Sunday, December 30, 2007

Nuclear site breached

Oh, great!
A Nuclear Site Is Breached
South African Attack Should Sound Alarms

By Micah Zenko
Thursday, December 20, 2007; Page A29

An underreported attack on a South African nuclear facility last month demonstrates the high risk of theft of nuclear materials by terrorists or criminals. Such a crime could have grave national security implications for the United States or any of the dozens of countries where nuclear materials are held in various states of security.

Shortly after midnight on Nov. 8, four armed men broke into the Pelindaba nuclear facility 18 miles west of Pretoria, a site where hundreds of kilograms of weapons-grade uranium are stored. According to the South African Nuclear Energy Corp., the state-owned entity that runs the Pelindaba facility, these four "technically sophisticated criminals" deactivated several layers of security, including a 10,000-volt electrical fence, suggesting insider knowledge of the system. Though their images were captured on closed-circuit television, they were not detected by security officers because nobody was monitoring the cameras at the time.

So, undetected, the four men spent 45 minutes inside one of South Africa's most heavily guarded "national key points" -- defined by the government as "any place or area that is so important that its loss, damage, disruption or immobilization may prejudice the Republic."

Eventually, the attackers broke into the emergency control center in the middle of the facility, stole a computer (which was ultimately left behind) and breached an electronically sealed control room. After a brief struggle, they shot Anton Gerber, an off-duty emergency services officer. Gerber later explained that he was hanging around because he believed (reasonably, in retrospect) that his fiancée -- a site supervisor -- was not safe at work. Although badly injured, Gerber triggered the alarm, setting off sirens and lights and alerting police stationed a few miles away.

Nevertheless, the four escaped, leaving the facility the same way they broke in.

Amazingly, at the same time those four men entered Pelindaba from its eastern perimeter, a separate group of intruders failed in an attempt to break in from the west. The timing suggests a coordinated attack against a facility that contains an estimated 25 bombs' worth of weapons-grade nuclear material. On Nov. 16, local police arrested three suspects, ranging in age from 17 to 28, in connection with this incident.
ad_icon

In response to the successful attack, the South African Nuclear Energy Corp. suspended six Pelindaba security personnel, including the general manager of security, and promised an "internal investigation which will cover culpability, negligence and improvements of Security Systems." It should be noted that Pelindaba's security was considered to have been upgraded after a break-in there two years ago (one individual was detained shortly after breaching the security fence).

It is still unclear why the two groups of intruders sought to break into this particular facility. More important, however, is that had the armed attackers succeeded in penetrating the site's highly enriched uranium storage vault, where the weapons-grade nuclear material is believed to be held, they could have carried away the ingredients for the world's first terrorist nuclear bomb.

As this incident shows, nuclear terrorism is a global issue, extending far beyond the familiar policy talking points of U.S. cooperation with Russia over its nuclear stockpiles, the security of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal in the face of threats from Islamic extremists, and concerns that if Iran acquires nuclear capabilities it could provide a bomb to sympathetic terrorist organizations.

Indeed, the essential ingredients required for making a nuclear weapon exist in more than 40 countries, in facilities with differing levels of security. Unfortunately, there are still no binding global standards on how to secure nuclear weapons and weapons-grade nuclear material. In the absence of sustained political leadership from the world's nuclear powers to develop, agree to and implement effective nuclear security standards, armed attacks such as the one at Pelindaba could become commonplace.

Micah Zenko is a research associate in the project on Managing the Atom at Harvard University's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. The views expressed here are solely those of the author.

Thursday, December 27, 2007

tourniquet clothes could save lives

This is something so simple it's really hard to understand why this hasn't been built into every uniform since the first world war, I really hope this simple improvement is put into every service members BDUs. It could save many lives.
RICHMOND, Virginia (AP) -- As an Army surgeon in the Middle East, Dr. Keith Rose watched a colleague bleed to death when a truck in his convoy was hit with a rocket-propelled grenade.

Rose could not get his comrade a tourniquet, which could have helped control the bleeding on his wounded leg, and sat along the mangled wreckage and talked with him as he took his last breath.

"It really kind of frustrated me," Rose said.

Once he returned to the U.S., Rose approached BlackHawk, a provider of military and law enforcement gear, with an idea to create clothes with built-in tourniquets.

The system being tested for use in military uniforms, called Warrior Wear, has eight tourniquets -- two in each sleeve and pant leg.

"No matter how good the tourniquet is, if you can't get it on the person at the right time, it doesn't work," said Rose, who does tactical medicine consultation and medical work overseas.

"It's something that is so basic, so cost effective and so overwhelmingly life changing," he said.

The Norfolk-based company said the clothing should be available for retail around the end of March. It is expected to retail for less than $200, but the cost to the military would depend on things like volume.

Military officials agree having readily accessible tourniquets is important.

"Tourniquets have allowed many people with devastating injuries to come back that in another time and another place would have died," said Col. Patricia R. Hastings, director of the Army's Department of Combat Medic Training based at Fort Sam Houston in Texas.

"If you can save a medic a few minutes of time so he can concentrate on saving your life ... it has great possibilities," Hastings said.

And with the concept of battlefields changing, Rose said the system is more vital than ever.

"The way wars are fought now ... there's no defined lines of engagement," Rose said. "The average cook could be hit with a rocket attack while he's carrying potatoes to the mess hall."

Advances in body armor have made protecting the core of a body easier, but more than 60 percent of injuries in military and law enforcement conflicts today are to the extremities, said Terry Naughton, director of industrial security at BlackHawk.

Naughton said 10 percent of deaths are from injuries where blood loss was uncontrollable.

"We are confident that the day that this hits the field, that lives will be saved," Naughton said. "And if we save one person, we've done our job."

BlackHawk was founded in 1993 by Mike Noell, a former Navy SEAL who fought in the first Gulf War.

The company, which has developed more than 2,500 products for military, law enforcement and the outdoor sporting community, has grown to about 250 employees and is expected to add 100 more within the next year.

HA ha ha ha!

Who is John Larson? I have never heard of him until now, but I like his style.

doom and gloom to follow Ron Paul presidency

This danish bank sees a grim out look for the future.
Bank predicts Ron Paul win, US slump
Thu, 27 Dec 2007 06:08:48

Denmark-based Saxo Bank predicts Ron Paul presidency in 2008, saying US economy will plunge into a depression prior to the election.

The Bank predicted that Ron Paul, US congressman and Republican presidential candidate, will win the US 2008 presidential election.

Saxo Bank says the US economy will shrink by 25% and the Chinese economy will decrease by 40%. The economic downturn will come about as a result of the housing crash.

Ron Paul has been critical of the Federal Reserve and has blamed the Federal Reserve for causing the real estate bubble and crash. Paul has said that the loose monetary policy of the Fed had artificially inflated real estate prices which lead to the collapse.

Paul supports 'Sound Money' and opposes the Federal Reserve's 'Inflation Tax' and says that he wants to prevent a dollar collapse.

Saxo Bank also predicts $175 a barrel for oil and the price of grain will double. Some have predicted that oil will climb to $250 a barrel if the US attacks Iran. The bank also predicts that 30% of large building companies will go bankrupt.

MRI/RA

Wednesday, December 19, 2007

Monday, December 17, 2007

Ron Paul breaks previous fundraising record!

Ron Paul just broke the record for one day fundraising by a candidate for office in the united states of America. Ever. and that's any office, dog catcher, senator, mayor. no other person in united states history has ever been able to muster so much monetary support for their campaign within a 24 hour period. This is going to herald a cataclysmic shift in the political landscape when it comes to fundraising. No longer will extensive donor networks and bundling of contributions be what creates traction and ensures primary longevity. In the future the massing of donors through the internet will swamp favorite possibly unsuspecting campaigns with the cash required to create turnout on election day. Back in the day the local community coordinator was the most indispensable piece of any campaign, local or federal. From distributing sample ballots to arranging for transportation of the voters to the polls, these volunteers served as the long arm of their respective campaigns. No more! The internet has upended these previous arrangements. 2008 may have been the last year for the “old style” campaign.

update: This is the single largest one day fund raising total for any political candidate in the history of the world. that's a rather big deal I should say.



December 17, 2007 12:45 AM Eastern Time
Ron Paul Campaign Iowa Announces Press Conference in Wake of Record Fundraising

DES MOINES, Iowa--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul has raised more money in one day than any other candidate in U.S. election history. The Ron Paul campaign took in more than $6 million on December 16th, 2007, breaking the one-day record formerly held by John Kerry.

Dr. Paul will speak at a press conference at 12:45 pm on Monday at the Des Moines Marriott in the Des Moines Room. Members of the press are strongly encouraged to attend, as the candidate will not be immediately available throughout the day.

Contacts

Ron Paul 2008 Presidential Campaign Committee
John Zambenini, 937-554-4583

Saturday, December 15, 2007

Energy bill; congress caves.

It's sad they couldn't have left the tax incentives in the bill. Do you know that the Japanese government has been installing reduced rate solar equipment to their citizens at the rate of 1 million units a year? We are loosing our edge as a nation in favor of profits to big business. Pathetic.
Our efforts failed… A new “scaled down” energy bill was passed through the senate last night and three of the most important items in the bill were taken out to appease oil funded republicans. Unfortunately our senators, democrats and republicans alike, failed our country and environment yet again by bowing to big oil and removing the most influential provisions and tax incentives this country has ever seen.

