media as untrustworthy, but she quickly added "No, I'm kidding, no. Candidate Obama he had a strong campaign, he was the agent of change and though he was inexperienced and relatively unknown in the U.S., people still desired that change."

In the talk she also said that if she was president, she wouldn't have hesitated when it came to taking action on Libya.

http://articles.nydailynews.com/2011-03-19/news/29185790_1_energy-policy-todd-palin-lamestream-media

Palin's Neocon Path by Jack Kenny The New American

http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/usnews/politics/6224-palins-neocon-path

You Will Drink Chocolate Milk, Yes You Will, Kid

2011-04-14T06:38:00.000-07:00

Chicago school usurps parental authority
Bill Bumpas - OneNewsNow - 4/13/2011
In an extreme example of the "nanny state" mentality, a public school in Chicago is forbidding students to bring lunches from home and is ordering them to only eat food from the school cafeteria.

The principal at Little Village Academy (K-8) on Chicago's West Side told the Chicago Tribune that making students eat the cafeteria food, unless they have a medical excuse, is intended to protect them from their own unhealthful food choices. "Nutrition wise, it is better for the children to eat at school," said Elsa Carmona. "It's about nutrition and the excellent quality food that they are able to serve [in the lunchroom]. It's milk versus a Coke."

While the administrator makes the nutrition argument, former public school teacher Dr. Karen Gushta -- research coordinator at Coral Ridge Ministries and author of The War on Children: How Pop Culture and Public Schools Put Our Kids at Risk -- tells OneNewsNow it usurps parental authority.

"It's another effort to take away parental rights and the right of a parent to make decisions about what is in the best interest for the welfare of their own child, and place that right in the hand of an administrator or some government agent or whomever it may be," she laments.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Education/Default.aspx?id=1329076

Gasp Goldman Sachs stands accused of misleading investors not a crime

2011-04-14T05:47:00.000-07:00

Goldman Sachs accused of misleading investors

A US Senate probe says Goldman Sachs misled investors selling mortgage-backed investments it knew would fail.

The Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations has spent two years looking at the behaviour of Wall Street banks at the time of the credit crisis.

It said Goldman had also misled Congress in a testimony given in 2010.

A Goldman Sachs spokesman said the testimony given by its executives had been "truthful and accurate", and the bank took the issues raised seriously.

Complex deals

On Wednesday, the Senate subcommittee said it had found "a variety of troubling and sometimes abusive practices" by banks in 2007 as the credit crisis began.

The report said that Goldman marketed four sets of complex mortgage securities to banks and other investors, but failed to tell them the investments were very risky.

In addition, the report said the bank did not mention that it was itself betting that the investments' value would fall, indicating it sold products to clients it did not believe in backing itself.

Carl Levin, the Democrat who heads the subcommittee, told a press briefing that Goldman had "exploited" clients.

Goldman Sachs spokesman Michael DuVally said that while the company disagreed with many of the report's conclusions, "we take seriously the issues explored by the subcommittee".

"We recently issued the results of a comprehensive examination of our business standards and practices, and committed to making significant changes," Mr DuVally said.

Previous probe

Goldman has already paid $550m (£337m) - without admitting or denying wrongdoing - to settle civil fraud charges over similar accusations relating to a large deal known as Abacus.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13077509

International Court ruling on religious symbol repurcussions?

2011-03-19T04:12:00.000-07:00

International court bases decision on what the 'majority' of individuals' 'religious' values and practices are at a point in time.

'Offended' parent can't remove classroom cross, court decides

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=276725#ixzz1H2irSVoS

At another point in time, what if the 'majority' (of parents) changes to paganism? Will use of those symbols in school classrooms then be allowed? Highly doubtful. The ruling is dangerous.

For the United States, this ruling should be ignored. But that is highly doubtful as well.

Net the Truth Online

"All the parents of all the 30 puupils in an Italian classroom enjoy equally the fundamental Convention right to have their children receive teaching in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions, at least analogous to that of the Lautsi children," he wrote. "The parents of one pupil want that to be 'non-crucifix' schooling, and the parents of the other 29, exercising their equally fundamental freedom of decision, want that schooling to be 'crucifix' schooling.

"No one has so far suggested any reason why the will of the parents of one pupil should prevail, and that of the parents of the other 29 pupils should founder. The parents of the 29 have the fundamental right, equivalent in force and commensurate in intensity, to have their children receive teaching in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions."

Read more: 'Offended' parent can't remove classroom cross, court decides http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=276725#ixzz1H2irSVoS

Patriot Ledger Article Shocking Historical Truth OK City Bombing

2011-03-11T03:45:00.000-08:00

Read the particulars in the article, "Author links man arrested in Quincy to the subject of her book on the Oklahoma City bombing, then read the comments section.

What is shocking, the intelligence community let 'somebody' go after a thorough investigation at the time. Why?

Will we ever know?

excerpts

Author links man arrested in Quincy to the subject of her book on Oklahoma City bombing - Quincy, MA - The Patriot Ledger

The author of a book on the Oklahoma City bombing says a homeless man arrested in Quincy on Wednes day is the same man identified by several witnesses to the bombing as having been with Timothy McVeigh before the deadly attack.

But an FBI spokesman, Greg Comcowich, said a man named Hussain Al-Hussaini was "thoroughly investigated" and "found to not have any role whatsoever in the attack on the Murrah Federal Building in 1995."

Author links man arrested in Quincy to the subject of her book on Oklahoma City bombing - Quincy, MA - The Patriot Ledger

...Both Dougan and the author of the Oklahoma City book said the man arrested in Quincy also has a tattoo on his arm that matches the description of one on the arm of the man in the book.

“His age, his name, the picture, the mug shot, that’s him,” the author of “The Third Terrorist,” Jayna Davis, told The Patri ot Ledger in a telephone interview.

Davis said she saw the Al-Hussaini she wrote about during depositions for a libel suit he brought against her.

Davis said the Al-Hussaini she wrote about is a former Iraqi solider who was seen with McVeigh in the weeks before Oklahoma City and on April 19, 1995, the day of the bombing, which killed 168 people.

McVeigh was executed for his role in the bombing. The Al- Hussaini seen with him was never charged...

http://www.patriotledger.com/archive/x1777801225/Author-links-man-arrested-in-Quincy-to-the-subject-of-her-book-on-Oklahoma-City-bomb-ing#ixzz1GI80TTVt

Net the Truth Online

Author links man arrested in Quincy to the subject of her book on Oklahoma City bombing

By Staff
The Patriot Ledger
Posted Mar 10, 2011 @ 08:32 PM
Last update Mar 10, 2011 @ 10:00 PM

QUINCY — The author of a book on the Oklahoma City bombing says a homeless man arrested in Quincy on Wednes day is the same man identified by several witnesses to the bombing as having been with Timothy McVeigh before the deadly attack.

But an FBI spokesman, Greg Comcowich, said a man named Hussain Al-Hussaini was "thoroughly investigated" and "found to not have any role whatsoever in the attack on the Murrah Federal Building in 1995."

Comcowich did confirm that a man named Hussain Al-Hussaini had been seen with McVeigh prior to the bombing.

Quincy Police on Thursday spoke with the author and notified the FBI of the arrest of Al-Hussaini for slash ing a man’s face with a beer bot tle.

Capt. John Dougan said the man arrested in Quincy on Wednesday has the same name as a man featured prominently in the 2004 book “The Third Terrorist: The Middle East Connection to the Oklahoma City Bombing.”

Both Dougan and the author of the Oklahoma City book said the man arrested in Quincy also has a tattoo on his arm that matches the description of one on the arm of the man in the book.

“His age, his name, the picture, the mug shot, that’s him,” the author of “The Third Terrorist,” Jayna Davis, told The Patri ot Ledger in a telephone interview.

Davis said she saw the Al-Hussaini she wrote about during depositions for a libel suit he brought against her.

Davis said the Al-Hussaini she wrote about is a former Iraqi solider who was seen with McVeigh in the weeks before Oklahoma City and on April 19, 1995, the day of the bombing, which killed 168 people.

Read more: Author links man arrested in Quincy to the subject of her book on Oklahoma City bombing - Quincy, MA - The Patriot Ledger

http://www.patriotledger.com/archive/x1777801225/Author-links-man-arrested-in-Quincy-to-the-subject-of-her-book-on-Oklahoma-City-bomb-ing#ixzz1GI5aYusK

http://www.patriotledger.com/features/x1777801225/Author-links-man-arrested-in-Quincy-to-the-subject-of-her-book-on-Oklahoma-City-bomb-ing#axzz1GFRb6cX5

Only a Couple More States to Con-Con Call?

2011-02-24T07:13:00.000-08:00

U.S. now only 2 states away from rewriting Constitution
Critic: 'This is a horrible time to try such a crazy scheme'

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: December 12, 2008
12:25 am Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2011 WorldNetDaily

A public policy organization has issued an urgent alert stating affirmative votes are needed from only two more states before a Constitutional Convention could be assembled in which "today's corrupt politicians and judges" could formally change the U.S. Constitution's "'problematic' provisions to reflect the philosophical and social mores of our contemporary society."

"Don't for one second doubt that delegates to a Con Con wouldn't revise the First Amendment into a government-controlled privilege, replace the 2nd Amendment with a 'collective' right to self-defense, and abolish the 4th, 5th, and 10th Amendments, and the rest of the Bill of Rights," said the warning from the American Policy Center.

"Additions could include the non-existent separation of church and state, the 'right' to abortion and euthanasia, and much, much more," the group said.

The warning comes at a time when Barack Obama, who is to be voted the next president by the Electoral College Monday, has expressed his belief the U.S. Constitution needs to be interpreted through the lens of current events.

Tom DeWeese, who runs the center and its education and grass-roots work, told WND the possibilities stunned him when he discovered lawmakers in Ohio are considering a call for a Constitutional Convention. He explained that 32 other states already have taken that vote, and only one more would be needed to require Congress to name convention delegates who then would have more power than Congress itself.

clipped for continuity

Read more: U.S. now only 2 states away from rewriting Constitution http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=83364#ixzz1EtDkga2r

DeWeese said the Constitutional Convention effort was begun in the 1980s by those who wanted to rein in government with an amendment requiring a balanced budget for the federal agencies.

"Certainly all loyal Americans want government constrained by a balanced budget," the alert said. "But calling a Con Con risks a revolutionary change in our form of government. The ultimate outcome will likely be a new constitution, one that would possibly eliminate the Article 1 restriction to the coinage of real money or even eliminate gun or property rights."

He noted that when the last Constitutional Convention met in 1787, the original goal was to amend the Articles of Confederation. Instead, delegates simply threw them out and wrote a new Constitution.

"We were blessed in 1787; the Con Con delegates were the leaders of a freedom movement that had just cleansed this land of tyranny," the warning said. "Today's corrupt politicians and judges would like nothing better than the ability to legally ignore the Constitution - to modify its "problematic" provisions to reflect the philosophical and socials mores of our contemporary society."

DeWeese then listed some of the states whose legislatures already have issued a call: Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah and Wyoming.

"You may have heard that some of those 32 states have voted to rescind their calls. This is true," the warning continued. "However, under Article V of the Constitution, Congress must call a Constitutional Convention whenever two-thirds (or 34) of the states apply. The Constitution makes no provision for rescission."

The warning also suggested that the belief that a Constitution Convention could be directed in its purpose is misplaced.

"In truth no restrictive language from any state can legally limit the scope or outcome of a Convention! Once a Convention is called, Congress determines how the delegates to the Convention are chosen. Once chosen, those Convention delegates possess more power than the U.S. Congress itself," the warning said.

Read more: U.S. now only 2 states away from rewriting Constitution http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=83364#ixzz1EtDJX5wx

Phyllis Schlafly: Warning On Article V Constitutional Convention

2011-02-24T07:01:00.000-08:00

Collection Phyllis Schlafly works include among the founder of Eagle Forum's works

The Constitutional Convention (Con Con) Series [10 boxes] contains materials from the Constitutional Convention battle, especially during the 1980s. Mrs. Schlafly led the opposition to a Constitutional Convention to propose a Balanced Budget Amendment.

http://www.eagleforumarchives.org/PS-Collection.html

A warning to states about a Con-Con
Posted: February 22, 2011 1:00 am Eastern
Phyllis Schlafly

Have you seen the television pictures of the tens of thousands of demonstrators at the Wisconsin State Capitol who are protesting proposed budget cuts for state employees? If so, you've had an advance peek at the sort of demonstrations that will take place if state legislatures are foolish enough to pass resolutions asking Congress to call a national convention to consider amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

Barack Obama's political arm, "Organizing for America," swelled the crowds by busing in protesters from Wisconsin and from other states, too. A national convention to amend the U.S. Constitution would become the media event of the century, with 24/7 TV coverage, giving us every reason to anticipate that "Organizing for America" would flood the process of electing delegates and then demonstrate to hurl demands on their deliberations.

All of a sudden, as though someone gave the signal, resolutions are pending in several state legislatures to use the never-before-used power set forth in Article V to petition Congress to "call a Convention for proposing Amendments." This campaign exploits the frustration of many Americans with Congress' out-of-control spending, increase in the national debt (with much of it borrowed from China) and passage of laws, such as Obamacare, that severely limit our freedoms.

Witness the birth of self-government in this inspiring portrayal of the Constitution's genesis, "A More Perfect Union"

Many state legislators are promising that a convention would be limited to consideration of only one specific amendment. No way. Article V clearly specifies that a convention is for the purpose of "proposing Amendments" (note the plural).

Furthermore, various state resolutions support different amendments. Some specify that the one amendment to be considered must be the Repeal Amendment (to allow states to repeal an act of Congress). Others want the one amendment to be Debt Limitation, others want a Balanced Budget Amendment, others want a change in the Electoral College, others want to abolish the 17th Amendment, and one proposal is for a list of 10 Amendments.

When the protesters assemble, we can be sure that many special-interest groups will be pushing their own agendas. You can bet that a once-in-a-lifetime convention will attract activists demanding union rights (like the Wisconsin demonstrators), gay rights, gun control, abortion rights, Equal Rights Amendment and Washington, D.C., statehood.

Calling a convention to amend the U.S. Constitution would be a plunge into darkness because the only rules to govern it are those specified in Article V. It takes two-thirds (34) of the states to pull the trigger, Congress controls and issues the call, and the convention must consider Amendments (in the plural).

Anyone who has attended a national political convention knows very well that the guy with the gavel exercises ruthless power. I've attended 15 Republican National Conventions plus many other national, state and district political conventions, and I've seen every kind of high-handed tactic and rules broken with the bang of the gavel, including cutting off mics, recognizing only pre-chosen delegates, expelling unwanted delegates, cheating on credentials and rules, fixing the voting machines, etc., etc.

Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, a national hero for winning the case that persuaded a judge to declare Obamacare unconstitutional, stated on the steps of the Capitol in Richmond on Jan. 17: "What about a runaway convention? Yes, it is true that once you assemble a convention that states have called, they can do anything they want."

