Author: roseeriter

Under Bush Administration initiatives, the American people now have the newly expanded freedom to be unemployed, to be homeless, to be deprived of medical insurance, and to be unable to afford prescription drugs without fear of government interference!

They now have the newly expanded freedom to breathe polluted air, to fear new mercury levels, to see great forests being thinned and pristine lands drilled for oil, and to remain helpless as the planet succumbs to global warming.

They are more free to live with skyrocketing deficits, reduced social programs, exorbitant energy costs, and tax cuts for the wealthy.

They are more free to die in illegal wars, to have their civil liberties disintegrate and see their personal choices invaded by the religious right.

They are more free to be hated by the world community and feared by nations who respected them in the past.

A GLANCE AT MANTRA MANIPULATION

1. Claimed Product: The War on Terror! – Keeping America Safe!

Actual Ingredients:
 Terror tactics designed to create a frightened, trusting public willing to believe that we are hated because we are free. Fear mongering designed to give President full, undemocratic war powers to carry out PNAC plans. All the while the real threat to America’s safety is increasing. The Bush administration’s environmental  policies alone are a greater threat to life than any terrorist.

2. Claimed Product: The Patriot Act

Actual Ingredients: Violations of civil rights, due process, habeas corpus and other protections provided by the US Constitution in the guise of security measures. The upset of the vital balance of power in US government, placing unnecessarily greater power in hands of executive branch.

3. Claimed Product: Homeland Security

Actual Ingredients: Selective contracts for the party faithful.  Gaping loopholes in cargo, nuclear plant and aviation safety; Chemical industry protected from implementing costly security standards. Cities funded without regard  to risk levels.

4. Claimed Product: Operation Iraqi Freedom!

Actual Ingredients: Violations of International Law, Geneva Conventions. Control of Iraq oil reserves and pipelines; prisoner abuse and torture; Indiscriminant killingof civilians; chaos, confusion, continued death and destruction. Construction of largest US embassy in the world; construction of 14 permanent US military bases. Huge profits for Halliburton, Carlyle Group, other US contractors. Note: This product was sold to the public as Operation Protect America from a Threat of WMD yet the public never noticed that the label did not match the sales pitch.

5. Claimed Product:  No Child Left Behind

Actual Ingredients: Unrealistic and educationally unsound under-funded testing program; dissatisfied teachers, parents, administrators and students.  Huge profits for manufacturers of practice and testing materials. Cuts in state and local funding for implementation of mandated program.

6. Claimed Product: Clear Skies

Actual Ingredients: More time for power plants, factories and refineries to reduce their air pollution. More pollution than allowed in present Clean Air Act. Increased caps on emissions of mercury, nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide and carbon dioxide. Restrictions on states to call for end of upwind pollution by other states.

7. Claimed Product:  Healthy Forests

Actual Ingredients: Severe limits on public participation; provisions for logging industry to cut down trees across 31,250 square miles of National Forests. No protection for homes nor for prevention of shrub land fires on private lands in southern California, the site of more than 90% of all fires in the state.

8. Claimed Product:  Medicare Reform

Actual Ingredients: Massive taxpayer handout to drug companies; ban on U.S. government to negotiate lower drug prices for senior citizens. Increases of 18%, to be followed by another 12% in contributions to Medicare coverage by seniors. Continued outrageous costs of prescription medications with only minor discounts.

 LINK

“US intelligence services are drawing up a secret watch-list of 25 countries in which instability might lead to US intervention, according to officials in charge of a new office set up to co-ordinate planning for nation-building and conflict prevention.

The list will be composed and revised every six months by the National Intelligence Council, which collates intelligence for strategic planning, according to Carlos Pascual, head of the newly formed office of reconstruction and stabilisation.

The new State Department office amounts to recognition by the Bush administration that it needs to get better at nation-building, a concept it once scorned as social work disguised as foreign policy, following its failures in Iraq.

Mr Pascual told a conference last week on reconstructing and stabilising war-torn states that the NIC would identify countries of “greatest instability and risk” to clarify priorities and allocate resources. The watch-list was classified, according to a spokesperson. However, another official gave the example of Nepal, saying it was the subject of a study on fragile states by USAid, the government aid agency. USAid declined to comment.

Although Mr Pascual, a former ambassador, will lead the co-ordination between civilian agencies and the Pentagon, officials stressed the new office did not mean the US was bent on nation-building through military action.

