Showing posts with label Corruption. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Corruption. Show all posts

Tuesday, November 27, 2012

Supreme Court rules cops can be filmed


Russia Today

Smile for the camera, coppers — the US Supreme Court has decided to let stand a lesser ruling that allows citizens in the state of Illinois to record police officers performing their official duties.

Police officers  in Chicago, Illinois.(AFP Photo / Joshua Lott)Up until just last year, an anti-eavesdropping legislation on the books across Illinois meant any person within the state could be imprisoned for as much as 15 years for recording a police officer without expressed consent. In August 2011, a federal appeals court struck down the law, but an Illinois prosecutor has asked the Supreme Court — unsuccessfully — to challenge that ruling.

On Monday, the top justices in the US said that they would not hear the case and will instead rely on last year’s ruling where a federal appeals court in Chicago agreed that the eavesdropping law, as written, “likely violates” the First Amendment.

“The Illinois eavesdropping statue restricts a medium of expression commonly used for the preservation and communication of information and ideas, thus triggering First Amendment scrutiny” and that the “statute restricts far more speech than necessary to protect legitimate privacy interests,” the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals opined previously.

Under that ruling and thanks to the Supreme Court’s refusal to weigh in this week, last year’s decision to not allow the enforcement of that law will stand, essentially making it for once-and-for-all perfectly legal at the highest level to tape record cops on the job.

Harvey Grossman, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois, says in a statement that the ACLU was "pleased that the Supreme Court has refused to take this appeal.”

“The ACLU of Illinois continues to believe that in order to make the rights of free expression and petition effective, individuals and organizations must be able to freely gather and record information about the conduct of government and their agents – especially the police,” Grossman says. “The advent and widespread accessibility of new technologies make the recording and dissemination of pictures and sound inexpensive, efficient and easy to accomplish."

The ACLU says they will now attempt to secure a permanent injunction in the case of Anita Alvarez v. ACLU of Illinois so that state attorneys will be barred from attempting to enforce the eavesdropping law ever again, “so that the ACLU’s program of monitoring police activity in public can move forward in the future without any threat of prosecution.”


Friday, November 16, 2012

Arizona Election Fraud: Mickey Duniho and Jim March Report Election Shenanigans to Pima County's Board of Supervisors




 County Board of Supervisors Comment for 11-13-2012

I have not spoken in this forum since I was appointed to your Election Integrity Commission four years ago. A sequence of events has brought me here today.

* * * * * * * *

The first event: In November 2011 the state added new election requirements, including one that counties must sort early ballots by precincts for the hand count audit. John Moffatt was involved, and reported to your commission on changes proposed and made – but did not report this new requirement to your commission.

The second event: In June and July 2012, Brad Nelson applied for and received a waiver from this requirement. Mr. Nelson neither consulted nor informed your commission of this action.

The third event: On October 26, with statistical evidence suggesting potential fraud nationally in computerized vote counting, an emergency meeting of your Election Integrity Commission unanimously approved a recommendation for today’s meeting that you order the sorting of early ballots and a precinct-based hand count audit to confirm the honesty of Pima County elections.

The fourth event: In response to a lawsuit the County included copies of two letters which revealed the existence of the new early ballot sorting requirement and Mr. Nelson’s successful request for a waiver of that requirement.

The fifth event: Without informing or consulting your Election Integrity Commission, your staff postponed your consideration of our recommendation to November 20.

The sixth event: In response to a query about why your Commission’s recommendation was missing from the November 13th agenda, Mr. Moffatt attributed the delay to ballot counting and possible recounts and challenges. The reasons given are clearly not relevant to delaying your consideration of our recommendation, and serve only to tighten the time frame in which to organize people to implement a precinct-based hand count audit before the ballots are moved to the Treasurer’s vault.

This sequence of events raises the question whether there is genuine importance or credence given to election integrity in our county. Your staff has been disrespectful to your Election Integrity Commission and by implication insubordinate to you.

The question now is whether you will take any action to address these acts of disrespect to you and the Election Integrity Commission you created four years ago, after listening to two years of public concern about the conduct of elections in Pima County, and after Pima County lost, at great taxpayer expense, a lawsuit having to do with election transparency.

If there is no election fraud to mask, there is no reason for Pima County’s continued tolerance of the obvious anti-transparency efforts demonstrated by your staff.

Thank you for your attention.

Michael A. Duniho

Monday, November 5, 2012

Pima County Judge Refuses Citizen's Request that Pima County Elections Follow the Law


J.T. Waldron

Pima County Judge James E. Marner denied every request by citizens concerned about election integrity in Pima County.  Parroting the previous Pima County judges' claims about the lack of jurisdiction, Marner has paved the way for Pima County to continue subverting efforts to improve election integrity.   Key auditing functions like the simple placement of election returns receipts in election returns envelops (A.R.S. §16-615), incorporating sufficient quantities for hand count audits and the separation of early ballots by precinct will fall outside of any meaningful law enforcement.  One of the main obstacles to improving elections in Pima County is the county's choice to simply adhere to what is legally permissible instead of what truly achieves election transparency.

The appellate court, which looms just above Pima County's insular legal structure, ruled in favor of the court's jurisdiction to intervene when the legislative branch and the executive branch fail to provide an adequate remedy in a constitutional crisis. As Brad Roach stated in his closing arguments in last Thursday's hearing, "To say you don't have the authority because there already been some rules that passed, it fails. It has to fail, because that's what court systems do is make sure state executives and state legislatures follow the state law."

In his analysis, Judge Marner refers to Judge Kyle Bryson's previous ruling over jurisdiction. He attempts to clarify the previous judge's ruling against what the appellate courts ruled:

"Judge Bryson's order does not find that he lacked jurisdiction to hear challenge and, as evidenced by his detailed analysis of the arguments before him, he obviously accepted jurisdiction to hear the contest. However, as indicated below, the nature of the requested relief by the Plaintiff does not raise a question of where this court's jurisdiction ends."

Citizens concerned about rigged elections know that jurisdiction "ends" once elections are truly verifiable and transparent. Local citizens have introduced very finite measures for this outcome.

