Burning Mad

Greyhawk - So, maybe they won't burn a Koran. Or maybe they will. Or maybe Fred Phelps will.

The whole thing's a story I was going to stay out of. But I got an email from a friend in Afghanistan who's a long way down the totem pole from General Petraeus, and thought I'd share.

Burning the Koran is going to fuck us all up over here. REALLY bad idea. Unless what you're trying to do is cause a mess. Be prepared for some serious shit that we over here seriously don't need. Not kidding.

And yes, the Afghans are aware and waiting to see what happens. No, they are not happy. Yes, it does matter. No, I'm not kidding and I've not gone native. All humor aside, it is important and not a single person is going to do anything to stop them from costing lives. My honest appraisal is that it will cost lives and turn people who take this very seriously against us. Needlessly.

So, there you have the thoughts of a guy who's actually engaged in defending freedom from extremists - at risk of life and limb. Personally I consider that at least as worthwhile as the opinions of those who enjoy the fruits of his labors, or are hypothetically willing to join the fight as demonstrated by their courageous typings on the innernets.

Meanwhile...

Daily brief: Quran burning protests sweep Afghanistan

Thousands of enraged Afghans and Pakistanis protested a small evangelical church's plans, currently on hold, to burn Qurans on September 11 by burning American flags and chanting "Death to Christians" (BBC, Pajhwok, AP, AFP, Post). Insurgents have reportedly handed out pamphlets in some areas of Afghanistan comparing the Quran burning to Draw Muhammad Day earlier this year, and a Pakistani Taliban commander in South Waziristan said his group is telling people the planned Quran burning is on par with drone strikes (ABC, Newsweek). Thousands of Afghans hurled rocks at a small NATO base in the northeastern province of Badakhshan in protest, and according to the head of UNAMA Staffan de Mistura the country-wide protests could delay Afghan parliamentary elections, scheduled for September 18 (AFP, AP, Reuters, Tolo).

Rep. Ron Paul Hints At 2012 Presidential Campaign

Steve Watson - Texas Congressman Ron Paul has hinted that he is strongly considering another Presidential run in 2012.

Paul, who previously ran for the Republican nomination in 2008 and under the Libertarian Party in 1988, told an interviewer that “It’s something I think about every single day,”.

The Congressman’s comments came during an interview with his former House colleague, Bob Bauman, legal counsel for The Sovereign Society – an independent investment advisory group.

Paul said it would “be a tough decision”, but that he believes the American people are ready to embrace a new political direction.

The comments have not been picked by by mainstream media sources as of yet.

The Congressman has previously downplayed rumours of another Presidential campaign, saying it is unlikely. However, following a string of successes in recent surveys and straw polls, including victory in the Conservative Political Action Conference’s (CPAC) presidential straw poll, it seems Paul is now reconsidering his earlier statements.

Paul’s comments add weight to more recent rumblings that he may once again pick up the presidential campaign mantle in 2012. Earlier this year the Congressman’s wife, Carol, stated “If you would ask him now he would probably say ‘no’, but he did say…things are happening so quickly and fast in our country, if we’re at a crisis period and they need someone…with the knowledge he has…then he would do it.”

Jesse Benton, Senior VP of Paul’s advocacy group Campaign for Liberty, has said of the prospective run: “If the decision had to be made today, it would be ‘no’, but he is considering it very strongly and there is a decent likelihood that he will. A lot of it depends on things going on in his personal life and also what’s going on in the country.”

At the height of Paul’s 2008 campaign, dubbed the Ron Paul Revolution by supporters, the Congressman smashed the all-time record for political donations on one day, beating John Kerry’s previous effort as he hauled in over $6 million dollars during a 24-hour period that coincided with the 234th anniversary of the Boston Tea Party.

Indeed, as we have continuously highlighted, The Tea Party movement, originally Libertarian in origin, grew out of this trend of honouring the anniversary of the Boston Tea Party. An event held in 2006 was repeated in 2007 with the Ron Paul Money bomb, and the movement evolved from there over the following three years.

As part of an effort to encourage Ron Paul to run for president in 2012, a Tea Party moneybomb has been set up with the aim of repeating those previous successes. The goal of The Ron Paul Tea Party is to have 100,000 people donate $100 each on December 16, 2010 to kick off Paul’s 2012 presidential bid, should he decide to run.

