Share

Tuesday, February 21, 2012

Links 2/21/12

Apologies for thin links. The combination of going out to lunch and doing a bunch of e-mails relating to a longer term initiative are more than my no-slack calendar can readily accommodate.

Frozen plants spring back to life BBC

FDA approves the treatment of brain tumors with electrical fields Gizmag (hat tip reader Aquifer)

Humans are naturally nice Aljazeera (hat tip Lambert)

Open hospital windows to stem spread of infections, says microbiologist Guardian (hat tip reader Lambert)

Climate scientist Peter Gleick admits he leaked Heartland Institute documents Guardian (hat tip reader John L). Yes, this is bad, but tell me how this is worse than what was done to Dan Rather (in which he was given fake documents that actually contained accurate information, so that the “fake documents” part would lead the information they contained also to be considered fake, when it was actually accurate. Rather took all the heat and no one was angry with the perps).

‘It’s Going to Be War’: First Nations Battle Canadian Tar Sands Common Dreams (hat tip readre Aquifer)

China realty weakens MacroBusiness

Youth Unemployment at Crisis Level Chosunilbo (hat tip reader Lambert)

Top Ten Ways Iran is Defying US, EU Oil Sanctions and How You are Paying for It All Juan Cole (hat tip psychohistorian)

Eurozone agrees second Greek bail-out Financial Times

The Greece deal MacroBusiness. Contains the full sustainability report.

Strauss-Kahn ‘a suspect’ in prostitution ring inquiry BBC. He tries the “in the night all cats are grey” defense.

Maine GOP Commits Massive Election Fraud in State Caucuses; Paul Supporters Justifiably Outraged Brad Blog (Feb 15) v. Why and how the Maine caucus mess matters Bangor Daily News (both hat tip Lambert)

Wisconsin Unions Use Politico Gaffe as Rallying Cry Dave Dayen (hat tip reader Carol B)

Will S&P fight to the death? Sydney Morning Herald (hat tip Crocodile Chuck)

Schneiderman Sues Again Wall Street Journal (hat tip reader Paul Tioxon). You have to read this. Seriously. This is concrete proof that reading the Wall Street Journal opinion pages will make you stupid.

Some Doubt a Settlement Will End Mortgage Ills New York Times (hat tip Lambert). We said from the get go that a single point of contact was impossible in a call center type environment. You actually do NOT need a single point of contact, you need decent record keeping, which (as we have also discussed at some length) seems to be beyond servicers’ capabilities (in part due to horrible systems). But this proves a bigger point: the servicers cannot live up to their servicing standards (at least without losing boatloads of money) and hence never will.

Massachusetts Home Seizures Threatened in Loan Case: Mortgages Bloomberg (hat tip reader Deontos). This is super important and I wish I had time to write on this, but I suppose I’ll just wait for the decision. The highly respected Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court is going to rule on whether the mortgage (the lien) can be separated from the note (the borrower IOU). Since the US Supreme Court over 100 years ago said the lien was a mere accessory to the mortgage, the odds are high they will say no. That means they might invalidate the foreclosure at issue, putting many other FCs under a cloud (but even if they rule for the borrower, I’d expect them to award damages rather than undo the FC; there is a lot of other law that treats sales out of bankruptcies and foreclosures as final). But a ruling in favor of the borrower would also deliver a fatal blow to MERS.

Is Obama Getting Serious About Bank Fraud? Real News Network (with Bill Black, hat tip reader Aquifer)

Antidote du jour:

Topics: Links

Email This Post Email This Post Posted by Yves Smith at 6:59 am

184 Comments » Links to this post

Share

184 Comments:

  • D. Mathews says:
    February 21, 2012 at 7:06 am

    Juan Cole is outraged; I’m just amused: http://www.juancole.com/2012/02/israeli-pm-netanyahu-attacks-gen-dempsey-as-servant-of-iran.html

    • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
      February 21, 2012 at 11:42 am

      possible *Caveat emptor* re Cashmobs *movement*–you MUST communicate through F%#book!

      Sorry to be so cynical, but the timing of the F-book IPO and this *movement* creates suspicion. Who will correlate the NUMBERS of people joining the Cashmob *movement* with the $$$ solicited in the F%#BOOK IPO?

      There is nothing, repeat: nothing, that Zuckerberg & Feemasters will not do for money. History shows they will not hesitate to screw over the public for a buck.

  • rjs says:
    February 21, 2012 at 7:29 am

    about cash mobs:

    http://cashmobs.wordpress.com/about-us/

  • rjs says:
    February 21, 2012 at 7:31 am

    Fitts’ comments marked up on the National Mortgage Settlement

    http://solari.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/National_Settlement_Executive_Summary-1.pdf

  • John L says:
    February 21, 2012 at 7:32 am

    Heartland documents: Gleick used a false name to get heartland to mail him some documents confirming their plans to undermine the teaching of the truth to America’s schoolchildren. I’m grateful to him.

    • dearieme says:
      February 21, 2012 at 8:58 am

      “Gleick used a false name to get heartland to mail him some documents” – so that will be theft by fraud, I assume? – “confirming their plans to undermine the teaching of the truth…” – but wasn’t that claim in the fake document that was added to the stolen ones? The fake one that Gleick claims was posted to him by person or persons unknown. The fake one that heartless and cynical people seem to suspect that Gleick had forged himself.

      Just the sorts of crookedness that Yves so despises amongst the Wallstreeters, in fact.

      • John L says:
        February 21, 2012 at 10:04 am

        I’m a little torn on this one, but only a little. I’m not sure that a small lie to expose a much bigger lie is so wrong when you’re battling an organization that is getting away with buying the truth.

        • dearieme says:
          February 21, 2012 at 12:48 pm

          “I’m not sure that a small lie to expose a much bigger lie is so wrong when you’re battling an organization that is getting away with buying the truth”: I disagree. I don’t think the sceptics should tell lies as they battle with the huge government-funded “Global Warming” propaganda machine.

          • John L says:
            February 21, 2012 at 4:23 pm

            What’s the motive behind this government propaganda machine? Who is backing it and what do they hope to gain? If you have identified some part of government that has not been completely coopted by corporate money, can you point me to it? I’d like to go thank them for doing what they are supposed to do.

          • reslez says:
            February 21, 2012 at 6:05 pm

            Too bad we can’t build you a time machine so you can go back in time 20 years and defend the tobacco companies too.

        • Jim says:
          February 21, 2012 at 6:01 pm

          It’s very unclear whose side Progressives should be on. Personally, I’m on the side that champions cheap energy for working and middle-class Americans. And if that means siding with the faction that opposed carbon tax and cap and trade, then that’s who I support.

          I’m not sure that many of you who support those regressive tax policies have thought things through.

          • reslez says:
            February 21, 2012 at 6:16 pm

            Your so called “cheap energy” isn’t cheap in any sense. The true costs are pushed onto the public and the profits are kept for corporations. And at $5/gallon this summer, the consumer price is driving the middle class to ruin.

            The only thing that’s unclear is why you even try to call yourself a progressive. Yeah cap and trade is a scam. Everything is a scam these days. That doesn’t mean we can stand by and do nothing while Big Oil stripmines the planet.

          • Jim says:
            February 21, 2012 at 6:48 pm

            What about “Big Solar” having working class Americans subsidize a Chevy Volt by as much as 10K (7.5K federal + 2.5K state). Should “progressives” support such a regressive transfer of wealth?

          • John L says:
            February 21, 2012 at 10:00 pm

            In other words you’ll vote for whoever tells you what you’d like the truth to be? Regardless of what it actually is?

            I think your comment is the most succinct explanation I’ve seen of why we’re in the mess we’re in.

      • Binky P. Behr says:
        February 21, 2012 at 3:59 pm

        It was wrong to try to convince the Axis that the Allies were going to try to take Cherbourg instead of taking the beaches of Normandy. It was the kind of dishonesty that makes it hard to tell who the good guys are. Because the bad guys are never doing the bad things they do out of ignoble motivations.
        We should just know our humble places and never try to struggle against villainy. Our betters know that for the benefit of the world we should just accept that they have a right to profit from devastating the planet we all live on. We need those wealthy elites to give our poor lives meaning, and if we have to suffer to maintain the status quo it is only our sacred duty. A good conservative knows how important it is to kneel before their betters, to calmly and carefully march into the pit so as to facilitate liquidation for the benefit of the aristocrat.

        • reslez says:
          February 21, 2012 at 6:20 pm

          Stories are only newsworthy when they violate the accepted social order. Otherwise the media dismisses it instantly. So a climate change denier organization issues fake science and promotes it in schools, nobody cares old news. A climate scientists sends for information under a fake name, oh my god we have a crisis.

          The same holds true for violence and theft. When committed against regular people, nobody cares. When committed against elites, hold the phone we have a new page 1.

    • John L says:
      February 21, 2012 at 12:06 pm

      Here’s an article on what was in said documents: Leaked Heartland Institute documents pull back curtain on climate scepticism http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2012/feb/15/leaked-heartland-institute-documents-climate-scepticism

  • John L says:
    February 21, 2012 at 7:51 am

    Humans are naturally nice: “Biological research is increasingly debunking the view of humanity as competitive, aggressive and brutish”. Have read much to confirm this. But the fiduciary responsibility to maximize shareholder profit rewards corporations and their leaders for competitive, aggressive, and brutish behaviour, and punishes empathy. This favors the promotion of pyschopaths to leadership positions.

    • Lambert Strether says:
      February 21, 2012 at 9:18 am

      FWIW, it seems to me that humans are naturally both good and evil, and that both good and evil have survival value, or they never would have arisen in nature.

      • John L says:
        February 21, 2012 at 10:39 am

        Buddha had it that the suffering in the world is caused by greed, hatred, and delusion. Looking at our corporations and politicians, I can see his point.

      • ohmyheck says:
        February 21, 2012 at 11:42 am

        In the movie “2012″, those people who had access to the ships that would save humanity were all elite 1%-ers, i.e.-psychopaths, narccisists and sociopaths. That is the genetic make-up of those that would re-populate the world.

        No thanks. I’d rather perish like everyone else, than live to see the dawning of a new age made up of those Freaks. What a world…

      • CautlinO says:
        February 21, 2012 at 1:47 pm

        Is it nature or is it language? Chimp troupes can often be high stress environments with a small gang of aggressive, power jockeying bullies ruling over a large number of bullied. In human societies with that structure, the weak and bullied are able to talk, read, write and, through language, plan, organize, cooperate and coordinate the removal, often violent, of the bullies.

        The rise of bullies in society and the need to deal with them does seem to be a constant problem for both species.

    • docG says:
      February 21, 2012 at 10:01 am

      The notion that humans are inherently violent and competitive has been getting a lot of play lately in the media, especially all the hoopla over Steven Pinker’s new book on the history of violence, “The Better Angels of our Nature.” Pinker’s claim is based on his assumption that humans inherited their violent tendencies from our common ancestor with chimps, who have been known to gang up on other chimps. It’s heartening, therefore, to read this report, based on the research of de Waal, who knows a great deal about primates of all types and tendencies.

