Here is an interview Alex Jones does with Robert J.Groden on The Kennedy assassination. A lot of really cool stuff in here so heres the link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sFhGKtH00U&feature=PlayList&p=20B84114D410BFFD&index=0
Enjoy all the good info!!!
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Link: http://www.infowars.com/new-legislation-authorizes-fema-camps-in-us/
A new bill introduced in Congress authorizes the Department of Homeland Security to set up a network of FEMA camp facilities to be used to house U.S. citizens in the event of a national emergency.
The National Emergency Centers Act or HR 645 mandates the establishment of “national emergency centers” to be located on military installations for the purpose of to providing “temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster,” according to the bill.
The legislation also states that the camps will be used to “provide centralized locations to improve the coordination of preparedness, response, and recovery efforts of government, private, and not-for-profit entities and faith-based organizations”.
Ominously, the bill also states that the camps can be used to “meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security,” an open ended mandate which many fear could mean the forced detention of American citizens in the event of widespread rioting after a national emergency or total economic collapse.
Many credible forecasters have predicted riots and rebellions in America that will dwarf those already witnessed in countries like Iceland and Greece.
With active duty military personnel already being stationed inside the U.S. under Northcom, partly for purposes of “crowd control,” fears that Americans could be incarcerated in detainment camps are all too real.
The bill mandates that six separate facilities be established in different Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions (FEMA) throughout the country.
The camps will double up as “command and control” centers that will also house a “24/7 operations watch center” as well as training facilities for Federal, State, and local first responders.
The bill also contains language that will authorize camps to be established within closed or already operating military bases around the country.
As we have previously highlighted, in early 2006 Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown and Root was awarded a $385 million dollar contract by Homeland Security to construct detention and processing facilities in the event of a national emergency.
The language of the preamble to the agreement veils the program with talk of temporary migrant holding centers, but it is made clear that the camps would also be used “as the development of a plan to react to a national emergency.”
As far back as 2002, FEMA sought bids from major real estate and engineering firms to construct giant internment facilities in the case of a chemical, biological or nuclear attack or a natural disaster.
A much discussed and circulated report, the Pentagon’s Civilian Inmate Labor Program, was more recently updated and the revision details a “template for developing agreements” between the Army and corrections facilities for the use of civilian inmate labor on Army installations.”
Alex Jones has attended numerous military urban warfare training drills across the US where role players were used to simulate arresting American citizens and taking them to internment camps.
Read the new legislation in full below.
————————————————————————
National Emergency Centers Establishment Act (Introduced in House)
HR 645 IH
111th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 645
To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish national emergency centers on military installations.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
January 22, 2009
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned
——————————————————————————–
A BILL
To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish national emergency centers on military installations.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `National Emergency Centers Establishment Act’.
SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL EMERGENCY CENTERS.
(a) In General- In accordance with the requirements of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish not fewer than 6 national emergency centers on military installations.
(b) Purpose of National Emergency Centers- The purpose of a national emergency center shall be to use existing infrastructure–
(1) to provide temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster;
(2) to provide centralized locations for the purposes of training and ensuring the coordination of Federal, State, and local first responders;
(3) to provide centralized locations to improve the coordination of preparedness, response, and recovery efforts of government, private, and not-for-profit entities and faith-based organizations; and
(4) to meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security.
SEC. 3. DESIGNATION OF MILITARY INSTALLATIONS AS NATIONAL EMERGENCY CENTERS.
(a) In General- Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall designate not fewer than 6 military installations as sites for the establishment of national emergency centers.
(b) Minimum Requirements- A site designated as a national emergency center shall be–
(1) capable of meeting for an extended period of time the housing, health, transportation, education, public works, humanitarian and other transition needs of a large number of individuals affected by an emergency or major disaster;
(2) environmentally safe and shall not pose a health risk to individuals who may use the center;
(3) capable of being scaled up or down to accommodate major disaster preparedness and response drills, operations, and procedures;
(4) capable of housing existing permanent structures necessary to meet training and first responders coordination requirements during nondisaster periods;
(5) capable of hosting the infrastructure necessary to rapidly adjust to temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance needs;
(6) required to consist of a complete operations command center, including 2 state-of-the art command and control centers that will comprise a 24/7 operations watch center as follows:
(A) one of the command and control centers shall be in full ready mode; and
(B) the other shall be used daily for training; and
(7) easily accessible at all times and be able to facilitate handicapped and medical facilities, including during an emergency or major disaster.
