Study Examines Boyhood Drinking of Fluoridated Water and Possible Links to Osteosarcoma
By Daniel J. DeNoon
WebMD Health News Reviewed by Louise Chang, MD
April 6, 2006 - Boys who drink fluoridated water have an increased risk of a deadly bone cancer, a new study suggests.
Elise Bassin, DDS, completed the study in 2001 for her doctoral dissertation at Harvard, where she now is clinical instructor in oral health policy and epidemiology. The study finally was published in the May issue of Cancer Causes and Control.
Bassin and colleagues' major finding: Boys who grew up in communities that added at least moderate levels of fluoride to their water got bone cancer -- osteosarcoma -- more often than boys who drank water with little or no fluoride.
The risk peaked for boys who drank more highly fluoridated water between the ages of 6 and 8 years -- a time at which children undergo a major growth spurt. By the time they were 20, these boys got bone cancer 5.46 times more often than boys with the lowest consumption. No effect was seen for girls.
Unexpected Results
In a prepared statement provided to WebMD, Bassin says she "was surprised by the results."
"Having a background in dentistry and dental public health, [I] was taught that fluoride at recommended levels is safe and effective for the prevention of dental [cavities]," Bassin says in the statement. "All of [our analyses] were consistent in finding an association between fluoride levels in drinking water and an increased risk of osteosarcoma for males diagnosed before age 20, but not consistently for girls."
It's not surprising that Bassin found a risk for boys but not for girls. Osteosarcoma is about 50% more common in males than in females. And boys tend to have more fluoride in their bones than girls.
Caution About Study
However, a commentary accompanying Bassin's article warns to take her findings with a grain of salt. Ironically, it is from Harvard professor Chester W. Douglass, DMD, PhD. Douglass led Bassin's PhD committee, which approved of the study when it was presented as her doctoral dissertation.
Douglass warns that the Bassin study is based only on a subset of people exposed to fluoridated water. Preliminary results from the entire population of exposed individuals, Douglass writes, show no link between bone cancer and water fluoridation.
But Bassin specifically looked at the subgroup of people most likely to be affected by fluoridation: children. She limited her analysis to people who got bone cancer by age 20. That's because most cases of osteosarcoma occur either during the teen years or after middle age.
Fluoride collects in the bones. And it's particularly likely to accumulate in the bones during periods of rapid bone growth. So Bassin looked at fluoride exposures during childhood for 103 under-20 osteosarcoma patients and compared them with 215 matched people without bone cancer. Her study took into account how much fluoride was in the water in the communities where children actually lived and the history of municipal, well water, or bottled water use.
Caution About Study continued...
The Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit watchdog organization, says water fluoridation should stop until further research can refute or confirm Bassin's findings. Tim Kropp, PhD, is a senior scientist at EWG.
"About 65% of the U.S. water supply has added fluoride," Kropp tells WebMD. "With evidence this strong, it only makes sense to act on it. Right now, it makes the most sense to put fluoride in toothpaste, and not into our water. It's not like this is a huge contaminant that will cost billions of dollars to fix. We can just stop adding it to our water it if we want to."
According to the American Cancer Society, every year some 900 Americans -- 400 of them children and teens -- get osteosarcoma.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
D.C. Metro to Randomly Search Riders’ Bags
Lena H. Sun
The Washington Post
October 28, 2008
Metro officials yesterday announced plans to immediately begin random searches of backpacks, purses and other bags in a move they say will protect riders and also guard their privacy and minimize delays.
The program is modeled after one begun three years ago in New York that has withstood legal challenges. However, experts said it is difficult to measure the effectiveness of such searches, beyond assuring the public that police are being vigilant. New York officials declined to say what they have found in their searches; none of the other transit systems conducting random searches have found any explosives, officials said.
Metro officials said the program was not in response to a specific threat but prompted by increased security concerns before next week’s election and the inauguration as well as by the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and later bombings of commuter trains in Madrid, London and elsewhere.
Although Metro police said the program will begin immediately, they would not say which of their 86 rail stations or more than 12,000 bus stops would be subject to inspection on any given day. On some days, there might be no inspections, or there might be several. Fifteen officers have been trained to perform searches, and more will be trained, officials said.
Children to get fluoride in school milk
Local authorities are planning to give schoolchildren "dental milk" which has been treated with fluoride. A dozen school nursery and infant schools in South Yorkshire, including those in Barnsley, Doncaster and Sheffield, are to be targeted by health officials advising headteachers and governors about the benefits of fluoridisation.
Local authorities are planning to give schoolchildren "dental milk" which has been treated with fluoride. A dozen school nursery and infant schools in South Yorkshire, including those in Barnsley, Doncaster and Sheffield, are to be targeted by health officials advising headteachers and governors about the benefits of fluoridisation.
At present, fewer than two-thirds of children are registered with an NHS dentist.
The drink is to be introduced especially in areas where the water supply has not been treated with the chemical - which is thought to be responsible for an enormous improvement in dental health over the past three decades.
The move has angered some parents who warn that fluoride will cause side-effects such as discoloured teeth.
A report by York University, commissioned by the Government, revealed that 48 per cent of all children are showing signs of side effects from the chemical.
The plan is to have bottles of fluoride milk specially labelled which will then be provided to children whose parents have given written consent.
A study carried out in Scotland, where a similar scheme is in place, showed that decay rates fell by 48 per cent among five- and 10-year-olds drinking the treated milk.
John Green, a consultant in dental public health at the Sheffield health authority, said fluoride in milk was a "fall back" in areas where the water supply had not yet been treated.
"The decision would have to be taken by the school governors," he said.
"Levels of tooth decay are high in the area and you have to do something to reduce levels of disease. Anything we can do to help children is important."
Dr John Rental, the British Dental Association's chairman, said he welcomed any plan to improve the health of children's teeth but warned of possible legal action from parents of children given treated milk by mistake.
"The issue of public health measures is always loaded with problems about consent, safety and liability," he said.
"With fluoride, there is an issue if a parent has not given consent and then their child drinks another's fluoride milk. This is not the great salvation."
His views are shared by Sue King of the North and Midlands Against Fluoridation campaign group.
"This creates all sorts of problems. How are teachers going to monitor this for a start? The fact is that the Government has not done enough research into the side effects. It's very worrying."
Children to get fluoride in school milk
By Sophie Goodchild, Home Affairs Correspondent
Sunday, 21 January 2001
In the meantime, ministers are drawing up plans to distribute millions of free toothbrushes and toothpaste to children in deprived areas.
The move is aimed at reducing the huge financial burden on the health service from children suffering the advanced - and often disfiguring - effects of tooth decay.
It will also help ministers meet their dental target which is to ensure that by 2003, 70 per cent of five-year-old children should have no tooth decay, and that the average five-year-old should have no more than one filled, decayed or missing tooth.
