Daily Digest

Daily Digest - September 17

Thursday, September 17, 2009, 9:48 AM
  • Rogers: Expect it. (Video)
  • Ron Paul: Second Great Depression (Video)
  • Bernanke: "Recession Is Over" (Depression Has Just Begun)
  • Trilateral Plan to Corner World Gold Market? (H/T DrKrbyLuv)
  • Next stop for Uncle Buck? (Chart)
  • Some more September (1930) news:
  • Ghost Fleet of the Recession = Biggest Maritime Gathering Ever
  • Inflation USA Video
  • Military Weapons Turned On Civilaians At Town Hall Meetings
  • EXCLUSIVE: White House Collects Web Users' Data Without Notice
  • The I word: Gold Rises to Record Settlement Price on Inflation Concern

Economy

Rogers: Expect It.

Ron Paul: Second Great Depression (Video)

Bernanke: "Recession Is Over" (Depression Has Just Begun)

Bernanke's gambit has failed - we must recognize the mathematical facts, force the bad debt out and clear the system.

Trilateral Plan to Corner World Gold Market? (H/T DrKrbyLuv)

If Fekete is correct, and he has seldom been wrong, then the trap is snapping shut on who will own the gold in 2009. Free-market supplies of gold are drying up, but the price is being kept low as global institutions sop up whatever crumbs are left.

Several very serious implications can be drawn: The massive amounts of gold leased to bullion banks will ultimately be seized by these same banks as collateral against worthless paper loans made to the Central Banks.

Next stop for Uncle Buck? (Chart)

Some More September (1930) News:

Brokers, businessmen, and even the general public more optimistic; over 75% of brokerage houses now advise buying stocks. Offering of $334.2M in 2 3/8% one-year Treasury certificates is oversubscribed by almost 4:1.

B. Anderson, Chase Natl. Bank economist, says Fed policy of easy money will not be sustainable when business revives; suggests moderate tightening now to avoid shock of a sudden severe tightening later.

Florida Bondholder's Adjustment Committee calls on owners of defaulted local bonds to accept arbitration with principle that local govt. should “pay to the full extent of its ability to pay” when fairly determined, and no more. Says full payment in many cases impossible due to string of problems in past few years including collapse of real estate boom, bank failures, storms, and Med. fly scare; local feeling is that many bonds were voted in due to high-pressure tactics by outsiders.

Roger W. Babson (economist, made perfectly timed bearish call in fall 1929) optimistic on immediate future, sees possible “stampede of orders” due to underproduction; says it's as evident now that business is bound to improve as it was clear a year ago that it must deteriorate.

Ghost Fleet of the Recession = Biggest Maritime Gathering Ever

Inflation USA Video

Military Weapons Turned On Civilaians At Town Hall Meetings

On Monday, members of the American Civil Liberties Union spoke with 10News, and they expressed outrage that local law enforcement had the device and that they had brought it to recent town hall meetings in case things got out of hand.

Kevin Keenan, of the ACLU, said, "We think that local law enforcement shouldn't be using military style weaponry like that."

EXCLUSIVE: White House Collects Web Users' Data Without Notice

The White House is collecting and storing comments and videos placed on its social-networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube without notifying or asking the consent of the site users, a failure that appears to run counter to President Obama's promise of a transparent government and his pledge to protect privacy on the Internet.

The I word: Gold Rises to Record Settlement Price on Inflation Concern

The worst U.S. recession since the 1930s has probably ended, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke said yesterday. The dollar slid to its lowest level in almost a year against a basket of six major currencies as the economic outlook reduced demand for the greenback as a haven. Gold futures were 1.3 percent below a record $1,033.90 an ounce set in March 2008.

34 Comments

saxplayer00o1's picture
saxplayer00o1
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 30 2009
Posts: 4064
Re: Daily Digest - September 17

Congressman Grayson: They are performing a truly remarkable, surreptitious transfer of wealth from public to private hands. They are taking their ability to print money and shore up failed banks. They are simply stuffing money into the pockets of private interests.

In the case of the half a trillion dollars, they stuffed the money into foreign private pockets. In the case of another $230 billion, it has been tracked as a secret bailout to Citicorp in the US. The fact is the Federal Reserve continuously puts all of us on the hook for decisions they make to play favorites with private interests to the tune of trillions of dollars.

  • 3) ANNAPOLIS, MD. — Gov. Martin O'Malley said Wednesday he's bracing for another $100 million to $300 million in budget reductions after the state's Board of Revenue Estimates releases its projections
  • 4) University of California to hike student fees by 32%
  • 5) Danville talks bankruptcy

However, it was noted that even in bankruptcy, the city still must pay its $47 million in pension debt, finish paying on contracts until they expire and still pay bonds.

Committee member Wayne Haugen said this should be a “wake-up call” for employees.

"(We) cannot tax our way out of this problem,” added committee member Travis Mains.

At the end of August, there were 131,300 foreclosures scheduled for sale, compared to 64,177 at the end of February.

