The Last Weekend Before Our Future

SURFING
No, I don't surf, but I do scuba dive.

The past two years, as you well know, there has been a lot of murky water we've had to swim through, in order to make this a better country. Have we?

To make this a better nation, I question the ramifications of this economic collapse. Daily, we hear of cut-backs, layoffs, foreclosures, bank/financial failures, and then the taxes to be levied, just to pay for the first phase of TARP.

In October 1987, the stock market fell 500 points. Several friends and I met at the neighborhood bar after work. Several people were crowded around the tv watching as news blared about the crash.

Stunned by the events transpiring before me, one friend paid little attention, being more concerned about the skirt she was wearing, as it was old. I listened to her moan about her two month old skirt, I was astonished that she wasn't paying attention about the crash.

I wonder if she is now listening to what is happening within our country? For that matter, I wonder how many folks are listening to what is happening now? Some I know are, as their retirement savings have gone down the tubes. No doubt they are listening.

SMOOTH SAILING
One could only hope that the coming transition be just that, smooth sailing. However, when our VP-Elect made his statement referencing a catastrophe heading our way, within six-month's of taking office, I knew that he knew something we don't know.

Transition smooth, but be looking for the V.P. Elect's catastrophe.

and to make my point...

WASHINGTON – Officials of the outgoing and incoming Bush and Obama administrations are teaming up for a rehearsal of how to handle a theoretical national emergency.

Bush White House chief of staff Josh Bolten announced that the exercise, involving representatives of both administrations, will take place on Tuesday afternoon at the executive mansion.

Bolten said that such a joint rehearsal for a possible terrorism-era emergency is a matter of necessity, not just courtesy.

He said a few key members of the Obama administration and the current administration will get West Wing briefings on "incident management procedures" and "continuity of government procedures."

Bolton said officials will "work on a specific scenario ... and talk about who does what" in the event of a homeland security incident.

In case you didn't know, realism is a bitch.

Don't Drink and Fly - Memories - I know about plane crashes

Thank the good Lord above for giving that pilot sense when he had to take the plane into the frosty waters of the Hudson River today.

I had been following my afternoon ritual of reviewing all the news cycles, attempting to make sense of what our future was going to be, when breaking news of the Airbus from La Guardia to Charleston plunged down ON the river.

I was so brought back to the late winter in 79 or 80 when that plane ran off the runway, plunging into the Potomac River in Washington.

This accident just so happened when I was planning my move to Chicago for my new position as Director of Public Relations with a national insurance company.

I flew into O'Hare on the coldest day in recorded history, 100 degrees below zero wind chill factor, and a 40 mph wind. It was too cold to snow.

In the south, we wear fur coats for fashion...up there you really have reason to wear them. Thank God mine had a huge collar that I used to wrap around my head and face.

I also had on new alligator shoes, which were ruined in the salt slush.

Once at the company apartment, I was greeted with a wonderful treat...indoor pool, hot tub and sauna, which I put to use immediately. After dipping into the pool, then into the hot tub, running outside to jump into a snow bank returning once again in to the sauna.

The next day, the plane went into the river and all week long those images played in my head. It was so horrific, seeing those people struggle to grasp onto life vests as the responders attempt to pull them to safety...ugh, it haunts me to this day.

I never had a problem flying before this, but by the time I was ready to come home and complete the move, I was so nervous, begging Glen, in travel, to let me come home via the train or bus.

Years earlier, traveling to boarding school, I would usually take the Panama Limited to New Orleans, boarding in either Grenada or Winona. Loved getting on that train at 4 a.m. headed south after a "good-conduct" weekend. That too, is another story.

Glen said he had already bought the ticket, so I took it as a no. "If you'd like, I'll take you to the airport and wait until you board."

At O'Hare, he took me in to the 7 Continents lounge where I got snookered. We both did. Ready to board, we took a wrong turn, heading down the concourse, to the wrong gate.

With no time to spare, we turned around, heading to the correct gate...at the other end of the concourse, I was the last to board. Getting on board was easy, and leaving easier, as I had to be awakened upon reaching Jackson.

