This Blog is created to stress the importance of Peace as an environmental directive. “I never give them hell. I just tell the truth and they think it’s hell.” – Harry Truman
(I receive no compensation from any entry on this blog.)
"Okeydoke" The population of Port-Au_Prince before the earthquake struck was 2 million people. A very, very rough estimate is that every family in that area experienced deaths. With about 5 members per family and realizing in some instances nearly entire families have been killed, the body count could go well into the 100s of thousands to even 400,000.
A catastrophic earthquake rocked Haiti this afternoon. The quake measuring 7.3 on the Richter scale struck ten miles southeast of the capital of Port Au Prince. Destruction is reported as being widespread with reports of the presidential palace and even a hospital collapsing. There have been no estimates of fatalities or account of damages but up to 3 million people may have been affected.
And a much weaker quake jolted Guatemala last night. The 4.9 magnitude quake struck 15 miles southwest of Puerto Barrios in Guatemala, 45 miles west of San Pedro Sula Honduras, and close enough to rattle Punta Gorda Town. We also felt it here in Belize City just after 5:00. Francesca Wellington of the Met Office told us more about it.
Francesa Wellington, “Near Barrios, about 20 kilometres southwest of Puerto Barrios at 5:30 yesterday evening an earthquake was experienced and the depth that it went to was 10 kilometres below the surface and the magnitude was 4.9. From calls that we made in Punta Gorda, people felt it but compared to the last earthquake it wasn’t as storng.”
As long as one trusts the process that the monies will be spent prudently, well and responsibly then send money.
There are three hundred million men, women and children in the USA. If there was a single dollar US sent to the relief funds for every person within the citizenship of the USA there would be a trust fund of $300 million US.
Before getting into the 'questions' one has to realize the strategy by the Republican Party is based in 'tried and true' TACTICS used by Bush and Cheney.
The 'uptick' of Brown is due to a huge amount of money coming into the campaign at the 'eleventh hour' ALONG with messages of fear.
The Democrats need to make the effort to 'know' The Independent Voter and not expect them to come to their value system without 'out reach.'
The Independent Voter has no profound 'value system,' except, what is good from them 'at the moment.' They aren't Democrats in disguise. In many ways they are disenfranchised from any political party. They basically don't want to affiliate with anyone because they feel every party is corrupt and they are the only honest folks in the electorate.
They don't understand government, they don't want to understand government, they don't consent to methodologies of government and they would like to remake the entire political structure and begin again. They always see things that way, they always think that way and they always regret voting the way they did after a short while. They also don't learn from their mistakes.
A primary example was Bush in 2004. Many young voters cast their ballot for him because he blatantly stated, "I will not institute a draft." There hadn't been a draft, he was decreasing taxes regardless of their hardship the future would have to carry and they simply wanted a President that would not expand the capacity of the military as we were obviously engaged in an illegal war already. In many ways, the vote of 2004 was an agenda of military containment and nothing else.
Independents have no confidence in anything except what they know and they understand. They like to feel in personal control of their circumstances including the government even after an election. It is silly but true. It is an irrational way of dealing with 'a vote.' Independents have no rudder. They simply 'guess' at what they are being told in election material and through the media and don't engage ANY value system as if it belongs to a party and therefore so do they.
They would like some kind of 'homogenized' party of both Republicans and Democrats, but, simply don't understand how they can't have it after generations of frustration.
IN THE ELECTIONS FOLLOWING THE BUSH YEARS, the Republicans have 'learned' how fear and religious fervor mix well with lies to strike at the 'sense of well being' that will drive people in a direction they previously would not have taken. It is a BLATANT strategy against the electorate and they deployed it in Massachusetts 'on cue.'
When one analyzes Brown's message, it is all based in visceral issues. Health care is 'an intimate' issue and 'security' is a safety issue. They are both hot topics in regard to this administration in DC and the Independent voter is reacting to a lack of belief system, a lack of knowledge and emotional content that tells them 'they are safe in doing things the old way.' The Independent Voter is retreating from reality and promise and hope and returning to exploitation in hopes they can control something they already know about. They are fearing the unknown.
I don't think Brown is even talking about issues that concern Massachusetts either. I mean what has Giuliani got to do with Massachusetts? Clinton, yes, as a former President. Kerry, yes, as a current Senator. Obama, yes, as the current President. Mrs. Kennedy, yes, as a legacy to her late spouse. But. Giuliani? What did he have to say about issues regarding Massachusetts? Not a darn thing. And this is not a run for the Presidency, it is a Senate seat.
How can spending stop increasing debt?
- the electorate now and in the upcoming elections of 2010 is convinced the Democrats are not reliable to trust with their Treasury. It doesn't matter the sound decision making that has gone into any stimulus bill. It doesn't matter they had 'the con' of the century occur in the last Republican administration in the White House, it only matters they are scared of concepts they haven't experienced yet and will retreat to understanding what they know.