The tax incentives now set to expire in 2008 will end all federal tax credits on solar, wind and other alternative energy installations. No other tax incentive or provision has brought the solar industry closer to grid parity than this one and now it is gone. Grid parity is the point in which it will actually be cheaper to generate your own electricity on your roof than to buy from your local utility company. Now this idea is great for us, but bad for big business, (oil and coal) so of course, the lobbyist went to work on our republican senators and were apparently very affective at getting that tax break completely removed from the energy bill.

Second major blow to the renewable energy industry was the removal of the $22 billion dollar tax package designed to cut tax breaks for big oil companies and funnel the money towards the renewable energy industry. Of course this is bad for Big Oil considering how poor their financials are currently, (sarcasm: Big Oil showed record highs this year) so yet again the lobbyist went to work on our senators and “poof” the tax package is gone. Not only that, but Bush himself threatened to veto the entire bill if this tax package was not removed, showing yet again, a clear alliance with Big Oil and an unwillingness to do what is right.

Another major blow, was the removal of the alternative energy mandate which would have required all investor owned utility companies to get at least 15% of their electricity from alternative energy sources. Many utility companies complained that this would increase cost and again, “poof” another very influential and beneficial provision was removed from the energy bill.

Now many environmentalist (not me) are praising this bill because of the increase in the average MPG standard for automakers. However this small push for a 35 MPG standard by 2020 is nothing compared to the three provisions mentioned above. Not only that, but the bulk of this energy bill was aimed at increasing domestic biofuel production (like ethanol) by 36 billion gallons by 2022. Some people may think this is a good thing, but if you read some of my previous posts, you will find that ethanol and most other commercial biofuels are actually worse for the environment than gasoline. And although the 35 MPG is good, it is like putting a bandaid on a gaping wound.

On a positive note, the senate did increase energy efficiency standards for government buildings and consumer products and appliances. This provision will help to reduce phantom loads of typical electronics which are responsible for about two thirds of household energy usage. This efficiency provisions could potentially save about 40,000 megawatts of electricity and is in my opinion the most significant provision in the entire bill.

In the end, the original bill, prior to the removal of the truly beneficial tax packages and mandates, was one vote short of being passed. I believe senator Richard Durbin sumed up the evening best when he said:

“The future just failed by one vote, the past was preserved … the oil companies are now celebrating in their boardrooms. Not only do they have the highest profits in history, they continue to have a death grip on this Senate.”

Friday, December 14, 2007

Go buy a gun, before it's too late!

Good for that brave woman!
Buy A Gun
by Chuck Baldwin
December 14, 2007

"He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." (Luke 22:36 KJV)

Most of us are aware that the heroic actions of a brave woman at the New Life Church in Colorado Springs, Colorado a few days ago saved the lives of perhaps scores, or even hundreds, of people. However, her bravery would not have counted for much had she not been armed.

On that fateful December Sunday, a man by the name of Matthew Murray entered the church armed to the teeth. According to press reports, he was armed with a semi-automatic rifle, two handguns, some smoke grenades, and more than 1,000 rounds of ammunition.

By the time Murray arrived in the Colorado Springs church, he had already killed four people: two at a missionary training center miles away, and two in the church parking lot. He had wounded several others. No one realized it at the time, but the man was a serial killer in the midst of a rampage. He doubtless planned to kill as many people as he could, as there were thousands of people inside the church. Had there not been an armed citizen in the church house, the death toll would have been massive.

According to church spokesmen, the congregation has over a dozen members who volunteered to serve as security personnel for the church. Jeanne Assam was one of those volunteers.

A former police officer, Assam said, "I saw him [Murray] coming through the doors, and I took cover, and I waited for him to get closer. I came out of cover, I identified myself and engaged him and took him down." Murray died in the exchange. Although Assam shot him several times with her 9mm pistol, the coroner's office said that Murray actually succumbed to a self-inflicted gunshot wound. After being incapacitated by Assam's gunfire, Murray apparently turned one of his weapons on himself.

Chalk one up for the good guys, or in this case, good gals.

Have you noticed how the media dropped the Colorado story as soon as it was discovered that a lawfully armed citizen ended the potential massacre by using her own handgun? Had the killer been successful in murdering scores of people, however, it would have been at the top of the news for weeks. As it is, the story is already buried in the dungeon section of the news, if it is in the news at all.

One thing the national news media will always ignore is the practice of lawful self-defense. For example, most people are probably not aware of the fact that American citizens use a firearm to defend themselves more than 2.4 million times EVERY YEAR. That is more than 6,500 times EVERY DAY. This means that, each year, firearms are used 60 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives. Furthermore, of the 2.4 million self-defense cases, more than 192,000 are by women defending themselves against sexual assault. And in less than eight percent of those occasions is a shot actually fired. The vast majority of the time (92%), the mere presence of a firearm helps to avert a major crime from occurring. That is what Congressman Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD) concluded after extensive research. According to Rep. Bartlett, the number of defensive uses is four times the number of crimes reported committed with guns.

John Lott, senior research scientist at the University of Maryland, agrees with Bartlett. His book "More Guns, Less Crime" documents the fact that--instead of being a cause of crime--firearms in the hands of private citizens are actually a major deterrent to crime.

Another fact conveniently ignored by the major media is the connection between wanton killings and so-called "gun-free" zones. For an example of this, look no further than the Virginia Tech massacre. In spite of Virginia state laws that allow citizens to carry concealed weapons for self-defense, Virginia Tech forbade its students and faculty from carrying weapons for self-defense on campus. Had a student or faculty member been armed--as was Ms. Assam in the Colorado Springs attack--no doubt many, if not most, of the Virginia Tech victims would not have died. Obviously, bad guys do not pay any attention to "gun-free" zones, except to note that such zones create a free-killing environment.

Is it any wonder that those states and cities with the most restrictive gun control laws tend to also be home to the highest crime rates? The old saying is still true. "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns." There is another saying I like even better. "When guns are outlawed, I will be an outlaw."

Even our Lord understood and validated the right of every person to arm themselves for personal self-defense. He said, "He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." (Luke 22:36 KJV) The old Roman sword was the First Century equivalent of a modern handgun. It was the most practical and convenient form of self-defense available at that time. Also, please note that at least two of Jesus' disciples (one of whom was Simon Peter) were in the habit of carrying their own personal swords, and Jesus never rebuked them. (See Luke 22:38.)

Jesus also acknowledged, "When a strong man ARMED [emphasis added] keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace." (Luke 11:21)

Furthermore, the Apostle Paul said, emphatically, "But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel." (I Tim. 5:8) Does "not providing for his own" include not providing protection? Of course it does.

The right and, yes, obligation of personal self-defense is entrenched in both Christian and American tradition. People who would deny citizens the right to arm themselves are either naïvely ignorant or deliberately duplicitous. As Robert Heinlein said, "An armed society is a polite society."

America's Founding Fathers agreed with Heinlein. Thomas Jefferson said, "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." He also said, "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."

Samuel Adams said, "[T]he said Constitution [shall] be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms."

James Madison said, "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms."

Thomas Paine said, "[A]rms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property . . . Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them."

George Washington called the private collections of arms "the people's liberty's teeth."

America must always preserve the right to keep and bear arms. To do any less is to invite oppression and tyranny, not to mention acts of violence.

Some years back, Alan Rice of the Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO) wrote, "Since 1900 at least seven major genocides have occurred resulting in the murder of 50-60 million people:

*Ottoman Turkey, 1915-17; 1-1.5 million Armenians murdered;
*Soviet Union, 1929-53; 20 million anti-Communists and anti-Stalinists murdered;
*Nazi Germany & Occupied Europe, 1933-45; 13 million Jews, Gypsies, and Anti-Nazi murdered;
*China, 1949-52, 1957-60 & 1966-1976; 20 million anti-Communists murdered;
*Guatemala, 1960-1981; 100,000 Mayan Indians murdered;
*Uganda, 1971-1979; 300,000 Christians and Political Rivals of Idi Amin murdered;
*Cambodia, 1975-1979; 1 million murdered."

Rice continued to say, "In all seven of the genocides summarized above, gun control laws were in force before the genocide occurred, in some cases decades before. In five of the seven genocides, the lethal law, the gun control law was in force before the genocide regime took power."

Rice also said, "Gun control laws are usually enacted during a crisis or a perceived crisis." He then said, "Government officials, not hate groups or common criminals, were responsible for these seven genocides. In most of these cases the murder victims outnumbered their murderers; yet they were powerless to defend themselves because they were disarmed."

Do the math yourself. Absent an armed citizen, 32 innocent people lost their lives at Virginia Tech, while the presence of 1 armed citizen resulted in 2 innocent deaths in Colorado Springs. Furthermore, the presence of over 200 million firearms in the possession of the American people has done more to keep America free than any other human element--bar none!

Therefore, to help keep your family safe and your country free, go buy a gun.

© Chuck Baldwin

This column is archived as http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2007/cbarchive_20071214.html

Thursday, December 13, 2007

congressional gridlock

hmm.. I wonder if this will end up effecting earnings for these guys.



U.S. Army To Lay-Off 200,000 Civilians, Contractors

December 12, 2007 9:46 p.m. EST

Paul Icamina - AHN News Writer

Washington, D.C. (AHN) - The U.S. Army will run out of money for operations and maintenance by mid-February, and the Marine Corps will run out of funds a month later, according to a Congressional Research Service (CRS) report, confirming Defense Department projections.

The Army and Marine Corps may delay the inevitable for only a couple of weeks by transferring funds and slowing down spending, according to CRS, a part of the Library of Congress.