Just glad I never have had to experience what those dear folks in New York and Washington did.

Honestly, Honesty...I knew you well, Say it ain't so

(Biting Tongue)BREAKING NEWS

Pretend Treasury Chief Tim Geitner forgets to pay $48,000 in taxes while working for International Monetary Fund in 2001. How do you forget to pay that much moola?

Oh, it's known now that he paid just before his nomination!
Imagine that!

And oh, Henry Reid, you old sole (not mis-spelled) you...Tim's problems are just a hick-up...for me more like a gagging throw-up.

However, should his nomination be confirmed, he will be over the IRS. And did you know that if an IRS agent had been audited like ole Timbo, they would be fired?

Hmmmmmmmmmm!


(Biting Tongue)BREAKING NEWS

P-Elect and VP-Elect are going to visit the Supreme Court today. Not that they don't already have the papers that Berg filed. Another Conference on Berg's action will be held on the 16th. HA! Oh, that's right, according to our Senator Wicker's letter (in yesterday's post), Berg's case is to be dismissed on December 9th, 2009!

Yahoo News - The Obama transition team said the two will visit the court Wednesday afternoon at the invitation of Chief Justice John Roberts.

It's something of a tradition for incoming presidents and vice presidents to pay their respects to the court, though not all have made the trip. Bill Clinton and his vice president-elect, Al Gore, called on the court in December 1992, and Ronald Reagan and his vice president-elect, George H. W. Bush, visited in November 1980.

The Obama team said Wednesday's visit was private, with no press permitted.

No press permitted? Imagine that? Oh, that's right, we are going to have a transparent government!

(Biting Tongue)BREAKING NEWS

Foreign donations won't stop Hillary's bid for Secretary of State. What are you kidding me? Oh, that? Why, we all need to get nearly a half-a-billion dollars from "fereigner's" for our favorite charity...(us)...but, "I still have the ethics to be a suckatary of state." Who is sucking who here?

FROM THE SUBLIME TO THE RIDICULOUS

I normally would have let this one pass, but after receiving a "To whom it may concern" letter from the Department of Health and Human Services Public health Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention...whew, glad I don't have to type that everyday...

CHICKEN POX PARTIES
Rather than children get their immunizations, which some parents believe to the the cause for autism, they are having chicken pox parties. The children gather together with a child or children that have pox, thereby exposing them, in order to forgo the immunization.

Well, Dr. Sonik, Director, National Center for Health Statistics, is asking for help with an important study conducted by the CDC called the National Immunization Survey.

They want to ask about vaccinations and children's health services their children need or use.

Dang, there go the Pox Parties!

(Biting Tongue) BREAKING NEWS

Carol Browner, new Czarista of Government Socialism. And you thought we were going to be gentler, kinder, no hidden agenda Wishingtonia?

Hey, all you nuts who voted for this coming annihilation of free thought, free speech, open to all, accessible, big brother government, what the hell were you thinking?

Oh, that's right, we don't think anymore, do we?

Apparently all the signs that pointed in this direction said that we wanted a Big Mama and Big Papa to "hep" us.

We are going to be hepped alright. "Jest yew watch"!

Who's left standing?

Following a post at UrbanSurvival, and a letter I received in December from Senator Roger F. Wicker, I have to wonder just who our elected officials represent.

To begin with, every morning I open my computer with George Ure's news analysis site www.urbansurvival.com.

Yesterday, the last two paragraphs under Climate and Change post, may possibly identify where we are headed...

Meantime, the president-elect says the recession requires a "scaling back on promises" which I think is politease for "Now that I won, ya'll won't get what you bargained for...
Jan. 11 (Bloomberg) -- President-elect Barack Obama said reviving the U.S. economy will require scaling back on his campaign promises and personal sacrifice from all Americans.

“I want to be realistic here, not everything that we talked about during the campaign are we going to be able to do on the pace we had hoped,” Obama said in an interview on ABC’s “This Week” program broadcast this morning. “Everybody’s going to have to give.”