How can President Obama sign a bill that does not provide for a public option in order to increase competition?
It doesn't matter that there are other provisions in the bill that will provide competition and options that are similar to a Public Option. It doesn't matter that millions of Americans are without any health care and that could happen to them, too. If they aren't experiencing it, it does not exist and it does not have priority. Independents aren't noble people committed to any philosophy or belief system. They literally go with what they believe is personally noble and POPULAR to them. They don't realize that both Houses of the Legislature have the opportunity to use Reconciliation as a method to pass the bill and customize it to the exact bill we wanted in the first place. They don't stop to realize President Obama is listening to the legislature in what is preceived as a compromise. They don't realize the President may not be able to live up to every campaign promise because of compromised IMPOSED on him by the very legislators in the House and Senate they elected. They'll simply make the same mistake again.
How can any Democrat say the Health Care Bill will pay for itself when it raises taxes on The Middle Class when everyone was promised they would not see tax increases?
This issue is simply a matter of blatant propaganda. There is not one word in that question that is anchored in a truthful issue. This is a 'created for election' issue by the Republicans and can't be answered. It cannot be answered because its premise is all "W"rong. The idea that insurance companies will increase their premiums after the bill is passed because they have to insure the so called uninsurable is a completely wrong premise. The voters see this as a 'tax' as well. Increasing premiums is not a tax, it is an issue WHEN AND IF it ever presents itself. From where I stand there is no taxes created by the Health Care Bill that will impact anyone or couple making less than $200,000 or $400,000 US. So, all this mess about increased costs and taxing the Middle Class is fabricated. There are specific cost containment measures for premiums for helath care that will result after the bill is passed. The question is fabricated. An electorate SHOULD EXPECT to be protected by legislation and not exploited. IF the Health Insurance Industry finds loopholes or words to exploit after the bill is printed, then it needs to be addressed by the government. Legislation is a process. It is a process before a bill is written and it continues after a bill is passed. The entire question is hideous. The American people under Republican domination have become 'used to thinking' they are chronically nieve to their 'FINAL' outcomes. That doesn't have to be the case at all. What the American electorate has to do is to stop retreating to 'what they know' rather than 'venturing' into what hope lies ahead. They have to trust again. That trust will be postponed as long as they continue to be effected by propaganda.
How does any Democrat justify 'special treatment' of any state or political crony like unions?
This is an easy question to answer. To begin, what is a political crony?It is an entity that profits from government monies and/or brings votes to a candidate regardless of the sincere actions of a candidate. States cannot be cronies and organizations cannot be cronies. States and organization are comprised of people that range in all walks of life and socio-economic status. The unions represent workers, the states are government entities, they could never be cronies or privileged unless someone is getting a pay off.No one anywhere in the Health Care Bill is being paid off. AND. Not all states are created equal. There are poor states and wealthy states. It is a fact. It is the OBLIGATION of the federal government to maintain a 'common treasury' to benefit all the people and that sometimes mean carving out benefits for states with poorer incomes to their state and local governments. THAT is a fact. If one wants a blatant example of legislation that awarded monies differently all one has to do is look at the legislation passed under Bush for Homeland Protection monies. The provision for North Dakota is legitimate and very, very constitutional.
Unions are recognized as legitimate bargaining entities that represent the best interests of their members. They are allowed to donate to candidates that represent those member interests. The party is usually the Democrats because the Democrats concern themselves with issues of The Middle and Working Class. The unions are not only allowed to donate to candidates they are allowed to petition government officials when it is perceived legislation is not in the best outcome to their members. That is legal, it is a fact, it is constitutional and it is an obligation of unions to their members. Members pay dues to their unions to carry out those directives. It is just that unions are ostracized by Republican legislators that favor private industry and stockholder profits and a minority of citizens at the top of the income scale in the USA. Unions, by nature, represent a much broader scope of people in culture, income and social status. Unions should have an open door to any legislator as organizations that better represent democracy than any private industry or stockholder ever could.It is wrong to exclude them on sensitive issues that directly effect their members.
Why do I feel as though the promises of the Obama Administration were lies?
They weren't lies. President Obama sits in the Executive Branch and not the dictatorship. Kindly remember that. He doesn't come out everyday to make grandstanding statements to reassure the people of the country as he is 'at work' and not 'at campaigning.' There is something very wrong with any elected authority that acts on insecurity to carry out their office. Not only that, but, President Obama can only hope to have loyality from the legislature. There is every reason to believe he has that loyalty, but, the difficult aspect is achieving bipartisanship on anything. It is the Republicans that have decided it is a political advantage to be the Party of No. If one pays attention to the speeches President Obama makes, they are unwavering 99% of the time. I don't see that he has changed 'his promises' at all since being elected, however, the 'reality' of trying to achieve those promises are now impacted for a variety of reason. The most stark reality for me is not Health Care, but, Afghanistan. Before President Obama took office there was never this level of transparency about Afghanistan and Pakistan. If there was and the fact finding was this through the American people could have impeached the Bush Administration. Bush never lived up to his oath of office and neither did Cheney. Any electorate has to give some latitude to an elected President while accepting the reality of any circumstance as he reports on it. The world is not perfect. President Obama tries to make it so, but, sometimes its not as attainable as we would like. He is a wonderful President and sincerely cares about the people that elected him. I admire him. His response to the Haiti disaster is above and beyond anything that we have witnessed before. He took responsibility and the USA will probably have a presence there for some time to come until a stable government can be returned to Haitian people. What I like best about President Obama is that he is sincere in delegating responsibility and holding those responsible to see their jobs through competently. He also surrounds himself with diversity of views in the highest levels of his cabinet. Bush never did. Bush and Cheney isolated their positions and surrounded themselves with 'Yes men.'
