Tag Archives: current

CNN’s Ed Henry Touts Bill Clinton as ‘Best Democratic Politician’

On Wednesday’s American Morning, CNN’s Ed Henry lauded former President Clinton as ” one of the best politicians the Democrats have ever had …in the last quarter century” and touted his apparent credibility over current President Barack Obama. Henry also speculated that if “Al Gore… had used President Clinton more in 2000, he may have been president .” Substitute anchor Drew Griffin brought on the White House correspondent 26 minutes into the 7 am Eastern hour to discuss the Obama White House’s intention to “aggressively use the former president on the campaign trail over the next few months. One party official familiar with the plan calls it a- quote, ‘no-brainer.'” During the second half of the segment, Griffin asked, “How can Bill Clinton do it all? I mean, he was picked by President Obama, basically, to rebuild Haiti. Now, they seem to be yanking him off of that and heading him out to the campaign trail, just to save the Democrats in the House in November.” Henry used the “no-brainer” quote from the unnamed Democratic Party official in his answer and immediately proceeded to use his superlatives about Clinton: HENRY: Well, they’re careful here inside the White House to say that they don’t want to yank him off the Haiti job or any of his other important Clinton Foundation work, for example, altogether. They just want him to fit it in, because they say- look, as you noted, it’s a no-brainer . This is one of the best politicians the Democrats have ever had- you know, in the last quarter century . And, as President Obama faces these credibility questions and all these various national polls right now, and as he tries to make this case that there is a real choice between the Democratic message and the Republican message, people inside the White House say there’s no one better at making that case, that contrast between the Democrats and the Republicans, than Bill Clinton . So they want to use him early and often, and they point to what happened in 2000 when Al Gore had trepidation about using Bill Clinton- sort of backfired on him, blew up in his face. If they had used President Clinton more in 2000, he may have been president, Drew . Is Henry forgetting and/or brushing aside Clinton’s own credibility issues, such as his law license in Arkansas being suspended for five years after he lied under oath about his affair with Monica Lewinsky? Griffin followed through by asking about the current Democratic occupant of the White House: “You know, I can’t resist, Ed, but what about using President Obama, the current president? He just doesn’t have the clout?” The CNN correspondent acknowledged Obama’s failing poll numbers, but then touted him as still being more or less equal to former President Clinton: HENRY: … Clearly, he’s facing these credibility questions because of all these national polls you’ve been talking about . The ABC one yesterday saying 6 in 10 Americans basically don’t have faith in this president right now to make the right decisions. They’re pushing back on that, obviously, inside the White House , and saying- look, they’re going to send him out on the campaign trail. But there’s certain states like Arkansas where President Obama is just deeply unpopular- lost to John McCain there by double digits. And so, they see it as a one-two punch . President Obama will be out there in some states, Bill Clinton will go to other ones, Drew.

View post:
CNN’s Ed Henry Touts Bill Clinton as ‘Best Democratic Politician’

Why BP is readying a ’super weapon’ to avert escalating Gulf nightmare

In a desperate attempt to stop a huge area of the Gulf ocean floor from possibly rupturing due to subterranean methane gas (leading to a calamity no human has ever seen) BP has ripped a page from science fiction books. The giant oil company is now quietly preparing to test a small nuclear device in a frenzied rush against time to quell a cascading catastrophe. If successful they will have the capability to detonate a controlled fusion generated pulse. While the world watches BP's attempt to contain the oil gusher at the former Deepwater Horizon site, company officials have given the green light on an astounding plan to use what is known as a nuclear EPFCG charge if all else fails. Sea floor compromised Reports still indicate that methane is flooding the Gulf waters at a rate one million times more than normal, and the NOAA research vessel, Thomas Jefferson has reported spotting new fissures. [1] Last week the science ship stunned some reporters with the revelation that the oceanographic team had discovered and measured a rift in the ocean floor miles from the BP wellhead. The rift was reported to be more than 100 feet long and widening. Oil and methane continues to plume from that rift. BP has also admitted damage beneath the sea floor. [2] The Omega plan Most enterprises—whether business, government, or exploration—have a Plan B to fall back on. To date, BP has attempted Plans B through N. Yet it is the last ditch plan-the Omega plan-that hold the greatest risk. Yet that plan may be the final hope to stop what some insiders now consider a catastrophe that could culminate with a world-killing mass extinction event that modern civilization could not survive. At a super-secret security base-CFB Suffield-located in southern Alberta, Canada, area reports indicate that high level engineers, physicists and military scientists are feverishly working to complete an ‘explosively pumped flux compression generator’ (EPFCG). According to published scientific papers [see sources below] an EPFCG generator can be powered by a very small, controlled fusion explosion-in other words, a tiny nuclear bomb. Why the UK based BP has set up operations at CFB-Suffield is obvious: The company already runs three oil rigs on the base, have worked with Canada’s chemical and biological efforts on and off for almost 40 years, and have strong ties to the Commonwealth’s infrastructure. The CFB Base, which incorporates DRDC Suffield, is one of six Canadian military http://bit.ly/agZUx4 added by: ras_menelik

