Those of you that read this regular series know that I am from Hackett, Arkansas, just a mile or so from the Oklahoma border, and just about 10 miles south of the Arkansas River. It was a rural sort of place that did not particularly appreciate education, and just zoom onto my previous posts to understand a bit about it.
Last time we talked about some cars that I helped my father restore either for resale or for keeping. Cars seem to be a popular topic here, so we shall continue this theme about cars that were mine back in the day when I was growing up.
I have also decided to define my "growing up" period from birth to when I was 20 years old. I have chosen this somewhat arbitrarily, but since I married at 20 it seems to be a pretty good choice. Realistically, I do not think that anyone is grown up at 20, but I have to make some sort of demarcation.
How can it be illegal to live in a house before there was a law saying it was illegal to live in a house.
Simply because I present the evidence in a letter from Charlene saying she lived in my house in 1964 with three other families also living there that does not present evidence that these three families were not living there illegally even if I present evidence that there was no law saying that three families living in a single woodframe constructed building built in 1907 was not illegal in 1964.
Know it or not, like it or not your personal housing options have changed.
In-law apartments are "illegal". No, if you have space in your house and want to take care of Mom or Dad in their golden years, fuggedabboudit. There are far more costly options available to an industry which has targeted that most frugal and prosperous parents of baby boomer generation.
As to rules, building codes, fires, fire prevention and people, firefighters dying in "illegal" buildings well. A death, anyone's death in such an instance is tragic but allow me to submit the other motivational factor driving "safe" suburban American existence.
Profit margins of insurance companies.
We, statistically, used to kill 55,000 per year in America but that was before airbags, seatbelts and the saturation of road space trafficwise which prohibits attaining speeds fast enough to cause any damage in the first place.
That Jules Vernesy thing below is a telescope made by my great-grandpa back in 1936. He was a machinist back in the olden days when people made stuff (aside from the usual wars of aggression, financial collapses, snarky blog comments). Cool stuff that worked and lasted and made you go, "Huh." I didn't know the man, but I knew his son, a dashing man enough in a tux (Cary Grant-ish) but when Granny was at his side "fuggeddaboutit" they were drop-dead handsome; also capable with his hands on boats, paintings (a very decent draughtsman), and according to the large nasty dagger he also left behind, apparently, Nazis; he seriously questioned, yelled from shore, who gave my brother and I "permission to go onboard" when we were shark-scared kids (pre-Jaws!) swimming out at Monomoy Island about thirty yards out. Sharks! dude. The friggin' sharks gave us permission!
We all know that Chris Matthews is a fawning tool who gets excited over politicians' rhetoric even when it laced with blatant lies and 1% talking points. But Matthews got called out by none other than Rachel Maddow when he went all gushy over Gov. Mitch Daniels (R-IN) rebuttal to President Obama's State of the Union address.
MATTHEWS: You know, I really liked that speech by Mitch Daniels. I thought it was really a Midwestern conservatism of the best kind, honest, fiscally conservative or course, but recognizing that we have to protect our safety net and we have to recognize that the rich cannot get all the pension money and all the entitlement money. There's not enough to go around. We're going to have to have means testing. We're going to have to close the loopholes.
A very responsible kind of look at fiscal conservatism that recognizes that the rich can't plunder the poor any more, that if you're going to have a true conservatism, in other words a society that will sustain itself, a society that will be at peace with itself, you need to help the people to get a break and that means it's not Libertarianism at all. There's nothing of Ron Paul in what that man said.
It was a responsible social policy of the right, which was really I think cast in old time Midwest, Bob Taft conservatism, except for some of the bromides, the idiomatic crap that he threw in there to make everybody happy. There was a seriousness to this speech. And now I understand why people like Mitch Daniels.
MADDOW: Chris I am very glad that we area all talking about this together because I could not disagree with you more about the speech. This was just my impression of it but I don't have time to go into that...
MATTHEWS: Why?
MADDOW: We're going to go into that in a moment.
MATTHEWS: What's wrong?
MADDOW: I think that Mitch Daniels there to say the world is on fire. Be afraid. Run to Republicans. I mean, he's talking about America as a country that... America adrift, quarreling and paralyzed going over Niagra. I mean this was a "Be afraid, be afraid, be afraid" this guy's trying to murder the country speech.
MATTHEWS: But he also had solutions. He had gutsy solutions. He wasn't afraid to take on the rich and that's so rare today in the Republican side.
MADDOW: I will take you on that Chris, absolutely.
Last year there was a fierce Winter. Huge, frequent snowfalls. Extraordinary, aching, persistent cold. And this year, as if finding mercy, Winter has so far been quite mild. A deep snow at the end of October melted quickly. There has been no extended, sub zero cold. And there has been little snow. Yesterday's foul weather warning was unjustified: the feared storm turned into copious rain. Streams and ponds and lakes are not fully frozen. In short, mud season has arrived early and it may persist.
Mud season turns the world monochromatic. The sun is weak. The sky is overcast and gray. There is no snow cover. Fields and forests and dirt roads are all brown. And so we wait. We make it a practice not to complain. Not to jinx whatever clemency we've received. We wonder. Is the future a plunge into growling arctic blizzards, or is it a slow but muddy slog toward the Equinox?
Robert Frost:
Looking For a Sunset Bird in Winter
The west was getting out of gold,
The breath of air had died of cold,
When shoeing home across the white,
I thought I saw a bird alight.
In summer when I passed the place
I had to stop and lift my face;
A bird with an angelic gift
Was singing in it sweet and swift.
No bird was singing in it now.
