The IUSB Vision Weblog

The way to crush the middle class is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation. – Vladimir Lenin

Archive for April 20th, 2010

Obama Lied about Reason to Renege on Eastern European Missile Shield

Posted by iusbvision on April 20, 2010

[Editor’s Note – The video link that we posted is no longer working, so I had to find something to put here about Obama & Eastern Europe so we would have something here, and look at what we just discovered, see the special Editor’s Note below.]


By Krystyna Teller

A controversial move by President Barack Obama has Eastern European states, notably Poland, questioning America’s commitment to stand by them. In a poorly timed statement, Obama announces an end to the missile defense shield plan, initiated by the Bush Administration, on the 70th Anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Poland. For the global Polish population, the timing of this announcement is particularly insensitive, with many of them seeing this as a “stab in the back”.

Adam Andrzejewski, Republican candidate for Governor whose grandparents emigrated from Poland, weighs in on the decision; “Not only are we leaving an ally in the lurch, we left them hanging on the 70th Anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Poland. That’s like releasing an Al Qaeda terrorist on 9-11, and it’s a profound insult to all Poles.”

Illinois, home to the second-largest Polish population outside Warsaw, also produced politicians like Barack Obama and many of his subordinates.


Georgia Joins Growing List of Snubbed U.S. Allies.  Washington Post:

Forty-seven world leaders are Barack Obama’s guests in Washington Tuesday at the nuclear security summit. Obama is holding bilateral meetings with just 12 of them. That’s led to some awkward exclusions — and some unfortunate appearances, as well.

One of those left out was Mikheil Saakashvili, president of Georgia, who got a phone call from Obama last week instead of a meeting in Washington. His exclusion must have prompted broad smiles in Moscow, where Saakashvili is considered public enemy no. 1 — a leader whom Russia tried to topple by force in the summer of 2008. After all, Obama met with Viktor Yanukovych, the president of Ukraine and a friend of the Kremlin. And he is also meeting with the leaders of two of Georgia’s neighbors — Armenia and Turkey, both of which enjoy excellent relations with Russia.

So is Saakashvili — a democratically elected leader whose ambition is to lead his country into NATO — being snubbed in order to please Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev? The White House would insist no. The summit is about nuclear security; Yanukovych got an appointment because Ukraine agreed to give up 60 tons of highly enriched uranium that it now uses in research reactors. Turkey and Armenia are seeing Obama because the administration hopes to press them to move forward with an agreement on opening borders — a deal that would benefit everyone in the Caucasus.

Still, Saakashvili’s exclusion from the bilateral schedule is striking considering his strong support for U.S. interests, such as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Georgia sent as many as 2,000 troops from its tiny army to Iraq. It will soon have nearly 1,000 in Afghanistan; 750 are being sent to fight under U.S. command. U.S. envoy Richard Holbrooke noted last month that Georgia’s per capita troop contribution would be the highest of any country in the world.


Lech Wałęsa talks about missile shieldWarsaw Business Journal:

Former Polish President and Nobel Peace Prize winner, Lech Wałesa, has spoken out about media reports that the US has scrapped plans to install a missile shield in Poland and the Czech Republic.

“Americans have always cared only about their interests, and all other [countries] have been used for their purposes. This is another example,” Mr Wałęsa told TVN24. “[Poles] need to review our view of America, we must first of all take care of our business,” he added.

“I could tell from what I saw, what kind of policies President Obama cultivates,” the former president added. “I simply don’t like this policy, not because this shield was required [in Poland], but [because of] the way we were treated,” he concluded.


Poles, Czechs: U.S. missile defense shift a betrayal


WARSAW, Poland (AP) — Poles and Czechs voiced deep concern Friday at President Barack Obama’s decision to scrap a Bush-era missile defense shield planned for their countries.

“Betrayal! The U.S. sold us to Russia and stabbed us in the back,” the Polish tabloid Fakt declared on its front page.

Polish President Lech Kaczynski said he was concerned that Obama’s new strategy leaves Poland in a dangerous “gray zone” between Western Europe and the old Soviet sphere.

Recent events have rattled nerves throughout central and eastern Europe, a region controlled by Moscow during the Cold War, including the war last summer between Russia and Georgia and ongoing efforts by Russia to regain influence in Ukraine. A Russian cutoff of gas to Ukraine last winter left many Europeans without heat.