VIDEO Chevron Tries to Restrict 1st Amendment Rights of "Crude" Documentary Filmmaker

The ongoing saga of the class action lawsuit, Aguinda v. Chevron, originally filed in 1993 by the people of Ecuador whose rainforest land had been contaminated by oil production practices, and documented on film by Joe Berlinger in “Crude,” has taken a new turn. Chevron's latest diversionary and delaying tactic is to engage in a widespread and unprecedented legal assault on the First Amendment in their attempt to force Berlinger, the celebrated independent documentarian, to turn over more than 600 hours of private film outtakes from “Crude.” Chevron's legal tactic has attracted widespread criticism from prominent individuals across the media community, including actor and filmmaker Robert Redford, journalist Bill Moyers, bestselling author John Perkins, documentarians Michael Moore and Ric Burns, the Director's Guild of America, the Writer's Guild of America, and others. Virtually every major U.S. media outlet, including the NY Times, LA Times, CBS, NBC, ABC, Associated Press, Dow Jones, HBO, and others have opposed Chevron's action in court. This latest action by Chevron is part of a worldwide, desperate litigation campaign by the oil giant to escape liability for what is thought to be the world's worst oil-related environmental catastrophe. The extent of the contamination is almost unfathomable – by Chevron's own admission they dumped at least 15.8 billion gallons of toxic 'produced water' in the region, and their own audits indicate that the number may actually be much higher – more than 18.5 billion gallons. Of the 18.5 billion gallons of toxins, at least 345 million gallons of it was pure crude oil. To put this in perspective, as of June 15, 2010, U.S. government estimates have indicated that the BP spill in the Gulf has spilled somewhere between 73 and 126 million gallons of oil. At least the BP spill was not intentional. By contrast, Chevron's dumping was, by the company's own admission, a deliberate production decision to maximize profits. According to experts, a saving of approximately $1-3 per barrel of oil was achieved by dumping the toxins rather than disposing of them properly. The end result of this has been incredible devastation of a formerly pristine section of Ecuador's Amazon rainforest. Though Chevron no longer operates in the area (having ceased Ecuadorian drilling operations in 1990), the pollution still remains. The people living in that region do not have widespread running water or plumbing, and have had no access to water that has not been polluted by the oil operations for nearly four decades. I have seen firsthand the reality of the aftermath of Chevron's actions in Ecuador. I have seen some of the unlined, unfenced waste pits that Chevron left behind. I have met many people there who have lost their parents, their children, and who are losing heir own lives. The area is besieged with oil-related illnesses; families are plagued with extremely elevated levels of childhood leukemia, spontaneous abortions, birth defects, and other serious oil-related health impacts. Experts have estimated that at least 1,400 people have died needlessly from oil-related sicknesses due to the illegal dumping. In 1993, the people in the region brought a lawsuit against the oil giant to force the company to clean-up the damage it caused on their land. An independent court-expert has estimated that the damage caused in the region could cost as much as $27.3 billion to clean up. However, even that amount will be insufficient to return the people to the lifestyles they knew before the Chevron showed up. Small wonder Chevron are running scared. Without taking sides in the lawsuit itself, the enormous legal liability tied to all of these harms provides the context for why Chevron is so aggressively attacking its critics across the world. Chevron has one animating principle in their attacks on Joe Berlinger, the Ecuadorean people, and anyone attempting to hold the company responsible for the pollution it left behind in Ecuador: to find some way of eliminating the legal liability to protect the company's bottom line. But the time has come for Chevron to stop its attacks, and to stop trying to evade its responsibilities. The company should cease its futile attempts to force documentarians and journalists to open up their files to the company's lawyers, and instead focus on the essential issue: how they will remediate the damage it caused in Ecuador to the 30,000 affected people and their land. http://www.crudethemovie.com/ added by: captainplanet71