A single leaf was on a bough,
And that was all there was to see
In going twice around the tree.
From my advantage on a hill
I judged that such a crystal chill
Was only adding frost to snow
As gilt to gold that wouldn't show.
A brush had left a crooked stroke
Of what was either cloud or smoke
From north to south across the blue;
A piercing little star was through.
This Week In The Dream Antilles is usually a weekly digest. Usually, it appears on Friday. Sometimes, like now and for several of the past weeks, it isn't actually a digest of essays posted at The Dream Antilles. For the essays you have to visit The Dream Antilles
A graduate of Harvard Law School, Brandeis quickly earned a reputation in Boston as the people's attorney for taking on cases pro bono. Brandeis advocated progressive legal reform to combat the social and economic ills caused in America by industrialization. He met Woodrow Wilson, who was impressed by Brandeis' efforts to hold business and political leaders accountable to the public, during Wilson's 1912 campaign against Theodore Roosevelt. Brandeis' early legal achievements included the establishment of savings-bank life insurance in Massachusetts and securing minimum wages for women workers. He also devised what became known as the Brandeis Brief, an appellate report that analyzed cases on economic and social evidence rather than relying solely on legal precedents.
Brandeis settled in Boston where he became a recognized lawyer through his work on social causes that would benefit society. He helped develop the "right to privacy" concept by writing a Harvard Law Review article of that title, and was thereby credited by legal scholar Roscoe Pound as having accomplished "nothing less than adding a chapter to our law". Years later, a book he published, entitled Other People's Money, suggested ways of curbing the power of large banks and money trusts, which partly explains why he later fought against powerful corporations, monopolies, public corruption, and mass consumerism, all of which he felt were detrimental to American values and culture. He also became active in the Zionist movement, seeing it as a solution to the "Jewish problem" of antisemitism in Europe and Russia, while at the same time being a way to "revive the Jewish spirit."
When his family's finances became secure, he began devoting most of his time to public causes and was later dubbed the "People's Lawyer." He insisted on serving on cases without pay so that he would be free to address the wider issues involved. The Economist magazine calls him "A Robin Hood of the law." Among his notable early cases were actions fighting railroad monopolies; defending workplace and labor laws; helping create the Federal Reserve System; and presenting ideas for the new Federal Trade Commission (FTC). He achieved recognition by submitting a case brief, later called the "Brandeis Brief," which relied on expert testimony from people in other professions to support his case, thereby setting a new precedent in evidence presentation.
In 1916, President Woodrow Wilson nominated Brandeis to become a member of the U.S. Supreme Court. However, his nomination was bitterly contested, partly because, as Justice William O. Douglas wrote, "Brandeis was a militant crusader for social justice whoever his opponent might be. He was dangerous not only because of his brilliance, his arithmetic, his courage. He was dangerous because he was incorruptible. . . [and] the fears of the Establishment were greater because Brandeis was the first Jew to be named to the Court." He was eventually confirmed by the Senate by a vote of 47 to 22 on June 1, 1916, and became one of the most famous and influential figures ever to serve on the high court. His opinions were, according to legal scholars, some of the "greatest defenses" of freedom of speech and the right to privacy ever written by a member of the high court.
SIGNS OF THE TIMES Making the rounds on Facebook and Twitter, large posters at an Osaka department store trumpeted a "Fuckin' sale" with everything 20 percent off.
Also from the good people in Osaka, a burger joint was advertising a "Fuckin' yummy hamburger!!" We'll take two ... fuck yeah!
Coming of Age Day in Japan saw a record-low 1.22 million people who will turn 20 this year, the fifth straight year the figure has decreased.
The decline marks the first time the number has been less than half the record of 2.46 million set in 1970.
"The roughly 620,000 men and 600,000 women comprise 0.96 percent of Japan's population, down for the eighth consecutive year," according to an estimate by the Internal Affairs and Communications Ministry.
An ornery 65-year-old Japanese man was arrested by FBI agents in Hawaii for assaulting a flight attendant on a Delta flight from Tokyo to Honolulu. Apparently, the guy "hit the flight attendant once with an open hand and once with a closed fist after drinking multiple glasses of wine." So he hit the bottle then hit the stew.
A court in Kobe found a former president of West Japan Railway not guilty of professional negligence over the 2005 high-speed train wreck in Hyogo Prefecture that left 107 people dead when a train hopped the tracks and hit an apartment building.
The US magazine Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, which created the so-called "Doomsday Clock" in 1947, said in a statement there are still "approximately 19,500 nuclear weapons [in the world today], enough power to destroy the Earth's inhabitants several times over."
A researcher in Hokkaido has concluded that marimo balls-"a type of green algae that grows in a round shape"-have been spread around the world from Japan through migrating birds.
ANA passengers who flew on the airline's Boeing 787 "Dreamliner" on New Year's Day got a nice greeting from staff wearing long-sleeved kimonos while bearing gifts and souvenirs.
A marathon in tsunami-hit Ofunato in Iwate Prefecture was held once again this year, attracting some 1,500 runners, although the course did have to be altered due to the events of March 11.
A very pissed-off Chinese dude threw four Molotov cocktails at the Japanese Embassy in Seoul because, he says, "his great grandfather on his mother's side died of torture while fighting against Japan's colonial rule," according to a report from the Yonhap News Agency.
Three crew members from a disabled North Korean fishing boat found drifting off Shimane Prefecture were shipped back home via China. A fourth man, who had died, was also heading home in a body bag.
If 1974 had been a bizarre year, 1975 was more structured in some ways. Several events happened in 1975 that were important to their financial security, for both good and ill.
