Monday, February 28, 2011
REPORT: You Have More Money In Your Wallet Than Bank Of America Pays In Federal Taxes
Today, hundreds of thousands of people comprising a Main Street Movement — a coalition of students, the retired, union workers, public employees, and other middle class Americans — are in the streets, demonstrating against brutal cuts to public services and crackdowns on organized labor being pushed by conservative politicians. These lawmakers that are attacking collective bargaining and cutting necessary services like college tuition aid and health benefits for public workers claim that they have no choice but than to take these actions because both state and federal governments are in debt.
But it wasn’t teachers, fire fighters, policemen, and college students that caused the economic recession that has devastated government budgets — it was Wall Street. And as middle class workers are being asked to sacrifice, the rich continue to rig the system, dodging taxes and avoiding paying their fair share.
In an interview with In These Times, Carl Gibson, the founder of US Uncut, which is organizing some of today’s UK-inspired massive demonstrations against tax dodgers, explains that while ordinary Americans are being asked to sacrifice, major corporations continue to use the rigged tax code to avoid paying any federal taxes at all. As he says, if you have “one dollar” in your wallet, you’re paying more than the “combined income tax liability of GE, ExxonMobil, Citibank, and the Bank of America“:
[Gibson] explains, “I have one dollar in my wallet. That’s more than the combined income tax liability of GE, ExxonMobil, Citibank, and the Bank of America. That means somebody is gaming the system.”
Indeed, as politicians are asking ordinary Americans to sacrifice their education, their health, their labor rights, and their wellbeing to tackle budget deficits, some of the world’s richest multinational corporations are getting away with shirking their responsibility and paying nothing. ThinkProgress has assembled a short but far from comprehensive list of these tax dodgers — corporations which have rigged the tax system to their advantage so they can reap huge profits and avoid paying taxes:
- BANK OF AMERICA: In 2009, Bank of America didn’t pay a single penny in federal income taxes, exploiting the tax code so as to avoid paying its fair share. “Oh, yeah, this happens all the time,” said Robert Willens, a tax accounting expert interviewed by McClatchy. “If you go out and try to make money and you don’t do it, why should the government pay you for your losses?” asked Bob McIntyre of Citizens for Tax Justice. The same year, the mega-bank’s top executives received pay “ranging from $6 million to nearly $30 million.”
- BOEING: Despite receiving billions of dollars from the federal government every single year in taxpayer subsidies from the U.S. government, Boeing didn’t “pay a dime of U.S. federal corporate income taxes” between 2008 and 2010.
- CITIGROUP: Citigroup’s deferred income taxes for the third quarter of 2010 amounted to a grand total of $0.00. At the same time, Citigroup has continued to pay its staff lavishly. “John Havens, the head of Citigroup’s investment bank, is expected to be the bank’s highest paid executive for the second year in a row, with a compensation package worth $9.5 million.”
- EXXON-MOBIL: The oil giant uses offshore subsidiaries in the Caribbean to avoid paying taxes in the United States. Although Exxon-Mobil paid $15 billion in taxes in 2009, not a penny of those taxes went to the American Treasury. This was the same year that the companyovertook Wal-Mart in the Fortune 500. Meanwhile the total compensation of Exxon-Mobil’s CEO the same year was over $29,000,000.
- GENERAL ELECTRIC: In 2009, General Electric — the world’s largest corporation — filed more than 7,000 tax returns and still paid nothing to U.S. government. They managed to do this by a tax code that essentially subsidizes companies for losing profits and allows them to set up tax havens overseas. That same year GE CEO Jeffery Immelt — who recentlyscored a spot on a White House economic advisory board — “earned total compensation of $9.89 million.” In 2002, Immelt displayed his lack of economic patriotism, saying, “When I am talking to GE managers, I talkChina, China, China, China, China….I am a nut on China. Outsourcing from China is going to grow to 5 billion.”