VIDEO Chevron Tries to Restrict 1st Amendment of "Crude" Documentary Filmmaker

The ongoing saga of the class action lawsuit, Aguinda v. Chevron, originally filed in 1993 by the people of Ecuador whose rainforest land had been contaminated by oil production practices, and documented on film by Joe Berlinger in “Crude,” has taken a new turn. Chevron's latest diversionary and delaying tactic is to engage in a widespread and unprecedented legal assault on the First Amendment in their attempt to force Berlinger, the celebrated independent documentarian, to turn over more than 600 hours of private film outtakes from “Crude.” Chevron's legal tactic has attracted widespread criticism from prominent individuals across the media community, including actor and filmmaker Robert Redford, journalist Bill Moyers, bestselling author John Perkins, documentarians Michael Moore and Ric Burns, the Director's Guild of America, the Writer's Guild of America, and others. Virtually every major U.S. media outlet, including the NY Times, LA Times, CBS, NBC, ABC, Associated Press, Dow Jones, HBO, and others have opposed Chevron's action in court. This latest action by Chevron is part of a worldwide, desperate litigation campaign by the oil giant to escape liability for what is thought to be the world's worst oil-related environmental catastrophe. The extent of the contamination is almost unfathomable – by Chevron's own admission they dumped at least 15.8 billion gallons of toxic 'produced water' in the region, and their own audits indicate that the number may actually be much higher – more than 18.5 billion gallons. Of the 18.5 billion gallons of toxins, at least 345 million gallons of it was pure crude oil. To put this in perspective, as of June 15, 2010, U.S. government estimates have indicated that the BP spill in the Gulf has spilled somewhere between 73 and 126 million gallons of oil. At least the BP spill was not intentional. By contrast, Chevron's dumping was, by the company's own admission, a deliberate production decision to maximize profits. According to experts, a saving of approximately $1-3 per barrel of oil was achieved by dumping the toxins rather than disposing of them properly. The end result of this has been incredible devastation of a formerly pristine section of Ecuador's Amazon rainforest. Though Chevron no longer operates in the area (having ceased Ecuadorian drilling operations in 1990), the pollution still remains. The people living in that region do not have widespread running water or plumbing, and have had no access to water that has not been polluted by the oil operations for nearly four decades. I have seen firsthand the reality of the aftermath of Chevron's actions in Ecuador. I have seen some of the unlined, unfenced waste pits that Chevron left behind. I have met many people there who have lost their parents, their children, and who are losing heir own lives. The area is besieged with oil-related illnesses; families are plagued with extremely elevated levels of childhood leukemia, spontaneous abortions, birth defects, and other serious oil-related health impacts. Experts have estimated that at least 1,400 people have died needlessly from oil-related sicknesses due to the illegal dumping. In 1993, the people in the region brought a lawsuit against the oil giant to force the company to clean-up the damage it caused on their land. An independent court-expert has estimated that the damage caused in the region could cost as much as $27.3 billion to clean up. However, even that amount will be insufficient to return the people to the lifestyles they knew before the Chevron showed up. Small wonder Chevron are running scared. Without taking sides in the lawsuit itself, the enormous legal liability tied to all of these harms provides the context for why Chevron is so aggressively attacking its critics across the world. Chevron has one animating principle in their attacks on Joe Berlinger, the Ecuadorean people, and anyone attempting to hold the company responsible for the pollution it left behind in Ecuador: to find some way of eliminating the legal liability to protect the company's bottom line. But the time has come for Chevron to stop its attacks, and to stop trying to evade its responsibilities. The company should cease its futile attempts to force documentarians and journalists to open up their files to the company's lawyers, and instead focus on the essential issue: how they will remediate the damage it caused in Ecuador to the 30,000 affected people and their land. http://www.crudethemovie.com/ added by: captainplanet71

Dell Streak hitting AT&T on July 19th?