The only hope for citizens to restore the integrity of elections within the system is to once again appeal to a higher legal authority. The previous case heard by Judge Kyle Bryson is currently back in the appeals court and will be one of few options for straightening out elections within Pima County.

Closing arguments in last Thursday's hearing (Pardon the dirty tape heads):






Various figures of Pima County's legal establishment helping the county preserve their right to cheat in elections. Includes the five judges (Borek, Miller, Marner, Harrington and Bryson) that have juggled the hot potato of election integrity.  Can anybody guess what the green monster represents?



Related:

Pima County Circumvents It's Own Election Integrity Commission to Get a Waiver that Removes Proper Audit of County Election


Arizona Citizens Sue Pima County to Enforce Existing Election Laws

HSBC’s money laundering fines to top US$1.5-billion, criminal charges likely


FP Street
Steve Slater
Matt Scuffham

Reuters
HSBC said the U.S. investigation into anti-money laundering 
rule breaches had damaged the bank’s reputation.

The report undoubtedly caused considerable reputational damage to HSBC. The extent to which that has resulted in loss of business is hard to measure, but it has undoubtedly damaged our brand

LONDON — A U.S. fine for anti-money laundering rule breaches could cost HSBC significantly more than US$1.5 billion and is likely to lead to criminal charges, Europe’s biggest bank said on Monday.

HSBC said the U.S. investigation had damaged the bank’s reputation and forced it to set aside a further US$800 million to cover a potential fine for breaches in anti-money laundering controls in Mexico, adding to US$700 million put aside in July.

“It could be significantly higher,” Chief Executive Stuart Gulliver told reporters on a conference call, saying the latest provision was based on discussions with the various U.S. authorities involved in the probe.

The timing of any settlement is in the hands of regulators and is likely to involve the filing of corporate criminal and civil charges, the bank said.

A U.S. Senate report in July slammed HSBC for letting clients shift potentially illicit funds from countries such as Mexico, Iran, the Cayman Islands, Saudi Arabia and Syria. HSBC had warned earlier in the year it could face criminal or civil charges as part of the investigation.

The London-based bank has said the issue was “shameful and embarrassing” after the report criticised a “pervasively polluted” culture at the bank and said HSBC’s Mexican operations had moved US$7 billion into its U.S. operations between 2007 and 2008.

“The report undoubtedly caused considerable reputational damage to HSBC. The extent to which that has resulted in loss of business is hard to measure, but it has undoubtedly damaged our brand,” Gulliver said.

He said a number of staff had left the firm as a result of the investigation and a number had had pay clawed back.

Shares in HSBC were down 1.4% at 617.5 pence by 1130 GMT, slightly weaker than a fall in the European bank index.

“The money laundering provision is a concern, particularly given the uncertainty on what the final figure might be,” said Richard Hunter, head of equities at stockbroker Hargreaves Lansdown.

The issue is another blow for the reputation of British banks, after rival Barclays was fined US$450 million in June for rigging Libor interest rates and the industry has had to set aside more than 12 billion pounds to compensate UK customers for mis-selling insurance products.

Gulliver said it would take time to clean up the mess.

“There’s a whole series of things that came from probably a decade in the 2000 to 2008-09 period that have surfaced now that the industry needs to sort out, remediate, and make sure doesn’t happen again.

”It will take a chunk of time to clean the system and then it will take a little bit longer than that for trust to be restored more fully,“ he said, adding that it was his job to get HSBC back to a position ”where it’s regarded as the best of the bunch“.

HSBC Chairman Douglas Flint will appear before UK lawmakers investigating culture and standards later on Monday. He will be quizzed alongside new Barclays CEO Antony Jenkins and Santander UK boss Ana Botin at 1600 GMT.

COST CUTS, JOB CUT

S HSBC reported an underlying profit – after stripping out the impact of disposals and changes in the value of its own debt – in the July-September quarter of US$5.0 billion, up from a revised US$2.2 billion a year earlier.

It was helped by a bigger-than-expected drop in losses from bad debts and a solid performance by its investment bank arm.

Underlying operating expenses rose by 16% during the quarter from a year ago due to higher compliance and regulatory costs, which the bank said amounted to US$200 million to US$300 million.

Gulliver is well into a three-year restructuring plan to streamline the bank and he said he expects to surpass his target of cutting annual costs by US$3.5 billion, after driving through US$3.1 billion of savings already.

But subdued revenue growth and the higher compliance costs left its underlying cost/income ratio at 63.7% in the third quarter, well above his 48-52% target. Gulliver admitted hitting that was ”proving challenging“, but said he remained committed to delivering it by the end of 2013.

HSBC took another US$357 million charge for mis-selling payment protection insurance in Britain, lifting the total amount set aside to US$2.1 billion. The bank said it paid out US$1 billion in compensation.

Gulliver said more job cuts were likely before the end of 2013 at his bank, whose origins date back to 1865 as a financier of trade between Europe and Asia and operates in 84 countries.

HSBC has cut almost 30,000 jobs in the last two years – close to what Gulliver had predicted under his revamp – although about half of those have been due to disposals. ”In terms of the organic reduction, there’s still some way to go,“ he said.

He has sold or closed 41 businesses as part of that plan, including including selling its U.S. credit card arm and half of its U.S. branches, and said he was about three quarters of the way through that plan.


Sunday, November 4, 2012

Pima County Circumvents It's Own Election Integrity Commission to Get a Waiver that Removes Proper Audit of County Elections


J.T. Waldron

A key document has surfaced in a recent lawsuit in Pima County, Arizona, that suggests much more activity affecting the reliability of elections took place in secret meetings with Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett. When the 2011 revision of the state elections manual added a sentence requiring presorting of early ballots by precinct, the County secretly went to the Secretary of State and got a waiver, without any disclosure to their own Election Integrity Commission. This activity certainly falls within the purview of the Commission and presorting had been frequently discussed by the Commission.

