Friday, July 31, 2009

Grandpa, Pregnant Mom Tasered at Party

Cops in the USA are out of control with tasers. Citizens are not safe in their own homes anymore, from Harvard professors to senior citizens and pregnant women. If I hear there are good cops on the force, and the abusive ones are rogue cops, ONE MORE TIME, I may be nauseous. If there are good cops, where the hell are they? And why are the covering up for the bad ones and allowing the 'rogue cops' to paint all police with the same shameful brush.

Tasering cannot be a substitute for talking to people respectfully and responsible investigation of an incident. A police officers job is to de-escalate violence with professional training - not to play bully with taser guns.

Family: Cops Used Excessive Force at
Baptism Party

29 Jul 2009
Roby Chavez


On Tuesday night, a Manassas family said cops went too far. The 55-year-old homeowner is a church family counselor and a bible study teacher. He says he was hosting a party for his new godchild.

However, he and the pregnant mother of the baptized boys face serious charges. Relatives are charging police used excessive force just to quiet down the backyard party.


Edgar Rodriguez says the backyard celebration came to an abrupt halt. After some confusion, his 55-year-old father, Edgar Rodriguez, Sr. says he was asked for an ID and handed it over. Then, he was Tasered three times.



Prince William County Police issued a statement confirming two people were Tasered at the Baptism party.





The family calls it excessive force, and they say all of it happened in front of a yard full of children.


The 25-year-old pregnant woman remains in custody tonight--separated from her family. After her arrest she was detained by immigration and customs enforcement.

The family says after hearing about the incident, the police chief has ordered an internal affairs investigation.


Police Brutality USA - Interactive map

Police Overreact with a Taser Gun - AGAIN!

Grandma tasered - Unedited video from dash cam

Shooting dogs and tasering grandmas

Blind woman tasered

Boise ombudsman says police officer used excessive force in an arrest this year

Idaho man suffers burns inside anus from Police taser

Wednesday, July 29, 2009

Marijuana Has Anti-Cancer Properties

Wouldn't it be funny if governments were spending mountains of money to make a substance illegal that prevents cancer? Or would it be tragic? How about tragicomedy. Read and laugh; or weep; or both.

Marijuana Has Anti-Cancer Properties





THC belongs to a class of chemicals known as cannabinoids, named after the cannabis (marijuana) plant in which they occur. It is the chemical responsible for the psychoactive effects of marijuana consumption.

In a followup experiment, the researchers extracted and analyzed brain tissue from two patients with an aggressive form of brain cancer known as "recurrent glioblastoma multiforme." The patients were treated with THC for either 26 or 30 days, then the researchers extracted and analyzed another sample.

After examining the brain tissue under an electron microscope, the researchers discovered that THC treatment resulted in death of cancerous cells but had no effect on healthy ones. The researchers were also able to discover the signaling pathway by which THC acts.

The research opens up the possibility that cannabinoid research could yield "a new family of potential antitumoral agents," the researchers wrote.

Glioblastoma multiforme is the most common and aggressive form of primary brain tumor. Without treatment, the average patient lives only three months after being diagnosed with the cancer. Treatment extends the average life expectancy after diagnosis by less than a year.


Marijuana nutrients found to help prevent Alzheimer's disease

Marijuana top cash crop; public policy analyst calls for legalization to aid U.S. economy

The Brain's Own Marijuana

Wednesday, July 22, 2009

Boycotting Israel is now a crime - really!

This is an obsure but alarming article. I had to read it twice to figure what it was saying:
that it is a crime to advocate boycotting Israeli products in France. A man has been fined €1000 for organising a boycott of Israeli products; and the French appeals court and Council of Europe's European Court of Human Rights upheld this.

Since when is advocating a boycott of any country's products, punishible by law in any legal scope of Western civilised countries? I thought that's what civilised nations do - impose a trade embargo when rogue nations refuse to abide by international law. What about the trade embargo on Cuba for decades?

How can it be illegal for a citizen to refuse to buy a product if the producers are acting unethically? How can it be illegal to encourage other like minded citizens to do the same? Have we lost freedom to speak and meet politically also?