President George Bush has requested $189.3 billion in supplemental funds for war on terror, however Congress has so far only approved about $17 billion for mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicles. The rest of the funds are tied up in a disagreement between Congress and the White House over a timetable for withdrawing U.S. forces from Iraq.

The Army will be forced to curtail training, close several bases, furlough about 100,000 civilian employees and lay-off about 100,000 contractors, the defense department said in a statement, adding that furlough notification letters will be sent to unions and employees beginning next week.

Congress is scheduled to adjourn on Dec. 21. If it does not reach an agreement on funding, the legislation will not be considered until after Congress reconvenes, tentatively scheduled for Jan. 15.

Copyright © AHN Media Corp - All rights reserved.
Redistribution, republication. syndication, rewriting or broadcast is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of AHN.

Putin, set against the globalists

This explains much!
Why the Council on Foreign Relations Hates Putin
Why Murdoch's Journal Loves Kasparov

By MIKE WHITNEY

On Sunday, Putin's party, United Russia, stormed to victory in the country's parliamentary elections with 63 per cent of the vote. It was a romp. United Russia now controls 306 of the 450 seats in the Duma, an overwhelming majority. The balloting was a referendum on Putin's leadership and it passed in a landslide. Now it's certain, that even if Putin steps down as president next year as expected, he will be the dominant player in Russian politics for the foreseeable future.

Vladamir Putin is arguably the most popular leader in Russian history, although you'd never know it by reading the western media. According to a recent survey conducted by the Wall Street Journal, Putin's personal approval rating in November 2007 was 85 per cent, making him the most popular head of state in the world today. Putin's popularity derives from many factors. He is personally clever and charismatic. He is fiercely nationalistic and has worked tirelessly to improve the lives of ordinary Russians and restore the country to its former greatness. He has raised over 20 million Russians out of grinding poverty, improved education, health care and the pension system, (partially) nationalized critical industries, lowered unemployment, increased manufacturing and exports, invigorated Russian markets, strengthened the ruble, raised the overall standard of living, reduced government corruption, jailed or exiled the venal oligarchs, and amassed capital reserves of $450 billion.

Russia is no longer up for grabs like it was after the fall of the Soviet Union. Putin put an end to all of that. He reasserted control over the country's vast resources and he's using them to improve the lives of his own people. This is a real departure from the 1990s, when the drunken Yeltsin steered Russia into economic disaster by following Washington's neoliberal edicts and by selling Russia's Crown Jewels to the vulturous oligarchs. Putin put Russia's house back in order; stabilized the ruble, strengthened economic/military alliances in the region, and removed the corporate gangsters who had stolen Russia's national assets for pennies on the dollar. The oligarchs are now all either in jail or have fled the country. Russia is no longer for sale.

Russia is, once again, a major world power and a vital source of hydrocarbons. It's star is steadily rising just as America's has begun to wane. This may explain why Putin is loathed by the West. Freud might call it petroleum envy, but it's deeper than that. Putin has charted a course for social change that conflicts with basic tenets of neoliberalism, which are the principles which govern US foreign policy. He is not a member of the corporate-banking brotherhood which believes the wealth of the world should be divided among themselves regardless of the suffering or destruction it may cause. Putin's primary focus is Russia; Russia's welfare, Russia's sovereignty and Russia's place in the world. He is not a globalist.

That is why the Bush administration has encircled Russia with military bases, toppled neighboring regimes with its color-coded revolutions, (which were organized by US NGOs and intelligence services) intervened in Russian elections, and threatened to deploy an (allegedly defensive) nuclear weapons system in Eastern Europe. Russia is seen as a potential rival to US imperial ambitions and must be contained or subverted.

In the early years of his presidency, it was believed that Putin would comply with western demands and accept a subordinate role in the US-EU-Israel centric system. But that hasn't happened. Putin has stubbornly defended Russian independence and resisted integration into the prevailing system. .

The triumphalism which swept through Washington after the fall of the Berlin Wall has been replaced with a palpable fear that Russia's power will grow as oil prices continue to soar. The tectonic plates of geopolitical power are gradually shifting eastward. That's why the US has joined in The Great Game and is trying to put down roots in Eurasia. Still, it's easy to imagine a scenario in which America's access to the last great oil and natural gas reserves on the planet--the three trillion barrels of oil and natural gas located in the Caspian Basin---could be completely blocked by a resurgent Russian superpower.

The most powerful of the Washington think tanks, the Council on Foreign Relations, recognized this problem early on and decided that US policy towards Russia had to be reworked entirely.

* * *

John Edwards and Jack Kemp were appointed to lead a CFR task force which concocted the pretext for an all-out assault on the Putin. This is where the idea that Putin is "rolling back democracy" began. In their article "Russia's Wrong Direction", Edwards and Kemp state that a "strategic partnership" with Russia is no longer possible. They claim that the government has become increasingly authoritarian and that the society is growing less "open and pluralistic".

Kemp and Edwards provided the ideological foundation upon which the entire public relations campaign against Putin has been built. And it is quite an impressive campaign. A Google News search shows roughly 1,400 articles from the various news services on Putin. Virtually all of them contain exactly the same rhetoric, the same buzzwords, the same spurious claims, the same slanders. It is impossible to find even one article out of 1,400 that diverges the slightest bit from the talking points which originated at the Council on foreign Relations.

It's interesting to see to what extent the media has become a propaganda bullhorn for the national security state. Putin's personal approval ratings confirm his enormous popularity, and yet, the media continues to treat him like he's a tyrant. It is utterly incongruous.

In most articles, Putin is disparaged as "anti democratic"; a charge that is never leveled at the Saudi Royal family even though women are forbidden to drive, they must be fully-covered at all times, and can be stoned to death if they are found to be unfaithful. Also, in Saudi Arabia, beheading is still the punishment of choice for capital crimes.

When Saudi King Abdullah visits the US, he is not heaped with scorn for his regimes' repressive treatment of his people. Instead he's rewarded with flattering photos of he and George Bush strolling arm-n-arm through the Crawford sage.

Why is Putin blasted for "rolling back democracy" when American client, Mikhail Saakashvili, arbitrarily declares martial law and deploys his truncheon-wielding Robo-cops to beat protesters senseless before dragging them off to the Georgia gulag? The pictures of Saakashvili's bloody crackdown appeared in the foreign press, but not in the US. Rather, the media had all its cameras focused on Garry Kasparov (contributing editor to the Wall Street Journal and right-wing loony) as he was led off to the Moscow hoosegow in handcuffs for protesting without a permit.

* * *

Putin's real crime is that he serves Russia's national interests rather than the interests of global Capital. He also rejects Washington's "unipolar" world model. As he said in Munich:

"The unipolar world refers to a world in which there is one master, one sovereign; one center of authority, one center of force, one center of decision-making. At the end of the day this is pernicious not only for all those within this system, but also for the sovereign itself because it destroys itself from within.

"What is even more important is that the model itself is flawed because at its basis there is and can be no moral foundations for modern civilization."

He added:

"We are seeing a greater and greater disdain for the basic principles of international law....We are witnessing an almost uncontained hyper use of force -- military force -- in international relations, force that is plunging the world into an abyss of permanent conflicts. I am convinced that we have reached that decisive moment when we must seriously think about the architecture of global security."

Well said, Vladimir.

Putin's no saint, but he doesn't deserve the thrashing he gets from the western media.

And a final word on Garry Kasparov

On Sunday, while Putin's party "United Russia" was screeching to a landslide victory, Reuters News was busy taking mug-shots of the stony-faced Kasparov holding up Florida-style ballots claiming the voting was rigged. "They are not just rigging the vote," Kasparov moaned, "They are raping the whole electoral system. These elections are a reminder of Soviet elections when there was no choice.....Putin is going to have a hard time trying to rule like Stalin."

Stalin? So now Putin is Stalin? First of all, when did Reuters begin to take such a keen interest in voting irregularities? It must be a recent development, becuase they were nowhere to be found in the 2000 presidential election. And when did they start to pay attention to "political dissent"? They certainly never wasted any video-footage on the antiwar rallies in the US. Are we to believe that they are more interested in democracy in Russia than America?

And why is Reuters so eager to provide valuable column-space to a washed-up chessmaster who's only interested in making a nuisance of himself by bellyaching about voter fraud? That's not news; it's propaganda.

As for Kasparov and his silly accusations; he should be glad that he lives in Putin's Russia rather than Stalin's or he'd be in leg-irons right now boarding a northbound train to the Siberian outback.

What is Kasparov doing in Moscow anyway? And why is this little man --with virtually no political base -- such a big part of the western media narrative? Is he only there to discredit the election and throw a little more muck on Putin or is there more to it than that?

Garry Kasparov should give up politics and do what he does best; stand-up comedy. Watching Kasparov traipse around Moscow with his basket of sour grapes and his entourage of western media-stooges is like watching "Mr. Bean's Excellent Kremlin Adventure", a particularly lame performance in a dismal B-rated burlesque. It's painful to watch.

Kasparov's party, the "Other Russia" couldn't manage even a 2 per cent rating in the polls. The party is a complete dud. In fact, Reuters even (reluctantly) admits as much in its article.

Here's the clip. Reuters: "Kasparov and his "Other Russia" dissident movement are not standing in Sunday's parliamentary election because they could not get registered as a party. THEY ENJOY LITTLE PUBLIC SUPPORT AMONG RUSSIANS BUT HAVE A BIG FOLLOWING IN THE WEST." (Reuters) "Big following in the West"? Why doesn't that surprise me?