The most significant events of 1975 were the release of the motion picture Tommy, the release of The Who by Numbers, and the beginning of a huge tour of Europe, the UK, and North America. Now, there were certainly some problems associated with all three of these events, but 1975 turned out to be a pretty good year for them.
However, Townshend was not a really good frame of mind for much of the year. He was very unhappy with his place in the band and whether or not there even should be a band called The Who, at least with him in it. It is sort of an interesting turn of events that kept them together, and there is more on that later.
The institution of marriage is too serious to be treated like a political football. I would hope the Legislature would be willing to trust the people the way I'm willing to trust the people.
Republicans are all for letting the people vote on equal rights, unless they vote in some way contrary to what they want (see Iowa, Michigan, New Hampshire et. al.).
I think we should definitely be concerned that Twitter is bowing to pressure and allowing for the censorship of tweets in individual foreign countries.
...
I guess they're selling this as an advance. But really it's a way for countries to censor content inside their borders, without the messiness of having to kill the entire Internet, like they did in Egypt briefly during the uprising.
Twitter does plan to share the content censored at Chilling Effects. And the fact that the rest of the world can see the tweets means that someone can bear witness. But this unquestionably makes censorship easier in individual countries. I don't know how you could say otherwise.
The company has insisted that it will not use the gagging system in a blanket fashion, but would apply it on a case-by-case basis, as already happens when governments or organisations complain about individual tweets.
The new system, which can filter tweets on a country-by-country basis and has already been incorporated into the site's output, will not change Twitter's approach to freedom of expression, sources there indicated.
...
Twitter insists that the system will only formalise a system it already uses, where tweets are blocked or deleted following full judicial process. Being able to limit tweets to particular countries, rather than blocking them altogether, expands its ability to "let tweets flow".
...
Terence Eden, a London-based mobile developer, complained on Twitter: "I don't want to develop on an API which contains a 'withheld_in_countries' field. What's next, a 'for_your_own_good' field?" He added: "I helped develop a Twitter client that Chinese pro-democracy activists used. Guess that's dead now. Thanks, Twitter."
Eden, who describes the move as censorship, said it would be difficult to work around because Twitter will identify which country a user is in by their internet address. "You can spot the censorship, but it's hard to route around it," he said.
"The Tweets must flow", Twitter declared a year ago, and quickly became an instrument of fast-moving revolution across the Arab world, coordinating mass protests in Egypt and sidestepping the state censorship in Syria. But, the microblogging site conceded that the tweets would not flow evenly in every country.
The company was accused of censorship by many users and threatened with a one-day boycott on Saturday after announcing that it could remove tweets in certain countries which have "different ideas about the contours of freedom of expression".
...
Jeff Jarvis, the media commentator, said the move set the microblogging site onto the "slippery slope of censorship". "I understand why Twitter is doing this - they want to be able to enter more countries and deal with the local laws," he said. "But, as Google learned in China, when you become the agent of the censor, there are problems there."
Ai Weiwei, the Chinese artist and dissident, put it more simply, posting: "If Twitter starts censoring, I'll stop tweeting".
...
The US civil liberties website, Demand Progress, opened a petition declaring: "Twitter's importance as an open platform has been demonstrated time and again this year. We need you to keep fighting for and enabling freedom of expression - not rationalize away totalitarianism as a legitimate 'different idea'."
"I have a partner now, Jim Ready. I have an emotional attachment. I'm in love for the first time in my life" Barney Frank on the announcement of his engagement to Jim Ready
Massachusetts US Rep. Barney Frank has announced his engagement to his partner of five years, Jim Ready of Maine. No date has been announced for the nuptials that will take place in Massachusetts which recognizes marriage between same sex couples. Rep. Frank recently decided to not run for reelection to his House seat that he has held since 1981.
We here at The Stars Hollow Gazette and Docudharma extend our heartfelt best wishes to Barney and Jim. May they have a long, happy, healthy and prosperous life together. Blessed Be.
"I'm in love, I'm in love
I'm in love, I'm in love
I'm in love with a wonderful guy!"
First thing- it doesn't have anything to do with "Health Care" nor is it "Reform". It's about Mandated Insurance Coverage, taking money from your pocket and forcing you to give it to ghouls.
If you look at President Obama's State of the Union address as primarily a political speech to kick off his re-election effort, you get a strong sense of what the Obama campaign thinks are his strengths and weaknesses.
...
(I)n the entire 7,000 word speech, there are only two lines, one of which ignores the proposed large expansion of government Medicaid, sandwiched between other unrelated talking points.
I take this as a strong sign that the Obama campaign is basically admitting they simply can't win the politics on Obamacare. It's a sign they believe their best political approach is just to ignore the issue as much as possible in the campaign. The law was unpopular when it passed and is still unpopular to this day. There is no reason to believe it will get any more popular by November.
Since President Obama took office the percentage of uninsured people in America has been steadily raising and has now reached a new high.
...
I simply don't know how the Administration can successfully campaign on passing a law to expand coverage, when the level of uninsured has increased significantly during Obama's tenure. It is tough for people to see such a law is any form of a real accomplishment when over a year after its passage it hasn't even begun to accomplish its main promises and the exact opposite is taking place in people's lives.
Instead of campaigning on delivering for the American people with his signature legislation, Obama will be forced to explain that even though the insurance situation has gotten worse, voters need to trust his claims that his signature law will eventually improve things in the future.
"Eventual change in the future I hope you believe me about" just doesn't have that nice campaign ring to it.
