Friday, April 23, 2010

Raw milk is dangerous, but, industrial strength milk is heaven sent, huh? I don't think so !

The generational emergency that is burgeoning out of the corporate dairies could cripple this nation if we don't stop it.  Those children are handicapped for life.  For their entire lives they will have to be basket cases in regard to their daily meal plan.  Do you have any idea what is going to happen to the schools, public or private, with so many children suffering from these allergies? 
It is a disaster.  We should be grateful the American Pediatrician is as dedicated as they are ! 

GO ORGANIC !!!!!!!

Most of the milk from the dairy cows on South Pork Ranch ends up pasteurized — heat-treated to reduce the chance that the people who drink it will get sick.

But every month, 300 gallons of the milk are sold raw, much of it to about five dozen regular customers who arrive at the central Illinois farm toting their own containers to tap the creamy drink from a squat, stainless-steel vat in a room next to the milking stalls.

That choice has put the farm's owners, Keith Parrish and Donna O'Shaughnessy, at the center of a particularly American food fight between passionate defenders of personal choice and health officials who warn that drinking farm-fresh milk can be life-threatening.

The federal government and virtually all public health agencies oppose consumption of raw milk because it can carry dangerous bacteria including E. coli 0157:H7, listeria and campylobacter. Last month, 13 people in Michigan were sickened by campylobacter in an outbreak tied to raw milk sold at a northern Indiana farm....

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY. Observational studies have shown that allergic infants, irrespective of their type of diet, show various degrees of growth depression in the first year of life. The authors investigated whether the type of milk in the complementary feeding period (6–12 months of age) is associated with differences in the increase of standardized growth indices (weight-for-age [WA], length-for-age [LA], and weight-for-length [WL] z scores) in infants with cow's milk allergy (CMA)....

Sounds like peaceful use of Chinese muscle to handle pirates.

I am sure the Chinese admired the USA when it rescued the Captain of a pirated ship last year.

China does not want war. 
China turns its trillions towards NZ (click here) 

4:00 AM Saturday Apr 24, 2010

As China turns its trillions towards New Zealand's food production-based economy, Owen Hembry writes that fears of a foreign takeover may be misplaced
Growing Chinese investment in New Zealand is fuelling fears of foreign takeover.
With the Asian superpower's currency expected to rise in value, its buying power will increase.
China already has trillions of dollars to invest overseas, and New Zealand's food production-based economy is an attractive target.
With a free trade agreement in place, links are strengthening....

N.Korean Defectors 'Disappearing in China'(click here)

April 24, 2010North Korea has apparently intensified a crackdown to stem an increasing exodus of its people by picking up defectors who work along the border to help others escape. Experts say that the North seems to have started the crackdown around November last year....

N Korea seizes S Korean assets (See link below.)
North Korea seized South Korean-owned assets at a mountain resort on Friday, warning that the two countries were on the brink of war over the sinking of a South Korean warship which killed 46 sailors.

The communist state also declared that highly symbolic cross-border tours to the scenic Mount Kumgang resort had been halted for good.

It said it was seizing the five buildings at the resort, while freezing "all the remaining real estates" at the resort and expelling all their management personnel.

The move comes after a report in the Yonhap news agency from Seoul said that South Korea's military suspected that North Korean submarines had attacked and sunk the warship Cheonan with a heavy torpedo on March 26 this year. AFP

The World Today, Apr 23 - South Korea backs away from military revenge attacks for ship sinking  (see link below)

South Korea's president Lee Myung-bak signaled today he has no plans for a military revenge attack if investigations confirm North Korea sank one of the South's warships last month.
“We'll try to cooperate with the international community in taking necessary measures when the results are out,” Lee told a group of visiting foreign journalists in Seoul today.
North Korea insists it had nothing to do with the fate of the South's corvette Cheonan, which sank after an explosion on March 26.
Thirty-nine sailors are confirmed to have died in the sinking. Another seven are missing and now presumed dead.

US representative says multilateral engagement is best way to deal with North Korea (see link below)

NEW YORK (AP) - The U.S. Special Representative for North Korea policy says multilateral engagement with North Korea remains essential for progress on denuclearization despite allegations it was involved in sinking a South Korean naval vessel.