Mr Pascual said conflict prevention and postwar reconstruction had become a “mainstream foreign-policy challenge” because of the dangers of terrorism and weapons of mass destruction.”

LINK

Think Karl Rove is losing on Social Security and Schiavo? Those are mere tactical skirmishes–he’s got a grander prize in mind.

“Yet as ugly as the Social Security debate has been for Bush and the GOP, it has served–perhaps intentionally–one salutary purpose: distracting Democrats while Republicans legislate, with ungodly brio, the rest of their agenda.

Class-action reform, the bankruptcy bill, drilling for oil in the Alaskan wilderness: Republicans are teeing up pet legislation and knocking it down the fairway like Tiger Woods with a brisk wind at his back. “Without Social Security,” Grover Norquist, a Rove confidant and head of Americans for Tax Reform, told me, “this other stuff would’ve been the front line of battle. Instead, Democrats are holding us up on Social Security, while we get everything else we want done.”

Like Moore, Norquist concedes that Social Security reform (at least any version featuring private accounts) is unlikely to be passed this year. But this, he contends, would hardly be catastrophic for Republicans–and he has a point. “On Social Security, we’re playing on our field,” Norquist says. “What would a Democratic win be? The status quo! Not exactly exciting for the party of progressivism.”

In keeping the various breeds of elephant inside the Republican tent, Rove has his hands full. But while he may not qualify as a political Einstein–his tactics often crude (and even thuggish), his strategies susceptible to overreach–there’s no gainsaying his achievements or overstating his ambitions. Today Rove (whom Bush has dubbed “The Architect”) wields more power than any party operative since his hero Mark Hanna a century ago. If the GOP gains further ground in 2006, Rove’s influence will only grow. And if a Rove-guided Republican takes the White House in 2008 . . . well, maybe we better not go there. The Rove primary is unsettling enough; a Grand Rove Party would border on terrifying.”

 LINK

“About Competence Software LINK

Competence Software, founded in 1992, provides computer and web based training products which help corporate employees understand and communicate in the areas of business finance, investing and information technology. Over 500,000 of its Financial Competence® and Investment Competence® courses are in use by individuals and corporations large and small. Courses from Competence Software have been voted “Best of Breed” by leading on line learning and training organizations like Click2Learn, New York Institute of Finance, etc. It’s client list includes corporate giants like Merrill Lynch, Citibank, Dow Chemical, DuPont, IBM Credit Corp., General Electric, Barclays Bank, Bank of America, Dun and Bradstreet, 3M, Volvo, Columbia Gas, T. Rowe Price, Chevron, Sprint, Bell South, Office Depot. John Deere, Nortel, Johnson Controls, Ingersoll Rand, Cargil, Burger King, Mail Boxes Etc., Cytec, Nestlé Canada, Royal Bank of Canada, Pitney Bowes and the US Federal Reserve Bank. Educational clients include University of Toledo, Penn State, University of Chicago, University of Nevada Las Vegas, National Academy of Finance, etc.”

LINK

Finally, one can take the Privacy Option Check List Test given below.  An essential aspect to keep in mind, however, is that in choosing your options, assume that Any and Everyone has access — acquired legally or illegally, via purchase or other means — to any and all of the information that can be gleamed (and/or inferred) from the lack of privacy.

            * A device which monitors where your automobile is during selected/all times.

            * A device which monitors who is in your house during selected/all times.

            * A device which monitors who is in your office during selected/all times.

            * Devices monitoring selected/all public places that you frequent.

            * Devices monitoring selected/all private places that you frequent.

            * A device which monitors selected/all communications you send or receive.

            * A device which monitors where you are during selected/all times.

            * A device which controls your mood and/or your physical body.

            * A device which when triggered remotely can terminate your life.

LINK

The Threat

The most pressing threats of the new security environment are violent reactions to the world’s movement toward a single international system
marked by the free movement of people, investment,goods, and ideas.

The attacks of September 11th
and the overt hostility toward what is perceived to be a heavily American globalization make it plain that this evolution will be neither easy nor without significant peril. Yet, this movement is not so much a function of American efforts to promote any ideology as it is due to the attraction that many aspects of the Western economic model hold.

