June 30, 2010

Public Pension Perversion

Usually it takes a national government to spend itself into a debt measured in the trillions. Yet it comes as little surprise that the same profligacy that pervades the corridors of federal power infects this country's 87,000 state, county and municipal governments and school districts. By 2013, the amount of retirement money promised to employees of these public entities will exceed cash on hand by more than a trillion dollars. - Public-sector Unions Bankrupting America, The Washington Times, April 23, 2010

The Bankrupting of America

We have a ruinous collaboration of elected officials and unionized public workers

May 21, 2010

Wall Street Journal - The American public feels it is drowning in red ink. It is dismayed and even outraged at the burgeoning national deficits, unbalanced state and local budgets, and accounting that often masks the extent of indebtedness. There is a mounting sense that taxpayers are being taken for an expensive ride by public-sector unions. The extraordinary benefits the unions have secured for their members are going to be harder and harder to pay.

The political backlash has energized the tea party activists, put incumbents at risk in both parties, and already elected fiscal conservatives such as Republican Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey. Over the next fiscal year, the states are looking at deficits approaching hundreds of billions of dollars. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal think tank, estimates that this coming year alone states will face an aggregate shortfall of $180 billion. In some states the budget gap is more than 30%.

How did we get into such a mess? States have always had to cope with volatility in the size and composition of their populations. Now we have shrinking tax bases caused by recession and extra costs imposed on states to pay for Medicaid in the federal health-care program. The straw (well, more like an iron beam) that breaks the camel's back is the unfunded portions of state pension plans, health care and other retirement benefits promised to public-sector employees. And federal government assistance to states is falling—down by roughly half in the next fiscal year beginning Oct. 1.

It is galling for private-sector workers to see so many public-sector workers thriving because of the power their unions exercise.
Take California. Investigative journalist Steve Malanga points out in the City Journal that California's schoolteachers are the nation's highest paid; its prison guards can make six-figure salaries; many state workers retire at 55 with pensions that are higher than the base pay they got most of their working lives. All this when California endures an unemployment rate steeper than the nation's. It will get worse. There's an exodus of firms that want to escape California's high taxes, stifling regulations, and recurring budget crises. When Cisco CEO John Chambers says he will not build any more facilities in California you know the state is in trouble.
The business community and a growing portion of the public now understand the dynamics that discriminate against the private sector. Public unions organize voting campaigns for politicians who, on election, repay their benefactors by approving salaries and benefits for the public sector, irrespective of whether they are sustainable. And what is happening in California is happening in slower motion in the rest of the country. It's no doubt one of the reasons the Pew Research Center this year reported that support for labor unions generally has plummeted "amid growing public skepticism about unions' power and purpose."

In New York, public-service employees have received gold-plated perks for much of the 20th century, especially generous health-insurance benefits. Indeed, where once salaries were lower in the public sector, the salary gaps in the public and private sectors have disappeared or even reversed.
A Citizens Budget Commission report in 2005 showed that for most job categories in the greater New York City region, public-sector workers received higher hourly wages than private-sector workers. And according to a 2009 survey by the same group, this doesn't even count the money that New York City pays in full premiums for comprehensive health-insurance policies for workers and their families. Only 8% of workers in private firms enjoy that subsidy. In virtually all cases, the city also pays the full health-care premium costs for retirees and their spouses. And city pensions are "defined benefit" plans, which are more expensive since they guarantee specific benefits on retirement.
By contrast, private-sector workers in the survey were mostly in "defined contribution" plans, which means that, unlike their cushioned brethren in the public sector, they do not have a predetermined benefit at retirement. If New York City were to require its current workers to pay contributions toward health insurance equal to the amounts paid by the employees of local private-sector firms, the taxpayer savings would be $628 million a year. In New Jersey, Gov. Christie says government employee health benefits are 41% more expensive than those of the average Fortune 500 company.

What we suffer is a ruinously expensive collaboration between elected officials and unionized state and local workers, purchased with taxpayer money. "Scratch my back and I'll scratch yours."

No wonder the Service Employees International Union has become the nation's fastest-growing union: It represents government and health-care workers. Half of its 700,000 California members are government employees. More and more, it wins not on the picket line but at the negotiating table, where it backs up traditional strong-arming with political power. It spends vast amounts of money on initiatives that keep the government growing and the gravy flowing.

The state's teachers unions operate in a similar fashion—with the result that California's various municipalities, especially Los Angeles, face budget shortfalls in the hundreds of millions of dollars. California can no longer rely on a strong economy to support this munificence. Its unemployment rate of 12.5% runs several points higher than the national rate and its high-tech companies are choosing to expand elsewhere. Why stay in a state with such higher taxes and a cumbersome regulatory environment?

California is a horrible warning of how dreams can turn to dust. In most states, politicians face a contracting local economy and shortfalls in tax receipts. Naturally, they look to cut expenses but run into obstruction from politically powerful unions that represent state and local government employees, teachers and health-care workers who have themselves caused pension and health-care insurance costs to soar. It is not an accident that in framing the national stimulus program in 2009 Congress directed a stunning $275 billion of the $787 billion as grants to the states to support public-service employees in health care, education, etc.

The lopsided subsidies for pension and health costs are a large part of the fiscal crises at the state and local levels. The subsequent squeeze on education and infrastructure investment is undermining the very programs that have made it possible for our economy to grow.

Between New York and California, the projected deficits run about $40 billion—and that doesn't account for projected billions of dollars in the operating deficits in the states' mass transit systems or the multibillion-dollar unfunded liability in many of the state pension plans. New York would be badly hit because it is on the verge of being deprived of tax revenues by Washington's increased regulations on the financial industry, especially the hugely profitable, multitrillion-dollar market in derivatives—an industry that is critical to the economy of New York state and the country.

City government was developed to serve its citizens. Today the citizenry is working in large part to serve the government. It is always hard to shrink government spending. It is particularly difficult when public-sector unions have such a unique lever of pressure.

We have to escape this cycle or it will crush us. One way is to take labor negotiations out of the hands of vulnerable legislators and assign them to independent commissions. They would have a better shot at achieving a fair balance between appropriate salary increases and the revenues and services of local municipalities. The electorate won't swallow any more red ink.

America’s Public-Sector Unions are Bankrupting the States

June 24, 2010

Seeker Blog - A 2009 study by economists Robert Novy-Marx and Joshua Rauh, published in the Journal of Economic Perspectives, estimated that these government pensions are underfunded by $3.2 trillion, or $27,000 for every American household.

The fiscal damage done by the unions is fairly obvious if one examines the data on the public-collective-bargaining states such as California, New York, New Jersey and Hawaii.

The political rent-seeking is very simple: unions invest heavily to get friendly state politicians elected. Those politicians repay the unions with continuously increasing wages and benefits that are totally out of touch with the market.

The Cato Tax and Budget Bulletin has an up to date report dated March 2010 [PDF]. And do not miss the Capital Hill Briefing Are Unions Good for America? available as video or audio podcasts.

These unions have one purpose: to extract from taxpayers above market compensation for their members. This purpose is implemented via a suite of destructive policies all of which are designed to increase inefficiencies in government (which means more union members and bigger union budgets). Example union policies are blocking school choice, privatization, and free trade.

In Unions, the Rule of Law, and Political Rent Seeking, Armand Thieblot outlines the threat — a threat which has become especially troubling in the short history of the Obama administration.

Consider that there are no market constraints on the power of unions to award themselves an increasing share of the nations production. No business fails due to excessive costs, the obvious constraint on private-sector unions — the government just borrows more or expropriates more from taxpayers. Thieblot writes:
They do this as economic rent seekers— hoping to secure for themselves and their members rewards greater than the value society accords them in a free market. Second, they dishonor the very principles of the rule of law by engaging in a corrupt, symbiotic relationship with lawmakers. They do this as political rent seekers—hoping to secure rewards of their own choosing, independent of economic or market restraint.
Public employees salaries average 28% higher than private workers, and benefits are 70% higher.