(c) Location of National Emergency Centers- There shall be established not fewer than one national emergency center in each of the following areas:
(1) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions I, II, and III.
(2) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IV.
(3) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions V and VII.
(4) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region VI.
(5) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions VIII and X.
(6) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IX.
(d) Preference for Designation of Closed Military Installations- Wherever possible, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall designate a closed military installation as a site for a national emergency center. If the Secretaries of Homeland Security and Defense jointly determine that there is not a sufficient number of closed military installations that meet the requirements of subsections (b) and (c), the Secretaries shall jointly designate portions of existing military installations other than closed military installations as national emergency centers.
(e) Transfer of Control of Closed Military Installations- If a closed military installation is designated as a national emergency center, not later than 180 days after the date of designation, the Secretary of Defense shall transfer to the Secretary of Homeland Security administrative jurisdiction over such closed military installation.
(f) Cooperative Agreement for Joint Use of Existing Military Installations- If an existing military installation other than a closed military installation is designated as a national emergency center, not later than 180 days after the date of designation, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Defense shall enter into a cooperative agreement to provide for the establishment of the national emergency center.
(g) Reports-
(1) PRELIMINARY REPORT- Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site–
(A) an outline of the reasons why the site was selected;
(B) an outline of the need to construct, repair, or update any existing infrastructure at the site;
(C) an outline of the need to conduct any necessary environmental clean-up at the site;
(D) an outline of preliminary plans for the transfer of control of the site from the Secretary of Defense to the Secretary of Homeland Security, if necessary under subsection (e); and
(E) an outline of preliminary plans for entering into a cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f).
(2) UPDATE REPORT- Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site–
(A) an update on the information contained in the report as required by paragraph (1);
(B) an outline of the progress made toward the transfer of control of the site, if necessary under subsection (e);
(C) an outline of the progress made toward entering a cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f); and
(D) recommendations regarding any authorizations and appropriations that may be necessary to provide for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site.
(3) FINAL REPORT- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site–
(A) finalized information detailing the transfer of control of the site, if necessary under subsection (e);
(B) the finalized cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f); and
(C) any additional information pertinent to the establishment of a national emergency center at the site.
(4) ADDITIONAL REPORTS- The Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, may submit to Congress additional reports as necessary to provide updates on steps being taken to meet the requirements of this Act.
SEC. 4. LIMITATIONS ON STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.
This Act does not affect–
(1) the authority of the Federal Government to provide emergency or major disaster assistance or to implement any disaster mitigation and response program, including any program authorized by the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.); or
(2) the authority of a State or local government to respond to an emergency.
SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There is authorized to be appropriated $180,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 and 2010 to carry out this Act. Such funds shall remain available until expended.
SEC. 6. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act, the following definitions apply:
(1) CLOSED MILITARY INSTALLATION- The term `closed military installation’ means a military installation, or portion thereof, approved for closure or realignment under the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note) that meet all, or 2 out of the 3 following requirements:
(A) Is located in close proximity to a transportation corridor.
(B) Is located in a State with a high level or threat of disaster related activities.
(C) Is located near a major metropolitan center.
(2) EMERGENCY- The term `emergency’ has the meaning given such term in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122).
(3) MAJOR DISASTER- The term `major disaster’ has the meaning given such term in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122).
(4) MILITARY INSTALLATION- The term `military installation’ has the meaning given such term in section 2910 of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note).
NEW YORK (Fortune) — The cost of the bank bailout is likely to be much higher than $700 billion.
While the Obama administration hasn’t asked Congress for more money yet, some experts warn that government spending on support for struggling financial services companies will ultimately reach into the trillions of dollars.
The first half of the controversial $700 billion program to help banks has already been spent — mostly on buying up preferred shares of troubled banks.
Part of the remaining $350 billion may be used to purchase troubled assets from bank balance sheets and place them in what Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. chief Sheila Bair has dubbed an “aggregator bank.”
And while taxpayers will surely recover some of that sum eventually, more money is likely to be needed in order for the bank rescue to work.
“The amount of working capital you’d expect the government to take into this would be around $3 trillion to $4 trillion,” said Simon Johnson, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics and author of its Baseline Scenario financial crisis blog.
Johnson, who until last year was the chief economist at the International Monetary Fund, said that banks will need more rounds of capital from the government because their cushion against losses is too thin. He also said that there is a need to get rid of some of the toxic assets weighing on financial institutions before they can recover.