Speaking at a seminar in New York, Ambassador Stephen Bosworth said he was optimistic that six party talks - involving the two Koreas, the U.S., Russia, Japan and China - would resume but that he could not say when.

"As we look ahead today, we of course face a set of uncertainties in the short-term as we await the results of the investigation of the sinking of the South Korean naval vessel," Bosworth said. "But looking beyond that I think that there is reason to believe that multilateral engagement remains the essential condition for making progress on greater stability, denuclearization, peace and prosperity on the Korean peninsula."

- AP

The Casein Children - Drink Organic Milk and use Organic Milk Products for the safety of your fetus.

...Cow's milk contains more than 20 protein fractions. (click here) In the curd, 4 caseins (ie, S1, S2, S3, S4) can be identified that account for about 80% of the milk proteins. The remaining 20% of the proteins, essentially globular proteins (eg, lactalbumin, lactoglobulin, bovine serum albumin), are contained in the whey. Casein is often considered poorly immunogenic because of its flexible, noncompact structure. Historically, lactoglobulin has been accepted as the major allergen in cow's milk protein intolerance. However, polysensitization to several proteins is observed in about 75% of patients with allergy to cow's milk protein....

Why would any sane American allow plutocrats to take over the food supply of the country?   The research validating the fact that one third of the children in the USA in the past two years have immune disorders due to cow milk hormones ingested by mothers during pregnancy is still be conducted, but, it is fairly overwhelming.

No milk is hormone free.  (click here). Cows naturally produce the hormone bovine somatotropin in their pituitary gland. Sometimes, farmers give their cows a synthetic version of that hormone, called rbST, so that they produce more milk. Regardless of whether the milk was made by that supplement, our human bodies don`t recognize either as hormones, but rather as proteins.

The idea that all milk is created equal is a gross exaggeration in the year 2010.

For two years pediatricians are finding a large increase in the amount of newborns with immune disorders.

A full one third of all infants born in the past two years have been born with immune disorders and have allergies.  Most Pediatricians believe it is from the 'Big, Strong, Faster' cows of the Corporate Farms.  These cows have been fed hormones and the infants whom mothers drank the stuff have given birth to severe allergies, many protein intolerant.

I tell you what. Before I continue reading the Patient Protection and Affordability Act, maybe covering the Reconcilation might be better.

Won't know until I get into it though.  The debate about these two bills is a little tricky when it comes to understanding the complaints about it.  What I can tell from them is that they have gone through great lengths to remove incentives to charge more for health care insurance.  Both bills go to considerable trouble to lower costs of health care to consumers.  If consumers are impacted less that means there are going to be 'income' impacts on companies.  

The 'thing' is this, we cannot focus on complaints of reduced income, because, that does not necessarily mean lower profits or poorer services.  In other words, in removing such things a 'Vacation Trips' to physicians, surgeons and pharmacists as incentives to promote certain prescriptions that is a direct savings to the consumer, it will lower medication costs to the consumer, but, there may very well be a redistribution of income to Pharmaceutical companies because the larger companies might have had an unfair advantage in the first place.

Insisting on generics availability and preference to name brands by Medicare Prescription Drug Benefits is going to have a direct effect on the industry's income.  It is just the way it is.  Either Americans want highly efficient cost controls or they don't.  The high prices consumers were paying before the laws went into effect was actually a subsidy, and as far as I am concerned an illegitimate subsidy to the industry.

All the dynamics at work to 'support' the medical industries, insurance companies included, before the new legislation were putting high and unsustainable costs on the backs of the consumers.  They were paying for name brands which lead them to the 'donut hole' quicker, they were paying supplemental insurance costs for others care because they didn't have insurance or were forced into bankruptcy because of medical costs, etc.  

Those dynamics have been attacked by these two bills and there is going to a lot of complaints by companies as they realize their marketing strategies no longer are working for them.  These bills make the medical industry work for the consumer for the first time in history.  That is a huge culture shock to these companies.
They only hope their complaining on any venue they can find will effect the electorate of the USA and drive people to want to dismantle the laws.  That is not a good idea.  If the companies are complaining that is a good thing.  It means the legislation is carrying out the needs of the people and not catering to stockholders and CEOs.