The decision to delay the start date of the primary expansion in the Affordable Care Act until 2014 should be remembered as one of the most idiotic political and policy decisions ever made. I would argue that if Obama narrowly loses in 2012, it could be the single decision that is most responsible.
...
Almost no one will remember the bill's official CBO score come November 2012, but plenty of people will remember they haven't seen any tangle benefits from the law Obama spent a year working on in the middle of an economic and unemployment crisis.
Even after almost two years since the passage of the Affordable Care Act, the individual mandate continues to be as unpopular as always. An overwhelming 2/3rds of the county holds an unfavorable view of the mandate and the majority thinks the Supreme Court should strike it down.
...
The individual mandate was clearly politically toxic long before the Democrats voted for the law and it has remained politically toxic ever since. The Democrats had both ample warning and ample time to replace it with a less controversial and unquestionably constitutional alternative to encourage individuals to get insurance. Such a modest correction would have been easy to make right before passage to increase support for the law.
I don't know if I can think of another policy that was ever viewed so unfavorably by the electorate yet was still very publicly pushed forward by one party. The disdain this move showed toward public opinion played an important role in driving the conservative energy that allowed the GOP to win a historic victory in the House. The fact that Democrats could have easily avoided this political problem yet actively choose not to makes it one of the greatest unforced political errors in American politics.
Given how many people actually expect the Supreme Court to strike down the mandate, it is hard to guess whether a favorable ruling for the administration would be a political positive or negative for Obama.
...
They currently don't think they need a Republican to win the Presidency for the highly unpopular mandate to go away. If the Court doesn't get rid of it as these people expect, that could give many a new incentive to help elect Republicans in order for the GOP to get rid of the mandate with legislation.
I realize that there has been a lot of speculation about what went down in the 24 hrs prior to the SOTU after Miller announced that there was no bank/state settlement deal. There is a lot of speculation about Schneiderman and not without good reason. When I was writing my article for Stars Hollow I was careful not to join in the "sell out" theme that was running hot with some very respected bloggers. I think Obama is desperate. He knows that he is losing the Independents and moderate Republicans and needed to do something fast, especially in the light of the unpopularity of the 50 state agreement and the massive push to stop it. On the other side, and I somewhat agree with RJ Eskow on this, Schneiderman has the upper hand. He is wildly popular and scares the crap out of Cuomo & company. Schneiderman is not dropping the investigation here in NY, he's expanding it from what I hear.
That said, I think that if this unit doesn't move quickly in the evidence they already have, evidence BTW Schneiderman has not had access to, he will drop this like a hot potato and walk. Obama is walking a thin line and realizes that Wall St money alone will not get him reelected. I think Schneiderman is playing on that and hopes to at least hold some of them more responsible and get some better compensation for the homeowners that got screwed along with some regulation of the securitization that caused this all.
I have my doubts. There are better ways to do this, namely appointing a special prosecutor with a budget, investigators and subpoena power. I'm not willing to throw Schneiderman under the bus just yet.
I also think Obama wants him to succeed Holder who said he would leave this year even if Obama is reelected. It's either him or CA's AG Harris.
This was a complete surprise, so I'm being very cautious here, knowing what I do about Schneiderman and who is politically afraid of him. Like after Obama was elected, I'm watching and listening very carefully. Hoping that it is not as bad as it looks.
Eskow's opinion appeared in Huffington Post and he disclosed that he is a fellow at Campaign for America's Future, a left wing strategy center. (This site, however, is not affiliated with any outside organization and opinions expressed here are solely are own.) He gives a good analysis of the reasons for the skepticism of David Dayen, Yves Smith and Duncan Black (Atrios) who said, "It's hard to see the Schneiderman thing as anything but bad news."
Eskow dissects the reasons for the skepticism
The administration's lack of prosecutions has been inexcusable. His administration has refused to prosecute even the most compelling prima facie cases of and has appointed one revolving-door banker after another to key economic positions. Its financial settlements with Wall Street have been disgraceful. For far too long the president pushed the nonsensical argument that "Wall Street and Main Street rise and fall together."
And with an election coming up, bankers can write big checks that most other people can't.
He also points out that if the Department of Justice and the SEC had been doing their jobs in the first place neither the Financial Fraud Task Force or this unit would be necessary. It's hard not to agree with him that committees are "designed for paralysis and gridlock, not efficiency" and that president who promoted ""streamlining government" and "eliminating bureaucracy" would create this committee. Looking back on what happened with health care and financial reform everyone on the left has good cause to be wary of anything that President Obama does at this point and some groups, perhaps shouldn't have been so effusive in their praise of this deal. Eskow, as do I, thinks that the White House, left scrambling after Iowa AG Tom Miller announced that there was no settlement with the banks and presented with citizen petitions that had hundred of thousands of names, reversed course in desperation. Then with the announcement that Schneiderman would "chair" the committee, there was a rush of exuberant relief that Obama was finally showing some signs of supporting the 99%.
As to the possibility that Schneiderman "caved"to pressure from the White House, Eskow backs up what I have said, Schneiderman has too much leverage:
Whatever Eric Schneiderman's goals are, I doubt they include being stigmatized by progressives as a sell-out. His actions over the last few months have not been those of a guy who rolls over easily. It's safe to assume that he wants to prosecute bank fraud, and that this appointment will give him access to the resources he's needed to conduct a thorough investigation. [..]
Consider this: What would it do to the White House if Schneiderman labeled the entire effort a sham, resigned in protest, and continued his investigations alone? He must know he has leverage now, and presumably will use it if necessary.