      The piece is especially gratifying to me, since I came to essentially the same conclusion while researching my own book on the history of our common homo sapien ancestors in Africa and beyond. For my response to the claims of Pinker and others of his ilk, see Chapters 6 and 18 of my blog book, Sounding the Depths: http://soundingthedepths.blogspot.com/

      att. Yves: I have a feeling this will interest you, check it out.

      • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
        February 21, 2012 at 7:39 pm

        docG, explain the viciousness of packs of dogs, criminal gangs on a rampage. *mean girls* on the playground.

    • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
      February 21, 2012 at 11:45 am

      John L, people tend to be nice so long as there is nothing to lose by it. When there is no conflict of interest, it’s easy to be nice.

      • John L says:
        February 21, 2012 at 4:41 pm

        LBR, conflicts of interest are inevitable. It’s about how to resolve them.

      • SidFinster says:
        February 22, 2012 at 8:50 am

        If there were any reward in being nice, we’d all do it.

        As an aside, I am a Christian, but one thing that chaps my thighs are those preachers who say that we will be rewarded for our deeds (and for giving them lots of money) in this world.

        I suppose that if logic that wealth = godliness, the holiest people on the planet must be the ruling family of Saudi Arabia. Not only are they rich beyond the dreams of avarice, they never so much as lift a finger for their wealth.

        Far as I can see, when properly practiced, the only reward for Christianity is a bullet in the back of the head.

    • Walter Wit Man says:
      February 21, 2012 at 1:56 pm

      Notice how this research compliments anarchist theory which assumes the good in people outweigh the bad.

      Also note that some disinformation agents are spending a great deal of effort pretending that anarchist thought is exactly the opposite; that it is inherently “violent.”

      Of course they are doing violence to the definition of violence* when they engage in such propaganda.

      *Ha. I’m using one of the few sub-definitions of “violence” that allows for violence against an object or concept . . . in this case it’s violence against a definition. Of course the propagandists are conflating this more common usage with their invented usage where “violence” also means breaking property, (e.g. “the protesters used ‘black bloc’ tactics and committed violence by spray painting the letter ‘A’ on the wall.”).

      For example, this is the common usage of committing “violence” against property: “John was so determined to get where he was going that he committed violence against the steering wheel; he gripped it so hard his knuckles were white as he weaved in and out of traffic in his frantic trip to the hospital.” When people discuss committing an act of violence, they do not normally mean this usage and instead usually are referring to a physical act that harms another person. The usage of committing “violence” against an object is used differently than the way the propagandists are dishonestly alleging.

      • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
        February 21, 2012 at 2:38 pm

        WWM, of course there can be *violence* against property. The existence of *verbal violence* is plainly acknowledged. Consider the source of the *approved definitions* of words.

        • Walter Wit Man says:
          February 21, 2012 at 2:55 pm

          LRB,

          You have not been engaging in this “discussion” fairly, so I am hesitant to engage with you.

          You have not been as dishonest as the group that is apparently organizing via Corrente, but still . . .

          You are intelligent and possess a wide berth of knowledge and information to draw from (especially on psychology matters), but I doubt you can have an honest and fair debate on this matter.

          You ganged up on Graeber in a previous thread and engaged in misdirection and ad hominem–something you claim to abhor and something you normally avoid. I remember you claiming to Valissa that you like debating but you were not engaging in open and honest debate on this issue which tells me you have a similar agenda to the other activists, like Hedges, etc. (who most likely is engaged in a real life psy-op campaign).

          This whole contrived attack reeks of dishonesty.

          • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
            February 21, 2012 at 6:35 pm

            WWM, “not engaging in this discussion fairly” — what do you mean? I am speaking my own mind, just as i suppose you are doing.

          • Walter Wit Man says:
            February 21, 2012 at 7:29 pm

            There were three link posts where we’ve had this recent “debate”, and I won’t go back and find your offending comment right now . . . .

            but I think I posted a link to the earlier Daily Kos post and noted the poor treatment Dave Graeber got in comments there (by many of the same people who have collaborated in the above piece). Another NC reader posted Graeber’s well thought out reply to these attacks and then you made an inane comment about Graeber and his clothes or a dress, or something I can’t remember, but it was engaging in misdirection and deflection and you were basically calling him stupid and acted like his comment didn’t even merit an honest rebuttal.

            Not only was Graeber getting the bum rush at Daily Kos but you were piling on here! That was not honest debate on your part.

          • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
            February 21, 2012 at 7:35 pm

            WWM, your diatribe is lame, with all of its “can’t remember” but…whatever you allege I said.

            I made one plain statement about Graeber: that I did not trust him. My distrust arose BEFORE the recent post from Graeber at NC LINKS. I did not explain it or try to justify it.

            My comments about Hedges were my thoughts about him at the time of discussion.

      • Walter Wit Man says:
        February 21, 2012 at 3:05 pm

        I am *admitting* that there are sub definitions of “violence” that involve committing an act of “violence” against an object or concept. Unlike the other side, I can concede points and am trying to get to the truth . . . . whereas the propagandists double down on their dishonesty and keep throwing loaded terms around, like “Violence Advocates” (VA).

        But the most common definition or usage of “violence” that involves violence against an object, is the usage I describe. The first example I use is the best: “the propagandists at Corrente are committing violence against the definition of violence.”

        The usage of “violence” in the way the Corrente propagandists are using it is not common or historical. How many people would say, “the young boy committed a violent act when he spray painted the words, ‘anarchy rules’, on his school’s walls.” Sure, the propagandists in the media would have us believe that when students crossed arms as they were being beaten by UC Berkeley police they were committing “violence”, but this does not mean that usage is correct, historical, or common.

        It’s *odd* that putative leftists are trying hard to redefine this word and smear anarchists.

        • Lambert Strether says:
          February 21, 2012 at 4:21 pm

          I guess I’m a little unclear on why using the number one definition of violence from Google constitutes propaganda, but it’s a big Internet, isn’t it? People are going to say what they say, I suppose. Bye for now!

        • Lambert Strether says:
          February 21, 2012 at 4:39 pm

          Oh, I forgot to give the links to the material Walter mentioned: Pruning Shears, Kos, FDL, and Corrente. Readers can, I imagine, form their own characterizatons, or comment, depending on which of these sites they have accounts at. And now, goodbye for now.

          • Walter Wit Man says:
            February 21, 2012 at 5:39 pm

            And here’s a link to another one from this well-organized gang: http://occupylosangeles.org/?q=node/4285

            But notice how she must be reading my comments here at Naked Capitalism because she is mirroring back the exact same things I am speculating about, namely, psychological operations and the use of cult tactics.

            Not fair! I busted you perps first so you’re not going to get away with this projection.

            Anonymous, Hedges, and the so-called NVA are the agents provocateur.

          • JTFaraday says:
            February 21, 2012 at 7:27 pm

            ” danps February 21st, 2012 at 11:00 am «

            Yes, it also seems to be terribly provocative to insist that words be used with their universally understood definitions.

            I believe this is what poker players call a tell.”

            My opinion is this “danps,” the author of this disingenuous lengthy verbiage distributed to multiple blogs, is a real pill.

            Commonly accepted usage would suggest that “violence against property” (a formulation I, myself, find absolutely RIDICULOUS) is known as “vandalism,” unless it rises to level of some other commonly recognized form of “violence against property” like “arson” or “breaking and entering” or “blowing sh*t up” etc.

            “Violence” per se, is commonly applied to aggression against persons that rises to a certain level of intensity.

            “danps” should feel free to argue against aggression against persons (including aggression against anarchists and alleged members of the “black bloc” by the so-called “peace police”) AS WELL AS vandalism in Occupy due to to the potential affect of vandalism on the community, but when I wake up tomorrow morning Orwellian linguistic bullsh*t is still going to be Orwellian linguistic bullsh*t.

            Over on the other thread, Mary Jo White seeks to demonize us ALL as members of the mob, out for vigilante justice, simply because we wish to see justice done and corrupt government reformed.

            So, yes. People not using language in commonly accepted ways is “a real tell.”

            No sale.

          • Lambert Strether says:
            February 21, 2012 at 8:46 pm

            Google’s definition isn’t a good test of “commonly accepted usage”? Seems an odd argument to make, given that they’ve got, what, 1 billion searches a week? (“Behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.”)

          • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
            February 21, 2012 at 7:30 pm

            JTF, the problem could arise because Amurcans value property over people.

          • JTFaraday says:
            February 21, 2012 at 8:20 pm

            …Wow, that’s really impressive, actually. At this point “danps” is doing a better job discrediting Occupy Wall Street than Andrew Breitbart.

            Maybe he hire himself out.

          • JTFaraday says:
            February 21, 2012 at 9:38 pm

            Yes, I am saying Google is wrong about standard usage of the term “violence.”

            Now, it may be the case that some person ignorant in the English language wants you start using the term to mean “property damage” but that doesn’t mean you should.

            If “danps,” is so concerned about violence, then why not use the WHO definition?

            “Violence is defined by the World Health Organization as the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, that either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment or deprivation.[2] This definition associates intentionality with the committing of the act itself, irrespective of the outcome it produces…

            In the above definition of violence (“the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, that either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment or deprivation) the inclusion of the word ‘‘power,’’ in addition to the phrase “use of physical force,” broadens the nature of a violent act and expands the conventional understanding of violence to include those acts that result from a power relationship, including threats and intimidation. The “use of power” also serves to include neglect or acts of omission, in addition to the more obvious violent acts of commission. Thus, “the use of physical force or power” should be understood to include neglect and all types of physical, sexual and psychological abuse, as well as suicide and other self-abusive acts.

            This definition covers a broad range of outcomes – including psychological harm, deprivation and maldevelopment. This reflects a growing recognition of the need to include violence that does not necessarily result in injury or death, but that nonetheless poses a substantial burden on individuals, families, communities and health care systems worldwide. Many forms of violence against women, children and the elderly, for instance, can result in physical, psychological and social problems that do not necessarily lead to injury, disability or death. These consequences can be immediate, as well as latent, and can last for years after the initial abuse. Defining outcomes solely in terms of injury or death thus limits the understanding of the full impact of violence on individuals, communities and society at large.[5]”

            Even in this expanded definition, where I do see the addition of the term “power,” I nowhere see the elevation of property to equal status with persons as does your absurdist “google” definition.

            If anything, you are making the anarchists’s point about the sacred nature of “property” in this f*cked up culture FOR them.

            In which case, they are just going to tell you, “we told you so.”

          • Lambert Strether says:
            February 22, 2012 at 1:43 am

            One word: Jesuitical or, in the vulgate, hairsplitting. I’m sticking with common usage. Google is an excellent test of that. If Occupy is to be a mass movement, common usage would seem to be the sensible approach.

            And window smashing may seem “petty” to some. It isn’t necessarily petty to those whose neigborhoods are destroyed or at risk. I mean, transpose the situation to Iraq. Let’s assume that a platoon of US soldier came into a Baghdad neighborhood and started smashing windows, kicking in doors, destroying generators, and taking food out of the kitches and throwing it all over the streets. [Just to pre-empt, I'm not saying this happened at any Occupy.] No broken bones, not a scratch on anybody. Only property.

