May 10, 2008

Tasers pose potentially fatal health risks that studies proving their safety don’t take into account, a U.S. doctor told the B.C. taser inquiry yesterday.

San Francisco cardiologist and electrophysiologist Zian Tseng became interested in the use and effects of tasers after a taser-related death in San Francisco in January, 2005. In an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle, Dr. Tseng suggested tasers could induce cardiac arrhythmia.

“Shortly thereafter I was contacted by [Taser International, Inc.] directly to reconsider my statements to the media,” he said. “They even offered to … give me grant money for research.”

Much of the scientific justification for the safety of tasers is based on formulae that don’t examine their use in the “real world,” Dr. Tseng said.

“What’s not allowed in these theoretical calculations are worst-case scenarios,” he said. “Tolerability in healthy volunteers under optimal conditions does not mean safety.”

Many of the most commonly cited studies that show the devices are safe were financed by Taser International, Dr. Tseng said. Several of the authors of a 2005 study are Taser employees.

Many of these studies use simulated stun guns rather than tasers themselves, and a study on humans monitored only the subjects’ heart rate before and after the shock - not during it, which is when other studies have shown that heart rates were most dramatically disrupted.

The ability of tasers to disrupt a person’s heart rate fatally increases if the weapon’s barbs are embedded close to the heart or if the subject is affected by high adrenalin, heart disease, drug use or high blood acidity, Dr. Tseng said.

Several people have died after taser-related incidents in Canada since the devices were introduced in 1999, but no autopsy has found them responsible. Dr. Tseng said a fatal arrhythmia caused by a taser wouldn’t show up in an autopsy.

“If somebody dies and they find no cause of death, it’s almost certainly an arrhythmic death,” he said, adding that tasers can affect a person’s heartbeat long after the event.

Dr. Tseng said tasers may be able to play a role in law enforcement, but the way they’re used should be re-examined. He recommended police avoid tasering subjects near the chest area and carry “dummy-proof” automatic external defibrillators with them to ensure they can aid anyone who goes into cardiac fibrillation.

B.C. sheriff services Superintendent Paul Corrado and senior use-of-force instructor Greg Ducharme presented the B.C. sheriffs’ policy on taser use. They’ve been using tasers to assist in prisoner management since 2001.

Sheriffs don’t routinely carry tasers and have to be trained beforehand, Supt. Corrado said, but they aren’t told of any safety risks.

The presentations were part of a “study commission” headed by former Appeal Court judge Thomas Braidwood looking into taser use in the province. It’s the first part of a provincial taser inquiry; the second part will focus on the death of Robert Dziekanski after he was tasered in Vancouver International Airport in October, 2007.

GlobeandMail.com

By Geoffrey Lean
Sunday, 11 May 2008

Ministers have given permission for thousands of GM potatoes to be grown in Britain, a decision that is bound to provoke a new confrontation with environmentalists.

Hilary Benn, the Secretary of State for the Environment , has agreed to let scientists at Leeds University cultivate the potato, which has been engineered to resist eelworm, in a trial over the next three years in a test field near Tadcaster, North Yorkshire. The GM Freeze protest group is considering taking legal action.

The move follows repeated clashes over a different experimental GM potato, modified against blight, in Britain last year. Trials had to be abandoned following protests by environmentalists and local farmers.

The scientists, from Leeds University’s Faculty of Biological Sciences, are to grow around 1,200 potato plants at Headley Hall farm, near Tadcaster. They have added a gene to the potato’s roots that is designed to give it resistance to eelworm – which costs British farmers around £645m a year in lost yields and pesticide costs.

Pete Riley, of GM Freeze, is particularly worried about the inclusion of a gene that confers resistance to the antibiotic neomycin, which he says could interfere with its medical effectiveness.

IndependentUK

Bob Chapman
May 10 2008

Gold goes up, and the stock markets come down. At the risk of sounding like Jim Nabors’ character, USMC Private Gomer Pyle, we comment on this latest development by exclaiming: “Surprise, surprise, surprise! Shazam!” Yes, that severe case of yellow fever that the stock markets don’t seem to be able to shake is back with a vengeance as super-yen keeps jumping out of the Japanese bankers’ closets to fight against truth, justice and the American way by creating a carry trade liquidity drain to force liquidations of metals positions held mainly by large specs many of which have yet to wean themselves off of their carry trade crack addictions, although we might add that those protective derivatives we have been recommending for almost a year now must be helping.

On Friday gold went on a rampage, got slammed by the cartel and then slammed the cartel back. Gold rocketed $20 per ounce from Thursday’s close of $869.60 to reach as high as $889.50, which gave the cartel a collective myocardial infarction, so the cartel struck back, driving gold down almost $19 per ounce to about $870.95. Then gold came roaring back to close up almost $14 per ounce from its low, finishing at $884.50. This means that the negative impact of the liquidity drain caused by the yen-hit was completely undone as gold reversed the would-be destruction leveled at it by the cartel, gaining back almost everything that the original cartel onslaught had taken away. There’s nothing like having yen longs against the dollar and the euro and stock index puts to reverse the intended damage to carry trade liquidity which the cartel tried to wreak this week.

Note that last week Friday, at 2:05 PM EDT, the yen stood at 105.711 yen per dollar and 162.915 yen per euro, while on that day the Dow finished at 13,058.20 and gold closed at 856.35. So now this week gold starts to push upward, reaching as high as $889.50 on Friday, and closing up $33 per ounce from last week’s close on its quest to push past $900 again. As a result, the cartel goes into panic mode and asks their evil toadies in Japan to call on super-yen for another performance. The result: By Friday the yen strengthens to 102.886 yen per dollar and to 159.203 yen per euro as of 2:45 PM EDT, as the Dow gets leveled down to 12,745.88. So the cartel cashed in on 312 Dow points of market-crashing power, only to have gold gain $33 per ounce while silver temporarily cleared 17 again. The Illuminati must be really glad that they destroyed the stock markets for nothing, and have in fact helped gold’s cause by enhancing its value as a safe-haven.

So much for yen manipulations. After super-yen went up, up and away, so did gold, while the stock markets went down in flames! It doesn’t get any better than that! Super-yen has just been exposed to kryptonite, aka protective derivatives, making it powerless against gold. The yen-hits have become little more than a nuisance to gold as the US economy crashes and burns and gold becomes the safe-haven of choice over treasuries which are denominated in a doomed fiat currency known as the dollar.

If the American public wants oil prices to come down, the easiest solution is simply to buy gold and silver by the truckload. Wait until you see how far the cartel can drive oil prices down when gold blows past 1000 on its way to 2000! Forget energy alternatives, which will take years to implement. Just exchange some of your “worthless paper” for the only real money and we absolutely guarantee that oil prices will drop like a rock no matter how much OPEC yells and screams. Then OPEC will imminently threaten to break their dollar pegs and all hell will break loose unless the Fed strengthens the dollar and purges the economy. And if the Fed does not support the dollar, hyperinflation and double-digit rates of return will immediately destroy the US economy as the dollar pegs are broken. The economy is going to get destroyed anyway, so for the public, the sooner that occurs the better, because the longer this charade goes on, the deeper our fall will be. And if we wait too long, a major depression far worse than any economic debacle in our entire history is assured, a depression that will make the Great Depression of the 1930’s look like the Roaring 20’s. You can force the issue if you support gold and silver. Yet the misinformed US public knows nothing about gold as money nor does it understand gold’s interrelationship with oil. They are going to perish for their lack of knowledge, to use a biblical statement about what happens when people stop following God’s plan because they don’t read or understand their bibles. Always remember, gold suppression is JOB ONE at the Fed. The only difference between 1980 and today is that Paul Volcker stated in his memoirs that his only mistake in purging the US economy was his failure to cap the price of gold. Gold went from $35 per ounce just before Nixon took us completely off the gold standard in 1971, and soared to $850 per ounce in 1980. For gold to equal that feat in the current decade, gold would have to go from $252 to $6,120, which is where Shadowstats statistics indicate it would have to go to make up for actual, as opposed to official, inflation. That is why you see this continual gold suppression via central bank gold sales and leasing and the destruction of resource stocks by use of naked shorts, all courtesy of the PPT, which did not exist in 1980.

Paul Volcker’s statement is the cartel’s version of “never again.” They want to destroy your capital and discourage you from acquiring any precious metals and commodities so they can swoop in and buy them up at bargain basement prices just before they bail out at the top of the stock market using dark pools of liquidity unseen by the public and then use the proceeds to drive up precious metals, commodities and their related shares which they have loaded up on in the interim after beggaring everyone else. You must not let them do this to you, so load up now on gold, silver and their related shares, which will cause a huge short squeeze on the cartel, or you may as well just roll over and die and let the cartel have their way. It’s time to take a stand!

We were rather amused to hear that Senator Ted Kennedy recommended to Senator Barack Obama that he not take on the Queen B, Senator Hillary Clinton, as his Vice Presidential running mate. First, he knows that Bush and Clinton were in on the JFK, Jr. hit (anyone who believes that JFK, Jr.’s death from a plane crash was an accident is incredibly naive beyond all belief), which took place while Slick Willie Clinton was President and Clinton’s buddy, Caligula, was about to run for president, hence making JFK, Jr. a threat to the Bush-Clinton dynasties and crime families.