Boycott is the ultimate non-violent protest available to people to curb injustices they see but cannot directly change. They simply say, we will not purchase a product that has been made with child labour, in a sweat shop, or manufactured in a ecologically toxic manner, etc. But it is illegal in France to boycott the products of Israel who has committed unspeakable war crimes in Palestine and Gaza (among other places)? What is wrong with this picture?

To starve the beast into cooperation or compliance by doing nothing (except talking with other people) is the only power of passive resistance to tyrannical conditions available to people to influence government or the free market conditions.

I whole heartedly disagree with this ruling and the French people may also. The French don't like being pushed around for too long...they have a long fuse with a big bang at the end of it (see French Revolution). Or more recently, Michelin workers in France lock up management or French workers threaten to blow up factory.

Well if Author Naomi Klein Calls for Boycott of Israel, I am with her. The rest of Europe will probably be next in enjoying the new found powers of the EU of the Lisbon Treaty to homogenise the behaviour of its citizens. (Look out Brits - your government is almost midevil now anyway.)

Kudos to the Czech government for having been the only dissenting voice in the ECHR. Czechs must be made of marvelous stuff.

European court: Israel boycotts
are unlawful discrimination









The one dissenting opinion was written by the Czech judge.



Tuesday, July 21, 2009

No to Lisbon to keep Blair out

I voted YES on the Lisbon Treaty last time: this time I will be voting NO. Not only has the EU not addressed the issues of Irish citizens concerning the Treaty after more than a year, but the news is fraught with backroom deals 'guaranteeing' Ireland who knows what! If the the EU wanted Lisbon passed by Irish voters, it should have answered their questions and made the Treaty more understandable. It should have come clean about NATO obligations, about data privacy, about policing functions which may violate the Irish Constitution and many other issues.

I conclude the EU does not want its citizens to understand the most important treaty Ireland will ever just wants Lisbon passed. This will not increase the soldidarity of EU citizens or member states.

Although this is a serious telling clue that the Lisbon Treaty is just too important to inform or consult the common people by discussing the real issues, the coup de grace is that Tony Blair has been a shoe in for the role of EU president for some time now - and this time it will be for 2 1/2 years. Imagine the mess he could make of the EU and world after the fiasco of his last six month presidency. Let's not mention Iraq, Afghanistan or the unquiet death of Dr. David Kelly.

I am voting NO on Lisbon....keeping Tony Blair (or Nicholas Sarkozy) from directing the fate of the EU is quite a sufficient reason for me. Until the EU gets serious about respecting its citizens as equal procreators of the union, it will not have my support.

Downing Street admits it backs
Tony Blair for EU Presidency

By Andrew Porter and Bruno Waterfield in Strasbourg
15 Jul 2009

Tony Blair claimed £7,000 for new roof two days before leaving No.10. The former prime minister has already faced questions over his expense claims.

The intervention came after Baroness Kinnock embarrassed Gordon Brown by admitting that the Government wants Mr Blair to take up the newly created role.

Downing Street has been forced to admit that it is backing Tony Blair to be President of the European Union.The position will come into force if the Lisbon Treaty is ratified across Europe. It is expected to carry a salary and perks package worth at least £200,000 a year.

The admission came as a close ally of Mr Blair told The Daily Telegraph that the former Prime Minister is set on landing the position which would wield considerable power and influence.

Baroness Kinnock, who was the controversial choice for Europe Minister in Mr Brown's recent reshuffle, revealed Mr Blair was being supported for what will be a new position that comes into force if the Lisbon Treaty is finally ratified across the continent.

She said: "The UK government is supporting Tony Blair's candidature for president of the council.

"I am not saying there has been any formal confirmation or statement from Tony but it is certainly is the government's position. I am sure they would not do it without asking him."

Downing Street was then forced to admit that they would back Mr Blair.

The Prime Minister's Official Spokesman said: "We have always made clear that if Tony Blair chooses to stand for the Presidency of the European Council then of course the Government would support him.

"It is a matter for Tony Blair to say whether or not he wants to put himself forward as President of the European Council."

A senior Labour MP who is close to Mr Blair and aware of Mr Brown's thinking on the issue, said: "Tony wants it. He still loves being close to the action and everything that goes with it.

"A while ago, and certainly in the old days, Gordon would have done everything to block it but he now accepts that having him there could be a good thing."

One stumbling block could now be a growing reluctance on behalf of some of the European leaders to support Mr Blair. Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor, is understood to be lukewarm on him taking the newly created post.