            Would we call that violence? I think most people would. I think especially the people who experienced it, as opposed to the people doing it, would think of that as violence. So now, take the uniforms off the soldiers and put on black masks. Is the violence suddenly and magically transmuted into vandalism? I don’t think so.

        • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
          February 21, 2012 at 9:46 pm

          JTF, the WTO would necessarily be interested in violence against people rather than against property.

          Has anyone seen how the Oxford English Dictionary defines *violence*?

          • JTFaraday says:
            February 21, 2012 at 11:19 pm

            It’s not an historical dictionary term in this context, it’s a modern legal term.

            So, say we assume that when violent/violence emerged in English from out of Latin, the property of the English aristocracy was equivalent to the lives of many English peasants.

            “Violence” against property would then be a more egregious sin than killing many peasants.

            In which case, Definition #1 over in the illuminated manuscript in the monastery might look like that of “danps,” with his surreal personification of things, once again elevated to equal status with the peasants.

            Why would I want to use an historical dictionary–or any decontextualized “dictionary definition”– to advance a backwards reactionary idea, when I have a modern legal system that (technically, anyway) draws an enlightened distinction between violent crimes against persons and petty crimes against property?

            No one can tell me that when the “black bloc” tags a building, sets a fire in a garbage can for theatrical effect, throws a brick in a plate glass window etc, it doesn’t know that it is engaging in the petty property crime of vandalism–and not a violent crime against a person–and that they could get hauled in for it. (Possibly with additional trumped up charges, but trumped up nevertheless).

            But “danps” is apparently plenty confused about it.

      • Lambert Strether says:
        February 21, 2012 at 4:50 pm

        DCBlogger writes: “The bank can replace the window. Or they can shut down the branch. Washington DC’s riot corridor was a ghost town for 30 years. The damage of a riot lives a long time after the riot. I hate to think what business insurance is in Oakland right now.” People don’t equal property. But damage to property does affect people. Specifically, it can drive them away.

        As for “anarchist thought,” I understand that there are a great many flavors of it. I don’t think all, or indeed most, anarchists are violence advocates. Nor are all violence advocates anarchists. Indeed, if you look at the administration, violence is the default setting. Some would go so far as to make violence advocacy the default setting for dispute resolution in American culture generally. In any case, it’s the presence of violence advocates in Occupy that concerns me, and not the rather academic topic of “anarchist thought.”

        Sheesh, “Just when I thought I was out…they pull me back in. “

        • reslez says:
          February 21, 2012 at 6:26 pm

          It’s impossible to engage honestly with a propagandist who insists on using loaded terms as you do.

        • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
          February 21, 2012 at 6:38 pm

          LS, I agree with you, if that makes any difference at this point.

          • Lambert Strether says:
            February 21, 2012 at 8:12 pm

            Well, I hope it makes a difference, since there will be more Occupy events coming in the spring. It would be nice to get back to numbers like the 10K at the Port Closing, as opposed to the hundreds at the FTP marches.

          • JTFaraday says:
            February 21, 2012 at 10:31 pm

            No more “Port closings.”

            Port closings = property damage = violence = terrorism = Obama’s gonna drone yer butt into the ground = Obama is perfectly justified in doing so according to “danps”

          • Lambert Strether says:
            February 22, 2012 at 1:49 am

            You think profit is a “thing” like a window is a “thing”? That seems odd.

          • Lambert Strether says:
            February 22, 2012 at 2:00 am

            Adding: In case it’s not clear, I’m not a pacifist and I’m not arguing from a spiritual perspective here. I’m arguing from a strategic perspective: Violence drives people away, and so makes Occupy less likely to succeed as a mass movement. Now, if there’s a different strategy, for example, insurrection, or simply spectacle, then this argument doesn’t apply. So maybe you can clarify what your strategic perspective is, and how your advocacy of violence (in common usage) supports it.

            I note in passing, since somehow the issue of property got dragged in, the following from the first Declaration of the Occupation of New York City:

            They have taken our houses through an illegal foreclosure process, despite not having the original mortgage.

            In my reading, that assumes both private property and the authority of the law, both of which (in my limited understanding) anarchism rejects. Do you agree with OWS, or would you advocate for changing their declaration?

          • JTFaraday says:
            February 22, 2012 at 8:25 am

            This is my last post on this issue for the time being because I haven’t really thought too much about this and I’m forming my opinions as things move along. (And I have other things to do).

            But as things move along, I do find this insistence on elevating the petty property crimes of the “black bloc” to equivalence with violent crimes against persons and, now also, to equivalence with the mass social upheaval caused by organized crime in the financial and government sectors, to be reactionary and possibly pernicious.

            You also say you are interested in a movement that encompasses “all walks of life,” recognizing I suppose, that Occupy was launched (largely by non-violent anarchists) in order to call out persons who are NOT necessarily already part of some narrowly defined and domesticated factional political interest that all but takes orders from above from some D-Party operative.

            Given that, I have a hard time believing that you think you can have a “mass movement” in a nation as large and diverse as the US and still control who participates, what they do when they participate, how it escalates (or not), and what the reaction of the authorities and the public will be when (and if) it does.

            You THINK you are (at least) controlling the reaction of the public by trying to give Occupy a squeaky clean image like the civil rights movement– but NOT the labor movement because that’s NOT how the labor movement went down– and that MAY not a bad strategy, at least in terms of appealing to the public.

            I don’t necessarily disagree with that strategy, but it seems to me that in claiming to adopt it, Chris Hedges, “danps,” and who knows who else have already run all the way into the Breitbart and Limbaugh camp of heightened demonization of what are, in the history of popular political movements, relatively minor incidents.

            It is because I think you CAN’T control “mass movements” in the way the Hedges camp seems to think you can by trying to control the “black bloc,” that *I* think the “black bloc” should tone it down. Why deliberately escalate something that can all too easily escalate on its own?

            Now it could be that Oakland’s “grumpier anarchists,” as Graeber likes to say, are not that easy to talk to. It’s also likely that these hot-headed young people have never been a part of a mass action that escalated out of their control– because they, like Hedges, also think they can keep everything under control– and that they do need to have the conversation you want them to have.

            And it’s clear that they think they can control things, when you see them light fires and also put them out with fire extinguishers–that they just happen to have on hand, whereas I think this belief that you can “control things,” and people, in a mass action is ultimately false.

            So, by all means, do have a conversation about your collective lack of control.

            But frankly, if I’m out on the streets in Oakland and all some obvious idiot can manage to squeak out about that is to call me a violent criminal and a cancer on the butt of America so that Jamie Dimon doesn’t have to waste his breath doing it himself, when I know your apparent new master has indeed caused mass social destruction and real harm to persons in the process, I’d probably shut you off too.

            Personally, and unlike Graeber, I don’t even really care if the rest of Occupy decides to disown the “blac block,” but I do know when someone is projecting things onto them that they haven’t done.

            And I do know that you’re still not going to be able to control a genuine “mass movement” for having evicted this one obstreperous faction. For example, did we not just have riots in England last summer? Or in France in 2005?

            Suppose I accuse YOU of fomenting “mass violence” just for joining the anarchists last fall by calling everyone out into the streets “in protest,” (spontaneously, no less).

            Does that make you the cancer on the butt of America now?

          • Lambert Strether says:
            February 22, 2012 at 10:30 am

            The links give a number of videos and links to articles. Readers can decide for themselves whether “demonization” is the right word or not, and whether projection is the right word or not. Yes, the numbers are small. And I’d like to think we’d all like to keep them that way — not for spiritual or pacifist reasons, but to keep the barrier to participation in Occupy as low as possible. That’s the strategic point that’s being made in this series of posts, and I don’t see Breitbart or Jamie Dimon making it. For some reason.

    • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
      February 21, 2012 at 6:32 pm

      John L, see Bill Black’s analogy to Gresham’s Law: Bad money drives out good. So do criminals in business and banking drive out honest men and women.

  • Goin' South says:
    February 21, 2012 at 8:02 am

    Re: naturally nice humans.

    Nice article, but the biologist who fought for this view over a century ago, Peter Kropotkin, doesn’t get a mention. Kropotkin noticed mutual aid and even altruism among animals in Siberia, and recognized that it was necessary to survival of these species in that harsh environment.

    This insight led him to become one of the leading advocates and theorists of anarchism.

    Interesting article and interview here:
    Prince of Evolution

  • Doug says:
    February 21, 2012 at 8:26 am

    Several paragraphs into the NYTimes article (“Some Doubt…”) is this sentence:

    “While most homeowner advocates welcome the new settlement, many are skeptical about whether the banks will actually change their behavior.”

    Begging this fact-checker question: What’s the basis for the adjective ‘most’?

  • Stephanie says:
    February 21, 2012 at 8:49 am

    This one might be of interest:
    What If Corporations Couldn’t Use Our Commons For Free?

    • John L says:
      February 21, 2012 at 10:09 am

      Good one, thanks.

    • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
      February 21, 2012 at 11:48 am

      Stephanie, thanks.

    • F. Beard says:
      February 21, 2012 at 12:06 pm

      The biggest “common” the corporations exploit is the population’s purchasing power which they steal via loans (“credit”) from the counterfeiting cartel, the banking system.

      Corporations, ya see, are very often “credit-worthy.”

    • PQS says:
      February 21, 2012 at 12:53 pm

      Excellent article. It touches on the use of our common airwaves by huge corporations to spew their propaganda, which IMO is the worst excess of “Citizens United”. Specifically, who benefits most handsomely from all those wheelbarrows full of money for political advertising? The tv and cable networks. Our already decrepit press must be yet further hobbled by the presence of those bribes….I can imagine the marketing department whispering into the news department’s ears: “Just wait until the check clears before you ask another question….”

      Why we as the actual owners of the airwaves cannot tell the Superpacs that they may spend as much money as they want as long as the adverts only run between midnight and three a.m., I don’t fathom. Isn’t that an already Supreme Court approved “time, place, and manner” restriction on free speech? (I wouldn’t want to ask the current occupants of the SC, though, it goes without saying.)

    • Stephanie says:
      February 21, 2012 at 1:50 pm

      Posted it on my Facebook page and the immediate response was that such a scheme would only hurt consumers as corporations would transfer the increased costs of production to consumers.

      • John L says:
        February 21, 2012 at 4:36 pm

        Oh that hurts. We have been domesticated.

        The state of the planet is nothing but the tragedy of the commons writ large. The rentiers have already persuaded us through our governments to give them our coal, oil, gas and ores and then sell them back to us. Same with our food and water supplies. You can extend the same logic to housing, education, healthcare. Air is about all we have left that hasn’t been privatized, although if you look at the siting of say coal fired power stations near poor neighborhoods, you can even make a case for that.

        Please don’t give up.

        • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
          February 21, 2012 at 6:41 pm

          John L, how about our rivers, which BigCorp has used as toxic waste dumping grounds for centuries?

        • Lidia says:
          February 21, 2012 at 7:04 pm

          That is Thomas Greco’s line about the credit commons (paraphrasing): that we give our trust to the banks, and then pay them to lend it back to us.