- WELLS FARGO: Despite being the fourth largest bank in the country, Wells Fargo was able to escape paying federal taxes by writing all of its losses off after its acquisition of Wachovia. Yet in 2009 the chief executive of Wells Fargo also saw his compensation “more than double” as he earned “a salary of $5.6 million paid in cash and stock and stock awards of more than $13 million.”
The Intel Hub Radio Show, Five Days A Week On Oracle Broadcasting :
The Intel Hub Radio
February 27th, 2011
We are happy to announce that we have picked up the 8 to 10 pm EST Monday thru Friday slot on Oracle Broadcasting. The Intel Hub Radio will be hosted by Shepard Ambellas & Bob Tuskin, and produced by Alex Thomas.
We hope to bring you a jam packed news show with a unique twist. The Intel Hub Radio will be joined by multiple contributors who will join us on a bi weekly or weekly basis.
From the New World Order Report with Travinyle1 to What On Earth Is Happening with Mark Passio, to Sheree of Truth Frequency, our contributors will bring a fresh perspective week in and week out.
For our first and second week we will be joined by some of our favorite guests with information we deem vitally important.
First Week Schedule
Monday: Inauguarl Show with all hosts and contributors.
Tuesday: Cassandra Anderson of Morph City on Monsanto’s latest tyrannical move.
Wednesday: James Evan Pilato of MediaMonarchy and Paul Verge of Divergent Films
Thursday: Jack Blood of Deadline Live and Andrew Gavin Marshall of Global Research.
Friday: Michael Murphy on the Geo Engineering Budget and new chemtrail devolopments
Monday March 7th: Steve Quayle and Greg Evensen for a SPECIAL two hour broadcast.
Call In Number: 1 866 841 1065
You can listen here or at The Intel Hub Radio and Oracle Broadcasting.
The price of food is at the heart of this wave of revolutions - Africa, World - The Independent
Revolution is breaking out all over. As Gaddafi marshals his thugs and mercenaries for a last-ditch fight in Tripoli, several died as protests grew more serious in Iraq. Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah tried to bribe his people into docility by splashing out $35bn on housing, social services and education. Across the water inBahrain the release of political prisoners failed to staunch the uprising. In Iran, President Ahmadinejad crowed about chaos in the Arab world, but said nothing about the seething anger in his own backyard; in Yemen, the opposition gathers strength daily.
And it's not just the Middle East. This is an African crisis: Tunisia, where it started, is an African country, and last week in Senegal, a desperate army veteran died after setting fire to himself in front of the presidential palace, emulating Mohamed Bouazizi, the market trader whose self-immolation sparked the revolution in Tunisia. Meanwhile, the spirit of revolt has already leapt like a forest fire to half a dozen other ill-governed African nations, with serious disturbances reported in Mauritania, Gabon, Cameroon and Zimbabwe.
Nowhere is immune: dozens of activists in China are in detention or under other forms of surveillance, and the LinkedIn network was shut down as authorities seek to stamp out Middle East-style protests there. In what is arguably the most repressive state on the planet, North Korea, the army was called out and five died in the northern city of Sinuiju after violent protests erupted there and in two other cities. The generals who rule Burma under a trashy façade of constitutional government were keeping a close eye on the Middle East, ready to lock up Aung San Suu Kyi again at the first sign of copycat disturbances.
Sunday, February 27, 2011
FOX NEWS BOSS ROGER AILES TO BE INDICTED???
FOX NEWS BOSS ROGER AILES TO BE INDICTED???
Last week it was revealed that legendary FOX News boss Roger Ailes allegedly told underling Judith Regan to lie to federal investigators to protect Rudy Giuliani.
Regan reportedly has a tape of the telephone call in which Ailes urged her to do this.
If this story is true, and the telephone call is clear, Ailes would obviously be exposed to obstruction-of-justice charges.
And now the scuttlebutt is that Ailes will in fact be indicted.
Here's financial commentator Barry Ritholtz:
Someone I spoke with claimed that Ailes was scheduled to speak at their event in March, but canceled. It appears that Roger’s people, ostensibly using a clause in his contract, said he “cannot appear for legal reasons.”
I asked “What, precisely, does that mean?”