(Column continues below)

Read more: A warning to states about a Con-Con http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=266665#ixzz1EtAJFk16

We Echo Letter Urging Rand Paul Recant Con-Con Call

2011-02-23T11:34:00.000-08:00

News with follow-up letter

February 23, 2011

State lawmakers call for constitutional convention
By Ronnie Ellis
CNHI News Service The Richmond Register Wed Feb 23, 2011, 01:00 PM EST

FRANKFORT — With U.S. Sen. Rand Paul leading the cheers, the state Senate on Tuesday passed a resolution calling for a limited constitutional convention to pass a federal balanced budget amendment.

The vote was 22-16 — Republican Sen. Julie Denton of Louisville joined the 15 Democrats in opposing the measure — on the measure sponsored by Senate President and Republican candidate for governor David Williams. The vote followed Paul’s speech to the body and his earlier remarks to the Senate State Government Committee.

The resolution must be passed by the House to have the effect of law, but that’s
unlikely...

more on site the following is clipped

Sen. Robin Webb, D-Grayson, called the amendment “playing chicken with Congress,” and Paul and Williams didn’t entirely dispute that notion. Both told the committee Tuesday they don’t think such a convention will ever be called —– that fear of such a convention will force Congress to act on the idea.

But Paul said in the absence of Congressional action, he supports the convention option.

http://richmondregister.com/localnews/x1348433843/State-lawmakers-call-for-constitutional-convention

Can you believe Rand Paul says what he does after well Kentucky state legislators take some action?

Sen. Robin Webb, D-Grayson, called the amendment “playing chicken with Congress,” and Paul and Williams didn’t entirely dispute that notion. Both told the committee Tuesday they don’t think such a convention will ever be called —– that fear of such a convention will force Congress to act on the idea.

But Paul said in the absence of Congressional action, he supports the convention option.

A call to convene a convention is no small matter and it certainly is no such threat to Congress to act or else what - the states will call for an actual convention to propose the 'limited' convention?

We think Rand Paul should be seriously considered for more letters than his inbox can hold. What is really troubling - he obviously has not read much about how the 1787 delegates went far beyond the convention's stated mission and crafted a new Constitution.

Net the Truth Online

Rand Paul Urges Kentucky to Call for Constitutional Convention
Submitted by SteveMT on Tue, 02/22/2011 - 16:06
in Rand Paul
7
votes Rand Paul urges state lawmakers to call for constitutional convention
By Jack Brammer
Posted: 1:20pm on Feb 22, 2011; Modified: 2:07pm on Feb 22, 2011

FRANKFORT — At the urging of U.S. Sen. Rand Paul, a state Senate committee approved a measure Tuesday urging Congress to convene a constitutional convention that would consider a balanced budget amendment.

Critics of Senate Concurrent Resolution 134 said the state legislature should not meddle in federal policy and expressed fear that a constitutional convention would lead to other unwanted changes.

Read more: http://www.kentucky.com/2011/02/22/1644712/rand-paul-urges-s...

http://dailypaul.com/157929/rand-paul-urges-kentucky-to-call-for-constitutional-convention

Net the Truth Online has covered the dangers of a federal Constitutional Convention for several years now. We emphatically agree with the following letter and all of the negative comments regarding Rand Paul and his push for Kentucky to call for a Con-Con for any reason, including balanced budget. Also we've posted material about Judge Andrew Napolitano, who has urged the Tea Party brigade to also push for state legislatures to initiate a convention call. All of the comments are extremely important, don't miss a one.

Some selections

Submitted by Jive_Dadson on Wed, 02/23/2011 - 13:50.
http://paul.senate.gov/contact_form.cfm

Dear Dr. Paul:

As a friend of Liberty, I urge you to recant the call for a constitutional convention.

The only time a constitutional convention met previously, the limited purpose was to provide means for funding of the union. Instead of keeping to that task, the convention scrapped the existing organic laws, the Articles of Confederation, and wrote an entirely new and different constitution.

Although it is flawed, that document does contain elements that are essential for Liberty, most importantly the Bill of Rights. A constitutional convention would put the the Bill of Rights in grave danger. Know that few if any State representatives who would vote in the convention would share our ideals!

There is no provision in the present organic laws to limit the scope of a constitutional convention. Any words to that effect in a resolution for a convention could simply be voted away at the convention.

Our problem is not the Constitution; It is the failure of federal government to abide by it. If changes to the constitution are warranted, the only prudent way to effect them is through amendment, not a constitutional convention.

I beg you not to open that Pandora's box.

Yours for Liberty,

http://dailypaul.com/157929/rand-paul-urges-kentucky-to-call-for-constitutional-convention

next comment

Say it ain't so!
Submitted by spacehabitats on Wed, 02/23/2011 - 13:36.
As much as I admire and support Rand Paul, this is a HUGE mistake.

Every fiber of my body screams that this nuclear option to balancing the budget is the LAST thing we need right now.

Once convened, a Constitutional Convention would have as much authority as the original convention; passing or abolishing ANY amendment or even scrapping and replacing the entire document!
A Con-Con can NOT be limited to a specific topic or amendment, and anyone stating that it can be is guilty of naivete, deception, or wishful thinking.

When it comes to this issue, Rand needs to put the gun down and back away... slowly.

http://dailypaul.com/157929/rand-paul-urges-kentucky-to-call-for-constitutional-convention

so bad
Submitted by NJforRP on Tue, 02/22/2011 - 20:45.
Rand Rand Rand....

A ConCon is dangerous, and balanced budget amendments mean they are forced to raise taxes.

http://www.libertynewsnetwork.tv/?p=685

Once the Article V can is opened, the Constitution is gone.
The delegates can declare that ratification is optional by states is not necessary.
There is no limit to what they can do.

WATCH THIS VIDEO please!

http://dailypaul.com/157929/rand-paul-urges-kentucky-to-call-for-constitutional-convention

States Warned of Dangers of Con-Con
Submitted by robbjerk on Tue, 02/22/2011 - 17:24.
Here is a good article on the dangers of a Constitutional Convention. I agree that Rand Paul needs to reconsider this issue.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=266665

http://dailypaul.com/157929/rand-paul-urges-kentucky-to-call-for-constitutional-convention?page=1

More please review as much as possible and write or email your objections to Senator Rand Paul today.

Danger: Rand Paul to Push for Constitutional Convention
Has the sellout of the Republican Majority begun?

http://www.mediacontrol.org/2011/02/danger-rand-paul-to-push-for.html

Also see

Have Senators Rand Paul and DeMint caved in to our Capitol Hill RINO Crowd?Posted by johnwk on November 23, 2010 at 6:18pm in Constitutional Issues

http://www.patriotactionnetwork.com/forum/topics/have-senators-rand-paul-and

PA: Will Commonsense Reform Pass Now?

2011-02-23T06:27:00.000-08:00

Very interesting topic debated on the PCN Channel between Gene Barr VP Government and Public Affirs for PA Chamber of Business and Industry and Scott Cooper PA Association for Justice, VP.

http://www.pcntv.com/schedule_daily.php

Below are links to basically the positions taken while on the PCN TV program.

Now if the B and I group would please look into the wholly unconstitutional Keystone Opportunity Zones,

Right, talk about unfairness hasn't happened during the entire run of the Pennsylvania tax-abatement/exemption program since 1999. Hasn't happened for over 10 years of the documented as failed state program. Doubtful such will happen now.

How in reality is it fair that a select group of residents/homeowners and business owners whose property is authorized to be designated a KOZ (3-taxing bodies meet and forgive, annually) get local and state taxes waived for some amount of years - possibly 20 years - and yet the governments waiving these taxes don't cut expenses even a smattering thus other residents/homeowners and business landowners not in a KOZ must fork over not only their own tax bill payment but share the burden of the tax-free KOZers?

Yet not a peep from the PA Chamber of Business and Industry on that unfairness.

Guess there aren't enough disgruntled PA taxpayers not in KOZs to get the attention of that organization.

Sickening isn't it? See our long-standing coverage of PA Keystone Opportunity Zones found with a search of the site or in the sidebar links.

Net the Truth Online

Links some clips

Fair Share Act Pennsylvania state legislature

Schedule PCN TV call-in programming and guests

http://www.pcntv.com/shows_callin.html

Pennsylvania Considers Tort Reform
By Kenneth J. St. Onge | February 18, 2011
Pennsylvania lawmakers are once again eyeing a tort reform package — a resurrection of the “Fair Share” act — that many in the insurance industry say would help put downward pressure on premiums and rein in what critics say is a legal system abused by plaintiffs’ lawyers in the state.

The tort reform package — which is similar to others previously proposed in Pennsylvania — would alter the mechanics of civil liability; that is, how the courts and juries assign a dollar value to judgments rendered against defendants.

Pennsylvania works differently from most other states, where guilty parties typically can be apportioned liability in civil cases. In other states, typically, a party that was found 50 percent at fault for causing $100 worth of damage would be responsible for paying $50. But in Pennsylvania, that same person could be held responsible for $100, under the legal theory joint and several liability. In a nutshell: one party can be forced to pay for the misdeeds of another.

The peculiar quirk is sometimes referred to as the “1 percent rule” since it’s conceivable — but unlikely — that a party in a lawsuit can be found 1 percent liable for causing an injury, but be forced to pay 100 percent of any monetary damages. In states where it’s allowed, it’s extremely rare, although it can happen. It’s also called the “deep pocket” rule by critics, who say it encourages lawsuits against companies with substantial assets.

Pennsylvania tort reformers, chiefly Republicans, say the measures — which would change rules regarding comparative and contributory negligence — are long overdue, benefit businesses in a struggling economy and would ultimately help drive down insurance costs. But plaintiffs’ attorneys counter that the measures would actually drive up legal costs — and could even open a slew of potential new lawsuits and claims against insurance agents.

It’s a huge concern for insurers, who often front the legal bills and pay the judgments against guilty defendants in the state, said Kari Kissinger, government affairs director for the Insurance Agents and Brokers (IA&B) group in Pennsylvania. “Those damages can sometimes be very, very high, so it really puts the cost burden on those that are perceived to have these deep pockets.” In other words: insurers.

But those concerns can have a real impact on other businesses, particularly when owners worry they will be sued for someone else’s mistakes. That type of tort climate brings higher insurance premiums and dissuades new businesses from opening, Kissinger said. “It’s well understood that businesses are hesitant to come to Pennsylvania, simply because they look at the Tort climate, number one being that we do not have an enactment of the Fair Share Act and are hesitant to come into the state… it creates that fearful and defensive environment.”...

http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/east/2011/02/18/186942.htm

Scott Cooper PA Association for Justice

http://www.pajustice.org/pa/index.cfm?event=showPage&pg=TodaysNews

Push is on for commonsense lawsuit abuse reform

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re-enactment of Fair Share Act is PA Chamber members' top priority
The PA Chamber is fully engaged with the General Assembly to secure enactment of a number of its members’ lawsuit abuse reform priorities. They include: ensuring that defendants in civil liability cases are responsible only for their fair share of damages; preventing plaintiffs’ attorneys from shopping for favorable court venues; protecting innocent sellers of products who had nothing to do with the product’s manufacture; and enacting other reasonable protections for manufacturers.

These improvements will help create a legal system that is fair for all Pennsylvanians.

The debate over lawsuit abuse reform, or tort reform, is about restoring common sense, fairness and personal responsibility to the Commonwealth’s legal system. This is important because a state’s legal system has a direct bearing on the cost and quality of health care; the cost of consumer goods and services; new product research and development; business investments and job creation. Pennsylvania has one of the worst legal climates in the nation, which threatens all of these.

One of the PA Chamber’s first orders of business is re-enactment of the Fair Share Act – or joint and several liability reform.

Under the Fair Share Act, damage awards in civil liability cases would be proportional to responsibility for an injury or loss except in cases in which a defendant is: (1) found liable for intentional fraud or tort; (2) held liable for environmental hazards; (3) held civilly liable as a result of drunk driving; or (4) held more than 60 percent liable for the injury or loss. However, a defendant who is found more than 60 percent, but less than 100 percent, liable would still maintain the right to take action against other defendants seeking compensation for contributory damages.

Under the current system of joint and several liability, a defendant found only 1 percent responsible can be held liable for 100 percent of the damages. Trial lawyers take advantage of the unfair legal doctrine in order to go after “deep pockets.” The reasonable changes contained in the proposed Fair Share Act restore balance, while maintaining extra protections for victims in the egregious situations outlined above.

http://www.pachamber.org/www/news/headlines/2011/whatsnew/Push%20is%20on%20for%20commonsense%20lawsuit%20abuse%20reform.php

Reuters Columnists Propose 4-State Bailout Plea

2011-01-24T13:54:00.000-08:00

Capitol Region Voice posts a response to made-up letter

Letter: Bail Out the States? (New York Times)
Saturday, January 22, 2011
To the Editor: Pretending to be writing as four Democratic governors seeking federal bailouts of their states, Rob Cox and Richard Beales (“How 4 Governors May Ask for Help,” Reuters Breakingviews, Business Day, Jan. 10) cite Tax Foundation research showing that their states have paid more in federal taxes than they’ve received in federal spending. Mr. Cox and Mr. Beales say that entitles the four states to federal financial “help” flowing in the opposite direction. Not even close. The differences are overwhelmingly a result of the federal income tax, which extracts larger percentages of income from higher earners. So long as we have a heavily progressive income tax, states with more high earners (like the four in the article) will always end up sending more revenue to Washington than they receive in federal spending. Even a huge bailout to certain states wouldn’t change that dynamic much. Illinois, California et al. are in fiscal trouble not because they receive too little money from Washington, but because they haven’t aligned desired spending with available revenues. Governors should spend their time doing that rather than pushing for bailouts from other states’ taxpayers. Richard Morrison Manager of Media Relations Tax Foundation Washington, Jan. 18, 2011

http://illumen.orchidsuites.net/sites/capitalregionvoice.com/index.php?ht=display/ContentDetails/i/4074061

Reuters Breakingviews
A Democratic Plea Republicans May Listen ToBy ROB COX and RICHARD BEALES
Published: January 9, 2011

The newly installed governors of Illinois, California, New York and Connecticut face huge budget gaps that are worrying financial markets. In the extreme, federal government rescues might be called for. Breakingviews imagines how these Democratic governors from traditionally left-leaning states may justify a plea for help from Congress.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/business/10views.html

The case for Washington bailing out some states
Jan 10, 2011 10:04 EST
By Rob Cox and Richard Beales
The authors are Reuters Breakingviews columnists. The opinions expressed are their own.

NEW YORK — The newly-installed governors of Illinois, California, New York and Connecticut face huge budget gaps that are worrying financial markets. In extremis, federal government rescues might be called for. Breakingviews imagines how these Democrat governors from traditionally left-leaning states might justify a plea for help from the U.S. Congress.

Dear Esteemed Members of the 112th Congress:

Like many of you, the four of us have been elected with strong mandates. The voters of Illinois, California, New York and Connecticut have asked us to rectify past mistakes and set sustainable paths for the future. While we are Democrats and most of you are Republicans, we share your wish to address our financial challenges.

http://blogs.reuters.com/columns/2011/01/10/the-case-for-washington-bailing-out-some-states/

Will 8 Be Enough?