This means that for every $1 in pay and benefits a private employee earned, a state or local government worker received $1.45.

This is all due to the compensation of union employees as non-union employees are compensated at about the same as the private sector. The WSJ editorial has a few shocking examples:
The Orange County Register reports that California has 3,000 retired teachers and school administrators, who stopped working as early as age 55, collecting at least $100,000 a year in pensions for the rest of their lives.

Illinois’s pension obligations are so costly the state had to issue $3.5 billion of bonds merely to meet its mandatory contribution to the worker retirement program, which faces $85 billion, or three years of state tax revenues, in unfunded liabilities. Near-bankrupt New Jersey would have to pay $7 billion a year if it properly accounted for its pension and health benefits.

Wouldn’t you like to be able to retire and rehire?

California, Nevada New Jersey and Ohio all allow double dipping, which lets government workers retire in their 50s and then work another full-time job while collecting retirement checks. In Ohio, police, firefighters and teachers can retire after 30 years on the job, collect a full benefit each year and go back to work full-time doing the same job. This is called retire and rehire.

As the Columbus Dispatch reported last year: “Across the state, Ohio’s State Teachers Retirement System paid out more than $741 million in pension benefits last school year to 15,857 faculty and staff members who were still working for school systems and building up a second retirement plan.” Some teachers can earn nearly $200,000 a year in pensions and salaries.
One last fact: 70% of the 40 states running deficits would have a balanced budgets but for the raid on the taxpayers by the unions. The political reality of Obama’s “Stimulus Package” is that a big portion of it went to state and local governments to pay the inflated wages of public-sector employees. This means that taxpayers in well-governed states like Texas are paying the excessive wages of California employees. The WSJ editorial closed with this:
So if your state is broke, this is a major reason. Eventually, governors, state legislators and city council members are going to have to decide whether protecting America’s privileged class of government workers is a higher priority than funding such core functions of government as public safety. Something has to give. It’s time to close the biggest pay gap in America.

June 29, 2010

Cell Phones and a Cashless Society

All New Nokia Smartphones to Come with NFC for Electronic Payments from 2011

June 17, 2010

NearFieldCommunicationsWorld.com - The announcement was made by a top Nokia executive at the Mobey Forum's 10th anniversary meeting in Helsinki this morning.

Anssi Vanjoki, Nokia's executive vice president for markets, has announced that all new smartphones introduced by the company from 2011 will come with NFC. Vanjoki, who is responsible for consumer insights, sales, marketing, manufacturing and logistics across all Nokia products and services, made the announcement during a keynote presentation at the Mobey Forum's 10th anniversary workshop in Helsinki this morning.

Vanjoki wasn't able to give specific details about the new smartphone models, Liisa Kanniainen, executive director of the Mobey Forum, has told NFC World. But delegates were informed that more information will be made available "in due course."

Vanjoki was also asked whether the new smartphones would support the Single Wire Protocol (SWP), says Kanniainen. In reply, he explained that the phones would support all open business models, suggesting that they will include support for both SWP and other secure element formats such as MicroSD cards and, perhaps, an embedded secure element too. A set of tools is also to be made available to third party application developers.

The announcement follows concerns in the NFC market that Nokia was pulling back from its long-term support for near field communication technology, following the news earlier this year that Nokia had cancelled plans to put its long-awaited 6216 Classic NFC phone into production.
Buzz

“Government must force banks to cut excessive NFC and contactless transaction fees” say UK retailers
Nokia commits to an NFC future, but retailers are set to rebel
Nokia confirms cancellation of planned 6216 SWP NFC phone
White paper helps banks decide how to implement NFC services
NFC Forum & Mobey Forum to work together on the development of mobile payments standards
Nokia announces next-generation NFC phone
Nokia to launch multiple NFC handsets in late 2010?

US Bank to Test NFC in Q4 2010

June 7, 2010

NearFieldCommunicationsWorld.com - US Bank is to run an NFC pilot from the fourth quarter of 2010, Brandon McGee reports from the Mobile Banking & Emerging Applications Summit in Las Vegas.

The pilot will include a Mobile Shopping Concierge service which will include a wide range of enhanced shopping services such as mobile coupons, offers, recipes and shopping lists plus loyalty card, savings summary and grocery store layout functions.

US Bank will be using DeviceFidelity's NFC add-on for its pilot. In February, Visa announced it would be running a series of trials using the MicroSD format device and, last month, a protective sleeve enabling the device to be used with Apple's iPhone was also introduced.

And a survey of delegates attending the event indicates that US Bank won't be the only bank looking to offer NFC services to US consumers in the year ahead. In total, 18% of attendees say they plan to offer NFC services in one form or another in the coming year.

Apple Unveils iPhone 4, Video Calling as Smart Phone Competition Heats Up

June 7, 2010

Investor's Business Daily - In what Apple CEO Steve Jobs described as a Jetsons-inspired dream, the company aims to make mobile video calling the next killer app for its iPhone smart phones.

Jobs demonstrated the application, called FaceTime, Monday at Apple's Worldwide Developers Conference in San Francisco.
"I grew up with 'The Jetsons,' dreaming about video phones," Jobs said, referring to the space-age cartoon. "And it's real now."
FaceTime is one of 100 new features shipping with the newest version of its iconic smart phone, the iPhone 4. The device will be available June 24 in the U.S., France, Germany, Japan and the U.K., rolling out to the rest of the world by the end of September.

Better Screen, Battery

Jobs showed off a host of capabilities for the redesigned iPhone and its new operating system, now called iOS 4. The new device features a higher resolution display, video recording, an upgraded 5-megapixel camera with a flash, and improved battery life.

But he saved video calling for his trademark "one last thing" bit.

The iPhone 4 comes with front-facing and rear-facing cameras. FaceTime initially will work only between iPhone 4 devices and over Wi-Fi wireless hot spots, not cellular networks. Jobs says the quality isn't good enough on cellular yet.

Other mobile devices are capable of video chat, but Apple has made it simple, says Ken Dulaney, an analyst with market research firm Gartner.
"FaceTime looks pretty interesting," he said. That users can switch between the front-facing and rear-facing cameras during a video chat is cool, he added.
Apple is unleashing mobile video chat at a good time because Skype video calling is growing popular, says Ezra Gottheil, an analyst with Technology Business Research.
"But the party doesn't really begin until Apple arrives," Gottheil said.
Apple's iPhone 4 arrives as smart phone competition heats up, especially with vendors such as HTC and Motorola selling devices running Google's Android operating system.

The Whole Package

While other vendors might beat Apple on individual hardware specs, Apple excels at product design and marketing.
"With Apple, it's the whole package," Dulaney said. "They put the whole thing together, make it look great and then they advertise the heck out of it."
The iPhone 4 is slimmer than its predecessors — 9.3 millimeters — and features a new glass and stainless-steel design.

Jobs called the iPhone 4 the "biggest leap" forward in mobile phones since the original iPhone, which launched in June 2007.

Much of the hardware announcements were leaked weeks ago by tech blog Gizmodo, which bought an iPhone 4 prototype that an Apple engineer lost at a Silicon Valley bar. Apple shares fell nearly 2% Monday. The Nasdaq also fell 2%.

The iPhone 4 will sell in the U.S. for $199 for the 16 gigabyte model and $299 for the 32 GB model with a two-year contract with AT&T.

The new phone runs on iOS 4, which features multitasking, folders, enhanced e-mail, deeper enterprise support and Apple's new iAd mobile advertising platform.

The Cupertino, Calif.-based company said Monday that it will debut its iAd business on July 1 with mobile ad campaigns from big names such as Best Buy, Campbell Soup, Chanel, Citigroup, DirecTV, Geico, General Electric, JCPenney, Liberty Mutual, Nissan, Sears, State Farm, Target, Turner Broadcasting System, Unilever and Walt Disney.

$60 Million Committed

Apple has advertising commitments totaling more than $60 million in 2010.