8) Kansas Public Employees Retirement System faces bankruptcy

9) Social Security Receipts Down 5.5%10) Iowa public employees pension fund drops 20%

  • 11) Ohio  teachers

state pension fund (this number is not current and is much worse)

  • 12) This guy is an idiot, but at least click on the word "chart"  in the

2nd paragraph

Mike Pilat's picture
Mike Pilat
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 8 2008
Posts: 929
Re: Daily Digest - September 17

One article I just came across today was written by Paul Craig Roberts, Ronald Reagan's former assistant Treasury Secretary. I suppose I run the risk of getting this booted to a, um, different thread, but I am posting it here if for no other reason than it demonstrates the lack of faith some of our former leaders have in the "official" stories that are put out. Paul Craig Roberts discusses why people's beliefs and emotional needs often stand in the way of the truth and why propaganda often trumps reality. He discusses Hitler's propaganda machine and puts all of this in context with the 9/11 Truth Movement, which I was surprised to hear had 80,000 protestors in NYC this year. Regardless of what you believe, it seems that something is amiss, perhaps growing, here. I'm honestly a bit surprised to see a former Republican appointee with the qualifications of this guy (see the bottom of the article) raising the questions he does.

http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2009/09/16/why-propaganda-trumps-truth/

On top of all of this, I'm saddened to read in the DD today that Obama is indeed seeking to extend 3 of the Patriot Act provisions (notably, roving wiretaps) and now engaging in a program to archive and search internet postings. This wasn't the change I was hoping for. Wow, it all feels like a punch in the gut.

In the spirit of asking the right questions,

Mike

 

kelvinator's picture
kelvinator
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 25 2008
Posts: 202
Re: Daily Digest - September 17

I think it's fascinating and a great thing to see how many points a nominal progressive like Ariana Huffington and a nominal libertarian like Ron Paul can find to agree on.    There's not much daylight between them, or many who are simplistically labeled as "left" or "right", on the basic fact that Bush and Obama have both been bailing out the oligopoly on Wall Street by running the dollar printing press and taking exponential US debt creation into the vertical phase.

brjohnson789's picture
brjohnson789
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 27 2008
Posts: 52
Re: Daily Digest - September 17

Hi, just read Peter Schiff is definitely running for Senate now.

http://us1.campaign-archive.com/?u=45b009ba848bc9d8a6cd9bda5&id=1fc2201ca9&e=1e63083760

 

Mike Pilat's picture
Mike Pilat
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 8 2008
Posts: 929
Re: Daily Digest - September 17

You know, I think the "American spirit" is inherently competitive, which I generally think can be a force of good if channeled appropriately. But in the politcal arena, the false divisions created by the duopoly of parties is creating a lot of competition over some universally worthless goals. There are more and more former and current political leaders that are beginning to step up and start questioning this system. At a time when distrust of the government is rightly very high on both sides of the spectrum (though centered on different aspects of our political machine), it is important for the politicians to start asking the right questions and understanding why the distrust is so high...perhaps this sounds Pollyannaish.

Whether "Blue Dog" dems or libertarian minded Republicans, they might not quite agree on the solutions, but many of the leaders are beginning to correctly identify the problems, which is a huge plus. It's a start, but there's still many challenges looming ahead.

saxplayer00o1's picture
saxplayer00o1
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 30 2009
Posts: 4064
Re: Daily Digest - September 17

Any reason why my message (#1) got flagged?

wake-up-sheeple's picture
wake-up-sheeple
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 11 2009
Posts: 5
Re: Daily Digest - September 17

Mike Pilat,

Don't beat yourself up...In an ideal world people are supposed to be able to trust the reports and information they get from the news. Unfortunately, those responsible for this crisis (not themselves elected officials I might add) also own the media and manipulate the information to achieve their desired results.

For example, take the early 1990s. Say you want to pass the North American Free Trade Agreement which you know will decimate the country's manufacturing base. You will need a lot of pro-labor politicians to betray their constituents in order to get the thing passed. So what do you do? You find a "pro-labor" politician secretly willing to support NAFTA; next you twist the information presented to the public and finally, you run a third party candidate (Perot) to split the opposition vote and get your man elected with only 42% of the vote. Once your man is in office, he will do the arm-twisting of other "pro-labor" congressmen to get NAFTA passed. Controlling the information makes it easy. Those responsible however, always wish to remain in the shadows pulling the strings.

http://www.realityzone.com/creature.html

 

 

cannotaffordit's picture
cannotaffordit
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 12 2008
Posts: 273
Re: Daily Digest - September 17

saxplayer00o1 writes:

"Any reason why my message got flagged?

Probably because it didn't stick closely enough to the  E E E's.

After 2 years of reading and writing, and learning from lots of different comments that didn't necessarily stick strictly to the purpose of this site, but from which I learned a lot of valuable information, I can see the rope tightening.....so I'm out of here when my enrollment expires Sept 27.

Of course I expect this comment to be pulled too.

But, until it is, my sincere thanks to each and every one of you who contributed to my education and my preparation for whatever is to come.  Keep it going, for a long as you can.  So long.

DJT's picture
DJT
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 18 2009
Posts: 7
Re: Daily Digest - September 17

How long do we allow the creators of money to keep putting the screws to us?

I've asked this question on two or three sites and and have not recieved an answer, actually I have never seen it addressed anywhere.

Maybe these are dumb questions, I am farily new to the issues surrounding our monetary system but here goes.

The Federal Reserve creates money out of thin air to purchase dept and finance the government. Apparently the central banks around the world all do pretty much the same thing, after all, where does all this money come from. Money is obviously created through the issue of debt.

It is my understanding that apparently the Federal Reserve at one point in time started to get a little heat and agreed to refund the US Treasury a portion of the intested earned when the debt is repaid. sounds good but where does the principal go?

When a treasury bond matures isn't the total amount due?

The debt owed by the Government today, how old is it? What happened to the money that was used to retire earlier debt? If the people that create money get to keep it after it is repaid, how much do they have?