It is a huge transition for these companies and they need to be insightful and prudent in their decisions.  The CEOs will find that 'the long view' of profits is the best way to earn their pay.  The bills are written to have a long term and carefully measured effect on health care insurance.  It is THAT 'horizon' the CEOs need to focus and stop hoping for 'flash in the pan' profits.  I just don't see that happening.  Their R&D is there best investment.  The FDA needs to pursue these new medications with vigor as well.  Quite frankly, I am concerned about the chronic issues with 'warnings' to people after the drugs have been marketed.

I got sincerely upset the other day when I saw an ad for class action suits being filed against "Yaz." (click here).  It wasn't  the ads that bothered me, it was the idea that young women were a target for a medication that has proven to be dangerous in a very short time of marketing.  That is way out of line with consumer protection the way it needs to be administered.  Even the side effects in the commercials for Yaz is prohibitive to a patient's best outcome.  In all honesty, I believe commercial marketing of medications is profoundly wrong.  It makes it a 'popularity' issue, drives up the cost of medications and quite frankly imposes demands on MDs that should be left up to their discretion and not necessarily the demands of their patients.

If a company wants to 'morally' market their products then do public awareness commercials about medical conditions that can be addressed by their products without adding a lot of 'jazz' to the product.  And where did the bedside manner of the physician go to have a good relationship with their patients to be sensitive to their needs and possible diagnosis.  I really believe the 'incentive' for prescription writing is all backwards.  It is consumer heavy when it should be physician directed.


But, the bottom line is there will be a lot of complaints by CEOs and companies and all sort of folks as the laws roll out.  Everyone has to work through them because this is a major paradigm shift and I don't care if the Tea Baggers don't like the word paradigm.  Grow up.

"I don't like this and I don't like that...blah, blah, blah."  


Health Care Stocks Climb  (click here)

Last Update: 23-Apr-10 13:30 ET 
Dow +19.35 at 11153.64, Nasdaq -3.19 at 2515.88, S&P +1.66 at 1210.33
[BRIEFING.COM] Stocks have retraced most of this morning's gains following a pop in health care stocks, and the sector is now up 0.8%.  Health care stocks found a bid around noon after Merck (MRK 35.36, +1.61) announced its revenues would fall by $170 millon, less than expected.  Competitors Pfizer (PFE 16.86, +0.38), and Bristol-Meyers Squibb (BMY 24.73, +0.30) followed suit.  The moves comes after the sector had fallen 3% over the past two sessions.  

One Hundred Eleventh Congress of the United States of America AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday, the fifth day of January, two thousand and ten

An Act

To provide for reconciliation pursuant to Title II of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2010 (S. Con. Res. 13).

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, ...


I am not going to read the table of contents.


Subtitle A--Coverage


(a) Premium Tax Credits- Section 36B of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as added by section 1401 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and amended by section 10105 of such Act, is amended--

Now, I have to find the section in the PPACA to know the exact changes.  I have stated on many occasions Section 36B of the IRS Code of 1986 is the part of the code that addresses health care and health care insurance. 

No one would want me as a President either.  I'd tell ya exactly what I thought of you.  I'll tell you how completely stupid the Tea Baggers are.  They want a paradigm shift back to 1776,  or there abouts.  If that were to occur, the country would have to shrink back to 13 colonies.  

Think about how completely stupid that concept truly is.  George Washington would no more be able to be President today with the vast expanse of the USA as it exists and all the complexity to that fact than Santa Claus can stop the North Pole from melting down.

Internet what?  Paradigm shifts happen for a reason and they are good reasons.  There is no way the laws that existed in 1776 could bring justice to the USA and its 300 million people and vast land mass and organized military than if there were a man in the moon.

Morons, I am telling you.  Chickens for payment.  Dear God what has happened to the intelligence of the people of the USA?  The citizens of the USA should be grateful for all the paradigm shifts SINCE 1776 and how the citizens of this country are beating longevity challenges, disease challenges, etc.  Morons.  Completely ignorant ingrates.  THAT is what I would be saying to these jerks if I were President.  They should be grateful I didn't slip into POWER in the White House on a technicality.

What was that section again?

Oh, yeah, 1401, if I remember correctly there were issues I left off with last time on 1401.