But others, including President Nicolas Sarkozy of France, see Mr Blair as an international statesman who can help boost the EU's presence on the world stage as its official global representative.


Mr Blair, currently working as international envoy to the Middle East, has never ruled himself out of the EU job but has stressed that the Lisbon Treaty must enter into force before a presidential contest can begin.

Baroness Kinnock, the wife of Neil, the former Labour leader, was the surprise job for Europe Minister in last month's Cabinet reshuffle. The vacancy arose when Caroline Flint stormed out of Government over her lack of promotion.

Mr Brown was criticised for giving the job to someone whose family has been immersed in the European political culture for years. She is still a serving MEP and her husband served as a European commissioner.

William Hague, the Shadow Foreign Secretary, William Hague, reiterated Conservative opposition to the position of President.

He said: "The creation of a new EU President could be enormously damaging for Europe. Any holder is likely to try to centralise power for themselves in Brussels and dominate national foreign policies. In the hands of an operator as ambitious as Tony Blair, that is a near certainty. He should be let nowhere near the job. It shows what a grip Lord Mandelson now has over Gordon Brown that he has been forced to support his bitterest rival.

"Appointing Tony Blair as a President in Europe would be the perfect symbol of this stale Labour Government's arrogant disregard for democracy."

A spokesman for Mr Blair said: "As we have said time and again on this, there is nothing to be a candidate for since the job doesn't actually exist."

The Lisbon Treaty, the successor to the EU constitution is awaiting a second referendum in Ireland after Irish voters rejected it last year.

A British Government spokesman said: "The Irish have yet to hold their referendum on the treaty, and if and when the treaty enters into force, and if Mr Blair decides to run as a candidate as president, then Glenys Kinnock is quite right - he would have the Government's support."

Under the treaty, the current system of six-monthly EU presidencies rotated between 27 member countries will be replaced by a "President of the Council".

The new EU president will be a full-time Brussels official for his two and half year term, chosen by Europe's leaders but unelected by voters.

The job, would involve Mr Blair coordinating EU policy and brokering agreements between leaders of the 27 member states.

Monday, July 20, 2009

Russia-China Warn US - Iran attack means WW3

The headline below has not been in the least unpredictable. Israel has been barking threats to bomb Iran like a mad rabid terrier. Russia and China have made huge investments in Iran and they will not stand quietly by while Israel carries out another savage military invasion. One has to wonder exactly how crazy are the Israelis: surely with all their 'political savvy' augmented by the Mossad pipeline of info, they could have figured this out themselves?

The question begs to be asked: Why does Israel think bombing Iran will be tolerated? Is Israel suicidal? Or perhaps starting WW3 is a goal the Israelis would like to pursue?

Russia-China Warn US That

Israeli Attack On Iran Means “World War”

Posted by sakerfa
July 18, 2009


Fueling Russian and Chinese fears are intelligence reports stating that Israel has moved over three-quarters of its Naval Forces through the Suez Canal and has assembled over 30 of its US-built fighter jets in Kurdistan for a planned attack using American made “bunker busting” bombs and nuclear armed cruise missiles.

Russian Military Analysts state in these reports that Israel first plans to use its US-built fighter jets to target Iran’s nuclear facilities, and upon a combined Iranian and Lebanonese Hezbollah “response”, that is said will “rain missiles down upon Israel”, Israeli submarines and surface vessels with unleash nuclear armed cruise missiles against Iran’s military, religious and political infrastructure.

Israeli news sources are also confirming Russian and Chinese fears over an attack by their country upon Iran, and as we can read as reported the Haaretz News Service:



President Bush had become so alarmed over Israel’s plan to attack Iran that in an unprecedented move, just prior to leaving office, he refused the Israelis “secret request” for 1,000 of the American bunker busting bombs they wanted, but, Israel had obtained 100 of these dreaded weapons in a 2005 deal with the Pentagon.

Upon Obama assuming the US Presidency, Israel’s Prime Minister gave the American leader a stark warning that “Either you take care of Iran-quickly-or I will”, a challenge that Obama, while in Russia last week, slapped down by warning that the United States is “absolutely not” giving Israel a green light to attack Iran, a curious statement, however, when viewed in the light of the American Vice President Biden stating just days before that “Israel is free to do whatever it deems necessary to remove the Iranian nuclear threat”.