The way this system works seems so strange to me, it seems Ron Paul has been an oddity within the governemnt because he has a complete understanding and is trying to change it. He knows this is not what was envisioned by the founding fathers, and that it does not serve in the best interest of the population.

What does that say for those that have a complete understanding and are doing everthing they can to perpetuate it?

cmartenson's picture
cmartenson
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 7 2007
Posts: 5569
Re: Daily Digest - September 17

Nope, none that apply to you.  Someone was flagging the Daily Digest itself for one of the articles. But they flagged your post as the first one of the string.  I've removed the flag.

I cleaned up the formatting a bit though.  I really like your finds and hope you keep posting them. 

However, I would also like to help you get the formatting down as it makes the posts easier to read and keeps down the invisible formatting clutter that comes over from other sites when a straight copy/paste is used. 

If you use the "paste as text" button (second from right), this eliminates the clutter problem, but introduces a bit of extra work on your part.  However if you are willing, I have a good routine for doing what you do that involves dropping items into Worst first, and then here to the site.

Let me know.

 

cmartenson's picture
cmartenson
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 7 2007
Posts: 5569
Our Community

Ben, it's been a pleasure having you around.  Safe journeys.

For new people here, the "rope tightening" refers to a new set of posting guidelines and terms of use (link). 

GUIDING PRINCIPLES

The goal of PeakProsperity.com is to draw attention to the important messages in the Crash Course and also to create a safe and welcoming place for people to discuss its implications in an intelligent and enlightened way.

Together we will continue to hold this site to a higher standard than is usually found elsewhere on the Internet.  We will be civil with each other, respectful, thoughtful, and considerate. 

Anything that causes people to feel unwelcome or unsafe will be discouraged or removed, as will things that serve to detract from our high standard of intelligent discourse.  Our mission is to engage, not to repel.

Posts must be data-rich, fact-based, and constructive, especially if they are critical.  We ask that all critical commentary be accompanied by thoughtful suggestions for improvement—or not offered at all.

TERMS OF USE

We expect people to maintain the same level of civility in posting that a polite person would at the dinner table of a wedding—before drinks are served.

We expect and require courteous interactions everywhere comments can be posted to the site. In an online community, social courtesies are observed, just as at a physical gathering.  One doesn't monopolize the conversation, pound the table about a single point until others' eyes glaze over, insult their host or their fellow guests, or spew patently offensive slurs.  Tactfulness is a reasonable expectation within a voluntary community.  

Please ask yourself these questions before making a post:

  1. Does my post constructively illuminate an issue or answer a specific question?
  2. If constructively critical, is it emotionally neutral and considerate? Does it offer specific, actionable solutions?
  3. If asking a question, is it a bona fide question that will lead to an increased understanding of the 3E’s and related issues?

Users should strive to post with integrity and accuracy.  We expect that users will not abuse their anonymity by posting things that a polite individual would refrain from saying in person. 

We expect users to take reasonable care to make sure that their posts are accurate and always use verifiable facts to support an argument.  We expect users to do their best to offer constructive solutions to problems, and to remember that this site is about strengthening our communities, not tearing them down or otherwise damaging them.

We are seeking to develop a civil, polite, intelligent and safe place for people discuss any of the issues that pertain to the three Es and what might transpire in the future.

As part of these amended rules, we are also asking that people provide references, links, and/or sources for any and all claims.  It really helps others assess whether and how much to trust any particular assertion.

I am thoroughly pleased with the level and quality of the discussion around here and I can quite unabashedly state that I think it has progressively gotten better, richer and deeper over time.  I think that our request for people to back up their claims with facts is appropriate and will help to set this community apart from many others.

We also respect that this won't be to everyone's liking, but we've got to have some sort of a position on the matter.  Mainly, we didn't want to create "just one more place" on the net where tempers flare and facts, opinions and beliefs are hopelessly blended into a single stew.

It takes time and effort to build a community, whether virtual or real, and we don't claim to be infallible or above it all over here at Martenson central - just people doing our best to create something good for everyone to enjoy.

Thank you all.

Chris Martenson

Jeff Borsuk's picture
Jeff Borsuk
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 25 2008
Posts: 150
Re: Daily Digest - September 17

Thanks for the work Davos! (Jim Rogers is always a great interview!)

Here's Rep. Greyson tellikng it like it is regarding Fed handing out billions upon billions:

http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2009/09/congressman-grayson-fed-secretly-gave.html

Shocking, yet, not really...

Jeff

 

 

LogansRun's picture
LogansRun
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 18 2009
Posts: 1443
Q for CM

I guess my question would be "who decides fact from fiction"?  

In my world this:  http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-594683847743189197#

Is based on mostly FACT.  This is not from just watching a movie and saying "wow, this sounds like it's real".  But it's from personal experience from working on Capital Hill for many years.  As well as personal experiences and meetings with many of the people that are part of the "CT" organizations as well as the ruling gov't.  

My biggest issue is that certain people that seem to "seek out" things that they consider CT's are pushing the subject matter of the forums.  And I've also found that these few people, no matter HOW MUCH information you provide as evidence in favor of the so called CT's, will never agree. 

To have these few people seemingly directing the site on WHAT IS REAL and WHAT ISN'T is not what me nor many others paid our initial subscriptions.  I also feel that CM.com as a site, taking this direction is just becoming another MSM site in which "truth" cannot be spoken about because of an aggressive few that point the direction.  