Subtitle E--Affordable Coverage Choices for All Americans


Subpart A--Premium Tax Credits and Cost-sharing Reductions


I need to find Section 10105.  You know what my mother used to tell me when I would complain because I was SPOILED.  

"YOU COULD HAVE IT A LOT WORSE !"   I never wanted to make those words to come true.


(a) Section 36B(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as added by section 1401(a) of this Act, is amended by striking ‘is in excess of’ and inserting ‘equals or exceeds’.
(b) Section 36B(c)(1)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as added by section 1401(a) of this Act, is amended by inserting ‘equals or’ before ‘exceeds’.

(c) Section 36B(c)(2)(C)(iv) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as added by section 1401(a) of this Act, is amended by striking ‘subsection (b)(3)(A)(ii)’ and inserting ‘subsection (b)(3)(A)(iii)’.

(d) Section 1401(d) of this Act is amended by adding at the end the following:

‘(3) Section 6211(b)(4)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting ‘36B,’ after ‘36A,’.’.

(e)(1) Subparagraph (B) of section 45R(d)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as added by section 1421(a) of this Act, is amended to read as follows:

‘(B) DOLLAR AMOUNT- For purposes of paragraph (1)(B) and subsection (c)(2)--

‘(i) 2010, 2011, 2012, AND 2013- The dollar amount in effect under this paragraph for taxable years beginning in 2010, 2011, 2012, or 2013 is $25,000.

‘(ii) SUBSEQUENT YEARS- In the case of a taxable year beginning in a calendar year after 2013, the dollar amount in effect under this paragraph shall be equal to $25,000, multiplied by the cost-of-living adjustment under section 1(f)(3) for the calendar year, determined by substituting ‘calendar year 2012’ for ‘calendar year 1992’ in subparagraph (B) thereof.’.

(2) Subsection (g) of section 45R of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as added by section 1421(a) of this Act, is amended by striking ‘2011’ both places it appears and inserting ‘2010, 2011’.

(3) Section 280C(h) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as added by section 1421(d)(1) of this Act, is amended by striking ‘2011’ and inserting ‘2010, 2011’.

(4) Section 1421(f) of this Act is amended by striking ‘2010’ both places it appears and inserting ‘2009’.

(5) The amendments made by this subsection shall take effect as if included in the enactment of section 1421 of this Act.

(f) Part I of subtitle E of title I of this Act is amended by adding at the end of subpart B, the following:

That is that complete section.  What a mess that, huh?  And the change is this:

(1) in subsection (b)(3)(A)--

(A) in clause (i), by striking ‘with respect to any taxpayer’ and all that follows up to the end period and inserting: ‘for any taxable year shall be the percentage such that the applicable percentage for any taxpayer whose household income is within an income tier specified in the following table shall increase, on a sliding scale in a linear manner, from the initial premium percentage to the final premium percentage specified in such table for such income tier:

The initial premium percentage is-- The final premium percentage is--
Up to 133%                                     2.0%                              2.0%

133% up to 150%                                3.0%                              4.0% 

150% up to 200%                                4.0%                              6.3% 

200% up to 250%                                6.3%                              8.05% 

250% up to 300%                               8.05%                              9.5% 

300% up to 400%                                9.5%                        9.5%’; and 
(B) by striking clauses (ii) and (iii), and inserting the following:

Let me look to see what this is all about so far.  Section 10105 is not the focus to this segment of the bill.  The focus of the bill is on Section 1401 AND any of the effects as amended by 10105.  So, let get the language from 1401 and 10105 is immediately above so it should make it easy to amend that section in this regard.

‘(b) Premium Assistance Credit Amount- For purposes of this section--



Anyone ever consider that the 'intelligent' discussion of the nation sorta fell apart with the decline of NEWSPRINT?  Anyone ever do a study about that?

One of the changes is this and addresses (i) in that section.

(A) in clause 

This is the OLD wording:

‘(i) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in clause (ii), the applicable percentage with respect to any taxpayer for any taxable year is equal to 2.8 percent, increased by the number of percentage points (not greater than 7) which bears the same ratio to 7 percentage points as--

And  "with respect to taxpayer" is removed.