Having Hillary as a running mate is like begging for an assassin’s bullet, especially considering the scores of dead bodies and the swath of destruction which she and hubby Bill have left in their wake during their notorious political careers that have been rife with corruption and the brown-nosing of elitists like David Rockefeller, who is Hillary’s slave-master. Richard Nixon was wise enough to know that when Spiro Agnew was taken out by the Illuminati to make way for Nelson Rockefeller to become Vice President after Mr. S&M (Rocky) had pushed through a constitutional amendment to allow that to happen, it was the functional equivalent of committing suicide. Nixon wisely chose Gerald Ford instead to be his Vice President, which infuriated Mr. Whips and Leather (Rocky). When Nixon was taken down with the promise of a pardon, quite possibly by the Illuminati to again pave the way for Rockefeller to become Vice President, Gerald Ford, who then became President, apparently lacked Nixon’s savvy and blithely appointed Mr. I Love Bondage (Rocky) as his Vice President pursuant to his instructions from the Illuminati, oblivious to the mortal danger this put him in. Hence the two or more assassination attempts that were made on Ford’s life by would-be female assassins (and some say by poison in yet another attempt) in order to propel the King of Perverts (Rocky) into the Oval Office.

We can just hear God laughing as both pathetic assassination attempts were foiled and the King of Perverts was nixed from becoming President and leading us into WWIII complete with nukes and other weapons of mass destruction. The Prince of Darkness (Rocky) was assassinated in full S&M regalia in the presence of his mistress in 1979, probably for screwing a drug lord out of multiple millions of dollars. To hide the embarrassment, the controlled press were stifled and in a very unusual move for the funeral of someone of high political standing and notoriety, a closed casket service was held to keep the wounds from the assassination hidden. Just a little trivia we thought you might enjoy. We can only hope that brother David soon joins him in the darkest depths of Hell.

Our economy over the past two decades has been systematically destroyed by free trade, globalization off-shoring, outsourcing and illegal immigration. The three pillars of the cover-up that has been implemented by the Illuminati to keep the American public from finding out that their economy has been destroyed right under their noses are a strong dollar backed by cheap oil, an endless supply of money and credit and profligate consumer spending propelled by successive asset bubbles and bogus economic statistics. The party is now over and their nefarious deeds are being unveiled as we speak. We have an incredibly weak dollar backed by incredibly expensive oil with OPEC dollar pegs about to blow. The credit-crunch has stopped the supply of money and credit from making its way outside of the banking system as reserves are hoarded due to a complete lack of confidence in the system and in its largely insolvent participants. Consumer spending is dropping into the tank as the last in a succession of asset bubbles start to burst, those being the real estate bubble and the “financial engineering” product bubble (i.e. the derivatives alphabet soup containing toxic waste such as CDO’s, MBS’s, ABS’s, SIV’s, CDS’s and IRS’s), and as fewer and fewer believe the whopping statistical lies produced by the reprobates and sociopaths in our government. Thus, all the pillars for the cover up have imploded and have revealed to one and all that the totally buck naked king really is not wearing any clothes despite endless Illuminist assertions to the contrary. The Illuminati are in real trouble that has gone way beyond what they had intended due to the bungling of their neocon henchmen. This has spiraled way beyond their control and they know it.

Rome is burning and the barbarians have broken through the Praetorian Guard at the palace gates as Caligula remains in denial. They have unknowingly placed themselves in mortal danger and they will be lucky to survive the anger and devastation, which we see on the horizon when everyone figures out what they have done to us. We will provide names, addresses and phone numbers for all of the most reprehensible of these criminals so that when the time comes you can be sure to thank them appropriately for all the death, destruction, famine and misery they will have caused you.

The InternationalForecaster

Sarah-Kate Templeton
May 11, 2008

Scientists have created what is believed to be the first genetically modified (GM) human embryo.

A team from Cornell University in New York produced the GM embryo to study how early cells and diseases develop. It was destroyed after five days.

The British regulator, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA), has warned that such controversial experiments cause “large ethical and public interest issues”.

News of the development comes days before MPs are to debate legislation that would allow scientists to use similar techniques in this country.

The effects of changing an embryo would be permanent. Genes added to embryos or reproductive cells, such as sperm, will affect all cells in the body and will be passed on to future generations.

The technology could potentially be used to correct genes which cause diseases such as cystic fibrosis, haemophilia and even cancer. In theory, any gene that has been identified could be added to embryos.

Ethicists warn that genetically modifying embryos could lead to the addition of genes for desirable traits such as height, intelligence and hair colour.

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill, which will have its second reading this week, will make it legal to create GM embryos in Britain.

The bill will allow GM embryos to be created only for research and will ban implantation in the womb. Ethicists, however, say that the legislation could be relaxed in the future.

The HFEA has said that it is preparing for scientists to apply for licences to create GM embryos. A paper, published by the authority, states: “The bill has taken away all inhibitions on genetically altering human embryos for research. The Science and Clinical Advances Group [of the HFEA] thought there were large ethical and public interest issues and that these should be referred for debate.”

The Cornell team, led by Nikica Zaninovic, used a virus to add a gene, a green fluorescent protein, to an embryo left over from in vitro fertilisation.

The research was presented at a meeting of the American Society of Reproductive Medicine last year but details have emerged only after the HFEA highlighted the work in a review of the technology.

Zaninovic pointed out that in order to be sure that the new gene had been inserted and the embryo had been genetically modified, scientists would ideally need to grow the embryo and carry out further tests.

The Cornell team did not have permission to allow the embryo to progress, however.

Scientists argue that the embryos could be used to study how diseases develop. They also say GM embryos could be more efficient in generating stem cells.

However, Dr David King, director of Human Genetics Alert, warned: “This is the first step on the road that will lead to the nightmare of designer babies and a new eugenics. The HFEA is right to say that the creation and legalisation of GM embryos raises ‘large ethical and public interest issues’ but neglects to mention that these have not been debated at all.”

He added: “I have been speaking to MPs all week and no one knows that the government is legalising GM embryos. The public has had enough of scientists sneaking these things through and then presenting us with a fait accompli.”

TimesOnlineUk

By Steven Yates
May 11, 2008

Today—May 11, 2008—is not just Mother’s Day but REAL ID D-Day, so to speak: the day citizens of states not granted extensions to comply with the REAL ID Act of 2005 would find themselves unable to board planes, enter federal buildings, etc.

By the end of last year, seven states had passed laws prohibiting implementation of REAL ID in their state: Maine, Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Washington, New Hampshire, and Georgia. That number became eight on April 9 of this year when Idaho joined up. Ten states had laws that were passed in one house but not the other. Eight more states had introduced such laws. Twelve had passed nonbinding resolutions denouncing REAL ID. That’s a 38-state rebellion!

With no evidence that an increasingly dictatorial Department of Homeland Security (DHS) would back down, one by one, most of the states blinked and requested extensions. All but four: Montana, New Hampshire, Maine, and my adopted home state of South Carolina. According to DHS rules handed down in January, states had until March 31 to request an extension. If they did not, the above consequences for their citizens would kick in.

With the clock ticking, on March 31, 2008, South Carolina lived up to its reputation as a sometimes-defiant state with leaders capable of thinking independently and stand up for states’ rights (integral to the original meaning of federalism).

That day, Governor Mark Sanford declined to seek an extension from the Department of Homeland Security in order to comply with the REAL ID Act, which as some have noted did not get through Congress on its own merits but rode piggyback on an appropriations bill that Congress considered must-pass. That bill was signed into law by President Bush on May 11, 2005. For quite a while, little was said about REAL ID. Those of us who tried to draw attention to the subject often found ourselves derided as “conspiracy nuts.”

Last year, a small group of South Carolinians (which included your humble narrator) noticed that there was a rebellion brewing in certain states: New Hampshire, Maine, and Montana were examples. On January 25, 2007, Maine enacted the first resolution against the REAL ID Act. We wondered: what was South Carolina doing? Nothing, so far as we could tell. So we took action on our own. Slightly over a year ago, we drafted a proposed bill and took it to the South Carolina General Assembly. This involved a few day trips to Columbia. Many of our representatives were unfamiliar with REAL ID.

The law had never been publicized except on the Internet. And some folks out there—I’ve heard from a few—are really dense enough to wonder why we think there are “conspiracies” afoot. We educated our representatives. Fortunately, they were willing to be educated. They did not dismiss us as “conspiracy nuts.” I believe they were impressed by the fact that we were coming to Columbia at our own expense. We were not working as paid lobbyists. We had documentation to back up what we were saying, including copies of the REAL ID Act itself. Our bill went through several modifications and was shortened considerably, but finally came to the floor as S.449. Here was S.449’s crucial passage:

“Title 56 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding: Section 56-1-85. The State shall not participate in the implementation of the federal REAL ID Act. This act takes effect upon approval by the Governor.”

The S.C. General Assembly passed S.449 on June 8, 2007. Five days later, on June 13, Governor Mark Sanford made a special trip to Greenville to sign S.449 into law publicly. As many of our citizens group attended as could fit the event into our work schedules, and were recognized by the Governor. Why Greenville? Because nearly all the anti-REAL ID agitation had come from the Upstate, and Greenville was the largest city. Our neighbor, Spartanburg, had produced its share of anti-REAL ID activists. (We never found out what the rest of the state was doing.)