It's your site Dr. Martensen to do what you wish.  But I think becoming another site that says "CT's are just that, CT's" is the wrong direction if you're REALLY trying to save society.

 

 

 

cmartenson wrote:

Ben, it's been a pleasure having you around.  Safe journeys.

For new people here, the "rope tightening" refers to a new set of posting guidelines and terms of use (link). 

GUIDING PRINCIPLES

The goal of PeakProsperity.com is to draw attention to the important messages in the Crash Course and also to create a safe and welcoming place for people to discuss its implications in an intelligent and enlightened way.

Together we will continue to hold this site to a higher standard than is usually found elsewhere on the Internet.  We will be civil with each other, respectful, thoughtful, and considerate. 

Anything that causes people to feel unwelcome or unsafe will be discouraged or removed, as will things that serve to detract from our high standard of intelligent discourse.  Our mission is to engage, not to repel.

Posts must be data-rich, fact-based, and constructive, especially if they are critical.  We ask that all critical commentary be accompanied by thoughtful suggestions for improvement—or not offered at all.

TERMS OF USE

We expect people to maintain the same level of civility in posting that a polite person would at the dinner table of a wedding—before drinks are served.

We expect and require courteous interactions everywhere comments can be posted to the site. In an online community, social courtesies are observed, just as at a physical gathering.  One doesn't monopolize the conversation, pound the table about a single point until others' eyes glaze over, insult their host or their fellow guests, or spew patently offensive slurs.  Tactfulness is a reasonable expectation within a voluntary community.  

Please ask yourself these questions before making a post:

  1. Does my post constructively illuminate an issue or answer a specific question?
  2. If constructively critical, is it emotionally neutral and considerate? Does it offer specific, actionable solutions?
  3. If asking a question, is it a bona fide question that will lead to an increased understanding of the 3E’s and related issues?

Users should strive to post with integrity and accuracy.  We expect that users will not abuse their anonymity by posting things that a polite individual would refrain from saying in person. 

We expect users to take reasonable care to make sure that their posts are accurate and always use verifiable facts to support an argument.  We expect users to do their best to offer constructive solutions to problems, and to remember that this site is about strengthening our communities, not tearing them down or otherwise damaging them.

We are seeking to develop a civil, polite, intelligent and safe place for people discuss any of the issues that pertain to the three Es and what might transpire in the future.

As part of these amended rules, we are also asking that people provide references, links, and/or sources for any and all claims.  It really helps others assess whether and how much to trust any particular assertion.

I am thoroughly pleased with the level and quality of the discussion around here and I can quite unabashedly state that I think it has progressively gotten better, richer and deeper over time.  I think that our request for people to back up their claims with facts is appropriate and will help to set this community apart from many others.

We also respect that this won't be to everyone's liking, but we've got to have some sort of a position on the matter.  Mainly, we didn't want to create "just one more place" on the net where tempers flare and facts, opinions and beliefs are hopelessly blended into a single stew.

It takes time and effort to build a community, whether virtual or real, and we don't claim to be infallible or above it all over here at Martenson central - just people doing our best to create something good for everyone to enjoy.

Thank you all.

Chris Martenson

earthwise's picture
earthwise
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2009
Posts: 846
Re: Logan's Run post #11

Sorry if this seems like a stupid question, but what are 'CT's'?

jrf29's picture
jrf29
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 18 2008
Posts: 453
Re: Daily Digest - September 17

In the sense that LogansRun means, it's short for "Conspiracy Theory." 

cmartenson's picture
cmartenson
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 7 2007
Posts: 5569
Re: Response to Logan

Logan - to be clear we have not done anything with regard to so-called CT's except made sure that they are not prominently displayed for newcomers.

Yes, we've outright banned inflammatory topics (religion, abortion, etc) because experience has taught us that, on average, they are more trouble than they could ever be worth, but everything is allowed.  But everything else, within the guidelines (nothing illegal, not being hostile with others, etc) is discussed here.

How is this "becoming MSM?

Is it a matter of promotion?  Is it required that promote everything equally,. like some form of adult ADHD, in order to be "fair and balanced?"

But what about our goals and our strategies?  Must we subjugate them all to every denominator, every color and stripe of thought and emotional advancement in order to be considered "pure?"

And who decides what that is?

Here's the deal - we set our goal for year (coming up on October 23rd by the way!) to reach as many people as possible with the primary messages of the Crash Course.  As far as I know we should be able to claim a minimum of a million but, more likely, closer to 1.5 million when we consider all the people who may have watched dvds (bought or burned) without our knowing it.  It's now been used in more than 2 dozen college/university course (that we know about). 

For a three and a half hour tour through a lot of information, without an advertising budget, I think we might have set some sort of record there.  Maybe not.

That's the larger picture.  Given that, can we possibly allow anonymous people to log on and dictate all the terms of the discussion at every moment?  If I had infinite resources I suppose so...but nope, we don't.

Here's what I wrote a month or more ago about this on the site (in the enrolled area) about the controversial topics:

 

Dear XXXX,

one reason that I work especially hard to confirm and re-verify facts is because the anonymity and the pulpit of the internet are so easily abused.

Some bloggers make outrageous claims for narrow reasons of self-interest be those motivated by profit or psychological need.

But then there are some who are playing a different game, sowing their seeds of misinformation and destruction in order to secure or meet a larger or even official strategy.