Infowars’ Alex Jones has personally pledged support to the Draft Ron Paul movement, noting that Paul is the only candidate who will inject real issues into an otherwise sterile debate format and that everything he has been warning the American people about for decades is coming into fruition as we approach 2012.

Whether neocon and corporate Republicans like it or not, Ron Paul has had and continues to have a far reaching impact upon the direction of the party. Every rare intelligible thing that Sarah Palin has said regarding limited government, fiscal economic policy and the restoration of freedom is taken straight from the Ron Paul handbook.

The core difference between Paul and Palin is that the Congressman has built a real grass roots following over the course of several decades. Paul is the real deal, while Palin, Romney, McCain and Gingrich, on the other hand are all neocons at the core, supporting the invasion and occupation of sovereign nations in step with the grossly bloated empire building military industrial complex. Never pandering to the crowds, Paul has consistently hammered home this key difference.

Of the current crop of possible 2012 GOP presidential candidates, Ron Paul is once again the only one truly in step with the majority anti-war, anti-big government sentiment in America.

The Texas Congressman has also been instrumental in leading a grass roots revolt against the real culprits behind the economic collapse, the Federal Reserve, introducing a bill to audit the private organization which has received widespread support from both Republicans and Democrats but has been fought at every turn by elitists in Washington.

If you thought the impact of the Ron Paul Revolution in 2007 and 2008 was damaging to the new world order agenda, then imagine what kind of momentum could be built up over the next few years as we head towards 2012, which globalists have marked down as a key juncture by which they want their global feudalist system firmly in place.

It almost seems like fate that the Congressman should lead the mass resistance to the globalist agenda at this crucial time in history, and we implore him to take on that hefty responsibility while guaranteeing that the grass roots will rally behind him with a ferocity never before seen in recent political times.

America Held Hostage - 559

Legal Insurrection - I took yesterday off from blogging, and of course the big news broke that the Pastor in Florida was not going to set the world on fire (we think, not sure, he'll let us know for sure eventually) this Saturday by burning a load of Korans on the lawn in front of his church..

Just another example of how we are held hostage when our foreign policy becomes a means of satisfying some deep psychological need to be forgiven and liked.

When the desire to be liked by people who never will like us is the policy, we are hostages to irresponsible people like:

* The Florida Pastor who knew what the reaction would be to his stunt, and thereby got his 15 minutes of fame to such an extent that the President and Defense Secretary had to beg him to stop; and
* The Cordoba House Imam who has made the fear of violence part of his media strategy, and who, even before that, got his 15 minutes of fame to such an extent that the President and Mayor had to beg him to keep going..

Our nation now is held hostage to every kook with a match and every huckster who knows how to play the Islamophobia card.

I'd rather be respected than liked, and right now in the world, we are neither. We're just hostages.

What If They Gave A Quran Burniing And Nobody Came

Just One Minute - President Obama follows Sarah Palin's lead in condemning the Quran burning slated for Sept 11.

Left unremarked in the Times coverage - just what is the culpability and responsibility of the media in covering this stunt? The church hosting the Quran bonfire has all of fifty members and is not anyone's idea of mainstream. Why are these Quran crackpots being given a platform to hold our national security hostage and endanger our troops?

OK, part of the answer is that this started as a lovely opportunity for the liberal media to bash some crazed righties. Fun's fun, but if the media is so worried about this, they might wonder why they feel obliged to cover it. Will CNN be broadcasting live from the bonfire? I bet they will. But if fifty people gathered to demand a look at Obama's birth certificate (or Kerry's military records!), they would be ignored as crazy but not incendiary. Or, closer to home, this is the same media that refused to publish the Mohammed cartoons that started riots in Europe. Deep-sixing stories that don't fit their narrative is what these people do for a living - why not bury this one?

Some crackpot dreamed up a stunt that the liberal media loved, and now they don't know how to get off the tiger. Well done.

FWIW, my recollection is that many sports broadcasters have a policy of cutting away from the field when some fool of a "fan" runs onto it, in order not to reward that misbehavior with attention. A similar judgment would be appropriate here.

L.A. Thugs Riot at LAPD Station After Police Shooting Of Immigrant Manuel Jamines

Hundreds of demonstrators took to the streets for the second night in a row in downtown Los Angeles Tuesday night to protest the police shooting of a Guatemalan immigrant.

Outraged Angelinos threw rocks, eggs and bottles at a police station, and 22 were arrested, but police said the busts were primarily for failure to disperse and unlawful assembly.