None of the Apple announcements Monday were earth-shattering, Gottheil says. But taken together, it's enough to keep momentum going for the iPhone.

The most unexpected announcement was a gyroscope in the iPhone 4, which will help with video game apps, he said.

The three-axis gyro, when combined with the phone's accelerometer, will provide six-axis motion control.

No NFC in iPhone 4G

June 7, 2010

NearFieldCommunicationsWorld.com - Apple’s fourth generation iPhone sports a slew of new features but will not have built-in NFC capability.

The company’s chief executive, Steve Jobs, revealed the latest version of the best-selling mobile handset during a keynote speech at Apple's Worldwide Developer Conference in San Francisco today, but did not announce that near field communication will be built in to the device.

Apple is widely expected to add NFC technology to its iPhone soon, and is rumoured to have been testing prototype units, but it now looks like native NFC capability will not arrive until at least June 2011, in the device's next annual refresh.

Recently published patent applications reveal that Apple sees NFC as playing an important part in its future business, including roles in everything from concert and airline ticketing and file transfer and data synchronisation to, importantly, a mobile payments, mobile commerce and mobile payments business proposition that is set to see the company turn into a service provider sitting at the centre of the emerging multi-billion dollar world of mobile commerce.

AT&T Details Early iPhone 4 Eligibility, Pricing

Internet Censorship

New Worries Emerge About Internet Monitoring

Prospect of private-sector participation in the government's new Einstein 3 Internet monitoring system is raising concerns

June 4, 2010

FCW - Now that testing of the government’s latest Einstein 3 Internet monitoring and cyber defense system is under way, high-ranking officials have spoken again about trying to get selected companies to join agencies in using the controversial technology. But the prospect of private-sector participation in the government program, even if voluntary, has raised questions about privacy and the technology's supposed superiority over tools that companies might already be using.

Companies that operate critical infrastructure, such as power, transportation and financial networks, are the ones government officials want to get on board first, said Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn. The Defense Department has created a task force comprised of industry and government information technology and defense interests to examine issues about sharing the Einstein technology, reported Amber Corrin in Defense Systems, a sister publication of Federal Computer Week.

The plan to include critical infrastructure operators in government cyber defense programs is a goal of National Security Presidential Directive 54, signed by President George W. Bush in 2008. Much of the directive remains secret, but the White House released a declassified summary in March, including more detail about how Einstein 3 will work and the desired role of the private sector.

The latest version of the technology, named Einstein 2, monitors Internet and e-mail message traffic into federal agencies for signatures of known malicious activity and is in place in at least 11 of the 21 agencies that run their own networks, with more to follow. The system alerts security analysts when it detects threats, but doesn’t try to stop attacks.

Einstein 3 goes further in two ways: It can analyze traffic and messages more deeply, such as reading the contents of e-mail and other messages, and it can take measures to deflect attacks in real time, reported Siobhan Gorman in the Wall Street Journal last summer.

According to the summary of the security directive, Einstein 3 will also allow the Homeland Security Department, which runs the Einstein program, to share monitored information with the National Security Agency, though that data is not supposed to include message content. The recent combination of those three elements — reading e-mail messages, asking companies to participate in the monitoring program, and getting the NSA in the loop — has set off alarm bells about future uses of Einstein 3.

“If [Einstein 3] can perform deep packet inspection to prevent botnets from accessing certain Web pages, for instance, could it also be used to prevent a human from accessing illegal pornography, copyright-infringing music, or offshore gambling sites?” writes Declan McCullagh for Cnet.
Those particular examples make the right technical point, but they won’t stir much outrage from law-abiding citizens. However, a comment about this story from a reader identified as osamas_pjs asks how long before Einstein “is assigned to do keyword analysis and either prevent or track messages using language which the authorities wish to censor.”

Other questions surround the willingness of companies to participate in the program. Competitive concerns may make some firms reluctant to share information about breaches that might put them at a commercial disadvantage. And from a technical standpoint, some observers point out that the use of Einstein 3-style intrusion prevention tools is already mature in private industry, so it's not clear what new benefits the government technology will offer.

FCC’s Stealth Plan to Censor Internet Content

June 20, 2010

Infowars.com - In order to control the internet and do so without much notice, the FCC has rolled a censorship plan into its Net Neutrality scheme. Under the fallacious rubric of “consumer protection,” the FCC is calling for the regulation of television and internet broadband.

Kelly William Cobb, writing for Americans for Tax Reform, says “the FCC would begin regulating Internet access for the first time under a completely new regulatory scheme (even though they lack the authority to create it). Meanwhile, the FCC would push regulations – cloaked in the heart-warming language of competition and innovation – mandating that your cable box (known as a set-top box) become a ‘broadband gateway device’ controlling access to your Internet, TV, and phone. The FCC has already started looking at set-top box regulations in their National Broadband Plan.”

On top of this, it would open the door for the FCC to begin monitoring or censoring content on the Internet (in addition to your TV), something Free Press and other progressives, as well as the White House regulatory czar advocate. The Songwriters Guild of America has a great op-ed on why government censorship is entirely possible if the Internet becomes regulated. (Emphasis added.)

Under the FCC’s regulatory control consumers would be forced to buy an Internet/TV/Phone connectivity box that the government approves.

“Everyone will pay rates for service that the government sets. And everything passing through your Internet, TV, or phone would become subject to the FCC’s consistent regulatory whim,” writes Cobb.
The FCC has controlled television content for decades. If you want to know what the heavy hand of government will do to internet content think of the absurd Janet Jackson nipple incident and the government’s response.

The government wants to make sure the flow of information is safe for consumption by the plebs. Broadcast and cable television do not offer an alternative to news and information provided by the corporate media. The FCC plan and government oversight of content would effectively kill off alternative news, information, and commentary.

If the FCC gets its way Obama will not need a “kill switch” installed in the Oval Office. The internet will ultimately become a pale reflection of corporate-dominated television where there are hundreds of channels and nothing on — that is nothing that challenges the government and offers an alternative to the corporate media.

Lieberman: China Can Shut Down the Internet, Why Can’t We?

June 21, 2010

Prison Planet.com - Senator Joe Lieberman, co-author of a bill that would give President Obama a ‘kill switch’ to shut down parts of the Internet, attempted to reassure CNN viewers yesterday that concerns about the government regulating free speech on the web were overblown, but he only stoked more alarm by citing China, a country that censors all online dissent against the state, as the model to which American should compare itself.

During an appearance on CNN’s State of the Union with Candy Crowley, Lieberman characterized concerns that his 197-page Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act (PDF) legislation represents an attempt to hand Obama “absolute power” over the Internet as “total misinformation,” adding that people were “intentionally peddling misinformation.”

Lieberman again invoked “cybersecurity” as the motivation behind the bill and tried to assuage the worries of critics.

“So I say to my friends on the Internet, relax. Take a look at the bill. And this is something that we need to protect our country,” said the Senator.
However, Lieberman’s choice of comparison in justifying the necessity of the bill will only serve to heighten concerns that the government is going after free speech.
“Right now China, the government, can disconnect parts of its Internet in case of war and we need to have that here too,” said Lieberman.
The Senator’s reference to China is a telling revelation of what the cybersecurity agenda is really all about. China’s vice-like grip over its Internet systems has very little to do with “war” and everything to do with silencing all dissent against the state.

Chinese Internet censorship is imposed via a centralized government blacklist of any websites that contain criticism of the state, porn, or any other content deemed unsuitable by the authorities. Every time you attempt to visit a website, you are re-routed through the government firewall, often making for long delays and crippling speeds.

China has exercised its power to shut down the Internet, something that Lieberman wants to introduce in the U.S., at politically sensitive times in order to stem the flow of information about government abuse and atrocities. During the anti-government riots which occurred in July 2009, the Chinese government completely shut down the Internet across the entire northwestern region of Xinjiang for days. Similarly, Internet access in parts of Tibet is routinely restricted as part of government efforts to pre-empt and neutralize unrest.