  • Jim Haygood says:
    February 21, 2012 at 9:05 am

    Juan Cole: ‘Basically, US allies Afghanistan and Pakistan are paying no attention to American attempts to get them to join a boycott of Iran; in fact, they are openly defiant on this score.’

    Just as Israel pays no attention to the impact that Iranian sanctions are having on the U.S. economy, or to U.S. pleas to stop the illegal settlements which block any possibility of a middle east peace deal.

    It’s kind of like a killer flea seizing control of a retarded mastodon, and riding it into a tar pit to fossilize. Sad, and most distasteful.

  • Jim A says:
    February 21, 2012 at 9:16 am

    On the Dan Rather comparison…The thing in that case was that since the underlying facts were widely reported, the only “news” was that there was documentary evidence. Of course said document was a poor, obvious forgery. Which now reminds us of typical foreclosure filings, but way back then we were shocked to find that anybody had been taken in.

    On Straus Kahn…I can’t be the only person reminded of “Earache my Eye!” by Cheech and Chong.

  • They didn't leave me a choice says:
    February 21, 2012 at 9:21 am

    The U.N. Threat to Internet Freedom
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204792404577229074023195322.html

    Some highlights:
    • Allow foreign phone companies to charge fees for “international” Internet traffic, perhaps even on a “per-click” basis for certain Web destinations, with the goal of generating revenue for state-owned phone companies and government treasuries;

    • Impose unprecedented economic regulations such as mandates for rates, terms and conditions for currently unregulated traffic-swapping agreements known as “peering.”

    • Subsume under intergovernmental control many functions of the Internet Engineering Task Force, the Internet Society and other multi-stakeholder groups that establish the engineering and technical standards that allow the Internet to work;

    • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
      February 21, 2012 at 11:56 am

      FRAK Hitler-Bush NWO! George Carlin nailed it:

      “The don’t give a F%#K about you! They don’t care about you at ALL! at all, at all. …And now they want your PENSIONS! your Social Security!”

      The Global .01% want it ALL for their DNA, ALL, all, all. Bring RICO! Claw Back.

      BILL BLACK/YVES SMITH 2012: WE THE PEOPLE: JUSTICE NOW

  • Middle Seaman says:
    February 21, 2012 at 9:52 am

    Not being a big fan of Juan Cole doesn’t mean that he is always wrong and arrogant. The dealing with Iran by the West consists of one stupid mistake followed by another.

    The belief that there is a military option, pushed by the sensation seeking media, is laughable. Iran is not a collection of terrorists vulenrable to drone attacks.

  • jsmith says:
    February 21, 2012 at 9:58 am

    So, has Juan Cole put down his Libya war pom-poms and finally started to do his job once again?

    We shall see.

    Basically, the entire philosophy of the elite – that they can create their own realities and then dictate that reality to the rest of humanity – is really starting to fray.

    We see this philosophy at work concerning Iran, Syria, Libya, Greece, the EU, Israel, the mortgage crisis, the financial markets etc etc where elite policy makers will – barring incontrovertible evidence to the contrary – insist and insist through their mouthpieces in the MSM that what we in fact see in front of us is not what we are seeing.

    Libya and Syria were peaceful uprisings…

    The Greeks are lazy scum….

    There is no alternative to the EU….

    Israel is a beacon of democracy…

    Minorities caused the mortgage crisis….

    The markets aren’t being manipulated…

    The economy is recovering….

    Don’t be fooled by polls – insidious instruments in the hands of expert propagandists – that seemingly tell you otherwise, people are really beginning to see through the charade.

    On a separate note concerning the war on science, as the US empire continues on its descent through its self-created miasma of lies and fantasy, one must observe a crucial difference between the fall of the US and the fall of the USSR.

    The US is chock-full of anti-logic, anti-science subcultures (are they even sub-?) that the USSR was not prone to at the time of its demise.

    Given all of the faults of the USSR, at the very least its advocacy for science may have helped the population in the long run deal with the dissolution of their empire.

    The citizens of the US and the world should fear what the dissolution of the US will bring as its religious nutters and fundamentalist fools will be finally free to really take control at the local governmental levels.

    Far fetched?

    Then don’t look to Michigan where emergency “managers” are slowly taking over the state one city at a time.

    • Jim Haygood says:
      February 21, 2012 at 10:37 am

      jsmith: ‘As the US empire continues on its descent through its self-created miasma of lies and fantasy, one must observe a crucial difference between the fall of the US and the fall of the USSR.

      ‘The US is chock-full of anti-logic, anti-science subcultures (are they even sub-?) that the USSR was not prone to at the time of its demise. Given all of the faults of the USSR, at the very least its advocacy for science may have helped the population in the long run deal with the dissolution of their empire.’

      This theme is amplified in a recent post by Dmitri Orlov:

      The original Wheel of Fortune surfaced in Monday Begins on Saturday, a Soviet-era science fiction novella by brothers Strugatsky. We find it installed at the Scientific Research Institute of Sorcery and Magic (НИИЧAВO). It looks like the side of a moving conveyor belt protruding out of a wall: since it never repeats its course, the wheel must rotate slower than one RPE (revolutions per eternity) meaning that its radius must be infinite, and its edge, projected into our physical universe, appears as the edge of a conveyor belt moving past us.

      Unbeknownst to most of our contemporaries, Fortune is actually a deity, like Allah or Jesus, but unlike them she has been worshipped since most ancient times, as Tyche in Greece and as Fortuna in Rome. She continues to be worshipped in the present times, around the world, but especially in the US, where her temples and shrines are everywhere, from the humble lottery machines at every corner shop, gas station and liquor store to the casino capitalists who inhabit the glass towers of Wall Street.

      Millions of mortals supplicate before Tyche daily. Virtually unnoticed, the cult of Tyche dominates the religious landscape in the US: just compare the sizes of the casino buildings in Las Vegas and Atlantic City to the country’s largest cathedrals and temples: except for a few mega-churches, the former consistently dwarf the latter.

      http://cluborlov.blogspot.com/2012/02/wheel-of-misfortune.html

      How can you win, if you don’t know what the game is? Most Americans are unaware that it’s called ‘managing decline.’ And pre-emptive wars help accelerate it. Your kids ain’t gonna learn that at no public skool …

      • Walter Wit Man says:
        February 21, 2012 at 12:56 pm

        The U.S. is much better at propaganda as well. It has refined the methods of control.

        The Soviets would shoot dissenters and were much more open about silencing dissent (if one believes the conventional story of Soviet propaganda). Whereas the U.S. government quietly sought to influence huge portions of the media in silence, via projects like Operation Mockingbird.

        The U.S. method has proved to be much more effective than the clumsy efforts of the Soviets or the Nazis.

      • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
        February 21, 2012 at 2:41 pm

        JH, I attempted to reply before. Pls see comments re your link below. Thanks.

    • SR6719 says:
      February 21, 2012 at 10:52 am

      Excellent comment.

      One thing the elites cannot steal from us is the right not to believe a single word we are told.

    • Walter Wit Man says:
      February 21, 2012 at 11:55 am

      Juan Cole is most likely a CIA perp.

      Of course he would completely blow his cover if he were to outright cheer for an Iran war.

      Instead, he will be a gatekeeper on a few critical issues.

      I have my doubts about Angry Arab as well. Most of our media is corrupt and of course they would have tried to infiltrate blogs as well. It makes me realize how insular much of my blog reading is . . . I got referred to most blogs via other blogs and I’m wondering how many places I’ve been steered to when I thought I was discovering something new . . . .

      • SR6719 says:
        February 21, 2012 at 2:01 pm

        Sometimes it’s worth checking the Z communications website. Here’s a pretty good article by Australian journalist John Pilger, entitled, “The Assange case means that we are all suspects now”:

        http://www.zcommunications.org/the-assange-case-means-that-we-are-all-suspects-now-by-john-pilger

        • Walter Wit Man says:
          February 21, 2012 at 2:29 pm

          Indeed. Both the legal cases against Assange and Manning seem to be designed to push the legal limits. They serve as a warning and as a precedent.

          Which is why I suspect the truth of the official story re Wikileaks and Assange. I have become very skeptical and cynical.

          I actually suspect something similar to what we saw in the underwear bomber case–that the entire incident is a false flag “attack” on the U.S. It’s possible both Assange and Manning are complicit and actually agents of the U.S.

          I suspect the underwear bomber doesn’t really have to go to prison or has some deal because he waived his very good entrapment defense and instead played the crazy terrorist card. Manning and Assange may be engaging in similar trickery.

          The evidence:

          Manning appears to have employed a strange defense strategy.

          1. It’s odd that Manning wasn’t able to get a trial, let alone a preliminary hearing, for almost 2 years after he was imprisoned. I know there has been an erosion of rights, but the right to a speedy trial still exists and its odd to me it took so long (and I don’t buy the defense excuses). If their client was being tortured, and his mind was possibly being controlled or washed, then speed was of the utmost importance.

          2. The defense at the preliminary hearing was odd. The main evidence against Manning appears to be these chat logs and it appears they may have been doctored! I don’t get the impression that the defense hammered at this evidence but instead wanted to make the broader case that Manning was potentially a whistleblower exposing vast crimes. I’m not saying this broader defense isn’t good, but why present it at the preliminary hearing? Why not reserve it for trial and use the preliminary hearing to expose the weakness of the evidence? Maybe I’m misreading the events at the preliminary hearing, but it seems odd to me.

          3. Many of the cable leaks benefit the government. Plus, this is an old-school spook trick, to pretend to be releasing something but to subtly doctor it to fit an agenda. Plus, the NY Times and other establishment media have been closely involved in the vetting and release of this info.

          • SR6719 says:
            February 21, 2012 at 3:38 pm

            Assange and Manning as agent provocateurs is a interesting thesis, however I haven’t followed this case as closely as you have. I remember reading an article on alternet or some place, which argued that WikiLeaks was a professionally engineered psy-ops project, but at the time I didn’t take it too seriously.

            Like you I’ve become very cynical and skeptical, however this has led me to a point where, in an effort to avoid the system’s propaganda, I hardly ever read any corporate media.

            Nevertheless you’ve raised some good points, I’ll have another look at the whole WikiLeaks/Assange/Manning case, keeping an open mind. And thanks for a thought-provoking comment.

          • Walter Wit Man says:
            February 21, 2012 at 4:03 pm

            I hadn’t really been following it either–I too was simply horrified at the way Manning was treated and the bullying the U.S. was engaging in to go after Assange.

            But who did that benefit? The extreme details shock the mind and confuse.

            I only began to review the facts in this case as I have begun to learn that most of the other “terrorist” events are staged attacks, like the underwear bomber. I have also started to suspect the perps use the legal system to establish precedents and maybe even “convict” patsies who are along for the ride.

            Think about it, this may work even better than simply killing the patsy, as may have been done in the past (think Oswald and Ruby). But if the patsy knows he’s going to live and going to benefit, he’s sure going to be a lot more likely to go along with the scam.