I certainly don't agree with Michael Shure and what basically is "the lesser of two evils" meme. It can be just as bad with Obama. That said, could this turn out as the cynics are predicting? Sure and if it does we here at Stars Hollow, like Eskow, will say so.
I'm not ready to throw in the towel nor am I going to get on the cheer-leading band wagon. I will wait to see what transpires and keep my fingers crossed for the best outcome for the most people, the 99%.
On this day in 1888, the National Geographic Society is founded in Washington, D.C., for "the increase and diffusion of geographical knowledge."
The 33 men who originally met and formed the National Geographic Society were a diverse group of geographers, explorers, teachers, lawyers, cartographers, military officers and financiers. All shared an interest in scientific and geographical knowledge, as well as an opinion that in a time of discovery, invention, change and mass communication, Americans were becoming more curious about the world around them. With this in mind, the men drafted a constitution and elected as the Society's president a lawyer and philanthropist named Gardiner Greene Hubbard. Neither a scientist nor a geographer, Hubbard represented the Society's desire to reach out to the layman.
The National Geographic Society began as a club for an elite group of academics and wealthy patrons interested in travel. On January 13, 1888, 33 explorers and scientists gathered at the Cosmos Club, a private club then located on Lafayette Square in Washington, D.C., to organize "a society for the increase and diffusion of geographical knowledge." After preparing a constitution and a plan of organization, the National Geographic Society was incorporated two weeks later on January 27. Gardiner Greene Hubbard became its first president and his son-in-law, Alexander Graham Bell, eventually succeeded him in 1897 following his death. In 1899 Bell's son-in-law Gilbert Hovey Grosvenor was named the first full-time editor of National Geographic Magazine and served the organization for fifty-five years (1954), and members of the Grosvenor family have played important roles in the organization since.
Bell and his son-in-law, Grosvenor, devised the successful marketing notion of Society membership and the first major use of photographs to tell stories in magazines. The current Chairman of the Board of Trustees of National Geographic is Gilbert Melville Grosvenor, who received the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2005 for the Society's leadership for Geography education. In 2004, the National Geographic Headquarters in Washington, D.C. was one of the first buildings to receive a "Green" certification from Global Green USA The National Geographic received the prestigious Prince of Asturias Award for Communications and Humanity in October 2006 in Oviedo, Spain.
Rules of American justice: a tale of three cases Laws are used to shield egregious crimes while severely punishing those who publicly discuss them By Glenn Greenwald, Salon
Tuesday, Jan 24, 2012 4:23 AM Eastern Standard Time
(I)n American justice yesterday, the conclusion came to the criminal process arising from a horrific 2005 incident in which 24 unarmed Iraqi civilians were slaughtered in the town of Haditha during American raids conducted in the aftermath of an explosion of a roadside bomb. The Marine Staff Sgt. who ordered his soldiers to "shoot first, ask questions later," Frank Wuterich, was in the midst of a manslaughter trial that could have sent him to prison for life (first-degree murder charges were previously withdrawn by the Government). Instead, prosecutors "offered Wuterich a deal that stopped the proceedings and could mean little to no jail time." Instead, he "pleaded guilty Monday to negligent dereliction of duty" and "now faces no more than three months in confinement." Lest you think that's too lenient: "he could also lose two-thirds of his pay and see his rank demoted to private when he's sentenced."
...
The Rules of American Justice are quite clear:
(1) If you are a high-ranking government official who commits war crimes, you will receive full-scale immunity, both civil and criminal, and will have the American President demand that all citizens Look Forward, Not Backward.
(2) If you are a low-ranking member of the military, you will receive relatively trivial punishments in order to protect higher-ranking officials and cast the appearance of accountability.
(3) If you are a victim of American war crimes, you are a non-person with no legal rights or even any entitlement to see the inside of a courtroom.
(4) If you talk publicly about any of these war crimes, you have committed the Gravest Crime - you are guilty of espionage - and will have the full weight of the American criminal justice system come crashing down upon you.
Just to be clear, let's remind ourselves of just what these "soldiers", "this generation of heroes (that) has made the United States safer and more respected around the world" did-
Eyewitness accounts suggest that comrades of TJ Terrazas, far from coming under enemy fire, went on the rampage in Haditha after his death.
Twelve-year-old Safa Younis appears on video saying she was in one of three houses where troops came in and indiscriminately killed family members.
"They knocked at our front door and my father went to open it. They shot him dead from behind the door and then they shot him again," she says in the video.
"Then one American soldier came in and shot at us all. I pretended to be dead and he didn't notice me."
There were eight bodies in the house, including Safa's five siblings, aged between two and 14.
In another house seven people including a child and his 70-year-old grandfather were killed. Four brothers aged 41 to 24 died in a third house. Eyewitnesses said they were forced into a wardrobe and shot.
In the street, US troops gunned down four students and a taxi driver they had stopped at a roadblock set up after the bombing.
According to a witness, they were shot by the side of the road, as they stood with their hands on their heads.
Jones said he had planned to recommend 90 days in the brig - the maximum as requested by the prosecution - but that the plea bargain approved by Lt. Gen. Thomas Waldhauser had called for no jail time.
"It's difficult for the court to fathom negligent dereliction of duty worse than the facts in this case," Jones told Wuterich.
...
A Marine Corps spokesman said Waldhauser would offer no public explanation of his decision to accept the plea bargain and stipulate that Wuterich receive no jail time.
However, the military court's decision to demote Wuterich's rank to private in lieu of jail time is one more blow to the idea of US justice system being a source of guidance or authority in Iraq, according to the Washington Post.