So, in other words, Kasparov has no base of support in Russia, and yet he gets his own camera crew and media team to follow him around recording every silly he says. That's just great. Who do they think he is; Nelson Mandela?

Kasparov is a contributing editor of Murdoch's Wall Street Journal; so he already has a regular platform for launching his tirades on the "tyrannical" Mr. Putin. Normally, one doesn't get a spot on the op-ed page of the WSJ unless their politics are somewhere to the right of Augusto Pinochet. That's probably the case with Kasparov, too. In Saturday's edition of the WSJ, Kasparov delivered his latest absurd soliloquy disparaging Putin and recounting his agonizing 5 day ordeal in the Moscow poky.

Although Kasparov has garnered little public support in Russia, he appears to have a loyal following among the Washington elite. According to Wikipedia: "In 1991, Kasparov received the Keeper of the Flame award from the Center for Security Policy (a US think tank), for anti-Communist resistance and the propagation of democracy. Kasparov was an exceptional recipient since the award is given to "individuals for devoting their public careers to the defense of the United States and American values around the world". Hmmmm...."For devoting their public careers to the defense of the United States and American values around the world"? Isn't that a definition of an American agent?

Again, according to Wikipedia: In April, 2007 it was asserted that Kasparov was a board member of the National Security Advisory Council of the Center for Security Policy, a non-profit, non-partisan national security organization that specializes in identifying policies, actions, and resource needs that are vital to American security". Kasparov confirmed this and added that he was removed shortly after he became aware of it. He noted that HE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THE MEMBERSHIP and suggested he was included in the board by an accident because he received the 1991 Keeper of the Flame award from this organization. But Kasparov maintained his association with the neoconservative leadership by giving speeches at think tanks such as the Hoover Institute."

Here's a list of some of the other fellow travelers who've been given the "Keeper of the Flame Award": 2007-Senator Joe Lieberman. 2004-General Peter Pace. 2003- Paul Wolfowitz. 2002- General Richard Meyers. 1998-Donald Rumsfeld. 1996-Newt Gingrich. 1995-Ronald Reagan. 1990-Casper Weinberger.

Is Kasparov an anomaly or does he fit right in with this coven of far-right loonies? And who are some of the prominent members of the Center for Security Policy? Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Frank Gaffney, James Roche and Laura Ingraham. Oh, boy. The whole front office of the neocon's cuckoo's nest. Now tell me, dear reader, with friends like that; what should we really think about Kasparov's performance in Moscow? Is he really interested in "democracy promotion" as he claims or is their acting out a script that was prepared in Washington?

In the US, Kasparov has become the focal point of the Russian elections - the primary source of "unbiased" analysis. NPR reiterates his spurious claims every half hour. The other news agencies are no better. He has become the distorted lens through which Americans view Russian democracy. This says a lot more about the choke-hold the neocons still have on the media rather than anything objective about Russia. The Kasparov fiasco gives us a chance to see the inner-workings of the establishment media. It's nothing more than a propaganda bullhorn for far-right organizations executing their bloody imperial strategy. Fidel Castro summed it up best just days ago when he said: "It is the most sophisticated media ever developed by technology, employed to kill human beings and to subjugate or exterminate peoples".

Amen to that, Fidel.

Mike Whitney lives in Washington state. He can be reached at: fergiewhitney@msn.com

Tuesday, December 11, 2007

Marx Cafe tonight!


Hey All, I'm playing at Marx Cafe tonight, 9-11. Seeya there!

3203 Mt. Pleasant St. NW

Yup, it's official now, recession.

Finally, someone is saying publicly what we have all know for almost a year.
Morgan Stanley issues full US recession alert

By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, International Business Editor
Last Updated: 1:24am GMT 11/12/2007

Morgan Stanley has issued a full recession alert for the US economy, warning of a sharp slowdown in business investment and a "perfect storm" for consumers as the housing slump spreads.

In a report "Recession Coming" released today, the bank's US team said the credit crunch had started to inflict serious damage on US companies.

"Slipping sales and tightening credit are pushing companies into liquidation mode, especially in motor vehicles," it said.

"Three-month dollar Libor spreads have jumped by 60 to 80 basis points over the last month. High yield spreads have widened even more significantly. The absolute cost of borrowing is higher than in June."

"As delinquencies and defaults soar, lenders are tightening credit for commercial, credit card and auto lending, as well as for all mortgage borrowers," said the report, written by the bank's chief US economist Dick Berner. He said the foreclosure rate on residential mortgages had reached a 19-year high of 5.59pc in the third quarter while the glut of unsold properties would lead to a 40pc crash in housing construction.

"We think overall housing starts will run below one million units in each of the next two years -- a level not seen in the history of the modern data since 1959," he said.

Although the US job market has apparently held up well, an average monthly fall of 138,000 in the number of self-employed workers over the last quarter suggests it may now be buckling. "Consumers face what could be a perfect storm," said Mr Berner.

The partial freeze on subprime mortgage rates announced last week by US treasury secretary Hank Paulson may help cushion the blow for some banks, but it could equally backfire by adding a "risk premium" that drives even more lenders out of the mortgage market.

Like Goldman Sachs, and Lehman Brothers, the bank no longer believes Asia and Europe will come to the rescue as America slows.

It has slashed its 2008 growth forecast for Japan from 1.9pc to 0.9pc, and warned that credit stress will weigh heavily on the eurozone.

Mr Berner said US demand is likely to contract by 1pc each quarter for the first nine months of 2008, but the picture could be far worse if the Federal Reserve fails to slash rates fast enough. It is betting on a quarter point cut this week, with three more cuts by the middle of next year. "We expect the Fed to insure against the worst outcome," he said.

Morgan Stanley is the first major Wall Street bank to warn that it is may now be too late to stop a recession, though most have shifted to an ultra-cautious stance in recent weeks.

The bank at first treated the August crunch as a "mid-cycle correction", much like the financial storm after Russia's default in 1998. But the collapse of the US commercial paper market has now continued for seventeen weeks, suggesting a "fundamental deleveraging of the banking system."

Mr Berner -- known at Morgan Stanley as the "resident bull" -- is one of the most closely watched analysts on Wall Street. While he began to turn bearish last April as the credit markets turned nasty, the latest report is written in tones that may is rattle the fast-diminishing band of optimists.

Thursday, December 06, 2007

Man invents battery, gets death penalty

Another blow is landed for the oil companies! Down with cheap energy!?!?
Free-Energy Battery Inventor Killed at Airport?

Official statement cites "natural causes" but others familiar with the disruptive potential of the inventor's technology to the existing power structure consider it a probable assassination.

by Sterling D. Allan
Pure Energy Systems News
Copyright © 2007

WBTV reported death as "most likely not a homicide."

On Nov. 11, inventor of a revolutionary, affordable, clean energy technology, M. DeGeus was found slumped in his car, totally unresponsive, in the long-term parking lot of the Charlotte Douglass International Airport in North Carolina. He was taken to the hospital and died a short time later. The autopsy suggested heart failure, so officials were saying the death was a result of a medical problem or natural causes, and not likely to be a homicide. (Ref.; ref.)

Those who were involved with his research are doubtful, citing, among other things, that he had been in good health at around age forty five. The timing is also suspicious. He was apparently on his way to Europe where he was to secure major funding for the development and commercialization of his technology, which could make oil obsolete.

Charlotte Macklenburg Police detective, M. Conner, said that it would be a while yet before the toxicology report comes in on this case.

Tom Bearden, a well-known figure in the cutting-edge, clean energy technology industry, wrote a lengthy report on the inventor, his death, and his technology. He said:

"DeGeus was the inventor of a thin wafer-like material/device that somehow specially aligned the atoms or electron currents ongoing in that material, so that the wafer produced a constant amperage at a small voltage – continuous real power, or in other words a strange kind of “self-powering battery”.

Bearden also speculates about the cause of death, citing a technology that shoots an electromagnetic beam that destroys the body's control of its heartbeat. He said there are two basic sizes of the Venus ECCM technique. One has a range of around thirty feet, and the other, about the size of a bazooka, has an effective range of around 200 feet.

Bearden claims to have been hit with such a device along with his colleague Ken Moore while at a restaurant several years ago. They felt the fibrillation and saw the would-be assassin about 20 feet away, with his suit coat pulled back, exposing a book-sized shooter. Fortunately, they were near an emergency exit and were able to get away before a lethal dose was received.

DeGeus had been in Salt Lake City a couple of weeks ago, demonstrating the technology to some people who were also seeking to raise money for its advancement. That group said that DeGeus was not the only person who knew how the technology works, and they hope to see it go ahead even though DeGeus is no longer around.

The above information has been brought to the attention of the Charlotte media and police.

# # #

Wednesday, December 05, 2007

Wall Street Chatter

Hey! Sounds like the day trader endorsement is all but sewn up.
Press Release Source: Dream Catcher Technology

Ron Paul Leads the Republicans in the Wall Street Chatter Chat Room Presidential Poll
Monday December 3, 12:14 pm ET

NEW YORK, NY--(MARKET WIRE)--Dec 3, 2007 -- Dream Catcher Technology's (Other OTC:DRMC.PK - News) Wall Street Chatter Ratings (www.wallstchatter.com) has reported today that of the 9 primary Republican presidential candidates, the Wall Street Chatter Presidential Poll has Ron Paul leading as the most talked about Republican candidate.