The response: “Roger Ailes will be indicted — probably this week, maybe even Monday.”
If the scuttlebutt is true, THIS will be the trial of the century.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/fox-news-boss-roger-ailes-to-be-indicted-2011-2#ixzz1FDmIcEkF
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Friday, February 25, 2011
Thursday, February 24, 2011
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Sunday, February 20, 2011
Friday, February 18, 2011
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
Tea Party Crashes: The Most UnPatriotic Act :
The Intel Hub
By Susan Lindauer, 9/11 Whistleblower indicted on the Patriot Act
February 15th, 2011
I confess that since November I’ve been holding my breath, watching the clock for how long Tea Party newcomers could hold out against the entrenched Republican elite on Capitol Hill. Collapse was inevitable, however I admit to feeling bitterly surprised at how rapidly they have thrown in the towel.
For the record, most of the Tea Party quit their principles of liberty on February 14, 2011—20 days into the new Congress—when Tea Party leaders abruptly abandoned their opposition to the Patriot Act and voted to extend intrusive domestic surveillance, wire tapping and warrantless searches of American citizens. In so doing, they exposed the fraud of their soaring campaign promises to defend the liberty of ordinary Americans, and fight government intrusions on freedom. All those wide eyed speeches that flowed with such thrilling devotions, all of it proved to be self-aggrandizing lies.
The Tea Party didn’t even put up a fight. Briefly they rejected a sneak attack to renew three surveillance clauses of the Patriot Act on a suspension vote. That filled my heart with hope. One push from the Republican elite, however and they went down with a loud thud.
My disappointment is particularly acute. Rather notoriously, I am distinguished as the second non-Arab American to face indictment on the Patriot Act, after Jose Padilla.
My status was pretty close to an enemy non-combatant. One would presume that I must have joined some terrorist conspiracy? Or engaged in some brutal act of sedition, such as stock piling weapons and munitions to overthrow those crooks in Congress?
You would be wrong. I got indicted for protesting the War in Iraq. My crime was delivering a warm-hearted letter to my second cousin White House Chief of Staff, Andy Card, which correctly outlined the consequences of War. Suspiciously, I had been one of the very few Assets covering the Iraqi Embassy at the United Nations for seven years. Thus, I was personally acquainted with the truth about Pre-War Intelligence, which differs remarkably from the story invented by GOP leaders on Capitol Hill.
More dangerously still, my team gave advance warnings about the 9/11 attack and solicited Iraq’s cooperation after 9/11. In August 2001, at the urging of my CIA handler, I phoned Attorney General John Ashcroft’s private staff and the Office of Counter-Terrorism to ask for an “emergency broadcast alert” across all federal agencies, seeking any fragment of intelligence on airplane hijackings. My warning cited the World Trade Center as the identified target. Highly credible independent sources have confirmed that in August, 2001 I described the strike on the World Trade Center as “imminent,” with the potential for “mass casualties, possibly using a miniature thermonuclear device.”
Thanks to the Patriot Act, Americans have zero knowledge of those truths, though the 9/11 Community has zoomed close for years. Republican leaders invoked the Patriot Act to take me down 30 days after I approached the offices of Senator John McCain and Trent Lott, requesting to testify about Iraq’s cooperation with the 9/11 investigation and a comprehensive peace framework that would have achieved every U.S. and British objective without firing a shot. Ironically, because of the Patriot Act, my conversations with Senator Trent Lott’s staff got captured on wire taps, proving my story.
You see, contrary to rhetoric on Capitol Hill, the Patriot Act is first and foremost a weapon to bludgeon whistleblowers and political dissidents. Indeed, it has been singularly crafted for that purpose.
The American people are not nearly as frightened as they should be. Many Americans expect the Patriot Act to limit its surveillance to overseas communications. Yet while I was under indictment, Maryland State Police invoked the Patriot Act to wire tap activists tied to the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, an environmental group dedicated to wind power, solar energy and recycling. The DC Anti-War Network was targeted as a “white supremacist group.” Amnesty International and anti-death penalty activists got targeted for alleged “civil rights violations.”