Not withstanding recessions and inequities, the complex adaptive economic system that we call free enterprise has proven to be a much more efficient producer of goods and services than command economies or more traditional economies, an efficiency that manifests itself in the increased quantity of goods and services available. It is the promise not of mass
consumption but of consumption by the masses, the idea that everyone can aspire to material goods and a better life, that is attracting support for change.

In addition, the introduction of new information
technologies stands to further enhance this
productivity and attraction. America may aspire to influence the direction and timing of this change, but it cannot control it.

Democratic government, the complex adaptive
political system, is the necessary complement to this complex adaptive economic system. Again, the
reason is practical rather than ideological.

Responsive government is needed to cope with the accelerating pace of political and social change that accompanies the free market and information-driven globalization, both to curb the potential abuses of the free market system and to enforce the competition that drives increased efficiency. In essence, it is the “feedback loop” that focuses the economic effort and ensures that efficient free enterprise does not sink into inefficient monopolies or corrupt oligarchies.

The movement toward a new international system
has also been marked by an expanding information
revolution and the spread of the free, mass culture of the West, abetted by a pervasive global media whose reach has been further expanded by the revolution in information technology (embodied in
Effects-Based Operations 4
the Internet).

This media revolution has not only heightened demand for the goods that a more efficient free market economy can bring, but also increased demand for more open and flexible government.

Again, the information revolution is not the result of any American effort to create democratic bastions, support the free press, or promote information technology.

Rather, it results from the spread of the information itself and the resulting increased awareness around the world of how life might be different and how governments might be better.

This awareness lends force to the entire movement for change, political and economic, as well as social.

The course of this internationalization has not and will not be smooth.

Expectations raised by the expanding media will exceed the ability of governments and economies to deliver.

There will be violent reactions and often destabilizing changes in established cultures and institutions. And, those who oppose change will see conflict as a way to disrupt the movement toward globalization.

The anti-Western violence of al-Qaida is only one manifestation of a problem that is likely to continue as long as the process of globalization continues.

Herein lies the threat to American security. The United States can control neither the movement toward a new international system nor the violent reactions to it, yet the United States, its citizens, and its interests will clearly be a principal target. To make
matters worse, the free trade and travel that are part of globalization make the United States and the West vulnerable in ways that they have never been before. Ocean barriers are no longer protection against terrorism in an era of mass air travel and still more massive trade.

Amidst this turmoil, a strategy of “forward defense” takes on a new meaning, and the traditional military missions of deterrence, presence, and crisis response take on a new significance.

Over the past 50 years, the United States’ forward defense strategy has rested on three pillars: the economy, politics and culture, and the military.

Since September 11, 2001, this strategy has taken on a new urgency. The pace of the transition in which we are engaged is likely to be at least in part a function of the internal and regional stability surrounding it.

The greater the instability and conflict, the slower the pace is likely to be and the more prolonged the threat to the United States. By aiding the transition to a successful and speedy conclusion, we therefore lessen the danger to ourselves at home and abroad.

The forward strategy thus rests on a paradox. It must seek both stability and highly-disruptive change.

How then do military forces contribute?

The Military Role-

The lasting solutions to the unrest wrought by
globalization are political, social, and economic in nature, not military. This is because the root causes of the instability are themselves political, social, and economic in nature. Thus, the United States and the West can influence global evolution only to the
degree that their businessmen, teachers, diplomats, and journalists are free to play a role. But, these varied roles, like the change as a whole, demand a basic local stability in order to succeed.

While our Effects-Based Operations forward military forces certainly may have a role in influencing local militaries, their crucial role is not as an agent of change. Their real role is to create and/or reinforce the stability that political, social, and economic change requires.

The role of military
forces is not to solve all of the social, political, and economic dilemmas; it is to buy time.

Military forces buy time in a very immediate sense by dealing with the symptoms of unrest: meeting threats to American and Western nationals; containing crises; supporting local efforts to handle unrest; and countering opportunistic threats from other local states.

However, perhaps the most significant military contribution is not dealing with the symptoms of instability, but acting as the forward deterrent that underpins long-term stability, a force whose presence and capabilities support an enduring peace within which change can occur.

We can conceive of the economic, socio-political,
and military roles in forward defense as a series of
overlapping circles, depicted in Figure 1. Each
element has a distinctively different function in the
strategy. Each overlaps and supports the other
elements. These overlaps are instructive. For
example, by opening new markets, businessmen
also engage in people-to-people contacts that help
to expand the cultural and political frontiers.