It appears that the AT&T Dell Streak might be hitting the network on July 19th, only a day after the Galaxy S series Samsung Captivate launches. added by: admillios

Fox News Anchor in Screaming Fit

|main|dl9|link4|http2F%2F www.bvblackspin.com 2F072Fmegyn-kelly-and-kirsten-powers-joust-over-new-black-panther-civi%2F Fox News reporter Megyn Kelly (pictured) and New York Post columnist Kirsten Powers went at it recently, regarding charges from a former Justice Department lawyer that civil rights cases where whites are the victims are ignored. The case involves allegations against two New Black Panther Party members who were accused of intimidating white voters near the entrance to the polling place of a largely black neighborhood. The men allegedly called white voters “white devil” and said that once Obama was elected, they would be “ruled by the black man, cracker.” The Bush Administration, who many observers agree had a terrible civil rights record, brought suit against the men. The new administration, including Attorney General Eric Holder, dropped the charges because they did not feel there was much of a case. “To some, the civil rights laws are not meant to protect all Americans, they are meant to protect certain Americans,” said former Justice lawyer J. Christian Adams, a conservative who helped prosecute the New Black Panther Party case. The case has taken on a life of its own in conservative circles and on Fox News, where Kelly and Powers went at it. The two women tried to talk over one another for most of the “interview,” while Kelly accused Powers of not being informed about the case: “You don't seem to know what you're talking about,” Kelly said. “Where was this outrage when the Bush Administration … was dismissing cases where black people were discriminated against?” Powers asked. “The minute I challenge you, you say I don't know what I'm talking about.” “Because you don't,” Kelly responded. At one point, Kelly threatened Powers, saying, “Don't make me cut your mic.” Although Kelly was louder, Powers held her own, saying the case was really about “the scary black man thing.” She also called Adams a “conservative activist posing as a whistleblower” and said this one case should not “provoke hysteria” as it has because action was taken in the form of an injunction. The Bush Administration, meanwhile, stocked the civil rights division with conservatives while failing to prosecute many civil rights cases involving blacks. “It's ridiculous to accuse the Obama Administration of not doing anything when they have,” said Powers. “Two wrongs make a right,” Kelly kept repeating. Mediaite columnist Colby Hall said the interview displayed “remarkably uncomfortable levels not normally seen on any cable news program.” added by: TimALoftis

Fears Grow As Millions Lose Jobless Benefits

(Reuters) – Deborah Coleman lost her unemployment benefits in April, and now fears for millions of others if the Senate does not extend aid for the jobless. “It's too late for me now,” she said, fighting back tears at the Freestore Foodbank in the low-income Over-the-Rhine district near downtown Cincinnati. “But it will be terrible for the people who'll lose their benefits if Congress does nothing.” For nearly two years, Coleman says she has filed an average of 30 job applications a day, but remains jobless. “People keep telling me there are jobs out there, but I haven't been able to find them.” Coleman, 58, a former manager at a telecommunications firm, said the only jobs she found were over the Ohio state line in Kentucky, but she cannot reach them because her car has been repossessed and there is no bus service to those areas. After her $300 a week benefits ran out, Freestore Foodbank brokered emergency 90-day support in June for rent. Once that runs out, her future is uncertain. “I've lost everything and I don't know what will happen to me,” she said. The recession — the worst U.S. downturn since the 1930s — has left some 8 million people like Coleman out of work. Unemployment has remained stubbornly high at around 9.5 percent. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in June 6.8 million people or 45.5 percent of the total are long-term unemployed, or jobless for 27 weeks or more. Before the recession began in late 2007, the unemployed received benefits, usually a few hundred dollars a week, for 26 weeks or around six months after losing their jobs. Under the federal/state programs, which are administered by state governments and partly funded by taxes on business, only full-time workers are eligible for benefits. Within federal guidelines, benefits and eligibility vary from state to state. As the downturn left more Americans out of work for longer periods, Congress voted to provide funding to extend benefits to as long as 99 weeks in some areas. Some critics say this adds to the country's large fiscal deficit, and may even discourage job-seeking. FOOD BANKS FEAR STRAIN An attempt to pass another extension has become bogged down in partisan political bickering in the Senate. Relief agencies fear that failure to extend benefits will strain their resources and may worsen the U.S. housing crisis. “This will put a great deal of stress and strain on our organization, which has already been working hard,” said Vicki Escarra, chief executive of Feeding America, which has a network of more than 200 food banks. In the year ended June 30, Feeding America distributed 3 billion pounds (1.36 billion kg) of food, a 50 percent increase over the past two years. The benefits debate has pitted the majority of Democrats against most Republicans and some conservative Democrats. When the House of Representatives passed a $34 billion benefit extension on July 1, 11 fiscally conservative Democrats voted against it. The Senate may take up the issue again in mid-July, but Republicans like Senator Tom Coburn have argued any extension must be paid for with cuts elsewhere. “Even then he (Coburn) is not sure if that's a good idea,” said John Hart, a spokesman for the Oklahoma senator. “The longer the unemployed have benefits, the less incentive there is to find a job.” Most economists argue that cutting benefits could slow recovery, describing benefits as direct economic stimulus because almost every penny of it gets spent. In a June 28 client note, Goldman Sachs said if all additional U.S. stimulus spending expires, it could slow the economy up to 1.5 percentage points from the fourth quarter 2010 to the second quarter of 2011. The note added that extending unemployment benefits and a $400 tax credit would “substantially mitigate” that impact. 3 MILLION CUT OFF IN TWO MONTHS During the Senate impasse, from the week ended June 5 to the week ended July 10, more than 2.1 million Americans lost their benefits. Another million will join them by July 31. In Ohio alone, where unemployment stood at 10.7 percent in May, more than 83,000 people lost their benefits in June. Sister Barbara Busch, executive director of non-profit housing group Working in Neighborhoods in Cincinnati, 65 percent of the people who come seeking help with their mortgages are unemployed or underemployed. “I fear once the benefits run out, I suspect we'll see a new wave of foreclosures,” she said. “I just hope I'm wrong.” Ohio is a bellwether U.S. state in elections. The state's Democratic attorney general Richard Cordray said blocking extending jobless benefits was politically motivated ahead of the midterm elections in November. “If people lose their benefits they will blame the congressional majority and the administration,” he said. “As unappetizing as it is, that would appear to be the strategy.” Senator Coburn's spokesman Hart said suggestions the Republicans were playing partisan politics were “ludicrous.” “The Democrats say that because they want to avoid making the hard decisions,” he said. Alonzo Allen, 55, a former aid agency worker in Cincinnati whose benefits will run out in September, spends two days a week volunteering at the food bank in Over-the-Rhine and the other three looking for work. He said he worries about the one-bedroom apartment he rents and how he will feed his dog Ginger, who is the “only family I have.” “If the benefits stop, I'll be out on the street and I'll lose all my furniture,” he said. “That's going to be tough.” (Editing by Eric Walsh) http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE66D0LB20100714 added by: ScottyT