Although Bennett is familiar with Pima County's Election Integrity Commission, he may or may not be aware that the meetings took place without the knowledge of the other Commission members. Pima County employee John Moffatt and staunch county supporter Benny White were the two members of Pima County's Election Integrity Commission (EIC) that sought changes to the Secretary of State’s Election Procedures manual. One key substantive auditing provision, to sort early ballots by precinct, was removed without the knowledge of the rest of the EIC.

The letter from the Secretary of State, dated June 29th of 2012, acknowledges the request made by Pima County Elections Director Brad Nelson to avoid presorting early ballots by precincts and grants an exemption for the upcoming Fall election. At no point was this change mentioned at any of the commission meetings. Retired NSA analyst Mickey Duniho, Computer expert Tom Ryan, and Black Box Voting member Jim March are among the members of Pima County's EIC that strongly recommended presorting the early returns by precinct.

The process for revising the Secretary of State’s Election Procedures manual begun in 2011 when Ken Bennett formed a commission consisting of Pima County employee John Moffatt and Benny White. Although Brad Nelson is the recipient of the exemption, it is unknown whether he participated in that committee. During the time in 2011 when that committee was meeting, John Moffatt and Benny White regularly reported to the Pima County Election Integrity Committee about the changes that were being recommended. At no time did they mention the Secretary of State's intention of requiring presorting of early ballots by precinct. At almost every EIC meeting, however, Mickey Duniho and other members frequently discussed with the board the importance of presorting early ballots by precinct before conducting the hand count audit.

Citizens filed a lawsuit against Pima County and held a hearing earlier this week over presorting early ballots along with other auditing procedures provided by Arizona Statutes. They filed this lawsuit absent any knowledge that this provision was added by the Secretary of State and later exempted at the request of Pima County. Had it not been for the current lawsuit to get Pima County to follow existing election laws, we would have never discovered this activity taking place behind the backs of the rest of the Election Integrity Commission. Such trickery seems to involve far more work and effort than actually negotiating the logistics of presorting early ballots by precinct.

It appears that County Attorney Chris Straub has reported this change and the accompanying waiver to the court in this recent trial. This disclosure is likely required to avoid potential sanctions, even possible disbarment, for withholding information from the court that is pertinent to the case.

Those who knew that the Election Integrity Commission was being circumvented are obviously Benny White and John Moffatt. Brad Nelson and Chuck Huckelberry would also have a difficult time claiming ignorance over withholding information and secretly obtaining a waiver from Ken Bennett to avoid compliance with the new rule. Every EIC meeting has transcripts and are sufficient to show that Moffatt and White were falsely representing what took place with the Secretary of State.

Was Benny White's role in working with the Secretary of State to enhance the impression of the EIC's participation in the revision of the Secretary of State’s Election Procedures manual? Pima County has no doubts over Benny White's loyalty to those currently entrenched in Pima County's bureaucracy. In 2008, he provided false testimony and slandered John Brakey to the Pima County Board of Supervisors when Brakey was falsely arrested while serving as an elections observer (see below). Brakey has so far refrained from suing Pima County over his false arrest, which was requested by Brad Nelson. Despite what we had previously predicted, Benny White indeed testified in the hearing earlier this week. You could see the difficulty in getting a direct answer out of him as he's asked his position over presorting early ballots by precinct.



Discovery of this "runaround" by the county sheds new light on the dynamics of last week's emergency meeting proposed by Mickey Duniho. Here they are spending hours discussing the importance of presorting the early ballots. Benny White left early because he claims to have a conflict of interest with the upcoming court case. Absence makes withholding information a lot easier. Brad Nelson has the easy excuse of being busy during the election season (It's also the excuse Pima County uses for not complying with state election laws). Pima County employee John Moffatt is left to sit through the whole meeting discussing a subject that he knows has been "managed" behind their backs. It's his job.



Here is Benny White lying to the Pima County Board of Supervisors:



With all the scurrying behind the scenes, one has to wonder what part of the election do they plan to alter?

Saturday, October 27, 2012

CNBC Exec’s Children Murdered, 1 Day After CNBC Reports $43 Trillion Bankster Lawsuit


IntelHub
JG Vibes

This week financial news organization CNBC gave some mainstream attention to the largest money laundering and racketeering lawsuit in United States History, in which “Banksters” and their U.S. racketeering partners are being accused of laundering of 43 trillion dollars worth of ill gotten gains.

The lawsuit is said to involve officials located in the highest offices of government and the financial sector.
Since this information was surprisingly revealed by the mainstream news organization there has been a very suspicious and deadly fallout at the CNBC headquarters.
Within hours the original page for the article was taken down, and CNBC senior vice president Kevin Krim received news that his children were killed under very suspicious circumstances.
It seems that the murder happened first and then the page was removed later.
According to mainstream accounts the children’s nanny is responsible for the murders, allegedly stabbing both children.
However, those same mainstream news sources report the highly unlikely story that the nanny slit her own throat just after committing the homicides.
Police have released very little information and although a wider plot has not been officially implicated, it seems very possible that these murders are a show of force against the press organization for releasing such damning information about the most powerful people in the world.
Here is some more information about the lawsuit from the Wall Street Journal:
“In the District Court lawsuit, Spire Law Group, LLP — on behalf of home owner across the Country and New York taxpayers, as well as under other taxpayer recompense laws — has expanded its mass tort action into federal court in Brooklyn, New York, seeking to halt all foreclosures nationwide pending the return of the $43 trillion ($43,000,000,000.00) by the “Banksters” and their co-conspirators, seeking an audit of the Fed and audits of all the “bailout programs” by an independent receiver such as Neil Barofsky, former Inspector General of the TARP program who has stated that none of the TARP money and other “bailout money” advanced from the Treasury has ever been repaid despite protestations to the contrary by the Defendants as well as similar protestations by President Obama and the Obama Administration both publicly on national television and more privately to the United States Congress.
Because the Obama Administration has failed to pursue any of the “Banksters” criminally, and indeed is actively borrowing monies for Mr. Obama’s campaign from these same “Banksters” to finance its political aspirations, the national group of plaintiff home owners has been forced to now expand its lawsuit to include racketeering, money laundering and intentional violations of the Iranian Nations Sanctions and Embargo Act by the national banks included among the “Bankster” Defendants. “
Some of the alleged conspirators are Attorney General Holder, Assistant Attorney General Tony West, the brother in law of Defendant California Attorney General Kamala Harris, Jon Corzine (former New Jersey Governor), Robert Rubin (former Treasury Secretary and Bankster), Timothy Geitner, Treasury Secretary, Vikram Pandit (recently resigned and disgraced Chairman of the Board of Citigroup), Valerie Jarrett (a Senior White House Advisor), Anita Dunn (a former “communications director” for the Obama Administration), Robert Bauer (husband of Anita Dunn and Chief Legal Counsel for the Obama Re-election Campaign), as well as the “Banksters” themselves, and their affiliates and conduits.
It is expected that all news on this subject will be removed from CNBC, and that other news organizations will be discouraged from covering such information.
However, screen shots of the original CNBC article were taken to verify the authenticity of this story.
Assassination and brute intimidation are common strategies for the ruling class to use on people who may threaten their agenda.
This is the second situation this week in which a high level executive was the victim of a suspicious attack that seemed very much like an assassination.
The Intel Hub just reported that Nicholas Mockford, a 60 year old British executive for the oil company ExxonMobil was shot dead in front of his wife in an assassination-style killing in Brussels.