Fueling Russian and Chinese fears over Israel’s planned attack on Iran, these reports continue, is the Jewish states planned use of Iraqi territory from their Kurdistan region which borders Iran, and which this past week furthered its goal to become an independent Nation with the adopting of a new constitution, and with its Israeli trained army can expect an “immediate” invasion from both its sworn enemies Turkey and Iran.

Even worse, Syria’s leader has reportedly warned the US that upon Turkey and Iran declaring war upon Kurdistan and Israel it would “no choice” but to honor its defense agreements with the Iranians calling for their Nations to protect each other in times of peril.

Further complicating this mess is Turkey’s membership in NATO, and which under that alliances agreement calls for the United States and Europe to join with the Turkish military in fighting against what in essence would be their own allies of Israel and Kurdistan.

Not being known to the American people is that while their Military Forces have been fighting in Iraq, the United States and Iran have longstanding agreements allowing the Iranians to shell Iraqi Kurd territory without fear of reprisal, an agreement that also includes Turkey who have battled against the Iraqi Kurds for decades.

Most ominously in these reports though, both Russia and China state that they will have “no choice” but to place an “immediate embargo” against any oil and gas coming from the Middle East and weapons to the region the United States may try to supply. China further states in this warning that upon an Israeli attack upon Iran they will “immediately cease” to purchase any more US debt, and with the American deficit hitting $1 Trillion for the first time in their history, and with it expecting to exceed $2 Trillion by the end of the fiscal year on September 30th, a particually grave threat being that China’s $2 Trillion in reserves are the only thing keeping the US economy afloat.

Russian Intelligence Analysts further report that the long-serving head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, Gholam Reza Aghazadeh, resigned today over fears for his and his family’s safety upon an attack by Israel upon the Persian Nation.

What is not known at this time, these reports summarize, is if Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system, which the Israelis report has been “successfully tested”, would be able to withstand the estimated 6,000 plus missiles expected to be fired at it by the combined powers of Iran, Syria and Hezbollah.

But, to Israeli war leaders believing that upon the conventional destruction of Iran’s nuclear facilities, the Persian Nation will “sue for peace” rather than be hit by nuclear weapons, these reports state, unequivocally, that Iranian leaders are “fully prepared” to engulf the entire World in “brutal fire” rather than to ever “kneel down” before the “Zionists” they have long stated have no right being in the Middle East in the first place.

Source: CFC Iowa


Tehran: Israel's "200 nuclear warheads" must first be part of Middle East disarmament

Sunday, July 19, 2009

Pigs might fly - and vaccines may not help

The vaccinations produced and recommended for administration to millions of people may be useless. These vaccines have been manufactured to deal with a strain of flu which may have been engineered to resist vaccinations, by the military industrial complex itself.

Many will become very rich from stock holdings in the pharmaceutical companies now manufacturing swine flu vaccines. But these vaccines may be not only worthless as the flu strain mutates, but cause other side effects and permanent damage to those who recieve them.

The world is truly ruled by madmen.

The WHO Plays with Pandemic Fire

The Continuing Saga of the Flying Pigs Pandemic Flu

by F. William Engdahl
Global Research
June 5, 2009






US CDC stops regular reporting?





Drug giants gearing up






The 1976 Swine Flu fiasco





Free from liability?







Journalist Files Charges against WHO and UN for Bioterrorism

Ireland should be leading; not following the herd

Ireland has been following the US over the cliff of economic collapse for way too long. It's time the Irish considered a new role model for economic development and growth. Ummmm...the word 'China' comes to mind - but I am sure this strategy has not yet reached the halls of Irish academia or government. What a shame! Ireland should be leading now with innovative thinking rather than following the savage capitalist herd over the economic cliff. Ahem....time to wake up the Irish people and demand a better way to prosperity for all.

Depressionary bust in Ireland is echoed in California

For quite some time now I have been of the view that there are a number of striking similarities between the goings on in Ireland and those in California, none of them good. Both locations have seen extraordinary rises in home prices turn to massive busts. As a result, both locales have seen depression-like collapses in consumer demand and the local economy. Unemployment and government deficits are surging in both California and Ireland. But, both California and Ireland have zero control over monetary policy and this is the crucial connection.