The Bush administration’s missile defense plan would have been “a major step in preventing various disturbing trends in our region of the world,” Kaczynski said in a guest editorial in Fakt that also was carried on his presidential Web site.

Neighboring Lithuania, a small Baltic nation that broke away from the Soviet Union in 1991 and is now a NATO member, also expressed regret over Obama’s decision.

Defense Minister Rasa Jukneviciene said that the shield would have increased security for Lithuania and she hoped missile defense would not be excluded from future talks on NATO security.

“This NATO region cannot be an exception and its defense is not less important compared with others,” she said.

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said he still sees a chance for Poles and Czechs to participate in the redesigned missile defense system. But that did not appear to calm nerves in Warsaw or Prague. Kaczynski expressed hopes that the U.S. will now offer Poland other forms of “strategic partnership.”

Later Friday, U.S. ambassador Victor Ashe stressed that “the United States counts Poland among its closest allies and friends.”

“Consultations on the way forward for missile defense will continue between our two governments,” Ashe said in a statement. “The role Poland would play in the new, phased, adapted approach is as crucial now as in the past.”

In Prague, Czech Foreign Minister Jan Kohout said he made two concrete proposals to U.S. officials on Thursday in hopes of keeping the U.S.-Czech alliance strong: for the U.S. to establish a branch of West Point for NATO members in Central Europe and to “send a Czech scientist on the U.S. space shuttle to the international space station.”

An editorial in Hospodarske Novine, a respected pro-business Czech newspaper, said: “an ally we rely on has betrayed us, and exchanged us for its own, better relations with Russia, of which we are rightly afraid.”

The move has raised fears in the two nations they are being marginalized by Washington even as a resurgent Russia leaves them longing for added American protection.

The Bush administration always said that the planned system — with a radar near Prague and interceptors in northern Poland — was meant as defense against Iran. But Poles and Czechs saw it as protection against Russia, and Moscow too considered a military installation in its backyard to be a threat.

“No Radar. Russia won,” the largest Czech daily, Mlada Fronta Dnes, declared in a front-page headline.

[Now read this next paragragh very carefully – IUSB Vision Editor]

Obama said the old plan was scrapped in part because the U.S. has concluded that Iran is less focused on developing the kind of long-range missiles for which the system was originally developed, making the building of an expensive new shield unnecessary.


Now the facts have gotten out that the Obama Administration KNEW that wasn’t true….

Fox News:

“With sufficient foreign assistance, Iran could probably develop and test an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) capable of reaching the United States by 2015,” says a new 12 page unclassified report prepared by the Department of Defense on the Iran Military Threat.

The report says Iran’s military strategy is designed to defend against external or “hard” threats from the United States and Israel. “Iran’s nuclear program and its willingness to keep open the possibility to develop nuclear weapons is a central part of its deterrent strategy,” according to the report.

Now what was that about Iran not wanting long range missiles????

World Tribune:

LONDON — Iran is said to have been constructing a new rocket launch facility that could later accommodate an intercontinental ballistic missile carrying a nuclear warhead.

Iran's new launch site is 4 km northeast of the existing facility at Semnan. IHS Jane's imagery by DigitalGlobe

IHS Jane’s reported that Iran was building a launch site with help from North Korea. Jane’s said the launcher was detected by commercial remote-sensing satellites in the Semnan province east of Teheran.

“It [rocket launch facility] contains a gantry tower, which is 13 meters wide, approximately 18-20 meters tall and has a cliff-side flame bucket nearly as high as the tower itself,” Jane’s said on March 5. “It appears midway towards completion.”

This is about as busted as busted gets. Obama lied about his reasoning to strip Eastern Europe of their promised missile shield. It seems that the analysts have been proved correct, that we threw our allies under the bus to show good will to Putin and Russia. 

Maybe the administration can claim ignorance from just a few months ago. Of course that is unlikely in the extreme, but assuming that is true, it cannot be ignored that Iran has been test launching longer and longer range missiles for how long now?  

The BBC Reports Iranian long range missile tests in Sept 2009, when Obama was saying that Iran “was less focused” on long range missile plans.

BBC – 28 September 2009:

Iran has successfully test-fired some of the longest range missiles in its arsenal, state media say.

The Revolutionary Guards tested the Shahab-3 and Sajjil rockets, which are believed to have ranges of up to 2,000km (1,240 miles), reports said.