We will be keeping a close eye on both of these stories and provide more details as they become available.

Friday, October 26, 2012

Pima commission to discuss chance of election fraud in larger precincts


Arizona Daily Star
Carli Brosseau

The Pima County Election Integrity Commission is holding a special meeting today to talk about whether one member's statistical analysis of votes in recent elections shows evidence of fraud.

Under the group's bylaws, an emergency meeting can be held if at least five of the nine members call for one.

Michael "Mickey" Duniho
His presentation to the Election Integrity Board
will be posted on The Intercept today.
Mickey Duniho, a retired National Security Agency computer programmer, requested the meeting two days ago after he began plotting cumulative votes by precinct and noticing that outcomes seemed to differ by precinct size.

He was replicating earlier studies done by California researchers Francois Choquette and James Johnson, an aerospace engineer and a financial analyst. The researchers argue that their analysis of the recent Republican primary shows Mitt Romney making strange vote gains in most states' large precincts.

Duniho - formerly a Republican election observer in Maryland, a supporter of Democrat-backed lawsuits against Pima County's Elections Department and now a registered independent - said that his results seem to parallel those of Choquette and Johnson, who tried to account for their findings using demographics.

He is now collecting demographic data by precinct to try to explain his results with other factors, such as whether a precinct is rural or the affluence of the precinct's residents.

Duniho suspects that the patterns he found show a 10 percent flip of votes in favor of the Republican candidate in the 2010 race between Raúl Grijalva and Ruth McClung and the race between Gabrielle Giffords and Jesse Kelly the same year, as well as votes switched to benefit Romney in the Republican primary.

"The problem is figuring out what the statistical evidence does mean," Duniho said. "The computer is a black box. It is very easy for the guy who wrote the program to do just about anything."

At today's meeting, Duniho hopes to persuade the county Elections Department to sort early ballots by precinct before doing the hand-count audit required by law.

He has been advocating for that sorting, as well as for upping the percentage of ballots hand-counted, for about six years, arguing that his method boosts the chances of revealing fraud if it were to occur.

By law, Arizona counties must do a hand-count audit of 1 percent of early ballots and 2 percent of precincts in at least one federal and one state race. Pima County already audits more than required - 4 percent of precinct-cast ballots and 1 percent of early ballots. No local races are audited.

Some of the commission's members have argued strongly against holding the meeting and worry that it could unnecesarily increase fears about the vote count.

Benny White providing false testimony
to the Pima County Board of Supervisors.
about John Brakey's arrest while monitoring
elections in the Fall of 2008.
Benny White, a Republican election observer, responded to news of the meeting request with a sharply worded email.

"After reviewing the academic research involved with the links in the message, I conclude that the allegations being made are absolute nonsense," he wrote. "These academics don't take into account the fact that election results are the response by voters to campaigns and candidates. …

"I think there is a greater probability that fluctuations in the electrical voltage of the lines serving the election department have more to do with variations in election results than these alleged anomalies."

The county's technical consultant on election matters, John Moffatt, agrees that the data do not seem to show a vote flip in Pima County, but he does think the California researchers may be on to something with their findings in some other states.

Pima County employee John Moffatt speaks of
"witch hunts" in the past, but is responsible
for the incoherent rationale that required a suit
to obtain electronic public records. 
"It's worth paying attention to, and we took it seriously," he said. "My personal opinion is that it's another witch hunt, but our responsibility is to check this stuff out, not just blow it off."

He adamantly rejects allegations that county elections staff somehow tampered with any results.

The county's elections director, Brad Nelson, will not be at the meeting to approve a change of audit procedures because of family issues, but county workers involved in those processes caution that while it's theoretically possible to make Duniho's suggested change, it would be logistically difficult.

"That's a monumental task," Pima County Recorder F. Ann Rodriguez said. "It's kind of late to be changing the procedures in the middle of a major election."

The sorting machine needed to do the job efficiently would cost at least $125,000, said Chris Roads, deputy recorder and registrar of voters.

To do the sorting by hand would likely take two days, Moffatt said.

The window to challenge a vote count after an election in Arizona is five days after the canvass.

Wednesday, October 24, 2012

Karl Rove's Electronic Empire Of Fraud


Jim March
Jill Simpson

Jill Simpson and Jim March are election integrity researchers who have traveled the country documenting the various elements of Rove's electronic election fraud network, guided by Ms. Simpson's past as a volunteer GOP operative directly under Karl Rove.

Jim March is a specialist in electronic voting systems and one of Bev Harris' supporters at BlackBoxVoting.org.

Together they have produced the first “big picture” outline of what the total election fraud network looks like, at least as connected to Karl Rove (which is most of it).

They are particularly concerned due to the passage of something called the “MOVE Act” in 2009. This new federal law for Military Overseas Voting Enhancement purported to make voting more “efficient” for this surprisingly large class of voters consisting of military, various “contractors” overseas, consulate staff and the usual mix of US business people overseas.