Let’s rewind a bit to 1999 when the Euro came into being. Ireland was a founding member of Euroland. So, on January 1st of that year, the Irish fixed their currency the Punt to the Euro for good at a rate of 0.7876. From that time forward, Ireland effectively had no control of the monetary spigot. By 2002, Punts ceased to exist as money in Ireland and the Euro was ushered in.

What this change meant for Ireland is that it had the many benefits that go with being part of a large single currency market. Among the many advantages of a single currency are reduced foreign exchange costs, less currency volatility, less chance of a run on the currency, and a greater certainty in business planning that results from those benefits. And these benefits can be huge in times of crisis – just ask Iceland.

There is a problem though which I mentioned before, namely the Irish have no control over their own money. To be sure, hard money types probably see this as a good thing as it prevents countries inflating to get out of an economic pickle. But, the alternative for the Irish has been depression.

Back in February, I mentioned this problem in a post called “The European Problem.”

The Eurozone members have decided to forgo independent monetary policies. Individual member nations have free capital movement and a fixed exchange rate but zero control over monetary policy. That rests with the European Central Bank (ECB) in Frankfurt.

The problems mount in recession. Some members are getting devastated. Spain, for instance, is in depression already with unemployment at 14%. Ireland’s national budget is imploding with estimates for deficit reaching 10-12% of GDP. If you are Spain or Greece, you would like to print money– a lot of it. But that’s not happening in the Eurozone yet.

The result is a potential national bankruptcy for the likes of Ireland, one reason their credit rating is suffering. Will Ireland go bankrupt? Perhaps. It is unclear how willing other Eurozone members would be to support the country were it to run into that kind of difficulty. The Germans are furious for having abandoned the Deutsche Mark for the Euro, which they see as a ‘weak’ currency. Bailing out a Eurozone member would come with many strings attached.

Then, there is the case of Austria. They too are in the Eurozone. They have a weak banking system because of excessive lending to Eastern Europe — reaching a full 85% of Austrian GDP. (Whether the Austrians were mentally re-creating their lost Empire, stripped after World War I, is a case for the Austrian psychologist Freud). If the Eastern Europeans run into problems, Austrian banks will fail en masse, requiring help from other Eurozone members (read France and Germany).

So, Ireland, having no other choice, must cut spending…drastically. Ambrose Evans-Pritchard reports.



Education must be cut 8pc. Scores of rural schools must close, and 6,900 teachers must go. “The attacks outlined in this report would represent an education disaster and light a short fuse on a social timebomb”, said the Teachers Union of Ireland.



I hope this sounds familiar to American readers because this is exactly the scenario faced by California. The state does not have the option of going out to the California Federal Reserve Board’s backyard to pick a few ten billion dollar notes off the money tree. This is a privilege reserved for the U.S. Federal Government, one I would add that has the Chinese worried. Effectively, California is to Ireland as the United States is to the Eurozone. And that spells depression for California. Here are a few headlines:

Welcome to Reykjavik on the Pacific. Don’t think this train wreck happened overnight. It has been building for months. I first asked in October of 2008 is the State of California bankrupt. Technically, they are not. But, when a state refuses to honor its bills by handing out IOUs, that’s bankruptcy to me.

It is going to get worse for California. That is for sure. The problem here again is the depressionary bust that is likely to take hold as California starts firing workers and cutting spending. Remember, people with no jobs have little income. And having little income means foreclosure, which also means a surge in housing inventory and falling prices. That’s a recipe for still more foreclosures, continued house prices declines and a deflationary spiral. I imagine Wells Fargo and Bank of America would be rendered insolvent by such a scenario. So why is Obama balking at lending a helping hand?

I anticipated a bust in California and a helping hand from the Obama Administration, because I figured they wanted to mitigate worst-case outcomes. As far back as January 2nd, I was already saying this was the likely scenario. I asked “Will federal largesse be countered by state and local cutbacks?



Yes. Yes. Yes. Doesn’t the Obama administration see this? I would argue they did not understand this in January or the stimulus bill would have been larger and more front-loaded. But, perhaps they do now, but have chosen not to act because every state and municipality in America would be looking for a handout if they did try to act in California. So, we’re in bit of a pickle here.