Levels of decay are strongly linked to social background and poverty. According to the British Dental Health Foundation, problems start extremely early. Four per cent of two year olds have some decay, rising to 30 per cent in four year olds.
The latest statistics from the Health Education Authority show that 17 per cent of all children have decayed teeth, a problem that increases with age. Most of the decay found by the authority had been left untreated by a dentist. In Scotland, 55 per cent of five year olds have decayed teeth.
The BDA launched its five point plan last week, demanding that the Government increase funding for NHS dentistry by more than £147m a year.
Local authorities are planning to give schoolchildren "dental milk" which has been treated with fluoride. A dozen school nursery and infant schools in South Yorkshire, including those in Barnsley, Doncaster and Sheffield, are to be targeted by health officials advising headteachers and governors about the benefits of fluoridisation.
At present, fewer than two-thirds of children are registered with an NHS dentist.
The drink is to be introduced especially in areas where the water supply has not been treated with the chemical - which is thought to be responsible for an enormous improvement in dental health over the past three decades.
The move has angered some parents who warn that fluoride will cause side-effects such as discoloured teeth.
A report by York University, commissioned by the Government, revealed that 48 per cent of all children are showing signs of side effects from the chemical.
The plan is to have bottles of fluoride milk specially labelled which will then be provided to children whose parents have given written consent.
A study carried out in Scotland, where a similar scheme is in place, showed that decay rates fell by 48 per cent among five- and 10-year-olds drinking the treated milk.
John Green, a consultant in dental public health at the Sheffield health authority, said fluoride in milk was a "fall back" in areas where the water supply had not yet been treated.
"The decision would have to be taken by the school governors," he said.
"Levels of tooth decay are high in the area and you have to do something to reduce levels of disease. Anything we can do to help children is important."
Dr John Rental, the British Dental Association's chairman, said he welcomed any plan to improve the health of children's teeth but warned of possible legal action from parents of children given treated milk by mistake.
"The issue of public health measures is always loaded with problems about consent, safety and liability," he said.
"With fluoride, there is an issue if a parent has not given consent and then their child drinks another's fluoride milk. This is not the great salvation."
His views are shared by Sue King of the North and Midlands Against Fluoridation campaign group.
"This creates all sorts of problems. How are teachers going to monitor this for a start? The fact is that the Government has not done enough research into the side effects. It's very worrying."
Children to get fluoride in school milk
By Sophie Goodchild, Home Affairs Correspondent
Sunday, 21 January 2001
In the meantime, ministers are drawing up plans to distribute millions of free toothbrushes and toothpaste to children in deprived areas.
The move is aimed at reducing the huge financial burden on the health service from children suffering the advanced - and often disfiguring - effects of tooth decay.
It will also help ministers meet their dental target which is to ensure that by 2003, 70 per cent of five-year-old children should have no tooth decay, and that the average five-year-old should have no more than one filled, decayed or missing tooth.
Levels of decay are strongly linked to social background and poverty. According to the British Dental Health Foundation, problems start extremely early. Four per cent of two year olds have some decay, rising to 30 per cent in four year olds.
The latest statistics from the Health Education Authority show that 17 per cent of all children have decayed teeth, a problem that increases with age. Most of the decay found by the authority had been left untreated by a dentist. In Scotland, 55 per cent of five year olds have decayed teeth.
The BDA launched its five point plan last week, demanding that the Government increase funding for NHS dentistry by more than £147m a year.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Monday, October 27, 2008
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Senator Warner Supports Domestic Use of Military
http://www.infowars.com/?p=5473
David Swanson
Global Research
October 22, 2008
A citizen of Virginia named Moya Atkinson wrote to Senator John Warner to express concern over the recent violation of the Posse Comitatus Act created by the assigning of U.S. soldiers to duty within the United States, reported by the Army Times as intended for "crowd control" among other duties. This, like other changes imposed by President Bush, of course violates the Posse Comitatus Act. It also served to strengthen the threats of martial law that Congressman Brad Sherman reported the White House making to Congress members in order to win their support for the $780 billion give-away to Wall Street.
Warner sent back the following note, proposing that, rather than changing the president’s behavior to comply with the law, we should — as with warrantless spying, habeas corpus, etc. — change the law to comply with the president’s behavior:
Thank you for contacting me regarding your opposition to Northern Command dedicating a combat infantry team to work within the United States. I appreciate your thoughtful inquiry on this important matter.
As you may know, the Northern Command has assigned the 1st Brigade Combat Team of the 3rd Infantry to deal with catastrophes in the United States. While the unit would not take over as the lead, the Army reports that this unit would be deployed to help local, state, or federal agencies deal with matters such as chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and high-yield explosive (CBRNE) incidents. The unit will be based in Fort Stewart, Georgia, and will focus primarily on logistics and support for local police and rescue personnel.
Looking back, the Hurricane Katrina relief efforts highlighted the important role our military plays during domestic crises. From providing security in destroyed neighborhoods, to treating patients aboard naval vessels, to rebuilding damaged levees and unwatering New Orleans, the military has performed vital work that no other federal or state entity has the capacity to undertake.
Not withstanding these tremendous achievements, I am deeply concerned that the Department of Defense and the President may not have authority to use active duty personnel in the most effective manner. In our federal system, we normally, and rightly, depend upon state and local authorities to maintain order and protect the public. The National Guard, operating under Title 32 of the U.S. Code, is the primary military organization authorized to employ police powers in times of crisis. However, in a situation of the magnitude of Hurricane Katrina, the level of destruction, coupled with the difficulty in maintaining order, brings into question the prohibition on using federal active duty military personnel, operating under Title 10 of the U.S. Code, to perform law enforcement duties.
I believe we must review the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act and similar provisions that limit the role of the active duty military to ensure that every available asset is properly employed in any type of future emergency situation. Title 18, Section 1385 of the U.S. Code, commonly referred to as the Posse Comitatus Act, prevents the armed forces from becoming involved in law enforcement activities for which, in most cases, they are not specifically trained or equipped. Posse Comitatus is largely rooted in historical tradition that prohibits military involvement in civilian affairs.
To be clear, I do not believe that U.S. law pertaining to this matter needs to be entirely rewritten. I do, however, think it is necessary that we review the regulations governing use of military personnel in domestic operations in order to better understand how all of our military assets can best assist during emergency situations.
Once again, thank you for contacting me on this issue.
With kind regards, I am
Sincerely,
John Warner
United States Senator
David Swanson
Global Research
October 22, 2008
A citizen of Virginia named Moya Atkinson wrote to Senator John Warner to express concern over the recent violation of the Posse Comitatus Act created by the assigning of U.S. soldiers to duty within the United States, reported by the Army Times as intended for "crowd control" among other duties. This, like other changes imposed by President Bush, of course violates the Posse Comitatus Act. It also served to strengthen the threats of martial law that Congressman Brad Sherman reported the White House making to Congress members in order to win their support for the $780 billion give-away to Wall Street.