All of these are American activists engaged in lawful disputes of government policy. All of them got victimized by the surveillance techniques approved by Tea Party leaders, because they pursued a policy agenda that contradicted current government policies. The Tea Party swore to defend the freedom of independent thinking in Congressional campaigns. One presumes those promises are now forgotten until the next election.
I cannot forget. I cannot forget how I was subjected to secret charges, secret evidence and secret grand jury testimony that denied my right to face my accusers or their accusations in open court, throughout five years of indictment. I cannot forget my imprisonment on a Texas military base for a year without a trial or evidentiary hearing.
I cannot forget how the FBI, the US Attorneys Office, the Bureau of Prisons and the main Justice office in Washington — independently and collectively verified my story— then falsified testimony to Chief Justice Michael Mukasey, denying our 9/11 warnings and my long-time status as a U.S. intelligence Asset, though my witnesses had aggressively confronted them. Apparently the Patriot Act allows the Justice Department to withhold corroborating evidence and testimony from the Court, if it is deemed “classified.”
I cannot forget threats of forcible drugging and indefinite detention up to 10 years, until I could be “cured” of believing what everybody wanted to deny— because it was damn inconvenient to politicians in Washington anxious to hold onto power.
Some things are unforgivable in a democracy. The Patriot Act would be right at the top of that list. Nobody who has supported that wretched law should ever be allowed to brag of defending liberty again. That goes for the Tea Party. By voting to extend surveillance of American citizens, they have abandoned the principles of freedom that brought about their rise to power. They have shown their true face.
It is a face that we, the people, will remember. I, for one, have no intention of allowing them to forget.
Susan Lindauer is the author of EXTREME PREJUDICE: The Terrifying Story of the Patriot Act and the Cover Ups of 9/11 and Iraq.
Intel Hub Note: On a brighter note, Rand Paul is completely against the Patriot Act and sent a letter of opposition to his colleagues.
US Air Force C17 transport caught smuggling arms and drugs into Argentina « Aletho News
Pagina/12 Report – February 14, 2011
Translation by Aletho News:
Argentina’s foreign ministry has issued a press release stating that it will be making a formal protest over undeclared weapons and drugs brought into the nation at Ezeiza last Thursday.
A manifest provided by the US did not list war materiel and drugs which were seized by Argentine authorities.
Among the confiscated materiel were communications interception equipment , encrypted communications equipment, sophisticated GPS devices, high power rifles, a machine gun and narcotics as well as a full trunk of expired pharmaceuticals including stimulants. All boxes had the stamp of the 7th Army Airborne Brigade based in North Carolina.
The Argentine government estimates the value of the goods and the C17 transport expenses to exceed $2 million.
The unreported contents also included an odd brochure with the phrase “I am a United States soldier. Please report to my embassy I have been arrested by the country.” translated into fifteen languages.
US documents described the shipment as intended for an Argentine government approved Federal police training course.
Argentina reiterated that it does not wish for the internal security practices of Rio’s favelas or El Salvador’s gangs to be the model for the Argentine nation.
The Argentine government will be suspending the police training program.
Argentina’s ambassador to the US described the situation as “a shameful embarrassment” before returning the cargo to North Carolina.
It is noted that any Argentine, civilian or military, who attempted to smuggle weapons and drugs into the US would be arrested immediately.
###
Spanish language source:
La Argentina “formulará una protesta” formal ante los Estados Unidos por el intento de ingresar de forma ilegal “material camuflado” en un avión militar que llegó a Ezeiza el jueves pasado, tal como informó ayer Página/12. Según un comunicado de prensa difundido anoche por CancillerÃa, entre el material que se incautó tras la inspección “hay desde armas hasta diferentes drogas” que no habÃan sido declaradas en el manifiesto… continuarse
WANT LUNCH? GIVE US YOUR FINGERPRINTS - ‘Big Brother’ fears at Parliament Hill School | Camden New Journal
Published: 10 February, 2011
by JOSIE HINTON
PUPILS at one of Camden’s top secondary schools may have to provide fingerprints to get their school lunches.