(i), by striking ‘with respect to any taxpayer’ and all that follows up to the end period  

 This is the rest of that section that is being removed:

‘(I) the taxpayer’s household income for the taxable year in excess of 100 percent of the poverty line for a family of the size involved, bears to

‘(II) an amount equal to 200 percent of the poverty line for a family of the size involved.
And these are the words that replace it:

and inserting: ‘for any taxable year shall be the percentage such that the applicable percentage for any taxpayer whose household income is within an income tier specified in the following table shall increase, on a sliding scale in a linear manner, from the initial premium percentage to the final premium percentage specified in such table for such income tier:

So in other words, the old wording was discarded and there is an 'income tier' that replaces it for TAX CREDITS for health care insurance.  Section 1401 is about the tax credits persons or families can take off their income tax.  They are refundable credits.  That means a consumer pays the premium and then qualifies on their Income Tax for the credits to their TAX based on the table above.  These are monies that come directly off the tax and not off their reportable income.  That is a big difference in the amount of tax paid or refunded.  The tax credit is higher to the taxpayer by applying it this way.  And I am sure everyone understands that aspect.  Right?  Taxes are paid based on income.  If the tax credits were applied to income it would be far, far less than if they were applied to the actual tax paid.  Taking any amount directly off the taxes paid, results in monies directly in their pocket rather than a small percentage of those monies.

To validate that, under Section 1401 it states this:


‘(a) In General- In the case of an applicable taxpayer, there shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by this subtitle for any taxable year an amount equal to the premium assistance credit amount of the taxpayer for the taxable year.

That is applied directly to the taxes paid.  Okay.  Now about the table. 

This is rather incredible.  The percentages are based on the poverty line.  This is from Section 1401:

‘(I) the taxpayer’s household income for the taxable year in excess of 100 percent of the poverty line for a family of the size involved, bears to

That means there are credits for income above the poverty line of 400%. 

The poverty thresholds vary for the size of the family and there is difference from the 48 contiguous states and Alaska and Hawaii..  (Click here and refer to the table for 2009, although I believe there was also a revision for 2010).  These credits start this year, by the way. 

The lowest is for one individual in Alabama in the amount of $10,830.00.  So, a person making  $43,320.00 has a tax credit coming.  Wow.  That is the Middle Class.  It goes up from there.  That is the lowest on this table.

If I am reading that table correctly, the percentage listed is the percentage a person/family has to pay in premiums and the tax credit would be for the rest.  That means someone at the 133% poverty line will only have to pay 2% of their premium cost and someone the 400% of the poverty line would only pay 9.5% of their premium.  Is that right?  Let me read that some more.

These are the provisions for section 1401.  The first two paragraphs are the introduction and definition of the provision.  The provision is actually stated under (b)(2).

‘(b) Premium Assistance Credit Amount- For purposes of this section--

‘(1) IN GENERAL- The term ‘premium assistance credit amount’ means, with respect to any taxable year, the sum of the premium assistance amounts determined under paragraph (2) with respect to all coverage months of the taxpayer occurring during the taxable year.

‘(2) PREMIUM ASSISTANCE AMOUNT- The premium assistance amount determined under this subsection with respect to any coverage month is the amount equal to the lesser of--

‘(A) the monthly premiums for such month for 1 or more qualified health plans offered in the individual market within a State which cover the taxpayer, the taxpayer’s spouse, or any dependent (as defined in section 152) of the taxpayer and which were enrolled in through an Exchange established by the State under 1311 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or

‘(B) the excess (if any) of--
‘(i) the adjusted monthly premium for such month for the applicable second lowest cost silver plan with respect to the taxpayer, over

‘(ii) an amount equal to 1/12 of the product of the applicable percentage and the taxpayer’s household income for the taxable year.

That isn't the amount that has to be paid, the entire cost of the policy is a tax credit.  That percentage table is the percentage of credit give ABOVE the cost of the policy related to percentage of income.

For those income brackets there is help for health care.  The insurance premiums are deductible and there is an additional benefit to help with costs of any nature.  The percentage is what reflected in the table that is provided for those percentage above the poverty line.  Paragraph 2 is very specific.  It states, " the coverage month based on monthly premiums."  The reason the word 'month' is used is because that is how the premium cost is delineated in case there are prorated amounts.  The tax credit is calculated based on monthly costs per twelve months.  So if an insured changes insurance carriers there will be two different premiums to consider in that calculation.

