New York Times reporter prompts White House media staff on Twitter

Does she have a vision problem? Can’t she distinguish ‘hashtags’ in a tweet? She says she did it to help herself; maybe a pair of glasses would help!

Are you guys using specific hashtag?”

By Neil Munro

Minutes after President Obama urged Americans this morning to tweet their support for a Democratic debt-ceiling bill, a New York Times reporter prompted the White House to organize the effort with a special Twitter hashtag.

Hashtags use the “#” symbol to mark keywords or topics on Twitter. They often help drive messages by linking similar messages together in a common theme.

At 10:55 a.m. the Times’s Jennifer Preston suggested that administration officials might create a hashtag, so tweeting Democrats could jointly target Republicans who are now trying to pass their own debt ceiling plan.

Preston tweeted to a White House rep, saying “@macon44 Hi there. I heard the President ask the people to tweet re: debt ceiling. Are you guys using specific hashtag?”

A minute later, she tweeted a followup to White House staffer Jesse Lee, saying, “Hi Jesse, what’s the hashtag that you guys are urging people to use in their tweets to Congress re: debtceiling.” Lee is the White House’s s director of progressive media & online response. (RELATED: New WH talking point: Boehner is the Grinch, and he’ll steal your Christmas)

Eight minutes later, at 11:04, the White House’s press shop announced a new hashtag for Democrats to use when targeting GOP members of Congress: “@NYT_JenPreston People responding to POTUS shld use #compromise. As he said, it is ‘time for #compromise on behalf of the American people.’”

At 11:31, The Washington Post reported out the new hashtag, and at 12.32, staffers at the White House’s Office of Management and Budget re-tweeted the same message. “RT @postpolitics: The @whitehouse new media team has said people responding to the President on Twitter should use #compromise.”

Preston, whose own tweet ID is @NYT_JenPreston, covers social media in politics and government. Reached by TheDC for comment, she insisted that she wasn’t trying to aid the White House in any way.

“I use Twitter all the time as a reporting tool,” Preston said. “I’m a social media reporter. A lot of reporters use email. I use Twitter. I heard that the president of the United States had urged people to tweet — I didn’t watch the address — But I wanted to set up an alert on Tweetdeck so I could track things.”

“I wasn’t doing it to help the White House,” she added. “I was doing it to help myself.”

Cuff him: Alaska researcher who documented polar bears demise in Arctic placed on leave

APNewsBreak: Arctic scientist under investigation

By BECKY BOHRER - Associated Press | AP –

JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — A federal wildlife biologist whose observation in 2004 of presumably drowned polar bears in the Arctic helped to galvanize the global warming movement has been placed on administrative leave and is being investigated for scientific misconduct, possibly over the veracity of that article.

NASA Data: Far less heat trapped in atmosphere than alarmist computer models have predicted

Global warming was, is, and will always be a huge fraud, costing billions, possibly trillions of wasted dollars. It’s perpetrators should be in handcuffs!

New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hold In Global Warming Alarmism

NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth's atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted, reports a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing. The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide trap far less heat than alarmists have claimed.

Study co-author Dr. Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and U.S. Science Team Leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA's Aqua satellite, reports that real-world data from NASA's Terra satellite contradict multiple assumptions fed into alarmist computer models.

"The satellite observations suggest there is much more energy lost to space during and after warming than the climate models show," Spencer said in a July 26 University of Alabama press release. "There is a huge discrepancy between the data and the forecasts that is especially big over the oceans."

In addition to finding that far less heat is being trapped than alarmist computer models have predicted, the NASA satellite data show the atmosphere begins shedding heat into space long before United Nations computer models predicted.

The new findings are extremely important and should dramatically alter the global warming debate.

Scientists on all sides of the global warming debate are in general agreement about how much heat is being directly trapped by human emissions of carbon dioxide (the answer is "not much"). However, the single most important issue in the global warming debate is whether carbon dioxide emissions will indirectly trap far more heat by causing large increases in atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds. Alarmist computer models assume human carbon dioxide emissions indirectly cause substantial increases in atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds (each of which are very effective at trapping heat), but real-world data have long shown that carbon dioxide emissions are not causing as much atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds as the alarmist computer models have predicted.

The new NASA Terra satellite data are consistent with long-term NOAA and NASA data indicating atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds are not increasing in the manner predicted by alarmist computer models. The Terra satellite data also support data collected by NASA's ERBS satellite showing far more longwave radiation (and thus, heat) escaped into space between 1985 and 1999 than alarmist computer models had predicted. Together, the NASA ERBS and Terra satellite data show that for 25 years and counting, carbon dioxide emissions have directly and indirectly trapped far less heat than alarmist computer models have predicted.

In short, the central premise of alarmist global warming theory is that carbon dioxide emissions should be directly and indirectly trapping a certain amount of heat in the earth's atmosphere and preventing it from escaping into space. Real-world measurements, however, show far less heat is being trapped in the earth's atmosphere than the alarmist computer models predict, and far more heat is escaping into space than the alarmist computer models predict.

When objective NASA satellite data, reported in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, show a "huge discrepancy" between alarmist climate models and real-world facts, climate scientists, the media and our elected officials would be wise to take notice. Whether or not they do so will tell us a great deal about how honest the purveyors of global warming alarmism truly are.

James M. Taylor is senior fellow for environment policy at The Heartland Institute and managing editor of Environment & Climate News.

If Palin goes rogue, I’m going with her

The Democrat, Republican paradigm has utterly failed the American people. It’s time for a change.

I left the Republican party when they chose McCain as their candidate…and they've done nothing to cause me to go back.

I voted against Obama and for Palin in 2008, not for McCain.

Despite the influx of tea party conservatives in 2010 the path of the party hasn’t changed. The leadership continues pushing the ruling classes agenda.

There are 5 types of Republicans in the congress:

1. ruling class: new world order types, lifers who are installed in leadership positions
2. corrupt: lifers in it for the money, bought off by the highest bidder
3. blackmailed: ruling class has something on them and therefore controls them through fear and intimidation
4. RINO’s: probably ruling class but there may be a few who are simply ideologues
5. genuine conservatives: too few to make a real difference

KICK OFF: Palin to keynote Labor Day Tea Party rally in Iowa

Conservative Senators oppose Boehner’s debt ceiling increase

How is an increase in the debt ceiling going to lead to a decrease in spending? Mr. Spock would certainly see that as illogical!!!

SENATORS ISSUE LETTER TO HOUSE GOP COLLEAGUES IN OPPOSITION TO DEBT LIMIT EXTENSION BILL

Published 07/27/2011 - 9:56 a.m. CST

Senator Rand Paul

WASHINGTON, DC - On Tuesday Republican Sens. Rand Paul, Mike Lee (Utah), Jim DeMint (S.C.), and David Vitter (La.) issued a Dear Colleague letter to their Republican House brethren, stating their opposition to tomorrow's House vote on the debt limit extension and urging them to stand in opposition as well.

Upon issuing the letter, Sen. Paul offered the following statement:

"Members of both chambers of Congress who wish to protect American taxpayers must stand together in opposition of the current debt 'deal.' Tomorrow the House of Representatives will have that opportunity, and I hope they will find the courage to do so.