Warner sent back the following note, proposing that, rather than changing the president’s behavior to comply with the law, we should — as with warrantless spying, habeas corpus, etc. — change the law to comply with the president’s behavior:
Thank you for contacting me regarding your opposition to Northern Command dedicating a combat infantry team to work within the United States. I appreciate your thoughtful inquiry on this important matter.
As you may know, the Northern Command has assigned the 1st Brigade Combat Team of the 3rd Infantry to deal with catastrophes in the United States. While the unit would not take over as the lead, the Army reports that this unit would be deployed to help local, state, or federal agencies deal with matters such as chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and high-yield explosive (CBRNE) incidents. The unit will be based in Fort Stewart, Georgia, and will focus primarily on logistics and support for local police and rescue personnel.
Looking back, the Hurricane Katrina relief efforts highlighted the important role our military plays during domestic crises. From providing security in destroyed neighborhoods, to treating patients aboard naval vessels, to rebuilding damaged levees and unwatering New Orleans, the military has performed vital work that no other federal or state entity has the capacity to undertake.
Not withstanding these tremendous achievements, I am deeply concerned that the Department of Defense and the President may not have authority to use active duty personnel in the most effective manner. In our federal system, we normally, and rightly, depend upon state and local authorities to maintain order and protect the public. The National Guard, operating under Title 32 of the U.S. Code, is the primary military organization authorized to employ police powers in times of crisis. However, in a situation of the magnitude of Hurricane Katrina, the level of destruction, coupled with the difficulty in maintaining order, brings into question the prohibition on using federal active duty military personnel, operating under Title 10 of the U.S. Code, to perform law enforcement duties.
I believe we must review the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act and similar provisions that limit the role of the active duty military to ensure that every available asset is properly employed in any type of future emergency situation. Title 18, Section 1385 of the U.S. Code, commonly referred to as the Posse Comitatus Act, prevents the armed forces from becoming involved in law enforcement activities for which, in most cases, they are not specifically trained or equipped. Posse Comitatus is largely rooted in historical tradition that prohibits military involvement in civilian affairs.
To be clear, I do not believe that U.S. law pertaining to this matter needs to be entirely rewritten. I do, however, think it is necessary that we review the regulations governing use of military personnel in domestic operations in order to better understand how all of our military assets can best assist during emergency situations.
Once again, thank you for contacting me on this issue.
With kind regards, I am
Sincerely,
John Warner
United States Senator
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Oktobefest 2008
More photos in the slideshow to the right
 |
| From June 2008 - Now |
 |
| From June 2008 - Now |
 |
| From June 2008 - Now |
 |
| From June 2008 - Now |
 |
| From June 2008 - Now |
 |
| From June 2008 - Now |
 |
| From June 2008 - Now |
 |
| From June 2008 - Now |
 |
| From June 2008 - Now |
 |
| From June 2008 - Now |
 |
| From June 2008 - Now |
Friday, October 17, 2008
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
I love automated responses from Congress folk..shows they actually care.
So i e-mailed all of my Reps a week or so before the bail out passed. I basically said vote no or i dont vote for you again.
Of course i had automated replies from all of them, Below is what Kay-Bailey auto responded with. I went back to her site and responded to this email. Asking why the american people had to buy the Toxic loans that not even the banks wanted, etc, and just to show that congress folks either dont have time for you or dont care. I go tthe same automated response from her again.
Dear Mr. Bartoszek:
Thank you for contacting me regarding the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. I welcome your thoughts and comments on this issue.
On September 19, 2008, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson announced a plan by the Bush Administration to stabilize the financial services sector of the economy. This plan included broad authority for the Treasury Secretary to purchase troubled financial instruments with very limited oversight and few protections for taxpayers.
In July, I voted against a similar proposed bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac because it did not provide taxpayer protection and limits on executive compensation for a government owned entity. For the same reasons, I was not willing to support the Administration’s initial proposal, and I encouraged my colleagues to continue work on a plan that would protect taxpayers, provide strict oversight, and place limits on the benefits to executives who accept taxpayer assistance.
In the days following the Treasury Secretary’s announcement, concerns about the danger to the broader economy deepened. The high-profile failure of numerous financial institutions caused the commercial lending market to accumulate and hold cash. The credit markets effectively froze, making it difficult for consumers to obtain loans for purchases such as homes and automobiles. The lack of lending in these areas began to place further pressure on the troubled housing market and threatened to spread deeper into the economy. Similarly, many small and mid-sized businesses were finding it difficult to obtain financing to meet their payroll obligations and purchase inventory. Many cities were entering the bond market and getting no bids, even with AAA ratings. The current liquidity crisis still poses a real potential for significant job losses. After consulting with numerous financial experts, small businesses, and bankers in Texas, it became clear to me that normal commercial lending activity would not resume without action by Congress.
Despite this realization, I was still not inclined to support the Paulson plan. After weeks of negotiation, however, a bi-partisan compromise was reached. While there are provisions in the bill that I do not favor and would not have drafted, overall the need for action to stabilize the market and to protect the retirement savings of millions of Americans weighed heavily on my mind. Ultimately, I supported the Senate bill along with 73 of my colleagues. The bill we passed was a major improvement over the initial plan announced by Secretary Paulson.
We increased the deposit insurance cap from $100,000 to $250,000 so that families will have added protection for savings and retirement accounts. While the initial proposal authorized up to $700 billion to purchase distressed assets, the measure we passed takes a more cautious approach, initially authorizing $250 billion and requiring the approval from Congress and the President for additional funding. Importantly, the bill we passed includes restrictions on the benefits received by executives whose companies are selling some of their distressed assets to the government. In return for purchasing the assets, taxpayers will obtain an ownership stake in the companies. Many leading economists believe that the real estate market will turn around in the foreseeable future and government owned properties and assets will be sold at a profit. A provision in this bill that I supported requires any profits realized to be placed in the nation’s treasury to reduce the deficit. If, however, after five years the government is facing a loss in the program, the President must submit a plan to Congress recommending how the money will be recouped from financial services companies. I believe that these protections are a dramatic improvement over the Administration’s initial proposal.
The bill passed by the Senate included an important package of tax policy provisions. One of these provisions is an extension of the state and local sales tax deduction, which is a matter of fairness for states like Texas that do not have a state income tax. The average Texan will save $520 when they file their federal income tax forms next year. We also shielded low and middle-income taxpayers from higher taxes associated with the flawed alternative minimum tax (AMT) and included tax incentives to spur energy production and innovation including the wind energy production tax credit and the research and development tax credit.