Freedoms Resurrection: The 230 year Old Answer

By David P Shirk In the mid 1700’s, there lay on a new continent clusters of colonies from many countries populated by many different people. Some were there as outcasts from their parent nation, and some to escape tyranny or oppression. Some came seeking to make a new life, and some in service of another. Battles were fought on this relatively new land as extensions of hostilities of the parenting nations. When the dust settled and the fighting stopped, the colonists for the most part became united in the populated areas under English rule. People of every origin and background were now merged together under the rule of the English crown and sought to make their own fortunes as best they co…. …We learn, and we seek solutions. Do any of you now understand why it is that those whom are either anarchical or voluntary in nature are far more beneficial to the real American ideal then statism or a corruptible republic could ever be? Do you see how the cries of a democracy can bring so much damage when those who raise their voices do so in ignorance? It has been well over 200 years since all this came about, and it is inexcusable to continue following 200 year old mistakes! All I can say is that if people don’t open their eyes soon, then their collective voices will bring us all to ruin. http://www.peacefreedomprosperity.com/?p=3696 added by: shanklinmike

8 U.S. Troops Killed in Afghanistan Attacks

A bloody day and night for American forces in southern Afghanistan has left eight U.S. troops dead, as Taliban militants step up their attacks in the face of an ongoing American-led offensive to capture the militants' hometown. Three U.S. troops and five civilians were killed Tuesday night in an attack on police headquarters in the southern Afghan city of Kandahar, according to officials with the international military coalition. An Afghan official said a police officer also died in the attack. A statement from the international force said a car bomb slammed into the entrance of the compound. Insurgents then opened fire with machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades. International forces and police kept the attackers from entering the compound and eventually fought them off, but three international troops died along with five civilian workers. An official with the International Assistance Force-Afghanistan (ISAF) confirmed to CBS News' Fazul Rahim that all three of the foreign troops killed in the attack were American. added by: TimALoftis

Burqa ban passes French lower house overwhelmingly – CNN.com

Paris, France (CNN) — France's lower house of parliament Tuesday overwhelmingly passed a ban on any veils that cover the face — including the burqa, the full-body covering worn by some Muslim women. added by: irishlonewolf