"The 'deal' at hand would lead to an increase of our national debt over the next 10 years by at least $7 trillion, and the amount of 'cuts' introduced in the first year are a measly $7 billion. More so, it doesn't even balance the budget and all but guarantees a U.S. downgrade. There are so many things wrong with this legislation that will be passed on to the American taxpayer if enacted, the urgency of denying its passage is great."

Caveman: Boehner caves in and offers plan to raise debt ceiling

In no way is Boehner’s plan a victory for fiscal sanity; the liberals get their credit card limit raised immediately but the meager spending cuts are tomorrow…and tomorrow never comes.

All this bluster about a huge rift between Boehner’s and Obama’s views is for show. It’s intended to convince you that the GOP plan is something that it’s not!

Be not deceived; Boehner, McConnell, Reid, Pelosi, and Obama are on the same side.

Boehner to GOP: ‘Get your ass in line’

'I can’t do this job unless you’re behind me,' Boehner said to House Republicans. | AP Photo Close

By JAKE SHERMAN & JOHN BRESNAHAN | 7/27/11 9:55 AM EDT

Scrambling for votes on his troubled deficit package, Speaker John Boehner told GOP lawmakers Wednesday morning to “get your ass in line” behind his debt ceiling bill, saying the Senate will fold and pass it.

“This is the bill,’ Boehner said in a closed-door meeting of House Republicans on Wedneday morning. “I can’t do this job unless you’re behind me.”

Continue Reading

Text Size

• -
• +
• reset

Listen

Latest on POLITICO

• Cain's Muslim outreach
• Boehner: 'Get your ass in line'
• O'Donnell tells House GOP to resist
• Browner: GOP-EPA fight replay of '95
• VIDEO: POLITICO Playback
• Reid savings trumps Boehner plan

POLITICO 44

Boehner was forced to postpone the vote until Thursday after the Congressional Budget Office said it fell $150 billion short of the $1 trillion goal. Many GOP lawmakers are still undecided whether they will back the measure.

Boehner also predicted Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.) and Senate Democrats will have to pass his proposal once the House does. Reid has an alternate plan to cu $2.7 trillion.

“If this gets chaotic, they (the Senate) will fold like a cheap suit,” Boehner said, according to GOP sources.

But some top gop aides to rank and file members indicated the delay may be a blessing in disguise. It could give majority whip Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) more time to get members in line.

While Boehner tried to adjust to his setback from the CBO’s estimated savings, Reid was enjoying a boost from the independent, non-partisan office, which said the Reid bill would save $2.2 trillion over the next decade — almost triple what Boehner’s bill would.

The Boehner vote whipping and Reid’s maneuvering set the stage for the final six day runup to the Aug. 2 deadline for raising the nation’s debt limit

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/60022.html#ixzz1TJhvX6Xo

Silver Star stripped from from John F. Kerry comrade—take Kerry’s too!

Partners in crime, Kerry and Swett, falsified war records to get undeserved medals.

Kerry spokesman stripped of Silver Star

Thomas Lifson

John F. Kerry almost became president running on the basis of his alleged heroism in Vietnam. Thanks to the efforts of a group of truth-tellers, the Swiftboat Veterans for Truth, the serious holes in the fantasy narrative propounded by the Kerry campaign came to the attention of enough Americans that John Kerry was not the first faux-Irish President of the United States.

One of Kerry's enablers in propounding his imaginary heroism was a man named Wade Sanders, who himself held a Silver Star, and who introduced Kerry to the Democratic Convention. Scott Swett, who was central to the unraveling of the Kerry storyline, tells us that the Kerry enabler has been exposed for what he is. His Winter Soldier site has the details:

John Kerry was introduced at the 2004 Democratic National Convention by Wade Sanders, a retired Navy Captain and former Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy who served as a Swift Boat officer in Vietnam. Like Kerry, Sanders was the recipient of a Silver Star for gallantry in action. During the 2004 campaign, Sanders functioned as Kerry lead attack dog against the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, repeatedly denouncing the veterans on the air as liars and comparing them to Nazi propagandists.

Wade Sanders is now in Federal prison, serving a 37-month sentence for possessing child pornography. Now the Navy Times reports that Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus has revoked Sanders' Silver Star. The highly unusual decision appears unrelated to Sanders' felony conviction. A Navy spokesman cited "subsequently determined facts and evidence surrounding both the incident for which the award was made and the processing of the award itself." John Kerry has to be hoping this doesn't become a trend.

As one might imagine, the media has ignored this story. Even the Navy Times declined to post its own article online.

Update: Here is the Sanders sentencing memorandum. Horrific.

Debt ceiling negotiation collapse is a ‘false flag’ event

Don’t fall for the ridiculous notion that the Boehner plan is in any way a victory for the Republican conservatives.

It raises the debt ceiling even after a 3 year 9 trillion dollar spending binge.

The posturing's of the last few days look more and more like political calculations to make conservatives think they are winning the battle by facing down the president.

Conservatives would never accept the notion that raising the debt ceiling is a true effort to curb spending, so the ruling class conjured up up all this smoke and mirrors in an effort to hide the truth.

The president is playing his part, Dingy Harry is playing his part, and Boehner is playing his part. Did you really think Boehner rose to his powerful position without being a member of the ruling class?

The Boehner Plan: Phony Cuts, Slimy Procedures, Dangerous Ignorance

Posted by Michael Hammond (Profile)

Tuesday, July 26th at 5:42PM EDT

19 Comments

The main problems with the Boehner proposal are:

• Most of the initial $1.2 trillion of discretionary cuts are (1) from defense, or (2) are phony, out-year, and easily avoided. The compensatory immediate $1 trillion increase in the debt limit is, on the other hand, very real.
• Even worse, however, the notion of giving a Reid/Pelosi/McConnell/Boehner-appointed commission the power to devise non-filibusterable, unamendable tax increases (or, for that matter, gun control, taxpayer-funded abortion, forced unionism, or federalized same-sex marriage) in the second tranche is devastating.
• And a guarantee of a losing vote on a balanced budget constitutional amendment doesn’t get you anywhere.

WHEN WILL THE BOEHNER CUTS TAKE PLACE?

The initial $1.2 trillion in discretionary spending cuts extend from fiscal year 2012 through 2021 -– or an average of $120 billion a year. But the commensurate borrowing authority will happen immediately. [Section 101(c)]

For fiscal years 2012 and 2013, the proposal sets up a “firewall” between defense cuts and domestic cuts -– and slashes defense dramatically.

After 2013, there is nothing to prevent ALL of the discretionary cuts from coming from defense. And it would certainly be tempting to gobble up Harry Reid’s proposal to “save” $1.3 trillion from the natural wind-down of the war in Afghanistan and Iraq and the commensurate interest reductions.

That said, any “cut” after the upcoming fiscal year (2012) is nothing more than a pig-in-a-poke.

BUT WON’T THE GRAMM-RUDMAN-TYPE SEQUESTRATION INSURE THAT THE DISCRETIONARY CUTS ARE IMPLEMENTED –- EVEN THOUGH THEY’RE A LONG WAY OFF?

