new icn messageflickr-free-ic3d pan white
View allAll Photos Tagged National+Audit+Office

Shared from ZDnet


The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) has declared the Department of Human Services (DHS) as reaching its highest designated "cyber resilient" level, while the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) and Department of Immigration...

iPhone via Hipstamatic


The National Audit Office building, built originally as the Imperial Airways Empire Terminal. The statue, "Speed Wings over the World" is by Eric Broadbent


Victoria, London, UK


Buckingham Palace Road, London SW1 and an almost new AEC Reliance of Grey Cars is about to enter Victoria Coach Station to deposit a less than full load of travellers from the West Country.

This Willowbrook Viscount bodied coach was new to the company in 1962 and was one of nine (960-8HTT). These vehicles were identical to a delivery of nine from the previous year (934-42GTA). They seated 41 and were fitted with an inward sloping rear window similar to the contemporary Ford Anglia car.

The Viscount body was more stylish than its Viking predecessor due to the use of the red side mouldings to break up the expanse of grey. In 1962 Grey Cars sent their Viking bodied Reliances back to Loughborough and Willowbrook added similar mouldings to those coaches to update their appearance.

On January 1st 1971 TCR967 passed with its sisters to the Western National Omnibus Co. and later that year was transferred to Greenslades Tours of Exeter.

Operating here on loan to Royal Blue the Reliance is passing the BOAC Air Terminal opposite the coach station. Designed by Albert Lakeman in 1939 for Imperial Airways the impressive Art Deco building was used by BOAC & their successor British Airways. It now houses the National Audit Office.

An AEC Regal IV one & a half deck coach can just be seen entering the terminal behind the PA Vauxhall Cresta. An Austin A40 van follows our coach.

Although TCR967 is long gone sister vehicle 960HTT is preserved and can be seen here;


Authored by Ron Unz, originally posted at The American Conservative,



In mid-March, the Wall Street Journal carried a long discussion of the origins of the Bretton Woods system, the international financial framework that governed the Western world for decades after World War II. A photo showed the two individuals who negotiated that agreement. Britain was represented by John Maynard Keynes, a towering economic figure of that era. America’s representative was Harry Dexter White, assistant secretary of the Treasury and long a central architect of American economic policy, given that his nominal superior, Secretary Henry Morgenthau Jr., was a gentleman farmer with no background in finance. White was also a Communist agent.


Such a situation was hardly unique in American government during the 1930s and 1940s. For example, when a dying Franklin Roosevelt negotiated the outlines of postwar Europe with Joseph Stalin at the 1945 Yalta summit, one of his important advisors was Alger Hiss, a State Department official whose primary loyalty was to the Soviet side. Over the last 20 years, John Earl Haynes, Harvey Klehr, and other scholars have conclusively established that many dozens or even hundreds of Soviet agents once honeycombed the key policy staffs and nuclear research facilities of our federal government, constituting a total presence perhaps approaching the scale suggested by Sen. Joseph McCarthy, whose often unsubstantiated charges tended to damage the credibility of his position.


The Cold War ended over two decades ago and Communism has been relegated to merely an unpleasant chapter in the history books, so today these facts are hardly much disputed. For example, liberal Washington Post blogger Ezra Klein matter-of-factly referred to White as a “Soviet spy” in the title of his column on our postwar financial system. But during the actual period when America’s government was heavily influenced by Communist agents, such accusations were widely denounced as “Red-baiting” or ridiculed as right-wing conspiracy paranoia by many of our most influential journalists and publications. In 1982 liberal icon Susan Sontag ruefully acknowledged that for decades the subscribers to the lowbrow Readers Digest had received a more realistic view of the world than those who drew their knowledge from the elite liberal publications favored by her fellow intellectuals. I myself came of age near the end of the Cold War and always vaguely assumed that such lurid tales of espionage were wildly exaggerated. I was wrong.


The notion of the American government being infiltrated and substantially controlled by agents of a foreign power has been the stuff of endless Hollywood movies and television shows, but for various reasons such popular channels have never been employed to bring the true-life historical example to wide attention. I doubt if even one American in a hundred today is familiar with the name “Harry Dexter White” or dozens of similar agents.