With that in mind, he thinks that the net cost to U.S. taxpayers for a broadened bailout would be about $1 trillion to $2 trillion, or between 5% and 10% of U.S. gross domestic product. He said this figure is “in line with the experience” of other nations that have tried massive banking system restructuring.
Johnson isn’t the first to estimate that the final cost of a bank bailout will be well north of $1 trillion. FBR Capital analyst Paul Miller said in November that just the top eight U.S. financial institutions alone needed at least $1 trillion in new common equity.
But calls for a comprehensive response from the government have increased in recent weeks following the free fall of bank stocks.
The KBW Bank index has dropped 35% in January after a 50% plunge in 2008, as investors worry that the government may be forced to nationalize some banks — and wipe out shareholders in the process. Shares of Citigroup (C, Fortune 500) and Bank of America (BAC, Fortune 500) have been particularly hard hit.
“The big banks are a hope trade right now,” Johnson said.
Though the Obama administration hasn’t said it will need more money beyond the second $350 billion installment of the Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, officials have not ruled out the possibility of asking Congress for further funds.
Vice President Joe Biden said on CBS’ “Face the Nation” Sunday that the first task for the likely new Treasury secretary, Timothy Geithner, will be to assess whether the remaining $350 billion in funds available under TARP will be enough to stop the bleeding.
Geithner said last week that he didn’t yet see the need for more money, but stressed that the Treasury may have to “act flexibly” if the problems in the economy and the financial sector deepen.
While officials will have to spend huge sums upfront to show the market that they won’t let important institutions fail, Johnson said taxpayers won’t have to end up on the hook for the entire amount of money that’s being injected into banks.
Johnson said the government could get warrants in banks receiving assistance that would convert to common shares once the government sells them. He also said the government could hire private equity managers to oversee the assets the government takes on — and sell them when the time is right.
These arrangements, he said, should allow the Treasury to extract some gains for taxpayers when the economic free fall ends and the banking system starts to recover.
Some observers believe asset values are so depressed right now that as long as the government has a well designed plan that restores investor confidence, taxpayers should profit from the financial bailout
“I think we have seen prices fall to a point where the government could very easily make money, though I’d be very happy if we end up breaking even,” says Gary Hager, president of Integrated Wealth Management in Edison , N.J.
If the history of previous banking system rescues is any guide though, there’s also a good chance that removing toxic assets from bank balance sheets could leave taxpayers with a significant tab.
When Congress created the Resolution Trust Corp. in 1989 to clean up the mess left by the collapse of the savings and loan industry, legislators gave the RTC $50 billion to close or resolve troubled institutions.
But the RTC wound up needing three additional infusions of taxpayer funds over six years, as regulators confronted an industry whose health was much worse than feared.
In the end, taxpayers took a $124 billion loss on the RTC’s operations, according to a 2000 study published by FDIC researchers Timothy Curry and Lynn Shibut.
The RTC resolved 747 institutions, with total assets of $394 billion, according to the study. That means taxpayers lost 31 cents on each dollar of assets handled by the RTC — an institution that, because it was simply disposing of the property of failed institutions, didn’t have to pay for assets it later sold.
In contrast, the widely discussed aggregator bank would be paying institutions that participate for their assets.
Details of how the aggregator bank would decide how much to pay for toxic assets have yet to be determined. But whatever method the aggregator bank uses, it could mean significantly higher startup costs than the RTC had.
So expect to see the Obama administration coming back to Congress for more money…soon.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/27/news/bigger.bailout.fortune/index.htm?cnn=yes
“Never let a serious crisis go to waste. What I mean by that is it’s an opportunity to do things you couldn’t do before.”
So said White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel in November, and Democrats in Congress are certainly taking his advice to heart. The 647-page, $825 billion House legislation is being sold as an economic “stimulus,” but now that Democrats have finally released the details we understand Rahm’s point much better. This is a political wonder that manages to spend money on just about every pent-up Democratic proposal of the last 40 years.
![[Review & Outlook]](http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/OB-DA368_oj_1st_E_20090127211311.jpg)
APWe’ve looked it over, and even we can’t quite believe it. There’s $1 billion for Amtrak, the federal railroad that hasn’t turned a profit in 40 years; $2 billion for child-care subsidies; $50 million for that great engine of job creation, the National Endowment for the Arts; $400 million for global-warming research and another $2.4 billion for carbon-capture demonstration projects. There’s even $650 million on top of the billions already doled out to pay for digital TV conversion coupons.