Historically, Gramm-Rudman was pretty much of a flop. In 1985, the fiscal year before Gramm-Rudman kicked in, the debt was

• $1,823,103,000,000 (9/30/1985)

During the decade after the passage of Gramm-Rudman, this is what happened to the debt:

1986 $2.125 trillion
1987 2.350 trillion
1988 2.602 trillion
1989 2.857 trillion
1990 3.233 trillion
1991 3.665 trillion
1992 4.064 trillion
1993 4.411 trillion
1994 4.692 trillion
1995 4.973 trillion

In other words, at the end of a decade, the debt was 273% of the debt in 1985.

If we followed that trend for the next ten years, the current $14.29 trillion debt ceiling would have to be increased to almost…

• $39 trillion in 2021.

But, you protest, the problem with Gramm-Rudman is that it didn’t really get at the entitlements.

Duh! And this differs from Boehner in what way?

There are a lot of ways to “game” Gramm-Rudman. But the really obvious one is to pass a gigantic bill under section 101(b)(3)(A) of the Boehner proposal which declares a giant line-by-line emergency for everything.

After six months of Obama’s whining about “default, default, default,” it is now clear that the consequence of not increasing the debt limit would not be non-payment of interest, but rather a shutdown of many discretionary government programs. Yet, this seems more than the McConnells and Boehners can bear.

But if the McConnells and Boehners are unwilling to force these shutdowns now, why is it going to be easier in 2017 –- when they are presented with the same whiny “horror stories” unless a massive emergency bill turns Boehner’s discretionary cuts into mincemeat?

Incidentally, an “emergency” occurs whenever an unanticipated “loss of life or property, or a threat to national security” occurs. Is there any program in the government for which Barack Obama could not make this argument?

WHAT ABOUT THE JOINT COMMISSION? WON’T IT TAKE CARE OF ENTITLEMENTS?

Do you like the “debt reduction” proposals, such as ObamaCare, which have recently come from the desks of Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Mitch McConnell, and John Boehner?

You do?

Then you’ll love the fact that Boehner appoints a twelve-man commission -– with all 12 members chosen by these four –- and makes whatever legislation it proposes unfilibusterable and unamendable.

If Boehner’s poor stewardship leads to a GOP loss in the House, the filibuster may be the only tool available to prevent a gigantic unfilibusterable, unamendable tax increase or a second ObamaCare.

True, the Bob Dole-perfected “reconciliation procedure” offers some of the same advantages to a tax-loving leadership. But, unlike reconciliation, with its “Byrd Rule,” there are no limits whatsoever to what the debt commission can do.

Gun Control. Abortion. Forced unionism. Same-sex marriage.

All of these would be barred on reconciliation, but could easily be passed on the Boehner commission’s legislation.

by Michael E. Hammond, former General Counsel Senate Steering Committee 1978-89.

Small business owner has a message for Washington

We’re mad as hell, and we’re not gonna take it anymore!

Been there, done that: Boehner and Obama’s dog and pony show increases spending now promises cuts later

Same thing happened with Reagan. They promised cuts later, but later never came!

They think they can pull the wool over our eyes again by pretending to have this Herculean fight over the debt ceiling and coming up with a plan that raises the ceiling now and cuts nothing now!

MILLER: Congress agrees: Keep spending

Democratic and Republican leaders preserve status quo on Capitol Hill

By Emily Miller

The Washington Times

8:01 p.m., Monday, July 25, 2011

Illustration: Obama spending by Linas Garsys for The Washington Times

Congressional Democrats and Republicans waged a war of words on Monday over their debt-ceiling plans, but their agendas amount to pretty much the same thing. Washington just can’t kick its spending habit.

Both the blueprints cooked up by House Speaker John A. Boehner, Ohio Republican, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, claim 10-year domestic spending reductions equivalent to a bit over $1 trillion with the creation of new committees to find more spending reforms.

Neither leader will provide hard numbers for budget reductions in 2012, the only enforceable year. That means borrowing is immediate and spending cuts delayed. Neither plan raises taxes. The primary distinction between them is that Mr. Boehner seeks a smaller debt-ceiling increase, forcing President Obama to come back hat-in-hand in 2012 for more borrowing authority.

Mr. Reid’s hocus-pocus is phonier than usual. His plan banks on $1 trillion in savings from the eventual “winding down” of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. So that means essentially he’s giving the president $2.7 trillion to spend with only $1.7 trillion in alleged cuts. It’s obvious that Mr. Reid’s main motivation is pushing the issue beyond the election so Mr. Obama has the best shot at a second term.

Green Immelt goes Red: Obama’s Advisor on Jobs Moving GE X-Ray Business to China

What a crock…this guy has had his nose up Obama’s ‘you know what’ literally turning NBC green (yes the entire set for Sunday Night Football was actually done in green at least for one game when owned by GE, I stopped watching it after that one) leading to lucrative green technologies contracts and despite cozying up to tax happy Obama GE paid no taxes on $14 billion in profits in 2010.

GE moving X-ray business to China

Bloomberg News / July 26, 2011

General Electric Co.’s health care unit, the world’s biggest maker of medical imaging machines, is moving the headquarters of its 115-year-old X-ray business to Beijing.

While the media frenzy over phone hacking rages the ATF’s “Gunwalker” scandal involving over 150 deaths is ignored

Time to Fire Eric Holder

by  Human Events

07/25/2011

[The following was originally published as the editorial in the July 25 issue of Human Events newspaper.]
It has been strange to watch the mainstream media ignore the most incredible scandal of the modern era—the “Gunwalker” program used by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to pump American guns into Mexico—while lavishing obsessive coverage on the News of the World phone-hacking debacle in England.

Of course, the motivations of the media are not difficult to understand.  There has been absolutely no evidence that News Corp. owner Rupert Murdoch had anything to do with the invasions of privacy carried out by certain employees at one of his many newspapers.  But because he also owns influential conservative American media properties such as the Wall Street Journal, and especially, Fox News, media liberals find themselves looking at a very large domino and praying for it to fall.

Meanwhile, more than 150 Mexicans and at least one U.S. government agent, are dead because of Gunwalker.  The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)videotaped the sale of the gun that killed Border Patrol agent and military veteran Brian Terry. 

Weapons waltzed into Mexico under its “Operation Fast and Furious” have begun turning up in American cities.  A second program called “Operation Castaway” has been discovered, walking guns into Honduras.  MS-13, the most dangerous gang in the world, has strong ties to Honduras.

Operation Fast and Furious was run out of Phoenix.  Operation Castaway bubbled forth from the Tampa office of the ATF.  Some of the ostensible gunrunning “targets” of these operations turned out to be paid FBI informants.  The programs enjoyed funding from the Obama “stimulus” package.  These factors combine to make regional ATF supervisors, or acting ATF Director Ken Melson, unsuitable as fall guys.

Ken Melson doesn’t want to be a fall guy.  He’s cooperating with congressional investigators, but their requests for information have been stonewalled by Attorney GeneralEric Holder at every turn.
House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R.-Calif.) and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R.-Iowa) of the Judiciary Committee have sent an increasingly testy series of letters to Holder, most recently demanding he move the Justice Department “from spin mode to disclosure mode” and stop treating the Gunwalker scandal as “merely a public relations problem.”  Nevertheless, Holder continues to pump out billowing clouds of blue smoke, fill committee chambers with fun house mirrors and wipe out 80% of the documents he hands over with the dreaded black marker of redaction.