2011-01-24T13:40:00.000-08:00

Faceoff! States tell feds to back down
8 already considering plans simply to ignore Obama's health-care takeover
Posted: January 20, 2011
8:43 pm Eastern
By Bob Unruh

What if Washington made a law and nobody paid attention? Or even more significantly, what if states specifically repudiated it and threatened to prosecute those enforcing it?

The questions no longer are rhetorical but a real option as eight states consider a blanket nullification of the Obamacare nationalization of health-care decision-making advances in their legislatures.

"Thomas Jefferson advised, 'Whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers ... a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy,'" states the Tenth Amendment Center, which advocates a return to the constitutionally delegated powers for the federal government.

"When states pass laws to reject and nullify unconstitutional federal 'laws,' regulations and mandates – it's not rebellion ... it's duty," the organization states...

Read more: Faceoff! States tell feds to back down http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=253521#ixzz1BzWvadhx

Read more: Faceoff! States tell feds to back down http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=253521#ixzz1BzWUW4ZS

Glenn Beck Conspiracy Denier

2011-01-22T04:51:00.001-08:00

It is so discouraging to watch Glenn Beck and Damon Vickers whenever the pair are together. Both deny any conspiracy has been afoot since the North America Free Trade Agreement and all its sub-agreements yet in Part 2/4 video, (youtube reposted at politicalwind here )both admit and accept as a given that wages in the United States will spiral downward to Mexico's.

Of course to Glenn Beck nothing is a conpiracy not even Cloward-Piven, not a an expressed desire by the United Nations for a global currency, blah blah. Just a bunch of like-minded getting together and hey, things happen.

Maybe One-World Government will happen, but to Beck, there's no conspiracy there.

Just a bunch of like-minded people who become President of the United States, appointees by President of the US who just happen to hold membership in organizations which lean toward globalization and historically so, blah, blah...

Anyway, watch the entire programming.

Then ask why doesn't Beck ever mention NAFTA, or the NAFTA Superhighway, or the Security and Prosperity Partnership agreement, or anything and the New World Order in the same ranting-style he's become famous for complete with chalk and chalkboard at hand?

Why not?

You Tube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2gUG-Q8ocg&feature=player_embedded#!

Security and Prosperity Partnership (nothing to see here, really, repeats Beck)

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&aq=2&oq=security+prosperity+partnership+&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4SKPT_enUS403US403&q=security+prosperity+partnership+act

Who owns United States Debt?

2011-01-19T10:46:00.000-08:00

Some would have us believe China and Japan own most of our debt, but the fact is the Federal Reserve banks do via Treasury securities...

Net the Truth Online

Who Owns the U.S. Debt

At the end of March 2010, the national debt stood at $12.8 trillion. And if you look at some of the U.S. debt clocks that display real-time estimates, such as this one here, you will see that in the three months since that number has exceeded $13 trillion — and counting. What is commonly referred to as ”the U.S. debt” is basically securities such as savings bonds, bills, notes and other bonds that are issued by the Treasury and other federal agencies under special financing authorities. If you own Treasuries (or a fund that invests in them), you own a piece of the national debt. Who else does? The latest numbers can be found in the latest Treasury Bulletin, released in June 2010 and reflecting data through March 31, 2010. The largest chunk of Treasury securities is, in fact, held by Federal Reserve banks, adding up to $940 billion at the end of the period. And when it comes to foreign holders, number one is China, which at that time held nearly $900 billion’s worth. (Japan was a close second, with $784.9 billion.) You can find the details in the Treasury Bulletin – or for a more visual presentation, check out our infographic.

http://www.mint.com/blog/trends/who-owns-the-u-s-debt-07152010/

Grenville Clark: World Peace Through World Law

2011-01-18T08:57:00.000-08:00

While it is not believed by Net the Truth Online, it is worth reading Grenville Clark's World Peace Through World Law and others among world federalists.

It is the opinion of Net the Truth Online that push for a one-world government via the United Nations or any of its offshoots is treasonous to the United States of America. The United States should get out of the United Nations, today, actually yester-year.

Net the Truth Online

Among suggested reading since 1999

http://www.angelfire.com/pa/truthonline/Allbooks.html

Among fictional sleuth Nero Wolfe's book titles as compiled by others

http://www.nerowolfe.org/htm/tidbits/WolfeReadingList.htm

http://www.nerowolfe.org/htm/tidbits/WolfeReadingList.htm#index

Grenville Clark bio

http://www.centuryarchives.org/stamps/documents/clark.pdf

http://www.harvardsquarelibrary.org/unitarians/clark_grenville.html

http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/40929/paul-h-kreisberg/grenville-clark-public-citizen

ABA Journal

http://books.google.com/books?id=aaIDFbRLcYQC&pg=PA44&lpg=PA44&dq=world+peace+through+world+law+grenville+clark+book+online+free&source=bl&ots=qMutKrExDm&sig=zjlbIKFg_OdRL6jGS0ZzIal_aDQ&hl=en&ei=oMs1TdOjB4Wclge80cy5CA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&sqi=2&ved=0CFUQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=world%20peace%20through%20world%20law%20grenville%20clark%20book%20online%20free&f=false

World Peace Through World Law

http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-World-peace-through-world/dp/B0006W0BP6

http://www.faqs.org/copyright/world-peace-through-world-law-by-louis-bruno-sohn-and/

United States Constitution

http://www.senate.gov/civics/constitution_item/constitution.htm

H. G. Wells had also portrayed the need for world government in his 1933 novel, The Shape of Things to Come, which was made into a successful film with Raymond Massey in 1936. Republican Wendell Wilkie, who had lost the presidential election in 1940 to Roosevelt, published One World in 1943; this book was serialized in a hundred newspapers and sold two million copies in two years. Perhaps the most effective advocacy of world government was The Anatomy of Peace by Emery Reves that came out in June 1945 and was translated into twenty languages by 1950. Soon after the Hiroshima bomb exploded, Norman Cousins wrote his famous editorial for Saturday Review that "modern man is obsolete," arguing that the need for world government could no longer be ignored. By 1949 the United World Federalists (UWF) had 720 chapters in the US with 46,775 members.

By early 1946 the new Federation of American Scientists (FAS) had 3,000 members, and Rabinowitch started the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists with its "doomsday clock," which they set at seven minutes to midnight and still revise periodically. The FAS published the book One World or None, which included articles by Einstein, Bohr, Urey, Bethe, Oppenheimer, and Szilard. They supported the Baruch Plan for the international control of atomic weapons, but this effort failed. When President Truman announced in February 1950 a program to develop the hydrogen bomb, the FAS warned that the Russians would build them too. On November 1, 1952 the United States tested a thermonuclear device (H-bomb) that was a thousand times more powerful than an atomic bomb. Less than a year later the Soviet Union tested their first hydrogen bomb. The Communists around the world supported the World Peace Council; but in most countries it had little influence over non-Communists because they refused to criticize the policies of the Soviet Union.

Many philosophers and proponents of world peace have expressed ideas similar to the credo of the World Federalists, that world peace depends upon world justice, which depends upon enforceable world law, which depends upon world government. Probably the most discussed plan for effective world law is the comprehensive proposal to strengthen the United Nations delineated by Grenville Clark and Louis B. Sohn in their book World Peace Through World Law.

http://www.san.beck.org/GPJ27-Clark-SohnPlan.html

Tea Party Supported Freshman Legislator supports 2nd Con-Con Call too

2011-01-17T06:22:00.000-08:00

We've warned of an Article V convention method as a means of 'proposing' amendment/s to the federal United States Constitution many times over. We've pointed out the precedent-setting of the original and to-date first and only convention convened merely by several states initially to 'amend' the Articles of Confederation which went farther once the delegates convened in the convention. A new Constitution was produced and sent to the states for ratification.

Who called that convention? The states. All it takes is for 34 states to issue a convention call for the purpose of proposing an Amendment, say, a Balanced Budget Amendment, and the convention 'shall' be convened.

From then on, it is up for some debate how such a convention would be convened.

But even if that aspect becomes settled, other aspects of a Convention will never be settled until after the delegates to the convention have acted in what is known as being representatives of 'the people.'

It is folly to assume a federal second Constitutional Convention 'can' be limited.

Our first convention was not so limited even though it was expressly convened for the purpose of merely amending the Articles of Confederation.

There is nothing at all to prevent delegates in a second Constitutional Convention from going beyond stated limitations put on the body prior to convening.

Some notable resources include Phyllis Shlafly, New American.

Beware of the following so-called Freshman legislator, (Senator Lee) and others who would consider the Convention method an option, maybe a remote option, but an option to be among those if and when the normal route of proposing an Amendment to the Constitution, Congress proposes and states ratify - fails to get off the ground.

Some of those names have to include: Sean Hannity, Judge Andrew Napolitano, Brian Kilmeade, Sarah Palin, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham, Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, John Stossel, and Rand Paul. See our sidebar info including the video wherein Judge Napolitano encourages Republicans and specifically Tea Party supporters to rally round a push on state legislatures to make the call for a second Constitutional Convention.

Freshman Senator Backing a Balanced Budget Constitutional Amendment
by Lauren Torlone | January 16, 2011

Print Email Share 391 Comments

Buoyed by strong Tea Party support during his campaign, freshman Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) has arrived in Washington and says he's determined to take significant steps to rectify the staggering U.S. deficit. Lee talked to Fox News on Sunday about his proposed constitutional amendment to balance the budget.

In order to propose such an amendment, several steps would need to be taken. The first option, which Lee says is the path he will choose, is for both houses of Congress to pass a two thirds majority vote. The second option would be a Constitutional Convention, which would also require a two thirds vote from state legislatures. The proposal would then need to be ratified.

http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/01/16/freshman-senator-backing-balanced-budget

MUST READING

Have Senators Rand Paul and DeMint caved in to our Capitol Hill RINO Crowd?Posted by johnwk on November 23, 2010 at 6:18pm in Constitutional Issues
View Discussions
After listening to Rand Paul who was on Mike Huckabee’s show this weekend [Nov. 14th, 2010], I was shocked to hear him promoting the phony balanced budget amendment cooked up by RINOs in the 1980s and 90s, which they wanted to use to repeal our Constitution‘s apportioned tax method for extinguishing deficits. This RINO crowd of the 80s and 90s were even trying to convene a Constitutional Convention under the guise of adopting their fraudulent amendment, which would have put our entire Constitution up for grabs and be savaged by every snake and special interest group.

I fear Rand Paul has already been conned by these slithering snakes who cooked up the following fake and worthless balanced budget amendment, cleverly designed to supercede our founder’s method to deal with deficits, and which Rand Paul now supports:

`Section 1. Total outlays for any fiscal year shall not exceed total receipts for that fiscal year, unless three-fifths of the whole number of each House of Congress shall provide by law for a specific excess of outlays over receipts by a rollcall vote.

NOTE: The amendment can be immediately overrule by a three-fifths vote.

`Section 2. The limit on the debt of the United States held by the public shall not be increased, unless three-fifths of the whole number of each House shall provide by law for such an increase by a rollcall vote.

NOTE: The very intentions of the amendment can be subverted by allowing Congress to borrow without providing specific taxes at the same time to extinguish the specific amount being borrowed.

`Section 3. Prior to each fiscal year, the President shall transmit to the Congress a proposed budget for the United States Government for that fiscal year in which total outlays do not exceed total receipts.

NOTE: This is a feel good provision. It sounds great and technical but is it? Have we not just learned with the recent health care proposals, how projected figures can be manipulated by our friends in government to portray legislation in which outlays and receipts are in balance when they are not?

`Section 4. No bill to increase revenue shall become law unless approved by a majority of the whole number of each House by a rollcall vote

NOTE: Well, isn’t this just dandy? Taxes may be increased by a simple majority vote in each House to keep the budget balanced. How sweet of Congress to be so thoughtful to reduce their pain in raising taxes to keep the budget balanced, while making it more difficult, a three-fifths vote, to reduce spending which is really needed to balance the budget.

http://www.patriotactionnetwork.com/forum/topics/have-senators-rand-paul-and

Glenn Beck China Special Decades Old News

2011-01-14T15:03:00.000-08:00

Glenn Beck's China Special today (with footnotes here) was the oddest show of the beginning of this decade, because it's about 2 decades behind.

Glenn, you've got to catch up on the history, soon.

You have to get Jim Rogers who moved his family to Singapore, Asia to tell you we need to better educate our students... and your other guest, need him to tell you manufacturing in the United States is gone? Never coming back.

But um be aware, Glenn, these two are certainly, most certainly, part of the believers in the same ideas that have screwed up our public educational system for some many years now, but including the move to so-called School to Work and Goals 2000 and No Child Left Behind.

Do your research of that history and see "how that's working" for us.

And while you're at it, research all the particulars of China's acceptance into the free trade game known as the World Trade Organization.

Yep, same argument as when the United States joined with Mexico and Canada in NAFTA those countries were supposed to free up limitations/costs of our sending our products into their countries. How's that working for us, Glenn?

Net the Truth Online

Trade Agreements

http://www.fas.usda.gov/itp/agreements.asp

China-US Agreement on China's WTO Accession

China joined the World Trade Organisation (WTO) at the end of 2001.

The agreement signed with the United States preceding China's accession remains a good general guide to the obligations China entered into with its WTO partners

http://www.chinability.com/WTO.htm

2011-01-11T18:22:00.000-08:00

Loughner a "textbook" case paranoid schizophrenic
Tuesday, Jan 11, 2011 20:01 ET
A respected psychiatrist explains why talk of political rhetoric is a "red herring," and where responsibility lies

http://www.salon.com/news/jared_loughner/?story=/mwt/feature/2011/01/11/jared_loughner_paranoid_schizophrenia_and_why

Sarah Palin Reload Language on Twitter References Facebook Page

2011-01-10T05:23:00.000-08:00

Update: Palin removes map that includes 'target' list and depiction of localities in 'crosshairs...'

The former Republican vice-presidential candidate contender put the "target map" on her Facebook page last March ahead of the mid-term elections.

The image highlighted the districts of 20 Democratic politicians she had singled out for defeat after they supported President Barack Obama's healthcare reforms.

One of the targets — whose district was marked with the crosshair graphic — is now fighting for life in hospital after she was shot by a crazed gunman on Saturday.

Earlier this month her office in Tucson, Arizona, was hit by shotgun pellets.

Gabrielle Giffords had criticised Mrs Palin for using the gun graphic in a TV interview saying: "When people do that, they've got to realise there are consequences to that action."

Mrs Palin has previously boasted about her passion for hunting and has been pictured and filmed shooting wild animals.

The crosshairs were quickly taken off the website yesterday and Mrs Palin offered her "sincere condolences" to Mrss Giffords and the other shooting victims...