One of the more popular and listened to purveyors of "edgy" material, Hal Turner, has been charged with advocating violence and is now in court.  In his defense, his lawyer claims that Mr. Turner couldn't have crossed that line because he spent five years working for the FBI and they trained him on where that line existed.

In other words, he was an agent provocateur seeking to incite others to violence so that the FBI would have people to discover and arrest.

 

Lawyer: FBI Trained Hal Turner As An "Agent Provocateur"

HARTFORD — - Internet blogger Harold "Hal" Turner's attorney said today that Turner's background as an FBI informant will be a key part of his defense to charges that he incited violence against two state legislators and a state ethics official.

Superior Court Judge David P. Gold on Tuesday authorized Michael A. Orozco, a New Jersey attorney, to represent Turner. Turner did not appear again in court Tuesday because he remains in federal custody without bail in Chicago, where he is accused of threatening three federal judges.

In asking Gold to allow Orozco to represent Turner, Turner's Connecticut lawyer, Matthew R. Potter, said Orozco has a long-term legal relationship with Turner, plans to bring a complicated First Amendment defense and is familiar with Turner's background as an FBI informant.

That role as an informant for the FBI is a key part of the defense, Orozco said outside court.

Orozco said Turner was trained by the FBI as "an agent provocateur."

"Mr. Turner was trained by the FBI," Orozco said. "He was told where the line was — what he could say."

In his comments on his blog that brought the state and federal charges, Turner did not cross that line, Orozco said.

Orozco said Turner worked for the FBI from roughly 2002 to 2007.

"His job was basically to publish information which would cause other parties to act in a manner that would cause their arrest," Orozco said.

 

If true, this is an especially damning indictment on the character of Hal Turner.  Anyone who would attempt to incite unknown others to random violence in return for small favors or money lacks a few basic human widgets in my book.

Information is a source of power and as such it attracts attention from power brokers.  Because of this, one has to be ever vigilant for the "poisoned well" information which is especially hard to detect because it is carefully crafted to exist along side the truth, often being mostly true, yet leads in the wrong directions.  Also, we here need to be vigilant for those who might join and post to cause dissent or even incite violence as a means of dragging the site down.  I have no reason to suspect we've had any such interlopers yet, but it would be foolish to think it could never happen.

All of this is my way of saying that I no longer will spend any time on "fringe" sites because far too many of them are either officially or psychologically compromised and therefore not worth the effort to wade through.  This informs the policy of this site to not link to certain sites (e.g. Rense.com, David Icke, etc) and is a partial explanation for why "conspiracy theories" are relegated to the controversial topics folder in the forum areas. 

While there is undoubtedly some useful and instructive information located in some of these sites and/or theories, the degree to which they've been compromised makes it quite a burden to wade through and separate the wheat from the chaff.

And even so the world turns on, our date with massive change approaches, and we need our energy focused like a laser on reacting to what we know (not suspect) to be true. 

Pardon my long-windedness; if you have specific sites or sources for the rumors about the embassy money please post them and perhaps we can help assess whether they are worth considering seriously.

As always, here at CM.com, the more we can deal in verified facts the better.

So, who decides fact from fiction?  We all do, and we do it with sources and links displayed so that all can see.  We collectively decide that some sources are more trustworthy than others. 

We work together to separate the wheat from the chaff.  

My only firm role in all this is to weigh in when I know that a source has been proven to be untrustworthy.  Then I will not allow them back here because I have this thing about trust - I give it freely but if you abuse it it is gone for a very long time.  Given the pace of the changes before us, it might as well be gone forever.

So Hal Turner is gone forever.  And so are many others.  Mistakes can be made, if they are honest - they happen - but a deliberate attempt to deceive lands one on permanent probation and a second event results in exile.

And that's my promise to this community - I have extraordinarily high standards of integrity and I will defend those here.

Beyond that, I challenge anybody who feels they can do a better, more balanced and fair job of moderating and administering this site to contact me.  I have a couple of full time, unpaid, jobs that are currently unfilled.  I am not joking.  This is a serious offer.

Best,
Chris

 

eternal sunshine's picture
eternal sunshine
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 24 2008
Posts: 50
Re: Response to Logan

David Icke - I'm still laughing about the mere suggestion that he could be linked to this site. For me he is the british sports commentator who declared he was the son of god, talked about lizard people controlling the world and now seems to have obtained some sort of weird credibility. He might even be right but I just could ever bring myself to buy the DVD's to research more deeply.

In seriousness though this site seems to adopt a degree of scientific rigour and why shouldn't it? It's not unreasonable to ask people to reference their material, dig out a few supporting facts etc

 

eternal sunshine's picture
eternal sunshine
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 24 2008
Posts: 50
Re: Response to Logan

David Icke - I'm still laughing about the mere suggestion that he could be linked to this site. For me he is the british sports commentator who declared he was the son of god, talked about lizard people controlling the world and now seems to have obtained some sort of weird credibility. He might even be right but I just could ever bring myself to buy the DVD's to research more deeply.

In seriousness though this site seems to adopt a degree of scientific rigour and why shouldn't it? It's not unreasonable to ask people to reference their material, dig out a few supporting facts etc

 

Dogs_In_A_Pile's picture
Dogs_In_A_Pile
Status: Martenson Brigade Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 4 2009
Posts: 2606
Clarification Davos?

I followed the link in the "Military Weapons Turned On Civilaians At Town Hall Meetings".  The article talked about people being upset that the LRAD was at a Town Hall meeting but nowhere in the article was there any mention of it being used.  I guess the ACLU is okay with tasering folks, but don't make loud noises at them????