Aaron Bolinger, then living in Spartanburg, deserves the lion’s share of credit for having spearheaded our efforts. A former lobbyist with several years of experience on Capitol Hill, he knew how to approach the General Assembly. From him I learned much. He had assembled our documentation into a single package containing information on nearly every aspect, ramification, and point of view one could use to evaluate Real ID—its history, its costs as determined by DHS itself or by professional groups such as the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, its risk to our privacy, information on what other states were doing, and even the theological questions REAL ID raises (think of the “mark of the Beast” in Revelation). Having tasted victory here, Bolinger moved to Pennsylvania to assist that state’s anti-REAL ID effort.

Our victory was, of course, temporary. Back to 2008. DHS Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, as I mentioned, handed down final REAL ID rules on January 11. The new rules allowed states to request extensions, which would be granted if they could show “material compliance” with the Act. They would have until May 11, 2011, to achieve full compliance. Four states, as I also mentioned, remained steadfast in refusing to ask for extensions.

Almost immediately, Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer sent a letter to other governors stating, “I am asking you to join with me in resisting the DHS coercion to comply with the provisions of REAL ID. If we stand together either DHS will blink or Congress will have to act to avoid havoc at our nation’s airports and federal courthouses.” He cited concerns over privacy, states’ rights, and the cost of implementation. His letter went to governors of Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Maine, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Arizona, Hawaii, Illinois, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Washington.

Homeland Security spokesperson Laura Keehner responded: “That will mean real consequences for their citizens starting in May if their leadership chooses not to comply. That includes getting on an airplane or entering a federal building, so they will need to get passports.”

In other words, DHS’s way of dealing with dissent is typically authoritarian: make a threat. In Montana’s case, DHS blinked. The agency granted the state an extension it didn’t ask for. Existing Montana drivers licenses will continue to be accepted for federal purposes. Schweitzer was not appeased. “I sent them a horse,” he said afterwards, “and if they want to call it a zebra, that’s up to them.” He remained defiant.

On a March 7 National Public Radio interview he did not mince words. “[E]very month,” he said, the feds “come out with another harebrained scheme.… We play along for a while.… But if it comes to a head we’ve found it’s just best to tell them they can go to hell.”

On March 31, South Carolina Governor Sanford made his stand. Sanford was more polite than Schweitzer, but what happened was essentially the same. He sent a five-page letter to Chertoff stating that South Carolina declines to participate, would not seek an extension, and explained in great detail why not. He wrote of “what I consider to be grave consequences to the taxpayer, privacy interests, and civil liberties in our country if we continue with REAL ID in its present form.”

“As you know,” he states at the outset of the letter, “South Carolina has enacted legislation that prevents the state from complying with REAL ID, and I am duty bound to comply with the laws of our state.”

Sanford went on to explain his “serious reservations about REAL ID…” He observes, first, what I noted above: “REAL ID was never fully debated in Congress. As we both know, REAL ID was included as a rider to the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief in 2005… Does it make any sense to begin a de facto national ID system without debate?”

He argues, second: “at some point someone has got to draw a line in the sand with regard to unfunded federal mandates. Based on the broad array of groups from across the political spectrum that oppose REAL ID, if there was ever a federal mandate on which to draw that line in the sand, this seems to be it.” He then discussed Real ID’s price tag. “DHS currently estimates that REAL ID will cost $9.9 billion [down from $23 billion]. Over the last 15 years that I have had reason to closely watch things in Washington, three-fold decreases in cost have never been the order of things.

Nonetheless, if one leaves aside for a moment what we believe to be implausible assumptions that go with this downward revision, the revised costs are as follows: $3.9 billion cost to the states, $5.8 billion cost to individuals, and $0.2 billion ($200 million) to the federal government and private sector. It seems to me there is something wrong when the federal government imposes the burdens of creating a national ID system on the states—but only pays for two percent of the cost.”

Moreover, “REAL ID also does not address the cost to verify information across databases.” Sanford observes that the cost of the verification process has gone up. “Before legislation like this goes into effect, I believe transaction costs should be clearly and specifically enumerated.”

This assumes that the federal government can afford REAL ID. “As you know,” he had said earlier in the letter, “Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano and I share very different political philosophies, but I completely agree with her that if the federal government wants something, then the federal government should pay for it…. Unfunded mandates and unspecified costs are relevant to a national security debate and REAL ID because of the larger spending problems in Washington.” Our total indebtedness, that is, totals over $50 trillion. “[S]ustainable spending, especially given what is happening to the dollar, is a big part of this. In short, if the federal government thinks a national ID card is necessary, then, after debating its merits, they should pay for it—after determining they can pay for it” (orig. emphasis). For part two click below.

Click here for part —-> 2,

The Bush Administration has directly defied, not only the will and intent of Congress, but it is now openly ignoring legislation that the President himself signed into law. As a result a Constitutional crisis is rapidly developing over a project to let Mexican trucks on U.S. roads. As a result, many are now calling for the firing of U.S. Transportation Secretary Mary Peters.

In September 2007, the Bush Administration began a pilot project to allow Mexican trucks to drive on U.S. highways. The project is, frankly, necessary if goals for the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) are to be achieved. The SPP openly calls for “harmonizing” the borders between the U.S. Mexico and Canada. In fact, the Bush Administration sites the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) as its authority to push the project.

Congress was not happy with the program. Several members immediately sighted problems with safety of the Mexican trucks, including the inability of Mexican drivers to read English road signs in the US. Within weeks of the beginning of the project, both houses of congress began to draft legislation to put a stop to it.

Quickly, Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND) introduced an amendment to the Department of Transportation (DOT) appropriations bill to remove funding for the project. The amendment was passed by a bi-partisan majority of 74-24 and subsequently became part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, signed into law by President Bush on December 26, 2007.

To make it perfectly clear that the legislation was a demand for the Administration to stop the Mexican truck project, Senator Dorgan received a letter from the Senate Legislative Council to confirm the law’s intent. The letter said, “No funds made available under the Consolidation Appropriations Act, 2008, were to be used in fiscal year 2008 to establish or implement a cross-border motor carrier demonstration program to allow Mexican-domiciled motor carriers to operate beyond the commercial zones along the international border between the United States and Mexico.”

Can it be more clear? Further, it is the Constitutional duty of the Congress to fund or not to fund programs. Yet, in defiance of this clear intention of Congress, Secretary Peters continues to move forward, spending funds for the truck project unabated and against federal law.

Melissa Delaney, spokeswoman for the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Association (FMCSA), indicated the administration will simply ignore the congressional funding issue. In an all-too-familiar display of contempt for the concerns of the American people and in defiance of Congress, Delaney said, “We are committed to incremental steps in demonstrating the safety of the cross-border program, but there is no requirement to have a demonstration project.”

Apparently hoping to convince Congress to back off its plan to kill the program, on October 17th Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters called a press conference. She then instructed a Maryland state trooper to inspect a Mexican truck in front of DOT headquarters, claiming this action would “prove” that Mexican trucks are as safe as U.S. trucks.

This childish charade prompted Teamster President James Hoffa to ask, “Does the Bush administration think we’re stupid? It’s insulting to the intelligence of the American people to suggest that a staged truck inspection before the news media proves anything.”

In fact, actual inspections of the Mexican trucks prove that they are not safe to be on U.S. highways. A law firm (Cullen Law Firm of Washington, D.C.) has been compiling safety inspection reports on Mexican trucks in preparation for a lawsuit to stop the trucks from crossing the border. Their findings on Mexican truck safety are frightening and very telling about the agenda of the Bush Administration.

According to the Cullen documentation, in the span of one year, September 2006 to September 2007, four of the Mexican companies participating in the Bush administration’s test trucking program collected more that 1,700 safety violations. One company was Trinity Industries de Mexico, which was cited more than 1,100 times, averaging 112 violations per truck.

Another major concern about the safety of the Mexican trucks crossing our border is the ability of the drivers to read and understand highway signs. The Bush Administration has falsely assured that the drivers are required to be proficient in English before crossing the border. A brochure aimed at Mexican drivers on the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s website says, “Did you know? You MUST be able to read and speak English to drive truck in the United States.”

Yet, under heavy questioning during a Senate hearing in March, 2008, Transportation Secretary Peters and DOT Inspector General Calvin Scovel reluctantly admitted that Mexican drivers were being approved at the border as “proficient in English” even though they could only explain U.S. traffic signs in Spanish.

Here is the verbatim exchange between Senator Dorgan, Peters and Scovel. Dorgan asked, “Does the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration test for English proficiency at the border include questions about U.S. highway signs?”

“Do you show a driver an octagonal STOP sign at the border and qualify him if he explains the sign means ‘ALTO,” Dorgan asked with obvious agitation, “ALTO is the Spanish Word for STOP,” he said.

“Yes,” Scovel answered, hesitatingly. “If the stop sign is identified as ‘alto’ the driver is considered English proficient.”

“In other words,” said Dorgan, “the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration is allowing Mexican drivers in the demonstration project to prove their proficiency in English by responding to the examiner’s questions in Spanish?”

Mary Peters responded, “U.S. highway signs comply with international standards. I drive frequently in Mexico and I always recognize the octagonal ‘ALTO’ signs as ‘STOP’ signs.”

“Excuse me, Madame Secretary,” said Dorgan, “the question is not whether you understand Mexican highway signs when driving in Mexico but whether Mexican drivers entering the U.S. in your demonstration project can pass an English proficiency test by answering the questions totally in Spanish.”