The act specified new federal funds for new systems to support the MOVE Act, which requires that these voters have the option to both register to vote and vote electronically over the Internet. No security provisions were put in – at all. And worst of all, states are not allowed to put in security provisions more strict than the MOVE Act specifies if it slows down the “efficiency goals” of the MOVE Act in any way.

Scytl, an up-and-coming voting system vendor out of Barcelona Spain set up a series of sham US offices but in reality ran these critical functions out of Spain.

To fully implement “MOVE Act” election fraud, data mining companies would be needed to identify which overseas voters to impersonate – we have identified two including one with a notorious past as a cocaine dealer. Political strategists would be needed to identify races and counties to target – we have located those as well. Corruptable county election officials would be a boon to this scheme and we know how that works too.

We will be taking questions and doing a brief intro today at high noon, National Press Club

ElectionProtectionAction.org Press Contact 614-361-9434

The following audio clip contains key excerpts from last Monday's radio broadcast with Jim March,  Jill Simpson, Craig Unger and Mark Crispin Miller. Jim March identifies the MOVE act as containing the likely path for how the upcoming 2012 Presidential race can be rigged through Karl Rove and his operatives. Towards the end of the clip, he lends his expertise about what to specifically watch for this election season.




For larger view, click here.


German Parliament Denied Access To Inspect German Gold Reserves Due To ‘Lack Of Visiting Rooms’


Silver Doctors

German Federal auditors handed in a report slamming the Bundesbank for not inspecting their foreign held gold reserves to verify their book value. The report says the gold bars “have never been physically checked by the Bundesbank itself or other independent auditors regarding their authenticity or weight.” Instead, it relies on “written confirmations by the storage sites.”  The lion’s share of Germany’s gold reserves (nearly 3,400 tons estimated at $190 billion) are housed in vaults of the US Federal Reserve, the Bank of England and the Bank of France since the post-war days, when they were worried about a Cold War Soviet invasion. The Bundesbank stated, “There is no doubt about the integrity of the foreign storage sites in this regard”. In contrast with best industry practices Germany’s gold reserves do not seem to be independently verified by a third party. Philipp Missfelder, a politician from Merkel’s own party, has asked the Bundesbank for the right to view the gold bars in Paris and London, but the central bank has denied the request, citing the lack of visitor rooms in those facilities, German’s daily Bild reported. The Bundesbank won’t let German parliament members inspect the German gold vaulted abroad because the central bank vaulting facilities supposedly lack “visiting rooms.“ And yet one of those vaults, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, offers the public tours that include “an exclusive visit to the gold vault”.
From Goldcore:
Today’s AM fix was USD 1,717.00, EUR 1,317.22, and GBP 1,072.12 per ounce.
Yesterday’s AM fix was USD 1,725.00, EUR 1,321.03, and GBP 1,075.10 per ounce.
Silver is trading at $31.80/oz, €24.52/oz and £19.95/oz. Platinum is trading at $1,590.25/oz, palladium at $605.25/oz and rhodium at $1,125/oz.
Gold climbed $6.40 or 0.37% in New York yesterday and closed at $1,728.50. Silver hit a high of $32.434 and finished trading with a gain of 1%.
Gold edged down on Tuesday, in tandem with equities that relinquished gains, however demand from jewellers supported prices as investors await the policy statement from the US Federal Reserve meeting to be released on Wednesday at 18:15 GMT.
No major announcements are expected to come out of the meeting.  Last month the Fed committed to hold rates low even after the economic recovery has strengthened. This was the signal that indicated it will continue intervening until the economy grows fast enough to decrease US unemployment sharply.
The euro remained firm against the dollar as the market expects Spain to apply for a bailout within the next month.  Now that Spain’s regional elections are complete and with Spain’s Prime Minister Rajoy’s People’s Party winning 41 out of 75 seats in the Galician assembly this affirmed the approval of financial austerity measures and paves the way for a formal bailout from the EU.
Spain’s central bank announced this morning that the Spanish economy contracted at a faster pace in Q3 (1.7% vs. 1.3%) and that the country may miss its budget-deficit target because of tax-revenue shortfalls.
In India, demand for the yellow metal climbed overnight after a rebound in the rupee discounted prices by 1%.
German Federal auditors handed in a report slamming the Bundesbank for not inspecting their foreign held gold reserves to verify their book value.
The report says the gold bars “have never been physically checked by the Bundesbank itself or other independent auditors regarding their authenticity or weight.” Instead, it relies on “written confirmations by the storage sites.”
The lion’s share of Germany’s gold reserves (nearly 3,400 tons estimated at $190 billion) are housed in vaults of the US Federal Reserve, the Bank of England and the Bank of France since the post-war days, when they were worried about a Cold War Soviet invasion.

The Colombian “War on Drugs”, A Family Affair


Global Research
Tom Burghardt


Extractive Capitalism and the Divisions in the Latin American Progressive CampLast month’s capture of Colombian drug lord Daniel “El Loco” Barrera by Venezuelan police was hailed as a “victory” in the “War on Drugs.”Barrera, accused of smuggling some 900 tons of cocaine into Europe and the U.S. throughout his infamous career, was described by Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos, who announced the arrest on national television, as “the last of the great capos.”

But what of the “capo” who enjoyed high office, is wined and dined by U.S. corporations and conservative think-tanks, owns vast tracks of land, is a “visiting scholar” at a prominent American university (Georgetown) and now sits on the Board of Directors of Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation?

When will they be brought to ground?

A Family Affair

To clarify the questions above, one need look no further than the kid-gloves approach taken by the media when it comes to former Colombian President, the U.S. “Presidential Medal of Freedom” recipient Álvaro Uribe.

Accused by human rights organizations over his role in the forced disappearance of thousands of Colombians during two terms in office (2002-2010), Uribe may still land in the dock as a result of ongoing investigations by Colombia’s Supreme Court into official corruption, drug trafficking and mass murder.

Recent arrests by Colombian authorities and revelations by the president’s former allies however, are beginning to draw a circle around Uribe and the U.S. secret state in some of the hemisphere’s worst human rights abuses of previous decades.