Scanners could be installed at Parliament Hill School in Highgate Road, Highgate, to speed up queues in the canteen.
Replacing the current swipe cards, the cashless system would use students’ biometric data to record payments for school meals.
If approved, Parliament Hill will become the first state school in Camden to use the technology as part of students’ daily routine.
Staff say it would save “time and money” by tackling the problem of lost or broken cards, but critics argue that it is a “softening up” exercise to condition children to accept a creeping surveillance society.
Aza Lorentz, a parent who wrote to the New Journal raising concerns over the proposals, said: “The current photo ID card is sufficient, and it acts as lunch card as well as identity.
“Pupils could eventually have to sign in every time they use the library, enter or leave the school. I feel it is a way of making the younger generation more accepting of controlling technologies.” Judy Jenkin, another parent parent, added: “I’d like to see how much it costs because there are other priorities and I don’t really see any problem with the ID cards. If it’s designed to speed up the lunch queue, the canteen is about the size of my front room so I don’t think it will solve the problem.”
Parents have been invited to Parliament Hill next week for a demonstration of how the system would work.
Cate Hart, director of operations at Parliament Hill, said the “vast majority” of parents who responded to the consultation supported the use of the technology.
She added: “Parents and students had expressed concerns about the speed of the lunchtime service, using swipe cards to pay for lunches. Cards get lost, damaged and forgotten, which results in frustration for students and catering staff at the tills.
“There will be inevitable concern about the ‘use’ of fingerprints, but the image of the fingerprint is taken from the scanner and turned directly into a ‘number’, which is retained in the system.
“Images of the fingerprints are not stored on the system anywhere. The number cannot be turned back into a fingerprint.”
She added that governors will make a final decision based on all the consultation responses and comments from parents.
Students whose parents object will be able to opt out of the system.
The Department for Education (DfE) estimates about 30 per cent of secondary schools and 5 per cent of primaries across the country use biometric systems. But Terri Dowti, director of lobby group Action on Rights for Children, is concerned that these systems could be vulnerable to hackers.
A DfE spokesman said: “Legislation will be introduced in the Freedom Bill to ensure that no children’s biometric data are taken, in schools or colleges, without parental permission. The Bill will give children the right to refuse to use biometric systems and will ensure that alternatives are provided for those who opt out of using biometric technology.”
Monday, February 14, 2011
Sunday, February 13, 2011
Sen. Lee Bright: SC should coin its own money
Last Modified: Saturday, February 12, 2011 at 1:22 a.m.
Continuing a pattern of attempts to assert South Carolina's independence from the federal government, State Sen. Lee Bright, R-Roebuck, has introduced legislation that backs the creation of a new state currency that could protect the financial stability of the Palmetto State in the event of a breakdown of the Federal Reserve System.
Bright's joint resolution calls for the creation of an eight-member joint subcommittee to study the proposal and submit a report to the General Assembly by Nov. 1.
The Federal Reserve System has come under ever-increasing strain during the last several years and will be exposed to ever-increasing and predictably debilitating strain in the years to come, according to the legislation.
“If there is an attempt to monetize the Fed we ought to at least have a study on record that could protect South Carolinians,” Bright said in an interview Friday.
“If folks lose faith in the dollar, we need to have some kind of backup.”
The legislation cites the rights reserved to states in the Constitution and Supreme Court rulings in making the case that South Carolina is within its rights to create its own currency.
“The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that the states may adopt whatever currency they desire for the purposes of performing their sovereign governmental functions, even to the extent of adopting gold and silver coin for those purposes while refusing to employ a currency not redeemable in gold or silver coin that Congress has designated ‘legal tender.'...” Bright's legislation states.
The legislation claims “many widely recognized experts predict the inevitable destruction of the Federal Reserve System's currency through hyperinflation in the foreseeable future.”
Per the legislation, South Carolina's new currency could consist of “gold or silver, or both.”