Not that it's any surprise around here. Folks voted for 'change' but the truth of an old saying keeps welling up within me as a study and write: "The more things change, the more they stay the same...

Who qualifies for "standing"?

So you want to file a suit against a political action figure because you have reason to believe Mr. Action is not qualified to run for POTUS. You have reasonable questions citing Constitutional laws that address the suit and you have EXHIBITS (under Just the Facts link on the left) which further questions the authenticity of Mr. Action's qualifications, namely, place of birth and residency requirements to serve as POTUS.

It would be worth your time to check the entire site as it addresses the question, "Who can run for, and rightfully serve as POTUS?" Also, who has the right to file a lawsuit to vet that nominee, Mr. Action? Who has "standing" to take on the constitutional law?

As the softball media has yet to adequately cover this lawsuit, I addressed this question to Mississippi Senator Roger Wicker my concerns.

I received the following reply...

Dear Oliver (the name is Olivia)

Thank you for contacting me regarding questions surrounding the President-Elect Obama's citizenship. I am glad to have the benefit of your views on this issue.

The U.S. Constitution requires the president to a natural-born citizen. In August, a lawsuit filed in U.S. District court in Philadelphia alleged that President-elect Obama was born in Kenya, not Hawaii. The lawyer who filed this action has also filed suits alleging President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney knew about the September ll terrorist attacks. He also has called for Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia, and former Justice Sandra Day O'Conner to disbar themselves for their decision in the 2001 Bush v. Gore.

Yes, Mr. Berg, did file those other lawsuits, as the lawyer of record, not on behalf of himself, but on behalf of plaintiffs seeking remedies within the court. But why would these other cases deny him the validity of raising the questions of the right to serve.

Why do you, Senator Wicker, not answer the question at hand? Why subjugate your answers with promoting an "agenda of invalidation" of Mr. Berg's questions raised in his lawsuit?

As I am not a conspiracy theorist, nor conspiracy advocate; there are many folks out there that question our government's ability to run our country into the ground, or allowing it to survive and thrive...to which I do have real doubts, if we concern ourselves with globalization, not nationalism. But that is another question for another day.

In October, a federal judge dismissed the Obama suit, and on December 8, 2009 (yes, they actually wrote 2009), the Supreme Court declined to hear the emergency appeal without opinion. Several similar cases have been filed in various courts across the country and are going through the judicial process. It appears unlikely that senate Democratic leaders will bring up legislation related to this issue in the 111th Congress.

I hope this information is helpful. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can ever be of assistance.

With best wishes, I am

Sincerely yours,
Roger

RFW/lb

Well, Roger, you need to do some of your own research, and not depend on your staff to get the facts, all the facts...especially since according to your letter, the case you alluded to in October won't be dismissed until December '09.

I know, semantics...but I couldn't help but discern, by the tone of his letter, not to mention that of the softball media's lack of attention; that they could care less if Mr. Action was hatched from a prawn farm operation in Indonesia.

Who cares about these issues? Who of us has standing when it comes to our desire to voice our concerns of possible violations of our constitutional laws?

By the way, it ain't over till it's over. This won't likely be just swept under the rug, as hoped for by the incoming leadership. The stain of corruption will follow him throughout his administration, which is unfortunate.

Scrutiny of politicians is inevitable, however, necessary. For how else can one be trusted to care for our needs, when they, themselves, are so envious of power, that they will do and say anything to be elected.

So who of us has standing, an eligibility to bring forth a constitutional case before the Court? As a natural-born citizen of the United States of America, do I not have the right to question the legitimacy of a candidate who wants to serve as my President?

"Never Give Up, Never Surrender"

I loved "Galaxy Quest"! Its one of those memorable movies that is light-hearted enough to make you smile no matter how far-fetched the ideas were.

And although we hear the news everyday, we don't give a second glance to some of the really dire circumstances, or how far-fetched things seem to be and what we may find ourselves in - in the not so distant future.