"I was expecting that the American judiciary would sentence this person to life in prison and that he would appear and confess in front of the whole world that he committed this crime, so that America could show itself as democratic and fair," survivor Awis Fahmi Hussein told the Washington Post, showing his scars from a bullet wound to the back.
The Telegraph reports that the ruling is viewed as "...an insult to all Iraqis," while the Associated Press reports that it reopened old wounds - both with the US and the Iraqi government. The predominantly Sunni region has been unable to convince its Shiite-led government to condemn the murders or push to bring those responsible to trial.
"The Americans killed children who were hiding inside the cupboards or under the beds," said Rafid Abdul Majeed Hadithi, 43, a teacher who says he witnessed the 2005 assault by Marines that took the lives of 24 unarmed Iraqi civilians. "Was this Marine charged with dereliction of duty because he didn't kill more? Is Iraqi blood so cheap?"
...
"That soldier would be sent to prison for more than three months if he had thrown trash on the streets in America," said Khalid Salman, 45, whose cousin was killed. "This is not new, and it's not new for the American courts that already did little about Abu Ghraib and other crimes in Iraq."
...
Assim Omar al-Hadithi, 40, a relative of another victim, said such a light sentence "shows the lies of the Americans, whether they are judges or members of the military."
Thair Thabit Hadithi, 41, a photographer who says he came upon the scene shortly after the killings, on Tuesday recalled the unrelenting crackle of gunfire, an injured victim bleeding to death outside his house, the black nylon body bags in which Marines placed the corpses.
The Marine Corps initially said 15 Iraqis had been killed in a roadside bombing and that the others perished in a subsequent firefight. None of that was true. Hadithi said he had grisly photos showing the devastation and bloodshed in a poor residential quarter.
Assim Omar al-Hadithi, 40, a relative of another victim, said that such a light sentence "shows the lies of the Americans, whether they are judges or members of the military."
He continued: "All the world knew that the American soldiers committed crimes in Iraq. We were extensively surprised when we heard the news, and it has made our minds even worse. It is no consolation for the victims' families."
The shadows cast by the Haditha massacre, the abuse of detainees at the Abu Ghraib prison and the killing of civilians by contractors for Blackwater at a square in Baghdad helped turn Iraqi public opinion against the American presence. An agreement to keep American troops here past 2011 collapsed when Iraqi officials would not agree to extend their immunity from Iraqi prosecution.
...
A number of Americans in high-profile cases have received what many Iraqis regarded as token sentences. In August, the supposed ringleader in the Abu Ghraib abuses, Pvt. Charles A. Graner Jr., was released early from prison because of good behavior. He had been sentenced to 10 years but served just 6 1/2.
In 2009 charges were dropped against four American military contractors in the killings of the 17 civilians at the square in Baghdad. While a federal court ruling in Washington reopened manslaughter charges against the four, many Iraqis continue to believe that the contractors will never be punished.
Iraqis received Tuesday's plea deal with the same cynicism and anger. "I am not satisfied with the court decision against those killers - they need to be tortured and executed because they killed innocent people," said Tariq Abas al-Najar, 43, a taxi driver in Basra. "If Marines killed a sheep in Europe, the judge would punish them much harsher than for the killing of those innocent Iraqis."
While there are there are many reasons to cheer President Obama's announcement during his State of the Union address that he was forming a special unit within the Financial Fraud Task Force to investigate the fraud and other illegalities that caused the financial crisis and collapse of the housing market, there are plenty of reasons to be very skeptical.
The unit will be co-chaired by New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman who withdrew from the DOJ panel of state attorney generals that was working on a settlement with the big banks over their part in mortgage fraud. That's about all the good news there is. The other members of the unit are Lanny Breuer, assistant attorney general at the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice, Robert Khuzami, director of enforcement at the SEC; John Walsh, a U.S. attorney in Colorado, and Tony West, assistant attorney general in the Civil Division at DOJ. Also, the And there in lies the farce of this unit.
Lanny Breuer, along with Attorney General Eric Holder, was partner in the Washington DC law firm Covington & Burling that represented a number of big banks and MERS which are at the center of alleged foreclosure fraud. He recently appeared on "60 Minutes" making numerous lame excuses justifying the lack of prosecutions out of the Justice Department. Despite the evidence, including records from federal and state courts and local clerks' offices around the country, showing widespread forgery, perjury, obstruction of justice, and illegal foreclosures on the homes of thousands of active-duty military personnel, the Holder DOJ has not brought any criminal cases against big banks or other companies involved. There is a clear conflict of interest and possible ethics violations.
The director of enforcement of the SEC is another embarrassment. Robert Khuzami, a former general counsel at Deutsche Bank, one of the leading trustees in securitization, will no be looking into the instruments of the fraud he helped create. It has been Khuzami's office that has been giving the banks no-fault settlements which recently were rejected by U.S. District Judge Jed S. Rakoff.
The last unit member is Tony West, the brother-in-law of California's Attorney General, Kamala Harris who like Schneiderman withdrew from the DOJ agreement because it was too little and didn't hold the banks or companies libel. West, a lawyer with a Oakland, CA law firm and a former US attorney, appears to have little experience with financial fraud.
Is this really the way to do this? Why not create a Special Prosecutor with the budget and subpoena power rather than a committee within a task force that has done minimal in the last three years to investigate fraud? Both David Dayen at FDL News Desk and Yves Smith at naked capitalism think that Schneiderman is being used for a charade that would eventually let the banks get away with fraud anyway. But is Schneiderman that easily misled or dazzled by Obama's offer? He certainly didn't sound like he was going to end his state level investigation in this release from his office:
I would like to thank President Obama for his leadership in the creation of a coordinated investigation that marshals state and federal resources to bring justice for the victims of the misconduct that caused the mortgage crisis.