In selling the plan, President Obama has said this bill will make “dramatic investments to revive our flagging economy.” Well, you be the judge. Some $30 billion, or less than 5% of the spending in the bill, is for fixing bridges or other highway projects. There’s another $40 billion for broadband and electric grid development, airports and clean water projects that are arguably worthwhile priorities.
Add the roughly $20 billion for business tax cuts, and by our estimate only $90 billion out of $825 billion, or about 12 cents of every $1, is for something that can plausibly be considered a growth stimulus. And even many of these projects aren’t likely to help the economy immediately. As Peter Orszag, the President’s new budget director, told Congress a year ago, “even those [public works] that are ‘on the shelf’ generally cannot be undertaken quickly enough to provide timely stimulus to the economy.”
![[Review & Outlook]](http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/ED-AI932_1stimu_NS_20090127200020.gif)
Most of the rest of this project spending will go to such things as renewable energy funding ($8 billion) or mass transit ($6 billion) that have a low or negative return on investment. Most urban transit systems are so badly managed that their fares cover less than half of their costs. However, the people who operate these systems belong to public-employee unions that are campaign contributors to . . . guess which party?
Here’s another lu-lu: Congress wants to spend $600 million more for the federal government to buy new cars. Uncle Sam already spends $3 billion a year on its fleet of 600,000 vehicles. Congress also wants to spend $7 billion for modernizing federal buildings and facilities. The Smithsonian is targeted to receive $150 million; we love the Smithsonian, too, but this is a job creator?
Another “stimulus” secret is that some $252 billion is for income-transfer payments — that is, not investments that arguably help everyone, but cash or benefits to individuals for doing nothing at all. There’s $81 billion for Medicaid, $36 billion for expanded unemployment benefits, $20 billion for food stamps, and $83 billion for the earned income credit for people who don’t pay income tax. While some of that may be justified to help poorer Americans ride out the recession, they aren’t job creators.
As for the promise of accountability, some $54 billion will go to federal programs that the Office of Management and Budget or the Government Accountability Office have already criticized as “ineffective” or unable to pass basic financial audits. These include the Economic Development Administration, the Small Business Administration, the 10 federal job training programs, and many more.
Oh, and don’t forget education, which would get $66 billion more. That’s more than the entire Education Department spent a mere 10 years ago and is on top of the doubling under President Bush. Some $6 billion of this will subsidize university building projects. If you think the intention here is to help kids learn, the House declares on page 257 that “No recipient . . . shall use such funds to provide financial assistance to students to attend private elementary or secondary schools.” Horrors: Some money might go to nonunion teachers.
The larger fiscal issue here is whether this spending bonanza will become part of the annual “budget baseline” that Congress uses as the new floor when calculating how much to increase spending the following year, and into the future. Democrats insist that it will not. But it’s hard — no, impossible — to believe that Congress will cut spending next year on any of these programs from their new, higher levels. The likelihood is that this allegedly emergency spending will become a permanent addition to federal outlays — increasing pressure for tax increases in the bargain. Any Blue Dog Democrat who votes for this ought to turn in his “deficit hawk” credentials.
This is supposed to be a new era of bipartisanship, but this bill was written based on the wish list of every living — or dead — Democratic interest group. As Speaker Nancy Pelosi put it, “We won the election. We wrote the bill.” So they did. Republicans should let them take all of the credit.
KANSAS CITY, Mo. — A Kansas City man found a racial slur printed on his receipt after returning a pair of shoes he bought over the weekend.KMBC’s Marcus Moore reported that Keith Slater, 22, bought a pair of shoes from a store called Journeys. Slater later returned them after finding a cheaper pair at another store. Slater did get his money back, but it was what was printed on the receipt that he and his family found disturbing.”That makes me upset. I don’t want to look at that (receipt,) that makes me so upset. Why would you say that?” said a woman who was shown the receipt
absolutely crazy,” said a man who saw the store ticket.