I'd be lying if I said I wasn't out there looking for what is really going on in our proud capital of Wishingtonia. I can't help but hear what others are saying about the coming "WHAT" and "IF".

Some web bot linguistics are indicating a Summer of Hell...this year. With increased unemployment, failing DOW, massive foreclosures (as many have indicated, we haven't seen the worst yet), and lets not forget ole Bernie Madoff, who single-handily created a giant scheme suckering folks out of billions. Every time I see that smart-assed grin on his face, I wish that there was a miracle cream to wipe it off, sticking the grin where his sun doesn't shine. Amazingly, he is still allowed to reside in his million dollar apartment, while out on bail...I guess money talks and BS walks.

But back to the What and If part of this post...

So what is coming? My least favorite word in existence, CHAOS, comes to mind and thus...

Martial Law, the Financial Bailout, and War

by Prof. Peter Dale Scott at Global Research...

Paulson’s Financial Bailout

It is becoming clear that the bailout measures of late 2008 may have consequences at least as grave for an open society as the response to 9/11 in 2001. Many members of Congress felt coerced into voting against their inclinations, and the normal procedures for orderly consideration of a bill were dispensed with.

The excuse for bypassing normal legislative procedures was the existence of an emergency. But one of the most reprehensible features of the legislation, that it allowed Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson to permit bailed-out institutions to use public money for exorbitant salaries and bonuses, was inserted by Paulson after the immediate crisis had passed.

According to Congressman Peter Welch (D-Vermont) the bailout bill originally called for a cap on executive salaries, but Paulson changed the requirement at the last minute. Welch and other members of Congress were enraged by “news that banks getting taxpayer-funded bailouts are still paying exorbitant salaries, bonuses, and other benefits.”1 In addition, as AP reported in October, “Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. questioned allowing banks that accept bailout bucks to continue paying dividends on their common stock. `There are far better uses of taxpayer dollars than continuing dividend payments to shareholders,’ he said.”2

Even more reprehensible is the fact that since the bailouts, Paulson and the Treasury Department have refused to provide details of the Troubled Assets Relief Program spending of hundreds of billions of dollars, while the New York Federal Reserve has refused to provide information about its own bail-out (using government-backed loans) that amounts to trillions. This lack of transparency has been challenged by Fox TV in a FOIA suit against the Treasury Department, and a suit by Bloomberg News against the Fed.3

The financial bailout legislation of September 2008 was only passed after members of both Congressional houses were warned that failure to act would threaten civil unrest and the imposition of martial law.

U.S. Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., and U.S. Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Calif., both said U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson brought up a worst-case scenario as he pushed for the Wall Street bailout in September. Paulson, former Goldman Sachs CEO, said that might even require a declaration of martial law, the two noted.4

Here are the original remarks by Senator Inhofe:

Speaking on Tulsa Oklahoma’s 1170 KFAQ, when asked who was behind threats of martial law and civil unrest if the bailout bill failed, Senator James Inhofe named Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson as the source. “Somebody in D.C. was feeding you guys quite a story prior to the bailout, a story that if we didn’t do this we were going to see something on the scale of the depression, there were people talking about martial law being instituted, civil unrest….who was feeding you guys this stuff?,” asked host Pat Campbell. “That’s Henry Paulson,” responded Inhofe, “We had a conference call early on, it was on a Friday I think – a week and half before the vote on Oct. 1. So it would have been the middle … what was it – the 19th of September, we had a conference call. In this conference call – and I guess there’s no reason for me not to repeat what he said, but he said – he painted this picture you just described. He said, ‘This is serious. This is the most serious thing that we faced.’”5

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA 27th District) reported the same threat on the Congressional floor (Rep. Sherman later downplayed his remarks slightly on the Alex Jones show):

“The only way they can pass this bill is by creating a panic atmosphere…. Many of us were told that the sky would fall…. A few of us were even told that there would be martial law in America if we voted no. That’s what I call fear-mongering, unjustified, proven wrong.”6

So it is clear that threats of martial law were used to get this reprehensible bailout legislation passed. It also seems clear that Congress was told of a threat of martial law, not itself threatened. It is still entirely appropriate to link such talk to the Army’s rapid moves to redefine its role as one of controlling the American people, not just protecting them. In a constitutional polity based on balance of powers, we see the emergence of a radical new military power that is as yet completely unbalanced.