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3340548/Palin-removes-gun-target-map.html?OTC-RSS&ATTR=News

Update: posts of note to another report

Notice the date of March 31, 2010

Memo to Paul Krugman and Rep. Van Hollen: My Search Was Not in Vain (Updated)
John on March 31, 2010 at 8:37 am

In last Thursday’s column, Paul Krugman admitted to having fun watching “right-wingers go wild.” One of the things that apparently delighted him was this map which Sarah Palin posted on her Facebook page:

http://www.verumserum.com/?p=13647

Commonsense Conservatives & lovers of America: "Don't Retreat, Instead - RELOAD!" Pls see my Facebook page.
12:31 PM Mar 23rd, 2010 via OpenBeak
Retweeted by 100+ people

http://twitter.com/sarahpalinusa/status/10935548053

Sarah Palin Facebook Page with map

Don’t Get Demoralized! Get Organized! Take Back the 20!
.by Sarah Palin on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 at 9:41pm

http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=373854973434

DailyKOS Used Bulls-Eye Target Language 2008 Encouraging Primary Challengers to Blue Dog Democrats

2011-01-10T04:35:00.000-08:00

Politicizing An Horrific TragedyBlog,Politics
Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords is in intensive care unit following surgery for a gunshot wound in the head at close range by a liberal lone heartless gunman.

While the shooter was a lone criminal, liberals are coming out of the woodworks to pin the shooting on no other than Governor Palin for targeting 20 house democrates during the 2010 mid-term elections. Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas Tweeted, “Mission accomplished, Sarah Palin.”

http://sheya.com/2011/01/08/politicizing-an-horrific-tragedy/

2010 will be primary season
Share661 60by kos
Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 09:45:23 AM PST

...So 2010 is going to be the year we pivot from taking control of our government, to holding out accountable. Like Al Wynn this year, the corrupt, the tone-deaf, and the reactionary within Democratic ranks will face the possibility of primary battles. The infrastructure we're building will be available for those courageous enough to take on the entrenched elite. But when we have candidates that inspire, and can develop the alternate funding sources to finance them, the combined might of the Pelosis and Hoyers won't be enough to effect change. Just ask Donna Edwards.

So you're angry about the Democratic capitulation? Don't take it out on the party. More House Democrats voted against this abomination than voted for it. The party isn't the problem, it's too many of its elected members that have forgotten who they serve and why. Hint: It's not AT&T lobbyists, it's not Steny Hoyer, and it's not access to their checks.

You want to do something? If your local congresscritter is one of the bad apples, start organizing locally. Plug into existing networks or start your own. Begin looking for primary challengers. Do the groundwork. Don't expect help from the local party establishment, they'll close ranks. So tap into alternate infrastructures. Find allies in the progressive movement. If your local shitty Democrat is anti-union, approach the unions. They'd love to send this kind of message. If the Democrat is anti-choice, work with the women's groups. If the Democrat is anti-environment ... you get the idea. If you have access to professional networks and money, start organizing those.

Of course, this takes more than just bitching about your frustrations on a blog, damning a whole party for the actions of a minority more scared of Mr. 28% than of protecting the Constitution they swore to protect. This takes hard work. But now is the time to start.

And while people like me will focus on the task at hand this year, it won't be long after Election Day that we'll start looking at the 2010 map, looking for those great primary challengers.

Who to primary? Well, I'd argue that we can narrow the target list by looking at those Democrats who sold out the Constitution last week. I've bolded members of the Blue Dogs for added emphasis

Not all of these people will get or even deserve primaries, but this vote certainly puts a bulls eye on their district. If we can field enough serious challengers, and if we repeat the Donna Edwards and Joe Lieberman stories a few more times, well then, our elected officials might have no choice but to be more responsive. Because if we show them that their AT&T lobbyist buddies can't save their jobs, they'll pay more attention to those who can.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/6/25/1204/74882/511/541568

World Net Daily Headlines @ Arizona Shooting/Assassination

2011-01-08T18:53:00.000-08:00

Update: Headline from Phoenix Times Blog

Jared Loughner, Alleged Shooter in Gabrielle Giffords Attack, Described by Classmate as "Left-Wing Pothead"By James King, Sat., Jan. 8 2011 @ 5:02PM

http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2011/01/jared_loughner_alleged_shooter.php

The following are from World Net Daily

U.S. Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords shot
Young gunman opens fire on Democrat, staff at public event
--NPR

Hospital spokesperson: Giffords out of surgery
Congresswoman in ICU - doctors say they're optimistic she will recover
--KPSP-TV,

At least 12 wounded in mass shooting
Witness reports 15 to 20 gunshots fired at congresswoman's constituent meeting
--CNN

Federal judge killed in mass shooting
Gunman wounded several in crowd, including member of U.S. district court
--MSNBC

PHOTONETDAILY
Did alleged gunman appear in Arizona Star news photo?
'Jared Loughner, a volunteer, stands in background during Tucson Festival of Books'
--Arizona Star

Leftist bloggers blame Palin for Giffords' shooting
Republican's PAC targeted Arizona Democrat, showed crosshairs over district on map
--Politics Daily

Giffords' father: 'The whole Tea Party were her enemies'
Democrat was targeted for enthusiastic backing of Obamacare
--London Telegraph

Police warn lawmakers
'Advised to take reasonable and prudent precautions regarding their personal security'
--Wall Street Journal

Gabrielle Giffords' father: 'The whole Tea Party were her enemies'
The Telegraph

Sarah Palin had published a 'target map' on her website using images of gun sights to identify 20 House Democrats, including Miss Giffords, for backing the new health care law.

8:56PM GMT 08 Jan 2011
Miss Giffords, a Democrat congresswoman, was shot in the head during a public meeting in Tucson, Arizona.

A lone gunman, described by witnesses as being a white man in his late teens or early twenties, fired into a crowd gathered for a "Congress in your Corner" event outside a supermarket.

Her father Spencer Giffords, 75, wept when asked if his 40-year-old daughter had any enemies.

"Yeah," he told The New York Post. "The whole tea party."

Miss Giffords had been named in March as a political campaign target for conservatives in November’s elections by former Alaska governor Sarah Palin for her strong support for the health reforms of President Barack Obama.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/us-politics/8248399/Gabrielle-Giffords-father-The-whole-Tea-Party-were-her-enemies.html

ATTACK IN ARIZONA

Assassin's politics lean 'left wing, quite liberal'
'Communist Manifesto,' 'Mein Kampf,' listed as alleged gunman's favorite reads
Posted: January 08, 2011
5:22 pm Eastern
By Aaron Klein
© 2011 WorldNetDaily

"The Communist Manifesto" and Hitler's "Mein Kampf" were among the favorite reading materials of Jared Lee Loughner, the suspected gunmen in today's fatal shooting that reportedly left six dead and gravely injured a U.S. congresswoman.

Lougher, 22, listed those tomes among his favorites on his YouTube channel, in which he wrote that "conscience dreams" were a "great study" at his college, Pima Community College.

Understand what's happening to America's culture and what you can do to fight it with "How Evil Works," autographed, from the WND Superstore.

One user on Twitter, Caitie Parker, wrote she went to high school, college and was in a band with the gunman. She said she hadn't seen him since 2007.

Parker wrote of Lougher, "As I knew him he was left wing, quite liberal and oddly obsessed with the 2012 prophecy."

She also described him as "more left."

Lougher also left a trail of bold political statements.

Read more: Assassin's politics lean 'left wing, quite liberal' http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=248829#ixzz1AVF3s6dc

Truth No Matter What the Truth Reveals

2011-01-07T12:26:00.000-08:00

WikiLeaks Video Release Collateral Murder

http://wn.com/wikileaks_video_exposes_2007_'collateral_murder'_in_iraq__wikileaks_editor_interview

Visit dailypaul site for comments and discussion of the documentary "Collateral Murder"

http://www.dailypaul.com/node/130811

GORDON DUFF: “COLLATERAL DAMAGE,” SPINNING AWAY MURDER IN IRAQ
April 7, 2010 posted by Gordon Duff

... Statements that the Apache helicopter was subject to attack by this group is untrue. We have failed to reveal that the helicopter was, based on the optics and pattern of fire, nearly 1 mile away. The M789 ammunition which should have been used has an effective range, capable of

Namir Noor-Eldeen, MURDERED JOURNALIST SAID TO HAVE 6 FOOT LONG RPG 29 HIDDEN IN HIS LENS BAG
piercing tank armor, of 4000 meters, approximately 3 miles. The rationale given for the attack, that the Apache Longbow helicopters that were out of visual range, using their extremely sophisiticated optics were about to be attacked by advanced weaponry that of a size and type that only exists in science fiction, indicates a pattern of systematic deception between pilots and their controllers, deception meant to provide authorization for indiscriminate criminal activity.

American optics can read a car license plate from earth orbit. We can certainly tell a child in a car or a movie camera the size of a woman’s purse from an RPG that is 6 feet long. Hitting a helicopter with a non-existent RPG hidden inside a camera bag, from a mile away, is utterly impossible. Also, hitting any target at long range with an AK-47, a weapon with a short range 7.62/39 cartridge is also impossible.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/04/07/gordon-duff-collateral-damage-spinning-away-murder-in-iraq/

also see twitter notification

http://twitter.com/#!/dare4liberty/status/23469223133052928

Posting the video documentary link for your information and assessment.

No Hero Killer Billy the Kid could have been Pardoned by warped Gov. Richardson Why

2010-12-31T03:56:00.000-08:00

AP: NM Gov. Declines to Pardon Outlaw Billy the Kid
NM governor declines to pardon legendary outlaw Billy the Kid, who was shot to death in 1881

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=12513609

Update: December 31, 2010 7:33 am EST

Obviously, Governor Richardson rethought his potential action and he declined to issue the pardon for Billy the Kid.

Good move, Gov. Richardson. What kind of a message would the pardon have sent? A poor message.

Aside from that, we say good-riddance to you Gov. Richardson. What kind of a warped character would even consider a pardon of ANY SORT for a known murderer any time no matter the "fun of history."

It is just unbelievable Richardson even considered the pardon for some several months. Guess he got a lot of press coverage over those months.

He made the announcement on Friday's Good Morning America might we say virtually at the last minute since he leaves office at midnight tonight.

Guess he thought people would be partying starting early and would miss his reversal and statement.

No, we won't publish that. It cannot overshadow equating a known killer's actions to the "fun of history..."

Net the Truth Online

12/31/10 about 7:15 am EST
Can you believe, as if the world isn't turned on its head enough with renaming illegal aliens, or illegal immigrants, you know, people who break the law by illegally entering the United States, as undocumented workers, now along comes Governor Richardson who's been tempted to issue a pardon of some sort - posthumously - to none other than Billy the Kid.

Interviewed on Fox News, which has been replayed, Gov. Bill Richardson had a good two-liner for giving the pardon to the infamous, Billy the Kid. this should go down in history, too:

"...this is a fun thing... it's history..."

.Billy The Kid Pardon?
by Kelly Burke | December 30, 2010

http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/12/30/billy-kid-pardon
New Mexico Governor Considers Pardon for Billy the Kid

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/07/30/new-mexico-governor-considers-pardon-billy-kid/

Hoolywood sorry, Hollywood, has glamorized Billy the Kid, says granddaughter of the sheriff credited with killing and stopping Billy the Kid.

He murdered law enforcement and he murdered others, too.

Hmmm. But to Gov. Richardson, that's history. That's fun.

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson Considers Pardoning Billy The Kid
» 18 commentsby Jon Bershad | 4:53 pm, December 29th, 2010

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/new-mexico-gov-bill-richardson-considers-pardoning-billy-the-kid/

Please, do not pardon Billy the Kid. All that would do is make being an outlaw more attractive. And don't you have enough to deal there in New Mexico? How about election fraud? Why don't you dig into the history of that in New Mexico. Fun, huh.

Net the Truth Online

Harsh Winter = Manmade Global Warming = Fiddle the Facts says Expert

2010-12-27T05:26:00.000-08:00

Piers Corbyn appearing on Fox 'n Friends Monday morning slashed the concept believed by global warming enthusiasts that weather extremes (such as really really really cold weather in winter) are part of manmade global warming.

And the supportive "documentation" of the theory by scientists, that isn't science.

Corbyn called the documentation of the theory, "fiction."

His twitter account is twitter dot com piers underslash corbyn

http://twitter.com/Piers_Corbyn

More links and info from a google search well worth reading

We've covered both sides of the issue of global warming for several years now. See our links in our sidebar at the very bottom of our main page or use the search feature on the site to conduct a review of all we have managed to find on the issue.

Most notable finds are posted in the sidebar, too numerous to list here.

Of particular interest are two one-time notable skeptics, Reason Magazine's Ronald Bailey and as unfortunately Glenn Beck.

What's up with them?

We can't even begin to speculate why positions have changed over a mere few years, but they have...

Net the Truth Online:

Ronald Bailey: We're All Global Warmers Now

Astonishing development since Bailey edited a book entitled:

Global Warming and Other Eco Myths How the Environmental Movement Uses False Science to Scare Us to Death

http://netthetruthonline.blogspot.com/2006/12/ronald-bailey-admits-hes-wrong-about.html

NTTO: We're Not All Global Warmers Now

http://netthetruthonline.blogspot.com/2007/02/were-not-all-global-warmers-now.html

Search results (partial)

http://netthetruthonline.blogspot.com/search?q=ronald+bailey+global+warmers

Paul Joseph Watson:

Anointed Leader of Conservative Movement Glenn Beck Now Believes in Man-Made Global Warming

http://www.prisonplanet.com/anointed-leader-of-conservative-movement-glenn-beck-now-believes-in-global-warming.html

Glenn Beck: Assange Part of the "Revolutionaries"

2010-12-09T15:00:00.000-08:00

It took some time tonight while watching Glenn Beck's chart pointing before understanding where Glenn Beck stood on the matter of Julian Assange and wikileaks, ahem leaking at one time classified government information to everybody with access to well, wikileaks, but we did it.

Julian Assange is part of the "Revolutionaries."

See You Tube from at least Part 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5abHWMVUhuM

We have to go back to when Beck unveiled his theory about what was happening, really happening, obviously once Barack Obama was sent to Washington DC as President, and once President Obama began to make some appointments, and President Obama had a visitor who visited numerous times and his name is George Soros, well if you have watched Glenn Beck in recent months you know his theory.

Revolutionaries cause chaos cause the top (authority) to squelch or attempt to squelch the chaos and out of this comes Transformational Change... and that's not good.

It seems Beck's theory rests on the point in time when Barack Obama entered stage DC.

But ah the 'revolution' that was laid out in a little known book by a little known author which Beck obtained from a little known library in a little known town that only he was able to get to cough up a copy of must be the last remaining copy of this little known book.

We'll find the title shortly, but suffice it to say this 'Revolution' Julian Assange is part of... it isn't a good one.

It isn't one Glenn Beck supports.

It is one that Beck has traced back to this little known book which contains the actual blueprint for how to bring about CHANGE, transformational CHANGE.

Something is going to ahem... break...

Stay tuned since Beck has already written the book entitled BROKEN, guess his follow-up will be

THE REVOLUTIONARIES DID IT!