The thing IS loud and it works well, but to classify it as a military weapon isn't entirely accurate - yes the military has it and uses it.  But it is commercially available and has been installed on commercial cruise ships as an anti-pirate stand-off weapon.

Here is one link:  http://science.howstuffworks.com/lrad.htm

Google "cruise ship LRAD" or something similar and a whole bunch of links come up.

Davos's picture
Davos
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 17 2008
Posts: 3620
Re: Clarification Davos?
Dogs_In_A_Pile wrote:

I followed the link in the "Military Weapons Turned On Civilaians At Town Hall Meetings".  The article talked about people being upset that the LRAD was at a Town Hall meeting but nowhere in the article was there any mention of it being used.  I guess the ACLU is okay with tasering folks, but don't make loud noises at them????

The thing IS loud and it works well, but to classify it as a military weapon isn't entirely accurate - yes the military has it and uses it.  But it is commercially available and has been installed on commercial cruise ships as an anti-pirate stand-off weapon.

Here is one link:  http://science.howstuffworks.com/lrad.htm

Google "cruise ship LRAD" or something similar and a whole bunch of links come up.

I took some liberty with that title and changed the bullet point. I do that time to time.

I'm going to stand firm on this. It is utter and absolute B you know what that law enforcement carried out a piece of equipment that was desinged and used for the military to a freakin town hall meeting. It made me ask myself, would I want to attend an event with that thing there? What if someone yells or shouts, are they going to turn that on the crowd? 

This sort of heavy handed behavior, and that is exactly what it is, it negating free speach. Don't speak up or else.

I want readers to know this.

Bringing somehting like that in for riot control is one thing. Bringing it to a town hall meeting should have meant termination.

Take care

Dogs_In_A_Pile's picture
Dogs_In_A_Pile
Status: Martenson Brigade Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 4 2009
Posts: 2606
Re: Daily Digest - September 17

Davos -

Understand - I've seen (and heard) the LRAD in proof of concept demos and it works well.  I agree with you that it didn't have any purpose at a Town Hall.  My guess is the Sheriff had a new toy and thought maybe he'd have a chance to play with it.

jrf29's picture
jrf29
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 18 2008
Posts: 453
Re: Daily Digest - September 17

Hi Davos,

I noticed the title "Military Weapons Turned on Civilians at Town Hall Meetings," also, and I thought it was somewhat misleading.  Misleading for several reasons: (a) this device is not exclusively an instrument of warfare, and (b) it implies that there were multiple weapons and multiple town hall meetings.  That gives the impression that the deployment is part of a larger strategy that is not limited to a particular county or town.  Perhaps more to the point, it created the expectation in my mind that the source I was about to link to could possibly be less than objective.

I personally believe that it is the duty of every citizen to remain vigilant against abuses of the power of government.  However, in this case an argument at least could be made on the other side as well:  must the appearance of a non-lethal crowd control device at a highly contentious meeting always be evidence of sinister and malevolent intent?  Is it absolutely prohibited for local peace officers to publically project an impression of being prepared to handle tumultuous gatherings?  Once a disturbance does occur, if officers are limited to clubbing and shooting people, is it at least possible that could result in more physical and political harm than would have otherwise occurred?  Furthermore, does the article imply that all truly effective means of controlling crowds be possessed by and used by only the military?  What would be the long-term effect on public policy if our local police departments found that they lacked the tools to stop riots without blood, while only the military was in possession of a variety of effective and non-lethal tools?

In any case, these are questions which must be answered by the intelligent reader as they sift through the information and form an intelligent opinion based on the facts. 

To me, when any source of information suggests that my mind has been made up for me in advance by either the author or purveyor of the material, I can't help but feel that that my intelligence as a reader is not being entirely respected.  Most importantly, such practices always raise a flag of caution in the mind of any objective reader as to whether the information presented will be genuinely fair and neutral.  I gently and respectfully suggest this point of view for your consideration.

Davos's picture
Davos
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 17 2008
Posts: 3620
Re: Daily Digest - September 17
Dogs_In_A_Pile wrote:

Davos -

Understand - I've seen (and heard) the LRAD in proof of concept demos and it works well.  I agree with you that it didn't have any purpose at a Town Hall.  My guess is the Sheriff had a new toy and thought maybe he'd have a chance to play with it.

Thanks Dogs,

Hey, I WASN'T going off on you or the question. Stuff like this, the "Patriot" Act, mangled reporting of facts, going to a bunch of wars based on faulty data (like Bay of Tonkin etc), not listening to us at 100:1 and 300:1 opposition's monitoring websites, prepping soldiers for our soil, and basically spending like a lunatic and sticking us and our kids with insane debts/deficits/taxes and pathetically weak dollar - just really, really, really p's me off.

It is one thing to gripe to these corrupt arogant inept politicians that exemplify David Walker's definition of the leadership deficit. It is another for them to pass the duct tape out and tell us to shut our pie holes. Which, IMHO is what this guy did dragging that thing down there. Maybe he wears white to funerals to, I wouldn't be surprised he has poor taste.

MarkM's picture
MarkM
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 22 2008
Posts: 837
Re: Daily Digest - September 17

Davos,

The militarization of local law enforcement continues through Federal grants that allow the departments weapons of this nature.  My city has their very own armored personnel carrier, what a waste.  They have shown that they don't have the professionalism to use the tasers correctly and now their level of force is increasing exponentially.