As Texans, we have learned to take responsibility for our actions and being asked to pay for the mistakes of others is something many, including myself, find deeply troubling. However, after careful deliberation, I believe that the risks associated with doing nothing outweighed the risk of passing a less than perfect bill that nevertheless includes important protections for taxpayers. Economic evidence clearly suggested the problems were spreading into the broader economy. That is why I voted for the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act.
I appreciate hearing from you. Please do not hesitate to contact me on any issue of concern to you.
Sincerely,
Kay Bailey Hutchison
United States Senator
284 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
202-224-5922 (tel)
202-224-0776 (fax)
http://hutchison.senate.gov
PLEASE DO NOT REPLY to this message as it is not a valid e-mail address. Due to the tremendous volume of mail Senator Hutchison receives, she requests that all email messages be sent through the contact form found on her website at http://hutchison.senate.gov/contact.cfm .
If you would like more information about issues pending before the Senate, please visit the Senator's website at http://hutchison.senate.gov . You will find articles, floor statements, and press releases, along with her weekly column and monthly television show on current events. You can also sign up to receive Senator Hutchison's weekly e-newsletter.
Thank you.
Of course i had automated replies from all of them, Below is what Kay-Bailey auto responded with. I went back to her site and responded to this email. Asking why the american people had to buy the Toxic loans that not even the banks wanted, etc, and just to show that congress folks either dont have time for you or dont care. I go tthe same automated response from her again.
Dear Mr. Bartoszek:
Thank you for contacting me regarding the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. I welcome your thoughts and comments on this issue.
On September 19, 2008, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson announced a plan by the Bush Administration to stabilize the financial services sector of the economy. This plan included broad authority for the Treasury Secretary to purchase troubled financial instruments with very limited oversight and few protections for taxpayers.
In July, I voted against a similar proposed bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac because it did not provide taxpayer protection and limits on executive compensation for a government owned entity. For the same reasons, I was not willing to support the Administration’s initial proposal, and I encouraged my colleagues to continue work on a plan that would protect taxpayers, provide strict oversight, and place limits on the benefits to executives who accept taxpayer assistance.
In the days following the Treasury Secretary’s announcement, concerns about the danger to the broader economy deepened. The high-profile failure of numerous financial institutions caused the commercial lending market to accumulate and hold cash. The credit markets effectively froze, making it difficult for consumers to obtain loans for purchases such as homes and automobiles. The lack of lending in these areas began to place further pressure on the troubled housing market and threatened to spread deeper into the economy. Similarly, many small and mid-sized businesses were finding it difficult to obtain financing to meet their payroll obligations and purchase inventory. Many cities were entering the bond market and getting no bids, even with AAA ratings. The current liquidity crisis still poses a real potential for significant job losses. After consulting with numerous financial experts, small businesses, and bankers in Texas, it became clear to me that normal commercial lending activity would not resume without action by Congress.
Despite this realization, I was still not inclined to support the Paulson plan. After weeks of negotiation, however, a bi-partisan compromise was reached. While there are provisions in the bill that I do not favor and would not have drafted, overall the need for action to stabilize the market and to protect the retirement savings of millions of Americans weighed heavily on my mind. Ultimately, I supported the Senate bill along with 73 of my colleagues. The bill we passed was a major improvement over the initial plan announced by Secretary Paulson.
We increased the deposit insurance cap from $100,000 to $250,000 so that families will have added protection for savings and retirement accounts. While the initial proposal authorized up to $700 billion to purchase distressed assets, the measure we passed takes a more cautious approach, initially authorizing $250 billion and requiring the approval from Congress and the President for additional funding. Importantly, the bill we passed includes restrictions on the benefits received by executives whose companies are selling some of their distressed assets to the government. In return for purchasing the assets, taxpayers will obtain an ownership stake in the companies. Many leading economists believe that the real estate market will turn around in the foreseeable future and government owned properties and assets will be sold at a profit. A provision in this bill that I supported requires any profits realized to be placed in the nation’s treasury to reduce the deficit. If, however, after five years the government is facing a loss in the program, the President must submit a plan to Congress recommending how the money will be recouped from financial services companies. I believe that these protections are a dramatic improvement over the Administration’s initial proposal.
The bill passed by the Senate included an important package of tax policy provisions. One of these provisions is an extension of the state and local sales tax deduction, which is a matter of fairness for states like Texas that do not have a state income tax. The average Texan will save $520 when they file their federal income tax forms next year. We also shielded low and middle-income taxpayers from higher taxes associated with the flawed alternative minimum tax (AMT) and included tax incentives to spur energy production and innovation including the wind energy production tax credit and the research and development tax credit.
As Texans, we have learned to take responsibility for our actions and being asked to pay for the mistakes of others is something many, including myself, find deeply troubling. However, after careful deliberation, I believe that the risks associated with doing nothing outweighed the risk of passing a less than perfect bill that nevertheless includes important protections for taxpayers. Economic evidence clearly suggested the problems were spreading into the broader economy. That is why I voted for the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act.
I appreciate hearing from you. Please do not hesitate to contact me on any issue of concern to you.
Sincerely,
Kay Bailey Hutchison
United States Senator
284 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
202-224-5922 (tel)
202-224-0776 (fax)
http://hutchison.senate.gov
PLEASE DO NOT REPLY to this message as it is not a valid e-mail address. Due to the tremendous volume of mail Senator Hutchison receives, she requests that all email messages be sent through the contact form found on her website at http://hutchison.senate.gov/contact.cfm .
If you would like more information about issues pending before the Senate, please visit the Senator's website at http://hutchison.senate.gov . You will find articles, floor statements, and press releases, along with her weekly column and monthly television show on current events. You can also sign up to receive Senator Hutchison's weekly e-newsletter.
Thank you.
Monday, October 13, 2008
We could all be tracked
Jim Redden
The Portland Tribune
October 12, 2008
Portland police are testing a high-tech camera system that rivals anything in a science fiction movie.
It can reach back in time and track your movements across the city — and even produce photos of your previous locations.
But — while some are raising Big Brother civil liberties questions about the concept — the police promise they will only use it to solve crimes, like finding stolen cars or locating wanted criminals.
The system features a series of cameras that mount on patrol cars that automatically read and photograph the license plates of all passing vehicles — including those parked along the sides of the streets. Plates of stolen and suspect-linked vehicles trigger an alarm, allowing the officers to immediately locate them.
The Portland Tribune
October 12, 2008
Portland police are testing a high-tech camera system that rivals anything in a science fiction movie.
It can reach back in time and track your movements across the city — and even produce photos of your previous locations.
But — while some are raising Big Brother civil liberties questions about the concept — the police promise they will only use it to solve crimes, like finding stolen cars or locating wanted criminals.