Wow.  I thought everyone was doing good with small percentages to pay.  But, the law takes it further for those income brackets.  It provides help with deductibles and copays.  That is the way I read it.  

I am going to end here for today.  Go get your health care insurance, you'll get your money back.  I read a section that mentioned taxable years 2010, 2011 and 2012, so it seems as though this applies to this year.  However, by reading the Reconciliation Bill first, I might be missing some of the earlier particulars to these paragraphs.  This is some of the kindest laws I have ever witnessed in relation to insuring everyone.  Wow.  I'll discuss this again tomorrow and continue to read.

Sadly, where there are conservatives there is moronity.

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of the Republican gubernatorial primary race in Arizona shows Governor Jan Brewer gaining ground with 26% of likely primary voters now supporting her in a crowded field. 

 This is empty legislation that victimizes police officers as much as it does racial profiling.  It adds an entire dimension to police enforcement that is unrealistic and unenforceable which is the problem with 'individual laws.'

"Individual Laws" are what was at work with the detention camps during WWII.  It generalized Japanese CITIZENS into groups and these 'category' of laws, even for ILLEGAL issues is the same thing.  They add huge populations of people to the responsibility of police enforcement and they are grossly unrealistic.

This law is unconstitutional from the stand point that it assigns work the Federal Authorities of the Immigration Department usually carry out to 'average' law enforcement.  No insult intended, but, it will remove police enforcement from protecting and serving to make them into Immigration Detectives.  THAT IS NOT IN THE JOB DESCRIPTION.

These categories of laws also don't attack the problem which has an etiology in Mexico and NOT the USA.  The drug cartels are the problem as they continue to dominate the priorities of the Mexican government causing widespread impoverishment, violence and movement of large number of citizens over the USA border.  In many instances, the Mexican illegals can be viewed in some ways as 'refugees.'  The difference between refugees in the USA and other countries is that 'camps' aren't obvious and the USA economy can absorb them easier.  So to get back to the Arizona law, the legislature there is completely out of touch with reality and is only grasping at straws to offer the electorate a 'tough guy, take change' image without substance.

The circumstance in Mexico is one of shifting demographics and is taking on an Islamic model of 'wack a mole.'

FACTBOX-Main flashpoints in Mexico's drug war
22 Apr 2010 15:55:53 GMT
Source: Reuters
April 22 (Reuters) - A jump in civilian deaths in Mexico's drug war is hitting support for President Felipe Calderon's army-led crackdown as violence escalates, worrying Washington, scaring away tourists and freezing investment [ID:nN22121855]. Here are some facts about the main flashpoints and the cartels behind the violence that has killed some 22,700 people since Calderon launched his drug war in Dec 2006. CIUDAD JUAREZ The manufacturing city across from El Paso, Texas, has become one of the world's deadliest cities as Mexico's top trafficker, Joaquin "Shorty" Guzman, fights smuggler Vicente Carrillo Fuentes, whose Juarez cartel has controlled the area for more than a decade. Ciudad Juarez is prized by drug gangs for its road and rail links deep into the United States, but Guzman has so far been unable to dislodge the Juarez cartel from the city. Drug killings are escalating to horrific levels with some 5,000 deaths over the past two years.
Then there is that entire mess with Belize that is continuing.  Let me see if I can find the latest insult to that postage stamp country.  Recently a dam was stopped from being built in Bladen Reserve as it is a highly sensitive and environmentally protected area.  Well, Belize has NEVER been covered by Al Jezeera ever before.  I mean NEVER.  Then all of a sudden this shows up.

 I am sincerely concerned this INSISTENCE by outside interests that are normally disconnected from a Belizean interest is being instigated by those from the Belizean past that simply won't give up.  Namely, Ashcroft.  How convenient would it be to have Afghanistan opium come into port in Belize along with weapons for a continuing border war with Guatemala that also facilitates drug cartels in Mexico.  By the way, no one knows where Ashcroft has disappeared to.

Is he in Britain, or in Belize? That Shining Beacon of Tory Sleaze...