Officers responded to the demonstrators by firing at least two rounds of nonlethal foam projectiles, Officer Karen Rayner told The Associated Press.

The clash occurred after a late afternoon press conference where Police Chief Charlie Beck pleaded for calm and said the department would thoroughly investigate the Sunday shooting.

Beck also said only 40 seconds went by between the time the cops made contact with the victim, Manuel Jamines, and the moment when the police officer shot him twice.

On Sunday afternoon, bicycle police were alerted that Jamines, 37, was allegedly threatening pedestrians with a knife. When they arrived, cops ordered him to put drop the blade. When he refused, he was shot dead.

The shooting sparked demonstrations on Monday night near MacArthur Park, a busy neighborhood populated with many Central American immigrants. Angry protestors threw rocks and bottles at police, injuring three officers.

Beck said three cops involved in the shooting have been temporarily reassigned. Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa advised residents not to resort to violence.

"We need to calm the waters," he said.
Neighbors and family said Jamines had a wife and three children in Guatemala. He came to the U.S. six years ago to find work as a laborer. They said Jamines was a friendly, hardworking man, who was drunk at the time of the shooting but not dangerous, and didn’t understand what the officers were saying.

"Killing a drunk isn’t right," said the victim’s cousin, Juan Jaminez.

A cook who knew Jamines, agreed. "The officer who did this should be subject to discipline.

Liberal Corporate Media Ignore Widespread Health Problems On Gulf Coast

If you listen to Thad Allen, Obama’s point man on the BP oil gusher, we’re over the hump. On the weekend the former Coast Guard commander said the well no longer poses a threat to the Gulf and crews will now begin the last few remaining operations needed to abandon the well this week.

In short, Obama gets to declare another mission accomplished.

The problem has been lurking in the Gulf since the first days of the BP oil spill and now has the potential ignite a disaster unlike any this country has ever seen.

However, here is what Allen and the corporate media are not talking about — residents along the Gulf Coast are sick from the effects of the oil gusher.

“The harm dealt by this silent enemy is beginning to creep into the lives of those living and working in the Gulf. The problem has been lurking in the Gulf since the first days of the BP oil spill and now has the potential ignite a disaster unlike any this country has ever seen,” reports Project Gulf Impact, an organization of citizen journalists who are doing what the corporate media refuses to do. “The residents of the Gulf of Mexico are entering a crisis whose scope cannot be calculated. Several symptoms have been reported, from subtle to severe: skin rashes and infections, upper respiratory burning, congestion and cough, headaches, nausea, vomiting, and neurological symptoms including short-term memory loss and coordination problems. These health problems, if acknowledged at all, are mis-diagnosed, buried, and mis-attributed.”

In August, chemist Bob Naman tested the waters off Orange Beach, Alabama, and found they tested positive for the dangerous neurotoxin pesticide 2-butoxyethanol, the main ingredient of Corexit 9527A.

Months ago we were told by the government this version of Corexit was no longer in use.

Mr. Naman apparently made a mistake by making his findings public. He was subsequently threatened by BP. “I am not certain the reason or nature of the threats or whether they were financial or physical threats, but given the sudden rash of untimely deaths of those with damaging knowledge about BP I would not take any threats from BP lightly,” Alexander Higgins wrote on August 24.

On September 1, Infowars.com carried a story about a swimming pool in Homosassa, Florida, testing positive for the Corexit 9527A marker 2-butoxyethanol. Samples were tested by Robert Naman, the thorn in BP’s side. The story was ignored by the corporate media.

For BP and the Obama administration, scrubbing the oil gusher and its untold number of victims from the front page is more important than the health of people along the Gulf coast. The Democrats want the oil gusher to go away because of the political damage it will inflict on them during the mid-term elections this November. Republicans want it to go away because they are covering BP’s back. Illness and misery will not be allowed to interrupt the political dog and pony show.

On September 18, 2001, then EPA administrator Christie Whitman announced the air at Ground Zero was safe to breathe. Experts estimate that as many as 40,000 people breathed noxious pollution, including dust, in the wake of the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center.

But the afflicted — including heroic first responders — should not expect help from the government.

The James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2009 would provide medical monitoring to those exposed to toxins, increase treatment at specialized centers for those afflicted by toxins and reopen a compensation fund to provide for the economic loss of victims. It was characterized as another Obama entitlement program by the GOP House leadership, who vowed to defeat the legislation.