Saturday, February 12, 2011
Commoncents$ Radio
In July of 2010 quite a few show hosts decided to leave a radio network for reasons of their own. This event afforded me an opportunity to become a radio show host on that network. From the very beginning I worked hard, some would say I worked harder than anyone else, to keep that network from going under. It was a mutually beneficial relationship in that, the network had someone to fill air time which was crucial to keeping the network relevant and I was able to gain valuable on air experience. In fact there were many days in the beginning when I would be on air for 4 to 5 hours out of a 9 hour broadcast day schedule.
I enjoyed a good relationship with the owner of the network and others in upper management. Also because of my efforts, the communication between show hosts was excellent (something that was lacking in the past), as well as communication between those hosts and upper management (once again, something that was lacking in the past). Times were good, the network remained relevant and the negative effects of all of those show hosts leaving started to diminish. I enjoyed my time on the network completely, all the while going above and beyond what was asked and/or required of me.
On December 2, 2010 I had a conversation with the owner of the network to inform him that, because of a change in my work situation, I would have to end my show on the network effective December 31, 2010. I had always maintained that I intended to help out when I can, if needed, as evidenced by my filling in for a few shows during the month of January 2011.
As a result of another show host having to leave for work related reasons, on January 29, 2011 I once again offered my services to the network to fill one hour of a Friday show that the former host vacated. Instead it was asked of me to fill a 90 minute show later in the day on Friday evening, because a different show host was no longer going to be doing said show, I agreed to do it.
In an effort to mend fences and build bridges between a few of the former show hosts, listeners and the network, I invited 3 former show hosts to join me on air for a "family reunion" style show for my "official" return to the network on February 4, 2011. Now I did in fact inform the owner of the network of my intentions to do such a show in a phone conversation between the two of us that took place on Tuesday February 1, 2011 before the show was scheduled. I pointed out that this type of show might ruffle a few feathers and I was told that "we could use the publicity." So I went ahead with the planned show. It was a huge success, many of the former listeners to the network were in the chat room for the first time in over six months (as evidenced by the large amount of people in the chat room throughout the show, and not a one expressed any concerns or disapproval of the tone and/or content of that show) and the actual listens to that show were the best for that Friday time slot in quite a few months (over 400 total listens as I write this), this is fact backed up by numbers (a you tube video of that show is approaching 600 views).
Immediately following that show I had a conversation with the owner of the network and I was informed that a few people were upset about it, including a perspective sponsor to the network. I received a message on my profile page on the website of the network from another former show host, who made threats to initiate legal action if that show continued to be available for download. The assertions of said former show host were completely false and unfounded. This fact did not stop that show title from being edited for content at the wishes of said former show host (who just so happens to be a friend of the above mentioned perspective sponsor). I had to find out about this through a message sent to me, not from the owner of the network, but from my friend... a former show host. I looked into it and in fact, the title and description of the episode in question was edited (and remains so). I realize that the owner of said network has the final say in all decisions regarding show content. What is perplexing to me is that I did inform said owner about that show's content and scheduled guests and I was given the "green light" to proceed with it. My problem with the whole situation is that, as host of that particular show, it would have been nice to have been informed of the network management's decision to edit said show.
I feel as though myself and my friend, a former show host who participated in the show in question, were "thrown under the bus" and sacrificed for the opportunity to bring in said perspective sponsor (who once again, is friends with the former host who made threats of legal action against the network because of that show) who did not agree with the tone or content of the show. I have been informed that the show in question still remains available in it's entirety for download, but with my show information deleted from the title and description. The reasoning behind this given to me by the network owner was, to appease a former show host and to get an apology from said host for painting the network in a negative light in a you tube video.
I write this to point out the facts and no other motivations are behind this piece. I feel that my friend and myself have been unjustly wronged to satisfy the wishes of a former show host and his friend, a perspective sponsor of the network.
Never did I imagine on a network with the word "freedom" in the title, that I would be censored and denied freedom of speech.
These are my reasons for walking away... I wish everyone involved the very best of luck in the future.
Thanks but no thanks.
Jay a.k.a. ljc3000 (2-11-11)