Rove has gone 'belly up' in trying to remove doubt to the competency of The Republicans. He is chronically lying and using 'demeanor' as a method to control the lies.
He made a statement that gave me the best laugh I had all day.
He stated, through the 'POWER' of the Murdoch rag, the Wall Street Journal he would set the world straight about the Democrats.
Okay. Right.
The statement went like this...
"Obama states that Bush never paid for anything including the Medicare Drug Benefit. Well, neither did they." He stated "...neither did they." over and over and over as if it were a legitimate excuse for 'fiscal irresponsibility' by the Bush White House.
The beautiful part of that statement is that it indicts Bush's Administration by admitting first they were fiscally irresponsible and somehow the Obama Administration is their equivalent.
It was amazing to watch and realize the stupidity in his words. Simply amazing.
...there is such a thing as self preservation. Both the media and the rescue workers are safe. The emergency is not happening to them it is happening to others. There is no blame to be laid for worse than optimal outcomes. The odds were stacked against these people long before this ever occurred. Those odds were dictated for many reasons, but, they were not dictated 'for the trying.'
Rest is a good thing, too. There is nothing anyone working with these people can do in a depleted state of readiness. Working around the clock isn't going to benefit anyone.
Everyone is doing a magnificent job and it is obvious in all the reports there is a profound concern for all those suffering.
This is ONLY the third day. Tomorrow will bring more opportunity to turn the odds in the favor of the Haitian people. A month from now the odds will be better and better and in a year from now there will be infrastructure that will return a form of government and function to their society.
It is only our hope the best outcome occurs, but, there is no guarantee, there IS only trying in the best methods we know how. Thinking one has 'left something out' that would have turned the corner earlier is incompetent thinking. This is an impossible set of circumstances.
USAID is doing a wonderful job of coordinating. What they might not realize yet is they have to take over the role of a missing government until one is re-established.
If such a tragedy occurred in the USA, the people of this country would be able to 'figure it out.' The people of Haiti can't and they react with instinct and criminality.
If I may?
The Haitian people speak languages, of course they do, but they don't have a national language regarding emergency response. In that, they sincerely lack 'the culture' of emergency that facilitates 'cognitive' behavior BEFORE 'fight and flight' sets in.
They believe they have been abandoned by 'the caregivers' they had before this earthquake. They don't 'reason' that the folks and infrastructure that cared for them before was as human and vulnerable to death and injury as they have been. They expect their 'caregivers' to show up regardless.
The culture of Haiti never included emergency response. Example:
In the USA, when a person is 'on fire' for whatever reason a person would be on fire, the CULTURE of EMERGENCY instilled in a person from a young age tells that person to overcome 'instinct' to run and to STOP, DROP AND ROLL.
IT IS COUNTER INTUITIVE. It takes a lot of culture to have a young person 'accept' instruction from teachers to be counter intuitive, but, the American people are taught from very early ages to control their instincts and react in a way that will garner 'success' over 'emergency.'
The Haitian people not only don't have the culture, they don't have the language and are not empowered to reason through their circumstances. They are quite used to caregivers to provide for them. This tragedy will see secondary consequences because of the lack of 'emergency culture' within that society.
If I were there and trying to get aid to people that have moved beyond reason, this is what I would try to do.
I would not maintain control in distribution as NGOs are accustom to doing. I would find an abandoned area of the city or place where people are known to be near. Empty as many of the supplies in that area as possible as quickly as possible utilizing as large an area as possible. I would then leave. But, before I would leave I would set up an apparatus or 'loud speaker' to direct attention to the location of the supplies. Then as I was leaving through an established and safe exit route I would fire off flares to raise the attention of people in the area.
By placing supplies over a large area it will allow greater opportunity for more people to access the supplies. The loud speakers could explain the supplies, the quality of the supplies and how they can be used best. The distribution would be random with greater opportunity to more people as a plan to these sites. The people will carry out a 'street strategy' but they will eventually begin to get the 'idea' they are alone in their ability to cope. In that, they will have to come to realize they cannot carry weapons and there must be ample opportunity for all to remain calm and receive care.