Major websites like Twitter, Google and You Tube have also been shut down either temporarily or permanently by Chinese authorities.

News websites in China now require users to register their true identities in order to leave comments. This abolition of anonymity is used to chill free speech in that it prevents the user from engaging in criticism of the state for fear that they would be tracked down by authorities.

Chinese authorities are now going further than merely maintaining a “blacklist” of banned websites by instituting a “whitelist” of allowed websites, a move that “could potentially place much of the Internet off-limits to Chinese readers.” Websites not pre-registered with the government would be completely blocked to all Internet users, meaning “millions of completely innocuous sites” would be banned. This equates to requiring government approval to set up a website, which would obviously not be granted if the person or organization making the application has a history of or is likely to engage in dissent against the state.

President Obama himself has criticized Chinese Internet censorship as a hindrance to the free flow of information and allowing citizens to hold their governments accountable, and yet Lieberman wants to hand Obama similar powers.

Given the nature of Chinese Internet regulation, with has nothing to do with “war” as Lieberman claims and everything to do with political censorship and covering up information about state oppression, we should be alarmed that the Senator wants to see America move in the same direction.

The real agenda behind government control of the Internet has always been to strangle and suffocate independent media outlets who are now competing with and even displacing establishment press organs, with websites like the Drudge Report now attracting more traffic than many large newspapers combined. As part of this war against independent media, the FTC recently proposing a “Drudge Tax” that would force independent media organizations to pay fees that would be used to fund mainstream newspapers.

In addition, the FCC has rolled a censorship plan into its Net Neutrality scheme in a stealth attempt to impose Internet regulation.

Under the FCC’s regulatory control consumers would be forced to buy an Internet/TV/Phone connectivity box that the government approves.

“Everyone will pay rates for service that the government sets. And everything passing through your Internet, TV, or phone would become subject to the FCC’s consistent regulatory whim,” writes Americans for Tax Reform’s Kelly William Cobb.
Similar legislation aimed at imposing Chinese-style censorship of the Internet and giving the state the power to shut down networks has already been passed globally, including in the UK, New Zealand and Australia.

We have extensively covered efforts to scrap the internet as we know it and move toward a greatly restricted "Internet 2" system. Handing government the power to control the Internet would only be the first step towards this system, whereby individual ID’s and government permission would be required simply to operate a website.

Lieberman’s argument that the U.S. government should be handed the same power to regulate the Internet currently exercised by Chinese authorities only serves to confirm that the true agenda behind the Obama ‘kill switch’ legislation is to launch a war, not against foreign hackers, but against the free speech of the American people.

Watch the CNN clip below.



Bill Would Put DHS in Charge of All Civilian Computer Networks

June 10, 2010

NationalTerrorAlert.com - New legislation expected to be introduced today would give the Homeland Security Department broad new authorities and powers over federal civilian networks.

The bill, however, does not include a “kill switch” for private sector networks, as widely reported previously.

The legislation, Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act of 2010, sponsored by Sens. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.), Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Tom Carper (D-Del.), would move the responsibility of civilian agency cybersecurity to DHS from the Office of Management and Budget, according to a summary of the bill obtained by Federal News Radio.

The responsibility to develop, oversee and enforce IT security throughout the federal government would fall to a new office in DHS, the National Center for Cybersecurity and Communications. A director confirmed by the Senate would lead the NCCC.

Can Obama Shut Down the Internet?

June 18, 2010

The Daily Beast - A new bill rocketing through Congress would give the president sweeping powers to police the Web for national-security reasons. Could this be a way to block WikiLeaks?

Is cyberspace about to get censored?

Confronting threats ranging from Chinese superhackers to the release of secret documents on WikiLeaks and other whistleblowing websites, the Obama administration may be on the verge of assuming broad new powers to regulate the Internet on national-security grounds.

The powers are granted to the White House under a bipartisan bill that was introduced in the Senate only last week but is already moving quickly through Congress toward passage. The legislation has generated considerable buzz on tech blogs—but drawn little notice so far by major news organizations.
“The way it seems to be worded, the bill could easily represent a threat to free speech,” said Wayne Crews of the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
The bill would grant President Obama the power to declare a “national cyber-emergency” at his discretion and force private companies tied to the Web, including Internet service providers and search engines, to take action in response—moves that could include limiting or even cutting off their connections to the World Wide Web for up to 30 days.

While the bill’s sponsors say it is intended to create a shield to defend the United States and its largest companies from the growing threat of cyberattacks, civil-liberties activists tell The Daily Beast they fear the bill could give the White House the ability to effectively shut down portions of the Internet for reasons that could prove to be politically inspired.
“We have seen through recent history that in an emergency, the Executive Branch will interpret grants of power very broadly,” said Gregory Nojeim of the Center for Democracy and Technology, a group that promotes Internet freedom. He said the bill, which he described as moving “at lightning speed in congressional terms,” was too loosely worded in its definition of which companies would be regulated and what they would be required to do in an emergency.
Wayne Crews, vice president of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a free-enterprise think tank, said he believed the bill was so broadly worded that it might even allow the White House to take aim at whistleblowing websites that were believed to pose a national-security threat, such as WikiLeaks, in the guise of a “cyber-emergency.”
“That would be a concern of mine,” Crews tells The Daily Beast. “The way it seems to be worded, the bill could easily represent a threat to free speech.”
WikiLeaks, which is nominally based in Sweden and promotes itself as a global resource for whistleblowers, announced this week that it is preparing to post a classified Pentagon video depicting an American airstrike in Afghanistan last year that left as many as 140 people dead, most of them children and teenagers.

The Protecting Cyberspace Act was introduced last week by Senator Joseph Lieberman, the Connecticut independent who is chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, and Senator Susan Collins of Maine, the panel’s ranking Republican. Counterparts in the House Homeland Security Committee have endorsed identical legislation, meaning that a final bill could be adopted by the full Congress within weeks. The White House has not taken a stand on the legislation so far ...

June 28, 2010

Doctors Vaccinate for Profit

Investment in partnerships and other deals to develop and manufacture vaccines has been accelerating since the swine flu pandemic began. Billions in government grants are bringing better, faster ways to develop and manufacture vaccines. Rising worldwide emphasis on preventive health care, plus the advent of the first multibillion-dollar vaccines, have further boosted their appeal. While prescription drug sales are forecast to rise by a third in five years, vaccine sales should double, from $19 billion in 2008 to $39 billion in 2013. That's five times the $8 billion in vaccine sales in 2004. That jump is due to a couple of new blockbuster vaccines and rising use of existing ones. The government's list of recommended vaccines for children has more than doubled since 1985 to 17. It now also calls for a half-dozen vaccines for everyone over 18 and up to four more for some adults. - Vaccines market gives pharmaceutical industry a boos, The Associated Press, November 17, 2009

Doctors Vaccinate for Profit

January 25, 2010

vactruth.com - Years ago children were sent up chimneys or sold as servants to earn their parents extra money. Now they are being vaccinated by doctors, to boost their takings. Doctors, Governments and Pharma see our children as their property and are making thousands of pounds/dollars/euros out of them right under our noses. This, they call ‘Health Care’, I call it the legalization of child labour.

For years now we have been told that vaccines are good for us, that vaccines eradicate illness and that vaccines will save us from killer diseases. What we are not told is that the doctors and Governments telling us this are often linked to the drug companies who are manufacturing the vaccines that they promote and many are making thousands of pounds/dollars profit from vaccinating our children.

Let us begin at the bottom and start with the GP. In the UK every time a vaccine is given to us by our trusted GP, they are paid. The British Medical Journal published an article, GPs make deals with local NHS to vaccinate children against swine flu, explaining how that every single child who is vaccinated with the H1N1 in the UK will earn the GP £5.25.

In Ireland the GP’s are paid five times this amount for the seasonal flu shot. The article, Irish GP’s paid five times UK rate for flu vaccine (Irish Times), reports that in Ireland a GP will earn a staggering €38.95 per vaccine, making vaccines a very lucrative business indeed.