Everywhere the Obama administration encounters legal controversy Eric Holder can be found, and rarely in a good way.  He’s been criticized by Congress for dragging his feet on terrorism investigations, and became famous for insisting on the lunatic idea of trying top terror masters in civilian courts—a notion even the White House has backed away from.  His big shot at civilian prosecution of a terrorist ended with bomber Ahmed Ghailani’s beating 224 murder counts, only to be convicted for what amounts to aggravated vandalism.

Holder has been hammered by Sen. John Cornyn (R.-Tex.) for doing a “grossly inadequate” job of protecting military voting rights, which just happen to produce a lot of Republican votes.  Like many prominent Democrats, he’s a tax cheat, who somehow forgot to pay property taxes on a $400,000 town house in Queens.

Holder has been instrumental in Obama’s plan to ignore the Defense of Marriage Act.  Attorneys general are supposed to enforce laws, not choose which ones to disregard out of personal distaste.  That’s one of the differences between a republic and a dictatorship.
Strongly worded letters from Congress don’t seem to get Eric Holder’s attention.  Perhaps impeachment proceedings will.  The New York Times emphasized that “Article II of the Constitution gives Congress the power to impeach the President, the vice president, and all civil officers of the United States,” which they stressed would include cabinet members.

The Times declared that “the right of Congress to demand explanations imposes on the President, and on inferior executive officers who speak for him, the obligation to be truthful,” and said that an attorney general who elects to testify “has no right to lie, either by affirmatively misrepresenting facts or by falsely claiming not to remember events.  Lying to Congress is a felony—actually three felonies: perjury, false statements and obstruction of justice.”  The newspaper recommended impeachment as the ultimate remedy, cautioning Congress to “recognize that the issue here goes deeper than the misbehavior of one man.”

Of course, the New York Times said all this with respect to a Republican Attorney General,Alberto Gonzalez, in a May 2007 op-ed titled, “He’s Impeachable, You Know,” by Frank Bowman.  Surely its passionate and principled position hasn’t changed any.  It’s time for Eric Holder to go.

Think it's time for Holder to go?  Take the survey and let us know!

There is no credit fairy and maybe no ET say scientists

It’s just as likely that intelligent life is unique to earth as that it is not!

Are We Alone In the Universe? New Analysis Says Maybe

Natalie Wolchover, Life's Little Mysteries Staff Writer

Date: 26 July 2011 Time: 07:00 AM ET

Still from the 2005 film 'Alien Planet.'
CREDIT: Discovery Channel/Evergreen Films

Scientists engaged in the search for extraterrestrial intelligence (SETI) work under the assumption that there is, in fact, intelligent life out there to be found. A new analysis may crush their optimism.

To calculate the likelihood that they'll make radio contact with extraterrestrials, SETI scientists use what's known as the Drake Equation. Formulated in the 1960s by Frank Drake of the SETI Institute in California, it approximates the number of radio-transmitting civilizations in our galaxy at any one time by multiplying a string of factors: the number of stars, the fraction that have planets, the fraction of those that are habitable, the probability of life arising on such planets, its likelihood of becoming intelligent and so on. [10 Alien Encounters Debunked]

The values of almost all these factors are highly speculative. Nonetheless, Drake and others have plugged in their best guesses, and estimate that there are about 10,000 tech-savvy civilizations in the galaxy currently sending signals our way — a number that has led some scientists to predict that we'll detect alien signals within two decades.

Their optimism relies on one factor in particular: In the equation, the probability of life arising on suitably habitable planets (ones with water, rocky surfaces and atmospheres) is almost always taken to be 100 percent. As the reasoning goes, the same fundamental laws apply to the entire universe, and because those laws engendered the genesis of life on Earth — and relatively early in its history at that — they must readily spawn life elsewhere, too. As the Russian astrobiologist Andrei Finkelstein put it at a recent SETI press conference, "the genesis of life is as inevitable as the formation of atoms."

But in a new paper published on arXiv.org, astrophysicist David Spiegel at Princeton University and physicist Edwin Turner at the University of Tokyo argue that this thinking is dead wrong. Using a statistical method called Bayesian reasoning, they argue that the life here on Earth could be common, or it could be extremely rare — there's no reason to prefer one conclusion over the other. With their new analysis, Spiegel and Turner say they have erased the one Drake factor scientists felt confident about and replaced it with a question mark.

While it's true that life arose quickly on Earth (within the planet's first few hundred million years), the researchers point out that if it hadn't done so, there wouldn't have been enough time for intelligent life — humans — to have evolved. So, in effect, we're biased. It took at least 3.5 billion years for intelligent life to evolve on Earth, and the only reason we're able to contemplate the likelihood of life today is that its evolution happened to get started early. This requisite good luck is entirely independent of the actual probability of life emerging on a habitable planet.

"Although life began on this planet fairly soon after the Earth became habitable, this fact is consistent with … life being arbitrarily rare in the Universe," the authors state. In the paper, they prove this statement mathematically.

Their result doesn't mean we're alone — only that there's no reason to think otherwise. "[A] Bayesian enthusiast of extraterrestrial life should be significantly encouraged by the rapid appearance of life on the early Earth but cannot be highly confident on that basis," the authors conclude. Our own existence implies very little about how many other times life has arisen.

Two data points rather than just one would make all the difference, the researchers say. If life is found to have arisen independently on Mars, then scientists would be in a much better position to assert that, under the right conditions, the genesis of life is inevitable.

This article was provided by Life's Little Mysteries, a sister site to SPACE.com. Follow us on Twitter @llmysteries, then join us on Facebook. Follow Natalie Wolchover on Twitter @nattyover.

Glass of milk can contain as many as 20 chemicals

Who Knew this Cocktail of up to 20 Chemicals Was in Your Glass of Milk?

Posted By Dr. Mercola | July 26 2011

A single glass of milk can contain a mixture of as many as 20 painkillers, antibiotics and growth hormones. Using a highly sensitive test, scientists found the chemicals in samples of cow, goat and human breast milk.

The results show how man-made chemicals are now found throughout the food chain. The highest quantities of medicines were found in cow’s milk.

The Daily Mail reports:

“Researchers believe some of the drugs and growth promoters were given to the cattle, or got into milk through cattle feed or contamination on the farm ... [The] breakdown ... revealed that cow’s milk contained traces of anti-inflammatory drugs niflumic acid, mefenamic acid and ketoprofen ... It also contained the hormone 17-beta-estradiol”.

Unconstitutional?: "Super Congress" road may be a dead end

The Disturbing "Super Congress" that is being Created as Part of the Debt Negotiations

Global Research, July 25, 2011

Economic Policy Journal

There is some very alarming news coming out of the debt negotiations. Hidden in any deal may be the creation of a "Super Congress" that would result in more power being placed in the hands of the super-elitists and dilute the influence of the average congressman.