            Anyway, it’s just informed speculation at this point . . . and I don’t really know that much about the preliminary hearing and want to learn more . . . I was just surprised to learn the evidence was weaker than I thought and then the other basic facts about the timing and style of defense hit me. Then hearing allegations that Tim McVeigh may never have been executed and seeing pretty strong evidence the underwear bomber case was fishy I began to suspect the use of our courts for clandestine purposes . . . .

            like Chris Hedges being a plaintiff challenging the NDAA.

            or . . .

            Juan Cole suing the CIA, etc.

            and Assange and Manning setting precedents on international law and detainment of prisoners, etc.

          • SR6719 says:
            February 21, 2012 at 5:21 pm

            Walter Wit Man: “…the way Manning was treated and the bullying the U.S. was engaging in to go after Assange…

            But who did that benefit?”

            A good question, something to think about, perhaps there are no easy answers.

            If Assange were an agent provocateur, and the evidence against Manning has been doctored, as you say, then this could tie in with your theory on Chris Hedges, that it’s all intended as some kind of warning, and the message is: all resistance is futile.

            Who knows? I can’t say that you’re wrong because I haven’t really considered it from this angle before.

            “Why should things be easy to understand”? – Thomas Pynchon

            “Why should things be easy to understand”? – Thomas Pynchon

          • SR6719 says:
            February 21, 2012 at 5:24 pm

            sorry, the second Pynchon quote was an accident

          • Walter Wit Man says:
            February 21, 2012 at 6:53 pm

            Yeah, I think that is part of the motive: conveying the message that all resistance is futile. You will be squashed like a bug with no rights. And now there will be yet another precedent for said squashing.

            Another motive is that they capture the opposition and establish bona fides for perps (think Chris Hedges giving an amplified speech and getting ‘arrested’).

            By capturing the opposition the perps can control, sow dissent and division, and engage in mindfucking.

            Don’t the actions of Chris Hedges seem like those of an agent provocateur:

            [a paraphrase:] “Everyone engage in civil disobedience! Follow my lead and physically resist the state. Every act of disobedience is important. NO, not that way impure anarchist! Off with her head! Feed her to the death state.”

            However, the whole Wikileaks and Anonymous psy ops may be geared more to conservative Americans rather than geared to the left. These rebel ‘organizations’ (probably in the same sense Al Qaeda is an organization, come to think of it–which is what Juan Cole provides–to tie all this up) are used to justify draconian laws and are made to be bigger and scarier than they seem (and really, according to their story, it’s mostly one low level guy, Manning, that is accused of causing the most ‘damage’).

            Also, the real value is in the disinformation potentially embedded in these cables. The cover story for how these crown jewels were released is elaborate precisely because it works so well in obscuring the truth from us–the drama of Manning and Assange may be hiding a much more simple story about the cables.

            Plus, there is precedent for a corrupt media and massive lies. Been reading about JFK’s alleged mistress, Mary Meyer, and it’s pretty interesting what Timothy Leary claims she told him regarding the media and academia. Anyway, this web of deceit is decades old and it’s a bit easier to see when we can correctly identify the perps and their crimes from the past. They are getting more and more exposed. No wonder they want to kill the internet.

          • SR6719 says:
            February 21, 2012 at 8:20 pm

            Walter Wit Man,

            Speaking of Mary Meyer and Kennedy, I remember reading something about this in Leary’s biography “Flashbacks”. That Meyer called Leary after the Kennedy assasination and said something like: “they couldn’t control him any longer and they’re covering everything up”.

            She was an unusual, very enigmatic character. With Leary’s help, she may have supplied LSD to top government officials, and may even have dropped acid with Kennedy in the White House.

            And then, about a year after the Kennedy assasination, she was murdered in DC under very mysterious circumstances.

          • Walter Wit Man says:
            February 21, 2012 at 10:51 pm

            Yep, that is part of what I’m referring to. It’s an incredible story, and there is a new book coming out on Mary Pinchot Meyer in April, I believe (although the author may be biased as he is related to some of the perps).

            But yeah, Tim Leary claims Mary came to him asking for help. She had organized with a couple of other women who were going to turn on powerful men in Washington, including her boyfriend who evidently was JFK. She kept notes, allegedly, of what he revealed under the influence, etc. She was good friends with Jackie and could have been referring to turning JFK on with Jackie.

            She was married to CIA agent Cord Meyer, but divorced during the time she dated Kennedy. I say supposedly b/c I now wonder if most of this was a cover. Meyer was supposedly a fascist that had a change of heart and turned lefty, or something, but I suspect it was a way to infiltrate leftist groups. Mary Meyer’s sister was married to Ben Bradlee and the whole Washington set palled around together and had CIA ties.

            Meyer evidently told Leary he was naive and had no idea how Washington was interested in drugs.

            You’re right the murder was suspicious. I heard about all this on this thread, that postulates that Mary’s murder was staged, and also theorizes that Kennedy’s murder was staged. http://letsrollforums.com/jfk-murder-staged-event-t23127p19.html (should jump to page 19 of the thread, roughly where Mary’s murder is discussed in more detail, but it takes hours to read the whole thread)

            I would never have considered these theories a year or so ago, but I’m now convinced something similar happened on 9/11, as well as with numerous other incidents such as the underwear bomber, so my mind is now open.

            Basically, I think the elite have engaged in the MO of staging fake assassinations/attacks and maybe even disappearing people to give them new identities, etc., more than we know. It’s a good MO. Plus, maybe a lot less people died than we thought. So that’s good, I guess.

          • Walter Wit Man says:
            February 21, 2012 at 11:13 pm

            And you’re also right that she evidently told Leary that they killed JFK because he was shaking things up too fast. Then she was killed. So no wonder Tim Leary didn’t say anything until the 1980s. He probably thought she was executed for talking to him. Although in the 1970s someone else revealed the fact that she was having an affair with Kennedy so maybe he became emboldened when he heard this revelation?

            Oh, and William Jefferson Clinton was evidently recruited into the CIA by Cord Meyer. Evidently, Bill Clinton snuck Kruchev’s biography out of the Soviet Union and it has been alleged the CIA engaged in dirty tricks by publishing it in many different languages. I am trying to find more info on this but can’t so I don’t know if they doctored the contents of the biography (like what may have happened with Wikileaks–and something Cord Meyer may have done in the past), or if they simply printed an accurate but embarrassing biography.

            So basically every president since Kennedy (if not before) has been neck deep in secret government and dirty tricks.

          • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
            February 21, 2012 at 11:48 pm

            WWM, see “Dr. Mary’s Monkey” on YouTube. This and related items on YouTube may connect some dots for you.

          • SR6719 says:
            February 22, 2012 at 12:39 am

            Very interesting discussion.

            I’d like to find out more on Mary Meyer and Tim Leary, and would say more on this, but it’s late so I’ll just add two quick things related to the Kennedy Assassination.

            British author J.G. Ballard frequently described the Warren Commission Report not only as a fascinating work of fiction, but one of the great avant-garde works of the 20th century, calling it a masterpiece of “invisible literature” that unintentionally transformed chapters on bullet trajectories and custody chains of cardboard boxes into rich and minimalist prose poetry that charted mass consciousness at the dawn of the 1960s.

            And in his book, “Simulacra and Simulation” Jean Baudrillard noted:

            “The Kennedys were killed because they incarnated something: the political, political substance, whereas the new presidents are nothing but caricatures and fake film — curiously, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, all have this simian mug, the monkeys of power.”

            This was written in the 80s, but I think it would be safe to describe all presidents since Kennedy as caricatures and fake film – the monkeys of power, all of them “neck deep in secret government and dirty tricks”, just like you said.

          • Walter Wit Man says:
            February 22, 2012 at 3:14 am

            LBR,

            That’s interesting. Hadn’t heard that before.

            The Kennedy assassination is amazing because there are so many layers and wrinkles to it that the perps, whoever they are and whatever their motive is, really obscured the truth.

            Interesting backstory on Lee Harvey though and the connection to killer cancer viruses.

            In the link above they speculate that Oswald’s assassination was staged as well. It is interesting there doesn’t appear to be much/any blood on the stretcher when they take him into the hospital–he was shot in the gut so I would think he would have bled more. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xU7Lhd7Wwo at about :52

          • SR6719 says:
            February 22, 2012 at 7:55 am

            If the 26 volume Warren Commission Report is largely a work of fiction (in other words, a cover-up), as many experts consider it to be, then we’ll never know the truth about the Kennedy Assassination.

            Also, in the link you provided above discussing the Fake/Staged Assassination theory, I’m surprised no one mentioned the eyewitnesses claiming that the coffin removed from Air Force One and placed in a waiting ambulance at Andrews Air Force Base on the evening of Nov 22, 1963 was empty. A decoy hearse carrying an empty casket. Or if they did mention it, I missed that part.

          • SR6719 says:
            February 22, 2012 at 9:27 am

            Although I doubt anyone’s still reading this, one final note related to the staged/framed assassination theory: one of the oddest things about the Zapruder film is how much it looks like a car commercial, with the only downside being that the passenger gets his head blown off.

            But still, whether I look at the Zapruder film in normal speed, or with every frame slowed down, my overall impression is that I’m watching a staged car commercial.

          • Walter Wit Man says:
            February 22, 2012 at 11:31 am

            If you read that thread they do discuss the body–maybe not the casket issue you raise, but . . . .

            it appears that John F. Kennedy is not the body buried in Arlington Cemetery–it’s probably the body of Officer Tippit!

            I always wondered about the autopsy photos and records not matching and the discrepancy with the casket, etc. Well, this theory explains it pretty well–Officer Tippit’s wounds match the wounds on Kennedy and Officer Tippit was teased for looking like Kennedy and his colleagues even called him Jack because of the resemblance. Also, Tippit was evidently searching for Oswald before the murder happened so maybe he was the only person to die that day? Tippit was supposedly killed 45 minutes after Kennedy and his body was transported to the same hospital as Kennedya and his family never saw his body.

            That thread is pretty good in that it also goes into detail about how worthless the Zapruder film really is. It’s been so doctored that I fail to see how one can take anything from it. I can see that they probably added to the images, or painted over them, so there may be some truth in the images (and evidently Oliver Stone may have done something like this to the version he bought). But one cannot trust it. And the actions of the people inside the car do look coordinated or suspicious. I never really looked at their actions closely–especially Jackie’s–before this thread. I’m not totally convinced the death was faked, I’m still working on the motive, but there is probably more evidence for this theory than the lone gunman theory, at least.

          • SR6719 says:
            February 22, 2012 at 1:18 pm

            WWM: …”autopsy photos and records not matching and the discrepancy with the casket, etc.”

            David S. Lifton spent much of his life trying to coming to terms with the discrepancies you mention above, and wrote about it in his book, “Best Evidence: Disguise and Deception in the Assassination of John F. Kennedy”.

            His theory is that unnamed conspirators stole the dead presidents body in transit from Dallas, Texas to Bethesda, then took it to Walter Reed Army Hospital where wounds were altered, bullets removed, and other wounds added, all in order to frame Oswald. Next the body was shipped to the Bethesda Naval School morgue in time to be autopsied by Navy pathologists.

            This far-fetched theory is the only way Lifton could account for all the discrepancies with the autopsy photos and casket. However applying Occam’s razor, the “Officer Tippit is buried in place of Kennedy” theory seems to account for the discrepancies in a much simpler way than Lifton does. I hadn’t heard that one before, and will check it out.