As far back as 2002, GP’s were so keen to get their hands on this extra money that they were striking off their lists the children who had not had the MMR because if they (the GP’s ) did not meet the Government target rate of 90% immunization, they would not earn their £2865 vaccination bonus (Children without MMR jab struck off GP’s list reports, Daily Telegraph).

In another article, The campaign for Gardasil Flawed, it is reported that Merck actually seeks out and trains doctors to lecture for them on Gardasil, paying them $4,500 each time they lecture on the Gardasil vaccine. Doctors are making thousands of dollars doing this.

This is nothing new and is not just attributed to vaccines. Doctors have been doing this for years.
In the article, Ex-Drug Sales Rep Tells Allews (ABC News), one drugs representative spills the beans and tells a Congressional committee what really goes on. Speaking about Eli Lilly he told the committee:
“To sell their drugs, pharmaceutical companies hire former cheerleaders and ex-models to wine and dine doctors, exaggerate the drug’s benefits and underplay their side-effects.”
Shahram Ahari, who spent two years selling Prozac and Zypraxa for Eli Lily, told a Senate Aging Committee chaired by Sen. Herb Kohl, D-Wisc., that his job involved ” rewarding physicians with gifts and attention for their allegiance to your product and company despite what may be ethically appropriate.”

Ahari claimed that drug companies like hiring former cheerleaders and ex-models, as well as former athletes and members of the military, many of whom have no background in science to wine and dine the doctors explaining the wonderful benefits of the drug they are employed to sell.

Leading figures in the medical profession who advise Governments on vaccine policies have strong links and alliances with the drugs companies helping them peddle their wares.

The article, Children Risk Untested Flu Vaccines in Hyped Pandemic (Child Health Safety), shows some very interesting links with the key figures who advise our Governments and drug companies.

Dr Salisbury, the Medical Director for the Department of Health and a key figure in the JCV I, who advises the UK Government on vaccine policies, is shown to be linked by association with drug companies.
“Dr Salisbury is also linked by association to drug companies. Dr Salisbury as the Medical Secretary for the Department of Health is also a member of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation. The JCVI has the task of approving UK vaccines. Many JCVI members have declared interests in a variety of drug companies when discussing the flu pandemic [JCVI meeting on 13th February 2008]. These financial ties include vaccine manufacturers Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi Pasteur and Novartis. The JCVI is reportedly involved in attempts to hide evidence that the MMR vaccine can cause brain inflammation and permanent brain damage [Vaccine E-Newsletter, March 20, 2009, Vaccine Bullies & Fighting Back by Barbara Loe Fisher].”
Another Government figure found to be linked to drugs companies is Kathleen Sebelius, The US Health and Human Services Secretary. She has been found to have strong links to Glaxo Smith Kline.

In early 2009 the US Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told The Associated Press that she was urging school superintendents around the USA to spend the summer preparing for the possibility that schoolchildren could be first in line for swine flu vaccine in the fall, if the USA Government decided to go ahead with mass vaccinations:
“If you think about vaccinating kids, schools are the logical place,” She said. [Kids May Get Swine Flu Shot First, Lauran Neergaard, June 16, 2009]
However, she did promise careful surveillance. Sebelius has strong alliances to drug companies. [GlaxoSmithKline website] announced her appointment stating that she could work with them to save ‘World Health’ and get out of the ‘Healthcare mess’, if they (GSK) gave the Government the ‘right attention’”

So can we trust the doctors and the Governments to keep our children safe? Sadly it seems that many are not really putting the safety of their patients before their ever increasing pay packets. Their loyalty is to the drug companies and not their patients, so what is the truth about the vaccinations used today?

Fortunately for us, we have a strong and growing army of ‘real doctors‘, who are less interested in the ‘nice little earners’ are more interested in keeping the public informed and safe. They have a very different view of what vaccines are doing to our health and our immune systems ...

Pharmaceutical companies accused of crying wolf over swine flu
Pharmaceutical Companies Stand to Make Profit From ‘Swine Flu'
Report condemns swine flu experts' ties to big pharma

June 26, 2010

What Do the 2010 Census, GPS and Drones Have in Common?

Maybe It Ain't All Theory!!



June 14, 2010

Fighting Liberty - FAA UNDER PRESSURE FROM WHO?? FROM WAR ZONES TO US??

Question: Why is Obama GPS marking EVERY front door in America!

Answer: Targeting computers need GPS coordinates!

THERE ARE ONLY TWO THINGS GPS HAS OVER STREET ADDRESSES.....THEY ARE COMPUTERIZED NAVIGATION AND COMPUTERIZED TARGETING!! THAT IS ALL!!

YOU TELL ME ANOTHER VALID PURPOSE AND I'LL THINK ABOUT IT....BECAUSE THERE IS NO REAL OTHER REASON FOR THIS...ESPECIALLY ONE THAT OUR CURRENT FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WOULD DO FOR US FOR FREE!!

America's are terrorists if they own a bible, a pocket Constitution or guns, and still believe in Life, Liberty and Freedom.

Obama and ACORN GPS Marking EVERY Front Door in America?

April 29, 2009

Canada Free Press - Republican Senator Judd Gregg was Obama’s first choice for the Secretary of Commerce post, and Gregg was actually considering joining the Obama team, until he found out that control of the US Census was being stripped from the Commerce Department and placed under the direct control of White House Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel.

Then, the same week that Americans learned that they were “domestic terrorists”—at least according to Obama’s new DHS (Department of Homeland Security)—if they own a bible, a pocket Constitution or guns, and still believe in Life, Liberty and Freedom, they also learned that Obama’s Census Bureau had hired thousands of new temporary employees, equipped each with a handheld GPS computer and sent them out to mark GPS coordinates for every residential front door in America.

Oddly, it was this same period that news was breaking of an international flu pandemic, suspected of being a weaponized strain of the virus never before seen, and that Obama’s team still sees no need to close the US-Mexican border, despite the cross continental spread of a deadly illness now claiming American lives.

Now, if any one of these events happened alone, one might not get too excited. But when a string of such events happen all at once, one begins to question the string of freedom and life threatening coincidences…

I can’t resist the urge to question the authority and purpose behind such a BIG BROTHER initiative, when the official Census itself is not due to be taken until 2010…

No imagination is required to think up a whole laundry list of evil that could be done with a nationwide GPS grid of coordinate’s markers painted on every private home across the country. But I was having trouble thinking up one good reason for it, even one legitimate use that would justify what must be a very expensive undertaking.

According to one of the Census workers, who spoke with me on condition of anonymity, they must GPS mark the coordinates “within 40 ft of every front door” in America and they are supposed to complete that mission nation wide within 90 days, by the end of July 2009.



[Editor's Note: I worked for the first phase of the 2010 U.S. Census, when workers were sent out into the field to map every residence using handheld computers with GPS. During training we were instructed to go to the front door. I immediately spoke up to ask why we had to go to the front door just to map and verify addresses. I was told to knock on each front door to let the owner know why we were on their porch and to get "as close to the front door as possible" to get the most accurate GPS coordinates.]

The workers were not told why they were GPS marking every front door. But a supervisor is sent out to follow them door-to-door, to make certain that no door is left unmarked. Every door will be marked by one employee, and then checked by a follow-up supervisor.

So, I had to ask, why?

Why does the Obama administration need or want the latitude and longitude coordinates for every home in America? Why the rush to GPS paint every home in the next 90 days? Why must the marker be within 40 ft of every front door? For what possible purpose do the Feds need GPS coordinates for every home, and under what authority do they have the right? Census workers, whom I asked, had the same holy-crap look on their faces that I had by then…

ACORN signed on as a national partner with the U.S. Census Bureau in February 2009 to assist with the recruitment of the 1.4 million temporary workers needed to go door-to-door to count every person in the United States — currently believed to be more than 306 million people. But the count doesn’t take place until 2010… This is April 2009.