The left is most up in arms about this development, as it would likely mean that cuts to Medicare and Social Security would be easier to get through Congress, but it could also result in the elimination of tax credits for retirement savings plans and the elimination of the tax deduction for mortgage interest payments.

The "Super Congress" would place more power in the hands of Washington D.C. power players and limit the power of the average congressman.

Ryan Grimm explains how this "Super Congress" would work, a joint committee that both House Speaker Boehner and the President are in favor of (My emphasis):

Debt ceiling negotiators think they've hit on a solution to address the debt ceiling impasse and the public's unwillingness to let go of benefits such as Medicare and Social Security that have been earned over a lifetime of work: Create a new Congress.

 
This "Super Congress," composed of members of both chambers and both parties, isn't mentioned anywhere in the Constitution, but would be granted extraordinary new powers. Under a plan put forth by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and his counterpart Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), legislation to lift the debt ceiling would be accompanied by the creation of a 12-member panel made up of 12 lawmakers -- six from each chamber and six from each party.

 
Legislation approved by the Super Congress -- which some on Capitol Hill are calling the "super committee" -- would then be fast-tracked through both chambers, where it couldn't be amended by simple, regular lawmakers, who'd have the ability only to cast an up or down vote. With the weight of both leaderships behind it, a product originated by the Super Congress would have a strong chance of moving through the little Congress and quickly becoming law.

A Super Congress would be less accountable than the system that exists today, and would find it easier to strip the public of popular benefits. Negotiators are currently considering cutting the mortgage deduction and tax credits for retirement savings, for instance, extremely popular policies that would be difficult to slice up using the traditional legislative process.

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has made a Super Congress a central part of his last-minute proposal, multiple news reports and people familiar with his plan say...Obama has shown himself to be a fan of the commission approach to cutting social programs and entitlements.

Got that? "Anti-tax" Boehner wants a Super Congress, which could eliminate popular tax credits and deductions. With "anti-tax" patriots like Boehner, who needs Democrats?

Bottom line: What the entire D.C. crowd is really looking for is a way to screw the elderly and also raise taxes, while not get caught doing it.

Issa: Obama administration intimidating witnesses in ATF gun probe

This program was an effort by communist/liberals to further erode US citizens 2nd amendment rights by secretly getting US guns into the drug cartels hands where they would no doubt be used in crimes and then charge that gun control was too lax because of all the US guns discovered in possession of the drug cartels.

They are willing to put lives in danger to further their communist agenda. A US border control agent was in fact killed by one of these guns that ATF supplied!

Rep. Darrell E. Issa, California Republican, suspects an effort by the Obama administration to intimidate witnesses from testifying before his House committee regarding the “Fast and Furious” ATF cross-border firearms investigation. (Rod Lamkey Jr./The Washington Times)

By Stephen Dinan and Chuck Neubauer

The Washington Times

“At the end of the day, the president’s not going to be impeached over either of those two offenses” — Darrell E. Issa, Chairman of House Oversight and Government Reform Committee (Rod Lamkey Jr./The Washington Times)

The Obama administration sought to intimidate witnesses into not testifying to Congress on Tuesday about whether ATF knowingly allowed weapons, including assault rifles, to be “walked” into Mexico, the chairman of a House committee investigating the program said in an interview Monday.

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell E. Issa, California Republican, said at least two scheduled witnesses expected to be asked about a controversial weapons investigation known as “Fast and Furious”received warning letters from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to limit their testimony.

Mr. Issa's committee is set to hear testimony from six current or former ATF employees, including agents and attaches assigned to the bureau’s offices in Mexico, about the operation — in which, federal agents say, they were told to stand down and watch as guns flowed from U.S. dealers in Arizona to violent criminals and drug cartels in Mexico.

The six-term lawmaker aired his concerns about the program in a wide-ranging interview with reporters and editors at The Washington Times on Monday.

Among other questions, the agents are likely to be asked about a large volume of guns showing up in Mexico that were traced back to the Fast and Furious program; whether ATF officials in that country expressed concerns about the weapons to agency officials in the U.S., only to be brushed aside; and whether ATF officials in Arizona denied ATF personnel in Mexico access to information about the operation.

Nearly 50 weapons linked to the Fast and Furious program have been recovered to date in Mexico. Committee investigators said Mexican authorities also were denied information about the operation.

View Entire Story

Compromise: How our Republic is being lost!

This is a piece sub headed ‘TECHNOLOGY IS A MORE POWERFUL SOCIAL FORCE THAN THE ASPIRATION FREEDOM’ from the Unabomber's Manifesto. Although I don’t see the connection here, the premise of the compromise is applicable to our two party system of government.

Just substitute the word parties for neighbors and principle for land and it’s evident what has happened to our once great nation!

The strong man is the one with powerful backing, i. e., the elite!

125…Imagine the case of two neighbors, each of whom at the outset owns the same amount of land, but one of whom is more powerful than the other. The powerful one demands a piece of the other's land. The weak one refuses. The powerful one says, "OK, let's compromise. Give me half of what I asked." The weak one has little choice but to give in.

Some time later the powerful neighbor demand s another piece of land, again there is a compromise, and so forth.

By forcing a long series of compromises on the weaker man, the powerful one eventually gets all of his land...

Heed the dog’s admonition this time please, for the sake of the Republic.

Give that dog a bone!!!!!

Dogs Know,

Have you ever heard that a dog 'knows' when an earthquake is about to hit?

Have you ever heard that a dog can 'sense' when a tornado is stirring up, even 20 miles away?

Do you remember hearing that before the December tsunami struck Southeast Asia, dogs started running frantically away from the seashore, at breakneck speed?

Do you know that dogs can detect cancer and other serious illnesses and danger of fire?

Somehow they always know when they can 'go for a ride' before you even ask. How do those dogs and cats get home from hundreds of miles away?

I'm a firm believer that animals - and especially dogs and cats - have keen insights into the truth.

And you can't tell me that dogs can't sense a potentially terrible disaster well in advance.

Simply said, a dog just KNOWS when something isn't right... when impending doom is upon us.

They'll always try to warn us!

We should have listened.

Congressman: Obama would be impeached if he blocked debt payments

CHARGE: Impeachment if he allows default

Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) said Monday that President Barack Obama “would be impeached” if the nation falls into default.

“STOP talking about default,” he wrote on Twitter. “The 1st dime of each $1 of revenue services debt. Obama would be impeached if he blocked debt payments. C C & B!”

POLITICO 44

King is among the House Republicans who voted for the so-called “Cut, Cap and Balance” plan that would introduce a constitutional amendment to require a balanced budget. The Senate last week dismissed the House bill.

King isn’t the first Republican to suggest that Obama should be impeached over the debt crisis.

'DOING THINGS ON MY OWN IS VERY TEMPTING'

New disease alert!

Take a dose of Votemout to prevent Gonorrhea Lectim…the most insidious malady ever!

Reverse terrorism: Farmer feared Norway being taken over by Muslims and Marxists

Face of evil: Killer wanted to 'stop Muslim and Marxist takeover,' judge reveals as Breivik appears in court

Peaceful, liberal Norway has been stunned by the bombing in downtown Oslo and the shooting massacre at a youth camp outside the capital, which the suspect said were intended to start a revolution to inspire Norwegians to retake their country from Muslims and other immigrants.