          • Walter Wit Man says:
            February 22, 2012 at 2:34 pm

            I read Best Evidence years ago. And I agree, the staged assassination theory does deal with these discrepancies in a much cleaner manner than the other theories.

            Same thing with the motive.

            Okay, we know Kennedy supposedly disagreed with people in the CIA about going into Cuba (but his brother was planning his own anti-Cuban activities as well–maybe not as terroristic as other plans but he still had terrorist plans). Kennedy also took clandestine power away from the CIA to give to the joint chiefs (who then planned such things as Operation Northwoods*). He wanted to break the CIA up into a thousand pieces and fired people like Dulles! He also made movements to end the Vietnam involvement, had disarmament discussions with the Soviets, and talked about having the U.S. print greenbacks again instead of letting private banks charge a fee to print our money.

            I would love to buy the liberal Kennedy hero myth . . . but I think it’s a cover. Just like his girlfriend, Mary Meyer, and Cord Meyer as well, turning hippy. Bullshit. Maybe these things were done because the elite knew they would be reversed once Johnson was in power and they would help to build up the myth of the Kennedy clan as liberal heroes. Maybe the Kennedy’s wanted to set their family up to be the liberal gatekeepers for America. Not only would Jack get to “serve”, but his mythical death would allow many other Kennedy’s to serve a gate keeping function in the future. Jackie seemed interesting in building up this myth as well.

            *which I just had a thought about . . . what if they allowed this report to be released to show to the elite the dangers of not having a secret CIA and allowing the joint chiefs to create a paper trail. It was probably one of many plans anyway, so maybe they figure they could use this as an example and prevent any future presidents from getting any ideas.

          • Walter Wit Man says:
            February 22, 2012 at 3:01 pm

            Oops, I don’t mean to say the motive for a staged assassination theory is better then the straight up motive some in the CIA would have. But it is a plausible motive.

            But the straight up motive of elements within the CIA wanting to kill Kennedy is the strongest logical motive. His apparent attack on the agency and his disagreement re Cuba and going into Vietnam would have been a strong motive to kill him. Which is why I’m suspicious. It’s too convenient. Wouldn’t the CIA have taken pains not to use someone that seems heavily associated with American intelligence? Why use an agent like Oswald when a nameless Cuban would have been preferable? Why not use someone from the Israeli mob?

            They also may have built in another truth layer behind this fake CIA motive by raising the possibility that Mary Meyer was trying to “turn on” JFK with a bunch of hippy drug stuff. It’s closely related to the other renegade liberal hippy motive. So basically they have laid this motive on a bit too thick for my taste. It tastes funny, this idea that JFK was a renegade hippy that had to be taken out, according to Mary Meyer.

            Of course all of those things Kennedy supposedly did were reversed (printing money, Vietnam, etc.), or were actually intended to project American power rather than weaken it (Non Proliferation Treaty).

          • SR6719 says:
            February 22, 2012 at 4:44 pm

            A couple more things related to the “JFK murder staged event” thread (probably the last on this I’ll post here, though I’ll still check back in case you respond).

            The photos of Jackie’s sitting position in the limo (covered with blood) followed by the photos of her dress afterwards (with no bloodstains) are hard to account for, unless the bloodstains in the limo were applied *after* she got out of the limo. And the only reason for faking this would be if there were no bloodstains in the first place.

            And if the Zapruder film can be relied on at all, it seems pretty clear that Nellie (Connally’s wife?) sprayed some kind of red fluid on the back of his head, although you probably wouldn’t notice this detail unless you were looking for evidence the entire event was staged.

            Now I’ll probably go through the entire “JFK murder staged event” thread and see how it fits with what I already knew or at least thought I knew about the assassination.

            And it’s probably time to have a second look at 9/11 as well as WikiLeaks, Assange, Bradley Manning, Chris Hedges, etc.

            The thing is no matter how cynical and skeptical you become, it’s probably not far enough to keep up with events.

          • Walter Wit Man says:
            February 22, 2012 at 5:06 pm

            It’s an interesting thread even if I don’t know if I believe it all.

            But if you go to the end of the thread you see a Dallas police officer appear to spray something in the car! Heck, here’s a gif: http://gifsoup.com/view/3379255/parkland-hospital-jfk.html

            What in the hell is a police officer doing putting his hand in the window, or anywhere near, the spot where the president has just been murdered? What cop would appear to contaminate such a critical crime scene is such a manner?

            I don’t really see what Nellie is doing but it does appear the guy in the front passenger seat gives her a message and she relays a message to Jackie as the “shots” are fired. I do see a rope type thing as Jackie swings her arm around just after the “shot”. I agree there should be more blood stains on Jackie’s clothes. They shocked us with blood and gore hoping we would not notice the finer details. I have to admit I was reluctant to look closely at the video for years because of the gore.

            Same thing with 9/11–Hedges saw multiple people jumping and a foot sticking out of a shoe–bullshit. That hoax is even more amazing than the Kennedy assassination (although not as expertly done–they messed up more).

            Oh, and re no blood on Oswald’s stretcher, the guy that took the iconic photo of Oswald being shot at the police dept. didn’t see a single drop of blood at the police station, I just read, so that is looking pretty fake too. I would think a shot to the gut would make one bleed pretty quickly and pretty good.

            That thread is interesting because it opens up the possibility that perps have used this MO more often than we know, like with Mary Pinchot Meyer case.

      • Walter Wit Man says:
        February 21, 2012 at 2:06 pm

        Here’s a Conterpunch article about Cole being a confirmed CIA asset.

        http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/08/30/meet-professor-juan-cole-consultant-to-the-cia/

        • SR6719 says:
          February 21, 2012 at 2:27 pm

          My favorite line:

          “None of this is all too surprising given Cole’s status as a “humanitarian” hawk.”

  • Jaybee says:
    February 21, 2012 at 10:17 am

    Point of clarification regarding the matter before the Mass. court: it isn’t whether or not a foreclosure can be made when the note and the mortgage (i.e., the debt and the collateral) are in different hands. They have already ruled on that issue and said no, the foreclosing party must have both the note and the mortgage. The question now, as I understand it, is whether to apply that ruling retroactively to foreclosures done prior to the rendering of that decision.

    • Susan the other says:
      February 21, 2012 at 10:59 am

      Reuniting note and mortgage is almost impossible. There is no way to recreate an uninterrupted chain of title, short of forgery of course. Which, either way, leaves the door open to future forgery. There is no imaginable solution. So if a property is illegally foreclosed, both the former owner and the new owner still remain liable should the real note holder one day come forward. The law cannot allow this. So this decision can only resolve this potential mess by making the ruling retroactive. Otherwise it resolves nothing and is blatantly unfair to previous victims.

      • Susan the other says:
        February 21, 2012 at 11:25 am

        The WSJ claims that Schneiderman doesn’t understand electronic mortgage registration! Their disinformation is really getting aggressively blatant.

      • Dave of Maryland says:
        February 21, 2012 at 1:18 pm

        I’ve heard of various legal dodges over the years, quiet title motions, etc., but it seems as if nothing legit works.

        So what is to stop the harried homeowner from filing a bogus, photoshopped “mortgage paid in full” document with the county clerk? Get the county’s stamp on it?

        In the battle of fake forms, the first fake wins. Always. Don’t wait to default. File fake papers before your bank does! Put the shoe on the other foot. Let them prove that your document is a fake. You’ve got home “court” advantage.

        • Walter Wit Man says:
          February 21, 2012 at 1:40 pm

          It’s important to remember that we still have justice in this country as far as the little guy is concerned.

          The AGs will come after you as a little homeowner if you commit document fraud. I know this doesn’t make sense because they are refusing to prosecute document fraud when the bankers do it . . . . but you can count on it.

          The “police” and “prosecutors” are complicit in the crimes. They will abuse their power to put you, a little guy, in jail.

          They are immoral crooks. Including Schneiderman.

          • Dave of Maryland says:
            February 21, 2012 at 3:13 pm

            The choice is between certain homelessness versus the possibility of jail. How, exactly, would a bank prove that you had not paid the mortgage, when they routinely lose documents and fake others? The bank has to make a claim before the state AG – or the local DA – is going to bother.

          • Walter Wit Man says:
            February 21, 2012 at 3:23 pm

            Of course it’s natural for desperate people to do these things and I even hope these desperate people don’t get caught. If we can’t fairly enforce our laws they shouldn’t be selectively enforced.

            But I’m being realistic. It’s probably better to be homeless than go to jail. Seriously. You don’t want to go to jail and have a felony fraud conviction. The U.S. runs the harshest prison system in the world–designed to crush brown, black and poor communities. Individual small fry homeowners will get crushed by our fascist state and their criminal prosecutors.

            And how will you get caught? Easy. Look to where the U.S. AG is spending his resources! Enforcing crimes against corporations. I’ve seen a number of puff pieces on the national media re the HUGE amount of crime from knock off products and how the police are using industry private eyes to investigate and refer crimes to police. Same thing with insurance crimes. The biggest corporations own our government so if they discover a little guy committing crimes they will easily sic the government prosecutor toadies (corporate bullies) on your ass. They do this all the time. Hell, look at who has already been convicted of mortgage fraud! Little guys. I’ve seen a few cases up close–they are always the little guys and the big perps get a free pass.

          • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
            February 21, 2012 at 7:24 pm

            WWM, in America, “Possession is 9/10 of the Law.” *Homeowners” stand pat and make the *bank* produce papers proving ownership (legitimate transfer of property should be on record in the Court House or wherever the Records are stored)–preferably back to the Act of Sale showing homeownerr’s signature.

      • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
        February 21, 2012 at 2:44 pm

        Susan, imagine: Homedweller: Your own the mortgage? prove it back to the Act of Sale with my signature on it.

  • Susan the other says:
    February 21, 2012 at 10:39 am

    First Nations v. Northern Gateway. Those awful tar sands might be better dedicated to a chemical industry situated in Alberta with brand new state of the art facilities which meet strict environmental standards. Pushing all that toxic glop through thousands of miles of pipeline is a total pipe dream.

    • John L says:
      February 21, 2012 at 11:12 am

      Canada threatens trade war with EU over tar sands http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/feb/20/canada-eu-tar-sands

    • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
      February 21, 2012 at 2:16 pm

      Susan, excellent idea. But think what the recent re-affirmation that the *Queen of England* is the absolute Sovereign of Canada implies: More Victorian Reich ruthlessness, as Pax Britannica screws over the world’s populations, so long as *Extraction Capitalism* fills the coffers of *The Crown*. ” Remember, it’s THEIR DNA Uber Alles, and “The Rest can go to bluddy ‘ell.”

      *Capitalism Is a Rigged Casino for the .01% Owners and their Dealers the .99%.* We the People the 99% must Turn the Tide!

      BILL BLACK/YVES SMITH 2012: WE ARE REALITY NOW!

      We the People UNITE! We have nothing to lose but our shame.