The foregoing analysis can’t leave you feeling like recovery is imminent in Europe or in America. Certainly, it is not in Ireland or California. The problem is the Impossible Trinity of a fixed exchange rate, independent monetary policy and free movement of capital. You cannot have all three. And California and Ireland both lack the monetary escape hatch. Depression will set in.

I see only three choices to solve this problem.

  1. Bailouts: Of course, we are going to see requests for transfer payments here. Will Obama bite? Will the Germans block this, afraid that the Austrians and Spanish would be next? Obviously, transfer payments are part and parcel of a monetary union in order to achieve economic harmonization. In the U.S., California gets less in federal largesse than it pays in taxes. This is a fact. However, it is looking ever less likely that this fact will help Schwarzenegger receive the help he wants.
  2. Backdoor currency: Marshall Auerback has argued that the IOUs in California are a backdoor currency system. No, they are not legal tender. But, in a note to me, he said “California can turn its warrants into sovereign currency by agreeing to accept them in payments to the state. Note that I AM NOT arguing that California should make them “legal tender, payable for all debts public and private”—this is something it cannot do. But you could basically reduce the cost of CA’s borrowing substantially via this device and essentially reduce the need for muni bond issuance. In fact, the implication that flows from my analysis is that you’d want to buy every single muni bond in sight as the IOU, by giving it an intrinsic value to pay state tax, effectively eliminates the need for muni bond issuance.” Could Ireland do the same?
  3. Immigration: People are just going to have to move. As jobs disappear in Ireland and California, the Irish and Californians will need to emigrate elsewhere. They have a huge market to chose from in both cases.

None of these are great options. I wish I had something more uplifting to say here. But, that is the situation we face.

Related Reading:

Stiglitz on Russia, WTO and NWO

Many people disdain the term New World Order - but like it or not - one is coming: a world order which is not dictated by the hegemons of the USA banking/corporate moguls. See What does the NWO really mean?

Yes, there will be a new world in which the 'profit before people' dogma is not the 'invisible hand' that rules the world.
Russia, China and the developing world has had enough of USA militarism for profit, and calling the shots for the rest of the world.

Whether or not one understands the earth shaking importance of the dollar being replaced as reserve currency, this change will rock the world. Perhaps not as fast as the bombs the US showers on its unfortunate imperialistic resource targets. But things are going to change big time. It may take a few years but the change cannot be stopped now.

If there is going to be hope for all, global governance must not be in the hands of the superlatively greedy. A balance of powers which must cooperate for the mutual benefit of all is much preferable. This battle will be fought not with bombs and high tech weapons; but with global trade. The new world order will have to do with how to divide the remaining resources of the planet among nations and their peoples in a fairer way for all. And the World Trade Organization (WTO)is center stage.

Members of WTO

I recall attending an upper division business class in which my fellow students had to give a presentation and overview of the WTO. At the end, I asked a question: If the WTO is so wonderful, why are so many nations protesting its meetings? My bizhead classmates stood frozen like deer in the headlights. They apparently had no answer because they had no real understanding of the topic they were assigned to discuss.

The World Trade Organisation is the power broker in today’s global economy of international trade which is the driver of world economic growth. Although WTO rules assure all countries will get a fair deal regardless of their size or bargaining position, this is sometimes forgotten when superpowers begin feuding in the global arena about cotton and corn. And as in the boxing ring, there are heavyweights and lightweights. Big fish eat little fish. Being the world's economic superpower for decades, the US has eaten a lot of little fish and intends to consume all it can. But the little fish are fighting back now, supporting the plans of China and Russia for a fairer distribution of earth's resources.

The critical drivers of this change are 1) a change in the reserve currency and 2) a fairer shake for all nations in the WTO. When China and Russia are both members of the WTO, the USA will no longer be able to dominate its mechanisms with the hubris of its hegemonic world domination plan.

Joseph Stiglitz is a world renowned maverick economist whose advice has largely been ignored by the governments who represent the interest of multi-national banking/corporate moguls. The article below concerns the entrance requirements of Russia to the WTO imposed by USUK (United States and United Kingdom). Of course USUK does not want Russia to join the WTO as it would dilute their power (and perhaps bring about a new world order not envisioned by the current Masters of the Universe).