He blames liberals for championing multiculturalism over Norway's 'indigenous' culture.

Times reporter asks: Is Obama a pathological liar?

This is not ‘new’ news other than the application to the Friday news conference. We already knew he is a pathological liar, a narcissist, a thug, a communist, an illegal alien, a Soros puppet, etc., etc., etc..

CURL: Is Obama a pathological liar?

According to “an insider” Obama’s Friday 6pm news conference, after the budget talks broke down, was filled with statements that Obama knew full well were untrue.

Dupes: When you see the dollars and cents on Social Security - wow, are we being ripped off!!

How did the good people of America get duped into thinking that Social Security is an entitlement program?

The government ‘takes’ our money with a promise to give it back in our old age and then spends it on whatever they want to and acts like it’s money that really doesn’t belong to us but is a generous gift from the benevolent government. It’s absolutely ludicrous!

It’s my money and I need it now!

Someone sent this email message to me so I thought I’d pass it on.

   Subject:  Social   Security

                      Remember, not only did you ‘contribute’ to Social Security but your employer did too.

                      It totaled 15% of your income before taxes.

                      If you averaged only 30K over your working life, that’s
close to $220,500.

                      If you calculate the future value of $4,500 per year
(yours & your employer’s contribution) at a simple 5% (less than what the govt. pays on the money that it borrows), after 49 years of working you’d have   $892,919.98.

                      If you took out only 3% per year, you receive $26,787.60 per year and it would last better than 30 years, and that’s with no interest paid on that final amount on deposit!

                      If you bought an annuity and it paid 4% per year,   you’d have a lifetime income of $2,976.40 per month.

                      The folks in Washington have pulled off a bigger Ponzi
scheme than Bernie Madoff ever had.

                                  I didn't try to clean up the language in
this message. It makes a better impact as it is.

                                    Entitlement my ass , I paid cash for my
social security insurance!!!! Just because they borrowed the money , doesn't make my benefits some kind of charity or handout !! Congressional benefits, aka. free healthcare , outrageous retirement packages, 67 paid holidays, three weeks paid vacation , unlimited paid sick days, now that's welfare, and they have the nerve to call my retirement entitlements!!!!!!

                                    What the HELL's wrong??? WAKE UP AMERICA!!!!

                                    Tuesday's Daily Bulletin paper, ran two
articles on   the front page side by side :

                                    1- California's 20 Billion Dollar Budget Deficit

                                    2- The California Supreme Court ruling that
ILLEGALS can attend college and get benefits.

                                  Why don't they just deport them when they
arrive to register?

                                  3- Last year they ran an article on the
yearly costs to California Taxpayers from Illegals using Hospital Emergency Rooms for their general health care -

                                     At just one hospital the cost to tax payers  
totaled over $25 million a year

                                    Someone please tell me what the HELL's wrong with all the people that run this country!!!!!!

                                  We're "broke" & can't help our own Seniors,
Veterans, Orphans, Homeless etc.,???????????

                                  In the last months we have provided aid to
Haiti , Chile , and Turkey . And now Pakistan ......home of bin Laden.
Literally, BILLIONS of   DOLLARS!!!

                                  Our retired seniors living on a 'fixed
income' receive no aid nor do they get any breaks while our government and religious organizations pour Hundreds of Billions of   $$$$$$'s and Tons of Food to Foreign Countries!

                                    They call Social Security and Medicare an
entitlement even though most of us have been paying for it all our working lives and now when its time for us to collect, the government is running out of money. Why did the government borrow from it in the first place?
                                    We have hundreds of adoptable children who
are shoved aside to make room for the adoption of foreign orphans.

                                    AMERICA: a country where we have homeless without shelter, children going to bed hungry, elderly going without 'needed' meds, and mentally ill without treatment –etc., etc.

                                    YET.....................
                                  They have a  'Benefit' for the people of
Haiti on 12 TV stations, ships and planes lining up with food, water, tents clothes, bedding, doctors and medical supplies.

                                  Imagine if the *GOVERNMENT* gave 'US' the
same support they give to other countries.

                                  Sad isn't   it?

This is not good, DHS video for law enforcement : White Americans Most Likely Terrorists

It is evident that American ideals, as embraced by the great American middle class, is the chief impediment to the new world order. Our government has been almost totally co-opted by new world order adherents and most of those that aren’t adherents have been bribed or blackmailed into going along with the plan to destroy the middle class. Our only hope is to get to law enforcement and military affiliated before DHS does.

There is a great organization called OathKeepers whose mission is to do just that. Try to get everyone you know who is affiliated with law enforcement or the military familiar with OathKeepers. They may be our last best chance at saving the republic!

DHS Video Characterizes White Americans as Most Likely Terrorists

Big Sis fear campaign continues, but Americans are just as likely to be killed by peanut allergies than they are in terrorist attacks

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Thursday, July 21, 2011

A new promotional video released by the Department of Homeland Security characterizes white middle class Americans as the most likely terrorists, as Big Sis continues its relentless drive to cement the myth that mad bombers are hiding around every corner, when in reality Americans are just as likely to be killed by lightning strikes or peanut allergies.

The video is part of Homeland Security’s $10 million dollar “See Something, Say Something” program that encourages Americans to report “suspicious activity,” which in every case throughout history has been a trait of oppressive, dictatorial regimes.

In the course of the 10 minute clip, a myriad of different behaviors are characterized as terrorism, including opposing surveillance, using a video camera, talking to police officers, wearing hoodies, driving vans, writing on a piece of paper, and using a cell phone recording application.

Despite encouraging viewers not to pay attention to a person’s race in determining whether or not they may be a terrorist, almost all of the scenarios in the clip proceed to portray white people as the most likely terrorists. Bizarrely, nearly every single one of the “patriotic” Americans who reports on their fellow citizen is either black, Asian or Arab. Imagine if the video had portrayed every terrorist as an Arab and every patriotic snoop as white, there’d be an outcry and rightly so, but this strange reversal must have been deliberate on the part of the DHS, but why? Is this merely political correctness taken to the extreme or is something deeper at work?

Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that the DHS’ own internal documents list predominantly white conservative groups as the most likely terrorists, such as Ron Paul supporters, gun owners, gold bullion enthusiasts, and a myriad of other comparatively banal political interests that are largely the domain of white middle class Americans.

This has little to do with the color of a person’s skin, and everything to do with the fact that white, middle class Americans are the biggest roadblock when it comes to Big Sis expanding its control over every facet of American society.

It’s plain to see that very little of the budget for this video went towards paying for decent actors, but perhaps it’s fitting that the participants were about as believable as Santa and his elves, because the notion that terrorists are hovering around every underground parking lot waiting to blow up federal buildings is demonstrably false.

As Ohio University’s John Mueller has documented, the likelihood of actually being a victim of terrorism is infinitesimally small, and only highlights how such threats are hyperbolically exaggerated for political purposes.

Figures collected by Mueller clearly show that Americans are just as likely to be killed by lightning strikes, accident-causing deer, or severe allergic reactions to peanuts.