It is a great puzzle to me that the Ashcroft affair seems to have died down. In fact no-one seems to know where Ashcroft is: is he in Britain or in Belize, and why has our media lost interest?

Not only is there significant violence in Belize City, Prime Minister Barrow's political office was shot up, too.


April 16, 2010

A shooting incident was reported this afternoon in Belize City. Love News got the details from Police Press Officer Sergeant Fitzroy Yearwood.

BELIZE CITY, Belize, CMC – Prime Minister Dean Barrow said Thursday he was un-phased after his Belize City office building was struck by bullets earlier in the day.
The tourism industry in Belize has suffered incredibly due to the global economic crash of 2008, (WHICH IS ANOTHER REASON TO REGULATE BANKERS - they don't care about anyone, not Americans, not allies, not sensitive countries and their people, NO ONE but their greed ratios.) so there is opportunity for all kinds of trafficking that might not otherwise be an issue.  The people of Belize do not need to be exploited, they have been traumatized enough.  They need 'relief' and it would be helpful for them to receive low cost, high quality food.  That also serves the Belizean government well as they fund their treasury with import taxes.

The real issue is what is the mess now with Al Jezeera and does it bring attention to extremist populations best left in the Middle East than inviting them to the North American and South American continent? 

There are also some oil interests at work in Belize.  The problem with that is the Belizean people never receive revenues from this exploitation to fund their treasury.  Literally, the outside world are like carpetbaggers that simply walk all over a new government. 

Treaty Energy Corporation and Princess Petroleum Limited of Belize Enter Into Joint Venture Agreement

This Business Venture Is to Implement Exploration, Drilling, and Production of Oil and Gas From Onshore and Offshore Blocks in Belize 

April 22, 2010, 12:02 p.m. EDT
HOUSTON, TX, Apr 22, 2010 (MARKETWIRE via COMTEX) -- Treaty Energy Corporation /quotes/comstock/11k!teco (TECO 0.02, +0.00, +7.48%) , a growth-oriented energy company in the oil and gas industry, today announced that it entered into a 50\50 Joint Venture Agreement with Princess Petroleum Limited ("Princess"), a Belize company that is engaged in the business of exploration, development and production of crude oil and natural gas.
Princess Petroleum Limited is a part of The Princess Group International, which is engaged in the development of Hotels, Casinos, and other Real Estate ventures throughout South America, the Caribbean, and Europe. Princess received one of 17 concessions from the government of Belize to explore for oil and natural gas. As part of the joint venture Treaty will have the right to explore for oil and gas on a total of 2,000,000 acres. The concession consists of 1,800,000 acres of off shore exploration, and 200,000 acres of onshore exploration....

So, the point is, that Arizona is NOT assigning the interest it needs to the issue as illegal immigration is much, much larger than simply telling police officers to have a 'round up' while crime rates go up everywhere else with stressed police departments.

Arizona governor to act on sweeping state measure to crack down on illegal immigration(click title to entry - thank you)

Ariz. gov. to act on immigration enforcement bill

A Saturday deadline was set when the legislation landed on her desk Monday. She can sign, veto or allow the bill to become law without her signature.
The sweeping measure gives police new duties to question people about their immigration status in some circumstances, targets hiring of illegal immigrants and creates a state crime for them to not have papers to be in the country illegally.
Arizona has an estimated 460,000 illegal immigrants and is the nation's busiest border crossing point.

The search for 'the missing' continues and the rig sinks. Yeah, environmental issues are huge.

Christy Murray -- sister of Chad Murray, who was rescued from the oil rig that exploded -- talks on the phone at a hotel in Kenner, La. Their father, Stanley Murray, left, talks to other crew members' relatives. (Gerald Herbert/associated Press)

The 'oil well (s)' need to be capped, otherwise, it will continue to leak oil and gas and all kinds of nasty stuff.  If there is an oil slick, besides the environmental damage, it will make it extremely dangerous to carry out a search at all.  The oil slick could ignite.  Then there will be not just an oil spill but a burning sea from smoldering debris.  That would be real interesting a chronically burning oil slick from a well that can't be capped.