You Tube video

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=glenn+beck+december+9%2C+2010&aq=f

Part 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFxvxvnrBi8

part 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04Aj4Eky_aI

Part 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5abHWMVUhuM

Net the Truth Online

More

We disagree with this headline and article. and the site only provides a clip of the program which features Beck's reference to Sarah Palin... One really has to watch from start to finish. We'll provide shortly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b_M_OdNGx8&feature=player_embedded

WHOA Glenn Beck Criticizes Sarah Palin For Saying Julian Assange Should Be Hunted Like A Terrorist
Glynnis MacNicol | Dec. 9, 2010

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/glenn-beck-criticizes-sarah-palin-for-saying-julian-assange-to-be-assasinated-2010-12#comment-4d0166d54bd7c83c3c040000#ixzz17f1KaCwV
http://www.businessinsider.com/glenn-beck-criticizes-sarah-palin-for-saying-julian-assange-to-be-assasinated-2010-12#comment-4d0166d54bd7c83c3c040000

possumcatcher on Dec 7, 6:10 PM said:
I don't get it.

One second Beck is saying he doesn't support Assange or what he is doing. The next second he is saying the guy is doing what every media outlet should be doing including Fox - exposing the lies that our governments are telling us.

So whose side are you on Glenn?
Reply

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/watch-glenn-beck-provide-the-most-coherent-explanation-of-julian-assanges-sex-charges-2010-12#ixzz17esZVsvN

http://www.businessinsider.com/watch-glenn-beck-provide-the-most-coherent-explanation-of-julian-assanges-sex-charges-2010-12

Newt Gingrich: Wikileaks Founder Others Should be Enemy Combatants

2010-12-08T04:41:00.000-08:00

The commentary by Newt Gingrich on Fox 'n Friends this morning was not unexpected.

"... Julian Assange and others should be declared "enemy combatants." Gingrich said.

We are all Enemy Combatants, now, then.

Earlier Dr. Peter Johnson declared similarly but didn't use the term. Johnson said "you can't call espionage, journalism."

Wikileaks then, to Johnson, does not equate to journalism.

Further, Julian Assange, Johnson said, "is not a journalist."

Right, and the Federal Government is allowed by our very Constitution to declare who is and who is not a journalist. Do we have to have our 'papers' in order?

Will the Feds now give the license and state-authorized stamp of approval to whomever they consider journalists?

Will the Federal Government create a listing of only these published works are to be considered the 'media?'

Hmmm. We can hear Newt Gingrich, the Fox News Network, and Sarah Palin now.

You Betcha!

Liberals wouldn't be far behind as long as their Soros backed enterprizes stand the test. Because there is David Axelrod announcing the Attorney General of the U.S. is looking into Wikileaks and Assange...

Merry Leaks Mass to all, and to all a Dark Ages...

Release of Wikileaks UFO Material Delayed Founder Arrested

2010-12-07T04:02:00.000-08:00

Interpol Warrant and Arrest of Wikileaks Founder Julian Assange

Assange turns himself in to authorities in Britain on a charge of sexual assault arising from Sweden.

WikiLeaks: Julian Assange to hand himself in to police after arrest warrant issued
Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, will hand himself in to police - possibly as early as Tuesday - after a fresh European Arrest Warrant was issued by the Swedish authorities.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8185247/WikiLeaks-Julian-Assange-to-hand-himself-in-to-police-after-arrest-warrant-issued.html

what is happening here? Will we ever know if the charges are trumped up or reality?

WikiLeaks founder arrested in England this morning - is "poison pill" next? December 7, 2010

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been arrested in England on rape charges he faces in Sweden. Assange made a promise to release the WikiLeaks “poison pill,” which are more secret files, if he were ever shut down or arrested. Will he stay true to his word?

Although the media is calling the charges “rape,” it is not, according to the legal documents says Judge Napolitano on Fox News this morning. Assange was already investigated regarding this charge and it was dropped three months ago, the Judge went on to say.

Assange had consensual sex in which the condom broke, the Judge continued on to say. Assange is fighting extradition to Sweden and the crime he is charged with is not a crime in England, so it may just be that England will honor his request, according to the Judge.

Judge Napolitano says that it has been suggest that this charge may be just an excuse to arrest him as an effort to get him to stop the WikiLeak postings.

http://www.examiner.com/pop-culture-in-hartford/wikileaks-founder-arrested-england-this-morning-is-poison-pill-next

It strains credulity with the United States Congress, virtually to a one, (there are a few not so inclined such as Congressman Ron Paul see Rep. Ron Paul Makes Special Request Of Wikileaks on Fox’s Freedom Watch by Frances Martel | 1:49 pm, December 4th, 2010) clamoring for Assange to face the death penalty for being a terrorist because he released a flood of material classified as super duper secret (it is said) to the public and further warned he'd release (metaphorically) not a mere tidal wave of new material he'd obtained in his own secret file entitled "insurance" if he was arrested.

While we don't have the means to investigate all the particulars, we have followed the absolute biased sites around the internet that think along with the federal government the founder of wikileaks has committed a crime against all of humanity and that laws pertaining to espionage are applicable to Assange now.

How can that hold water. Really, Assange shared the files with the world, and we didn't have to pay a dime. Nor should we. Our own government classifies whatever it wants for whatever reasons it wants. It brings upon itself skepticism as to motives for withholding material dating back to WWII, etc. and etc...

Wikileaks' 10 greatest stories The Telegraph

...In a delightful twist, a British military manual - the Defence Manual of Security, or Joint Services Protocol 440 (JSP440) - specifically dealing with how best to avoid leaks was leaked onto the site in October last year. It warned that the Chinese "[have] a voracious appetite for all kinds of information; political, military, commercial, scientific and technical" and that spying is no longer like "the novels of John Le Carre". Journalists are listed in the document as one of the "threats" to security, alongside foreign intelligence services, criminals, terrorist groups and disaffected staff. In an even more self-referential moment, a Pentagon document naming Wikileaks itself as a threat to national security was leaked - to Wikileaks.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/8070253/Wikileaks-10-greatest-stories.html

And there's Sarah Palin, agreeing Assange is worthy of the application of the 1917 Espionage law to him and the death penalty to him for releasing information she should want to 'study' so she can at least answer what does she read there in Alaska while she's looking over to Russia from her back yard.

Yep. Kill him for releasing that info about those odd paranormal circumstances there in Alaska as documented in

hmm will we ever know the title of that one?

Palin classifies Assange as a terrorist rather quickly... at the ready... you betcha!

John Nichols: Sarah Palin vs. Julian Assange
December 7, 2010 5:00 am

...Palin wants Assange hunted down as a terrorist. In a rant on her Facebook page, the former governor of Alaska says the Obama administration is not doing enough to take down WikiLeaks and Assange.

“Assange is not a ‘journalist,’ any more than the ‘editor’ of al-Qaida’s new English-language magazine Inspire is a ‘journalist.’ He is an anti-American operative with blood on his hands. His past posting of classified documents revealed the identity of more than 100 Afghan sources to the Taliban. Why was he not pursued with the same urgency we pursue al-Qaida and Taliban leaders?” Palin demands to know. “What if any diplomatic pressure was brought to bear on NATO, EU, and other allies to disrupt WikiLeaks’ technical infrastructure? Did we use all the cyber tools at our disposal to permanently dismantle WikiLeaks? Were individuals working for WikiLeaks on these document leaks investigated? Shouldn’t they at least have had their financial assets frozen just as we do to individuals who provide material support for terrorist organizations?”

As it happens, Palin does not get to define who is or is not a “journalist,” or what is or is not “journalism.” Nor does she get to decide who should be pursued “with the same urgency we pursue al-Qaida and Taliban leaders.”

But it is worth noting that, while reasonable people can and do criticize Assange, most of them do not place him in the same category as the leaders of international terrorist groups. Palin and New York Congressman Peter King, who wants to label WikiLeaks as a terrorist organization, are the outliers

http://host.madison.com/ct/news/opinion/column/john_nichols/article_0bc17590-3ed5-5f42-b68f-ffc8e176a560.html

Judge Napolitano of Fox News programming disagrees Assange is committing either terrorism or espionage by the release of materials recently.

REBEL OF THE WEEK: THE JUDGE By Megan Duffield at 8:06AM

...Among the many articles, interviews, and spin stories revolving around Wikileaks' war document disclosure, a voice stood out in the nightly news. Fox News Freedom Watch host Napolitano claims it was the reputation of the government, not the military, which was put in harm's way after the Wikileaks revelations. Napolitano was one of the few voices speaking out in support of Wikileaks' action in mainstream media and for that is named Silver Circle's Rebel of the Week Award. He is a former New Jersey Supreme Court judge turned political and legal analyst for the Fox News Channel. He has been outspoken on many civil liberty issues such as the recent TSA security measures, the PATRIOT Act, as well as foreign policy.

Monday night, Judge Napolitano covered the Wikileaks story in a different light than most of the media. He called out the government's imperialism around the world. With Julian Assange at the center for scrutiny, Judge Napolitano used his legal expertise to show that Assange and others involved with Wikileaks did not illegally obtain the information. The document was given to Wikileaks, and according to the Judge, Wikileaks is, "free to publish it, to discuss it, to analyze it without any criminal activity at all." Much of what was released within the documents concerned military strategies, classified information on leaders in other countries, as well as financially relevant details that the American people would probably be sick from after reading.

http://www.yaliberty.org/posts/rebel-of-the-week-the-judge

We're wondering if the disagreement between Judge Napolitano and Sarah Palin over this issue will ever arise during any of his forthcoming interviews with her.

What is even more astonishing. Just as Assange is about to release material related to those government files we've all been waiting for since we learned there were such government files puff like a disappearing unidentified flying object aka a UFO he's wanted in Sweden for sexual assault, and he turns himself in to authoritities.

Sounds like a conspiracy to us.

WikiLeaks: new diplomatic cables contain UFO details, Julian Assange says
By Andrew Hough 11:00PM GMT 03 Dec 2010

New leaked diplomatic cables set to be published by Wikileaks will contain fresh details on UFOs, according to the website's founder Julian Assange

The 39 year-old Australian, who is wanted by Interpol over a charge of rape and sexual assault in Sweden, said there were some references to extraterrestrial life in yet-to-be-published confidential files obtained from the American government.

He did not disclose what information was contained in the diplomatic memos obtained by the whistleblowing website. It also remains unclear when they will be published.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8180528/Wikileaks-new-diplomatic-cables-contain-UFO-details-says-Julian-Assange.html

additional articles from The Telegraph

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/ufo/

WikiLeaks may release 'UFO' files

http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/TechandScience/Story/STIStory_610718.html

Meanwhile

WikiLeaks sparks worldwide diplomatic crisis
The King of Saudi Arabia privately urged the United States to attack Iran to destroy its nuclear weapons programme, according to diplomatic cables leaked by the whistle-blowing website, WikiLeaks.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/8166502/WikiLeaks-sparks-worldwide-diplomatic-crisis.html

U.S. Facing Global Diplomatic Crisis Following Massive WikiLeaks Release of Secret Diplomatic Cables

http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_22108.cfm

http://www.democracynow.org/2010/11/29/us_facing_global_diplomatic_crisis_following

Net the Truth Online

Fed Stimulus Funded Chertoff Group Full Body Scanners

2010-11-17T08:16:00.000-08:00

Well there was a "shovel" ready project ready and able to be carried out with the federal stimulus money. Full of it, right.

And why no investigation of Michael Chertoff?

Net the Truth Online

Biochemist, Pilots, Passengers Backlash against Naked Body Scans
By Teresa Knudsen
Last Updated Nov 14, 2010, Published Nov 13, 2010

Body Scanners Deployment in Airports

After the failed bombing attempt on Christmas, former head of the Department of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff, outlined his solution to possible similar bombing. Chertoff advised that the U. S. government purchase hundred of body scan machines from a company he now represents as CEO of the Chertoff Group.
Images
The U.S. government used funds marked to help Americans receive an economic stimulus, and instead placed machines and staff that require air passengers to surrender their 4th Amendment rights and endure a virtual strip search from machines that deliver an unknown radiation experiment. Then, the passengers can be groped on breasts and genital areas by Transportation Security Administration staff. The TSA is now groping men, women, tweens, children, toddlers and babies, as well as elderly people...

Read more at Suite101: Biochemist, Pilots, Passengers Backlash against Naked Body Scans http://www.suite101.com/content/biochemist-pilots-passengers-backlash-against-naked-body-scans-a308429#ixzz15YaqKPAx

Also note post by guest

James Babb & George Donnelly have started a campaign to protest the Naked Body Scanners. They will be joining Freedomizer Radio (http://www.freedomizerradio.com) today November 16th to talk about November 24th, which will be "National Opt Out Day" & why everyone flying on this day should Opt Out of going through the naked body scanner

Read more at Suite101: Biochemist, Pilots, Passengers Backlash against Naked Body Scans http://www.suite101.com/content/biochemist-pilots-passengers-backlash-against-naked-body-scans-a308429#ixzz15YjbQAJL

US Opt Out Day could cause widespread travel delays
by Jessica MCILHINNEY on November 16, 2010

Grassroots organisation ‘We Won’t Fly’ is encouraging US travellers to refuse full body scans at airports beginning next week, as several pro-consumer groups protest the use of such security measures.

As next week begins the busiest travel season of the year, widespread delays could be seen as travellers opt out of scans. November 24 has been designated by ‘We Won’t Fly’ as National Opt Out of the Airport Scanners Day in order to draw attention to the campaign against, what consumer groups, have called a threat to ‘health and privacy’.

http://www.cheaphotelbookings.com/news/us-opt-out-day-could-cause-widespread-travel-delays/31584.html

Glenn Beck Soros Focus Neglects Trilateralists

2010-11-16T08:29:00.000-08:00

We don't know the facts and can never conduct the kind of research to find the facts concerning Glenn Beck's recent charges that when a teen and a Hungarian Jew himself, George Soros in some way sent Jews to their deaths...

Other quarters have raised concerns about Beck's facts in that regard, and we post those for informational purposes.

Libertarian Reason magazine joins growing chorus condeming Beck's Soros attacks November 14, 2010 4:59 pm ET by Justin Berrier

Beck's three-day attack on Jewish financier George Soros has been widely criticized by Jewish leaders, Holocaust survivors and, most recently, Commentary magazine which describes itself as "the flagship of neoconservatism." Critics have been particularly concerned with Beck's false smears related to Soros' actions as a 14-year-old Hungarian Jew during the Holocaust. Beck suggested that Soros was a Holocaust collaborator, even going so far as to suggest that Soros helped "send the Jews" to "death camps."

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201011140010

We've viewed Beck's coverage the last few days, and found while the focus on Soros or anyone of his power is certainly welcome, Beck totally neglects more long-standing interconnections of powerful people with suspect goals such as those known as the Trilateralists.