Answered Peters, “But answering in Spanish, the drivers explain they understand the English-language highway signs.” Countered Dorgan, “If you answer in Spanish, you’re not English proficient.”

Continued Dorgan, “My main concern is safety. We’ve established (in the Senate hearing) that there are no equivalencies between Mexican trucks and U.S. trucks. There are no equivalent safety standards. Mexico has no reliable database for vehicle inspections, no accident reports or driver’s records. Now you tell us Mexican drivers can pass their English proficiency tests in Spanish. The Department of Transportation is telling Congress - ‘We’re doing this and we don’t care’–” Senator Dorgan concluded.

In a news release issued just prior to the March 10, 2008 Senate hearing, Peters tried to take the offensive against Senate efforts to stop the Mexican truck project. In the release she said, “Our drivers and our workers don’t deserve a timeout for success and prosperity. So my message to Congress is clear. If you want to help American businesses thrive, support American agricultural success, and champion American highway safety, then keep on trucking with cross border shipping.”

Obviously Secretary Peters is pandering to American workers. None of what she said is true. American workers are being destroyed by agreements like NAAFTA and the SPP. Wages are down. American jobs are disappearing and America’s trade deficit is out of control because of these agreements.

Moreover, American trucking companies are not seeking “markets” in Mexico. They don’t want to drive their trucks into that country. As James Hoffa said, “It’s ridiculous when the State Department issues regular warnings to alert U.S. citizens to the dangers of kidnapping and murder if they travel Mexico’s roads…No trucker wants to drive a load of automobiles into Mexico to park them somewhere.”

Hoffa went on to say, “It’s a disgrace that Mary Peters is still in office. She has broken the law and defied the will of the American people by exposing them to dangerous trucks from Mexico.” The Teamsters Union has filed suit to stop the Mexican trucks from crossing the border and has called for Mary Peters to be fired.

The fact is, the Bush Administration, represented by Mary Peters, is determined to force the Mexican truck project on the American people because of agreements it has made with Mexico to open our borders. Further, it has made agreements with international corporations, through Public/Private Partnerships, to use the power of government to allow them to plunder the U.S. economy with little regard as to the impact on the American people.

As Senator Dorgan said, the Bush Administration doesn’t care what Americans think about these policies. Mary Peters should be fired as a way to send a very strong message to the Bush Administration that the American people are fed up with its arrogance. Her firing would be a major blow to efforts to impose the North American Union, which of course President Bush denies exists. Fire Mary Peters first, and we’ll get the rest of the gang later.

NewsWithViews.com

Deanna Spingola
May 11, 2008

Property seizures in other countries are considered totalitarian. When they occur at the hands of the corporate-controlled U.S. government they are apparently condoned and even facilitated by the courts whose job it is to reign in this kind of abuse. The monopoly media, including “conservative” talk radio, is an information filtering system masquerading as “news.” They habitually conceal government land grabs and other privatization schemes like the current controversy in southeastern Colorado. The army is attempting to seize property, claiming they need extra land to better prepare the troops. What’s really behind this patriotic-let’s-help-the-troops endeavor? Call it what they will, land seizure is land seizure and violates the public trust.

What is it about Colorado and the military? In 1989, George H. W. Bush’s administration wanted to store dangerous radioactive waste at the Pueblo Army Depot but the state wisely objected.[1] Toxic waste disposal is no longer an unmanageable issue – well-connected arms manufacturers use it for bombs and bullets – kind of a double whammy – if the bullets and bombs don’t kill them, the lethal residue causes widespread cancer and horrific birth defects for future offspring of those who absorb, inhale or swallow the deadly dust. The Pentagon and their private contractors suppress the noxious nature of depleted uranium. Earlier, they didn’t tell troops about Agent Orange. And the citizens of Anniston, Alabama weren’t told about PCBs.[2] There are thousands of such examples. The government consistently protects corporate profits rather than citizens…

NewsWithViews.com

By Rev. Ted Pike

The State Department “Office of Global Anti-Semitism” says the New Testament claim that the Jews had Christ crucified is “classical anti-Semitism”—a historic form of hate. It included as an “anti-Semitic incident” the case of a Polish priest who said Jews killed Christ.

Are you one of tens of millions of Christians who agree with Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ that Jewish leaders incited a Jewish mob and persuaded Pilate to have Christ crucified? The government now considers you “anti-Semitic.” You are part of a worldwide scourge the U.S., Canada, Australia, and 55 European nations are uniting to suppress.

In the many countries now ruled by hate laws, it is already a federal offense to repeat the claim of New Testament “hate literature” that the Jews had Christ crucified. The State Department’s equation of biblical Christianity with “hate” is an ominous indication. The Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith—architect of hate laws worldwide (and primary ideological and statistics-gathering force behind the Office of Global Anti-Semitism)—is moving rapidly to create bias against Christians as haters, particularly of Jews and homosexuals.

Despite passionate support of Israel by evangelicals, the ADL claims Christianity is inherently anti-Semitic. The ADL says the New Testament is the seedbed of suspicion and blame against Jews leading to the Holocaust of World War II. Televangelist John Hagee, recipient of numerous Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith awards, upholds ADL propaganda.

He preaches that Jews did not reject or kill Christ, do not have to accept Him, and that New Testament Christianity is a primary source of anti-Semitism throughout the ages.

As Jewish-dominated media increasingly persuades the public and government to agree with this stereotype, it will become easier to pass Christian-restricting hate crime laws. All who adhere to the Bible on homosexuality or Jewish complicity in Christ’s death could be subject to state-sponsored prosecution.

Bible believers aren’t the only ones at risk. The State Department report also says it is anti-Semitic to: Allege “intentionally or unintentionally” that the state of Israel persecutes Palestinians; criticize “intentionally or unintentionally” Zionism or Israel if such criticism leads to lowering of public opinion of Jews or the government, military, or people of Israel; publish cartoons depicting the Israeli government and military as similar to Nazis; diminish the 6 million figure of Holocaust dead in any amount; allege that Jews exert undue influence in Congress, the White House and the media; and/or allege that American Jews are equally loyal to Israel.

Congress unanimously created this office of thought crimes disinformation in 2004. Cast your vote to end its influence: call your senators and representative toll-free at 1-877-851-6437. Tell them: “Please revoke funding for the State Department’s Office of Global Anti-Semitism. It does not represent scholarly research but the anti-Christian biases of the Anti-Defamation League.”

The Rev. Ted Pike is is director of the National Prayer Network, a Christian/conservative watchdog organization.. He can be reached at 503-631-3808, emailed at www.truthtellers.org, or contacted by mail at National Prayer Network, P.O. Box 828, Clackamas, OR 97015.

AmericanFreePress.com

TOKYO — The U.S. Navy air wing commander for the USS Kitty Hawk’s strike group was relieved of duty Friday after an admiral said he lost confidence in the commander’s ability, according to a Navy spokeswoman.

Capt. Michael P. McNellis was relieved as commander of Carrier Air Wing 5 by Rear Adm. Richard B. Wren, commander of Commander Task Force 70, the Navy said in a news release.

The admiral’s mast, a nonjudicial punishment proceeding below the level of court-martial, was held Friday at sea aboard the Kitty Hawk, according to Cmdr. Jensin W. Sommer, CTF-70 strike group spokeswoman.

Sommer declined Friday evening to give any details about the circumstances leading to McNellis’ nonjudicial proceeding.

Sommer described Wren’s findings as a removal from command “due to a loss of confidence, not a punishment.”

McNellis left the Kitty Hawk on Friday, Sommer said. McNellis, who graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy in 1982 and trained as an EA-6B Prowler pilot, was preparing for retirement, she said.

Capt. Michael S. White, the former air wing deputy commander, assumed command, Sommer said.

McNellis took command of Carrier Air Wing 5 in September 2006 from Capt. Garry Mace, who commended McNellis at the time for his experience.

“Since I started working with [McNellis], he’s always been a moral compass for me, keeping me pointed in the right direction,” Mace said in 2006. “I’m sure as a leader, he’ll do great things for this air wing.”

The air wing is based at Naval Air Facility Atsugi and includes seven aircraft squadrons and two smaller aircraft detachments, consisting of about 70 aircraft and 2,000 people. It is part of the Kitty Hawk’s strike group, the largest in the Navy.

The USS Kitty Hawk Carrier Strike Group is conducting training and operations in the Philippine Sea, Sommer wrote in the news release.

Stars and Stripes

The collapse of ANB Financial National Association is significant.

Population of Bentonville, Arkansas is 19,500 people …. and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Bentonville IS Wal-Mart !

For the past four months, Wal-Mart (Bentonville, Arkansas) has been canceling (Tip of the iceberg:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/al-norman/wal-mart-cancels-45-super_b_94112.html) almost all of their (major) corporate projects into the future. We know the magnitude of Wal-Mart’s financial dilemma directly from its internal (attorney) legal “dropped project memos” and “Real Estate Committee reapproval memos.”

Wal-Mart press releases and media news reports to the public are disingenuous.

Over 700,000 Chinese exporters / manufacturers (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/95f406ee-fc69-11dc-9229-000077b07658.html) are now refusing to accept U.S. dollars as payment for products for retail sales. Wal-Mart’s on-shelf stock numbers have been significantly reduced. Merchandise quality is now marginal to bad and in many cases becoming unavailable as prices skyrocket with broad spectrum factors coming together to create an uncomfortable sales environment. Wal-Mart’s total overhead is becoming unsustainable we believe.