The missiles’ range could potentially permit them to reach Israel and US bases in the Gulf, analysts say.

The tests come amid heightened tension with the big international powers over Iran’s nuclear ambitions.


The BBC link even has a video of the launch. – Editor

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration, Russia | 2 Comments »

Caught: White House Political Collusion in SEC Investigation. White House Wants Unlimited Bailout and Siezure Power. Can anyone be trusted with that much power? UPDATE – All the president’s Goldman Sachs men

Posted by iusbvision on April 20, 2010

[Editor’s Note – This is a bit of a complex story. Please read the following story carefully. After you are done go HERE for a story update.]

The SEC (Securities Exchange Commission) is supposed to be an independent agency. This may be the scandal that brings an administration down. When the GOP takes Congress back they will have subpeona power and the investigations are going to fly.

Barack Obama took nearly a million dollars from Goldman Sachs and four million from Wall Street.

Barack Obama worked to prevent mortgage reform and to prevent reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Barack Obama took the second highest amount of money from the mortgage giants in the Senate.

Now Barack Obama is making political hay out of an SEC investigation of Goldman Sachs (of which, believe it or not they might actually be innocent in this one case).

There is evidence that the White House knew about the coming SEC investigation in advance. The timing for Obama’s new financial regulation bill seemed just a little too sweet. The White House (who insists that it didn’t know about this in advance) bought the advertising for the Google search term “Goldman Sachs SEC”. The SEC in a highly unusual party line move decided to sue Goldman Sachs just now at the beginning of Obama’s push for this legislation.

Financial News:

The Securities and Exchange Commission decided to sue Goldman Sachs Group over the objections of two Republican commissioners, suggesting an unusual split at the agency that could politicise one of its most prominent cases in years.

The legislation gives the White House near unlimited bailout power (unlimited Wall Street bailouts) and the ability to sieze any private business without any check and balance. That is the kind of power you see in Stalinistic regimes, not the United States. The legislation also has no provisions to reform the two biggest players in the mortgage scandal, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, who funded almost $200 million to partisan activities, and whose multimillion dollar bonuses were protected by Democrat legislation.

[Editor’s Note – Ok who wants to say that this is not the biggest power grab and opportunity for corruption of our lifetimes? Does anyone know a mainstream Democrat or Republican voter who would trust any man with this kind of power? But do not be fooled, this “lawsuit” is for public release only (PR purposes). It will either go away or Goldman Sachs will get a slap on the wrist and gladly pay, as Goldman has made a fortune since the economic collapse and the Obama Administration continues to be a revolving door for Goldman employees, lobbyists and influence peddling.]

Rush Limbaugh played some of the evidence the media has discovered so far. In spite of what you think of Limbaugh he is very factual here in what he presents and it is worth watching (Hat Tip Rightscoop for the video):

Charlie Rose to Rahm Emanuel: How is it that the New York Times knew about the SEC Investigation Before Goldman Sachs did….

By the way I did a Google on “Goldman Sachs SEC” and sure enough….

There it is on the very top, “Help Change Wall Street” and it goes to this:

.. amazing…

Real Clear Politics: Limbaugh: White House Had Advanced Knowledge Of SEC Suit Against Goldman Sachs

In the mean time even MSNBC criticized Democratic Senate Leader Harry Reid for dodging questions on Goldman Sachs/Wall Street fund raisers hosted by the president of Goldman Sachs. Video:

Charles Krauthammer discussing the Obama Administration’s “Financial Reform Bill.” He said it would provide “no check, no balance” for Executive power: 

Brad Sherman Congressman (D-Calif.), member of House Financial Services Committee (Via Politico):

But there are serious problems with the Dodd bill. The Dodd bill has unlimited executive bailout authority. That’s something Wall Street desperately wants but doesn’t dare ask for. The bill contains permanent, unlimited bailout authority.

House Republicans put out this statement about this power grab:

Washington, Apr 19

With a new national survey showing that nearly eight in 10 Americans say they don’t trust the federal government, Washington Democrats are getting ready to force through Congress a permanent bailout bill that establishes an unelected council of federal regulators with the power to seize any U.S. business and do with it as they see fit.

The permanent bailout bill authored by Senate Banking Chairman Chris Dodd (D-CT) creates a Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) made up of federal regulators – including representatives from the Treasury Department, the Federal Reserve, the CFTC, FDIC, and the SEC.  In other words: the government bureaucracies asleep at the switch the last time around.