ADVERTISEMENT

Wall Street Chatter collects data from nearly 100 online chat-rooms and focuses on online chat-room activity regarding stocks and investments. The Wall Street Chatter Presidential Poll is based on the top 17 Republican and Democratic presidential candidates. The data is presented weekly by percentage by party and overall.

The company also provides a subscription based online system containing data on chat-room activity about more than 5000 stocks. The Wall Street Chatter Ratings system is based entirely upon non-biased frequency of online conversations in public chat rooms. The data is published daily on the wallstchatter.com website as the top 10 list. Data on more than 5000 companies is available to subscribers via the Wall Street Chatter service. Subscribers can run reports and see historical data and graphs on any of the more than 5000 stocks in the database. Subscribers pay only $9.95 per month for the basic service. Wall Street Chatter is owned by Dream Catcher Technology (Other OTC:DRMC.PK - News), a global technology, research and information services company.

See www.wallstchatter.com for today's top 10 and information how to subscribe.

Certain statements contained herein are "forward-looking" statements (as such term is defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995). Because such statements include risks and uncertainties, actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements.


The Wall Street Chatter

Wall Street Chatter Chat Room Presidential Poll

Who are people talking about in the chat rooms in regards to
the candidates for President

Democrats Republicans
Clinton 39% Paul 27%
Obama 22% Giuliani 25%
Edwards 19% Romney 15%
Kucinich 9% McCain 15%
Gravel 5% Thompson 7%
Richardson 4% Huckabee 7%
Biden 1% Tancredo 3%
Dodd 1% Hunter 1%
Brownback 0%

Data provided by Wall Street Chatter
Wall Street Chatter is a division of Dream Catcher Technologies, Inc.
http://www.wallstchatter.com


Contact:

Contact:

Wall Street Chatter
Email Contact
http://www.wallstchatter.com
631-369-4022


Source: Dream Catcher Technology

The Great Communicator

Tuesday, December 04, 2007

no Marx tonight.

I'm staying home and nursing a cold, damn this blustery weather. I'll be back next week to wreck shop as you have come to expect.

-m

Friday, November 30, 2007

Returning Iraqi exiles story overhype

I knew those stories about returning exiles entering Iraq from camps in Syria were too good to be true, i wish I could find some better reporting though, this peice from tomdispatch.com does a good job conceptually, yet dosen't win in the details department.
Tomgram: Michael Schwartz, Why Bush Won't Leave Iraq
Whoa, let's hold those surging horses in check a moment. Violence has lessened in Iraq. That seems to be a fact of the last two months -- and, for the Iraqis, a positive one, obviously. What to make of the "good news" from Iraq is another matter entirely, one made harder to assess by the chorus of self-congratulation from war supporters and Bush administration officials and allies, as well as by the heavy spin being put on events -- and reported in the media, relatively uncritically.

An exception was Damien Cave of the New York Times, who had a revealing piece on a big story of recent weeks: The return of refugee Baghdadis -- from among the two million or more Iraqis who had fled to Syria and other countries -- to the capital. This has been heavily touted as evidence of surge "success" in restoring security in Baghdad, of a genuine turn-around in the war situation. In fact, according to Cave, the trickle of returnees, which had actually been lessening recently, has been heavily "massaged by politics. Returnees have essentially become a currency of progress."

Those relatively modest returnee numbers turn out to include anyone who crossed the Syrian border heading east, including suspected insurgents and Iraqi employees of the New York Times on their way back from visits to relatives in exile in Syria. According to a UN survey of 110 families returning, "46 percent were leaving [Syria] because they could not afford to stay; 25 percent said they fell victim to a stricter Syrian visa policy; and only 14 percent said they were returning because they had heard about improved security." And that's but one warning sign on the nature of the story under the story.

A recent Pew Research Center poll of American reporters who have been working in Iraq finds that "[n]early 90 percent of U.S. journalists in Iraq say much of Baghdad is still too dangerous to visit" and many believe that "coverage has painted too rosy a picture of the conflict." In an on-line chat, the reliable Thomas Ricks of the Washington Post (and author of the bestselling book Fiasco), just back from Baghdad himself, offered his own set of caveats about the situation. He suggested that, in addition to the surge of U.S. troops into the capital's neighborhoods, some combination of other factors may help explain the lessening violence, including the fact that "some Sunni neighborhoods are walled off, and other Sunni areas have been ethnically cleansed. In addition, the Shiite death squads, in addition to killing a lot of innocents, also killed some of the car bomb guys, I am told." Of the dozens of American officers he interviewed, none were declaring success. "[T]o a man, they were enormously frustrated by what they see as the foot-dragging of the Baghdad government." And he points out that violence in Baghdad "is only back down to the 2005 level -- which to my mind is kind of like moving from the eighth circle of hell to the fifth." In 2005, or early 2006, of course, such levels were considered catastrophic.

Robert Parry of Consortium News points out that, while "good news" dominated front pages here, "the darker side" of "success" has "generally been shoved into brief stories deep inside the newspapers." He adds that "the harsh repression surrounding the ‘surge' has drawn far less U.S. press attention," even as "Iraq steadily has been transformed into a more efficient police state than dictator Saddam Hussein could have ever imagined."

Jim Lobe of Interpress Service interviewed surge "skeptics" who "argue that the strategy's ‘ground-up' approach to pacification -- buying off local insurgent and tribal groups with money and other support -- may have set the stage for a much bigger and more violent civil war or partition, particularly as U.S. forces begin drawing down from their current high of about 175,000 beginning as early as next month."

Michael Schwartz, a Tomdispatch regular on Iraq these last years, takes up this changing post-surge landscape and what exactly it may mean for the Iraqis -- and for us. Tom

Thursday, November 29, 2007

Plunge Protection Team meets in secret

Woah, so these guys think they can hide behind some notion of executive shield?!

THE TREASURY'S MISSING MINUTES MYSTERY

November 29, 2007 -- AFTER a year and a half of stalling, the US Treasury finally complied with The Post's requests for information about The President's Working Group on Financial Markets - by delivering 177 pages of crap.

In essence, the Treasury's Freedom of Information officials said that the Working Group - affectionately nicknamed the Plunge Protection Team - doesn't keep records of its meetings.

How interesting and convenient!

Included in the 177 pages that the Treasury said responded to our request on the actions of The President's Working Group were 53 pages on which something was redacted - blacked out so that the discussion was unreadable.

Many of those 53 pages contained no words at all - just a big black blob.

Starting in June of 2006 The Post asked for an accounting of the actions of The President's Working Group, which was formed under President Reagan. The Group seems to have the ill-defined task of keeping an eye on the financial markets. We also asked for e-mails related to our request through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

The Working Group operates out of the Treasury Department and includes the heads of the various exchanges in the US, as well as top-ranking government officials.

Hank Paulson, the Treasury Secretary, and Ben Bernanke, the head of the Federal Reserve, are the two most prominent members.

Back in August, Paulson said in a television interview that "we've reenergized The President's Working Group on Financial Markets."

The Wall Street Journal last year said that Paulson, upon becoming Treasury Secretary, was insisting that the Working Group meet every six weeks.

Whatever the schedule of meetings, one of those meetings occurred on Aug. 17 - the day the Federal Reserve surprised the financial markets with a cut in its discount rate.

According to records that someone else got from Bernanke's office through a FOIA request, there was an 11 a.m. conference call on Aug. 17 of the "PWG" - the President's Working Group.

Fed Governor Kevin Warsh and Patrick Parkinson, a Treasury staffer, took part in that call, according to Bernanke's phone log.

The day before - Aug. 16 - Bernanke and Paulson had lunch, but it isn't clear whether this was just two guys having a meal or if it, too, was related to The President's Working Group.

Hours after that lunch, word got around on Wall Street that the Fed was about to make a move and the stock market staged a tremendous rally.

The next day those rumors of Fed action proved accurate.

So what's the Working Group up to?

I suspect the group is ready to come to the rescue of the financial markets - even equities - in the case of a meltdown.

And as I've said in the past, that would be a completely acceptable task as long as it remains a limited power that is used infrequently.

But who decides when a rescue is needed?

And if no records are kept, who is held accountable if The Working Group's power is abused?

George Stephanopoulos, a former top aide to President Clinton, tried to calm fears right after the terrorist attack in 2001 by explaining that The President's Working Group was at the ready to prop up the stock market.

I, too, had a similar conversation with a Fed official in Sept. 2001.

But the chance of abus ing this presi dential man date - even for personal gain - is great whenever an orga nization operates in secrecy.

And that's exactly how The President's Working Group is operating.

Included in the pile of manure we received from Treasury this week is an internal e-mail dated April 9, 2007 that Heidilynne Schultheiss, director of the Treasury's Office of Financial Market Policy, sent to six people.

The subject "Minutes of PWG Meetings?"

"Hi All, We received a FOIA request asking for minutes of meetings of the President's Working Group on Financial Markets (PWG). As far as we know, minutes are not (and never have been) kept . . . A search of our records turned up nothing," Schultheiss wrote.

That same day someone at Treasury named Mary Kertz e-mailed a bunch of folks "re: meeting notes from last PWG meeting on Financial Markets."

The e-mail said: "Thanks. Just spoke with Norman - he said the Fed Chairman had said he believed minutes were recorded for these meetings. Strange."

I don't know who Norman is. But I agree that having a powerful organization like this meet in secret is very, very strange.

And extremely dangerous. john.crudele@nypost.com

Tuesday, November 27, 2007

Marx Cafe tonight!