Right now, they see a truck full of supplies and believe it is the only truck in that capacity and violence breaks out to take as much of the supplies as possible a person can horde. They don't realize there are warehouses full of supplies available to them that will be continuous.
The truth they also don't realize is that a fairly short walking distance of about 5 to 6 miles there is no or far less devastation. They only know their reality and they believe all of the country is in the same condition.
That is the good news. The bad news is that there are people still surviving in the city and amongst the rubble that have to be reached and cannot move to obtain their care. They will perish if those causing violence continue to do so making it unsafe to workers to make in roads to survivors. What I am concerned about is that those engaged in violence will try to form an encampment and hence a militia and then there will be real issues that the USA military will have to confront. It would be better if people's needs were met and they began to think about a different reality. These folks don't understand their own actions threaten their lives and the lives of the people that are weak they may be trying to save.
It is my opinion that with such an abundant amount of supplies already in Haiti, it is imprudent to try to control the distribution so much as allowing it to happen. I mean where is it going to go? At this point, considering we are attempting to have them survive, the supplies are theirs to destroy even that is their directive. They are a tough bunch to try to save from themselves.
I debate whether to discuss Haiti first and then the media covering Haiti or the other way around?????
I think Haiti first, then the media covering Haiti, then Rove and finally Massachusetts. Rove by the way is over. He isn't saying one word that is true, he is manipulating through demeanor alone and he is 'on the run' from the fact The Republican Party during his tenure was corrupt and out of control.
Haiti first. I'll keep my perspective short and to the point. At least I'll try.
If financial institutions can place 'Credit Scores' on consumers regardless the country then we can do the same thing.
For every contractor that ever enters into government contracts there needs to be a 'Credibility Score' that is recognized as the ability of such entities to actually achieve their goals within the definitions of the contract.
There is no reason why within the USA, the Government Accounting Office is NOT scoring all the companies that does work for the people of this country. I would imagine a State Level accountability initiative is possible as well.
The Credibility Score would measure the quality of materials, the quality of the workman, the outcome of the product and the extent 'the goal' of the contract was met to increase the infrastructure or services to citizens.
Not difficult and the USA GAO can even provide ways for contractors to improve their scores. Any contractor that has caused injury, death or environmental deterioration can immediately be relieved and removed from any future government opportunities.
THAT is Constitutional. Anything short of it, is NOT !
In the case of an International Credibility Score, in countries where there is impoverishment there needs to be included for those contractors in particular, an 'apprentice' and 'journeyman/woman' component of the 'visited' country's citizens. The purpose is to improve the infrastructure of the country over time as a measure of good will and diplomacy. The citizens have to be proven to be from within the country or returning to the country with a measurable amount of improvement in their personal circumstances. It also upholds the integrity of the sovereignty of the 'visited' country.
It is safe to say the methodology Republicans use to justify their very existence is not constitutional under USA law and certainly a danger to most cultures in the world.
Above is the headquarters of Halliburton in Dubai. It is safe to say Halliburton is a Poster Child for corporations that rose to 'power' (not esteem) during the 30 years of Republican domination in the USA. Halliburton has proved itself UNWORTHY of government contracts in the USA, in Iraq and I would anticipate the United Nations to begin a list of 'troubled assets' of countries throughout the world.
Halliburton was given 'no bid' contracts to save Cheney from being sued as their former CEO, showed up in Iraq with some of the most shoddy work a construction company could pull off killing Iraqis and USA military as well. It then 'moved on' to Dubai where its Executives 'abandoned' personal debt when Dubai fell into fiscal difficulties. Nearly overnight the Halliburton Expatriots found themselves comfortably back in Houston, Texas.
Halliburton no longer has a 'sustainable' reputation and the only means it has to sustain at all is when it presents as a legitimate contractor with unblemished accomplishments to government contracts. It can manipulate its poor management, which started under the leadership of Dick Cheney, to later cast off HBR as 'its problem' while changing none of its work ethic. The management stayed the same and its exploitative 'character' went on to places like Saudi Arabia.
When will companies PROVEN to be undesirable actually be ostraciized into oblivion on the global stage? Never? Will their CEOs simply retire in comfort after scalping the 'public trust' of billions in their 'tenure at the top' or should there be 'real life' consequences for even attempting to carry away immoral profits from a country's treasury?
I believe those CEOs that have garnered the reputation of being incompetent costing nations and their treasuries hardship, regardless of that definition as measured in fiscal assets or human assets, should be listed to the extent they have been toxic to global activities and outcomes.There are many, many instances where that is true, including environmental atrocities that have caused not only damage to the natural world, but, cancers and human deaths.
What exists today in the wake of the former Republican Regime in the USA are corporations with bloated treasuries that have occurred through power plays and fear mongering. It has to stop. Listing these corporations and their CEOs as global entities with undesirable outcomes in their contracts will begin to inhibit their growth and ultimately will remove them from the world stage of exploitation.