This clique of regulators could – by a 2/3 vote – deem any firm (financial or non-financial) “systemically significant,” which is merely jargon for other jargon: “too big to fail.”  At that point, according to economist Larry Lindsey, the Council would “authorize the FDIC and Treasury Secretary to treat each of the firm’s shareholders and creditors as they choose, without regard to bankruptcy law.”  Any institution could be ordered to “break itself up, stop selling certain products, or even go out of business,” according to the Heritage Foundation.

INSTITUTIONALIZING “TOO BIG TO FAIL,” HURTING SMALL BANKS.  Senior Atlantic editor Clive Crook sees the council of regulators as a major factor in how Washington Democrats’ permanent bailout bill institutionalizes “too big to fail”:

Sen. Dodd’s bill “adds new bodies … a Financial Stability Oversight Council to coordinate the policing of systemic risks.  Overall, after much shuffling of duties among this expanded list of regulators, the plan makes the system more complicated, not less. … Under the Dodd plan, although the senator denies it, many big financial firms would indeed be declared too big to fail. The market would put banks that meet the assets threshold for Fed supervision into this category.  Other financial firms would be viewed the same way if the Financial Stability Oversight Council designates them as ‘systemically significant.’” (National Journal, 3/20/10)

Once these firms are deemed ‘systemically significant,’ they will be seen as safer firms to lend to than small firms that are not government-backed.  The result will be a permanent market distortion, favoring large companies over small ones.  This will hurt small businesses and smaller banks at the worst possible time for our economy.

ENDLESS BAILOUTS FOR WALL STREET. In a speech last month, SEC Commissioner Troy Paredes outlined how Washington Democrats’ financial bailout bill would grant this council of regulators “unbounded power” to intervene in U.S. businesses:

“…[E]ach of the proposals I took time to reference would, in my view, result in just this sort of open-endedness.  For example, by allowing the new regulator to consider so many factors in deciding whether a firm is systemically significant, the bills in Congress go far to empower the regulator.  The council of regulators could readily find some basis, among the host of factors it is permitted to consider, to justify designating a financial firm for heighted prudential oversight.

“Equally uncertain are the extent and character of the more restrictive standards that may be imposed to bind the size or activities of a systemically-significant firm; there are no clear limits on the degree of government intervention that could be expected. … I do not welcome the prospect of such unbounded power, even if exercised with the best of intentions.  It would inject too much uncertainty into the system and aggregate government authority to a worrisome degree.”PROTECTING BANKERS, NOT TAXPAYERS.  Carnegie Mellon economist Allan Meltzer sees the new bureaucracy as “just another way to pick the public’s purse” given how regulators are historically inclined to protect bankers, not taxpayers:

“So setting up an agency to prevent systemic risk, as Mr. Dodd has just proposed, is just another way to pick the public’s purse.  Systemic risk will forever remain in the eye of the beholder.  Instead of shifting losses onto those that caused them, systemic risk regulation will continue to transfer cost to the taxpayers.  The regulators protect the bankers.  They continue to lose sight of their responsibility to protect the public.(The Wall Street Journal, 3/19/10)

POLITICS.  Manhattan Institute fellow Nicole Gelinas examines how the council of regulators would inevitably “fall victim to politics”:

“In a bubble, more people are over-exuberant than not. The new Financial Stability Oversight Council would not escape this fact.  It would also fall victim to politics. Imagine that the Fed and other agencies had restricted all but the plainest-vanilla mortgages back in 2000…. The regulators would have tempered the bubble–but the politicians wouldn’t have seen it that way. Instead, they’d have accused bureaucrats of roping off citizens from the American dream. … We need politicians and regulators to implement simple rules that don’t require faith in omniscient, micro-managerial government planning.” (, 3/29/10)

In his Cooper Union speech in March 2008, then-Sen. Barack Obama said, “Reshuffling bureaucracies should not be an end in itself.”  Instead of protecting taxpayers by crafting reforms that are regulator-proof, Washington Democrats have devised a system that is regulator-reliant.  Republicans believe we should stop endless bailouts for Wall Street and reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government mortgage companies that sparked the meltdown by giving high-risk loans to people who couldn’t afford it. For more information on the House Republican plan, click here.