The receipt, which shows “Cust: Dumb” and then the n-word, is what Slater received after returning a pair of shoes to Journeys at Oak Park Mall.”When he showed me that receipt, I could not believe it,” said Slater’s mother, Linda. “He couldn’t believe it. I couldn’t believe it. None of us got any sleep just thinking about it.”By the time the Slaters noticed the racial slur printed on the receipt, the store was already closed for the day.Hoping to get answers about how the words got on the receipt, the Slaters returned to the store the next day. But they said they never got a full explanation, only that the employee entered a generic code.”And it pulled up six or seven different choices, and the choice that she (the employee) chose was the very last choice,” said Slater’s father, Keith.”I really don’t doubt that this is the first time it happened. I’m sure it’s happened before, but this is probably the first time that somebody noticed their receipt and came back and asked about it,” Linda Slater said.The Slaters said they are waiting for answers.”To me, the appropriate thing to do is to terminate the employee because it’s just inappropriate for that to be there, and then to have that deleted from their system,” Keith Slater said.The Slaters also filed a complaint with mall security.A representative with the U.S. Department of Justice told KMBC that it will refer the case to the FBI to investigate whether a civil rights violation has occurred.
On Tuesday, Genesco, which owns Journeys, released this statement:”While we are continuing to investigate this incident, it now appears that an employee in one of our stores entered highly inappropriate statements in a form used to process a merchandise return. Needless to say, such an act was not authorized by Journeys, and will not be tolerated. This employee has been terminated.”At Journeys, we pride ourselves on valuing and respecting every customer. We are shocked and sickened that a former associate could be responsible for an act so out of keeping with our culture and our values. We profoundly regret this incident.”
On Wednesday, community activist Alonzo Washington held a news conference to announce that he and his family will no longer shop at Journeys, and they are asking others to do the same.Washington said his family is returning several shirts that were purchased at Journeys a few days before the Slater incident.Washington said the store’s apology to Slater was not enough.Washington’s wife, Dana Washington, said she is concerned about a culture of race problems.”My kids are looking at this wondering why would a person do something like this. It’s unfortunate that African-Americans still have to go through these experiences today, because unfortunately, not everyone has arrived at the point where we should treat each other fairly,” Dana Washington said.
Whistleblower: NSA even collected credit card records
Filed by David Edwards and Stephen C. Webster
On Wednesday night, when former NSA analyst Russell Tice told MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann that the Bush administration’s National Security Agency spied on everyone in the United States, specifically targeting journalists, the Countdown host was so flabbergasted that Tice was invited back for a second interview.
On Thursday, he returned to the airwaves with expanded allegations against the NSA, claiming the agency collected Americans’ credit card records, and adding that he believes the massive, warrantless data vacuum to be the remnants of the Total Information Awareness program, shut down by Congress in 2003.
Asked for comment by Olbermann’s staff, the agency responded, “NSA considers the constitutional rights of US citizens to be sacrosanct. The intelligence community faces immense challenges in protecting our nation. No matter the challenges, NSA remains dedicated to performing its mission under the rule of law.”
Olbermann ran the quote under a banner which read, “Non-denial denial.”
“As far as the wiretap information that made it though NSA, there was also data-mining that was involved,” Tice told Olbermann during the pair’s second interview. “At some point, information from credit card records and financial transactions was married in with that information.”
At this point on the audio track, Olbermann can be heard taking a deep breath.
“So, lucky American citizens, tens of thousands of whom are now on digital databases at NSA, who have no idea of this, also have that information included in those digital files that have been warehoused,” said Tice.
“… Do you have any idea what all this stuff was used for?” asked the stunned host.
“The obvious explanation would be, if you did have a potential terrorist, you’d want to know where they’re spending money, whether they purchased an airline ticket, that sort of thing,” said Tice. “But, once again, we’re talking about tens of thousands of innocent US citizens that have been caught up into this trap. They have no clue.
“This thing could sit there for 10 years, then all the sudden it marries up with something else and 10 years from now and they get put on a no-fly list and they of course won’t have a clue why.”
Tice added that “in most cases,” spied-upon Americans didn’t have to do anything suspicious in order to trigger the surveillance.
“This is garnered from algorithms that have been put together to try to just dream up scenarios that might be information that is associated with how a terrorist could operate,” he said.
Ultimately, the technical explanation boils down to this: “If someone just talked about the daily news and mentioned something about the Middle East, they could easily be brought to the forefront of having that little flag put by their name that says potential terrorist,” said Tice.
“Do you know, or do you have an educated guess, as to who authorized this? Who developed this?” asked Olbermann.
“I have a guess, where it was developed,” he replied. “I think it was probably developed out of the Department of Defense, and this is probably the remnants of Total Information Awareness, that came out of DARPA. That’s my guess, I don’t know that for sure.”