Government contracts are 'an entity' that are only monitored by loose associations with accountability offices. It is extremely easy for corporations to take advantage of a country where the realization of their activities do not show up for many, many years and then too late to do anything about it. The Global Community has to have a resource whereby activities of these companies can be known before the fact so tragedy and exploitation can be minimized and stopped.
A country such as Haiti is a prime 'target' for companies seeking monies unfairly. Its leadership may not have the abilities to monitor the activities of these entities and may not even realize there is something grossly wrong with their conduct until too late. If the people of the Third World are to be removed from poverty and use by networks of violence, their governments have to be able to access companies with good reputations and known ability to work within infrastructure to bring about improvements the people need. Measurable and sustaining improvements that are gone with the next wind that blows through.
And lastly, within the political infrastructure of the USA lies a powerful party that has not only ideologies that are toxic to the electorate that sides with them, but, also seeks to destroy the government of the USA for its own purposes. There is no way the USA, with 300 million inside of its borders and a reputation on a global scale can ever shrink its 'government structure' so much to disintegrate vital services to communities, including education and health care, without realizing it is outside the boundaries of its very Constitution.
The USA Constitution provides for a FUNCTIONING infrastructure that enhances its methods of democracy. To allow a political entity to deceive and lie in order to gain prominence based in unattainable goals is a travesty to the people of this country. It also sets no example to other governments and political parties to an example of how best to 'carry out corruption.'
The Republican Party is a toxic asset in the USA and should never be allowed once again to influence the outcomes of the USA military or its domestic policies that literally robs generations of their Treasury assets. That 'BRAND' has to be placed solidly on that party without the ability to be erased.
The United States of America is about being 'cutting edge,' providing opportunity and providing defense to itself and its allies. It is called sovereignty. Today the USA has a questionable sovereignty and there are indications that President Obama indeed has removed the dissolution of that sovereignty since taking office.
The point is, the eight years of the Bush/Cheney Regime should be 'witness enough' to prove the danger such a political entity that is 'too big to fail' has on the very sovereignty of its government. The multi-party system is a good system, but, needs to be guarded from political media that seeks to 'steer' a 'certain' direction of the electorate. The political media under Bush/Cheney became a 'toxic asset' itself and needs to be stopped.
Denial of what occurred during the years 2000 - 2008 is NOT an option, regardless of the political bargaining that has gone on during that time to secure 'the freedoms' of those that participated.
There is a lot that has to happen in Haiti to secure the lives of people living along the fault between the huge North American Plate and the far, far smaller Caribbean Plate. It will happen again. No telling when and to simply have an 'alarm system' in place to warn of an earthquake won't solve the problem either.
To begin the worst that can happen here is for corruption through government contracts to take place and give these people even worse conditions to live in than they had before. That said, it is best for the USA to offer the services of the much maligned Army Corp of Engineers to help with any return to 'buiding' again. Until that 'legitimacy' takes place within the country the USA government is best to help establish 'buildings' again. There is no need for any country to rush into government contracts that will ultimately not serve the Haitian people in a productive way.
There is a reason why 'huts' sometimes work best in tropical paradise for citizens that cannot afford to live in quake proof hi-rises. And that is the 'best' venue for building in Haiti. Condos. Hi-rise condos that are quake proof. Significantly, quake proof.
But, before that occurs the Haitian people need an economy. In this case, I don't really think I would mind outsourcing American jobs in customer service to the people there. It would be a start for them with a vigor import business where the government derives income from 'import taxes.'
Imports that would include food and clothing items. China would be a good partner to the lower cost imports to serve their people. There needs to be schools for children and adults. Adult learning centers that focus on 'marketable skills' to move into functional condos that would insure their lives in a far better manner than any other masonry existing today. I don't see George W. Bush bringing in Halliburton to help either.
The people of Haiti need 'quality' improvements to their lives and infrastructure, NOT, exploited ones and Republican cronies have a long history of exploiting 'third world' people, heck they exploit the USA military, instead of being 'constructive.'
If the world governments are to be successful in Haiti to 'secure' the people away from such disaster, the United Nations needs to ask for 'an overview and plan' for reconstruction. The United Nations needs to 'set standards' and 'required building materials' for construction within Haiti. This should not be an opportunity for 'contracts for money' necessarily, so much as 'contracts of compassion' whereby profits after expensives are returned to the Haitian government.
This country has been ignored long enough and now we have one of the worst disasters known to human history on our hands. Thousands upon thousands dead. The Haitian people need answers and not more problems.I would hope the United Nations would exert extreme oversight to all that is to transpire there and that might mean putting a hold on projects for reassurance to the QUALITY of the work.
This is not a matter of rhetoric. It is a matter of experience and known reputation. The people of Haiti need to have skills including construction skills taught to them. If the Haitians are building their infrastructure they will be sure they are safe from any kind of disaster to this proportion again. And the quakes will occur again and again and again in the history of this country.