As the net tightens, members of the president’s own family are sharply focused in the cross-hairs of investigators. Back in June, Antifascist Calling reported on the arrest of Ana Maria Uribe Cifuentes and her mother, Dolly Cifuentes Villa on drug trafficking and money laundering charges. The U.S Treasury Department froze their assets last year.

Accused by the Justice Department of having trafficked some 30 tons of cocaine into the U.S. as business partners of Sinaloa Cartel boss Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán, the women, members of the Cifuentes Villa crime family led by Dolly’s brother, Jorge Milton Cifuentes Villa, are prominent members of Colombia’s jet-setting narco-bourgeoisie.

According to the Justice Department, the investigation revealed that “the Cifuentes Villa drug trafficking organization was using sophisticated drug trafficking routes to distribute multi-ton cocaine loads from Colombia through Central America, for ultimate distribution in Mexico and the United States.” In 2009, some 8.3 tons of cocaine which the family were attempting to export to Mexico were seized by law enforcement officials in Ecuador.

Federal prosecutors charged that the Cifuentes Villa family owns or controls 15 companies operating in Colombia, Mexico and Ecuador involved in a variety of ventures that supported their narcotrafficking enterprise.

Among the firms targeted were Linea Aerea Pueblos Amazonicos S.A.S., a newly-created airline operating in eastern Colombia, Red Mundial Inmobiliaria, S.A. de C.V., a real estate company located near Mexico City, along with Gestores del Ecuador Gestorum S.A., a consulting firm located in Quito, Ecuador.

It is also worth noting that the Cifuentes Villa organization, as the Center of Public Integrity reported, have also profited from illegal mining operations that traffic rare-earth minerals destined for the world market.

Accordingly, the Cifuentes Villa clan employed the same smuggling routes that trafficked cocaine to move precious metallic ores such as coltan and tungsten, used by the communications industry and weapons manufacturers, onto the international market. When the Treasury Department placed family members onto its drug kingpin list they identified their mining fronts as “a money-laundering operation in support of a cocaine-smuggling enterprise.”

While U.S. media were mesmerized by the extradition of Sandra Ávila Beltrán, whom the press had dubbed “La Reina del Pacífico” (The Queen of the Pacific), over her lavish lifestyle and family ties to legendary Mexican drug lord Miguel Ángel Félix Gallardo, onetime godfather of the Guadalajara Cartel, Uribe’s relatives inexplicably “disappeared” from “court records and authorities were unable to pinpoint the pair’s whereabouts,” Colombia Reports informed us.

Imagine that.

For his part, the former president denied allegations leveled against his brother Jaime, who died in 2001, and claimed that unnamed “criminals,” who conducted “business” from his brother’s car phone had cloned it. He also “denied any knowledge of his brother’s relationship with Cifuentes or the existence of his niece, despite a birth certificate that was uncovered proving Jaime Uribe was her father,” Colombia Reports averred.

What Uribe continues to gloss over however, is the inconvenient fact that brother Jaime had been arrested and interrogated by the Colombian Army after investigators recorded calls \made from his phone to none other than Pablo Escobar, the Nuevo Arco Iris political research center in Bogotá disclosed.

Among the unanswered questions surrounding these recent arrests, investigative journalist Daniel Hopsicker wondered: “Did Álvaro Uribe okay the loading of 3.6 tons of cocaine at an airport he controlled in Rio Negro Colombia onto a ‘former’ CIA Gulfstream (N987SA) jet from St. Petersburg Florida that crashed in the Yucatan in 2007?”

That fateful crash eventually led to the deferred prosecution agreement between the U.S. federal government and Wachovia Bank, fined $160 million for laundering some $378 billion for Mexico’s Sinaloa Cartel, “business associates” of the Cifuentes Villa clan.

More pointedly Hopsicker asked: “Why did two successive U.S. Administrations lavish billions of dollars to stop drug trafficking on a President of Colombia who was himself involved in the drug trade?”

As the investigative net is drawn around the family of the former president, another Uribe brother, Santiago, “is facing a criminal investigation for the alleged founding and leading of a paramilitary group,” Colombia Reports disclosed.

Investigations into that group, the notorious death squad the 12 Apostles, again surfaced when The Washington Post revealed that a former police chief, Juan Carlos Meneses, charged that Santiago “led a fearsome paramilitary group in the 1990s ... that killed petty thieves, guerrilla sympathizers and suspected subversives.”

Meneses, who fled to Venezuela with his family, disclosed that the “group’s hit men trained at La Carolina, where the Uribe family ran an agro-business in the early 1990s.” For services rendered, Meneses told the Post “he received a monthly payment of about $2,000 delivered by Santiago Uribe.”

The former police official said he came forward “because associates in the security services warned him he would soon be killed for knowing too much.”

“The revelations,” according to the Post, “threaten to renew a criminal investigation against Santiago Uribe and raise new questions about the president’s past in a region where private militias funded with drug-trafficking proceeds and supported by cattlemen wreaked havoc in the 1990s. The disclosures could prove uncomfortable to the United States, which has long seen Uribe as a trusted caretaker of American money in the fight against armed groups and the cocaine trade.”

“Uncomfortable” perhaps, but not surprising given the U.S. track record in support of drug-trafficking death squads, especially those which advanced corporate America’s geopolitical interests throughout Latin America.

“Meneses,” the Post averred, “is the first close collaborator of the 12 Apostles to speak publicly about the group’s inner workings. His declarations are also the most extensive recounting by a security services official of how Colombia’s militarized police and its army worked in tandem with death squads in one community–a model that investigators of the paramilitary movement say was duplicated nationwide.”

For his part, the former president accused human rights’ activists who have leveled charges against his family “of being guerrilla stooges who disseminate false accusations against his government.”

However, Nobel Peace Prize laureate, Adolfo Pérez Esquivel, who was present when Meneses recounted his story during a taped interview in Buenos Aires, told the Post that the former police chief “‘incriminates himself and also the brother of the president who managed the paramilitary group, but also President Uribe’.”