Obama’s interest in an ACORN controlled 2010 Census, for the purpose of redistricting to the advantage of Democrats before the 2010 mid-term elections, comes as NO shock from a regime known for their heavy handed Rules for Radicals political strategies. But what does this have to do with GPS marking every home in the country?

The 2% of Americans, who have served military duty at some point in life, are very familiar with the most common use of GPS target painting. The other 98% of Americans might want to pick up a book on the subject, such as "The Precision Revolution: GPS and the Future of Aerial Warfare" ...

Their Authority?

RightSoup.com has just about the only online report available on the matter, and they report,
“Why does the government (and ACORN) need to have the GPS coordinates of your FRONT DOOR? Your house is probably on Google Maps already. But the front door? Sounds like a jackboot convenience to me. This is a developing story, and several reports of those who have already been visited by the GPS squad can be found in this forum thread.”
If you challenge Census Bureau employees about the GPS marking of your private residence, you will be handed a pre-printed explanation referring you to Sec. 223, Title 13, U.S. Code, Chapter 7, Subtitle 2, which explains the penalties for refusing to provide names and statistics of occupants when asked for by a census taker. This only applies when they are taking a census, (which will not be taken until next year), and the penalty for refusing to answer questions for a census is up to a $500 fine.

However, since the actual Census is not due to be taken until 2010, nobody is asking for any information today. They are only GPS marking your front door today, and Sec. 223, Title 13, U.S. Code, Chapter 7, Subtitle 2 provides the Feds NO authority to GPS paint your front door.

Best I can tell, the Feds have NO authority whatsoever, to paint the front door of every private residence in America. Still, that is exactly what they are doing. Now, the trillion dollar question is, why?

A State of Emergency

From Wikipedia - The Posse Comitatus Act is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385) passed on June 16, 1878 after the end of Reconstruction, with the intention of substantially limiting the powers of the federal government to use the military for law enforcement. The Act prohibits most members of the federal uniformed services from exercising nominally state law enforcement, police, or peace officer powers that maintain “law and order” on non-federal property (such as states and their counties and municipal divisions) within the United States.

In short, the statute generally prohibits federal military personnel and units of the National Guard operating under federal authority, from acting in a law enforcement capacity within the United States.

As members of the military are sworn to protect and defend the Constitution and the American people against all enemies, both foreign and domestic, a federal order to do the exact opposite, and take aim at American citizens, would be a clear violation of the US Constitution and the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, unless…

US Military personnel are trained to follow orders. But they are also obligated to refuse any order deemed “unlawful.” In order to make such an order appear “lawful,” the federal government would first have to declare a national “state of emergency,” such as in the case of an international pandemic, which can be demonstrated to threaten the health and well-being of American citizens.

Following a state of emergency declaration, a federal order for Martial Law would be expected, to allegedly provide law enforcement and security for citizens. This type of scenario can be followed by a presidential order to quarantine, disarm and contain American citizens in the name of national security, all of it, having the appearance of being “lawful.”

Is this what is happening?

Connecting the Dots

Alone, individual events look concerning, but not conspiratorial. What about when you place the pieces of the puzzle together and take a look at the entire picture developing?

Under this “theory,” how does the GPS marking of every private residence in the nation fit into the picture?

I wish I knew… but I don’t!

What I do know is this… Coincidences of this number and magnitude don’t happen. They certainly do not happen all at the same time, within hours or days of each other, out of the wild blue tin-foil hat heaven…

I also know that people had better start asking the right people the right questions and demanding answers fast. Begin with asking the mainstream press why there has been no public notification of the federal government's GPS marking your front door?

Then, I suggest contacting your local Census Bureau office immediately, and demanding an explanation as well as advice as to what law gives them the right to GPS paint every front door in America?

I’d also recommend sending a copy of this column to your state and federal representative, demanding that they put a stop to it or explain why it’s necessary, and what law gives them the right?

Unfortunately, we live in a moment of history when real events are much stranger than nutty conspiracy theories. The people have every right to know what is happening. But unless you demand to know, nobody’s talking!

Bill Clinton sold US nuclear technology to Red China for a mere $300,000 in campaign contributions. The event landed Chinese bagman Johnny Chung in prison, but put Hillary Clinton in the US Senate, and now at the helm of the US State Department.

Highly secured government servers are hacked daily. Soon, hackers will be able to grab a nation wide GPS grid map, marking the front door of every home in America.

How much is a GPS grid of every American household worth to the enemies of America, both foreign and domestic? I’d estimate, PRICELESS!

There is a foul odor resonating from the current regime in Washington DC and most Americans can smell it. Can most Americans gather the strength to do something about it?

GPS Marking EVERY Front Door - Part II

A United Nations Mandate?

May 7, 2009

Canada Free Press - It turns out that Obama, ACORN and the US Census Bureau are not the only folks interested in the GPS coordinates for every home in the USA.

In a United Nations Report dated September 2004 titled, Integration of GPS, Digital Imagery and GIS with Census Mapping, the United Nations Statistics Division announced:
“The recent technological developments, including new high-resolution sensors, global positioning systems (GPS), geographical information systems (GIS), Internet and World Wide Web services, are revolutionizing cartography, surveying and mapping in fundamental ways:”-

“For the past decade, the United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD) has been promoting the development of geographical information systems for population and demographic statistics in developing countries through technical cooperation projects supported by the United Nations Fund for Population Activities (UNFPA), training workshops, and technical publications.”
Despite Fed assurances that “the Census Bureau cannot share any private information about you with anyone else,” a lie parroted by every leftist Obama minion under the sun, including in the mainstream press, the GPS coordinates marking taking place in America today is a project being coordinated with the always reliable and pro-American United Nations, and we should assume, all of it’s member nations…

Besides, an administration anxious to expose all of America’s “TOP SECRET” intelligence and counter-terrorism agencies and programs, would hardly consider the GPS coordinates of every private residence in the U.S. to be a matter of “national security…” Would they?

As the United Nations report suggests, this program had been quietly underway for a “decade” as of September 2004, when the report was issued.

This means that the GPS marking of every home in the U.S. taking place today was put in place sometime in 1994, during the first Clinton administration, likely while Democrats controlled congress. And of course, it also means that the GPS coordinates are NOT a “top secret” database to be used only by the US Census Bureau… anymore than only the US Military can use Google Earth.

According to the UN report from 2004, the program was originally designed to get a better handle on populations in “third world” nations where it is very difficult to know much of anything about what is going on within those nations. You can view the entire document for yourself here.

But it was quickly turned into an effort to develop a “worldwide” GPS grid and today, with the partnership between the Obama administration, the United Nations, the USA Census Bureau and ACORN—it is clearly evolving into much more… Author of Rules for Radicals Saul Alinsky, would be proud, I’m sure of it!

Maybe since Obama is fast turning America into a “third world nation,” U.S. citizens must comply with all United Nation’s programs designed for “third world nations?”

Such as the pending International U.N. Anti-gunTreaty, which Obama has promised to sign, trumping US Constitutional Second Amendment rights?

But this is exactly the kind of event that many Americans expect will ignite a second American Revolution.

Active and retired members of the military and law enforcement across this country are gathering at places like the http://oath-keepers.blogspot.com/ reaffirming their oath to uphold and defend the US Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, going so far as to list 10 specific executive orders that they will refuse to follow, if Obamanation continues on its current path to a national emergency.

It’s why private gun and ammo sales have been through the roof for the last six months. It’s why state legislature after state legislature is rushing to reclaim state sovereignty and states rights under the Ninth and Tenth Amendments in our Bill of Rights. These are the very people described in Obama’s DHS Reports as “rightwing extremists” and “potential terrorists.”