But the facts don’t matter for a federal agency whose primary function is to manufacture fear to keep Americans under control and submissive to the fact that their economic futures and their constitutional rights are being torn to shreds by their own government while it points to a contrived outside threat as a convenient distraction.

“At its core, the video is filled with scenes of ordinary citizens spying on each other and alerting the authorities to their compatriots’ suspicious deeds,” writes Simon Black. In my favorite scene, a woman calls the police after snooping over the shoulder of a young man typing away on his smartphone.”

Black notes that such videos are solely aimed at reinforcing ignorance, hate and fear for those who still live in darkness and are completely unaware of the real agenda behind Homeland Security’s “see something, say something” charade.

But what is that agenda?

No matter where you look, from East Germany, to Communist Russia, to Nazi Germany, historically governments who encourage their own citizens to report on each other do so not for any genuine safety concerns or presumed benefits to security, but in order to create an authoritarian police state that coerces the people into policing each other’s behavior and thoughts.

As Robert Gellately of Florida State University has highlighted, Germans under Hitler denounced their neighbors and friends not because they genuinely believed them to be a security threat, but because they expected to selfishly benefit from doing so, both financially, socially and psychologically via a pavlovian need to be rewarded by their masters for their obedience.

At the height of its influence around one in seven of the East German population was an informant for the Stasi. As in Nazi Germany, the creation of an informant system was wholly centered around identifying political dissidents and those with grievances against the state, and had little or nothing to do with genuine security concerns.

This is the kind of society the Department of Homeland Security is, whether deliberately or inadvertently, recreating in 21st century America. It is about as far removed as you can possibly get from the vision the founders of the nation had in mind when they created the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence.

Comment by Alex Jones: This DHS video is purposefully designed to transmit fear and hatred of Muslims over to white Americans. Look at the part of the clip where an image of “Jihad Jane” is displayed, the blue eyes are artificially intensified in order to get the message across.

This is about playing minorities off against whites, creating further resentment and suspicion, getting us at each other’s throats just as how different racial groups were set upon each other in Hitler’s Germany to create an environment of fear and distrust, motivating people to inform on each other for the state.

World Guides website claims Obama born in Kisumu, Kenya

M O N D A Y  ,A P R I  L 1  8  ,2  0 1 1  /  / T H E WA  S H I  N  G T  O N T I  ME  S

Obama, the Putative U.S. President, was Born a British Subject Governed by the British NationalityAct of 1948, and is Currently also a British Protected Person and/or a British Citizen to this Day.

How can a person who is born a British Subject be considered a Natural Born Citizen of the USA?

The President & Commander in Chief of the Military Must Be A“natural born Citizen” — U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 5

No Person except anatural born Citizen, ora Citizen of the UnitedStates, at the time of the Adoption of thisConstitution, shall beeligible to the Officeof President

Per the British NationalityAct of 1948, Obama whenborn in 1961 was aBritish

Subject at birth.

Obama’s Father wasNOT a U.S. Citizen,

nor was he an Immigrant tothe USA, nor was he even aPermanent Resident of the USA.

The Law of Nations,Vattel, 1758.Used by Ben Franklin, John Jay,George Washington, ThomasJefferson, and other founders.Vol.1, Ch.19, Section 212:

“natural-born citizens, arethose born in the country,of parents who are citizens”

•

Kenyan National Assembly members state at various times that Obama was born in Kenya and is not a native born American:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/36604073/

•

Kenyan Ambassador to the United States says on a U.S. radio show that Obama’s birth location in Kenya is well known:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zH4GX3Otf14

•

Newspapers in Kenya and other African countries report as far back as 2004 that Obama is Kenyan born:

http://www.scribd.com/my_document_collections/2441535

•

Obama’s family members in Kenya say he was born there:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=107524

•

Michelle Obama the wife of Barack Hussein Obama says in 2008 that Kenya is her husband’s “home country”:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bx4Afe1NVYI

•

Michelle Obama the wife of Barack Hussein Obama in 2007 says her husband is a Kenyan:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rep-MB-wbkU

•

NPR radio says that Obama is Kenyan born:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=138293

•

Gov Richardson of New Mexico says Obama is an immigrant:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEjGmT1gmcw 

•

School records in Indonesia report that he is an Indonesian citizen:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=72667

•

No hospital records exist in Hawaii proving Obama was born there per Tim Adams a 2008 Hawaii Election official’s sworn affidavit:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=254401

•

Obama’s Hawaiian birth registration records was likely created by an affidavit filed by Obama’s maternal grandmother declaringhim born at home with no witnesses using a simple mail-in form available in 1961 simply to gain her new foreign born grandsonCitizenship. Birth registration fraud to gain Citizenship occurs now and it occurred then. His vital records were likely subsequentlyamended upon the marriage of his mother to her second husband, Lolo Soetoro in Hawaii. His official name in the vital records of Hawaii may show his name still as Soetoro. The online Certification of Live Birth (COLB) is a forgery:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmZpwcRf3FQ

A Catalog of Evidence: Concerned Americans Have Good Reason toDoubt that Putative President Obama was Born in HawaiiRead why here : http://www.scribd.com/doc/32486123/WEB/BLOG: http://www.protectourliberty.org • http://puzo1.blogspot.com

Paid for by: American people donating funds at ProtectOurLiberty.org to support awareness of Obama’s constitutional eligibility issues.

Obama is NOT a “natural born Citizen” to constitutional standards!

What Post-Founding Generation U.S. President is Reported as Born in a ForeignCountry by Family Members, Newspapers, and Government Officials in that ForeignCountry who repeatedly state the he was Born in Their Country and not in the USA?Answer: None - until Obama usurped the Presidency of the United States.

Unholy alliance: GE and communists

After dancing with the devil GE prospers materially but how do they sleep at night? They maniacally embraced all things green in order to ingratiate themselves with our communists regime and have been richly rewarded. They are expecting billions of green profits from windmills, electric cars, and other useless green gadgets. MSNBC and NBC were turned green and Obama was idolized under GE’s ownership of the networks.

GE reports 21.6% rise in profit...

1. FLASHBACK: Paid no tax on $5.1B profit...

Surprise, BBC will favor ‘climate change’ fraudsters and diss skeptics

Climate change is an industry; scientists and universities and foundations rake in billions in grants for studies.

GE is looking to make billions on windmills and other useless green energy gadgets.

The SyFy channel fills at least half of it’s programing with apocalyptic climate change movies.

And big AlGore has made millions in speaking engagements/books/documentaries and selling carbon credits.

UPROAR AS BBC MUZZLES CLIMATE CHANGE SCEPTICS

The BBC has been criticised by climate change sceptics

Thursday July 21,2011

By Nathan Rao

 

THE BBC was criticised by climate change sceptics yesterday after it emerged that their views will get less coverage because they differ from mainline scientific opinion.

In a report by its governing body, the BBC Trust, the corporation was urged to focus less on opponents of the “majority consensus” in its programmes.

It said coverage should not be tailored to represent a “false balance” of opinion if one side came from a minority group.

The report was partly based on an independent review of coverage by Steve Jones, Professor of Genetics at University College, London.

Although he found no evidence of bias in BBC output, he suggested where there is a “scientific consensus” it should not hunt out opponents purely to balance the story.