I have great hopes for a people their Prime Minister believes are 'sturdy' people that will come through this disaster with hope for their futures. I would dearly expect a compassion 'global community' to see to it that such a future insures its well being and not just efforts to 'tidy up' the place from time to time.
This needs to be the last time such a huge disaster ever strikes Haiti. I am confident their people will desire a better future than simply 'live through one.' We need 'severe' GLOBAL MORAL POLICE to insure these people are secured from disaster. I would hope that would be effortless for most of the countries on Earth. No squandering of Haiti's assets through global generosity. They are counting on us to be vigilant to their best outcomes. Thank you.
And no more of this. Dust is bad for the lungs and bad for the environment, especially, if the Haitians are to practice good conservation with restoration efforts to their biotic content for the benefit of tourism. The Haitian nation can contribute to the Global Carbon Sinks and help with Human Induced Global Warming.
It eventually was going to come to pass, that the dread China held against Falun Gong was going to be an asset in the cyber age.
Members of the Falun Gong have been notorious in China for their agility with internet skills to bring focus to oppression in China. There were many attacks in the USA for a long time by members of this religious cult. Their members were imprisoned and it only makes sense that China would eventually make them an asset to their 'spy network.' The members are very gifted in maneuvering around the worldwide web and now they probably do work for the government through lucrative contracts. China never had to train them. They were trained through years of activism. For all I know, the Falun Gong cult was trying to sell their skills to the Chinese government, but, only in recent years since Google entered the market place there have they been worth anything to the Chinese government as spies.
China needs to take 'ownership' of the fact there have been cyber attacks 'globally' from within its borders and the recent being directed at the intelligence infrastructure of the USA military that has threatened the USA's national security.
Hello? Denial won't get them anywhere. This has been a long time problem and the attacks can be traced right back into China.
The Chinese government has entered into what they want to hide as benign 'hacking' and mischievous citizens, but, its time that both the USA and China come to terms through written diplomatic documents there are issues and they need to be solved. China can no longer deny they are oppressing their citizens from educating themselves to the history of activism within that country. It is long lived and has been oppressed from the culture for quite some time now.
The truth is the Chinese government was never able to oppress the activism within their own borders. It has been passed down for generations now by word of mouth. Local legend, if you will. Just because it wasn't official doesn't mean it didn't exist. The Chinese want to maintain a facade of 'innocence' to such episodes and for awhile they could, but, when the hacking serves 'the purposes' of official government knowledge about American intelligence assets, it no longer is a legitimate stand.
China is either going to embrace the sophistication of its people, move out of the way of progress and allow freedom of expression or it will regress to an isolated giant with few legitimate secure internet ties to the real world. China has existed regardless of oppression, NOT, because of it. It is time for China to throw off its insecurities and believe in the abilities of its people. Spying is not a dignified identity for Chinese cyber talent.It is not like it is a 'giant leap.' All China has to do is stand out of the way of its people and the information they crave. It seems far too late for them to do otherwise anyway. The Chinese government needs to recognize the 'long lived' freedoms of the Chinese people through 'innate talents' that have existed for decades now. It is silly not to 'go there.'
The 'information age' is an economy all to itself. Just think of the books that will be sold that were never sold before and the infrastructure that can be built in the most distant provinces when 'education' can take place at the click of a mouse. It is time China got out of its own way and provided amusement for its people through modern day approaches to technology. Just think of the modern farming techniques alone the people of China can learn through government sponsored education? China is inhibiting its own abilities while stopping the progress of its peaceful people.
It was never 'permission' its populous wanted, it was 'to proceed.' Russia is proof that a communist government can exist in the cyber age and thrive as well. There is absolutely no reason for China to remain 'removed' from its own 'truth,' now is there? It is simply 'fear' that prevents the well being of the Chinese citizen to include internet access and information. Their history is probably known to them, but, simply 'pretend' to ignore it for the benefit of the 'integrity' of its government. The Chinese people want a 'noble' relationship with its government, not a covert one. The Chinese government hasn't got anything to lose by being open and honest, but, simply to embrace all forms of their cultural experience. The Truth really isn't a threat to any government, simply a transition.
It would seem as though someone has gone missing within the massive infrastructure that is China. Let's hope no one has hurt him. That can't be good. The Chinese government needs to address the fears that exist within its culture and stop this silliness among its people.
Colleagues concerned about China rights lawyer (click title to entry -thank you)
(AFP) – 3 hours ago
BEIJING — Chinese lawyers and a US-based rights group on Friday demanded that Beijing police locate a prominent attorney who disappeared in September, seven months after being taken into custody.
According to the US-based ChinaAid rights group, the family of Gao Zhisheng was recently told by police that the lawyer went "missing" in September, prompting fears by the group that he was beaten to death in prison.
"It is totally unacceptable for the Chinese government to lose track of their own prisoner," said ChinaAid's president Bob Fu.