Surely Beck's studies aren't so narrow as to leave out an entire line of inquiry that leads pretty conclusively to the likes of:

David Rockefeller
Zbigniew Brzezinski

The Trilateral Commission: Usurping Sovereignty
By Patrick Wood

http://www.augustreview.com/issues/globalization/the_trilateral_commission:_usurping_sovereignty_2007080373/#

We can't help but wonder why Glenn Beck has to date not made these powerhouses the focus of even a one-day inspection of interconnections and activities with a bent to not only trash the sovereignty of the United States as a "nation" but also create a new world order?

A quick review of the conclusion in The Trilateral Commission: Usurping Sovereignty
By Patrick Wood should have already been highlighted by Beck on his mission to provide information viewers can use.

Conclusion

It is clear that the Executive Branch of the U.S. was literally hijacked in 1976 by members of the Trilateral Commission, upon the election of President Jimmy Carter and Vice-President Walter Mondale. This near-absolute domination, especially in the areas of trade, banking, economics and foreign policy, has continued unchallenged and unabated to the present.

Windfall profits have accrued to interests associated with the Trilateral Commission, but
the effect of their “New International Economic Order” on the U.S. has been nothing less than devastating. (See America Plundered by the Global Elite for a more detailed analysis)

The philosophical underpinnings of the Trilateral Commission are pro-Marxist and pro-socialist. They are solidly set against the concept of the nation-state and in particular, the Constitution of the United States. Thus, national sovereignty must be diminished and then abolished altogether in order to make way for the New World Order that will be governed by an unelected global elite with their self-created legal framework.

If you are having negative sentiment against Trilateral-style globalization, you are not alone. A 2007 Financial Times/Harris poll revealed that less than 20 percent of people in six industrialized countries (including the U.S.) believe that globalization is good for their country while over 50 percent are outright negative towards it.21 (See Global Backlash Against Globalization?) While citizens around the world are feeling the pain of globalization, few understand why it is happening and hence, they have no effective strategy to counter it.

The American public has never, ever conceived that such forces would align themselves so successfully against freedom and liberty. Yet, the evidence is clear: Steerage of America has long since fallen into the hands of an actively hostile enemy that intends to remove all vestiges of the very things that made us the greatest nation in the history of mankind.

http://www.augustreview.com/issues/globalization/the_trilateral_commission:_usurping_sovereignty_2007080373/#

We can't help but wonder why Beck hasn't outed other noted globalists than Soros as authors have and when will Beck's viewers hold him accountable for missing informative pieces such as from the August Review.

It's about time they did.

The Global Elite: Who are they?
Introduction

...This report will attempt to identify and label the core players in the globalization process. The intent is to show the makeup and pattern of the core, not to list every person in it. Nevertheless, many people will be named and their associations and connections revealed. This is done for two reasons.

First, it will equip the reader be able to accurately identify other core players as they are brought into focus. Secondly, the reader will be able to pass over minor players who may sound like "big fish" but in fact are only pedestrians.

http://www.augustreview.com/issues/globalization/the_global_elite:_who_are_they?_200511146/#

Net the Truth Online

TSA:No Right of Refusal Scanner Pat-Downs if Baggage Conveyed

2010-11-16T05:20:00.000-08:00

Can you believe this is happening? We can.

Civil penalty possible if airport body scan, pat-down rejected
By Tom Fontaine
PITTSBURGH TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Airline passengers don't have a right to refuse security screening after placing carry-on bags on conveyor belts at airport checkpoints, according to the Transportation Security Administration.
It doesn't matter if a person worries that body scanners emit radiation or produce graphic images, or considers the alternative -- a pat-down search -- as too hands-on.

Those were among objections a California man gave when he refused to be screened Saturday in a San Diego airport. The man opted to turn around and go home but said he was threatened with legal action as he left the checkpoint area.

The TSA on Monday defended its actions, touching off arguments among travelers and legal experts.

Body scanners "safely screen passengers for metallic and nonmetallic threats to help keep the traveling public safe," said spokeswoman Ann Davis. Such screening is optional, she said, but passengers who decline must undergo alternate screening that includes "a thorough pat-down."

Independent studies showed radiation from the screeners does not present a risk, Davis said. Some pilots are concerned about cumulative effects if they pass through a scanner several times a day and several days a week, said Sam Mayer, a Boeing 767 captain and spokesman for the Allied Pilots Association.

The agency's representatives two weeks ago started using their palms and fingers to probe for hidden weapons and other devices in pat-down searches. In the past, screeners used the back of their hands to brush past sensitive body parts.

Anyone who refuses screening would be subject to civil penalty, Davis said, in addition to being denied access beyond a security checkpoint or onto a flight. She couldn't say whether the agency fined anyone for refusing to be screened, but she said less than 1 percent of passengers require pat-down searches. The TSA has 300 full-body scanners operational in 60 U.S. airports, including five in Pittsburgh, and will deploy more.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/transportation/s_709528.html

There is more. See how Judges are enabling the federal government, and so-called experts agree it's A OK.

Civil penalty possible if airport body scan, pat-down rejected
By Tom Fontaine
PITTSBURGH TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Tuesday, November 16, 2010

A 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals opinion issued in 2007 supports the TSA's stance.

"The constitutionality of an airport screening search does not depend on consent, and requiring that a potential passenger be allowed to revoke consent to an ongoing airport security search makes little sense in a post-9/11 world," the opinion reads.

Allowing a passenger to revoke consent "would afford terrorists multiple opportunities to attempt to penetrate airport security by 'electing not to fly' on the cusp of detection until a vulnerable portal is found," the opinion said.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/transportation/s_709528.html

Janet Napolitano: Scanners R Safe Pat Downs Discreet

2010-11-15T10:35:00.000-08:00

Napolitano: Scanners are safe, pat-downs discreet

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-11-15-column15_ST1_N.htm

OK Janet, let's have your grand-daughters aged 13 or 15 take a flight with a regular airline instead of the elite private jets and wait in line to be patted down, discreetly, of course. Not just one trip, but dozens or hundreds.

See, the problem is not just an abridgement and intrusion by government on our 4th Amendment rights, the problem is certain people are simply exempted because they work for the government.

How about Napolitano stand for a full body scan on just one day, and have the radiation go over her again and again all at once, say 100 times. Think she'll do it to show it's safe. Of course she would, for show, but it will be a fake machine.

Net the Truth Online

Napolitano: Scanners are safe, pat-downs discreet

...As part of our layered approach, we have expedited the deployment of new Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) units to help detect concealed metallic and non-metallic threats on passengers. These machines are now in use at airports nationwide, and the vast majority of travelers say they prefer this technology to alternative screening measures.

AIT machines are safe, efficient, and protect passenger privacy. They have been independently evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, who have all affirmed their safety. And the weapons and other dangerous and prohibited items we've found during AIT screenings have illustrated their security value time and again.

Rigorous privacy safeguards are also in place to protect the traveling public. All images generated by imaging technology are viewed in a walled-off location not visible to the public. The officer assisting the passenger never sees the image, and the officer viewing the image never interacts with the passenger. The imaging technology that we use cannot store, export, print or transmit images.

If an anomaly is detected during screening with AIT, if an alarm occurs after a passenger goes through a walk-through metal detector, or if a passenger opts out of either of these screening methods, we use pat-downs to help detect hidden and dangerous items like the one we saw in the failed terrorist attack last Christmas Day.

Pat-downs have long been one of the many security measures used by the U.S. and countries across the world to make air travel as secure as possible. They're conducted by same-gender officers, and all passengers have the right to request private screening and have a traveling companion present during the screening process.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-11-15-column15_ST1_N.htm

'Naked' scanners at US airports may be dangerous: scientists
By Karin Zeitvogel (AFP) – 2 days ago

WASHINGTON — Some US scientists warned Friday that the full-body, graphic-image X-ray scanners now being used to screen passengers and airline crews at airports around the country may be unsafe.

"They say the risk is minimal, but statistically someone is going to get skin cancer from these X-rays," Dr Michael Love, who runs an X-ray lab at the department of biophysics and biophysical chemistry at Johns Hopkins University school of medicine, told AFP.

"No exposure to X-ray is considered beneficial. We know X-rays are hazardous but we have a situation at the airports where people are so eager to fly that they will risk their lives in this manner," he said.

The possible health dangers posed by the scanners add to passengers' and airline crews' concerns about the devices, which have been dubbed "naked" scanners because of the graphic image they give of a person's body, genitalia and all.

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) began rolling out full-body scanners at US airports in 2007, but stepped up deployment of the devices this year when stimulus funding made it possible to buy another 450 of the advanced imaging technology scanners.

Some 315 "naked" scanners are currently in use at 65 US airports, according to the TSA.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5h08khPyFPinX_4vNYd1JZwn8hV4Q?docId=CNG.442824fa7c08853af96322d7315a6f02.461

Mo McGowan: Nobody likes Airport Scanners 4th Amendment Violation But

2010-11-15T07:46:00.000-08:00

Mo McGowan speaking on Fox News this morning and asked about the full body scanners and pat downs mandated by the federal government to be used at airports which some are criticizing and in some cases refusing to comply responded:

"Nobody likes their 4th Amendment Rights Violated going through a security line, but the truth is we have to do it... wouldn't you want your children and grandchildren protected by using this and other means necessary to thwart attack..."

see Fox video of interview with McGowan

November 15, 2010

Backlash Against Airport Body Scans
Traveler records confrontation after he refused full body scan and pat down

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4419443/backlash-against-airport-body-scans/?playlist_id=87937

Ah yes. Use the safety of our children and grandchildren to sell this travesty to what the Founding Framers of the United States Constitution intended.

Worse, McGowan admits our 4th Amendment rights exist and are thus violated by the full body scanners and the pat-downs.

Meanwhile, making the rounds of some news programs, a potential traveler refuses the full body scan with the words: "I don't think so..."

Fox News video report clip of traveler who used cell phone to record encounter

November 15, 2010

National Debate Over Full-Body Scanners
Travelers' group calls for boycott of airport scanners

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4419495/national-debate-over-full-body-scanners/?playlist_id=87937

Here's the story from anonymous posting at johnnyedge.blogspot

http://johnnyedge.blogspot.com/2010/11/these-events-took-place-roughly-between.html

California man confronting procedures records on cellphone beware graphic

November 15, 2010

Backlash Against Airport Body Scans
Traveler records confrontation after he refused full body scan and pat down

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4419443/backlash-against-airport-body-scans/?playlist_id=87937

Lew Rockwell's blog notes a contribution entitled:

The Porno Scanner-Spangled Banner
Posted by Lew Rockwell on November 8, 2010 09:01 AM
Writes Robert Frasconi

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/68798.html

Graphic descriptions beware but be wary of hands=on pat-downs

Daedalus Shrugged
by William Norman Grigg

http://www.lewrockwell.com/grigg/grigg-w180.html

Meanwhile, a Reuters poll on the issue reveals an astonishing 2 percent of respondents think these extreme measures are just A OK and necessary and are not affecting personal flight plans.

Are new security screenings affecting your decision to fly?
Nov 12, 2010 13:02 EST

http://blogs.reuters.com/ask/2010/11/12/are-new-security-screenings-affecting-your-decision-to-fly/?cp=5

98 percent think the measures are not OK, while another 2 percent are well just the undecideds.

What can we do? Apparently, nothing, as parents are willing to subject their own children to the concept of governmental Authority rules, even when your rights are violated by such. Imagine the children of the future after a few years of this.

Stand there. Raise your hands up high. Bend over. Lift up your leg. Lift up your other leg. All under the absolutely ignorant gaze of parent puppets, and people like Mo McGowen with excuse after excuse as to why the government must do this to save you and protect you.

We're not buying it. Neither should the other air travelers.

All it would take is one day of full non-compliance by ticket holders who in tandem stand and refuse to be scanned or patted down. Make a daisy chain holding hands around the entirety of the airport in every single airport in the country and refuse to be subjected to this violation of your 4th Amendment rights. Turned away from flight. Do so. Stand in lines to submit a complaint and try to obtain a refund. If you are refused a refund, hold onto your ticket and exit the airport all at the same time in a single orderly file.

Imagine thousands of ticket-holding customers all sending in a photocopy of tickets, and demanding a full refund from the airlines.

When that is not forthcoming, find a freedom-loving attorney somewhere in this country who will take the case on.

Soon

We've heard some like Bill O'Reilly guest Laura Ingraham exclaim flying is not a right, it's a privilege.

She should talk to Mo McGowan who at least has admitted the airport full body scans and pat-downs are a violation of the constitutional 4th Amendment rights of travelers.

Fox is also reporting there is a website devoted to a day before Thanksgiving opt out. but unfortunately the only thing suggested to opt out of is the full body scan!

Can you believe that. OK opt into the pat-down, dummies. You can still travel, raise a little protest by making things go a bit slower, but you can still get to travel = yes you can...

Net the Truth Online

More from Lew Rockwell blog

Mad Dogs of the TSA
Porno-scan, porno-grope, $10,000 fine, cops throw him out of the airport. What happened to John Tyner.

If We Think Beating the TSA Is All
May our chains rest lightly on our wrists, says Brian Travis.

Orbitz, Thanks
But you must do more against the TSA, says Kathryn Muratore

http://www.lewrockwell.com/

Lou Dobbs Fox Business Network Show Truth Be Told?

2010-11-12T03:57:00.000-08:00

Who didn't know this was coming? Interesting. Maybe he'll team up with Sarah Palin a couple of times and not refrain from showing her in her true light as everybody else at Fox just tippy toes around her and her lack of knowledge about much. For instance, Judge Napolitano will interview Palin on his weekly and nightly program.

We have no reason to believe Napolitano will hold Palin accountable for her lack of Constititional knowledge.

John Stossel obviously won't chance having Palin on his program as he'd annihilate her on hundreds of issues.

Dobbs has a multi-year contract now, and an opportunity to bring truth out the truth, starting with Palin, and right on to everything and everyone else.

Net the Truth Online

Former CNNer Lou Dobbs Signs Multi-Year Contract With Fox Business Network
by Hillary Busis | 1:47 pm, November 10th, 2010

http://www.mediaite.com/online/former-cnner-lou-dobbs-signs-multi-year-contract-with-fox-business-network/

Beck Still Claiming Global Currency New World Order Not A Conspiracy

2010-11-07T02:35:00.000-08:00

We're nearly speechless. A while back, Glenn Beck had Damon Vickers explaining to him how when things go downhill, albeit slowly, there will come a time when the international solution to the global financial 'crisis' will be: a global currency and a new world order ...

the pair even laughed as Beck brought up a question about conspiracy... uh No explained Vickers. Beck laughed all the way through...

Now Beck's 11/05/2010 program he's tagged the 15-Day Decline in the Dollar experts include Damon Vickers and ... Brad Thor...

The trio are laughing as Beck mentions again his question about a conspiracy, and his denial he believes there is any conspiracy.

Oh no, of course not the two guest experts plugging their books respond in unison.

Beck notes again, for his oh so walking-dead live audience, no conspiracy, "I believe these people..." - don't rise up in a united gasp audience... don't object when Beck states his belief:

"these people believe they're doing the RIGHT THING."