It is sad to see the tentacles of the Federal executive branch taking over the domain of the local law enforcement.  You can be sure that this trend will continue as our government seeks more and more control.

Davos's picture
Davos
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 17 2008
Posts: 3620
Re: Daily Digest - September 17
jrf29 wrote:

Hi Davos,

I noticed the title "Military Weapons Turned on Civilians at Town Hall Meetings," also, and I thought it was somewhat misleading.  Misleading for several reasons: (a) this device is not exclusively an instrument of warfare, and (b) it implies that there were multiple weapons and multiple town hall meetings.  That gives the impression that the deployment is part of a larger strategy that is not limited to a particular county or town.  Perhaps more to the point, it created the expectation in my mind that the source I was about to link to could possibly be less than objective.

I personally believe that it is the duty of every citizen to remain vigilant against abuses of the power of government.  However, in this case an argument at least could be made on the other side as well:  must the appearance of a non-lethal crowd control device at a highly contentious meeting always be evidence of sinister and malevolent intent?  Is it absolutely prohibited for local peace officers to publically project an impression of being prepared to handle tumultuous gatherings?  Once a disturbance does occur, if officers are limited to clubbing and shooting people, is it at least possible that could result in more physical and political harm than would have otherwise occurred?  Furthermore, does the article imply that all truly effective means of controlling crowds be possessed by and used by only the military?  What would be the long-term effect on public policy if our local police departments found that they lacked the tools to stop riots without blood, while only the military was in possession of a variety of effective and non-lethal tools?

In any case, these are questions which must be answered by the intelligent reader as they sift through the information and form an intelligent opinion based on the facts. 

To me, when any source of information suggests that my mind has been made up for me in advance by either the author or purveyor of the material, I can't help but feel that that my intelligence as a reader is not being entirely respected.  Most importantly, such practices always raise a flag of caution in the mind of any objective reader as to whether the information presented will be genuinely fair and neutral.  I gently and respectfully suggest this point of view for your consideration.

Hell JRF29: No insult to the intelligence of the reader was intended, but I can't argue that point and will make every attempt to take that into consideration the next time.

All your merits are sound.

I will, and I don't mean this disrespectfully or to sound like a quip remark, say that tasers are non lethal, and so are some of the 72 year old grandmothers I have seen law enforcement use them on. IMHO we are leaning towards a police state. The republic seems to be 3/4's of the way over the edge of the cliff. If no one speaks up or lets fear beat them into submission I can see this thing going off the cliff.

For 20 years I have been reading and watching. Little by little the pot of water is getting hotter and hotter. We've been in the kettle so long amd I think a good many are distracted by other things that I don't think we know how close to boiling it is.

The headline was meant to be a slap of a cold water comparison. Take care

Cloudfire's picture
Cloudfire
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 29 2008
Posts: 1813
Re: Response to Logan

If I am not mistaken, I was the first person to bring that particular post (regarding embassies hoarding foreign currencies) to Moderator Jason's attention, and also noted the underlying conflict of interest in the body of one of the threads in which the information was cited.  I pointed out that the report regarding American embassies being supplied with cash (dollars) to purchase the currencies of the places they were stationed was a rumor perpetrated by Bob Chapman, who is a "guest" nearly every day on Alex Jones' Prison Planet TV, which is a property of Ted Anderson, a gold marketer who appeals to unsophisticated investors. 

I also have deep reservations about the clear potential that CM's new policy has for culling opinions with which management or members do not agree, simply by making it possible for one or a group of posters to inconvenience other posters with which they disagree by inflicting frequent flags and requests for references.  This can put a time-burden on the target which, in effect, precludes significant participation.  This operates in much the same way that a well-paid lawyer can prevent justice or silence a victim by filing motions until the cows come home, essentially "spending" the victim into submission, rather than weighing the merits of the case.  Therefore, I no longer consider the posts on this site as a cross-section of observations, information, and perceptions of highly intelligent people, but rather a selected group of participants, whether this effect is intentional, or not.

The potential for this "culling effect" is magnified by the fact that, whether he seeks it or not, there is no shortage of individuals who, for lack of a better term, idolize Dr. Martenson, and who seek to be seen as being "in his corner".  I suspect that this is because Martenson is charismatic, and has strong leadership qualities, but I also suspect that people tend to cozy up to the captain as the waters rise.  Regardless of the cause, the phenomenon puts a subliminal pressure on the behavior of a number of active participants that has the potential to result in distorted flagging behaviors, and consequently, a distorted impression of membership and visitor knowlege, perceptions, and opinions.

Additionally, there are a number of ambiguities that render the policy prone to bias.  "Reliable source" is at best a vague term . . . . It could rightly be said that the mainstream media, en masse, are no longer a reliable source.  All of the statistics and data reported by the various governmental agencies could certainly be considered of questionable reliability in this day of creative accounting.  Credibility is indeed in the eye of the beholder.  I would prefer to allow people to post what they will, and if it is a matter of significant concern to me, I'll research it . . . And if I know the source to lack integrity, as in the case I've cited, I'll expose it.  And if my research unearths information to the contrary, I'll post it. 

Being able to trust a site goes beyond footnotes and references . . . . A true cross section of expression, observations, and interpretations can only exist when censorship is absent.  And I'm not at all clear that this policy will not result in de facto gagging of certain interpretations of the facts.