If the massive poisoning of the people of the Gulf is ever exposed, we can expect a similar response on the part of the government.

President Obama Plans To Cut Social Security Next Year

Lawrence Hunter - President Obama is playing “Watch the Birdie” with Americans over the age of 50, diverting their attention with handouts and scare tactics to hide in plain sight the enormous damage his policies are doing to the retirement safety net.

First it was Medicare. The ObamaCare legislation drops a few free goodies like breadcrumbs in front of Medicare recipients (such as free diagnostics and annual checkups) to draw their attention away from the enormous cuts in Medicare being used to help pay the freight for the new national healthcare system. Additionally, the White House has engineered a full-blown propaganda campaign, coordinated with the AARP, to deceive Medicare recipients and baby boomers about the magnitude and the implications of the $575 billion in Medicare cuts being used to help pay for ObamaCare. Even more deceitfully, using TV icon Andy Griffith in a taxpayer-funded TV ad to talk about how happy days are here again, the Obama Administration and its mouthpiece AARP are attempting to hoodwink people over the age of 50 about the inherent healthcare rationing sown into the very fabric of ObamaCare.

Medicare’s own Chief Actuary has already publicly reported that the Medicare payment rates for the doctors and hospitals serving retirees will be cut by 30 percent during the next three years. The details buried in the Medicare Trustees report reveal that still further Medicare cuts adopted in the ObamaCare legislation add up altogether to $818 billion during the first 10 years of full implementation, and $3.223 trillion during the first 20 years, just for Medicare’s hospital program (Part A, HI). Counting the cuts for Medicare physician reimbursement under the Part-B program brings the grand total in Medicare cuts to $1.048 trillion during the first full 10 years, and $4.95 trillion during the first 20 years.

Now the president is coming after Social Security.

In his Saturday radio address on August 14, President Obama revealed he is already moving on to cut Social Security.

But again, he is playing "Watch the Birdie," this time using scare tactics rather than sweeteners.

In that address, he denounced the idea of solving Social Security’s problems by allowing young workers the freedom to voluntarily choose to save and invest some of their taxes in their own personal retirement accounts, an option federal employees already enjoy. The president rejects fixing the Bernie-Madoff Ponzi scheme currently used to finance Social Security with some form of personal accounts to begin pre-funding Social Security with real saving and investment. Instead, he rails about “privatization,” an incendiary (and false) characterization of voluntary personal retirement accounts intended to scare the bejeebers out of the American people.

"President Obama thinks Americans over the age of 50 are stupid and can be demagogued with false claims about their benefits."

President Obama knows that all these account proposals affect only younger workers and do not touch the benefits of today’s retirees or the baby boom generation soon to retire. Moreover, congressional proposals for voluntary personal accounts have maintained the safety net of Social Security, guaranteeing that workers would get at least as much as Social Security promises now.

But President Obama thinks Americans over the age of 50 are stupid and can be demagogued with false claims about their benefits. The far-left faction in the Democratic Party just can’t stand the idea of workers and retirees supporting themselves more through the private sector. They call that “privatization,” which means too much filthy capitalism for their tastes.

So the question remains: What is the president up to?

How does he propose to solve Social Security’s long-term financial crisis, which even his own Presidential Debt Commission realizes is real? Without some form of real saving and investment for workers to begin prefunding their retirement, the only alternatives remaining are to raise payroll taxes or cut benefits—and that is precisely what President Obama’s Debt Commission is planning.

One might think raising payroll taxes is out because President Obama pledged over and over to get elected that he would not raise taxes on anyone making less than $250,000 a year. If he refuses even to consider personal accounts as inconsistent with his socialist ideology, he will never be able to deliver on that promise.

As to benefit cuts, this is exactly what the Presidential Debt Commission is plotting to reveal right after the November election. Former Sen. Alan Simpson, co-chairman of the Commission, tipped the Commission’s hand recently when he described Social Security as a “milk cow with 300 million tits.”

Leaks indicate that among the options being considered are delaying the retirement age (sounds like a panacea to bureaucratic pencil pushers who never did a day of hard labor in their lives), changing the basic benefit formula to reduce future benefits, and delaying or slashing COLAs.

Apparently, President Obama’s concept of spreading the wealth includes sacking both the Medicare and Social Security systems on which America’s retirees have come to rely. That’s some progressive vision of “fiscal responsibility:” Put seniors out in the cold and into an early grave