August 2005: Two years ago -

Wal-Mart estimates that utility expenses rose by $100 million in its second quarter (one three month period), when it also spent $30 million more to truck merchandise from its U.S. distribution centers to stores. Those additional costs add up to almost 5 percent of Wal-Mart’s second-quarter profit of $2.8 billion.
http://wakeupwalmart.com/news/20050825-reut.html

Bank Failure In Arkansas

May 9, 2008
ANB (Arkansas National Bank), Financial National Association, 706 S Walton Blvd, Bentonville, AR 72712-5751
Federal regulators close Arkansas bank ANB Financial
Friday May 9, 8:45 pm ET
ANB Financial banks closed by federal regulators over ‘unsafe and unsound’ practices

BENTONVILLE, Ark. (AP) — Federal regulators says they’ve closed ANB Financial National Association banks after discovering “unsafe and unsound” business practices there.

David Barr, a spokesman for the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. says many customers served by the bank’s nine locations had accounts under $100,000, which will be fully insured by the government. Barr says customers can continue to write checks and draw money from ATMs through the weekend.

Barr says Pulaski Bank and Trust Co. agreed to assume control over ANB Financial’s bank locations, which will be open Monday.

As of Jan. 31, federal regulators say ANB Financial had about $2.1 billion in assets and $1.8 billion in total deposits.

It was the third closure this year of an FDIC-insured bank. Douglass National Bank, a Missouri bank with $58.5 million in assets, was shut in January; another Missouri institution with assets of $18.7 million, Hume Bank, was shut down in March.

Both were dwarfed in size of ANB Financial, where regulators found lax lending standards, mostly for construction and development loans for projects in Utah, Idaho and Wyoming, as well as Arkansas.

Observers have been watching for signs of bank distress resulting from the mortgage crisis. Profits at federally insured U.S. banks and thrifts plunged to a 16-year low in the fourth quarter as institutions set aside a record-high amount to cover losses from sour mortgages.

The FDIC is planning to beef up its staff, including temporarily hiring up to 25 retired FDIC employees who worked in the agency’s more than 200-person division that handles failed banks. They will handle an anticipated increase in bank failures.

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080509/bank_closed.html?.v=4

Rense.com

LONDON (Reuters) - From the poorest of Africa to the United States and big business, a breakneck rally that could take oil to $200 a barrel is likely to inflict pain on everyone.

The world was remarkably resilient to a series of record prices in 2007, but a roughly 30 percent rise since the end of last year, with predictions of more to come, is harder to absorb.

“The key issue is the rate of change. The recent exponential rise is unhealthy for everyone,” a senior executive from a major oil company said. He declined to be named.

On the first trading day of 2008, oil prices hit the $100 a barrel level, which once seemed unimaginable.

The price topped $125 a barrel on Friday, making a rise to $150 probable and to $200 possible, according to OPEC ministers and investment bankers alike.

“If current conditions continue, reaching a period when oil is supplied at $200 a barrel is not out of reach,” Iran’s Oil Minister Oil Minister Gholamhossein Nozari said this week.

Investment bank Goldman Sachs said the possibility of $150-$200 a barrel over the next six-to-24 months was “increasingly likely.” The bank was one of the first to point to a triple-digit oil price more than two years ago.

Oil at $200 a barrel would mean roughly $6.50 a gallon for U.S. gasoline, according to figures from Standard Life. It makes the record $3.61 U.S. consumers are now paying seem cheap. Continued…

Reuters.com

Oil prices soared to highs above $126 yesterday as the President of Brazil said that the South American country was considering joining Opec.

The latest record, the fifth in as many sessions, was driven by a new round of speculative buying as markets remained jittery about tight global supplies and booming demand. New York’s main oil futures contract, light sweet crude for June delivery, touched a high of $126.20 in early afternoon London trading. London’s Brent crude contract hit a record $125.90.

Investor sentiment was unnerved by comments from President da Silva of Brazil, where a series of oil discoveries promises to turn the country into a key global producer in the coming years.

In an interview in a German magazine, Mr da Silva said that Brazil aimed to produce oil from its Carioca field offshore from São Paolo in 2010 and was considering joining Opec, the cartel of 13 countries that produce 40 per cent of the world’s oil. “[From 2010] Brazil will then become a large oil exporter. We want to join Opec and try to make oil cheaper,” he was quoted as saying.

Last month Haroldo Lima, the head of Brazil’s National Petroleum Agency, cited data from Petrobas, the state oil company, which suggested that the Carioca field could contain reserves of as much as 33 billion barrels of oil. If confirmed, it would be the largest find in the world in the past 30 years.

Brazil is likely to come under heavy pressure from big consumer countries, especially the United States, not to join the cartel, which produces 32 million of the world’s 85 million barrels of oil a day.

This week, Opec brushed aside American calls for a production increase, insisting that the market was well supplied. Oil markets surged this week after a report from Goldman Sachs forecast that prices would reach $150 to $200 a barrel within two years.

TimesOnlineUK

Apparently not having enough to do to keep illegal immigrants from entering the country, U.S. officials are now also spending their time looking for illegal immigrants leaving the country. According to an article entitled “Border Busts Coming and Going in the Los Angeles Times, federal customs and immigration officials are setting up random checkpoints 500 yards from the Mexican border to search vehicles leaving the United States for illegal immigrants, drugs, and other contraband. People who cannot produce their papers are taken into custody and then turned over to the Border Patrol, which then deports them a few hours later.

Apparently the idea is to send a message to illegal immigrants that the U.S. government is serious about cracking down on illegal immigration. (The message being sent to drug dealers, apparently, is: Don’t even think of removing illicit drugs from the United States.)

Pardon me for asking a discomforting question, but isn’t it likely that, like other government interventions, this measure will have an unintended consequence that is opposite to what government officials want? Once illegal immigrants realize that there is a strong likelihood of being caught returning home, wouldn’t that encourage them to remain permanently in the United States rather than return home after making some money? And wouldn’t that, in turn, induce them to smuggle their wife and children into the United States? And isn’t that the exact opposite of what U.S. officials wish to accomplish with their immigration-enforcement measures?

The U.S. checkpoints for people leaving the country should also remind Americans of something that Germans and Koreans learned long ago: a government that is sufficiently powerful to keep people out is sufficient powerful to keep people in. In a national emergency, people soon discover that enforcement measures that were previously applied to people trying to illegally enter a country can be quickly converted to apply to citizens trying to quickly get themselves, their families, and their capital out of the country. Sealed borders can seal people in as effectively as they seal people out.

FFF.org

There is a view slowly emerging that the worst of the global credit crunch and sharemarket ructions has passed. But there are many reasons to believe predictions that the crisis has reached bottom are prematurely optimistic.

Are we there yet?

There’s still a way to go.

Are we there yet?

A little down the road …

The children’s band Hi-5

The consensus is in. Things will get worse before they get better.

In large part the grim forecast is a consequence of the pain that has happened so far. What was first felt in disruptions to esoteric credit markets last August, then led to sharp sharemarket falls in January, has not yet made its full impact felt on the real economy.

But the real-economy pain is coming fast.

“Where I think we are at the moment is in the early stages of a real ‘hurt’ phase,” says Michael Schneider, the chief investment officer of fixed income fund manager Vianova.

Bad news is hard to miss. In the past month the banks have unveiled sharp increases in provisions for bad debts, with resulting effects on their profit forecasts. This week, St George took a $20 million hit on a margin loan related to the property group Octaviar, formerly MFS. Last week, Westpac set aside $201 million for bad loans. And the week before that it was ANZ topping up its bad debt provisions by $975 million.

In the wings of these announcements is the next step: cost-cutting, job losses and uncertainty. The Herald has reported advanced plans have been drawn up by Westpac to send 3000 jobs offshore. ANZ also has big offshoring plans and St George has taken a $30 million restructuring charge - a polite way of saying “money used to sack people”.

After years of rosy economic growth, and the more recent confidence that Australia can sail through what has become known as the credit crisis, there are solid grounds for five not-so-rosy predictions.

PREDICTION ONE:Pain is already being felt at the kitchen table.

Increased mortgage pain ahead

Official cash rates have risen 12 times since 2002. Since July last year the Reserve Bank has raised interest rates four times in its quest to reduce demand and arrest resurgent inflation. But on top of this banks have lifted their rates even higher as the credit crisis pushes up their cost of borrowing.

A home loan borrower with St George or ANZ has Australia’s highest variable interest rate of 9.47 per cent - or 0.45 percentage points higher than recent moves in the cash rate. For that borrower, that’s an extra $300 a month on a $400,000 mortgage over 25 years.

And this may not be addressing the bank’s full cost of funding. Westpac used to be able to borrow at 0.1 percentage points over a benchmark interest rate. At the height of the credit crisis this soared to 1.4 percentage points over the benchmark. It is currently sitting about 0.7 percentage points above the benchmark.

The good news is the worst effects of the crisis are receding after the US Federal Reserve stepped in, brokering the sale of investment bank Bear Stearns to JPMorgan in March.

The intervention led to global confidence that central banks would act to avert a major collapse that would threaten the entire financial system. Banks started to lend to each other and interest rates came down.