UPDATEMalkin: All the president’s Goldman Sachs men – LINK

Posted in 2012, Big Bizz Loves Big Govt, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Fannie and Freddie Amnesia: Taxpayers are on the hook for about $400 billion, partly because Sen. Obama helped to block reform.

Posted by iusbvision on April 20, 2010

We have said this since the scandal broke. In fact if you go back to the earliest posts of our mortgage crisis coverage you wills ee that we were saying this before some of the big newspapers. Today the Wall Street Journal gives us a much-needed reminder of recent history.

By the way Democrats in Congress made sure that Fannie Mae got millions in bonuses with our money.

Transparency, Congress & Corruption: AIG and Fannie Mae Bonuses

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac paying $210 million in bonuses with your money and no outrage why…..

Wall Street Journal:

Now that nearly all the TARP funds used to bail out Wall Street banks have been repaid, the government sponsored enterprises (GSEs) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac stand out as the source of the greatest taxpayer losses.

The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that, in the wake of the housing bubble and the unprecedented deflation in housing values that resulted, the government’s cost to bail out Fannie and Freddie will eventually reach $381 billion. That estimate may be too optimistic.

Last Christmas Eve, Treasury removed the $400 billion cap on what the government might be required to invest in these two GSEs in the future, and this may tell the real story about the cost to taxpayers. In typical Washington fashion, everyone has amnesia about how this disaster occurred.

The story is all too familiar. Politicians in positions of authority today had an opportunity to prevent this fiasco but did nothing. Now—in the name of the taxpayers—they want more power, but they have never been called to account for their earlier failings.

One chapter in this story took place in July 2005, when the Senate Banking Committee, then controlled by the Republicans, adopted tough regulatory legislation for the GSEs on a party-line vote—all Republicans in favor, all Democrats opposed. [Including Obama who took the second highest amount of cash from these people in the Senate – IUSB Vision Editor] The bill would have established a new regulator for Fannie and Freddie and given it authority to ensure that they maintained adequate capital, properly managed their interest rate risk, had adequate liquidity and reserves, and controlled their asset and investment portfolio growth.

These authorities were necessary to control the GSEs’ risk-taking, but opposition by Fannie and Freddie—then the most politically powerful firms in the country—had consistently prevented reform.

The date of the Senate Banking Committee’s action is important. It was in 2005 that the GSEs—which had been acquiring increasing numbers of subprime and Alt-A loans for many years in order to meet their HUD-imposed affordable housing requirements—accelerated the purchases that led to their 2008 insolvency. If legislation along the lines of the Senate committee’s bill had been enacted in that year, many if not all the losses that Fannie and Freddie have suffered, and will suffer in the future, might have been avoided.

Why was there no action in the full Senate? As most Americans know today, it takes 60 votes to cut off debate in the Senate, and the Republicans had only 55. To close debate and proceed to the enactment of the committee-passed bill, the Republicans needed five Democrats to vote with them. But in a 45 member Democratic caucus that included Barack Obama and the current Senate Banking Chairman Christopher Dodd (D., Conn.), these votes could not be found.

Recently, President Obama has taken to accusing others of representing “special interests.” In an April radio address he stated that his financial regulatory proposals were struggling in the Senate because “the financial industry and its powerful lobby have opposed modest safeguards against the kinds of reckless risks and bad practices that led to this very crisis.”

He should know. As a senator, he was the third largest recipient of campaign contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, behind only Sens. Chris Dodd and John Kerry.

With hypocrisy like this at the top, is it any wonder that nearly 80% of Americans, according to new Pew polling, don’t trust the federal government or its ability to solve the country’s problems?

Posted in 2012, Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Mortgage Crisis, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Sarah Palin Tells Joke on What is the World’s “Oldest Profession”

Posted by iusbvision on April 20, 2010

Via Freeedom’s Lighthouse:
Here is video of Gov. Sarah Palin speaking at a Women of Joy Conference in Louisville, Kentucky, where she opened her remarks with a joke about what is the world’s “oldest profession.”

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

Dick Morris: Janet Reno Threatened Clinton with Spilling the Goods on Waco

Posted by iusbvision on April 20, 2010

This is no surprise at all.

Waco and Ruby Ridge were both completely avoidable. In the Davidian Church trial the survivors were acquitted of charges of murder and conspiracy to commit murder by the jury. At Waco military equipment was used against civilians. The Posse Comitatus Act forbids the military to be involved in civilian law enforcement. Federal agents violated federal law in both incidents and in the case of Ruby Ridge the government was caught illegally manipulating evidence. When it was over, it was the federal government paying the Randy Weaver family for the unlawful deaths of his son and his wife.