Olbermann then asked if Tice knows who had access to the data.
“I started looking into this, and that’s when ultimately they came after me to fire me,” said Tice. “They must have realized that I’d stumbled onto something, and after that point I of course had no ability to find anything else out.”
Tice concluded that he does not know if the program, as he understands it, continues to this day, and he refused to specifically state which media organizations the Bush administration’s NSA had targeted for surveillance.
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Whistleblower_NSA_collected_credit_card_records_0122.html
These videos are from MSNBC’s Countdown, broadcasts Jan. 21 & 22, 2009.
Night 1;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDVJiAFVdZ8
Night 2;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ABp60KLxpqc
Sen. Rockefeller: NSA may have spied on me
Filed by David Edwards and Stephen C. Webster
Update: Ex-NSA analyst believes program is last remnant of ‘Total Information Awareness’
Wiretapping whistleblower Russell Tice has been heard. Loud and clear.
Following Wednesday’s allegation by the former National Security Agency analyst that President Bush’s warrantless wiretapping program had spied on everyone, contrary to what the administration had claimed, Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) told MSNBC’s Chris Matthews on Thursday that he was “quite prepared to believe” the allegations.
“I think they went after anyone they could get — including me,” Tice added.
Tice, during an appearance on MSNBC’s Countdown with Keith Olbermann the prior evening, proclaimed, “The National Security Agency had access to all Americans’ communications — faxes, phone calls, and their computer communications. It didn’t matter whether you were in Kansas, in the middle of the country, and you never made foreign communications at all. They monitored all communications.”
“In one of the operations that I was in, we looked at organizations, just supposedly so that we would not target them,” Tice told Olbermann. “What I was finding out, though, is that the collection on those organizations was 24/7 and 365 days a year — and it made no sense. … I started to investigate that. That’s about the time when they came after me to fire me.”
President Bush shaking hands with Sen. Rockefeller in July 2008, shortly after the passage of the FISA Amendments Act. (Reuters)
When Olbermann pressed him for specifics, Tice offered, “An organization that was collected on were US news organizations and reporters and journalists.”
The allegation essentially changes America’s debate about domestic spying by the government, from one of listening to terrorists, as the Bush administration had framed it, to that of an intelligence operation beyond President Nixon’s greatest aspirations, if it’s true.
It should also raise new questions about a 2004 revelation in the New York Times that the paper had withheld a story for over a year, at the administration’s request, which described scant few, albeit now-known false details of the program.
“While many details about the program remain secret, officials familiar with it said the N.S.A. eavesdropped without warrants on up to 500 people in the United States at any given time,” the Times wrote, shortly after the 2004 election. “The list changes as some names are added and others dropped, so the number monitored in this country may have reached into the thousands over the past three years, several officials said. Overseas, about 5,000 to 7,000 people suspected of terrorist ties are monitored at one time, according to those officials.”
The paper also notes that additional information was omitted, again at the request of the Bush administration. The allegations at hand would seem to quickly dovetail into, ‘Why?’
On July 9, 2008, the US Senate passed a bill expanding legal authority for electronic wiretaps by spy agencies, handing victory to President George W. Bush after a standoff over anti-terror strategy. Then-Senator Obama, along with newly appointed Secretary of State Clinton, said they would support Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn) in filibustering the GOP effort, specifically when it came to immunity for the private telecom companies which allowed the NSA to conduct warrantless spying.
Obama ultimately “compromised,” saying: “The President’s illegal program of warrantless surveillance will be over. It restores FISA and existing criminal wiretap statutes as the exclusive means to conduct surveillance – making it clear that the President cannot circumvent the law and disregard the civil liberties of the American people.”
Clinton maintained her position, voting against the majority.
“I’ve never seen contempt for the rule of law such as this,” said Sen. Dodd in Dec. 2007.
With this latest round of revelations, perhaps another new question should be, ‘Has Obama?’
Tice reappeared on Countdown the following night, bearing new allegations against the NSA.
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Rockefeller_NSA_may_have_spied_on_0122.html
This video is from MSNBC’s Hardball, broadcast Jan. 22, 2009.
(John Schults/Reuters)
Jérôme Kerviel, right, and his lawyer leave a hearing in Paris after being questioned by magistrates
By Gilles Castonguay
MILAN (Reuters) – A warning of unprecedented staff cuts at Toyota, the world’s biggest auto maker, and word of a possible first quarter loss by Volkswagen piled fresh pressure on struggling car manufacturers on Friday.