The Army’s New Role in 2001: Not Protecting American Society, but Controlling It

This new role for the Army is not wholly unprecedented. The U.S. military had been training troops and police in "civil disturbance planning" for the last three decades. The master plan, Department of Defense Civil Disturbance Plan 55-2, or "Operation Garden Plot," was developed in 1968 in response to the major protests and disturbances of the 1960s.

But on January 19, 2001, on the last day of the Clinton administration, the U.S. Army promulgated a new and permanent Continuity of Operations (COOP) Program. It encapsulated its difference from the preceding, externally-oriented Army Survival, Recovery, and Reconstitution System (ASRRS) as follows:

a. In 1985, the Chief of Staff of the Army established the Army Survival, Recovery, and Reconstitution System (ASRRS) to ensure the continuity of essential Army missions and functions.

ASRRS doctrine was focused primarily on a response to the worst case 1980's threat of a massive nuclear laydown on CONUS as a result of a confrontation with the Soviet Union.

b. The end of the Cold War and the breakup of the former Soviet Union significantly reduced the probability of a major nuclear attack on CONUS but the probability of other threats has increased. Army organizations must be prepared for any contingency with a potential for interruption of normal operations.

To emphasize that Army continuity of operations planning is now focused on the full all-hazards threat spectrum, the name "ASRRS" has been replaced by the more generic title “Continuity of Operations (COOP) Program.”7

This document embodied the secret Continuity of Operations (COG) planning conducted secretly by Rumsfeld, Cheney, and others through the 1980s and 1990s.8 This planning was initially for continuity measures in the event of a nuclear attack, but soon called for suspension of the Constitution, not just “after a nuclear war” but for any “national security emergency.” This was defined in Reagan’s Executive Order 12656 of November 18, 1988 as “any occurrence, including natural disaster, military attack, technological emergency, or other emergency, that seriously degrades or seriously threatens the national security of the United States.” The effect was to impose on domestic civil society the extreme measures once planned for a response to a nuclear attack from abroad.9

In like fashion ARR 500-3 Regulation clarified that it was a plan for “the execution of mission-essential functions without unacceptable interruption during a national security or domestic emergency.”

Donald Rumsfeld, who as a private citizen had helped author the COG planning, promptly signed and implemented the revised ARR 500-3. Eight months later, on 9/11, Cheney and Rumsfeld implemented COG, a significant event of which we still know next to nothing. What we do know is that plans began almost immediately – as foreseen by COG planning the 1980s -- to implement warrantless surveillance and detention of large numbers of civilians, and that in January 2002 the Pentagon submitted a proposal for deploying troops on American streets.10

Then in April 2002, Defense officials implemented a plan for domestic U.S. military operations by creating a new U.S. Northern Command (CINC-NORTHCOM) for the continental United States.11 In short, what were being implemented were the most prominent features of the COG planning which Oliver North had worked on in the 1980s.

Deep Events and Changes of Party in the White House

Like so many other significant steps since World War Two towards a military-industrial state, the Army’s Regulation 500-3 surfaced in the last days of a departing administration (in this case the very last day). It is worth noticing that, ever since the 1950s, dubious events--of the unpublic variety I have called deep events--have marked the last months before a change of party in the White House. These deep events have tended to a) constrain incoming presidents, if the incomer is a Democrat, or alternatively b) to pave the way for the incomer, if he is a Republican.

Consider, in the first category, the following (when a Republican was succeeded by a Democrat):

* In December 1960 the CIA secured approval for the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba, and escalated events in Laos into a crisis for which the Joint Chiefs proposed sending 60,000 troops. These events profoundly affected President Kennedy’s posture towards Cuba and Indochina.