These developments have fuelled increasing optimism that the crisis may be passing, with the US Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson, this week saying that US financial markets were emerging from the credit crunch and that “the worst is likely behind us”.

In Australia, NAB’s chief executive, John Stewart, yesterday also suggested that the worst of the global debt market turmoil could be over, not withstanding any surprises “out of left field”.

The bad news, though, is that the cost of borrowing for banks seems likely to remain permanently higher.

Westpac’s chief economist, Bill Evans, predicts the likely rate will settle about 0.5 percentage points above the benchmark - or five times more than it used to cost a bank to borrow. And you can bet this will be passed on to customers, whether they are home loan borrowers or big corporate organisations. Housing pain quickly feeds into the real economy of shopping malls and corner shops.

Statistics from Standard & Poor’s for December show borrowers are in default on about 6.5 per cent of the $6.2 billion of subprime loans on issue in Australia. Behind that figure are houses waiting to be repossessed and families looking for a home.

PREDICTION TWO:Rising interest rates and a credit market that has frozen also have a dramatic effect on companies. Just ask directors at Centro Properties Group, MFS, Allco Finance and ABC Learning Centres.

More companies will explode

But it is not as if these early starters will be the only candidates for corporate collapse.

There would be casualties among entities with more vulnerable capital structures, a panel including Mark Phillips, the managing director of Keybridge Capital, told a Minter & Ellison seminar last week.

And, like rising household arrears rates, the effects are not felt overnight.

Standard & Poor’s reports more than 20 per cent of Australia’s $130 billion in corporate debt has to be refinanced within a year. And these refinancings - assuming banks are willing to lend - will be done in a starkly different environment from the days of cheap debt enjoyed until last June and easy credit.

Big borrowers that are due to refinance this year include Telstra, Fonterra, BHP Billiton, Westfield and Orica.

Even for blue-chip companies, refinancing is likely to be done at higher rates.

And if you have high levels of debt, as Wesfarmers did after its acquisition of Coles, the increase in rates can be crippling.

Wesfarmers was facing a refinancing cost of a massive 4 per cent above a benchmark interest rate. It eventually decided to use its blue-chip brand name and loyal retailer base to sell shares instead of debt.

Not all companies are so well regarded and they won’t have the same options.

Higher interest rates mean higher costs for companies and not all companies will be able to bear the pain.

In the view of the Standard & Poor’s capital markets analyst Philip Bayley, the credit cycle has turned and companies will be under pressure. “While we may have seen the worst in credit and equity markets, credit quality is expected to continue to deteriorate,” Bayley says in his most recent quarterly report.

PREDICTION THREE:

Higher costs need to be passed on. But it’s not exactly a great environment for consumers to reach into their pocket to pay higher prices to help out big companies.

Retailers are about to be crunched

After all, consumers have been hit by rising interest rates and record-high oil prices.

These factors mean consumer-facing companies such as retailers are facing higher costs and lower profits.

Michael Baker, an analyst with the retail consultancy Urbis JHD, says the evaporation of rising house prices, which have even come off in the go-go states of Western Australia and Queensland, has already dented consumer confidence.

“[The] wealth effects people have been able to take out of that [rise in prices] has really been underpinning the consumer spending boom,” Baker says.

That’s all gone. Baker is predicting growth in consumer spending - a major driver of the economy - will fall from a cracking 10 per cent last year to low single figures this year.

This theme was picked up by Macquarie Group analysts after the first day of company presentations at Macquarie’s annual conference this week: “It seems clear that the closer a company was to the domestic consumer there seemed to be lack of any detail around financials, and the lack of any colour on the current trading environment.”

The broader sharemarket outlook is patchy at best. Don Williams, the chief investment officer of the equities fund manager Platypus Asset Management, cites profit growth forecasts for the ASX 200 of a little above zero in both financial years 2008 and 2009.

He says the ability of companies to be valued more highly by investors (and therefore increase their price-earnings ratio, a consistent feature of the previous bull market) has disappeared in a period of cost pressures, higher interest rates and uncertainty.

“If you don’t believe price-earnings ratios will go up and you think there’s pressure on profits, it’s hard to promote a particularly bullish view,” Williams says.

Williams is predicting the ASX 200 index will trade in a band between the low 5000s and the low 6000s - and he will be selling if it goes above 6000.

PREDICTION FOUR:

The US is unlikely to give much support to Australian investors, or comfort to Australian consumers about the state of the global economy.

The US will be no help at all

Not surprisingly, investment banks that have racked up about $US312 billion ($331.5 billion) in losses and asset writedowns are among those keenest to put the credit crisis in the past.

Bloomberg has quoted Wall Street chief executives, including JPMorgan Chase’s Jamie Dimon, Goldman Sachs’s Lloyd Blankfein, Lehman Brothers’ Richard Fuld and Morgan Stanley’s John Mack, as saying they are optimistic the worst of the credit crisis may have passed.

But not everyone is buying this sanguine view. Warren Buffett, the world’s richest person, repeated warnings at a news conference last week that the US economy was in recession. “There’s going to be more pain,” Buffett said.

Last month he warned on CNBC: “My general feeling is that the recession will be longer and deeper than most people think. This will not be short and shallow. I think consumers are feeling gas and food prices and not feeling they’ve got a lot of money for other things.”

Vianova’s Schneider adds to these dangers the fact the “hurt” phase could include further dislocation in the world’s markets, “runs” on banks and other financial services players, and good assets being sold in fire sales.

“What we are suggesting is we have not seen the last of these challenges central banks have been faced with in recent times,” he said.

PREDICTION FIVE:

The picture is not unrelentingly bleak.

Soft landings are not easy

Australia has hooked its caboose to the freight train that is the great global commodities boom.

While this increases some of the cost pressures being felt by companies - analysts are hearing more consistently of labour shortages and higher commodity costs - the unstinting demand for resources from Asia is seen as an overwhelming positive for resources companies.

Macquarie Group equity strategists note resources companies profit upgrades have led to earnings growth forecasts of almost 70 per cent in 2008-09.

Reflecting this continuing boom are the strong labour market figures released this week, showing 19,000 full-time jobs were created in April, while the jobless rate was 4.2 per cent - still close to full employment.

If it is a slowdown, it is an exceedingly strange one.

Similarly, a commercial property downturn - so often the first casualty in a slowdown - is not necessarily the first place where the axe will fall this time.

Property Council of Australia figures for January, the latest available, show average CBD vacancy levels across national capitals falling to 3 per cent, the lowest levels in 20 years.

The regional director of the real estate agent CBRE, Kevin Stanley, says the issue of the credit crisis is yet to hit the business of renting out commercial real estate in any meaningful way.

“We see those two overlapping in a very small area at the moment,” he says.

The above signs of good health highlight the delicate balance expected of the Reserve Bank as it raises rates to put inflation back into the bottle.

Urbis JHD’s Baker notes the blunt nature of interest rate rises in this quest.

“The fact of the matter is it’s based on a conceit you have control over the process,” he says. “Once you set the process in motion, everything depends on confidence. Once the slowdown starts you don’t have any control of how far the impact goes. My fear is that they have reached a tipping point in terms of reducing that confidence.”

And if this is the case, things might get much worse before they get better.

5 Pages…

SMH.com

Suzy Jagger
May 10, 2008

Vallejo, California, is notable for many things. It was the state capital, for example, if only briefly, in 1851. It is the home of Boomerang, Kong, ROAR! and V2: Vertical Velocity, evocatively named rollercoasters at the sprawling Six Flags Discovery Kingdom theme park. And, as of this week, it is seeking to declare itself bankrupt.

Faced with tax revenues that are spiralling downwards, the Mayor and council members voted unanimously this week to file for bankruptcy. Joanne Schivley, one councillor, said that nobody wanted to go down this road, but added: “There do not appear to be a lot of options left. We are going to be out of cash by June 30.”

If it happens, Vallejo will become yet another victim of the American property crash. In the United States, homeowners pay a local tax that is calculated as a percentage of the market value of their house. That’s fine when property values are robust, but America is suffering its worst property slump since the Great Depression, with values down 15 per cent over the past 12 months – and some states, not least the West Coast giant California, have suffered much bigger declines.

Some towns – cities in local parlance – have experienced house price falls of about 40 per cent in the past two years, with as many as one in thirty-one households falling into serious arrears with their mortgages.

While Vallejo could still be bailed out with emergency funds by California, the city has voted in favour of applying to a court for bankruptcy protection under legislation known as Chapter 9. Such a move, particularly by a city such as Vallejo, is very rare. Should the application be accepted, the city would try to negotiate with its creditors, including Wall Street banks that have bought municipal bonds issued by the city.

In the short term, such a move could threaten salary payments to council workers and the provision of utilities such as electricity to council buildings. But in the medium to long term, filing for bankruptcy protection would have far more serious consequences for the residents of Vallejo.

The city would find it either prohibitively expensive or impossible to raise new money through the bond market – a big source of funding – because it would be seen as too risky a creditor. Should the municipal bond market become closed to the city, new infrastructure projects such as roads and bridges could be threatened. In addition, services such as schools and public safety could be reduced. Bad enough in the poor, rural Mid-West, but in the prosperous Bay Area conurbation surrounding San Francisco?

While the city has suffered a fall in tax revenues because some homeowners have entered the foreclosure process and have lost their properties, other residents have stopped paying their property tax as they demand a revaluation of their home.