What strikes me as odd is how Americans will arm up, restate sacred oaths and reclaim state rights, while allowing the very people they worry about, to mark the front door of every private home in America with the same GPS coordinates used for guided aerial munitions… not to mention a plethora of invasive modern surveillance technologies…

American citizens worried about such events sound a lot like the very people described in recent Obama DHS reports, referred to as “rightwing extremism?” - DHS Extremist ‘Lexicon’ Yanked by Napolitano

Once again, I encourage people to do the research and draw their own conclusions. In my opinion, a laundry list of coincidences like this is never a coincidence. But you research and decide for yourself. Still think there is nothing to that crazy GPS conspiracy theory? I hope you decide it soon!

Census GPS-tagging Your Home's Front Door

Coordinates being taken for every residence in nation

May 5, 2009

WorldNetDaily - According to an online Yahoo program, the Global Position System coordinates for the White House, probably one of the best-known publicly owned buildings in the world, are 38.898590 Latitude and -77.035971 Longitude. And since you know that, it's no big deal for the White House to know the coordinates for your front door, is it?

Some people think it is, and are upset over an army of some 140,000 workers hired in part with a $700 million taxpayer-funded contract to collect GPS readings for every front door in the nation.

The data collection, presented as preparation for the 2010 Census, is pinpointing with computer accuracy the locations and has raised considerable concern from privacy advocates who have questioned why the information is needed. The privacy advocates also are more than a little worried over what could be done with that information.

Enhancing the concerns is the Obama administration's recent decision to put White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel in an oversight role over the census, which will be used to determine a reapportionment of congressional seats and could be used to solidify a single political party's control over the nation, its budget, military and future.

Commerce Secretary Gary Locke recently told the Washington Post:

"The census director reports to me, and, of course, I serve at the pleasure of the president." He added the White House told him "it has no interest in politicizing [the census]."

But at American Daily Review, blogger Douglas Gibbs had more than a few doubts.

"GPS coordinates of your front door will make it easier for the government to monitor you," he said. "The U.S. Census Bureau is simply an excuse — a harmless looking means of obtaining the front door coordinates. The creation of GPS coordinates for front doors has nothing to do with the census, in all honesty, no matter how much the United States government tries to convince you that it does."

In his article titled, "Big Brother GPS Doorway Census," Gibbs, recalled wondering why, just weeks ago, the Obama administration announced its oversight of the census, "literally taking control of the census away from the Commerce Department."

He put that together with Obama's longtime push for national service.

"The Obamites, thirsty to serve their new messianic figure, have lost enough of their objectivity to be willingly recruited into such an insidious program like gaining these coordinates for the U.S. government. … I ask again, what would be the purpose of shooting the GPS coordinates of American doorways?" he wrote.

The answer he provided was alarming.

"Imagine, if you will, that there are a number of people in a neighborhood that could not find the addresses they are tasked with finding. They are not locals, maybe are unable to read a map, or perhaps do not have the time to pull out a map, and they need to find you with specific GPS coordinates. Their devices would lead them to your front door with these coordinates. Imagine a crisis is afoot, and martial law is put into place. U.S. troops need to round up particular folks," he wrote.

"Let's take this a step further. After all, with Barack Obama desiring to decrease the number of folks in the military, and with forces committed worldwide, we may not have sufficient military forces at home to deal with a rising national emergency. If the government decided to rely on foreign troops, perhaps United Nations personnel, most of which may not understand the street signs, much less know the lay of the land, they could use GPS devices to direct them to your front door," he wrote.

According to the Census Bureau's website,

The GPS technology "allows us to reduce the amount of time spent by census workers in locating addresses. … Most importantly, by adding a GPS coordinate to each housing unit, the Census Bureau is able to ensure that residents are counted in the right location."

At Canada Free Press, commentator J.B. Williams said,

"I can't resist the urge to question the authority and purpose behind such a BIG BROTHER initiative, when the official census itself is not due to be taken until 2010…

"No imagination is required to think up a whole laundry list of evil that could be done with a nationwide GPS grid of coordinate's markers painted on every private home across the country. But I was having trouble thinking up one good reason for it, even one legitimate use that would justify what must be a very expensive undertaking," he said.

"Why does the Obama administration need or want the latitude and longitude coordinates for every home in America? Why the rush to GPS paint every home in the next 90 days? Why must the marker be within 40 feet of every front door? For what possible purpose do the Feds need GPS coordinates for every home, and under what authority do they have the right? Census workers, whom I asked, had the same holy-crap look on their faces that I had by then," he wrote.

Then he cited the cooperative effort that the U.S. Census Bureau has reached with ACORN, the organization of community activists with which Obama worked.

"Obama's interest in an ACORN-controlled 2010 Census, for the purpose of redistricting to the advantage of Democrats before the 2010 mid-term elections, comes as NO shock from a regime known for their heavy handed Rules for Radicals political strategies. But what does this have to do with GPS marking every home in the country?" he questioned.

Ask those who have served military duty, he said. They are very familiar with the most common use of GPS target painting, and the rest might want to read books such as "The Precision Revolution: GPS and the Future of Aerial Warfare."

Online sources noted that Google Maps already probably has listed most homes in the nation.

"But the front door? Sounds like a jackboot convenience to me," said RightSoup.com.

Added Williams, "What I do know is this … Coincidences of this number and magnitude don't happen. … I also know that people had better start asking the right people the right questions and demanding answers fast. Begin with asking the mainstream press why there has been no public notification of the federal governments GPS marking your front door?"

A number of concerned citizens have contacted WND about the program, and repeatedly have cited warnings delivered by the GPS squad members that their failure to allow the readings would result in fines and possibly imprisonment under Title 13, which allows the census to be taken.

But repeatedly they've gotten no answers when asked what a GPS reading has to do with the number of people living at the home — which isn't supposed to be subject to questions until 2010 anyway.

One WND reader raised these questions to a local census office.

"What authority does the U.S. Census Bureau have for sending anyone to my front door in April of 2009 to mark it with GPS coordinates? This is unacceptable. The census is not due until 2010, and the usurpation of the census by the White House is unconstitutional. … This citizen will not answer census questions until the year they are due, and demands that my GPS coordinates be removed from all government records."

The census response?

"Address canvassing should conclude by mid-July. The operation will use new hand-held computers equipped with GPS to increase geographic accuracy. The ability to capture GPS coordinates for most of the nation's housing units will greatly reduce the number of geographic coding errors caused by using paper maps in previous counts. … During the address canvassing operation, census workers may ask to verify a housing structure's address and whether there are additional living quarters on the property. All census workers carry official government badges marked with just their name. You also may ask them for a picture ID from another source to confirm their identity. In addition, some census workers might carry a 'U.S. Census Workers' bag."

Another WND reader, from Washington state, reported he is having his attorney look into the legality of the GPS data collection and hopes to have enough support for a legal challenge.The reader, whose name was withheld because of his concerns over repercussions, said a government home data collector ignored his no trespassing sign, and he was threatened by the collector for wanting to refuse to provide "census" information. He said GPS mapping nowhere is authorized for census workers.

Census spokesman Stephen Buckner told WND the activity is, in fact, proper, and even necessary. There are homes being built and torn down constantly, and the census needs such information. Local building records and other government databases such as tax records would not suffice, he said.

"There are 140,000 workers walking every street of America," he told WND, in order to document 145 million addresses with GPS coordinates.

He assured WND that all such personal information is confidential because employees of contractors doing the work are subject to a $250,000 fine or imprisonment for five years for revealing personal information. He also confirmed that the last case that was prosecuted under the law was nearly 50 years ago.

"We have to verify every single address," he said.

Civil Liberties, Health Care, Food Policies

Monsanto GM Seed Ban is Overturned by U.S. Supreme Court

The bio-tech company Monsanto can sell genetically modified seeds before safety tests on them are completed, the US Supreme Court has ruled.

June 21, 2010

BBC - A lower court had barred the sale of the modified alfalfa seeds until an environmental impact study could be carried out.

But seven of the nine Supreme Court Justices decided that ruling was unconstitutional.

The seed is modified to be resistant to Monsanto's brand of weedkiller.