The system features a series of cameras that mount on patrol cars that automatically read and photograph the license plates of all passing vehicles — including those parked along the sides of the streets. Plates of stolen and suspect-linked vehicles trigger an alarm, allowing the officers to immediately locate them.
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Chavez: “Comrade Bush” a Socialist
Russia Today
October 8, 2008
http://www.infowars.com/?p=5168
George Bush has been the target of fresh jibes by Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez for doing exactly what he was criticising the socialist leader for – overriding market laws to protect the economy.
Critics say the U.S. bailout plan is an example of a double standard by the Bush administration, reports America’s McClatchy newspaper.
“If the Venezuelan government, for example, approves a law to protect consumers, they say, ‘Take notice, Chavez is a tyrant!’” said Chavez, speaking in one of his recent weekly television shows.
“Or they say, ‘Chavez is regulating prices. He is violating the laws of the marketplace.’ How many times have they criticised me for nationalising the phone company? They say, ‘The state shouldn’t get involved in that.’ But now they don’t criticize Bush for having to nationalise (the biggest banks in the world.) Comrade Bush, how are you?”
Warming to his theme, he added: “Comrade Bush is heading toward socialism.”
Nicaragua Congressman Edwin Castro agreed: “We think the Bush administration should follow the same policies that they and the International Monetary Fund have always told us to follow when we have economic problems — a structural adjustment that requires cutting government spending and reducing the role of government.”
Meanwhile, Bush said the bailout plan, that will see $700 billion of government money used to buy toxic mortgages, was necessary, although he said it stood against his personal philosophy.
October 8, 2008
http://www.infowars.com/?p=5168
George Bush has been the target of fresh jibes by Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez for doing exactly what he was criticising the socialist leader for – overriding market laws to protect the economy.
Critics say the U.S. bailout plan is an example of a double standard by the Bush administration, reports America’s McClatchy newspaper.
“If the Venezuelan government, for example, approves a law to protect consumers, they say, ‘Take notice, Chavez is a tyrant!’” said Chavez, speaking in one of his recent weekly television shows.
“Or they say, ‘Chavez is regulating prices. He is violating the laws of the marketplace.’ How many times have they criticised me for nationalising the phone company? They say, ‘The state shouldn’t get involved in that.’ But now they don’t criticize Bush for having to nationalise (the biggest banks in the world.) Comrade Bush, how are you?”
Warming to his theme, he added: “Comrade Bush is heading toward socialism.”
Nicaragua Congressman Edwin Castro agreed: “We think the Bush administration should follow the same policies that they and the International Monetary Fund have always told us to follow when we have economic problems — a structural adjustment that requires cutting government spending and reducing the role of government.”
Meanwhile, Bush said the bailout plan, that will see $700 billion of government money used to buy toxic mortgages, was necessary, although he said it stood against his personal philosophy.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Monday, October 6, 2008
CNN Reports on Deployment of 1st Brigade Combat Team in U.S.
Larry Shaughnessy
CNN
October 5, 2008
WASHINGTON (CNN) — The United States military’s Northern Command, formed in the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks, is dedicating a combat infantry team to deal with catastrophes in the U.S., including terrorist attacks and natural disasters.
The 1st Brigade Combat Team of the 3rd Infantry, which was first into Baghdad, Iraq, in 2003, started its controversial assignment Wednesday.
The First Raiders will spend 2009 as the first active-duty military unit attached to the U.S. Northern Command since it was created. They will be based in Fort Stewart, Georgia, and focus primarily on logistics and support for local police and rescue personnel, the Army says.
The plan is drawing skepticism from some observers who are concerned that the unit has been training with equipment generally used in law enforcement, including beanbag bullets, Tasers, spike strips and roadblocks.
That kind of training seems a bit out of line for the unit’s designated role as Northern Command’s CCMRF (Sea Smurf), or CBRNE Consequence Management Response Force. CBRNE stands for chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and high-yield explosive incidents.
According to Northern Command’s Web site, the CBRNE Consequence Management Response Force is a team that will ultimately number about 4,700 personnel from the different military branches that would deploy as the Department of Defense’s initial response force.
CNN
October 5, 2008
WASHINGTON (CNN) — The United States military’s Northern Command, formed in the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks, is dedicating a combat infantry team to deal with catastrophes in the U.S., including terrorist attacks and natural disasters.
The 1st Brigade Combat Team of the 3rd Infantry, which was first into Baghdad, Iraq, in 2003, started its controversial assignment Wednesday.
The First Raiders will spend 2009 as the first active-duty military unit attached to the U.S. Northern Command since it was created. They will be based in Fort Stewart, Georgia, and focus primarily on logistics and support for local police and rescue personnel, the Army says.
The plan is drawing skepticism from some observers who are concerned that the unit has been training with equipment generally used in law enforcement, including beanbag bullets, Tasers, spike strips and roadblocks.
That kind of training seems a bit out of line for the unit’s designated role as Northern Command’s CCMRF (Sea Smurf), or CBRNE Consequence Management Response Force. CBRNE stands for chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and high-yield explosive incidents.
According to Northern Command’s Web site, the CBRNE Consequence Management Response Force is a team that will ultimately number about 4,700 personnel from the different military branches that would deploy as the Department of Defense’s initial response force.
They're gearing up for something...
U.S. Army Troops To Serve As U.S. Policemen?
http://www.infowars.com/?p=5112
Guidelines Expand FBI’s Surveillance Powers
http://www.infowars.com/?p=5111
Germany to allow domestic military deployment
http://www.infowars.com/?p=5113
Brit police train for riot scenarios
http://www.infowars.com/?p=5102
Financial Dictatorship Comes to America
http://www.infowars.com/?p=5105
http://www.infowars.com/?p=5112
Guidelines Expand FBI’s Surveillance Powers
http://www.infowars.com/?p=5111
Germany to allow domestic military deployment
http://www.infowars.com/?p=5113
Brit police train for riot scenarios
http://www.infowars.com/?p=5102
Financial Dictatorship Comes to America
http://www.infowars.com/?p=5105
Homeland Security’s Space-Based Spying Goes Live
Tom Burghardt
Global Research
October 5, 2008
While America’s attention has shifted to the economic meltdown and the presidential race between corporate favorites John McCain and Barack Obama, The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday that the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) National Applications Office (NAO) "will proceed with the first phase of a controversial satellite-surveillance program, even though an independent review found the department hasn’t yet ensured the program will comply with privacy laws."
As I wrote in June, NAO will coordinate how domestic law enforcement and "disaster relief" agencies such as FEMA use satellite imagery intelligence (IMINT) generated by U.S. spy satellites. Based on available evidence, hard to come by since these programs are classified "above top secret," the technological power of these military assets are truly terrifying.