Hey, I'm back from the dead, I'll be playing at Marx tonight, 9-11pm. I have been on sort of a vacation from the internet for some time, also went to England for three weeks, so been out of the loop. All that's changing tonight, come get your 2-step bassline fix with me!

Marx Cafe
3203 Mount Pleasant St. NW

Seeya tonight!

Tuesday, September 04, 2007

Marx Cafe tonight!


Hey guys, I'll be playing at Marx Cafe tonight from 10-2am. and I DO have new music this time. woo hoo! Seeya there.

3203 Mt. Pleasant St. NW

fuzzy bush math

These jokers haven't produced an honest deficit prediction since they came into office. Each year we hear the news that the OMB numbers predict a budget shortfall or an increase in year to year deficit spending, then magically when the real numbers are released they are able to share the good news that the deficit has been pared down and we were able to do better than their initial estimates. What they aren't saying is that only the rate of increase was slowed, based on their "predictions". IT HAPPENS EVERY YEAR!
Fuzzy Bush math
You're about to hear that the budget deficit is falling. Don't believe it, warns Fortune's Allan Sloan. The deficit is much, much bigger than you think.
FORTUNE Magazine

By Allan Sloan, Fortune senior editor-at-large
September 4 2007: 8:10 AM EDT

(Fortune Magazine) -- There will be lots of celebrating in Washington next month when the Treasury announces that the federal budget deficit for fiscal 2007, which ends Sept. 30, will have dropped to a mere $158 billion, give or take a few bucks.

That will be $90 billion below the reported 2006 deficit, and will be toasted by the White House and Treasury as a great accomplishment.

But I have a nasty little secret for you, folks. If you use realistic numbers rather than what I call WAAP -- Washington Accepted Accounting Principles -- the real federal deficit for the current fiscal year is more than 2 1/2 times the stated deficit.

Why am I inflicting this information on you? Because there's been so much joyous noise about the budget emanating from Washington, despite the subprime mess and market meltdowns (which don't bode particularly well for future tax collections), that my natural contrarianism makes me feel like bombing the buzz machine.

In addition, so many investors (and speculators) are fleeing to the supposed safe haven of Treasury securities lately that it's a good time to take a look at what's really going on with the federal budget.


Welcome to Bailout City

If a publicly traded corporation tried keeping books the WAAP way rather than the GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles) way, its auditors would be on the phone to the SEC before you could say "Sarbanes-Oxley."

But this is the federal government, which operates its unique budget accounting system regardless of which party's running the show. Making the deficit look smaller than it really is helps whoever's in power, be it today's borrow-and-spend crew or yesteryear's tax-and-spenders.

Let me show you how this works, using numbers from the recent update issued by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. (I'm giving you the simplified version to keep your eyes from glazing over. You can find the detailed version in "The numbers" on the right.)

We'll start with Social Security, which will take in about $78 billion more in payroll and income taxes than it shells out. The Treasury takes that cash, gives the trust fund IOUs for it, and spends it. That $78 billion isn't in the stated deficit.

Wait, there's more. The Treasury will fork over $108 billion of interest on the trust fund's $2.2 trillion of Treasuries -- but will give the trust fund IOUs, not cash. They won't count in the deficit either. Add that $186 billion to the stated budget deficit, and it more than doubles, to $344 billion.

The stated deficit, you see, measures how much less cash Uncle Sam takes in than he spends. That's fine for gauging the deficit's impact on the economy, which is what budget experts generally do. But if you're trying to assess Uncle Sam's overall fiscal condition, as I am, you should count those IOUs in the deficit because they have to be paid someday.


More sugar for Schwarzman

Now, let's move on. We end up with a total deficit of more than $400 billion by undoing another piece of WAAP ledger-demain: the $97 billion increase in Treasury securities held by "other government accounts" such as federal employee pension funds.

Thanks to the magic of Washington math, that doesn't increase the deficit, even though it increases the government's overall debt. Don't you wish you could keep books this way at home?

I worry that the happy news may produce unhappy long-term results by making politicians even less inclined than usual to inflict pain on voters by raising taxes or trimming future benefits to keep entitlements from overwhelming the public fisc.

Budget office director Peter Orszag warns that at their current growth rate, Medicare and Medicaid will devour 20% of our gross domestic product in 2050 -- more than today's entire federal budget. Yech!

So even though the deficit's smaller than it was and financial markets (for now) love Treasury securities, don't take next month's budget numbers at face value. If you do, you're setting yourself up to be WAAPed.

Sunday, September 02, 2007

Friday, August 31, 2007

Green Zone Slime, WTF?!

The part about this guy watching cartoons during a meeting with Congressmen is so mind numbingly insane, I'm having trouble accepting it despite the fact I read it with my own eyes. With intellectual heavy weights like Muwaffaq al-Rubaie in charge, I can see how only three of eighteen benchmarks were met.
Rap Sheets
Lawmakers Describe 'Being Slimed in the Green Zone'

By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, August 31, 2007; Page A13

The sheets of paper seemed to be everywhere the lawmakers went in the Green Zone, distributed to Iraqi officials, U.S. officials and uniformed military of no particular rank. So when Rep. James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.) asked a soldier last weekend just what he was holding, the congressman was taken aback to find out.

In the soldier's hand was a thumbnail biography, distributed before each of the congressmen's meetings in Baghdad, which let meeting participants such as that soldier know where each of the lawmakers stands on the war. "Moran on Iraq policy," read one section, going on to cite some the congressman's most incendiary statements, such as, "This has been the worst foreign policy fiasco in American history."

The bio of Rep. Ellen O. Tauscher (D-Calif.) -- "TAU (rhymes with 'now')-sher," the bio helpfully relates -- was no less pointed, even if she once supported the war and has taken heat from liberal Bay Area constituents who remain wary of her position. "Our forces are caught in the middle of an escalating sectarian conflict in Iraq, with no end in sight," the bio quotes.

"This is beyond parsing. This is being slimed in the Green Zone," Tauscher said of her bio.

More than two dozen House members and senators have used the August recess to travel to Iraq in the hope of getting a firsthand view of the war ahead of commanding Gen. David H. Petraeus's progress report in two weeks on Capitol Hill. But it appears that the trips have been as much about Iraqi and U.S. officials sizing up Congress as the members of Congress sizing up the war.

Brief, choreographed and carefully controlled, the codels (short for congressional delegations) often have showed only what the Pentagon and the Bush administration have wanted the lawmakers to see. At one point, as Moran, Tauscher and Rep. Jon Porter (R-Nev.) were heading to lunch in the fortified Green Zone, an American urgently tried to get their attention, apparently to voice concerns about the war effort, the participants said. Security whisked the man away before he could make his point.

Tauscher called it "the Green Zone fog."

"Spin City," Moran grumbled. "The Iraqis and the Americans were all singing from the same song sheet, and it was deliberately manipulated."

But even such tight control could not always filter out the bizarre world inside the barricades. At one point, the three were trying to discuss the state of Iraqi security forces with Iraq's national security adviser, Mowaffak al-Rubaie, but the large, flat-panel television set facing the official proved to be a distraction. Rubaie was watching children's cartoons.

When Moran asked him to turn it off, Rubaie protested with a laugh and said, "But this is my favorite television show," Moran recalled.

Porter confirmed the incident, although he tried to paint the scene in the best light, noting that at least they had electricity.

"I don't disagree it was an odd moment, but I did take a deep breath and say, 'Wait a minute, at least they are using the latest technology, and they are monitoring the world,' " Porter said. "But, yes, it was pretty annoying."

It was the bio sheets that seemed to annoy the members of Congress the most. Just who assembled them is not clear. E-mails to U.S. Central Command's public affairs office in Baghdad this week went unanswered.

"I had never seen that in the past. That's new," said Porter, who was on his fourth trip to Iraq. "Now I want to see what they're saying about me," he added, when he learned of the contents of his travel companions' rap sheets.

For one, the quotations appeared to be selected to divide the visitors into those who are with the war effort and those who are against. For another, they were not exactly accurate. Under "latest Iraq vote," Tauscher's bio noted that she had voted in favor of legislation requiring the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq within 120 days of the bill's enactment.

She did vote that way -- in May. On Aug. 2, Tauscher voted in favor of her own bill, which mandates that troops be granted a leave from combat at least as long as their last combat deployment before being shipped back to Iraq. That vote might have been a little too popular with the soldiers she was meeting, Tauscher said.

Still, Porter was quick to add, for all the drawbacks, the trip was worth it.

"No doubt you will have people speak the company talking points," Porter said. "But I spent time with people who were not officers, four of them from Nevada, two who were very blunt" about their support for the war and their anger over partisan fighting in Washington.

"I tend to lean with the rank-and-file members of military who have nothing to gain," he added. "They want to go home as soon as possible."

Thursday, August 30, 2007

after Gonzo, who? nobody.

I nominate Mr. Bean!

Gonzales' replacement - there won't be any nominee.
August 27, 2007 - 4:59pm.

By ROB KEZELIS

The tubes of the internets are abuzz with today's breaking news - the resignation of the worst attorney general our country has ever experienced. Of course, the president blamed Democratic politicians for dragging a good man through the mud, one who had done nothing wrong. Gonzales added to the carnival atmosphere by claiming that his worst day "serving the public" was better than his father's best day.

The next hottest issue is who will replace Gonzo. My guess is none of the above.