"It is absolutely clear that he was forcibly taken from his home in February 2009. Nearly a year later, the Chinese government now says they do not have him."
According to ChinaAid, the police officer that took Gao into custody recently told Gao's brother, Gao Zhiyi, that the lawyer has been "missing" since September 25.
Repeated phone calls by AFP to Gao's brother were not answered Friday. Colleagues of the lawyer also said they could not contact the family....
WASHINGTON -- Democratic congressional leaders, intensifying the health-care drive in marathon White House talks yesterday, are considering a new strategy to help finance their plan -- applying the Medicare payroll tax for the first time not just to wages but to capital gains, dividends and other forms of unearned income.
The move could placate labor leaders who bitterly oppose President Barack Obama's plan to tax high-end insurance policies that cover many union members. It could help shore up Medicare's own shaky finances. And the new tax would fall primarily on affluent Americans, not the beleaguered middle class.
The concept also carries political risks: Many older Americans, one of the nation's most potent voting blocs, could see their tax bills rise because they often rely on savings and investment income in retirement.
House and Senate Democratic leaders worked throughout the day and into the night yesterday in talks with Obama and his top lieutenants.
Late yesterday, the president joined House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in a written statement after daylong talks among senior Democratic leaders at the White House, saying that they have made "significant progress" toward reaching a final health-care deal.
The White House wants Obama to sign a bill in time for his State of the Union address next month....
The Republicans will complain that an additional Medicare tax on capital gains, dividends and other unearned income will hurt business.
It is unjust to have ONLY the working class of the USA pay a tax for Medicare.How many Americans didn't know those that worked for a living were the only ones paying for Medicare through payroll tax? I am sure there are plenty.
Income is income and there is no reason why anyone with income should not be paying taxes to support Medicare spending.
And most of all I don't want to hear 'word one' complaining from Wall Street. I heard it all yesterday and they deserve no respect.
One of the 'gems' of Wall Street called the fiscal disaster of 2008 an equivalent to an act of God, namely a hurricane.
I don't think so.
The the other gem stated, JP Morgan Chase Chief Executive Officer Jamie Dimon said, "using tax policy to punish people is a bad idea. All businesses tend to pass their costs onto customers."
Customers? Like the small business loan customers you all service so eagerly? You mean those customers?
Or the homeowners you eagerly refinanced after the bailout? Or the house buyers receiving mortgages today that your furnish in abundance. You mean those customers?
Ask me what I care if the federal government taxes all of you 'out the #%*@*%$*# !!!!!!
Maybe after the nation has reasonable health care costs and there is a Treasury Surplus and our children will have a good quality of life with quality employment, THEN, there can be complaints about taxes,...
Banks were provided with a service that should not be counted simply in terms of protection schemes
Monday 11 January 2010 20.15 GMT
The Obama administration seems to be roughly where the UK government was about three months ago. It sees the public anger about bankers' bonuses and it recognises that the banks have had an enormous leg-up from taxpayers. Even the White House grumbles about banks "not getting it" sound like Alistair Darling's. Yet the administration is struggling to find the right policy response. The latest version – offered in vague terms, it should be said – envisages a fee on financial institutions to recoup the cost of the bailout.
The obvious difficulty here is that banks might try to pass on the cost of the fee to customers or investors, who in various guises tend to be taxpayers themselves. That's a real danger, of course, but the notion of a fee deserves to be applauded....
Oh.
By the way. For all those objections regarding the Windfall Tax?
Murdoch BOUGHT Sarah Palin. To begin why isn't she on special assignment in Haiti? I guess sitting with Beck and the rest of the Bozos and talking 'hate' to their viewers is more important. And talk about putting words in her mouth. The 'interrogators' are polishing her for her next act as a candidate somewhere.
It's over for Sarah. She burned huge bridges. She is BATE. Then Murdoch will play 'Bate and Switch' with the electorate. FOX is trying to 'hook' the people that purchased her book for political ambitions.
They don't care about Palin, they care about power. And the Tea Party Movement isn't about politics, it is about hate. The more hate they can build the more chance they can actually sponsor some real acts of terror against the country.
Seriously.
They are bigots. There leader is openly racist. He is all about raising hate to a level of intolerable so people with guns will act on it.
He is not quite as bad as the KKK. Not quite, but, close.
I feel bad for Sarah. She did it all wrong. Completely wrong. She didn't care enough about her career to really plot a course for herself. She allowed a party desperate for a 'wind change' to use her.
She has no qualifications and is doing exactly what every other Republican has done for decades. She is becoming a fool for rhetoric and is willing to be polished to lie even better than she did before.
I would never want to be a member of the Republican Party and to be a candidate has to be worse. They are extremists. Show me one Republican that actually votes in a 'reasonable' fashion.
Murdoch will promote her and use all the power available to him to achieve some demented goal.