* In 1976 CIA Director George H.W. Bush installed an outside Team B intelligence unit to enlarge drastically estimates of the Soviet threat to the United States, eventually frustrating and reversing presidential candidate Jimmy Carter’s campaign pledge to cut the U.S. defense budget.12

Equally important were events in the second category (when a Democrat was succeeded by a Republican):

* In late 1968 Kissinger, while advising the Johnson administration, gave secret information to the Nixon campaign that helped Nixon to obstruct the peace agreement in Vietnam that was about to be negotiated at the peace talks then taking place in Paris. (According to Seymour Hersh,“The Nixon campaign, alerted by Kissinger to the impending success of the peace talks, was able to get a series of messages to the Thieu government” in Saigon. making it clear that a Nixon presidency would offer a better deal. This was a major factor in securing the defeat of Democratic candidate Hubert Humphrey.13 Kissinger was not the kind of person to have betrayed his president on his own personal initiative. At the time Nixon’s campaign manager, John Mitchell (one of the very few in on the secret), told Hersh that “I thought Henry [Kissinger] was doing it because Nelson [Rockefeller] wanted him to. Nelson asked Henry to help and he did.”14

* In 1980 the so-called October Surprise, with the help of people inside CIA, helped ensure that the Americans held hostage in Iran would not be returned before the inauguration of Reagan. This was a major factor in securing the defeat of incumbent Jimmy Carter.15 Once again, the influence of the Rockefellers can be discerned. A CIA officer later reported hearing Joseph V. Reed, an aide to David Rockefeller, comment in 1981 to William Casey, the newly installed CIA Director, about their joint success in disrupting Carter’s plans to bring home the hostages.16

Both the financial bailout, extorted from Congress and the escalated preparations for martial law can be seen as transitional events of the first category. Whatever the explanations for their timing, they will constrain Obama’s freedom to make his own policies. I fear moreover they may have the consequence of easing this country into unforeseen escalations of the Afghan war.

The Intensive Quiet Preparations for Martial Law

Let us deal first with the preparations for martial law. On September 30, 2008, the Army Times announced the redeployment of an active Brigade Army Team from Iraq to America, in a new mission that “may become a permanent part of the active Army”:

The 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team has spent 35 of the last 60 months in Iraq patrolling in full battle rattle, helping restore essential services and escorting supply convoys.

Now they’re training for the same mission — with a twist — at home.

Beginning Oct. 1 for 12 months, the 1st BCT will be under the day-to-day control of U.S. Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command, as an on-call federal response force for natural or manmade emergencies and disasters, including terrorist attacks. . . . After 1st BCT finishes its dwell-time mission, expectations are that another, as yet unnamed, active-duty brigade will take over and that the mission will be a permanent one. . . .They may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control.17

This announcement followed by two weeks the talk of civil unrest and martial law that was used to panic the Congress into passing Paulson’s bailout legislation. Not only that, the two unprecedented events mirror each other: the bailout debate anticipated civil unrest and martial law, while the announced positioning of an active Brigade Combat Team on U.S. soil anticipated civil unrest (such as might result from the bailout legislation).

Then on December 17, 2008, US Northern Command chief General Renuart announced that “the US military plans to mobilize thousands of troops to protect Washington against potential terrorist attack during the inauguration of president-elect Barack Obama.”18

The US Army War College has also raised the possibility of the U.S. Army being used to control civil unrest, according to the Phoenix Business Journal:

A new report by the U.S. Army War College talks about the possibility of Pentagon resources and troops being used should the economic crisis lead to civil unrest, such as protests against businesses and government or runs on beleaguered banks.

“Widespread civil violence inside the United States would force the defense establishment to reorient priorities in extremis to defend basic domestic order and human security,” said the War College report.

The study says economic collapse, terrorism and loss of legal order are among possible domestic shocks that might require military action within the U.S.19

For the whole caboose....click here
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=11681

Check out the links posted in his notes at the end of the article that you will find particularly fascinating.

Just remember, once you digest this, "Never Give Up, Never Surrender!"