Yet, despite the overlap, the role of the businessman clearly remains economic. Similarly, a diplomat might aid business in opening new markets or
expanding investments while continuing to execute
U.S. policy. This overlap of functions is also
apparent in the military domain.

One role of military forces in forward defense, for example, may be to keep the seas safe for commerce. Another may be to engage people-to-people contacts, e.g. exercises with local militaries.

However, while each of the latter roles may be important, they describe only those areas in which the military role overlaps and directly
supports the economic and political elements.

In this sense, they are missions that are peripheral to the actual and most critical military role of creating and maintaining the basic local stability.

It is this role of deterrence and crisis response that is the true contribution of the military pillar.

In describing this role and the context of effects based operations, our problem is complicated by
Effects-Based Operations  

Forward Defense the fact that we tend to look at military efforts in terms of reactive operations such as the evacuation of American nationals threatened by
local terrorism, or crisis responses to block local
aggression.

Such operations deal with the symptoms of the instability and the incipient failures of local deterrence. As such, they are but one part of the real contribution of constructing and acting as the guarantor of local stability.

Strategic Deterrence and the New Security Environment Post-September 11th strategic deterrence has two dimensions: homeland defense and forward
defense, deterrence and containment.

During the Cold War, strategic deterrence tended to be defined predominantly in terms of strategic
nuclear deterrence. This is certainly understandable given the stakes involved in a nuclear conflagration, however this strategic nuclear deterrence was paralleled by a broader dimension that might be termed conventional or non-strategic nuclear deterrence. Both remain a fundamental part of our security, but the latter dimension in particular lies at the heart of our post-September 11th problem and the need for effects-based operations.

Strategic Nuclear Deterrence

The nuclear deterrence of the Cold War rested on
the threat of retaliation. It worked because each
nuclear-armed power could threaten opponents…

Downloadable book

Social Security
Privatization

Privatizing puts survivors and disability protection in jeopardy.
Privatization plans that involve diverting funds in the Social Security system to personal savings accounts would drastically cut survivors and disability benefits. Since privatization plans call for diverting as much as forty percent of payroll taxes to private investment accounts, survivor and disability protection levels would be cut to accommodate a smaller Social Security Trust Fund. This is a critical issue which has been largely ignored by proponents of privatization.

Today, workers who become disabled or die can rely on Social Security for a basic income for themselves and/or their families. This is true even for younger workers who have not had many years to pay into the system. But if Social Security were replaced with a private accounts plan, workers who face death or disability would be forced to rely primarily on their own investments for income. If they are young and have not had sufficient time to accumulate funds in their personal accounts, they could be putting their families in serious jeopardy.

LINK

Mar. 23, 2005 Mutual Fund Manager Putnam Pays $40 Million Fine to Settle SEC Enforcement Action

Mar. 23, 2005 Citigroup Pays $20 Million to Settle SEC Action Relating to Mutual Fund Sales Practices

Mar. 21, 2005 SEC Charges Time Warner with Fraud, Aiding and Abetting Frauds by Others, and Violating a Prior Cease-and-Desist Order; CFO, Controller, and Deputy Controller Charged with Causing Reporting Violations

See this link at the SEC for more violations SEC

Iraq Halts Contract Payments to Raytheon, Maersk, Official Says

March 22 (Bloomberg) — Iraq’s interim government is refusing to make payments on some contracts with foreign companies including Raytheon Co. and A.P. Moeller-Maersk A/S because they overcharged or failed to deliver everything they promised, an official said.

`It’s a problem all ministries are dealing with because of the lack of paperwork provided by the U.S.-led administration on contracts they signed before handing over power in June,” Iraq’s deputy transport minister, Atta Nabil Hussain Auni Atta, said in a telephone interview from Amman, Jordan, on March 21.

Atta, 63 and a 30-year veteran at the ministry, said Raytheon hasn’t delivered an air-traffic control system to Baghdad airport, and the government is withholding a $19 million payment. James Fetig, a spokesman for the Waltham, Massachusetts- based defense contractor, declined to comment on the matter.

The Coalition Provisional Authority, led by U.S. Ambassador Paul Bremer, awarded billions of dollars of contracts to foreign companies including Halliburton Co. during the 14 months it administered Iraq after the U.S.-led invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein’s regime.

LINK