In coordination with our federal partners, our office will continue its steadfast commitment to holding those responsible for the economic crisis accountable, providing meaningful relief for homeowners commensurate with the scale of the misconduct, and getting our economy moving again.
The American people deserve a robust and comprehensive investigation into the global financial meltdown to ensure nothing like it ever happens again, and today's announcement is a major step in the right direction.
(emphasis mine)
Considering who has run the Treasury, the revolving door of bankers in the Oval Office and Obama's weak efforts in investigating or prosecuting any person or entity that would ruffle the feathers of his Wall St. contributors over the last three years, there is a whole lot of reason to be doubtful about the president's sincerity or any future hope of substantial relief for homeowners.
The fundamental reality is that their economies can no longer support the inflated, leveraged, fictional values the holders of these worthless scraps of paper demand and the reckoning is going to come from their pockets simply because they're the ones holding the hot potato.
Hedge funds that in the last month or so have purchased an estimated 4 billion euros ($5.2 billion) of beaten down Greek bonds that mature on March 20 are now trying to unload their positions, according to brokers and traders.
That is because it is becoming clear to one and all that Greece - under pressure from its financial backers - is preparing to impose a broad-based haircut that would hit all investors with a loss of 50 percent or more, whether they agree to the deal or not.
...
Starting in December, the counterintuitive, go-long Greece bet was one of the more popular pitches made to funds in New York and London.
Investment banks - Merrill Lynch was particularly aggressive in recommending the trade, investors say - argued that even though Greece was near bankrupt, those who bought the paper maturing in March could double their money when Greece received its latest bailout tranche due that month.
...
Now, with momentum building in Europe for an agreement on a 50 percent-plus haircut to be reached before March 20 - one that would be legally binding on all holders - the smart money is not looking so smart anymore.
For months, the proposed debt restructuring deal between Greece and its private sector creditors had excluded the central bank from taking a loss on its Greek bond holdings while banks and hedge funds would have losses of 50 percent or more.
...
Private sector investors, including large European banks and hedge funds, have complained bitterly - and in some cases threatened legal action - over the central bank's insistence that its 55 billion euros in Greek bonds were exempt from the loss that the private sector is facing, which some have estimated at 60 cents on the euro.
The central bank bought the bulk of its Greek bonds in 2010 in a failed attempt to stabilize Greece's collapsing bond market, paying discounted prices of about 70 to 75 cents on the euro. As part of the current talks, the central bank might exchange its current bonds for a different form of Greek debt at a cost similar to that of the distressed bonds.
The head of the European Commission's economics team Mario Buti said Brussels is prepared to allow credit default swaps (CDS) on Greek bonds to come into play if talks fail to reach a deal that gives Greece enough debt relief to claw its way back to viability. "Triggering CDS may have to be considered," he said.
...
Charlesa Dallara, the head of the International Institute for Finance (IIF) representing creditor banks, said EU officials were playing with fire by talking about default and demanded that the EU stick to the agreement reached last October.
"We put an offer on the table and it remains on the table. All parties need to contribute to the solution. We are wiping off the face of the earth €100bn in existing claims against Greece," he told Bloomberg.
Let me be clear, absolutely clear, here. Within any conceivably realistic macroeconomic model, there is no way that Greece can reach a stable debt level with moderate growth under these conditions. Under the interest rate scenario noted above (let us say with an average interest rate of 3.8% on the new debt) the nominal interest rate would still be substantially higher than the growth rate of the economy. The only way, the nominal debt level could then be kept stationary is by forcing the fiscal balance into surplus. However, the problem is that this affects the denominator in the debt/GDP calculation by sucking out demand (growth) from an economy already structurally impaired (within a currency union and all that).
...
The deal which now seems to be close to completed by no means closes proceedings. It is very likely in my opinion that private creditors who are currently the only ones being forced to take a haircut due to seniority of the IMF and the ECB will face a near 100% loss on their holdings. The argument is simple. Given the amount of debt held by the ECB and the IMF and the fact that these two institutions are senior debt holders the debt held by private creditors becomes junior debt and thus the tranche which takes the first (and in my opinion likely complete) loss in the event of a default.
Of course, once we reach this point the issue of CDS contracts will rear its head yet again since if a 50-60% haircut can be considered voluntary anything beyond this becomes very difficult to characterize as such. Any rating agency would find it difficult not to classify further losses as a default and thus begins the fun in earnest. And then comes the ECB and IMF's share. It will be political dynamite if the ECB had to print on the liability side to cover losses on the asset side on Greek sovereign debt or if the IMF had to ask its contributors for extra cash to cover for losses on loans made out to Greece or any other economy. Obviously, much will be done to prevent this, but just look at the numbers of Greece's economy and you will see that it is not that outlandish, especially if Greece opts to stay in the euro zone. Finally, Greece only represents the starter here. Any deal agreed to in Greece will be ardently watched in Ireland and Portugal who will feel they are entitled to the same deal with their private creditors.