Let's take a look at today's reality. Our congress, as compliant, spineless and corruptable as ever, is so afraid of taking a real stance, that it is highly unlikely that even a Chertoff, an Addington, or even a Libby or Fielding would be oppsed by them. The longer that the Democratic-led congress remains clueless and impotent, the more breathing room the president has. The odds are good, given past behavior, that the Senate would eventually cave in to the president's wishes, even if Jack the Ripper, RIchard Speck, or Mr. Bean was nominated.

But, I suspect that the White House is content to do nothing. Especially now. You never push against an enemy that is busy self-destructing, and the Democratic leadership sure seems to be doing that. Of course, the White House meltdown continues unabated as well. Rove, Libby, and many others are gone, and Gonzales is following in their wake. Still, the White House is in power, and that power remains significant, what with unfettered, uncontrolled domestic spying approved by the congress, and personally controlled by the top man at the DOJ. As I said, a LOT of power.

Bush knows that a truly useful candidate would never pass through the senate, not even if he selected a senator like Hatch. Why pick a fight that might cause the democrats to organize and stand up for a change, instead of slinking away like a slimy snake, fearful, scared, clueless?

Besides, there is no need to make a choice. The status quo suits Bush perfectly. Not only do the Democrats scurry around, worrying who he might pick, but they will waste energy making demands of Bush to play fair and be nice. The louder those claims are, the more foolish and weak the Dems look.

The secret behind the resignation's timing is simple - Bush did not want to go through a messy nomination hearing. And given his promise not to inject an appointment while congress is not in session, some think that he is boxed in. They would be wrong.

When Gonzales was still #1, his top deputy resigned. That left Paul Clement as the next highest ranking DOJ employee. Now that Gonzo is leaving, while those top spots remain open, he takes charge.

What Bush and Rove managed to do is to "set up" congress yet again. Not only will there never be a confirmation hearing for a new DOJ head, there won't even be a nominee. Why would Bush need one? His dream candidate is already in place.

Let's look at Clement's dirty laundry: He clerked for two of the biggest neocon judges, Laurence H. Silberman (DC Circ) and Justice Antonin Scalia. He worked for Kirkland and Ellis, the GOP dream firm. In fact, he was hired to work for Ken Starr. He worked for then Senator John Ashcroft, before he was hired to write the supreme court briefs in support of the GOP in Bush v. Gore.

No matter how you slice it, Clement is a clone of the worst aspects of both Ashcroft and Gonzales, except that by all accounts, he is also brilliant and extremely ideological. And on top of all that, he is friendly, personable, and has a nice smile, with no smirk to be found.

Clement is Bush's wet dream candidate - he could not have picked a better nominee - except he doesn't even have to officially pick him now. Clement remains in place and in charge as long as no other nominee is selected by Bush.

Why would Bush risk energizing the left and the center with a worse nominee? Why would Bush remove a dream candidate who will pursue White House political and legal strategies for the next 18 months without the slightest hint of remorse? Why spend the time and energy vetting, questioning and searching, when from Bush's point of view Clement is the perfect man for the job. Committed, loyal, political, smart, neoconservative, and ideologically tested and found to be true.

For these reasons, Bush make play at a new nominee, just to keep the critics guessing and confused. He may even dangle a few names, in an effort to split the Dems and keep the GOP in line. He might even promise things in exchange for "support for my new choice", while all the time, he won't have to lift a finger, in fact, he won't lift a finger to pick anyone. Clement's already there.

Ditch Mitch!

I just read about this happening in KY. This should be replicated on a state by state basics. Bands of angry mobs following each senator around 24/7 wherever they go, being so loud that no effort can drown out our demands. These scumbags work FOR US!!!

read all about it here, http://www.ditchmitchky.com/

and here, http://www.hillbillyreport.com.

The first step would be to compile a list of every senators home addresses, establish a scheduling committee to determine when and where these people will be within earshot of their constituents. Then follow them around with dogged persistence until they get the message. If the success of this first effort in KY can be used as a guide, 200-300 protestors is enough of a presence to make a statement, so a national organization would have to be able to depend on almost 20,000 volunteers in order to make their presence felt.

This is the type of unavoidable constant effort required to dislodge these automatons from their lethargic inaction.

Youtube clip of the protest in front of Mitch Mcconnell's house.

Wednesday, August 29, 2007

Matthew's Cooking Narrative Episode 1

This is the first in a series of self produced cooking narratives, enjoy.

Tuesday, August 28, 2007

Marx Cafe tonight!

Hey all, I'll be playing records at Marx cafe tonight from 10-2am. Stop by if you can, great beer specials, 4$ Chimay and 5$ Dekoneke. I have some new records that are burning a hole in my record bag, cause these tunez are that hot!!1

203 Mt. Pleasant St. NW

tar and feather attack

Oh my, I didn't think this kind of thing happened anymore. Sends a perfectly clear message however, don't deal drugs in Belfast. Perhaps this attack had little to do with narcotics and was truly a punishment attack by the Ulster Defence Association, seems unlikely given the increasing willingness of these former paramilitary groups to participate in meaningful political reconciliation with former enemies. It's still a particularly vicious mob rule incident, whatever the man's crimes I don't feel he deservers to be treated in such a horrible and extra judicious manner. It's possible no complaint will be filed with the authorities, whomever this is in the photograph will likely have more to fear by reporting the attack than from the act itself. At any rate, that shit will not come off easy!

Tarring and feathering: a shameful echo of our past
UDA role again under spotlight
Tuesday, August 28, 2007

By Ashleigh Wallace

These are the shocking pictures which show a Belfastman being tied to a lamppost before he is tarred and feathered by two hooded men in a horrific punishment attack.

The man was targeted in the loyalist Taughmonagh estate in south Belfast on Sunday evening.

After having tar poured over his head, the victim was covered in feathers. A placard was then placed around his neck.

The brutal attack will once again raise concerns over UDA activity, although a member of the Ulster Political Research Group (UPRG) has denied the incident was a UDA punishment attack, saying it was a "reaction from the community".

Local Ulster Unionist Assemblyman Michael McGimpsey branded the tarring and feathering as "ghastly" and said it "harked back to the worst days of the Troubles".

The victim was targeted on Sunday and, after being tied to a lamppost at the shops in Taughmonagh, he was tarred and feathered by two men wearing black balaclavas while a group of people - including women and children - looked on.

Family members arrived at the scene and released the man and led him away.

Colin Halliday from the UPRG, which gives political advice to the UDA, said: "This man being tarred and feathered was a community reaction. It was not a UDA punishment attack.

"There was a lot of anger within the community.

"The community demanded something be done. There were people baying for blood but that's not the way things are done now.

"There were women and children present when this was going on and what happened has sent out a very clear message."

South Belfast Assembly member Mr McGimpsey said the weekend attack was " ghastly".

He said: "If there is an accusation against an individual, then this should be dealt with by the police and the courts.

"It is wrong for anyone concerned - whether they purport to represent the community or not - to take the law into their own hands and administer this type of mob punishment.

"I know the community in Taughmonagh and community leaders have been working tremendously hard over the years to overcome negative publicity in the area.

"I feel they will see what happened on Sunday as a major setback to that hard work."

A police spokesman confirmed the PSNI received a report that a man had been assaulted in the Finwood Park area of Taughmonagh on Sunday evening.

He said: "When police arrived at the scene, no victim was located and none has since come forward."

The attack happened at a time of heightened public concerns over UDA violence. Minister for Social Development Margaret Ritchie has warned she will pull a £1.2m grant for a conflict transformation initiative if the UDA fails to move on the arms issue after recent violence in Bangor and Carrickfergus.

Last week in an interview with the Belfast Telegraph, loyalist 'brigadier' Jackie McDonald challenged the Chief Constable to remove criminals from the ranks of the UDA and called for dialogue between the loyalist leadership and the Department of Social Development.

Monday, August 27, 2007

An Arab plan to end the war in Iraq

This sounds much like the plan that Colin Powell had drafted before being forced to go to the UN and lie in an attempt to legitimize our invasion of a sovereign nation. It has even less chance of being acted upon now.
Substantive Plan for Ending the Iraqi War
Jonathan Power, Arab News


Everybody out! Surely that is the only answer for Iraq. The trouble is — among all the other troubles — that no one has a plan. At best we have vague ideas — a pull back but leaving troops in their bases to do training work, a conference with the interested neighbors, or a break-up of Iraq into its constituent ethnic and religious parts. Where do we go from there, remains unanswered.

Rather bravely, if belatedly too, Sweden’s Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research (TFF) has come out with a plan. (Although I am an unpaid associate of the foundation I have had no say in the plan’s drafting.)

It begins with a telling observation: “As long as the overall perspective is concentrated on how bad and wrong everything is, it is a safe hypothesis that there will be either no withdrawal or an even worse situation after such a withdrawal... Withdrawal is not likely until many more citizens around the world can see alternatives to occupation. Elise Boulding has eloquently stated that what people can’t envision, they are not likely to fight for.”

A “withdraw-and-forget” policy à la Vietnam would be the worst and most dangerous policy.

TFF suggests that we have to establish an international peacebuilding mission under UN leadership. This will not be “just another UN mission”. It will be of a fundamentally new type. Its main ingredients must be — a clear and comprehensive mandate giving the UN control with funding secured for a least five years at the onset; partnership with influential organizations, such as the Arab League, the European Union and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, as well as nongovernmental organizations; 100,000 UN troops (I would double this figure) of which 15 percent will be acting under a robust command, as laid out in Chapter 7 of the UN Charter, 25 percent will be police and 60 percent will be civilian-humanitarian workers. No military personnel will be recruited from countries that have been occupiers and a majority will come from non-Western countries. Countries with sophisticated armies like India, France, Japan and Brazil must play a leading role.