In both trials the governments case fell apart. To say this was a complete mess is an understatement. No matter how much one may dislike or like the people involved, government should rightly be expected to show restraint and obey the law.

Dick Morris: “It’s never been said before” …Janet Reno to Clinton: “If you don’t appoint me, I’ll tell the truth about Waco”

Posted in Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild, Violence | 1 Comment »

U.N.’s $732 Million Haiti Peacekeeping Budget Goes Mostly to Its Own Personnel

Posted by iusbvision on April 20, 2010

Ahh yes the lovely UN in action…

Fox News:

The United Nations has quietly upped this year’s peacekeeping budget for earthquake-shattered Haiti to $732.4 million, with two-thirds of that amount going for the salary, perks and upkeep of its own personnel, not residents of the devastated island.

The United Nations has quietly upped this year’s peacekeeping budget for earthquake-shattered Haiti to $732.4 million, with two-thirds of that amount going for the salary, perks and upkeep of its own personnel, not residents of the devastated island.

The world organization plans to spend the money on an expanded force of some 12,675 soldiers and police, plus some 479 international staffers, 669 international contract personnel, and 1,300 local workers, just for the 12 months ending June 30, 2010.

Some $495.8 million goes for salaries, benefits, hazard pay, mandatory R&R allowances and upkeep for the peacekeepers and their international staff support. Only about $33.9 million, or 4.6 percent, of that salary total is going to what the U.N. calls “national staff” attached to the peacekeeping effort.

Click here to see the supplementary budget document.

Presumably, the budget also includes at least part of some $10 million that the U.N. has spent on renting two passenger vessels, the Sea Voyager (known to some U.N. staffers as the “Love Boat“) and the Ola Esmeralda, for a minimum of 90 days each, as highly subsidized housing for some of its peacekeepers and humanitarian staff. The tab for the two vessels, which offer catered food, linen service and comfortable staterooms and lounges, is about $112,500 per day.

Under a cost-sharing formula, the U.S. pays a 27 percent share of the entire $732.4 million peacekeeping tab for Haiti during this 12 month period, or about $197.7 million.

The ultimate size of the peacekeeping bill for Haiti this year has been a source of much concern among the three dozen or so of the U.N.’s 192 members who pick up roughly 96 percent of the U.N.’s overall peacekeeping bill.

That concern rose sharply about a month ago, when U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon’s office issued an updated peacekeeping estimate that used a $700 million figure strictly as a placeholder for the final Haiti post-quake number.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild | Leave a Comment »

New speed cameras trap motorists from space

Posted by iusbvision on April 20, 2010

England is broke, and look at their “priorities”. Put satellites in space to track your movements so they can spy on you and write more tickets to bilk you out of your money. The potential for abuse of a system like this is off the scale.

Could government be possibly more out of touch.

UK Telegraph:

A new type of speed cameras which can use satellites to measure average speed over long distances are being tested in Britain.

The cameras, which combine number plate reading technology with a global positioning satellite receiver, are similar to those used in roadworks.

The AA said it believed the new system could cover a network of streets as opposed to a straight line, and was “probably geared up to zones in residential areas.”

The Home Office is testing the cameras at two sites, one in Southwark, London, and the other A374 between Antony and Torpoint in Cornwall.

The `SpeedSpike’ system, which calculates average speed between any two points in the network, has been developed by PIPS Technology Ltd, an American-owned company with a base in Hampshire.

Details of the trials are contained in a House of Commons report. The company said in its evidence that the cameras enabled “number plate capture in all weather conditions, 24 hours a day”. It also referred to the system’s “low cost” and ease of installation.

The system could be used for “main road enforcement for congestion reduction and speed enforcement”, and could help to “eliminate rat-runs” and cut speeds outside schools, it added. It could also reduce the need for speed humps.

The development of speed cameras has raised concerns about expanding state surveillance.

The Home Office said it was unable to comment on the trials because of “commercial confidentiality”.

The AA said it would watch the system “carefully” but it did not believe there was anything sinister. “It is a natural evolution of the technology that is out there,” a spokesman said.

Posted in Camera Fraud, Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild | Leave a Comment »

Bill O’Reilly & Bernie Goldberg vs. John Stewart on Hypocrisy, Generalizations, and Name Calling.