Sure Beck. Because you cannot 'connect the dots' to a specific political side you do not favor, say Marxist supporters you find among the policy-makers in the Obama Administration, because all in Congress (with the exception of Ron Paul), and a specific current President of the United States and all former Presidents have supported this madness, it is best not to admit there's been a conspiracy and every single federal office-holder who's supported the Federal Reserve system has been a part of it.

Beck's guest Brad Thor has a novel to plug The Athena Project. According to Beck's plug of the author, Thor was a former Think Tanker. Right audience, just clap.

Now how can Brad Thor sit there and talk about anarchists and revolutionaries as the haha bad guys... but no, the (known) manipulators of the U.S. financial system they are not the bad guys.

There's nobody behind the curtain, according to Beck, no real conspiracy HAHAHA to bring us into a New World Order, uhuh, look all around that curtain, Beck audience, don't open it all the way, even though you see a pair of shoes, and is that laughter you hear, it's nobody.

Thank you to Logistics Monster. Here is the complete Nov. 5, 2010 video of Glenn Beck's program the 15-Day Decline in the Dollar...

review Beck accepting Damon Vickers offering again... what we need and what is coming to fix the global financial crisis is New World Order...

but listen carefully to Beck, it's ok as long as it doesn't come from the "government..."

There goes Damon Vickers again... let's try a new twist... this will be a 'community' thing... all we have is "faith, courage, love," and oh yes, Beck emphatically agrees with t-h-a-t... what is coming is profound either profound darkness or profound wonder-ful-ness, exclaims Beck...

And the audience just claps and claps and claps.

Right, as long as the currency for the world has the words In God We Trust (maybe it will even in some way partially be backed by gold), believers, there is no darkness.

It's all profound wonder-ful-ness.

Net the Truth Online

Logistics Monster

http://logisticsmonster.com/2010/11/05/glenn-beck-11-5-2010-the-15-day-decline-in-the-dollar/

Federal Reserve Jekyll Island conference

2010-11-05T18:26:00.000-07:00

The Federal Reserve Is Holding A Conference On Jekyll Island To Celebrate 100 Years Of Dominating America: “A Return to Jekyll Island: The Origins, History, and Future of the Federal Reserve”
The Federal Reserve is going back to Jekyll Island to celebrate the 100 year anniversary of the infamous 1910 Jekyll Island meeting that spawned the draft legislation that would ultimately create the U.S. Federal Reserve. The title of this conference is "A Return to Jekyll Island: The Origins, History, and Future of the Federal Reserve", and it will be held on November 5th and 6th in the exact same building where the original 1910 meeting occurred. In November 1910, the original gathering at Jekyll Island included U.S. Senator Nelson W. Aldrich, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Department A.P. Andrews and many representatives from the upper crust of the U.S. banking establishment. That meeting was held in an environment of absolute and total secrecy. 100 years later, Federal Reserve bureaucrats will return to Jekyll Island once again to "celebrate" the history and the future of the Federal Reserve.

Sadly, most Americans have no idea how the Federal Reserve came into being.

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/the-federal-reserve-is-holding-a-conference-on-jekyll-island-to-celebrate-100-years-of-dominating-america-a-return-to-jekyll-island-the-origins-history-and-future-of-the-federal-reserve

Dollar Value Decrease = Happy U.S.A., Right?

2010-11-05T11:43:00.000-07:00

MSNBC guest economists discussed the recent action taken by Ben Bernacke... one noted a goal was to spur U.S. exports to foreign countries and by the value of the dollar decreasing more such products/exports would be 'affordable...'

Uh uh.

a must read here at Net the Truth Online. We really want to "know" the truth, no matter what the truth shows.

Re: The Federal Reserve
Zeitgeist provides a condemnation of central banks in general, as of the Federal Reserve in particular. The Federal Reserve is portrayed as the product of a broad conspiracy, and that it is run for massive profits by secret owners. It is a mixture of fact, fiction, and insinuation.

Web Skeptic has addressed this part of the film point-by-point because there does not seem to be any other such comprehensive analysis of this section of the film on the web.

http://webskeptic.wikidot.com/zeitgeist-federal-reserve

Some items of note...

Mike Whitney: Dollar in the Dustbin

QE2 and Last Rites for the World's Reserve Currency
Dollar in the Dustbin
By MIKE WHITNEY

Millions of Americans have no idea what Quantitative Easing is or how it will effect them personally. That's why Wednesday's announcement that the Fed will purchase another $600 billion in US Treasuries merely reinforced feelings of helplessness and a sense that government spending is out-of-control. Unfortunately, Ben Bernanke's rambling explanation of QE2 in a Washington Post op-ed on Thursday only added to the confusion. The article is loaded with half-truths and omissions that are meant to mislead the public about how the program works and what the Fed's real objectives are. It's another missed opportunity by Bernanke to come clean with the people and let them know what policies are being enacted in their name...

http://www.counterpunch.org/whitney11052010.html

9 Reasons Why Quantitative Easing Is Bad For The U.S. Economy

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/9-reasons-why-quantitative-easing-is-bad-for-the-u-s-economy

Book Review @ Mises Institute: How an Economy Grows

2010-11-04T14:36:00.000-07:00

How an Economy Grows And Why it Crashes by Peter d. Schiff and Andrew J. Schiff

Mises Daily: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 by George F. Smith

...People who find anything related to economics tedious will find the Schiff book an exciting discovery. It should have special appeal to Austrians at all levels of expertise, while the Keynesian wizards who laughed at Peter Schiff when he predicted the housing collapse will likely disdain it.

It might be the only economics book ever written that could be read aloud to one's family without putting them to sleep. The narrative never once lags or becomes academic. The authors manage to convey the critical concepts without straying from their "Connecticut straight-talk" approach.

http://mises.org/daily/4796

Articles and Recommended Books at Mises Institute

http://mises.org/articles.aspx

You tube video - rap

"Fear the Boom and Bust" a Hayek vs. Keynes Rap...by EconStories

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0nERTFo-Sk

The Making of the Keynes-Hayek Rap: Economic Theory Meets Popular Culture

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBzXpH3Tjo0&feature=related

PBS Newshour

Keynes vs. Hayek: Late Economists' Rap Battle

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGd3PHXIqU0&feature=related

Rap find via

November 04, 2010
An Epic Rematch
In January, the website EconStories released the first epic rap battle between Friedrich Hayek and John Maynard Keynes.

At The Economist Buttonwood Gathering, the two met again live on stage.

Video below the jump.

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/307876.php

via

http://ace.mu.nu/

via

http://minx.cc/?post=307867

election fraud

2010-11-04T10:12:00.000-07:00

It happens... election fraud, and here is what happened in response to what happened in a past election.

The Connecticut Election Fraud.

.[ DISPLAYING ABSTRACT ]

The course taken by the Democratic members of the Connecticut Legislature last Wednesday, affords a striking illustration of the natural sympathy that appears everywhere to exist in these days between a large section of Democracy and fraud.

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=F50E14F634541B7493C7A9178ED85F458784F9

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F50E14F634541B7493C7A9178ED85F458784F9

But nope, not widespread in 2010. Give US a break.

election fraud 2010 style - is not enough to force investigations of voter registries, paper ballots without optical scanners, districts that have more reported as voting than registered in a district, and so on and so forth. Just not enough because Secretary of State appointments are more important and what SoS says in the end, is official, well, that is official and the end.

http://www.google.com/#q=election+fraud&hl=en&rlz=1R2SKPT_enUS403&tbs=nws:1&ei=IRrUTOnCG4OKlwfw5fnaBQ&start=10&sa=N&fp=af30fe239ea3a864

Updated daily

Foley concedes defeat, but GOP wants probe of Bridgeport vote
Ken Dixon, Staff Writer
Published: 11:55 p.m., Monday, November 8, 2010

Tom Foley abandoned any legal challenge Monday of his 5,810-vote loss in the governor's race, saying that while election irregularities were rampant in Bridgeport an appeal wouldn't overturn Dan Malloy's "conclusive" gubernatorial victory.

In a low-key, gracious valedictory session with reporters, the Greenwich Republican said that after meeting all weekend with his legal team and reviewing a variety of Election Day problems town by town, there was "no credible evidence" of fraudulent voting.

But the concession six days after the election did not stop Chris Healy, chairman of the Republican State Central Committee, from filing requests for investigations on Monday with the U.S. Department of Justice and the office of the Chief State's Attorney.

http://www.ctpost.com/news/article/Foley-concedes-defeat-but-GOP-wants-probe-of-803589.php

Bridgeport Connecticut: Video From The Polls

So many things went so wrong.

Mayor Jason McCoy has obtained a video that was taken inside a polling place in Bridgeport and shows a poll watcher warning a poll worker not to mix unofficial ballots with official ballots. She ignores him and he is escorted away.
There are additional charges:

* Some voters were given more than one ballot
* Other voters were not checked off on the registration list
* Some voters were never asked for IDs

http://minx.cc/?post=307908

Vernon's McCoy Says Video Shows Bridgeport Election Official Refusing To Follow Law
November 05, 2010|By DAVID OWENS

Vernon Mayor Jason L. McCoy, a Republican who worked as a poll monitor in Tuesday's election, said he saw questionable conduct on the part of Bridgeport election officials, although he said the conduct in many cases appeared to be unintentional.

In one instance he shot video of an election worker not counting ballots before putting them in a bag. McCoy said he was urging the woman to count them before placing them in the bag.

Another man, whose name McCoy said he did not know, yelled at the woman to count the ballots.

http://articles.courant.com/2010-11-05/news/hc-election-mccoy-video-1106-20101105_1_ballots-mccoy-election-officials

don't miss this headliner

Bag of Uncounted Ballots Found in Bridgeport

http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/elections/2010/races/race-2/Bag-of-Uncounted-Ballots-Found-in-Bridgeport-106727208.html

How Republican Gov. candidate Foley could ever concede amid such reports of a bag of ballots being found after the election and uncounted is beyond our comprehension.
Foley should never concede. Unfortunately, he may not be able to obtain a recount or any investigation of what happened in Bridgeport and other areas where voter registration favors Democrat numbers. Worse still is the extension of voting hours in this same voting district for some couple of hours after the official time for polls to close there. And to add to the confusion, it is unclear whether the list of voters who signed in is a complete list of those who cast the paper ballots during the 2-hour extension period.

Net the Truth Online

Bridgeport ballots counted; Malloy wins
Brittany Lyte, Ken Dixon And Timothy Loh, Staff Writers
Published: 10:46 a.m., Friday, November 5, 2010

...The vote totals posted earlier on the secretary of the state's website, which include totals for all of the state's municipalities except Bridgeport, showed that Foley led Malloy, 556,787 to 548,378.

A Foley campaign representative who sat in on the overnight counting, noted that the Bridgeport tallies had changed during the tally process.

"We think the tallying process was flawed," said Chris Covucci, a state field director for the Foley campaign. "It's inaccurate to say that this is the final number."

An ovenlike yellow lunch room inside the Registrar of Voters office was the site of the three-day vote count, and recount, that launched at midnight after Election Day.

A bag of uncounted ballots found in McLevy Hall earlier had plunged the already chaotic governor's election into further confusion, prompted a new round of political accusations and delayed until Friday the expected announcement from state officials that Malloy had triumphed.

http://www.ctpost.com/local/article/Bridgeport-ballots-counted-Malloy-wins-797923.php

Miffed is an understatement for Bridgeport's election performance
Published: 11:09 p.m., Thursday, November 4, 2010

http://www.ctpost.com/opinion/article/Miffed-is-an-understatement-for-Bridgeport-s-798990.php

And what is going on currently as of November 3, 2010?

via Luther Weeks

Connecticut Governor Race: Integrity Issues

http://www.ctvoterscount.org/connecticut-governors-races-integrity-issues/

November 4, 2010?

Recount may loom amid confusion in Connecticut governor race CS Monitor
The secretary of state declared Democrat Dan Malloy the winner Wednesday in the Connecticut governor race, before the release of official numbers. Republican Tom Foley says his own tally puts him ahead

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Election-2010/Governors/2010/1104/Recount-may-loom-amid-confusion-in-Connecticut-governor-race

Foley not conceding Conn. governor's race
Published: Thursday, November 04, 2010

unable to access news item

Foley: Show Me The Numbers
by Paul Bass | Nov 3, 2010 1:51 pm

http://newhavenindependent.org/index.php/archives/entry/foley_show_me_the_numbers/id_30945

Foley Asks Bysiewicz To Hold Off On Calling Election Results 'Official' - Controversy Continues
November 04, 2010|By CHRISTOPHER KEATING, The Hartford CourantJustin Clark, the campaign manager for Tom Foley, is asking that Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz refrain from calling any election results "official'' today in the governor's race.

"Tom Foley contacted the Secretary of the State's office this morning to request that any further announcements of election results for the governor's race be postponed until the results are certain and discrepancies between The Secretary of the State's office, the Tom Foley for Governor campaign, and the media, are reconciled,'' Clark said early this afternoon.

"In the last 24 hours alone, Bridgeport has revised downward the number of votes cast for Dan Malloy by over 3,500,'' he continued. "Other cities and towns are likely to revise their results in the days ahead. We understand that Susan Bysiewicz plans to announce this afternoon that their results of the gubernatorial election are official. We have sent the Secretary of the State's office a letter requesting that she not refer to her preliminary results of the election as "official" until the results are unlikely to be amended.''

http://articles.courant.com/2010-11-04/news/hc-foley-election-results-1104_1_election-results-announcements-campaign-manager

AOL Message Board regarding Governor's race in Connecticut

http://messageboards.aol.com/aol/en_us/articles.php?boardId=544978&articleId=991894&func=6&channel=Do+You+Believe&filterRead=false&filterHidden=true&filterUnhidden=false

News

Fox News reports Sec. of State of Connecticut has pushed back the press conference to 3 PM EST.

New Haven Votes Could Push Malloy Over The Top In Governor's Race
By CHRISTOPHER KEATING, ERIC GERSHON and JON LENDER, ckeating@courant.com

1:12 p.m. EDT, November 4, 2010

CLIP

Malloy was declared the winner of the governor's race Wednesday by Bysiewicz, but the Florida-style election is not over: Foley not only refused to concede Wednesday, he claimed victory.

Bysiewicz said Wednesday that Malloy won by an unofficial margin of 3,100 votes.

Wednesday evening, the Associated Press — which had called the race for Malloy — withdrew its call. It reported that only about 9,000 votes had been cast in New Haven, and its vote count showed Foley with a lead of 8,424 votes over Malloy with all but 1.5 percent of the precincts counted.

But Thursday morning, vote totals posted online by the AP mirrored the numbers reported by the New Haven Registrar of Voters.

The AP's online totals now show Malloy winning the race by 6,240 votes, with all but 10 precincts in Bridgeport reporting.

"Out of an abundance of caution, we're just waiting" to call the race, said William J. Kole, AP's New England bureau chief, shortly before 12:30 p.m. Thursday. "We are looking at whether we want to call it back for Malloy."

AP "un-called" the race Wednesday night because they realized they were missing vote counts, Kole said. Votes were missing from both New Haven and Bridgeport, and Windham also hadn't reported all of its votes until Thursday morning, Kole said.