This will be the largest ever UN mission. “It must be big enough so that it can do the job, but not so big that the Iraqis will feel that it is a new occupation.” The mission must strike a balance between the traditional “heavyweight” activities such as the military, law, institution building and physical re-building and “lightweight” people-orientated elements, such as working directly on reconciliation, forgiveness, human healing, neighborhood-regeneration, schooling, health and psychiatric care. The UN would work through two new Iraqi bodies appointed by the Iraqi government — a reconstruction and development council run by Iraqi professionals and technocrats with support from the UN and a national security council that will oversee defense, interior affairs, intelligence and national security.

Added to this there should be a South Africa-style commission so that those accused of wrongdoing can find a way to clean the sheet by owning up publicly to their crimes.

Remembering what the supposed reason was for the American-British invasion — to root out weapons of mass destruction — the UN should resolve to insist that the Middle East become a zone free of such weapons. The US and Britain should also make Iraq a hefty endowment to compensate for all the destruction they have brought about, just as Iraq was compelled to aid Kuwait after the first Gulf War. This would amount to at least $250 billion. The whole effort will demand a high-class team of high-powered international diplomats who have earned a reputation for impartiality and the ability to empathize with both sides in a conflict. Fortunately over the years the UN has built up a cadre of these — Kofi Annan could be one.

Here is a plan that will require not just American and British consent but active support from all over. It needs the full weight of the European Union and real credible backing from Moscow and Beijing. It also demands that the rest of the world pull their weight too — with troops, professionals and finance. Nearly every country in the world has a vested interest in making sure that Iraq does not go from bad to worse, that Iraq doesn’t become a major recruiting ground and front for Al-Qaeda.

For those who have doubts they should re-read the UN Charter. It was written with situations like this clearly in mind — when such is the hell that only the combined will and willingness of mankind can rectify the destruction being done.

Friday, August 24, 2007

Flemish Belgium to secede?

Who ever said that Europeans have no sense of humor?
Viewers fooled by 'Belgium split'
BBC

Belgians reacted with widespread alarm to news that their country had been split in two - before finding out they had been spoofed.

The Belgian public television station RTBF ran a bogus report saying the Dutch-speaking half of the nation had declared independence.

Later it said Wednesday night's programme was meant to stir up debate.

It appears to have succeeded. Thousands of people made panicked calls to the station and politicians complained.

"It's very bad Orson Welles, in very poor taste," said a spokesman for Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt, referring to the famous director's 1938 radio adaptation of War of the Worlds. That spoof fooled many Americans into believing Martians had invaded.


We obviously scared many people - maybe more than we expected
Yves Thiran
RTBF head of news

"In the current context, it's irresponsible for a public television channel to announce the end of Belgium as a reality presented by genuine journalists," he added.

The French-language TV channel interrupted regular programming with an apparent news report, announcing that Dutch-speaking Flanders had unilaterally declared independence and that Belgium as a nation had ceased to exist.

It showed "live" pictures of cheering crowds holding the Flemish flag, huge traffic jams leading to Brussels airport, and trams stuck at the new "border".

Monarchists gather outside the Royal Palace in Brussels with Belgian flags
Monarchists rallied outside the Royal Palace after the report

The broadcast came amid an apparent growth of separatist sentiment in Flanders.

Recent regional elections have shown strong support for the far-right, nationalist Vlaams Belang party, which advocates Flemish independence.

The station's website crashed briefly as alarmed viewers sought more information, and 2,600 calls were made to a telephone number given out during the spoof.

"Our intention was to show Belgian viewers the intensity of the issue of the future of Belgium and the real possibility of Belgium no longer being a country in a few months," Yves Thiran, head of news at RTBF, told the BBC.

He said it introduced people to the debate who would otherwise have ignored it, but he admitted some may have taken it the wrong way.

"We obviously scared many people - maybe more than we expected," he said.

Diplomatic reaction

Some politicians were in on the joke, contributing interviews to the programme with their reactions to the "news". But others were not amused.

The minister for audiovisual affairs for the French-speaking community, Fadila Laanan, said the words "this is fiction" appeared on screen half an hour into the broadcast - at her insistence.

"I find it questionable to use such a tactic, which frightened people unbelievably," she said, adding that a number of people had called her in panic when the "news" broke.

The AFP news agency reported that even some foreign ambassadors in Brussels were taken in, and sent urgent messages back to their respective capitals.

Thursday, August 23, 2007

Electricity in Baghdad

So now we have local militias seizing critical infrastructure to ensure that their neighborhood, clan or tribe has electricity before others. Doesn’t seem very positive at all coming right after the reports many regional power plants were beginning to take themselves off of the grid to avoid having to send power to Baghdad. Lovely.
BAGHDAD, Aug. 22 — Armed groups increasingly control the antiquated switching stations that channel electricity around Iraq, the electricity minister said Wednesday.

That is dividing the national grid into fiefs that, he said, often refuse to share electricity generated locally with Baghdad and other power-starved areas in the center of Iraq.

The development adds to existing electricity problems in Baghdad, which has been struggling to provide power for more than a few hours a day because insurgents regularly blow up the towers that carry power lines into the city.

The government lost the ability to control the grid centrally after the American-led invasion in 2003, when looters destroyed electrical dispatch centers, the minister, Karim Wahid, said in a news briefing attended also by United States military officials.

The briefing had been intended, in part, to highlight successes in the American-financed reconstruction program here.

But it took an unexpected turn when Mr. Wahid, a highly respected technocrat and longtime ministry official, began taking questions from Arab and Western journalists.

Because of the lack of functioning dispatch centers, Mr. Wahid said, ministry officials have been trying to control the flow of electricity from huge power plants in the south, north and west by calling local officials there and ordering them to physically flip switches.

But the officials refuse to follow those orders when the armed groups threaten their lives, he said, and the often isolated stations are abandoned at night and easily manipulated by whatever group controls the area.

This kind of manipulation can cause the entire system to collapse and bring nationwide blackouts, sometimes seriously damaging the generating plants that the United States has paid millions of dollars to repair.

Such a collapse took place just last week, the State Department reported in a recent assessment, which said the provinces’ failure to share electricity resulted in a “massive loss of power” on Aug. 14 at 5 p.m.

It added that “all Baghdad generation and 60 percent of national generation was temporarily lost.” By midnight, half the lost power had been restored, the report said.

With summer temperatures routinely exceeding 110 degrees, and demand soaring for air-conditioners and refrigerators, those blackouts deeply undermine an Iraqi government whose popular support is already weak.

In some cases, Mr. Wahid and other Iraqi officials say, insurgents cut power to the capital as part of their effort to topple the government.

But the officials said it was clear that in other cases, local militias, gangs and even some provincial military and civilian officials held on to the power simply to help their own areas.

With the manual switching system in place, there is little that the central government can do about it, Mr. Wahid said.

“We are working in this primitive way for controlling and distributing electricity,” he said.

Mr. Wahid said the country’s power plants were not designed to supply electricity to specific cities or provinces. “We have a national grid,” he said.

He cited Mosul and Baquba, in the north, and Basra, in the south, as being among the cities refusing to route electricity elsewhere. “This greatly influenced the distribution of power throughout Iraq,” Mr. Wahid complained.

At times the hoarding of power provides cities around power plants with 24 hours of uninterrupted electricity, a luxury that is unheard of in Baghdad, where residents say they generally get two to six hours of power a day.

Mr. Wahid said Baghdad was suffering mainly because the provinces were holding onto the electricity, but he said shortages of fuel and insurgents’ strikes on gas and oil pipelines also contributed to the anemic output in the capital.

Although a refusal by provincial governments to provide their full quotas to Baghdad could easily be seen as greedy when electricity is in such short supply, many citizens near the power plants regard the new reality as only fair; under Saddam Hussein, the capital enjoyed nearly 24 hours a day of power at the expense of the provinces that are now flush with electricity.

Keeping electricity for the provinces, said Mohammed al-Abbasi, a journalist in Hilla, in the south, “is a reaction against the capital, Baghdad, as power was provided to it without any cuts during the dictator’s reign.”

Other Iraqis are just grateful for anything that brings more comfort to their families and neighborhoods.

“We support any step that provides us with power,” said Ahmed Abdul Hussein, an ironsmith in Najaf, in the south.

The precision with which militias control electricity in the provinces became apparent in Basra on May 25 when Moktada al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army carried out a sustained attack against a small British-Iraqi base in the city center, and turned that control to tactical military advantage.

“The lights in the city were going on and off all over,” said Cpl. Daniel Jennings, 26, one of the British defenders who fought off the attack.

“They were really controlling the whole area, turning the lights on and off at will. They would shut down one area of the city, turn it dark, attack us from there, and then switch off another one and come at us from that direction.

“What they did was very well planned.”

The electricity briefing began with Brig. Gen. Michael J. Walsh, commanding general of the Gulf Region Division of the Army Corps of Engineers, saying the United States had finished more than 80 percent of the projects it planned for rehabilitating the Iraqi grid.

He said that even though Baghdad now got no power from either the south or north, about a third of its electricity was still supplied by the national grid.

But General Walsh said he knew people in Baghdad were far from satisfied.

“I understand people’s impatience,” he said. “Certainly when you flip the light switch and nothing happens, you can get angry.”

Damien Cave contributed reporting from Baghdad, and Iraqi employees of The New York Times from Baghdad, Basra, Najaf, Hilla and Karbala.