Interestingly enough, Uribe’s appointment to News Corp’s board came while the former president is under investigation for illegally wiretapping human rights activists, journalists, Supreme Court justices and opposition politicians.

His former chief of staff is currently in jail awaiting trial on criminal wiretapping charges and his former secret police chief, Maria Pilar Hurtado, fled Colombia and sought asylum in Panama before similar charges could be filed against her.

And with two more senators now under investigation for suspected ties to paramilitary death squads Colombia Reports averred, Uribe’s teflon armor is slowly being chipped away.

Parapolitical Scandal

If, as Voltaire once said, “the history of the great events of this world are scarcely more than the history of crime,” what of the powerful actors who have looted entire nations and did so while serving the interests of their imperialist overlords?

Dubbed the “parapolitical scandal” by Colombian media, the investigation was set in motion when leftist opposition politician, Clara López Obregón, formally denounced and provided evidence in 2005 to the Supreme Court of links between drug trafficking organizations, the military/intelligence apparatus, right-wing death squads and members of Congress, including prominent officials of Álvaro Uribe’s then-governing coalition.

That investigation gathered steam when a laptop was seized by authorities in 2006 from Rodrigo Tovar Pupo, alias Jorge 40, a leader of the Northern Bloc of the Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia (United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia, or AUC).

The origins of the AUC can be traced to the take-down of the Medellín Cartel and murder of “cocaine king” Pablo Escobar by rival drug organizations, principally the Cali Cartel run by the Rodríguez Orejuela brothers, who were provided logistical support and firepower by the CIA and U.S. Delta Force commandos to eliminate the competition.

Monday, October 22, 2012

The remarkable, unfathomable ignorance of Debbie Wasserman Schultz


The Chair of the Democratic National Committee is completely unaware of one of the biggest stories of the Obama years

Guardian
Glenn Greenwald

On 29 May 2012, the New York Times published a remarkable 6,000-word story on its front page about what it termed President Obama's "kill list". It detailed the president's personal role in deciding which individuals will end up being targeted for assassination by the CIA based on Obama's secret, unchecked decree that they are "terrorists" and deserve to die.
Based on interviews with "three dozen of his current and former advisers", the Times' Jo Becker and Scott Shane provided extraordinary detail about Obama's actions, including how he "por[es] over terrorist suspects' biographies on what one official calls the macabre 'baseball cards'" and how he "insist[s] on approving every new name on an expanding 'kill list'". At a weekly White House meeting dubbed "Terror Tuesdays", Obama then decides who will die without a whiff of due process, transparency or oversight. It was this process that resulted in the death of US citizen Anwar Awlaki in Yemen, and then two weeks later, the killing of his 16-year-old American son, Abdulrahman, by drone.
The Times "kill list" story made a huge impact and was widely discussedand condemned by media figures, politicians, analysts, andcommentators. Among other outlets, the New York Times itself harshly editorialized against Obama's program in an editorial entitled "Too Much Power For a President", denouncing the revelations as "very troubling" and argued: "No one in that position should be able to unilaterally order the killing of American citizens or foreigners located far from a battlefield - depriving Americans of their due-process rights - without the consent of someone outside his political inner circle."
That Obama has a "kill list" has been known since January, 2010, and has been widely reported and discussed in every major American newspaper since April 2010. A major controversy over chronic White House leaks often featured complaints about this article (New York Times, 5 June 2012: "Senators to Open Inquiry Into 'Kill List' and Iran Security Leaks"). The Attorney General, Eric Holder, gave a major speech defending it.
But Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the Democratic Congresswoman from Florida and the Chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, does not know about any of this. She has never heard of any of it. She has managed to remain completely ignorant about the fact that President Obama has asserted and exercised the power to secretly place human beings, including US citizens, on his "kill list" and then order the CIA to extinguish their lives.
Just marvel at this stunning, completely inexcusable two-minute display of wholesale ignorance by this elected official and DNC chair. Here she is after the second presidential debate being asked by Luke Rudkowski of We Are Change about the "kill list" and whether Romney should be trusted with this power. She doesn't defend the "kill list". She doesn't criticize it. She makes clear that she has never heard of it and then contemptuously treats Rudkowski like he is some sort of frivolous joke for thinking that it is real:



Anyone who observes politics closely has a very low bar of expectations. It's almost inevitable to become cynical - even jaded - about just how inept and inane top Washington officials are. Still, even processing this through those lowly standards, I just find this staggering. Staggering and repellent. This is an elected official in Congress, the body that the Constitution designed to impose checks on the president's abuses of power, and she does not have the foggiest idea what is happening in the White House, and obviously does not care in the slightest, because the person doing it is part of the party she leads.
One expects corrupt partisan loyalty from people like Wasserman Schultz, eager to excuse anything and everything a Democratic president does. That's a total abdication of her duty as a member of Congress, but that's par for the course. But one does not expect this level of ignorance, the ability to stay entirely unaware of one of the most extremist powers a president has claimed in US history, trumpeted on the front-page of the New York Times and virtually everywhere else.

Saturday, October 20, 2012

Portland City Council calendars don't show meetings reported by fluoride lobbyists: Portland City Hall roundup


OregonLive
Brad Schmidt

Portland’s newly elected City Council was all smiles
two weeks after the November 2008 election.
Mayor-elect Sam Adams (second from right) joined (from left)
Commissioner Randy Leonard, Commissioners-elect Amanda Fritz
and Nick Fish, and Commissioner Dan Saltzman for a portrait.
Fluoride lobbyists reported meeting personally with all five members of the Portland City Council in July or August but only one of those initial meetings appears on public calendars -- under a vague heading -- leaving lingering questions about the effectiveness of the city's lobbying and reporting requirements.

Promoted by then-Commissioner Sam Adams beginning in 2005, the lobbying and reporting rules are supposed to preserve integrity in city decision-making. The requirements affect both lobbyists and city officials and are meant to reveal who attempts to influence city leaders -- and on what topic.

Upstream Public Health is behind the push to add fluoride to Portland drinking water. But its plan has since been challenged through a referendum effort that may block the City Council's Sept. 12 unanimous approval.