Unlike commercial satellites that beam TV programs, forecast the weather or provide global positioning services, their military cousins are far more flexible, have greater resolution and therefore, more power to monitor human activity. By utilizing different parts of the light- and infrared spectrum, spy satellites, in addition to taking ultra high-resolution photographs to within a meter of their "target," can also track the heat signatures generated by people inside a building. ("Homeland Security’s Space-Based Spies," Antifascist Calling, June 4, 2008)
In other words, when combined with illegal NSA and FBI domestic surveillance programs–from data-mining to the massive interception of telephone and internet communications–NAO will furnish DHS and outsourced corporate grifters who actually run the program, with the blanket coverage of American citizens long sought by securocrats. Aside from The Wall Street Journal and The Raw Story, not a single media outlet has disclosed this vital information to the public.
Despite the absence of rigorous oversight that would determine whether or not NAO complies with what’s left of privacy laws, DHS is proceeding full speed ahead. The Journal reports,
A new 60-page Government Accountability Office report said the department "lacks assurance that NAO operations will comply with applicable laws and privacy and civil liberties standards," according to a person familiar with the document. The report, which is unclassified but considered sensitive, hasn’t been publicly released, but was described and quoted by several people who have read it.
The report cites gaps in privacy safeguards. The department, it found, lacks controls to prevent improper use of domestic-intelligence data by other agencies and provided insufficient assurance that requests for classified information will be fully reviewed to ensure it can be legally provided. ( Siobhan Gorman, "Satellite-Surveillance Program to Begin Despite Privacy Concerns," The Wall Street Journal, October 1, 2008) [emphasis added]
Reporting on the shocking absence of oversight features built into the program, Nick Juliano writes,
Essentially, the bill only requires the Homeland Security Secretary to assure lawmakers that NAO programs comply with exisiting laws. Congress also has required the DHS Inspector General to provide quarterly classified reports on how much information has been collected by the domestic satellite surveillance, although the bill required those reports be made to the House and Senate Appropriations Committees, not the Homeland Security Committees that are traditionally in charge of DHS oversight. ("DHS satellite spy program going forward despite objections," The Raw Story, October 2, 2008)
The GAO’s suppressed report is not the first to criticize the breathtaking scope of this repressive program. The Congressional Research Service (CRS) issued a study in June raising critical questions about NAO’s legality.
Members of Congress and outside groups have raised concerns that using satellites for law enforcement purposes may infringe on the privacy and Fourth Amendment rights of U.S. persons. Other commentators have questioned whether the proposed surveillance will violate the Posse Comitatus Act or other restrictions on military involvement in civilian law enforcement, or would otherwise exceed the statutory mandates of the agencies involved. Such concerns led Congress to preclude any funds in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 (H.R. 2764, P.L. 110-161), from being used to "commence operations of the National Applications Office … until the Secretary [of the Department of Homeland Security] certifies that these programs comply with all existing laws, including all applicable privacy and civil liberties standards, and that certification is reviewed by the Government Accountability Office." (Section 525.) Similar language has been included in FY2009 homeland security appropriations bills. (Richard A. Best Jr. and Jennifer K. Elsea, "Satellite Surveillance: Domestic Issues," Congressional Research Service, June 27, 2008)
But as the Journal reported, Congress’ "partial funding" for the program in "a little-debated $634 billion spending measure," means that an operational NAO will now provide federal, state and local officials "with extensive access to spy-satellite imagery–but no eavesdropping–to assist with emergency response and other domestic-security needs, such as identifying where ports or border areas are vulnerable to terrorism."
Such hollow "no eavesdropping" assurances to Congress from quarterly classified reports from the DHS Inspector General fly in the face of the steady erosion of constitutional protections by the Bush administration.
What "other agencies" might the GAO have in mind when citing concerns over potential abuse of intelligence data supplied by the National Applications Office? Well, take your pick since the U.S. "intelligence community" is comprised of 16 different agencies under the operational control of the Office of National Intelligence (ODI) and the powerful Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI).
Led by Michael McConnell, a ten-year veteran of the spooky Booz Allen Hamilton corporation, purchased this year by the sinister Carlyle Group, ODNI can truly be described as a "public-private partnership" in political repression. As CorpWatch reported in March,
McConnell … spent more than 10 years as a Booz Allen senior vice president in charge of the company’s extensive contracts in military intelligence and information operations for the Pentagon. In that job, his official biography states, McConnell provided intelligence support to "the U.S. Unified Combatant Commanders, the Director of National Intelligence Agencies, and the Military Service Intelligence Directors." That made him a close colleague of not only Donald Rumsfeld, who ran the Pentagon from 2001 to 2007, but of Vice President Cheney, who has served President Bush as a kind of intelligence godfather since the earliest days of the administration. (Tim Shorrock, "Carlyle Group May Buy Major CIA Contractor: Booz Allen Hamilton," CorpWatch, March 8, 2008)
Investigative journalist Tim Shorrock revealed last year, that the intelligence-sharing system to be managed by NAO,
…will rely heavily on private contractors including Boeing, BAE Systems, L-3 Communications and Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). These companies already provide technology and personnel to U.S. agencies involved in foreign intelligence, and the NAO greatly expands their markets. Indeed, at an intelligence conference in San Antonio, Texas, last month, the titans of the industry were actively lobbying intelligence officials to buy products specifically designed for domestic surveillance. ("Domestic Spying, Inc." CorpWatch, November 27, 2007)
NAO will utilize the military imagery and mapping tools of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA). NGA maintains a symbiotic relationship with both the NSA and the ultra-secret National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), that builds and maintains America’s fleet of spy satellites. Additionally, NRO operates the planetary wide network of ground stations where NSA’s signals intelligence (SIGINT) and NGA’s imagery intelligence (IMINT) are processed and analyzed.
Shorrock revealed that the program was kick-started in 2005 and the impetus came from veteran spooks with extensive ties to the military-industrial-security apparatus and corporate outfits such as Booz Allen Hamilton. The company was "tasked" with studying how "intelligence from spy satellites and photoreconnaissance planes could be better used domestically to track potential threats to security within the U.S." Completed in 2005, the Booz Allen plan became the basis for NAO.
Veteran spook Charles Allen told The Wall Street Journal in August 2007 that NAO is "an idea whose time has arrived." As DHS chief intelligence officer, Allen will head the new program.
Additionally, an "independent study group" appointed in 2005 by the Director of National Intelligence, tasked with reviewing the deployment of military reconnaissance assets in the "homeland" reached the desired conclusions. According to a press release by the Department of Homeland Security,
The study group unanimously recommended in its September 2005 report that the scope of the Civil Applications Committee be expanded beyond civil applications to include homeland security and law enforcement applications, and concluded that there is an urgent need for action. The study group concluded a new approach is needed to effectively employ Intelligence Community capabilities for civil applications, homeland security and law enforcement uses. ("Fact Sheet: National Applications Office," Department of Homeland Security, August 15, 2007)
How "independent"? You make the call! Shorrock reported that the group,
… was chaired by Keith Hall, a Booz Allen vice president who manages his firm’s extensive contracts with the NGA and previously served as the director of the NRO.