Fifteen of 25 precincts in Bridgeport still haven't reported totals, he said.

"We just didn't have the numbers," Kole said. "It didn't make sense to say Malloy won it slightly."

At one point, AP mistakenly thought it had 100 percent of the votes cast in New Haven, he said.

AP had called the race for Malloy in the first place "largely because of the secretary of state saying he won," he said.

http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc-ct-governor-election-results-1105-20101104,0,7073133.story

discussion following article

http://discussions.courant.com/20/hartnews/hc-ct-governor-election-results-1105-20101104/10

Bloomberg

...Democrat Dan Malloy, the former mayor of Stamford, was declared the unofficial winner over Republican Tom Foley in the race for Connecticut governor as the two sides sparred over election results. Foley refused to concede.

Connecticut Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz said today that Malloy won, based on unofficial results that show him leading Foley by about 3,000 votes with almost all the ballots counted. It will take about a week to certify the ballots, said Av Harris, a spokesman for Bysiewicz. If the final margin is less than 2,000 votes, a recount is mandatory, Harris said.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-03/malloy-is-elected-connecticut-governor-over-foley-as-democrats-end-drought.html

Fox News to have a report live soon reportedly with the Connecticut Secretary of State press conference amid allegations of voter fraud ...

Net the Truth Online

Meanwhile

Really angry with good reason...

http://minx.cc/?post=307867

John Stossel Face Down with Bill O'Reilly on Vote Getters

2010-11-04T05:59:00.000-07:00

We were disappointed with John Stossel when he faced Fox's The Factor powerhouse, Bill O'Reilly recently just prior to the mid-term elections.

O'Reilly was apparently convinced Republican candidates who supported the same concept of limited government as Tea Party activists were the only way to go this election. Who else is there? O'Reilly posed the question of choice between a Democrat and a Republican candidate for federal office specifically to Stossel during the program.

Stossel did not say anything like in his column of the day after the mid-term election.

Stossel knows that the two most unworthy of a dime of public monies Social (in)Security Medicare and other federal entitlement programs, and the (unconstitutional) Military Budget (and any other aspects of the budget which are not constitutionally authorized) as he says in Did Freedom Win remained unuttered sacred cows during Tea Party rallies, candidate rallies, speeches, and sit down breakfasts with the Republican candidates who promised 'limited government.'

Yet during his one-on-one with O'Reilly, Stossel could only shake his head when asked Who else is there than a Republican to vote for?

We can only wonder why Stossel didn't say emphatically to O'Reilly. It would be a better message to send to Washington DC to write in Peter Pan or Dumbo because stopping power elite from spending and spending on whatever they think is of benefit to their re-elections in the future is never going to happen.

Stossel was given an opportunity to explain why neither Republicans or Democrats fit the true "freedom" bill and shouldn't suit Bill O'Reilly either, so though he wasn't going to reveal who he was going to vote for, he could have made it clear it wasn't going to be any of the Republicans, Tea Party supported or other.

Net the Truth Online

John Stossel:
This Week's Column: Did Freedom Win?
The polls have closed. With the Tea Party taking some important races, and Republicans re-taking control of the House, some people have declared this election a victory for freedom. Many winning candidates campaigned on a promise to cut back on government. Some vowed to restore government to its constitutional limits.

But the Republicans have a poor record when it comes to cutting government. As I write in this week’s column, I’m not sure the Tea Party Republicans will do any better:

[…] The Tea Party is supposed to be different. It stands for fiscal responsibility, spending cuts, and deficit reduction. A New York Times poll found that 92 percent of Tea Partiers said they would rather have a “smaller government providing fewer services” than a “bigger government providing more services.” That’s encouraging. But when it comes to specifics, the results aren’t as good. The poll found that 62 percent thought “the benefits from government programs such as Social Security and Medicare are worth the costs.” A Bloomberg poll found that most Tea Partiers “want more drug benefits for Medicare patients” (http://tinyurl.com/25mpear). And when was the last time you heard Tea Partiers complaining about the exploding military budget?

Strangely, in other questions, Tea Partiers did seem willing to accept cuts in domestic entitlement programs if it meant smaller government. The contradictory answers don’t bode well for the time when lobbyists for well-organized special interests mount their passionate attacks against cuts.

You just cannot be committed to cutting government if you would leave two of the costliest programs intact.

Read more: http://stossel.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2010/11/03/this-weeks-column-did-freedom-win/?action=late-new#ixzz14JmlL1J4

We highlight Thomas J. DiLorenzo's Be Patriotic: Don't Vote here since it provides a viewpoint of interest with much of its contents.

Poll Watch do it yourself style

2010-11-01T06:04:00.000-07:00

Update coming soon where was the fraud, caught and prosecuted?

We already know the answer...

Suspect or see election day fraud, November 2, 2010? Download an app for your phone...

Just in time for Election Day, American Majority Action has created the nation’s first mobile application to help identify, report and track suspected incidents of voter fraud and intimidation. This free, cutting edge system will enable voters to take action to help defend their right to vote. Whether you’re a campaign junkie, or just want a better America, Voter Fraud will help you report violations at the election booth and serve to uphold the democratic process.

http://americanmajorityaction.org/voterfraudapp/

Isn't Election Tampering in Play if Clinton Urged Meek Drop Out

2010-10-29T06:03:00.000-07:00

Fox reporting for the second day that former President Clinton asked/encouraged Senate candidate Kendrick Meek to drop out of the race to prevent Marco Rubio the Republican candidate from winning...

As for Meek, according to yahoonews Bill Clinton urged Meek to quit the Florida Senate race he's challenging Politico Ben Smith's reportage on the circumstances as presented in the piece, Bill Clinton pushed Kendrick Meek to quit Florida race

Meek further alleges involvement of Governor Charlie Crist who switched party affiliation from Republican to Independent to make his bid for the Senate seat.

"President Clinton did not ask me to drop out of the race," Meek told reporters. "Nobody has called and said, 'You need to drop out of the race.'" Instead, he blamed Crist for starting the rumors, telling reporters that the Florida governor is trying to run him out of the raceâ€”an allegation that Crist did not dispute.

On Friday, Meek did a tour of national morning shows, doubling down on his argument that it was Crist, not Clinton, who tried to push him out of the race. "Gov. Crist talked to me about getting out of the race," Meek told CNN's American Morning. "I recommended to the governor that he should consider getting out of the race."

In an interview with Good Morning America's George Stephanopoulos, Meek insisted that Clinton "didn't encourage" him to quit the race. "I'll tell you this George, I never told President Clinton or any of his staffers…or Charlie Crist or anyone else that I was going to get out of the race," Meek said, again contradicting the Clinton camp."I guarantee you that I did not say I am getting out of the race."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20101029/el_yblog_upshot/bill-clinton-urged-meek-to-quit-the-florida-senate-race

Which is it?

In the real world, it wouldn't matter who made the attempt to have a candidate drop out. The attempt would be illegal and criminal under election law as the outcome of an election is at stake. It's a big, big no-no in the real world to encourage a candidate to drop out of an election for any reason, and if anything of any value such as a new boat, a trip, etc. is offered, that is nothing less than an election bribe.

We take issue with Politico's Smith as well with this ditty:

Clinton did not dangle a job in front of Meek, who gave up a safe House seat to run for the Senate, but instead made the case that the move would advance the congressman’s future prospects, said a third Democrat familiar with the conversations.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/44337.html#ixzz13kthuE2j

How does Smith know for certain Clinton didn't dangle 'something of value' to Meek. Isn't such implied with Smith's wording:

"... made the case that the move would advance the congressman's future prospects..."

did anyone inquire the meaning of "future prospects?"

Doesn't look like there is much interest to get to the real heart of this.

Sadly, though Fox News is again highlighting a situation which adds to the observable irregularities already occuring in the 2010 Mid-term elections, Fox News is not pursuing a full investigation of exactly what happened between Meek, Clinton, and Governor Crist.

Fox needs to find out precisely who made the request of Meek to drop out - who knew of the plea and determine if indeed, as we aver, an election was tampered with even though Meek did not drop out.

And the federal Dept. of Justice needs to pursue prosecution of tampering with an election even if prosecution is of the former President of the United States, Bill Clinton.

If it is also true the White House and current President Barack Obama were apprised of the effort to have a candidate drop out at the urging of a former President and knowledge of a state Governor, prosecution should ensue there as well.

Course, that's in the really real world. Which we don't appear to be in when it comes to elections in the United States of America.

Ruling on Arizona Voter Identification Request Dims State Rights

2010-10-28T08:08:00.000-07:00

Who'd have thought the federal government's Motor Voter Act which is itself intrusion into the states rights where conducting elections are concerned would take precedence over the state of Arizona's own duly adopted legislation regarding elections?

Who'd have thought?

Fox now reporting watchers at early voting polls in California. Some believe this is a way to prevent potential voting fraud, others believe it's simple harassment and voter intimiditation.

Eric Shawn reports, and includes a panel consisting of Jeff Davis with election integrity watch and Brennan Center for Public Policy Wendy Weiser...

Do a search for their positions we were not impressed with either comments pertaining to the question asked.

Court voids Arizona law on voter proof of citizenship

Court voids Arizona law on voter proof of citizenship
by Michelle Ye Hee Lee - Oct. 27, 2010 12:00 AM
The Arizona Republic.

A federal appeals court on Tuesday struck down Arizona's requirement that residents provide proof of citizenship when they register to vote.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled that a federal voter-registration law supersedes Arizona's requirement.

Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/azelections/articles/2010/10/26/20101026arizona-voiting-citizenship-law-ruling.html#ixzz13fPOnzjy

Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/azelections/articles/2010/10/26/20101026arizona-voiting-citizenship-law-ruling.html#ixzz13fPG20bw

Some background and of interest

EAC Chairman Tally Vote Outcome

http://www.eac.gov/assets/1/Page/Chairman%20Paul%20DeGregorio%20Regarding%20Arizona%20and%20the%20Federal%20Voter%20Registration%20Form%20August%208%202006.pdf

Take notice of Free Republic efforts to compile reports of allegations, instances, outcomes of lawsuits regarding voter fraud around the country

A drive to protect vote fraud
NY Post ^ | October 26, 2010 | Michelle Malkin

Posted on Wednesday, October 27, 2010 7:32:09 AM by Scanian

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2615409/posts

In Arizona, illegal aliens, felons and multi-state residents vote unabated
Sonoran News ^ | October 22, 2010 | Linda Bentley

Posted on Friday, October 22, 2010 11:15:58 AM by La Lydia

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2612514/posts

Fox News Eric Shawn Needs Prod Investigate Vote Fraud

2010-10-28T06:20:00.000-07:00

Apparently, only the Fox News network has spots nearly every hour on the hour highlighting voter fraud allegations around the country.

During one segment, Bucks County Pennsylvania was noted for a bulk of hundreds of suspicious absentee voter applications being set aside as rejected.

The news during the spot was a mere one-liner, citing the Bucks County situation as one among a handful of other situations occurring in early voting in other states.

Eric Shawn reported similarly as is contained in his blog:

Absentee Voter Fraud Allegations Again?
Eric Shawn October 27, 2010

...In Pennsylvania, in the Eighth Congressional District of Bucks County, authorities tell us more than 500 absentee ballot applications are allegedly fraudulent.

Voters in sworn statements say someone made up excuses for why they needed absentee ballots, and they claim they never signed for them. Some, they say, include fabricated excuses for why they supposedly needed absentee ballots, such as citing "travel," when the voter had no plans to go anywhere

Read more: http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/10/27/absentee-voter-fraud-allegationsagain-0#ixzz13fIWybi9

But the Bucks County fraud needs further spotlight on it because right in one Pennsylvania report on what happened is this gem:

Pa. county tosses over 600 absentee applications
Election officials in a southeastern Pennsylvania county have rejected several hundred absentee ballot applications because of mismatching signatures and other problems.

http://www.poconorecord.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20101026/NEWS90/101029823/-1/NEWS

"Mismatching signatures."

Let us say this, if there are mismatching signatures there in Bucks County, there are mismatching signatures in every county in Pennsylvania.

In some cases there is no signature in the district poll book to compare. We wonder what is done in the case or rather in all cases wherein a voter shows up at the polls has an id for the name of the voter in the pollbook for the precinct but the pollbook does not contain a signature to match?

We wonder, but does Fox News wonder - does Eric Shawn wonder - what could possibly be going on since one of the reasons election officials rejected the absentee ballot applications was mismatching signatures.

But there is obviously more, according to a WHYY.org report...

Number of rejected absentee ballot applications up in Bucks
Tuesday, October 26th, 2010
With just a week to go until the Nov. 2 election, Bucks County voting officials say they've rejected more applications for absentee ballots than in past years.

Deena Dean, director of the Board of Elections and Voter Registration for Bucks County, said of the just over 11,000 absentee ballot applications that have come in, more than 600 have been rejected.

"There's various reasons that they're being rejected. Some of them include that the signature does not match, birth date does not match, they've failed to complete the application, possibly sign it," said Dean. "There's many different variations of reasons."

http://whyy.org/cms/news/government-politics/2010/10/26/number-of-rejected-absentee-ballot-applications-up-in-bucks/49250

"birth date does not match"

So the birth date on an application for an absentee ballot does not match that of the name listed on the voter registry book supposed to be maintained by the county (with help from the state database of voters known with the acronym SURE)

Fox, Eric Shawn, where is your inquisitivesness here?

We find it too bad really too bad the Fox News network does not itself hire a string of people to fan out in each of the suspected cases of fraud and actually begin a full investigation which would be independent of what the state or local governments might conduct.

Odds are state/local governments won't do squat before the actual date scheduled for the election at the "polling place."

In our opinion situations like what happened in Bucks County are merely the tip of the iceberg so to speak.

Ineligible voters, missing signatures in county registry books, names of deceased, that and more could be swept out of sight because there is no full review of all names on local voter registries across the state.

Every so often we do hear of names of deceased, for instance, being used to sign nomination petititons, yet even those are very rarely caught unless a political opponent deems it advantageous to formally challenge nomination petititions.

Pennsylvania needs an overhaul of its state database as well, but that will simply not happen because nobody from the outside looking in - like the Fox News Network - Eric Shawn - is willing to conduct an in-depth investigation of how the database could indeed contain names of voters who are ineligible to vote in the state of Pennsylvania. Or anywhere else for that matter.

Come on over here, Fox News and Eric Shawn. You've highlighted voter fraud allegations in our neck of the woods, Bucks County, go from there to the heart of voter fraud contained in the local voter registries of our state.

Even one, just one, ineligible name on the voter rolls for a precinct is clearly an invitation for fraud.

Let's end that this next year with Eric Shawn leading the investigation.

We will volunteer our time.

Net the Truth Online

The Bucks County situation gets curiouser and curiouser

Bucks board of elections extends absentee voting
TEXT SIZE By: Peter Hall
phillyBurbs.com

http://www.phillyburbs.com/news/local/courier_times/courier_local_elections/courier_local_elections_details/article/2948/2010/october/29/bucks-board-of-elections-extends-absentee-voting.html