...Coast Guard Rear Adm. Mary E. Landry (click here) said crews saw a 1-mile-by-5-mile rainbow sheen with a dark center of what appeared to be a crude oil mix on the surface of the water. She said there wasn't any evidence crude oil was coming out after the rig sank, but officials also aren't sure what's going on underwater. They have dispatched a vessel to check.
The oil will do much less damage at sea than it would if it hits the shore, said Cynthia Sarthou, executive director of the Gulf Restoration Network.
"If it gets landward, it could be a disaster in the making," Sarthou said.
Doug Helton, incident operations coordinator for the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration's office of response and restoration, said the spill is not expected to come onshore in the next three to four days. "But if the winds were to change, it could come ashore more rapidly," he said....

The Amazing Republican Greed Machine - ONE case has absolutely NOTHING to do with another.

While the GOP ramps up the rhetoric in support of Financial Reform, the Republican wings of any financial institution is assaulting the charges against Goldman Sachs.

...two Republican members of the Securities and Exchange Commission (click title to entry - thank you) sharply questioned senior investigators last week about whether the evidence they had assembled was strong enough to file a fraud case against Goldman Sachs, according to current and former SEC officials familiar with the matter.... 

Along with this attack by Republicans over the lawsuit at the SEC, there is this.  It took until now to discover this issue and what indeed has been done about it.  Besides the 'discovery' is non-specific about the number of instances that these PORN surfing incidence took place and the opportunity it was an error.  I also want to know the definition of PORN.  Victoria Secret Catalogues accessed during holiday shopping?  Maxim?  The Bible?

WASHINGTON — Republicans are stepping up their criticism of the Securities and Exchange Commission following reports that senior agency staffers spent hours surfing pornographic websites on government-issued computers while they were supposed to be policing the nation's financial system.
California Rep. Darrell Issa, the top Republican on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said it was "disturbing that high-ranking officials within the SEC were spending more time looking at porn than taking action to help stave off the events that put our nation's economy on the brink of collapse."
He said in a statement Thursday that SEC officials "were preoccupied with other distractions" when they should have been overseeing the growing problems in the financial system.
The SEC's inspector general conducted 33 probes of employees looking at explicit images in the past five years, according to a memo obtained by The Associated Press.
The memo says 31 of those probes occurred in the 2 1/2 years since the financial system teetered and nearly crashed.
The staffers' behavior violated government-wide ethics rules, it says....

The point is that if folks at the SEC are wasting time they were suppose to be working on their own creature pleasures, besides the entire nature of the incidences and whom was actually responsible for allowing them to be accessed at the SEC (Homeland Security Issue) this is a profoundly chronic methodology of Republicans.  When they haven't got a chance to 'beat the charges' they attack the 'character/integrity' of those filing the charges.

I am confident the investigators at the SEC that found fraud with Goldman Sachs have reason to do so and the issue of AVAILABILITY of porn through internet access at the SEC is a separate and different issue than Goldman Sachs fraud.  

The Republicans are underhanded crooks that chronically seek to dismantle the USA JUSTICE infrastructure rather than seeking its integrity when it serves their purpose.  They hate the USA Constitution when it doesn't serve their purpose and 'risks' an assault against their corrupt greed machine.

We have not yet heard from the 'accused' attorneys either.  Wasn't there a recent issue regarding someone at Murdoch's network voyeuring?  They thought nothing of it.  So, let's get down to brass tacks and what 'goes on' when no one is watching including at the GOP. 

All this while the GOP of Nevada offers their electorate and the nation 'Health Care for Chicken Feed.'

...Sue Lowden, a Republican Senate hopeful in Nevada,m (click here) has been widely mocked for earlier this week stating that, "before we all started having health care, in the olden days our grandparents, they would bring a chicken to the doctor, they would say I'll paint your house." "I mean, that's the old days of what people would do to get health care with your doctors," she said. "Doctors are very sympathetic people. I'm not backing down from that system."...

It is Lowden's Sarah Palin moment (Sweet, innocent and that good ole 'female vulnerability to the male.  Even a caveman knows more than a woman does.  "I'll fetch the wood for the stove.  Uggah, uggah."  A little bit winky.).  

It is an opportunity to be recognized as a sincere Tea Bag supporter.  Both she and Gingrich share the same pride for the Tea Baggers, as they basically believe one has to be a moronic extremist in order to gain their support.