The bleak news came after a halt in dividend payments on Thursday by Italy’s Fiat SpA, the first European car maker to report 2008 results, as it headed into what it called one of its worst years.
As the global auto sector reeled from economic recession, plunging demand and production cuts, UBS analysts said they expected France’s PSA Peugeot Citroen and Renault to suspend dividends as well.
European commercial vehicle makers also shared the pain of economic downturn with industry data on Friday showing a 24.4 percent year-on-year drop in the market for December.
Toyota is considering cutting full-time employees in Britain and North America, a company source familiar with the matter told Reuters.
Despite its efforts to limit the damage of the crisis with production cuts at its factories, Toyota still faces its first operating loss in history for the year to March.
In Europe, although Volkswagen’s 2008 results are expected to be higher than the prior year, its chief financial officer could not rule out running a loss in the first quarter of 2009.
Hans Dieter Poetsch said the global car market could shrink 15 percent this year, echoing a warning given by Chief Executive Martin Winterkorn recently of “critical times ahead.”
STATE AID
The U.S. government has pledged billions of dollars to support its auto sector and European governments are working on plans to help crisis-hit car makers.
Others had differing views on state aid, however.
Despite its problems, British luxury car maker Jaguar Land Rover said it did not want the government to bail it out.
Speaking to Sky News, David Smith, chief executive of Jaguar Land Rover, a unit of India’s Tata Motors, said he wanted credit to start flowing again, either from direct lending or state-backed loans.
And a U.S. Democratic senator urged President Barack Obama to require Chrysler LLC to repay the billions of dollars in loans it received from the government if Fiat should take a controlling stake in it.
Fiat announced a partnership with Chrysler on Tuesday in a move that is likely to push other car makers to seek more alliances to cut costs in the face of plunging sales in the worst crisis to hit the industry in decades.
One small, bright spot came out of China, where FAW Car Co, a unit of one of China’s largest auto makers, posted a 90-120 percent net profit rise for 2009.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Possible-Toyota-job-cuts-as-rb-14138981.html
By Graham Smith
Last updated at 3:10 PM on 23rd January 2009
Quit: Iceland’s Prime Minister Geir Haarde called a general election for May. He also revealed he has cancer and will not be standing for re-election
The government of Iceland today became the first to be effectively brought down by the credit crunch.
After several nights of rioting over the financial crisis, Prime Minister Geir Haarde, surrendered to increasing pressure and called a general election for May.
A poll would not normally be held until 2011.
Haarde also revealed that he had been diagnosed with a malignant tumour of the oesophagus and would not seek re-election.
‘I have decided not to seek re-election as leader of the Independence Party at its upcoming national congress,’ he told a news conference.
The global financial crisis hit Iceland, which has a population 320,000, in October, triggering a collapse in its currency and financial system under the weight of billions of dollars of foreign debts incurred by its banks
The economy is set to shrink 10 percent this year and unemployment is surging.
Critics wanted Haarde, the central bank governor and other senior officials to resign.
Some senior figures in his party have also said they favour an early election, but Haarde had up to now vowed to defy plunging popularity and stay on.
Protests had been held weekly since the crisis broke last year, but since Tuesday have been held every night.
On Thursday, police used teargas on demonstrators for the first time since protests against the North Atlantic island’s entry into the NATO alliance in 1949.
Special forces had to rescue Haarde from his car after he was surrounded by an furious mob hurling eggs and cans outside the government offices, in Reykjavik.
Protesters clash with police in Reykjavik during a demonstration against the Icelandic government’s handling of the country’s financial crisis
Riot police huddle together as projectiles are thrown at the Parliament building behind them in downtown Reykjavik
The seething crowd spattered the building with paint and yoghurt, yelling and banging pans, hurling fireworks and flares at the windows and even lighting a fire in front of the main doors.
‘There were a couple of hundred (protesters) when they had to use the gas,’ police spokesman Gunnar Sigurdsson said. ‘It went on for two hours or so. There were no arrests. Some injuries, but not serious.’
Latvia, Bulgaria and other European countries hit hard by the global economic meltdown have also seen unrest.
Protesters carry a placard of Iceland’s Justice Minister Bjorn Bjarnason and a sign reading ‘death power’ during demonstrations