Posted by iusbvision on April 20, 2010

This is a very interesting dialogue and I encourage everyone to watch it no matter what yuour politics are

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action | Leave a Comment »

Blackout: Police chase reporters away from covering protest outside White House

Posted by iusbvision on April 20, 2010

What you are about to see in the following video is an abuse of power. If this happened under Bush the elite media would have a cow. Listen to the reporter who is outraged by this, and he is completely right to be, but the elite media is in the tank so media ethics are out the door.

I have a category called “Journalism is dead”, anyone need more proof?


Via Ben Smith, who’s told by his reporter pals covering the WH beat that this is “extremely unusual” police behavior. Maybe the protest got out of hand and the cops shooed the media away for their own safety? Doesn’t sound like it: Apparently, the “protest” was nothing more than six servicemen handcuffing themselves to the fence to object to “don’t ask, don’t tell.” I don’t know D.C. well enough to tell if these are city cops or some type of federal security service that might conceivably coordinate with the White House. Any readers know? We certainly don’t want to accuse a president who’s peeved at gay-rights protesters and who’s known for excluding the media from traditional press opportunities of quashing unfavorable coverage without good reason.

Exit question: On a scale of one to 10, where would this rate on the Crushing-of-Dissent-o-meter if it had happened under Bush?

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Glenn Beck Destroys Joe Klein Again. This Time on His Hypocritical “Sedition” Comments

Posted by iusbvision on April 20, 2010

The elite media talking heads say Rush Limbaugh is guilty of “sedition” for using the word “regime” to describe the Obama Administration. But guess who used the same word to describe Bush, and in several cases even the Obama administration… You guessed it, the very same people making the charges in this video.

Limbaugh states that he uses the word regime because the leadership of the Democratic Party is governing against the will of the people, which the Rasmussen, Pew and Gallup polls show.

NewsBusters comments HERE.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action | Leave a Comment »

The Far Left Fear Monger Machine

Posted by iusbvision on April 20, 2010

Sometimes I wish I was not in school and could write full-time. I finish in less than two weeks. Why is this important? I have been working on a story about the Southern Poverty Law Center about how every little thing that happens means that the Klan groups and militia’s are getting ready to overthrow us all, but Byron York just published a fabulous story on the SPLC that used my narrative (good work Byron, no hard feelings).

Granted I am exaggerating their narrative for effect, but it is only a mild exaggeration. The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) will smear anyone who opposes the Democratic Party. If you are a grass-roots Republican group they say that you are a racist patriot group who is one step removed from the militia guys and they are in turn one step removed from the Klan. If you are a part of a conservative group that supports Israel, too bad you’re a racist too.

When I used to work in the media during the Clinton years the SPLC warnings about the militia being a white supremacist thing was all over the elite media and the SPLC got a lot of press for making these kinds of charges. So I interviewed every so-called militia member and militia leader I could find, figuring it would be good for business. I interviewed members and leaders from Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, Illinois, Kentucky, Montana, and Georgia. I even went to some of the meetings to check them out. I could not find one person who supported any type of racism. In fact I was surprised to see the number of Blacks, Asians, Hispanics etc that showed up to the meetings. Heck I even saw people with a Yamikah on their heads.

I interviewed the head of an Ohio militia group who was a black man who was married to a Jewish lawyer. So I did not get much to report about. I came away with the impression that these were people who took their freedom very seriously, and so long as the government didn’t start trashing the Constitution worse than they already had, they had nothing to fear from these guys.

Time has borne this out, the Michigan and Montana militia groups are 16 years old now and no violence, no racist whatever, nada. In fact, the so called “Christian Militia” that got busted in Michigan, was not Christian, it was a full blown cult, and it was not a militia, it was nine crackpots who hated police. The Michigan Militia was thrilled to see them get busted. In fact, did you know that it was the Michigan Militia who tipped off the police about the cult? What!? You mean the elite media left that little detail out? What a shock.

I receive SPLC mailings through a third-party and all of it is the same old story, fear mongering about militias, fear mongering about the Klan, and fear mongering now about the Tea Party, which is easily shown to be nothing more than a bunch of nonsense. The stuff from the SPLC is not even good quality fear mongering propaganda any more as it is so over the top.

 Byron York in The Examiner:

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Leftist Hate in Action | 1 Comment »