  • Economystic says:
    February 21, 2012 at 11:12 am

    More on Occupy Wall Street:
    http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/02/20/occupy-the-sec-pitches-an-extreme-makeover-of-wall-street/

    from former insider Pam Martens.

  • MyLessThanPrimeBeef says:
    February 21, 2012 at 12:26 pm

    Frozen plants spring back to life.

    Those with eyes to see, or rather, with ears to hear, will be familiar with freezing vegetables howling every time the refrigerator door is opened.

    ‘We are being frozen to death here!’

  • Hugh says:
    February 21, 2012 at 1:17 pm

    Oil is largely fungible. There can be some friction at the margins over weight and sourness, but the era dominated by sweet, light crudes is over, and the world has adapted. So if Iran cannot sell to A and B, it will sell to C and D.

    What doesn’t get discussed much is what the sanctions on banking are like and if they are likely to be effective. I wish I knew more about those. I would think that Iran could work around much of this by using third parties. It might reduce its flexibility and increase its costs but at least in the short to intermediate term not be crippling, but I don’t have sufficient information really to form a judgment.

    I think Juan Cole is wrong that the saber rattling sparked increased speculation. I think it is more likely that oil speculators were ready for another binge and the manufactured Iran crisis provided a convenient excuse. That is if it hadn’t been Iran. It would have been something else.

    I also no longer have a good grip on world oil supplies. The US economy is going nowhere and needs periodic injections, like deficit spending and unemployment insurance extensions and the payroll tax reduction. And yet even with these, it continues to slow and edge toward recession. Europe already is in recession with large areas in depression. Japan may be importing more. Certainly, it’s started to run a trade deficit. With the slowdowns and recessions everywhere else, it is hard to see Chinese and East Asian demand increasing significantly.

    I read a few days ago that Saudi Arabia had cut production. This was widely seen as a move to push up oil prices, but I can’t help thinking it was more about maintaining price in the face of falling demand.

    • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
      February 21, 2012 at 6:52 pm

      Hugh, “Oil is fungible.” True, but it’s connected with a *currency* pass-through for *buying* and *selling* (naked derivates excepted?). Hear tell it’s *currency disobedience* Iran is guilty of: selling oil apart from the Yankee Petro-dollar kissed by Kissinger. That’s a no-no!

    • reslez says:
      February 21, 2012 at 6:53 pm

      There were charts a couple days ago (Mish’s blog and another site, it was linked here in the comments) that showed gasoline deliveries falling off a cliff for the past 3 weeks. Back to levels not seen since 1983. But there are 100 million more people in the country now. Those people are sitting at home not driving during the warmest winter on record. That indicates a plunge in economic activity. Nothing happens without energy/oil/gasoline.

      There may be an indication employment is down. IIRC the participation figures from mid January were terrible. Importantly, federal tax receipts are down. You can’t really play around with those numbers, an inarguable sign of contraction.

      It’s baked in. The employment figures from last month look to be a blip.

      The increase in gasoline prices is going to add a lot of misery. Maybe people will break for Obama in October when they let the prices crash again.

  • Valissa says:
    February 21, 2012 at 1:18 pm

    Turns out I can “legitimately” discuss recent cultural & basketball phenom Jeremy Lin here at Naked Capitalism. Turns out he majored in Economics while at Harvard.

    Three years ago, I was at a dinner at Harvard when someone introduced me to a junior from California, a nice, polite kid who explained that he was majoring in economics.

    On Sunday, I was at a family gathering, and everybody was crowded around the wide-screen TV watching that kid from Harvard who majored in economics.

    His name is Jeremy Lin and his unlikely, sudden NBA stardom is the most refreshing story in a nonwinter that has been dominated by tedious TV forecasters and a presidential campaign that is boring us all to tears.

    Rooting for Jeremy Lin http://bostonglobe.com/metro/2012/02/21/phenom-both-cultural-and-sporting/njXL6Kc20ELhefrpxCiUQO/story.html

    • Cynthia says:
      February 21, 2012 at 2:46 pm

      As Andy Borowitz tweeted, Jeremy Lin is probably the only economics Harvard graduate who is doing something positive with his life.

    • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
      February 21, 2012 at 2:49 pm

      Valissa, Harvard is in dire need of *positive PR* now. Maybe it will serve to undo the damage of ex-President Summers and the endless rapacity of The Harvard Endowment (by El-Arian?) for gain by any means?

  • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
    February 21, 2012 at 1:23 pm

    YVES, there’s a fly in the ointment at NC:

    I was replying to Jim Haygood re the Orlov link, with a complex response for the NC *market* on the fly, when the screen *refreshed* automatically, wiping out my comment. Why the *refreshment*? Because some ADVERTISEMENT on the NC site intruded, wiping out the comment, and making the comment irrecoverable.

    This is a great way for the owners of *Casino Capitalism* to destroy living thought anent the SYSTEM RIGGED for the .01% called “Capitalism”–run by the .01% owners and .99% dealers since “Capitalism” and “free trade” and “Opium Wars” by any name were invented for the profit of the Global 1% at the expense of the Global 99% .

    The Cluborlov blog almost gets it right, but not quite. The blogger is missing an extremely fine distinction. But one sentence remains timely and true:

    “If a single round of decimation fails to rally the troops to victory, the next one should drive them to mutiny.”

    NOW is the time for the American Patriots and Marines on YouTube to declare their MUTINY against the 1% Elite Casino Owners+Dealers–the Global Capitalist Organized Crime Cartel now running the U.S.A.–in order to demonstrate to We the People that is IS possible to EJECT them from our Government. M-I Patriots, NOW IS THE TIME to take back our Government of/by/for the People.

    Are We the People not as strong as Russians who survived fleecing by Harvard’s Agents of the Global .01% Fourth Reich? Can we not prove to Orlov that he us wrong to underestimate We the People of America?

    Civilians, NOW is the time to take back our Government of/by/for the People.

    Our Revolution of 1776 is right now! or never. TAKE BACK our Government from Puppet Tyrants. CLAW BACK our money from the .01% Global MonopolyCapitalistCasino Gangster Owners and their .99% Dealers.

    BILL BLACK/YVES SMITH 2012: WE THE PEOPLE GOVERN NOW!

    • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
      February 21, 2012 at 1:56 pm

      KOLLAPSNIK concludes in “The Wheel of Misfortune” – 5 Feb 2012 – http://cluborlov.blogspot.com/2012/02/wheel-of-misfortune.html –

      “At what point does a society of gambling addicts refuse to gamble? … Tyche’s [Fortuna's] charm are appealing only when she isn’t cheating. But if you are invited to play, although you (and just about everyone you know) always loses [sic.] while some perpetually ‘lucky’ group always wins, then that fails to satisfy the gambling urge, and Tyche fades away to be replaced by the far more destructive demons of envy and rancor which she previously held in check….”

      It is not Tyche that cheats. *Capitalism* has as much to do with *luck* as Las Vegas Casinos have to do with luck, and for the same reason: the House never loses, long term, and all else is illusion. *Capitalism* itself is a Casino, a RIGGED SYSTEM profiting the .01% Owners and their .99% Dealers in the Scam of the Ages. *Capitalism* and *free trade* are Universal Scams with Opium Wars and steady propaganda via *religions* and *media* on the side, providing the *destined-to-lose* 99% with a glut of junk and a circus of illusion. The Masters of the Universe are Black *Magicians* called *Capitalists* who have hoodwinked the 99% *en masse* since the Victorian Reich joined hands with the Dutch in their *tulip mania* and their *Indies free trade Projects*, through today’s Rape and Pillage of the U.S.A., *DECIMATING* the population and the People’s treasury private and public, turn by turn of their ruthless screws, working “THE SHOCK DOCTRINE” until death us do part. And why? To PROFIT THEIR DNA/Come what may.

      “If a single round of decimation fails to rally the troops to victory, the next one should drive them to mutiny.” (cluborlov blog cited above)

      American Patriots, save your blood for We the People’s Victory. The TIME for Mutiny against the .01% DNA Master Criminal Reich is RIGHT NOW.

      “Fight Club” — NOW is your time to DO in reality what has played in your minds like a movie with you as hero.

      Jack London: “THE IRON HEEL” presents the Perps and their Lethal Game. We the People of America must finish the Game in favor of the 99%, without delay. There is no more “Westward, Ho!” We must stand our ground and fight to the death right now, since flight from .01% Tyranny is no longer possible.

      99% UNITE: We have nothing to lose but our shame.

      BILL BLACK/YVES SMITH 2012: WE THE PEOPLE GOVERN NOW!

      • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
        February 21, 2012 at 2:52 pm

        Oops, almost forgot the infamous John Law scam in Louisiana (the Scottish French Auld Alliance in shady practice).

    • Lambert Strether says:
      February 21, 2012 at 4:52 pm

      Readers, has this “refreshment” happened to you?

  • Josh says:
    February 21, 2012 at 2:50 pm

    Stock Market Numerology 2012 – 0221

    http://chartistfriendfrompittsburgh.blogspot.com/2012/02/stock-market-numerology-2012-0221.html

  • Max424 says:
    February 21, 2012 at 3:55 pm

    re: 10 Ways the Iran is Defying the US…

    “Some analysts doubt that Saudi Arabia can keep up its current 11.8 million barrels a day [of oil production] …”

    Don’t know where that figure came from. The last crude oil production figures available for Saudi Arabia are from December, 2011, when production slipped to 9.55 million bpd from a three decade high of 10.04 million bpd the previous month.

    So the Saudi’s did hit the promised, “magical” production target of 10 million bpd –but only for a very brief moment in time (Nov, 2011).

    But who gives a fuck? Right? We ALL know this production hullabaloo is bullshit, because Saudi Arabia’s crude oil production figures are completely irrelevant. What can the Kingdom EXPORT … is the only thing that matters.

    And it is the Kingdom’s ability to EXPORT that is increasingly being impaired. By what? By Saudi Arabia’s exponentially exploding population that is consuming exponentially increasing amounts of their crude oil production.

    I’ll say it again; if you do not understand the Export Land Model (or the exponential function), then you do not understand the forces that are shaping the ineluctable, downward trajectory of modern civilization.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_Land_Model

    Apply the Export Land Model to Saudi Arabia, and what you’ll find; the Kingdom will no longer be a crude oil exporting nation in or around the year 2025. And it is very likely (almost a certainty), the Saudi’s will be the last man standing; in other words, the last of the great exporting nation-states.

    Meaning; every country* on this planet, in the latter of half of the second decade of this century, will be a net importer of oil. How does that work out for ya?

    *With the possible exception of Canada. Canada is a tricky read. Yes, thanks to black sands of Alberta, Canada exports about 2 million bpd of tar/crude. But, Canada also imports roughly 40% of the petroleum they consume.

    Interesting, eh? Apparently, Canada has no sovereign control of their oil reserve (Where is all our oil going? Who is getting all that money? And why are we importing!), which makes them a good candidate to replace the United States as … the stupidest nation on planet earth.

    • Max424 says:
      February 21, 2012 at 4:20 pm

      And let’s be very clear (to borrow a phrase from the assassin Obama), the Export Land Model is not a theory.