Other members of the group included seven other former intelligence officers working for Booz Allen, as well as retired Army Lieutenant General Patrick M. Hughes, the former director of the DIA and vice president of homeland security for L-3 Communications, a key NSA contractor; and Thomas W. Conroy, the vice president of national security programs for Northrop Grumman, which has extensive contracts with the NSA and the NGA and throughout the intelligence community. (Shorrock, 2008, op. cit.)
From the start, the group’s findings were "heavily weighted" toward corporations "with a stake" in both foreign and domestic intelligence. No surprise then, when the group’s "contractor-advisers" called for "a major expansion in the domestic use of the spy satellites that they sell to the government."
A power-grab by the ODNI and DHS should raise serious alarms of further encroachments by a lawless "unitary executive" and serve as a warning that domestic law enforcement is rapidly coming under the purview of opaque Pentagon spy agencies.
While the creeping militarization of civilian policing is not a new phenomenon, the NAO launch represents a qualitative leap towards the surveillance society dreamed up by Iran-Contra felon and former DARPA administrator John Poindexter, before he was kicked to the curb when plans for the Total Information Awareness (TIA) program first gained notoriety in 2003.
And like the newly-launched NAO, TIA was managed by none other than Booz Allen Hamilton and their sidekicks at the San Diego-based Science Applications International Corporation! Small world (of open-ended contracts for giant Bush regime-connected multinationals).
The NAO will be overseen by the National Applications Executive Council (NAEC). In turn, NAEC will be "tri-chaired" by the Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security, the Deputy Secretary of the Department of the Interior (DOI), and the Principal Deputy of the Director of National Intelligence, a position held by Donald M. Kerr.
As with the vast majority of top securocrats, Kerr has served in a multitude of capacities inside and outside government. When he ended his tenure as Director of the National Reconnaissance Office in 2007, Kerr joined ONI. The one-time CIA and FBI employee was also a SAIC executive vice president during the 1990s.
Tim Shorrock reported in his essential book, Spies for Hire, that Kerr described how "ninety-five percent of the resources over which we have stewardship in fact go out on a contract to our industrial base. It’s an important thing to recognize that we cannot function without this highly integrated industrial government team." Brutal honesty for brutal times.
Despite rigorous objections by members of Congress and civil liberties’ groups to a program with the breathtaking potential to invade our privacy in newer and more lethal ways, NAO is now reality. America’s headlong flight towards constructing a post-Constitutional "new order" just added another brick in the wall.
Global Research
October 5, 2008
While America’s attention has shifted to the economic meltdown and the presidential race between corporate favorites John McCain and Barack Obama, The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday that the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) National Applications Office (NAO) "will proceed with the first phase of a controversial satellite-surveillance program, even though an independent review found the department hasn’t yet ensured the program will comply with privacy laws."
As I wrote in June, NAO will coordinate how domestic law enforcement and "disaster relief" agencies such as FEMA use satellite imagery intelligence (IMINT) generated by U.S. spy satellites. Based on available evidence, hard to come by since these programs are classified "above top secret," the technological power of these military assets are truly terrifying.
Unlike commercial satellites that beam TV programs, forecast the weather or provide global positioning services, their military cousins are far more flexible, have greater resolution and therefore, more power to monitor human activity. By utilizing different parts of the light- and infrared spectrum, spy satellites, in addition to taking ultra high-resolution photographs to within a meter of their "target," can also track the heat signatures generated by people inside a building. ("Homeland Security’s Space-Based Spies," Antifascist Calling, June 4, 2008)
In other words, when combined with illegal NSA and FBI domestic surveillance programs–from data-mining to the massive interception of telephone and internet communications–NAO will furnish DHS and outsourced corporate grifters who actually run the program, with the blanket coverage of American citizens long sought by securocrats. Aside from The Wall Street Journal and The Raw Story, not a single media outlet has disclosed this vital information to the public.
Despite the absence of rigorous oversight that would determine whether or not NAO complies with what’s left of privacy laws, DHS is proceeding full speed ahead. The Journal reports,
A new 60-page Government Accountability Office report said the department "lacks assurance that NAO operations will comply with applicable laws and privacy and civil liberties standards," according to a person familiar with the document. The report, which is unclassified but considered sensitive, hasn’t been publicly released, but was described and quoted by several people who have read it.
The report cites gaps in privacy safeguards. The department, it found, lacks controls to prevent improper use of domestic-intelligence data by other agencies and provided insufficient assurance that requests for classified information will be fully reviewed to ensure it can be legally provided. ( Siobhan Gorman, "Satellite-Surveillance Program to Begin Despite Privacy Concerns," The Wall Street Journal, October 1, 2008) [emphasis added]
Reporting on the shocking absence of oversight features built into the program, Nick Juliano writes,
Essentially, the bill only requires the Homeland Security Secretary to assure lawmakers that NAO programs comply with exisiting laws. Congress also has required the DHS Inspector General to provide quarterly classified reports on how much information has been collected by the domestic satellite surveillance, although the bill required those reports be made to the House and Senate Appropriations Committees, not the Homeland Security Committees that are traditionally in charge of DHS oversight. ("DHS satellite spy program going forward despite objections," The Raw Story, October 2, 2008)
The GAO’s suppressed report is not the first to criticize the breathtaking scope of this repressive program. The Congressional Research Service (CRS) issued a study in June raising critical questions about NAO’s legality.
Members of Congress and outside groups have raised concerns that using satellites for law enforcement purposes may infringe on the privacy and Fourth Amendment rights of U.S. persons. Other commentators have questioned whether the proposed surveillance will violate the Posse Comitatus Act or other restrictions on military involvement in civilian law enforcement, or would otherwise exceed the statutory mandates of the agencies involved. Such concerns led Congress to preclude any funds in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 (H.R. 2764, P.L. 110-161), from being used to "commence operations of the National Applications Office … until the Secretary [of the Department of Homeland Security] certifies that these programs comply with all existing laws, including all applicable privacy and civil liberties standards, and that certification is reviewed by the Government Accountability Office." (Section 525.) Similar language has been included in FY2009 homeland security appropriations bills. (Richard A. Best Jr. and Jennifer K. Elsea, "Satellite Surveillance: Domestic Issues," Congressional Research Service, June 27, 2008)
But as the Journal reported, Congress’ "partial funding" for the program in "a little-debated $634 billion spending measure," means that an operational NAO will now provide federal, state and local officials "with extensive access to spy-satellite imagery–but no eavesdropping–to assist with emergency response and other domestic-security needs, such as identifying where ports or border areas are vulnerable to terrorism."