What is occurring with Sarah has been occurring for a long time. She is becoming a toy for Murd0ch and Rush Limbaugh. They will pull the strings of the electorate for her and in turn she will bend to their will. She will be at their beckon call from now on. There is going back. Not even Wasilla wants her anymore. She has no 'home' to go home to except Murdoch and his maniacal gaming.
He voted against an interim Senator, didn't want to change the Presidential Primary Date.
And this is something I don't see as being a valuable vote at all. He voted against a "Life Science Bill."
Huh? What is so objectionable about the future of medicine?
These are not huge expenditures. This is a bill that allocates valuable spending over ten years. Ten years. This is prudent spending as it invests in the future. I don't think this guy is too smart. He is a 'position voter' and doesn't care about people and if this doesn't prove it, don't ask me what does.
H 4554: Bill providing for the investment in and expansion of the life sciences industry in the Commonwealth. (click title to entry - thank you)
- Allocates $120 million for the Massachusetts Life Sciences Opportunity Relocation and Expansion Jobs Capital Program Fund (Sec. 2).
- Allocates $95 million for a life sciences laboratory research center complex at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst (Sec. 2).
- Allocates $90 million for Albert Sherman Center at the University of Massachusetts Medical School in Worcester. The center will include an RNAi Institute, stem cell biology cluster, cord blood bank and a gene therapy cluster (Sec. 2).
- Provides $5 million in loan guarantees to small businesses through the Small Business Capital Access Program (Sec. 2).
- Allocates $12.6 million for highway 93 interchange construction and maintenance (Sec. 2).
- Allocates $12.9 million for water and wastewater infrastructure for a proposed cell culture manufacturing facility in Framingham (Sec. 2).
- Allocates $6.5 million for the development of a life science incubator building in Pittsfield (Sec. 2).
- Allocates $10 million to the University of Massachusetts Lowell for a nano and biomanufacturing facility (Sec. 2).
- Provides a one-time grant of $9.5 million to the Tufts’ Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine (Sec. 23).
The Republicans are dumping big money into this guy because he is glamorous.
I mean for real here.
He hasn't done anything for the people of Massachusetts except be a member of the party of NO.
We can start with his hostility against women.
His 'stand' isn't about abortion, it is about cruel and unusual punishment of women that have been raped. That was RAPED. Got it? Pure unadulterated hostility against women. He can't remember all of a sudden that he made such a stand? Oh, really. Sorry, but, I wouldn't want to take the chance he would 'do it again' after he remembers. Republicans are liars. Nothing, but, liars. They 'play position politics.' No pun intended.
Yvonne Abraham
Brown’s failure (click title to entry - thank you)
By Yvonne Abraham Globe Columnist
January 14, 2010
I don’t know what’s worse: that Scott Brown tried to weaken a law guaranteeing emergency contraception to rape victims, or that he now claims he can’t remember doing it. Or maybe it’s that, now that he’s running for US Senate, he’s dragging his daughters into the controversy to protect himself....
All of a sudden he has a lot of money coming into his campaign. Where did it come from? Long time backers? Or opportunists?
GOP Senate hopeful Scott Brown (click here) is outspending Attorney General Martha Coakley in television and radio ads as his campaign forges ahead in the general election, a Democratic source told the Herald yesterday.
Although he began the campaign as an underfunded long shot struggling to catch up to Coakley’s robust fund-raising operation, Brown was bolstered by an online cash drive that raked in a whopping $1.3 million in a day, according to his campaign.
“As of today, he will have outspent Martha Coakley’s campaign,” said the source....
That position is not his only failure in the political spectrum. Allow me.
In the Massachusetts State Senate his voting record is a failure. He, only on an occassion voted effectively for his constituencies. He is a member of 'The Party of No." He doesn't have 'policies,' all he has going for him is politics. We have seen these Republicans before, they aren't interested in people, they are interested in power.
Now, unless the entire Massachusetts State Legislature is going to be thrown out on their ear next election or the people of the state have been up in arms for the past four years, it would be the most foolish thing people could do to vote him into a federal seat for Massachusetts. He is 'anti-people' and always votes in opposition of measures that have passed, except, for a very rare occasion. He isn't good for people.
In total he has about a 20% success rate. Of the following 40 or so legislative initiative he only voted successfully 8 times. And it isn't just that he voted successfully and well, it was issues and the bills that passed he opposed that are important. He is dangerous. He practices politics and not policy. That is a real of direction change for the people of Massachusetts. They don't care about themselves anymore? This is not suppose to be about politics, this is about having an effective legislator 'across the board' for the people of the state.
This isn't a game. People should not be toying with folks. He is. Definitely.
Budget, Spending and Taxes (click here)- He voted three times with measures that passed. That was three times out of 8 legislation issues. That is a 37.5 % success rate. People or politics?
Civil Liberties and Civil Rights – He voted one time successfully here.That is a 33% success rate.Politics.He isn’t interested in being effective.He manipulates his constituency on ‘TYPICAL Republican ideologies’ and delivers NOTHING.