      You have known knowns (to a borrow a phrase from our former War Lord Lord Rumsfeld). You have production. You have consumption. When consumption surpasses production, you are an IMPORTER.

      Nothing could be simpler or more straightforward. Unless, of course, you adhere to one of those philosophies that embraces fantasy, that allows you to believe anything your craven, craving little heart desires. Then yes, yes, yes, absolutely, EVERYTHING is then a “theory.”

      I think, therefor I am. Fuck that! I think that I think, therefor, I think that I am.*

      *Thanks Ambrose Bierce

      • chasd00 says:
        February 21, 2012 at 5:34 pm

        yeah yeah yeah and if current trends continue disposable razors will have an infinite number of blades on them by 2025

    • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
      February 21, 2012 at 7:02 pm

      Max424, that’s why they are pushing the XL keystone pipeline project. It would be rational for Canada to refine and ship its tar sands product, but no. It must be shipped to TEXAS for refining (by Bush’s Valero?), so it can be EXPORTED globally for top dollar. Americans never will see an ounce of gasoline from this. The pipeline in question is to give the .01% Global Reich Agents 01% Monopoly Control, while counting on the American Police State to keep the pipeline *safe* from damage. Heads they win, tails we lose. They profit at our expense, every which way.

    • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
      February 21, 2012 at 7:15 pm

      Max424, Where does it go? Black-ops? Bombing Libia? Bomb Iran? Dubai, to keep Halliburton and other Global Reich swells ice cold–replete with ski slopes– in the desert?

    • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
      February 21, 2012 at 7:17 pm

      Max424, at the Saudi endgame, will Wahabbis rate above Christian Crusaders?

      • Max424 says:
        February 21, 2012 at 8:06 pm

        re: Wahhabis

        An interesting question that is not addressed by the Export Land Model, but is, I think, integrally linked; at what point on the depletion curve do export nations stop exporting, to save whatever oil remains … for the grandkids.

        Norway, which has sovereign control of its oil reserve, might be the first up on that list. Mexico is a country that should save their oil, but can’t, because they need a constant influx of petrodollars to sustain their government.

        Countries like Libya, Iraq and Iran, either on purpose or through incompetence, were indeed saving a large percentage of their oil reserves for following generations. But of course, that was a mistake, because when you try to do something like that, you are going to get attacked, usually by the Big Mad Dog of the West.

        Which brings us to Saudi Arabia. How long will the Oligarchy of the Princes last there? If the Wahhabis, or the Party of the Followers of the Martyr Osama, or some other nationalist faction took over Arabia, would they continue to export their most precious resource to the West?

        Knowing they have less than 20 years left, would they do something that stupid? It’s an important question.

  • MyLessThanPrimeBeef says:
    February 21, 2012 at 4:16 pm

    China Realty Weakens.

    Phew! That is less worrying than ‘China Really Weakens!’

  • Worthy link says:
    February 21, 2012 at 4:23 pm

    Key Quote:

    “The agreement will deter absolutely no one from trying to pull off a similar stunt.”

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-20/sec-surrender-goes-on-with-bear-fund-deal-commentary-by-william-d-cohan.html

  • MyLessThanPrimeBeef says:
    February 21, 2012 at 4:25 pm

    Humans are naturally nice.

    So are plants and animals.

    Most living beings are nice except when they are hunger.

    Not so with internet blog commentors, they can be mean even when not hungry…present company excluded, of course.

  • Valissa says:
    February 21, 2012 at 4:37 pm

    Flies drink alcohol to medicate themselves against wasp infections http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/02/20/flies-drink-alcohol-to-medicate-themselves-against-wasp-infections/

  • wunsacon says:
    February 21, 2012 at 4:37 pm

    LOLZ!

    Check out these Mardi Gras floats:

    http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/fotostrecke-78897-2.html
    (H/T: Mish)

    Of course, many websites will republish those photos. So, by now, this might be old news to y’all…

  • Carlito Quesare says:
    February 21, 2012 at 5:11 pm

    regarding Peter Gleick,
    His half admission leaves him with no possibility of hiding behind 1st Amendment privileges of confidential sources.

    He will be eventually sued, he will either testify on stand about the fake document, or he’ll risk being found guilty of the forgery.

    If he isn’t sued, then maybe indeed the fake doc was created at Heartland as a honeytrap.

    If he is sued, and Heartland goes to trial and makes a point of attack regarding the source of the document, well, Gleick will have to know who it is, be it himself or a Heartland office worker, or a Gleick ally, etc.

    This isn’t rocket science, the guy’s actions are a caricature of the bumbling bad guy in a children’s detective novel.

  • Tim says:
    February 21, 2012 at 6:11 pm

    http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-02-21/florida-homeowners-find-little-to-cheer-in-deal-with-gangsters-.html

    LoL. I love the title.

  • wunsacon says:
    February 21, 2012 at 6:13 pm

    Did Gleick do anything wrong? He’s probably outing an astroturf group. Sounds like investigative journalism.

    The Guardian refers to The “Heartland” Institute as “libertarian”. Do “libertarians” think so? Wouldn’t they like to know whether the “Heartland” institute is a group of astroturf poseurs speaking on behalf of polluting industrialists who want to continue selling energy at a price that does not include the costs of the environmental damage they cause?

    • scraping_by says:
      February 21, 2012 at 10:36 pm

      Well, he’s not a proper Victorian. Back when the US didn’t have a foreign intelligence service because “Gentlemen don’t read each others’ mail.”

      On the other hand, if the person who gave Dr Gleick the username would have downloaded the material and forwarded it to Dr. Gleick, this part of the debate wouldn’t be happening. Letting him use the username was just cutting out a middleman.

      A private concern can say “eyes only” but that really has no force in law or, for most of us, morality. This is a bunch of lobbyists, not a hospital or a state police. Their expectation of privacy should be, commonsense, lower.

      And if they weren’t a gang of lying bastards, exposure wouldn’t horrify them nearly this much.

  • Tim says:
    February 21, 2012 at 7:03 pm

    Another goody. The fed is masking the sales of Maiden Lane II bonds since revelation of their true market price during the last auction depressed similar bond prices. Can’t have that now can we! So we just unload them behind closed doors to our best buddies for cheap!
    http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-02-21/fed-plays-wall-street-favorites-in-secret-bond-deals-mortgages.html

    The article actually uses the term crony capitalism. I wonder if the mainstreaming of the issues is going to have a positive affect of mobilizing people and strengthening their resolve against the crony capitalism or instill moral hazard into everybody with the knowledge that there are only two types of people in this country: Cheaters and losers”

  • Schofield says:
    February 21, 2012 at 8:05 pm

    Better I think to see that nature is constantly engaged in a struggle to balance competition and cooperation not that one permanently prevails over the other. As Christopher Boehm says in his book “Hierarchy in the Forest” human beings constantly seek to take advantage of those individuals with above average or unusual skills whilst making sure those individuals don’t use these skills for unfair advantage over the majority.

  • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
    February 21, 2012 at 9:58 pm

    Early NIGHTCAP: Walker Bush Dulles Thyssen DUTCH *banking* connection from pre-Nazi to after 1950: the smoking gun for Bush Dynasty TREASON:

    “How the Bush family made its fortune from the Nazis” – posted by Robert Lederman, and “The Dutch Connection” (article provided by Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz and Tetrahedron, LLC) — article by John Loftus — LINK:
    http://www.tetrahedron.org/articles/new_world_order/bush_nazis.html

    Here’s where the Prince Bernard of the Netherlands and the Bilderbergers connect with the Rockefeller-Bush Nazi Banking Nexus w/ Thyssen AFTER WWII.

    • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
      February 21, 2012 at 11:57 pm

      ATTN: WWM et al. — in article above, the name of a REPORTER who connected the *actionable* treason dots of the Walker-Bush-Dulles-Thyssen-Rockefeller connection in banking is MANNING. Follow the DNA, there may be a deeper *revenge* motive in the prosecution of *MANNING* the young soldier today (since he became a whistle blower, he may be a chip off the old block, if the reporter above was indeed his father or some other blood relative).

  • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
    February 21, 2012 at 11:40 pm

    YVES, do you know about this fraud? — http://www.youtube.com –

    “Lord James of Blackheath FOUNDATION X UPDATE February 16, 2012″ (allmoderncons on Feb 17, 2012) – LINK:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eL5hqvTWkYg&feature=player_embedded

    Timmy’s signature. What can you piece together, YVES?

    • LeonovaBalletRusse says:
      February 22, 2012 at 1:00 am

      YVES, connect HSBC above w/ items below, and consider: Lord Blackheath a fool, a co-conspirator, or he is onto a genuine BUST. I’ve been following the Wilcock and Fulford info since January, and thought this might be a scam. But with Lord Blackheath’s declaration in the House of Lords, who knows. As you know, HSBC represents the Old Alliance between Victorian Reich, QEII, the City, and China. The ISSUE is the bonds (fake or genuine) and the gold they represent in the BIS *arrangement* of the .01%.

      http://www.youtube.com –

      Showing HSBC certificate: “New Benjamin Fulford UPDATE 01/04/2012 116 Trillion dolar deposit” [dolar sic.] (The1stWarning on Jan 3, 2012) – NOTE: at 1:41/2:57 a clipping shows photo with caption: “THE TRILATERAL SOCIETY OF GLOBAL FUNDERS/HELD IN GENEVA, CONFERENCE CR. 1984″ — “From left Pres. Fernando E. Marcos, Tiburcio Villamor Marcos – Sole Owner, Representative of Bank of International Settlement Boston and Switzerland, Union Bank of Switzerland Officer … [caps in 2nd quote mine--N.B. This connects with the Bush Dynasty Nazi money-laundering bank owned by Thyssen, connected with DUTCH bank mentioned in the http://www.tetrahedron.org link above with posts from Robert Lederman and Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz and Tetrahedron, LLC]

      The TRILATERAL SOCIETY OF GLOBAL FUNDERS document shows the signatures of “Ronald Reagan: President of the United States of America” to the right of the signature at the center, top line, of “Elizabeth R”: Trilateral Nations (Queen Elizabeth II). The signatures of Marcos and others are shown on the document. Later in the video, the HSBC document to which LORD BLACKHEATH refers is shown. Connect details from:

      “TRADING WITH THE ENEMY: The Nazi-American Money Plot 1933-1949″ by Charles Higham, connecting Walker Bush Dulles BIS Rockefeller’s National City (Chase) and Standard Oil with Thyssen and Hitler’s Third Reich. Loftus adds details about the DUTCH connection at the http://www.texahedron.org link.

      http://www.youtube.com –
      “The End of the Illuminati – Proof of the Trillion & court case that will end humanity’s enslavement” (prisonersOfprogress on Dec 21, 2011) begins with the text of a letter re the DRAGON family’s dilemma, anent the *fake* or *genuine* bonds they are trying to redeem for their gold, delivered to the BIS during what can only be called a *conspiracy*. Details about this, from Fulford, were revealed on the David Wilcock website, to be believed or not.

      How will UBS get out of this net? As for Bush Dynasty: Cry Treason!


    • Subscribe to: Post Comments
    | Subscribe | Blogroll | Topics | Archives | Videos | Contributors | Search |