The city, which has 117,000 residents, is forecasting a $16 million (£8.2 million) deficit for the year starting in July. While it has an annual budget of about $89 million, salaries and pension payments for the local police and firefighters take up about 80 per cent of that sum. Labour unions have demanded pay rises for workers such as firemen and policemen.

James Spiotto, a partner at the law firm Chapman and Cutler in Chicago, would not rule out the possibility that other cities that have also experienced sharp property price falls would have to declare themselves bust. “There is always the possibility that this will become contagious,” he said.

The office for the Mayor of Vallejo failed to return calls yesterday.

Value for money?

House prices in Solano County, California, which includes the city of Vallejo, fell by 26 per cent in March compared with March 2007*

US housing
Sales of existing single family homes (not new builds) March 2007 – 5.33 million across the United States March 2008 – 4.35 million across the United States

Average sale prices of existing family homes
March 2007 – $216,200 across the United States March 2008 – $198,260 across the United States

TimesOnlineUK

The global free market for food and energy is facing its biggest threat in decades as a host of countries push through draconian measures to hold down prices, raising fears of a new “resource nationalism” that could endanger world food security.

India shocked the markets yesterday by suspending trading in futures contracts for a range of farm products in a bid to clamp down on alleged speculators and curb inflation, now running at 7.6pc.

The country’s Forward Markets Commission said contracts for soybean oil, chana (chickpeas), potatoes, and rubber had been banned for four months, even though a report by the Indian parliament last month concluded that soaring food costs had almost nothing to do with the futures contracts. Traders in Mumbai slammed the ban as an act of brazen political populism.

The move has been seen as a concession to India’s Communist MPs - key allies of premier Manmohan Singh - who want a full-fledged ban on futures trading in sugar, cooking oil, and grains.

As food and fuel riots spread across the world, a string of governments have resorted to steps that menace the free flow of food and key commodities. Argentina has banned beef exports, while Egypt and India have stopped shipments of rice.

Kazakhstan has prohibited wheat exports. Russia has slapped a 40pc export duty on shipments, and Pakistan a 35pc duty.

China, Cambodia, Malaysia, Philipines, Sri Lanka, and Vietnam have all imposed export controls or forms of rationing to ease the crisis.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has warned that this lurch towards national controls is becoming a threat to the open global system we all take for granted. “If not handled properly, this crisis could result in a cascade of others and affect political security around the world,” he said.

A new report by UBS says the scramble for scarce raw materials is turning ever more political, with ominous implications for ill-endowed societies that rely on imports.

“The bottom line is that countries with resources, particularly in food and energy are becoming more protective of these resources,” it said.

Nationalist policies are making the crisis worse. Governments are blocking foreign investments in sensitive sectors, imposing arbitary taxes, or meddling in details.

UBS said political intervention in the African Copper Belt, Kazakhstan, and Mongolia was already taking its toll on copper output, while oil companies are being shut out of key markets such as Russia - with damaging effect on oil production.

Even the US and Europe are falling prey to some of these populist impulses. A group of top Democratic senators on Capitol Hill this week called for draconian measures to halt speculative trading on oil futures, widely blamed for pushing crude prices to $124 a barrel.

They have drafted the Consumer-First Energy Act mandating higher margin requirements on oil futures contracts, as well as revoking $17bn in tax concessions for oil companies and imposing a 25pc windfall tax on oil profits.

“Big oil is making money hand over fist: We will hold them accountable for their unconscionable price-gouging and force them to invest in renewable energy,” said Senator Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader.

Jim Newsome, the head of the New York Mercantile Exchange, said trading curbs on hedge funds woold achieve nothing. “All you’re going to do is potentially cripple the US exchanges and move that flow of trading to non-US regulated markets,” he told the Wall Street Journal.

US regulators deny that speculators have been a major force behind the latest surge in oil prices, blaming the rise on relentless growth in demand from China and the Middle East and a string of supply upsets in Russia, Mexico, and the North Sea.

Martin Schulz, MEP, the leader of the Socialist group in the European Parliament, said speculators had crossed a moral line by trying to corner positions in the staple foods at a time when 100m people in the poorest countires are at risk of famine.

“Casino capitalism has taken a seat at the table of the poor. This is immorality carried to the extreme. We need international controls on financial markets,” he said, echoing a feeling share widely by Europe’s political class..

The UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization says the global food bill has risen 57pc in the last year. Soaring freight rates have compounded the effect. The Balic Dry Index has doubled since January, vaulting through the 10,000 mark this week.

The FAO says the cost of food for poor countries that rely heavly on food imports has raised food prices by 74pc.

The import ratio for grains is over 80pc in Eritrea, Sierra Leone, and Niger. It is 65pc in Bangladesh. FAO experts said the diversion of 20pc of the US grain harvest into bio-ethanol for fuel has been a key factor in surging prices from corn, wheat, and other grains.

TelegraphUK

BENTONVILLE, Ark. (AP) — Federal regulators says they’ve closed ANB Financial National Association banks after discovering “unsafe and unsound” business practices there.
David Barr, a spokesman for the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. says many customers served by the bank’s nine locations had accounts under $100,000, which will be fully insured by the government. Barr says customers can continue to write checks and draw money from ATMs through the weekend.

Barr says Pulaski Bank and Trust Co. agreed to assume control over ANB Financial’s bank locations, which will be open Monday.

As of Jan. 31, federal regulators say ANB Financial had about $2.1 billion in assets and $1.8 billion in total deposits.

It was the third closure this year of an FDIC-insured bank. Douglass National Bank, a Missouri bank with $58.5 million in assets, was shut in January; another Missouri institution with assets of $18.7 million, Hume Bank, was shut down in March.

Both were dwarfed in size of ANB Financial, where regulators found lax lending standards, mostly for construction and development loans for projects in Utah, Idaho and Wyoming, as well as Arkansas.

Observers have been watching for signs of bank distress resulting from the mortgage crisis. Profits at federally insured U.S. banks and thrifts plunged to a 16-year low in the fourth quarter as institutions set aside a record-high amount to cover losses from sour mortgages.

The FDIC is planning to beef up its staff, including temporarily hiring up to 25 retired FDIC employees who worked in the agency’s more than 200-person division that handles failed banks. They will handle an anticipated increase in bank failures.

BizYahoo.com

How frustrating it must be to be Ron Paul.

The Texas congressman and Republican presidential candidate always said there was no justification for war with Iraq – no weapons of mass destruction, no threat to the United States – and his colleagues in Congress and most of the American people ignored him.

Ron Paul also saw that we were headed for a financial collapse and runaway inflation because of the Federal Reserve Bank – and his colleagues in Congress and almost all of the American people ignored him.

Now, Americans realize the war was wrong, and they want the troops to come home – but they still vote for candidates who won’t promise to bring the troops home and who are ready or even eager to commit troops elsewhere.

Now, Americans know the economy’s in a recession, if not a depression, and inflation worries loom – but still they vote for candidates who offer no serious monetary reform.

Apparently there is much educational work to be done – and now Ron Paul is taking up that challenge, too.

His new book, “The Revolution: A Manifesto,” presents his political philosophy and provides a blueprint for restoring a peaceful, prosperous American Republic.

Paul shows how Republican politicians pull the wool over conservatives’ eyes. While campaigning, they’ll pick on isolated instances of government waste and promise to abolish them, leading voters to believe they’re supporting the small-government candidate. But once in office, the politicians invariably support greatly increased spending in other areas. “And,” Paul writes, “nothing changes.”

Democrats fool their voters, too. They oppose Republicans’ wars, at least at election time, but they have a list of other wars they’d like to wage in different parts of the world. “And nothing changes.”

Paul argues that voters need to reject the “false choice” between Republicans and Democrats. Whatever their superficial differences, both parties and their candidates will drive the country further down the path of ever-bigger government, empire and economic ruin.

If Americans want to get something different from what they’ve always gotten from Washington, they need to demand radical changes now. The book explains what those changes should be.

In foreign policy, Paul proposes bringing the troops home not only from Iraq, but also from all the places they’re stationed around the world. He shows how this was the policy of the founding fathers and explains why it would work today.

He documents well his claim that we face terrorist threats only because of our Middle East meddling. “When our government meddles around the world, it can stir up hornet’s nests and thereby jeopardize the safety of the American people,” he writes.

Recognizing that isn’t a matter of siding with terrorists – it’s “just common sense.”

The book’s penultimate chapter may be its most important, as it discusses what Paul calls the “forbidden issue in American politics”: our monetary system.

People know we have a Federal Reserve and that it somehow affects our economy, but they know little about how it works. Paul clearly explains how the Fed’s printing more money makes everyone’s dollars worth less – and why higher prices then hurt workers long before their wages catch up. He also explains how the Federal Reserve’s inflationary policy creates economic booms and busts.

The solution? Stop printing more money and allow people to use money backed by gold and silver, as all our money was not so long ago.

Will enough people read and heed Ron Paul’s words to change our course? It’s hard to say.

One thing’s certain, though: If you always do what you’ve always done, you’ll always get what you’ve always gotten. The failure to grasp that simple fact is a strong indicator of insanity.

But for some time now, America has been an insane asylum, with the inmates running it.

Isn’t it about time for the American people to wake up and take the crazies out of office, and move them to a padded cell where they can’t hurt themselves or anyone else?

Ron Paul’s book can go a long way in helping to accomplish all that and more.