Make no mistake: the future depends on a fairer system of international trade, whether or not one finds this boring.

Joseph Stiglitz calls Russia's WTO
entry terms 'outrageous'


Prominent U.S. economist Joseph Stiglitz on Thursday called the terms demanded of Russia to join the World Trade Organization "outrageous" and praised Russia for standing up to the global trade body.
"The WTO should be an international agreement where, if you agree to go along with the provisions, any country can join," said Stiglitz, winner of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences (2001) and former senior vice president and chief economist of the World Bank.

"That's not the way it's done. The way it is done is what one group called 'extortion at the gate,'" he said during a Moscow-Manchester video conference. "The United States and some other countries have tried to say, 'if you want to join our club, you just don't have to agree with the terms everybody else does, but you have to pay us something extra, you have to go beyond the terms of the agreement and give concessions that other countries don't have to agree to,'" he said. "I think this is outrageous.

And I think it was important for Russia to say 'we won't do that, we will go along with the agreement signed by other countries but we won't be subjected to this kind of extortion,'" Stiglitz said.
"Unfortunately poor countries, developing countries, often aren't in that position of strength to say that to the WTO.

And I think it was actually a positive contribution for the sake of the whole global community that Russia did that," the professor at Britain's University of Manchester said.
He also said Russia had much less to gain from joining than other countries because its export base depends so much on natural resources and raw materials, which are not subject to trade restrictions. "Meanwhile your market could be flooded with imported goods from other countries that would make it more difficult for you to recreate the industrial base that would be necessary for a strong economy," he said.

Russia has been involved in talks to join the WTO for 16 years, Kazakhstan for 13 years. Belarus recently has shown no desire to join the global trade body. Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan plan to join the global trade body in the form of a united customs territory. They made the decision on June 9 after talks between the three countries' prime ministers.


Why the dollar is dying
When China awakes, it will shake the world. - Napoleon Bonaparte
NWO = New reserve currency
Patrick Bond: Will economists Stiglitz and Yunus add to debate on crisis?
Stiglitz slams inflation-targeting
Stiglitz: The UN Takes Charge (Update: and The Economic Lessons of the Iraq War)

Saturday, July 18, 2009

CFR recommends anmesty for illegal immigrants in US

Sometimes I read a news article that just doesn't fit into the puzzle of our times. Its contents seem to be non sequiturs in the current economic climate, and although the headlines are brutally honest, noone pays any heed to the contents. Such is the case with the following article. The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is advocating an amnesty for illegal workers in the USA.

Let me get this straight:
  • US unemployment is skyrocketing.
  • An increase in the labour force means higher unemployment, greater scarcity of jobs.
  • An increase in hiring international professionals means higher unemployment.
  • So the CFR recommends this?
  • The US Congress has passed a rash of Draconian laws to prevent illegal immigration to the US since 911 designed to protect Americans.
  • Border checks and international travel have become travellers' hell by viture of US No Fly Lists and NSA investigations of 'persons of interest'.
  • Now the US wants to soften these laws? Why? The threat is gone? Tourism is in the shitter?
I don't get it. Unless this has something to do with the formation of a US-Mexico-Canada currency zone, the NAU. If this is the case, then the CFRs' amnesty on illegal aliens, and its recruitment of foreign students and tourists make much more sense.

What do you think? Have I missed a big piece of puzzle context here or do I not have the whole story? What's wrong with this picture? Maybe the CFR has had an epiphany of moral conscience? Cui bono here?


Phoenix Business Journal
by Mike Sunnucks Wednesday,
July 8, 2009








The Council’s corporate members include
  • Bank of America,
  • Goldman Sachs,
  • American Express,
  • Chevron,
  • ExxonMobil Corp.,
  • Rothschild North America Inc.,
  • News Corp.,
  • General Electric,
  • KBR Inc.,
  • Lockheed Martin,
  • Raytheon Co.,
  • Soros Fund Management and Google Inc.
  • U.S. Sen. John McCain,
  • former Arizona governor Bruce Babbitt,
  • U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano,

Other notable CFR members include:

• Former U.S. Treasury secretaries Henry Paulson and Robert Rubin.
• Former Federal Reserve Bank chairmen Alan Greenspan and Paul Volcker. • Former presidents George H.W. Bush, Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton and former vice president Dick Cheney.