 

Experience in controversies such as these brings out the impossibility of learning anything from facts till they are examined and interpreted by reason; and teaches that the most reckless and treacherous of all theorists is he who professes to let facts and figures speak for themselves, who keeps in the background the part he has played, perhaps unconsciously, in selecting and grouping them, and in suggesting the argument post hoc ergo propter hoc.

-- Alfred Marshall, quoted on page xviv of A Monetary History of the United States, 1867-1960, by Milton Friedman & Anna Jacobson Schwartz

 

Edited, for brevity and clarity, and to mitigate liability

Dogs_In_A_Pile's picture
Dogs_In_A_Pile
Status: Martenson Brigade Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 4 2009
Posts: 2606
Re: Daily Digest - September 17

Davos -

No sweat, I figured the LRAD piece was part of a larger whole that got you going. 

Besides, as Dave Barry once said, "If you disagree, I hereby extend this generous offer: get your own newspaper column."   (H/T to a friend - you know who you are)

britinbe's picture
britinbe
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 28 2008
Posts: 381
Re: Terms and conditions

I get involved in a lot of contract discussions and whilst the basis of any contract relationship has to be good will, there ultimately always has to be some text that conveys the understanding.  Naturally, different people can have different interpretations about what is written on paper.  In truth, these agreements become live and need to be judged on their application and use.

LogansRun's picture
LogansRun
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 18 2009
Posts: 1443
Re: Daily Digest - September 17

Thanks Chris.  I think you've cleared some things up for me.   Sorry for the late response......home alone with kids;-)

LogansRun's picture
LogansRun
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 18 2009
Posts: 1443
Re: Daily Digest - September 17

As far as this issue with the LRAD, I think the point is "when does it stop"?  When does the gov't stop deciding what is and isn't enough "force" on it's citizens?  I think it's been proven over and over again that they don't have a concept of "enough is enough".

bikemonkey's picture
bikemonkey
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: May 17 2008
Posts: 45
Re: Daily Digest - September 17

Let's keep it together here team...this community Chris has built is batting 1000.  I for one value your thoughts more than any other I have found online.

Davos's picture
Davos
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 17 2008
Posts: 3620
Re: Daily Digest - September 17
MarkM wrote:

Davos,

The militarization of local law enforcement continues through Federal grants that allow the departments weapons of this nature.  My city has their very own armored personnel carrier, what a waste.  They have shown that they don't have the professionalism to use the tasers correctly and now their level of force is increasing exponentially.

It is sad to see the tentacles of the Federal executive branch taking over the domain of the local law enforcement.  You can be sure that this trend will continue as our government seeks more and more control.

Hello MarkM: Many of my friends up north are in LE. Not to offend them, but I couldn't agree with you more! I'm a believer that our Constitution was to protect property, the pendulum has, IMHO, swung too far to the other side, also white collar crime (Geithner, Bernanke, Paulson et al) have robbed us blind.

that1guy's picture
that1guy
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 11 2009
Posts: 333
Re: Daily Digest - September 17

So on an amazing funny MSM SPIN side of the house you all should glance over this article if you haven's seen it already....well I cant seem to paste the link here. The title is

'What you Need to Know About Social Security' on yahoo news

Here are some direct quotes from the article, amazing...

'This benifit should be the cornerstone or your retirment planning...'  <--this is the first line, lol

'Despite what you may hear about the system going broke, the funds from workers payroll taxes will cover all retiree payments through 2016 even if no changes are made to the program. After that the Social Security Administration can cover full benifits until 2037 by cashing in on its Treasury Bonds from the Social ecurity Trust fund.'

 

One must wonder, do they reall really just  not get it....I mean, WOW

Mike Pilat's picture
Mike Pilat
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 8 2008
Posts: 929
Re: Daily Digest - September 17

For me, I guess I would expect that a Federal level government has little attachment to local people or ideals, so blatant violations of posse comitatus or the use of military weapons by our military in our streets would be upsetting, but would basically be following a normal progression that fits in with established patterns. I guess it wouldn't be an all out shocker, as upsetting as it would be.

I think the really problematic part is the fact that our local police units seem to have adopted an "us vs. them" mentality. Although the town hall meetings have become very heated, I just don't see any trend towards violent mob actions emerging at all. Police should understand that bringing weapons of this sort to what should be a civilized debate is doing something to provoke animosity and distrust. Certainly, the types of weapons they brought elicited at least a little fear on the part of some of the citizenry. A 2nd Amendment is an inherent move towards equality, but bringing this sort of weapon tends to destroy that spirit of equality. Police must remember who they work for.

If things are to get uglier in the future, I would absolutely hope that we could trust our local law enforcement to continue to support our local communities. But this relationship requires trust. Not to sound judgmental in the least, but any form of LE is a sort of insurance policy or a safeguard to protect rights but in a sense, it is an "economic bad." What I mean by that is that LE don't produce anything, they merely (should) ensure that others are able to produce and live their lives with their rights intact. This requires trust on the People's part - that the LE will not abuse power - but it also requires trust on the part of the LE. If the LE feels that hate or anger is focused on them, or if the LE does not feel somewhat supported by the community, sooner or later, their subconscious will begin to realize that their job exists only because other people choose to empower them, even at an economic cost to the locale. In a dysfunctional, chaotic "economy" in a breakdown, financially supporting a formal LE department will no doubt be more difficult. It may sound a little too flowery, but just as much as the people need to have LE respect their rights, LE also needs to know they are "wanted" by the community.  Dialogue needs to take place to maintain trust between both sides of this partnership or there will be disasterous results.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or Register to post comments