According to a recently filed disclosure, lobbyists reported meeting with Commissioners Randy Leonard on July 26, Dan Saltzman and Nick Fish on Aug. 2, Amanda Fritz on Aug. 6 and Mayor Adams on Aug. 27 to push for fluoride in public drinking water.

But those same city officials -- who are required to publicly post their calendars on a quarterly basis -- either didn't disclose the meetings about fluoride or left a vague subject heading. Adams and Leonard say they weren't actually present at the meetings.

Leonard, who championed the fluoride proposal, listed four meetings July 26. Two were about the Portland Loo, one was about skateboarding and one was with the police union. But no fluoride.

Saltzman listed three meetings Aug. 2 with the city forester, the police union and one about a homeless camp. But nothing about the fluoride proposal.

Of the nine slots on Fish's calendar, he reported a 30-minute meeting Aug. 2 with "Health Coalitions" but didn't identify the group or the topic.

Fritz, meanwhile, reports her calendar by week instead of by day. She listed 16 meetings or events, none about fluoride or with Upstream Public Health.

And Adams listed six items on his calendar for Aug. 27. They include a meeting with Police Chief Mike Reese, a meeting about Brazil trade, a meeting with Transportation Director Tom Miller, a media event and two blocks for "office time." But nothing about fluoride.

According to city code, elected officials are required to post their calendars "of activities related to official city business" 15 days after the end of the previous quarter. That deadline was Oct. 15. There is only one exception: If an elected official "determines that such posting poses a safety threat." 
Leonard said in an email Friday that he never met with Upstream Public Health on July 26, despite the group's assertion that it had a "personal meeting" with him. Leonard said the meeting involving Upstream Public Health was with Stuart Oishi on his staff. 
Adams' spokeswoman Caryn Brooks said Friday that Adams never met personally with Upstream Public Health, either. She said that Upstream instead met with herself and Amy Ruiz, Adams' deputy chief of staff, on Aug. 27. But Brooks did say that Adams called Upstream about fluoride -- which doesn't appear on the group's report -- and he also ran into representatives at Davis Street Tavern.
Fish said in an email Friday that Kayse Jama, a founder for the Center for Intercultural Organizing, requested the Aug. 2 meeting but told Fish's office it was about a "broad health equity strategy." Fish said he didn't learn the topic until the meeting.
As for Upstream Public Health, it didn't register as a lobbying group until Aug. 16. The Oregonian broke news of the fluoride push, and the group's stealth lobbying efforts, Aug. 9. 

Thursday, October 11, 2012

DNC Chair: Wrong Statements About Libya Attack Doesn't Mean False Statements About Libya


Anti-fluoride group will submit more than 35,000 signatures to Portland in 'confident' bid to force vote


Editor's Note:  Now you know why I live in Portland.

Oregon Live
Brad Schmidt

Portland city council votes to add fluoride to its water amidst protestors An anti-fluoride group said it's been so successful collecting signatures to block Portland's controversial fluoride plan that it will turn them in Thursday -- a day ahead of schedule and with thousands of signatures to spare.

If they succeeded in collecting 19,858 valid signatures from city voters, Portland's already-approved fluoride plan would come to a screeching halt. It wouldn't move forward unless voters approve, with the most likely election date not until May 2014.

Clean Water Portland collected more than 35,000 signatures by Wednesday afternoon, leader Kim Kaminski said, and the group plans to submit them Thursday afternoon, ahead of Friday's 5 p.m. deadline.

"I am confident that we will get this on the ballot," she said. "If I weren't confident, we wouldn't be turning them in a day early."

Portland's long and contentious history with fluoride dates back nearly 60 years, with residents supporting the cavity-fighting chemical once but voting against it three times. Before the City Council unanimously approved its plan Sept. 12, Portland was the largest city in the country that hadn't taken steps to add fluoride to its water supply, which also serves residents in Gresham, Tigard and Tualatin.

City Commissioner Randy Leonard, who pushed the Water Bureau to add fluoride by March 2014, conceded Wednesday that all planning work will stop if the signature-gathering is successful. But he said he isn't disappointed.

"That's why the process exists," he said, adding that he expects a "full and meaningful debate" in the months ahead.

Ironically, that's been a major complaint about Portland's process. Mayor Sam Adams and Commissioner Nick Fish joined Leonard in announcing their support of fluoridation weeks before public meetings or casting votes. While some residents fervently oppose fluoride, others were upset by city leaders' failure to let voters weigh in.

Since the council vote, Clean Water Portland's referendum committee has collected more than $41,000 and paid dozens of people to collect signatures. Referendums challenge a City Council ordinance but give opponents just 30 days to collect signatures from at least 6 percent of registered voters.

"Given the short amount of time that we have, and given the lack of notice by City Council and the way they railroaded it through, we had really no choice but to hire paid signature gatherers," Kaminski said.

It's been 11 years since a group successfully challenged a city decision. In 2001, the City Council voted to establish street fees, but big businesses -- which would have faced big bills -- helped bankroll a signature-gathering effort. The City Council repealed its decision instead of sending it to voters.

"It's not a typical process for the city, so we don't have a lot of history to go of off," said Deborah Scroggin, the city's elections officer.

Once Clean Water Portland submits its paperwork, city and county officials will have 30 days to certify whether enough of the signatures are valid. From there, the council has another 30 days to consider whether to repeal its ordinance, although that scenario is unlikely.

That means the fluoride issue would head to voters in the May 2014 primary election unless the council pushes for an earlier decision. According to city code, the council can set an earlier date if the "public interest in a prompt resolution of the question outweighs the costs associated with a special election." Among possible options are March, May, September or November 2013.

Fluoride supporters said they want to wait until all the signatures are verified before talking about next steps. But the Everyone Deserves Healthy Teeth Coalition has proved politically savvy through lobbying efforts at City Hall and in a television ad campaign.

"We absolutely will continue to promote fluoridation as the right step for our city to improve the dental health of Portland children and families," said Raquel Luz Bournhonesque, who organized the coalition.

Kaminski said voters deserve a chance to decide for themselves.

"It puts everything on hold," she said, "so that people have time and step back and take a deep breath and figure out what's going on."