The US is the world's largest producer of alfalfa, a grass-like plant used as animal feed.

It is the fourth most valuable crop grown in the country.

Environmentalists had argued that there might be a risk of cross-pollination between genetically modified plants and neighbouring crops.

They also argued over-use of the company's weedkiller Roundup, the chemical treatment the alfalfa is modified to be resistant to, could cause pollution of ground water and lead to resistant "super-weeds."

But Monsanto says claims its products were dangerous amounted to "bad science fiction with no support on the record."

No Anti-virus Software, No Internet Connection

June 22, 2010

News Limited - Australians would be forced to install anti-virus and firewall software on their computers before being allowed to connect to the internet under a new plan to fight cyber crime.

And if their computer did get infected, internet service providers like Telstra and Optus could cut off their connection until the problem was resolved.

Those are two of the recommendations to come from a year-long inquiry into cyber crime by the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Communications.

Results of the inquiry, titled Hackers, Fraudsters and Botnets: Tackling the Problem of Cyber Crime, were released last night in a 260-page report.

In her foreword, committee chair Belinda Neal said cyber crime had turned into a "sophisticated underground economy."
"In the past decade, cyber crime has grown from the nuisance of the cyber smart hacker into an organised transnational crime committed for vast profit and often with devastating consequences for its victims," Ms Neal said.
During its inquiry the committee heard a growing number of Australians were being targeted by cyber criminals and that increasing internet speeds were likely to make the situation worse.

It also heard the problem was costing Australian businesses as much as $649 million a year.

The committee looked at several different examples of cyber crime, including hacking, phishing, malware and botnets.

Among its final 34 recommendations were:

— The creation of an around-the-clock cyber crime helpline.

— Changes to the law to make unauthorised installation of software illegal.

— Companies who release IT products with security vulnerabilities should be open to claims for compensation by consumers.

Another of its recommendations was to create a new "e-security code of practice" that would define the responsibilities of internet service providers and their customers.

The code of practice would see companies like Telstra give their customers security advice when they signed up and inform them if their computer ever appeared to be compromised.

For their part, customers would have to install anti-virus and firewall software before their connection was activated and endeavour to keep the software up-to-date.

If a customer's computer was infected by malware, the service provider could introduce gradual restrictions and eventually cut off their internet connection entirely until the machine was "remediated."

June 25, 2010

Copenhagen Climate Treaty & Climategate

Kyoto Protocol Fraud: Watchdog Group Unearths Carbon Trading Scam

Carbon trading can lead to smoke and mirrors

June 14, 2010

Take Part - According to an industry watchdog, some companies participating in a Kyoto Protocol carbon trading system are falsely inflating their greenhouse gas emissions.

Countries that committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions under the Kyoto Protocol must do so primarily through national measures.

As a way to help signatories meet designated targets, Kyoto introduced three market-based mechanisms—Emissions Trading, Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), and Joint Implementation—in effect creating a carbon market.

The CDM market alone was worth $2.7 billion in 2009.

With such huge amounts of money at play, it's no wonder industry watchdog group CDM Watch—according to Reuters UK—found “that chemical plants that destroy a potent gas called hydrofluorocarbon-23 (HFC-23), may have inflated their emissions in order to destroy them and sell more offsets.”

"Analysis of monitoring data from all registered HFC-23 destruction projects revealed that plants are intentionally operated in a manner to maximize the production of CERs [Certified Emission Reductions]," CDM Watch said in a statement. "Because of the extra revenue ... far more HFC-23 is generated than would occur without the CDM."

"It's completely unacceptable for the U.N. to keep issuing an inflated number of bogus credits that create vast profits for carbon trading groups and chemical companies,” said CDM Watch director Eva Filzmoser.

According to Reuters UK:

CDM Watch said it made an official submission calling for new Certified Emission Reductions (CERs) handed to HFC projects to be discounted by over 90 percent, and for projects up for renewal to be reviewed at a panel meeting.

If approved, the revision could drastically alter the 2,236-project strong CDM, which to date has been ruled by the credits of 19 HFC projects, mainly in China and India.

The IPCC Consensus on Climate Change was Phoney, says IPCC Insider

A group of politicians inextricably linked to banking and big business who've never cared about anything but power throughout history, put forward a theory of environmental catastrophe with ZERO evidence from which they will make trillions at the expense of world populations. The Government quotes the findings of a group of scientists, who depend on the government for funding and grants, and who have been proven to be manipulating and hiding data to fit the pro-AGW agenda. The Earth has been warming steadily since the Maunder minimum 300 years ago, well before humans had industry. The late twentieth century gradient (1970s to 2001) has been repeated many times in the past even before the 20th century, and it's cooled for the past 8 years! The mediaeval period was hotter than today! Ice coverage is normal, sea levels have been rising at the same rate for thousands of years. Polar bears are in record numbers, sea temperatures have not increased......it goes on and on...... - Comment by Sabretruthtiger, June 16, 2010

June 13, 2010

National Post - The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change misled the press and public into believing that thousands of scientists backed its claims on manmade global warming, according to Mike Hulme, a prominent climate scientist and IPCC insider. The actual number of scientists who backed that claim was “only a few dozen experts,” he states in a paper for Progress in Physical Geography, co-authored with student Martin Mahony.
Claims such as ‘2,500 of the world’s leading scientists have reached a consensus that human activities are having a significant influence on the climate’ are disingenuous,” the paper states unambiguously, adding that they rendered “the IPCC vulnerable to outside criticism.”
Hulme, Professor of Climate Change in the School of Environmental Sciences at the University of East Anglia – the university of Climategate fame — is the founding Director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research and one of the UK’s most prominent climate scientists. Among his many roles in the climate change establishment, Hulme was the IPCC’s co-ordinating Lead Author for its chapter on ‘Climate scenario development’ for its Third Assessment Report and a contributing author of several other chapters.

Hulme’s depiction of IPCC’s exaggeration of the number of scientists who backed its claim about man-made climate change can be found on pages 10 and 11 of his paper, found here.

Q&A With Professor Phil Jones (Excerpt)

February 13, 2010

BBC - Phil Jones is director of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA), which has been at the centre of the row over hacked e-mails.

The BBC's environment analyst Roger Harrabin put questions to Professor Jones, including several gathered from climate sceptics. The questions were put to Professor Jones with the co-operation of UEA's press office.

Do you agree that according to the global temperature record used by the IPCC, the rates of global warming from 1860-1880, 1910-1940 and 1975-1998 were identical?

... the warming rates for all 4 periods are similar and not statistically significantly different from each other.

Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming

Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level. The positive trend is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods.

Do you agree that from January 2002 to the present there has been statistically significant global cooling?

No. This period is even shorter than 1995-2009. The trend this time is negative (-0.12C per decade), but this trend is not statistically significant.

Do you agree that natural influences could have contributed significantly to the global warming observed from 1975-1998, and, if so, please could you specify each natural influence and express its radiative forcing over the period in Watts per square metre.

This area is slightly outside my area of expertise. When considering changes over this period we need to consider all possible factors (so human and natural influences as well as natural internal variability of the climate system). Natural influences (from volcanoes and the Sun) over this period could have contributed to the change over this period. Volcanic influences from the two large eruptions (El Chichon in 1982 and Pinatubo in 1991) would exert a negative influence. Solar influence was about flat over this period. Combining only these two natural influences, therefore, we might have expected some cooling over this period.

How confident are you that warming has taken place and that humans are mainly responsible?

I'm 100% confident that the climate has warmed. As to the second question, I would go along with IPCC Chapter 9 -- there's evidence that most of the warming since the 1950s is due to human activity.

If you agree that there were similar periods of warming since 1850 to the current period, and that the MWP is under debate, what factors convince you that recent warming has been largely man-made?

The fact that we can't explain the warming from the 1950s by solar and volcanic forcing.

Would it be reasonable looking at the same scientific evidence to take the view that recent warming is not predominantly manmade?

No .