And that’s why the crazies have such great fear of Ron Paul and his revolution.

OCRegister.com

Amtrak – America’s socialized passenger rail service – is ever-desperate for passengers to justify its existence. For its latest futile publicity stunt, it wants us all to celebrate “National Train Day” at train stations across America today.

At Union Station in Los Angeles, for example, you can enjoy such not-so-fun-sounding events as a free concert by Drake Bell, star of Superhero Movie; an appearance by “ARTE,” Amtrak’s “environmental mascot;” and a “Train Driving Simulator,” which one might imagine is somewhat like the actual car driving you will do on the way to the event, only with less steering and more cow-catching.

Amid the festivities, there’s one thing we can safely assume no one will be singing about: Amtrak’s draconian new security measures. These reflect a drastic change from Amtrak’s heretofore easygoing policies that allowed you to pretty much just show up and board – no searches, no wandings, no pat-downs. Whatever one might say about Amtrak otherwise, this was its great advantage over air travel in the months and years following September 11, 2001.

Now, though, Amtrak is sending police to perform random screenings of passengers’ carry-on bags. It’s also deploying bomb-sniffing dogs and police armed with automatic weapons to patrol trains and platforms.

If a passenger doesn’t want to have his bag searched, he’s free to decline, not board the train, and have his ticket price refunded.

How any of this will increase passenger safety remains a mystery.

Presumably anyone who wants to carry a bomb onto a train will exercise his option not to have his bag searched, not board the train, and – unless he is an exceptionally lazy terrorist – come back on a day when the screening team isn’t there.

But don’t consider that an argument for screening everyone all the time. After all, why would a terrorist targeting a train bother to board it at all? He can’t hijack it, because there’s no place to take it except where it was going anyway. Presumably it would make a lot more sense – and I don’t think I’m giving anyone any new ideas here – for him to attack the tracks, which Amtrak cannot possibly guard along their entire length.

So it’s difficult to see what benefits this program might bring. But what about the costs?

The first and most obvious cost is compromised liberty and privacy. People should be free to travel without having to show papers or prove they aren’t criminals – especially where, as here, Amtrak has not come forward with any compelling reasons why an exception should be made to this usual rule.

These police searches might conveniently turn up evidence of contraband other than terrorist weapons in passengers’ bags, and allow them to be arrested for that instead. Indeed, how long will it be before the bomb-sniffing dogs are supplemented by those of the dope-sniffing variety? You might argue that it’s just as well to catch people committing other crimes, even victimless ones like drug possession. But if that’s the main “benefit,” then Amtrak should say so and not use the pretense of protecting us from terrorism.

Another cost of Amtrak’s plans is that they may make Americans accustomed to hallmarks of a police state: random searches, and men in uniform with big guns. That may not matter much to the masses of sheep who often seem so willing to trade liberty for false security, but it still means a lot to many Americans, and meant a lot to our Founding Fathers as well.

Amtrak may also pay a monetary cost: the new measures not only will cost money to implement, but may also make rail travel even less popular than it already is. Even if we assume that most Americans don’t mind giving up some liberty, travelers don’t like to be slowed down. Sure, Amtrak claims that the screenings are “not expected” to cause delays, but such promises from an essentially governmental entity are hardly reassuring, especially in light of the Transportation Security Administration’s record.

One thing that is certainly “not expected” by anyone is a profit for Amtrak in 2008, or ever. Instead, Amtrak has to return to taxpayers with its hand out year after year, presently getting about $1 billion annually from the federal government and many millions more from state governments. A real business could not function in this way: it would close its unprofitable lines (in Amtrak’s case, almost all of them) or immediately find a way to make them profitable, or it would go out of business.

In any event, a private business would not waste money on pointless projects like Amtrak’s security scam – which confer no benefit to anyone but instead impose costs on both the business and its customer.

May 10, 2008
LewRockwell.com

The Pentagon has posted to its website the roughly 8,000 pages and audio tapes it was forced to provide to the New York Times regarding its “military analyst” program. Anyone who reads through them, as I’ve now done, can only be left with one conclusion (other than being extremely impressed with David Barstow’s work in putting together this story): if this wasn’t an example of an illegal, systematic “domestic propaganda campaign” by the Pentagon, then nothing is.

Despite this, the truly extraordinary blackout by the major television and cable news networks — which were complicit in this program — continues. Howard Kurtz of CNN and The Washington Post previously called this blackout “pathetic”, and yesterday, The Politico published a relatively impressive article further documenting the “deafening silence” from the networks at the center of this story. As the article noted:

While bloggers have kept the story simmering, Democratic congressional leaders also are speaking out, calling for investigations that could provoke the networks to finally cover the Times story — and, in effect, themselves.
Beyond the networks’ keeping this scandal completely concealed from their viewers, The Politico story noted that only two network executives — CNN’s President Jim Walton and ABC’s President David Westin (.pdf) — even bothered to respond to the letters sent by Rep. Rosa DeLauro to all networks demanding answers with regard to their complicity in this program. When responding, the two executives — exactly as Brian Williams was when he was finally forced by blog-inspired commenters to respond (on his blog, but not on NBC) — were casually dismissive of the entire matter, insisting that they had done nothing wrong (other than CNN’s acknowledgment that they failed to detect a conflict of interest with regard to a single military analyst they had used).

Let’s just lay out some of the relevant facts about what happened — looking at one episode illustrating how this entire program worked and what CNN specifically did. Then, we can see whether CNN served as an eager instrument for a corrupt domestic propaganda campaign by the Pentagon, or whether, as Walton claims, CNN acted with perfect propriety. Tomorrow, we’ll do the same with regard to ABC.

* * * * *

In June of 2005, communications officials in the Pentagon began planning a military-sponsored trip to Guantanamo for selected retired military officers who were currently working as “news analysts” for various television networks and magazines. Amnesty International had just issued its most scathing report yet about Gitmo, as part of its 2005 report on America’s “new gulag of prisons around the world beyond the reach of the law and decency.” It specifically called Gitmo “the gulag of our times,” and detailed years of extreme abuses that had taken place there.

To counter Amnesty’s findings, the Pentagon planned the Gitmo trip over the course of two weeks in mid-June. They eventually confirmed June 24 as the date for the tour, with a list of ten participants, including retired Gen. Don Shepperd of CNN, along with various “military analysts” from MSNBC and Fox.

From the beginning, the whole trip was transparently propagandistic, and there was no possibility that the participants could learn anything meaningful about Gitmo. It was a one-day itinerary (pp. 7476-7477). They left Andrews Air Force Base at 6:45 a.m. on June 24, and did not land in Cuba until 10:00 a.m. Virtually the entire 3 hour plane ride was filled with “briefings” by various DoD officials, and after they landed — and before they were taken to the detention camps — they were given another 90 minutes of briefings.

They did not even arrive at Camp Delta — where the detainees are kept — until 12:35 p.m. that afternoon. After a 50-minute lunch with the troops, they began a guided tour of Camp Delta at 1:20 p.m. which lasted a grand total of one hour and 25 minutes. Packed into that 85-minute tour was a viewing of an interrogation, a tour of an “unoccupied cellblock,” and a visit to the detention hospital. That was all the time they spent touring Camp Delta: 85 minutes.

Then, at 2:45 p.m., they were brought to Camp V for 10 minutes, followed by a tour of Camp X-Ray for 35 minutes. Then they left Cuba — to fly home, with the “wheels up” on their plane at exactly 4:30 p.m. the same day, arriving back at Andrews that night at 7:45 p.m. They were then brought back to the Pentagon at 8:00 p.m. They spent a grand total of 3 hours and 55 minutes at the Guantanamo detention facilities, with almost one hour of that devoted to lunch with the troops. That was the sum total of their grand tour of the detention facility: less than 3 hours. And then the propaganda campaign to malign and dispute the extensive, amply documented findings of Amnesty was unleashed in full.

* * * * *

In a “trip report” he filed with his Pentagon handlers, CNN’s Gen. Shepperd explicitly acknowledged both the blatantly propagandistic purpose of the trip, as well as the extremely limited and controlled scope of information to which he had access in a single-day trip (7434). Shepperd stated:

“Did we drink the ‘Government Kool-Aid?’ — of course, and that was the purpose of the trip.” In his Pentagon report, Shepperd added the obvious: that “a one day visit does not an expert make,” that “the government was obviously going to put its best foot forward to get out its message,” and that “former military visitors are more likely to agree with government views than a more appropriately skeptical press.”

Shepperd’s statement as to the purpose of the GITMO trip — to have the pro-government analysts “drink the government Kool-Aid” — was unquestionably accurate, as multiple Pentagon documents reflect. As but one example, a planning email from Pentagon official Dallas Lawrence, dated June 21, 2005, highlighted the importance of scheduling the Gitmo trip to ensure that The American Spectator’s Jed Babbin could participate, noting (7486):

He is hosting a number of radio shows this summer. I would have to think he would have every member of Congress on to talk about their trip together — a definite plus for us looking to expand the echo chamber.
Shepperd, despite being employed by CNN as an “analyst,” clearly had as his first priority ensuring the success of the Pentagon’s messaging mission. Upon returning from the Gitmo trip, Shepperd, on June 25, sent an email to Pentagon officials praising the Gitmo tour and telling them: “let me know if I can help you.” He signed the email: “Don Shepperd (CNN military analyst)” (7470):…

The Rest…

Salon.com