Germany Loses Its Grip By Delusional Economics, Naked Capitalism
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
(I)t is just one symptom of the actual problem. That problem was highlighted overnight with the European flash PMI's. Germany once again outperformed the rest of Europe, France treaded water, admittedly with its head held a little higher, while the periphery of Europe slowly drifts away. The latest Euro PMI was a little better than expected, in some part due to the ECB's actions over the last month or so no doubt, put the forward looking indicators suggest more weakness to come and I expect the divide to grow as Europe slows further. As I have stated previously that the German data is a double edged sword because, although it is good for Germany that its economy is powering, it is a big negative for the rest of Europe because one of the major issues that brought on the crisis in the first place was the competitiveness imbalance of nations under the single currency.
...
So now even if Greece manages a deal to write-off some of its debt the markets will quickly turn their eyes to Portugal who will no doubt require a second bail out, but increasingly a debt restructure as well.
With Spain also struggling and Italy under increasing pressure, the continuation of contagion appears to be taking its toll on the politics of Europe with Germany's ability to control the situation diminishing.
...
Germany also appears to be losing support from even its strongest allies. Last week the Dutch central banker Klaas Knot gave an interview blaming Germany for the failure of the EFSF.
...
To add to that, Luxembourg's new foreign minister gave an interview with German media yesterday in which he called the fiscal compact a 'waste of time and energy'.
Is the failure of austerity-centric policy finally taking its toll on Germany's ability to steer Europe's response to the financial crisis? This would certainly explain why Mario Monti seems so sure that his country will be receiving the fiscal and monetary backstops. The outcomes from next week's EU summit will provide more clues.
On this day in 1788, Captain Arthur Phillip guides a fleet of 11 British ships carrying convicts to the colony of New South Wales, effectively founding Australia. After overcoming a period of hardship, the fledgling colony began to celebrate the anniversary of this date with great fanfare.
Australia Day (previously known as Anniversary Day, Foundation Day, and ANA Day) is the official national day of Australia. Celebrated annually on 26 January, the date commemorates the arrival of the First Fleet at Sydney Cove in 1788 and the proclamation at that time of British sovereignty over the eastern seaboard of New Holland.
Although it was not known as Australia Day until over a century later, records of celebrations on 26 January date back to 1808, with the first official celebration of the formation of New South Wales held in 1818. It is presently an official public holiday in every state and territory of Australia and is marked by inductions into the Order of Australia and presentations of the Australian of the Year awards, along with an address from the governor-general and prime minister.
The date is controversial to some Australians, particularly those of Indigenous heritage, leading to the use of alternate names, such as Invasion Day and Survival Day. Proposals have been made to change the date of Australia Day, but these have failed to gain widespread public support.
On 13 May 1787, a fleet of 11 ships, which came to be known as the First Fleet, was sent by the British Admiralty from England to Australia. Under the command of Captain Arthur Phillip, the fleet sought to establish a penal colony at Botany Bay on the coast of New South Wales, which had been explored and claimed by Captain James Cook in 1770. The settlement was seen as necessary because of the loss of the colonies in North America. The Fleet arrived between 18 and 20 January 1788, but it was immediately apparent that Botany Bay was unsuitable.
On 21 January, Philip and a few officers travelled to Port Jackson, 12 kilometres to the north, to see if it would be a better location for a settlement. They stayed there until 23 January; Philip named the site of their landing Sydney Cove, after the Home Secretary, Thomas Townshend, 1st Viscount Sydney. They also had some contact with the local aborigines.
They returned to Botany Bay on the evening of 23 January, when Philip gave orders to move the fleet to Sydney Cove the next morning, 24 January. That day, there was a huge gale blowing, making it impossible to leave Botany Bay, so they decided to wait till the next day, 25 January. However, during 24 January, they spotted the ships Astrolabe and Boussole, flying the French flag, at the entrance to Botany Bay; they were having as much trouble getting into the bay as the First Fleet was having getting out.
On 25 January, the gale was still blowing; the fleet tried to leave Botany Bay, but only the HMS Supply made it out, carrying Arthur Philip, Philip Gidley King, some marines and about 40 convicts; they anchored in Sydney Cove in the afternoon.
On 26 January, early in the morning, Philip along with a few dozen marines, officers and oarsmen, rowed ashore and took possession of the land in the name of King George III. The remainder of the ship's company and the convicts watched from onboard the Supply.
Meanwhile, back at Botany Bay, Captain John Hunter of the HMS Sirius made contact with the French ships, and he and the commander, Captain de Clonard, exchanged greetings. Clonard advised Hunter that the fleet commander was Jean-Francois de Galaup, comte de La Perouse. The Sirius successfully cleared Botany Bay, but the other ships were in great difficulty. The Charlotte was blown dangerously close to rocks; the Friendship and the Prince of Wales became entangled, both ship losing booms or sails; the Charlotte and the Friendship actually collided; and the Lady Penrhyn nearly ran aground. Despite these difficulties, all the remaining ships finally managed to clear Botany Bay and sail to Sydney Cove on 26 January. The last ship anchored there at about 3 pm.
Note that the formal establishment of the Colony of New South Wales did not occur on 26 January, as is commonly assumed. That did not occur until 7 February 1788, when the formal proclamation of the colony and of Arthur Phillip's governorship were read out. The vesting of all land in the reigning monarch George III also dates from 7 February 1788.
WikiLeaks Mirror Sites
On this day in 1916, 
I realize that there has been a lot of speculation about what went down in the 24 hrs prior to the SOTU after Miller announced that there was no bank/state settlement deal. There is a lot of speculation about Schneiderman and not without good reason. When I was writing 
On this day in 1888, the 
While there are there are many reasons to cheer President Obama's announcement during his State of the Union address that he was 
On this day in 1788, Captain Arthur Phillip guides a fleet of 11 British ships carrying convicts to the colony of New South Wales, 