Such hollow "no eavesdropping" assurances to Congress from quarterly classified reports from the DHS Inspector General fly in the face of the steady erosion of constitutional protections by the Bush administration.
What "other agencies" might the GAO have in mind when citing concerns over potential abuse of intelligence data supplied by the National Applications Office? Well, take your pick since the U.S. "intelligence community" is comprised of 16 different agencies under the operational control of the Office of National Intelligence (ODI) and the powerful Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI).
Led by Michael McConnell, a ten-year veteran of the spooky Booz Allen Hamilton corporation, purchased this year by the sinister Carlyle Group, ODNI can truly be described as a "public-private partnership" in political repression. As CorpWatch reported in March,
McConnell … spent more than 10 years as a Booz Allen senior vice president in charge of the company’s extensive contracts in military intelligence and information operations for the Pentagon. In that job, his official biography states, McConnell provided intelligence support to "the U.S. Unified Combatant Commanders, the Director of National Intelligence Agencies, and the Military Service Intelligence Directors." That made him a close colleague of not only Donald Rumsfeld, who ran the Pentagon from 2001 to 2007, but of Vice President Cheney, who has served President Bush as a kind of intelligence godfather since the earliest days of the administration. (Tim Shorrock, "Carlyle Group May Buy Major CIA Contractor: Booz Allen Hamilton," CorpWatch, March 8, 2008)
Investigative journalist Tim Shorrock revealed last year, that the intelligence-sharing system to be managed by NAO,
…will rely heavily on private contractors including Boeing, BAE Systems, L-3 Communications and Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). These companies already provide technology and personnel to U.S. agencies involved in foreign intelligence, and the NAO greatly expands their markets. Indeed, at an intelligence conference in San Antonio, Texas, last month, the titans of the industry were actively lobbying intelligence officials to buy products specifically designed for domestic surveillance. ("Domestic Spying, Inc." CorpWatch, November 27, 2007)
NAO will utilize the military imagery and mapping tools of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA). NGA maintains a symbiotic relationship with both the NSA and the ultra-secret National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), that builds and maintains America’s fleet of spy satellites. Additionally, NRO operates the planetary wide network of ground stations where NSA’s signals intelligence (SIGINT) and NGA’s imagery intelligence (IMINT) are processed and analyzed.
Shorrock revealed that the program was kick-started in 2005 and the impetus came from veteran spooks with extensive ties to the military-industrial-security apparatus and corporate outfits such as Booz Allen Hamilton. The company was "tasked" with studying how "intelligence from spy satellites and photoreconnaissance planes could be better used domestically to track potential threats to security within the U.S." Completed in 2005, the Booz Allen plan became the basis for NAO.
Veteran spook Charles Allen told The Wall Street Journal in August 2007 that NAO is "an idea whose time has arrived." As DHS chief intelligence officer, Allen will head the new program.
Additionally, an "independent study group" appointed in 2005 by the Director of National Intelligence, tasked with reviewing the deployment of military reconnaissance assets in the "homeland" reached the desired conclusions. According to a press release by the Department of Homeland Security,
The study group unanimously recommended in its September 2005 report that the scope of the Civil Applications Committee be expanded beyond civil applications to include homeland security and law enforcement applications, and concluded that there is an urgent need for action. The study group concluded a new approach is needed to effectively employ Intelligence Community capabilities for civil applications, homeland security and law enforcement uses. ("Fact Sheet: National Applications Office," Department of Homeland Security, August 15, 2007)
How "independent"? You make the call! Shorrock reported that the group,
… was chaired by Keith Hall, a Booz Allen vice president who manages his firm’s extensive contracts with the NGA and previously served as the director of the NRO.
Other members of the group included seven other former intelligence officers working for Booz Allen, as well as retired Army Lieutenant General Patrick M. Hughes, the former director of the DIA and vice president of homeland security for L-3 Communications, a key NSA contractor; and Thomas W. Conroy, the vice president of national security programs for Northrop Grumman, which has extensive contracts with the NSA and the NGA and throughout the intelligence community. (Shorrock, 2008, op. cit.)
From the start, the group’s findings were "heavily weighted" toward corporations "with a stake" in both foreign and domestic intelligence. No surprise then, when the group’s "contractor-advisers" called for "a major expansion in the domestic use of the spy satellites that they sell to the government."
A power-grab by the ODNI and DHS should raise serious alarms of further encroachments by a lawless "unitary executive" and serve as a warning that domestic law enforcement is rapidly coming under the purview of opaque Pentagon spy agencies.
While the creeping militarization of civilian policing is not a new phenomenon, the NAO launch represents a qualitative leap towards the surveillance society dreamed up by Iran-Contra felon and former DARPA administrator John Poindexter, before he was kicked to the curb when plans for the Total Information Awareness (TIA) program first gained notoriety in 2003.
And like the newly-launched NAO, TIA was managed by none other than Booz Allen Hamilton and their sidekicks at the San Diego-based Science Applications International Corporation! Small world (of open-ended contracts for giant Bush regime-connected multinationals).
The NAO will be overseen by the National Applications Executive Council (NAEC). In turn, NAEC will be "tri-chaired" by the Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security, the Deputy Secretary of the Department of the Interior (DOI), and the Principal Deputy of the Director of National Intelligence, a position held by Donald M. Kerr.
As with the vast majority of top securocrats, Kerr has served in a multitude of capacities inside and outside government. When he ended his tenure as Director of the National Reconnaissance Office in 2007, Kerr joined ONI. The one-time CIA and FBI employee was also a SAIC executive vice president during the 1990s.
Tim Shorrock reported in his essential book, Spies for Hire, that Kerr described how "ninety-five percent of the resources over which we have stewardship in fact go out on a contract to our industrial base. It’s an important thing to recognize that we cannot function without this highly integrated industrial government team." Brutal honesty for brutal times.
Despite rigorous objections by members of Congress and civil liberties’ groups to a program with the breathtaking potential to invade our privacy in newer and more lethal ways, NAO is now reality. America’s headlong flight towards constructing a post-Constitutional "new order" just added another brick in the wall.
Sunday, October 5, 2008
We are digital!
Watching tv now in the wonderful and sometimes horribly frustrating DIGITAL TV. We got our box and after playing with the antenna a bit got most of our local station in with no problem. Crystal clear just like cable. Our selection choices have now grown from 5 to 10, and we dont even have all of the channel we can, but as with digital you either have a signal...or you dont. There is no snow, just BER...which i guess goes right along with snow.
 |
| From June 2008 - Now |
Craft fair..incredibly unsuccessful
It's amazing how three big guys can become invisible to folks. I swear no one but kids even knew we were there.
 |
| From June 2008 - Now |
 |
| From June 2008 - Now |
 |
| From June 2008 - Now |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