He highlighted climate change as an example along with the controversy over the Measles, Mumps and Rubella vaccine potentially leading to autism.

On climate change, Professor Jones said there had been a “drizzle of criticism of BBC coverage” arising from “a handful of journalists who have taken it upon themselves to keep disbelief alive”.

A sceptic is not a denier, all good scientists should be sceptics

Dr David Whitehouse

The report says: “In its early days, two decades ago, there was a genuine scientific debate about the reality of climate change. Now, there is general agreement that warming is a fact even if there remain uncertainties about how fast, and how much, the temperature might rise.”

But critics accused Professor Jones of using the report as a cover to “push the BBC’s green agenda”.

Among them are former Tory Chancellor Lord Lawson, who was accused by the Government’s chief scientific adviser, Sir John Beddington, of making “incorrect” claims in An Appeal To Reason, the peer’s book on climate change.

Lord Lawson, chairman of the sceptical Global Warming Policy Foundation, said the fact that carbon dioxide levels were rising leading to global warming was not under dispute. However, he added, its extent and effect could not be explained by majority scientific opinion alone.

He said: “The BBC is already extremely one-sided on this issue. They have a settled view which is politically correct.

“The idea that because scientific opinion falls largely on one side you can’t have a debate is outrageous. Because there’s a strong majority in basic science doesn’t mean the issue is off the table, yet the BBC says it should be.”

The foundation’s director, Dr Benny Peiser, said the report would lead to biased coverage of climate change and stifle any real debate.

He said: “This is nothing the BBC has not been doing for the past 10 years, however. They are completely biased on the issue of climate change and this is nothing more than an effort to push their green agenda.”

Dr David Whitehouse, the foundation’s editor and a former BBC science correspondent, said the corporation had “lost the plot” when it came to science journalism.

He said the corporation was “grouping sceptics with deniers” which would result in a lack of valid scientific input to its reports.

He said: “A sceptic is not a denier, all good scientists should be sceptics. The BBC has got itself into a complete muddle.

“In seeking to get the science right it has missed the journalism which is about asking awkward questions and shaking the tree.”

But the BBC Trust defended the report. A spokesman said: “The report is not suggesting that climate change sceptics will not have a place on the BBC in future.

“The point Professor Jones makes is that the scientific consensus is that it is caused by human activity. Therefore the BBC’s coverage needs to give less weight to those who oppose this view, and reflect the fact that the debate has moved on to how to deal with climate change.”

Amerika under control of enemies of ‘We the People’; government targets you!

DHS VIDEO: White middle-class Americans 'most likely terrorists'

Big Sis fear campaign continues, but Americans are just as likely to be killed by peanut allergies than they are in terrorist attacks

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Thursday, July 21, 2011

A new promotional video released by the Department of Homeland Security characterizes white middle class Americans as the most likely terrorists, as Big Sis continues its relentless drive to cement the myth that mad bombers are hiding around every corner, when in reality Americans are just as likely to be killed by lightning strikes or peanut allergies.

The video is part of Homeland Security’s $10 million dollar “See Something, Say Something” program that encourages Americans to report “suspicious activity,” which in every case throughout history has been a trait of oppressive, dictatorial regimes.

In the course of the 10 minute clip, a myriad of different behaviors are characterized as terrorism, including opposing surveillance, using a video camera, talking to police officers, wearing hoodies, driving vans, writing on a piece of paper, and using a cell phone recording application.

Despite encouraging viewers not to pay attention to a person’s race in determining whether or not they may be a terrorist, almost all of the scenarios in the clip proceed to portray white people as the most likely terrorists. Bizarrely, nearly every single one of the “patriotic” Americans who reports on their fellow citizen is either black, Asian or Arab. Imagine if the video had portrayed every terrorist as an Arab and every patriotic snoop as white, there’d be an outcry and rightly so, but this strange reversal must have been deliberate on the part of the DHS, but why? Is this merely political correctness taken to the extreme or is something deeper at work?

Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that the DHS’ own internal documents list predominantly white conservative groups as the most likely terrorists, such as Ron Paul supporters, gun owners, gold bullion enthusiasts, and a myriad of other comparatively banal political interests that are largely the domain of white middle class Americans.

This has little to do with the color of a person’s skin, and everything to do with the fact that white, middle class Americans are the biggest roadblock when it comes to Big Sis expanding its control over every facet of American society.

It’s plain to see that very little of the budget for this video went towards paying for decent actors, but perhaps it’s fitting that the participants were about as believable as Santa and his elves, because the notion that terrorists are hovering around every underground parking lot waiting to blow up federal buildings is demonstrably false.

As Ohio University’s John Mueller has documented, the likelihood of actually being a victim of terrorism is infinitesimally small, and only highlights how such threats are hyperbolically exaggerated for political purposes.

Figures collected by Mueller clearly show that Americans are just as likely to be killed by lightning strikes, accident-causing deer, or severe allergic reactions to peanuts.

But the facts don’t matter for a federal agency whose primary function is to manufacture fear to keep Americans under control and submissive to the fact that their economic futures and their constitutional rights are being torn to shreds by their own government while it points to a contrived outside threat as a convenient distraction.

“At its core, the video is filled with scenes of ordinary citizens spying on each other and alerting the authorities to their compatriots’ suspicious deeds,” writes Simon Black. In my favorite scene, a woman calls the police after snooping over the shoulder of a young man typing away on his smartphone.”

Black notes that such videos are solely aimed at reinforcing ignorance, hate and fear for those who still live in darkness and are completely unaware of the real agenda behind Homeland Security’s “see something, say something” charade.

But what is that agenda?

No matter where you look, from East Germany, to Communist Russia, to Nazi Germany, historically governments who encourage their own citizens to report on each other do so not for any genuine safety concerns or presumed benefits to security, but in order to create an authoritarian police state that coerces the people into policing each other’s behavior and thoughts.

As Robert Gellately of Florida State University has highlighted, Germans under Hitler denounced their neighbors and friends not because they genuinely believed them to be a security threat, but because they expected to selfishly benefit from doing so, both financially, socially and psychologically via a pavlovian need to be rewarded by their masters for their obedience.

At the height of its influence around one in seven of the East German population was an informant for the Stasi. As in Nazi Germany, the creation of an informant system was wholly centered around identifying political dissidents and those with grievances against the state, and had little or nothing to do with genuine security concerns.

This is the kind of society the Department of Homeland Security is, whether deliberately or inadvertently, recreating in 21st century America. It is about as far removed as you can possibly get from the vision the founders of the nation had in mind when they created the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence.

VIDEO: Ron Paul’s take on the debt and default

Ron is vilified unjustly almost as much as Sarah. He has been fighting the FED forever. I think a lot of his detractors are moles set in motion by the new world order elites who fear him in the same way they fear Sarah.

Ron Paul: "We Will Default Because The Debt Is Unsustainable"

"When a country is indebted to the degree that we’re indebted, the country always defaults. We will default because the debt is unsustainable," Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) said on the House floor today.
"If we don’t understand this, this default will not be because we don't send out the checks. We will send out the checks. It will be defaulted on because people will get their money back, or they will get their Social Security checks and it won't buy anything."