The realization that the world is often quite different from what is presented in our leading newspapers and magazines is not an easy conclusion for most educated Americans to accept, or at least that was true in my own case. For decades, I have closely read the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and one or two other major newspapers every morning, supplemented by a wide variety of weekly or monthly opinion magazines. Their biases in certain areas had always been apparent to me. But I felt confident that by comparing and contrasting the claims of these different publications and applying some common sense, I could obtain a reasonably accurate version of reality. I was mistaken.


Aside from the evidence of our own senses, almost everything we know about the past or the news of today comes from bits of ink on paper or colored pixels on a screen, and fortunately over the last decade or two the growth of the Internet has vastly widened the range of information available to us in that latter category. Even if the overwhelming majority of the unorthodox claims provided by such non-traditional web-based sources is incorrect, at least there now exists the possibility of extracting vital nuggets of truth from vast mountains of falsehood. Certainly the events of the past dozen years have forced me to completely recalibrate my own reality-detection apparatus.


Thoughtful individuals of all backgrounds have undergone a similar crisis of confidence during this same period. Just a few months after 9/11 New York Times columnist Paul Krugman argued that the sudden financial collapse of the Enron Corporation represented a greater shock to the American system than the terrorist attacks themselves, and although he was widely denounced for making such an “unpatriotic” claim, I believe his case was strong. Although the name “Enron” has largely vanished from our memory, for years it had ranked as one of America’s most successful and admired companies, glowingly profiled on the covers of our leading business magazines, and drawing luminaries such as Krugman himself to its advisory board; Enron Chairman Kenneth Lay had been a top contender for Treasury secretary in President George W. Bush’s administration. Then in the blink of an eye, the entire company was revealed to be an accounting fraud from top to bottom, collapsing into a $63 billion bankruptcy, the largest in American history. Other companies of comparable or even greater size such as WorldCom, Tyco, Adelphia, and Global Crossing soon vanished for similar reasons.


Part of Krugman’s argument was that while the terrorist attacks had been of an entirely unprecedented nature and scale, our entire system of financial regulation, accounting, and business journalism was designed to prevent exactly the sort of frauds that brought down those huge companies. When a system fails so dramatically at its core mission, we must wonder which of our other assumptions are incorrect.


Just a few years later, we saw an even more sweeping near-collapse of our entire financial system, with giant institutions such as Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Wachovia, and AIG falling into bankruptcy, and all our remaining major banks surviving only due to the trillions of dollars in government bailouts and loan guarantees they received. Once again, all our media and regulatory organs had failed to anticipate this disaster.


Or take the remarkable case of Bernie Madoff. His colossal investment swindle had been growing unchecked for over three decades under the very noses of our leading financial journalists and regulators in New York City, ultimately reaching the sum of $65 billion in mostly fictional assets. His claimed returns had been implausibly steady and consistent year after year, market crashes or not. None of his supposed trading actually occurred. His only auditing was by a tiny storefront firm. Angry competitors had spent years warning the SEC and journalists that his alleged investment strategy was mathematically impossible and that he was obviously running a Ponzi scheme. Yet despite all these indicators, officials did nothing and refused to close down such a transparent swindle, while the media almost entirely failed to report these suspicions.


In many respects, the non-detection of these business frauds is far more alarming than failure to uncover governmental malfeasance. Politics is a partisan team sport, and it is easy to imagine Democrats or Republicans closing ranks and protecting their own, despite damage to society. Furthermore, success or failure in public policies is often ambiguous and subject to propagandistic spin. But investors in a fraudulent company lose their money and therefore have an enormous incentive to detect those risks, with the same being true for business journalists. If the media cannot be trusted to catch and report simple financial misconduct, its reliability on more politically charged matters will surely be lower.


The circumstances surrounding our Iraq War demonstrate this, certainly ranking it among the strangest military conflicts of modern times. The 2001 attacks in America were quickly ascribed to the radical Islamists of al-Qaeda, whose bitterest enemy in the Middle East had always been Saddam Hussein’s secular Baathist regime in Iraq. Yet through misleading public statements, false press leaks, and even forged evidence such as the “yellowcake” documents, the Bush administration and its neoconservative allies utilized the compliant American media to persuade our citizens that Iraq’s nonexistent WMDs posed a deadly national threat and required elimination by war and invasion. Indeed, for several years national polls showed that a large majority of conservatives and Republicans actually believed that Saddam was the mastermind behind 9/11 and the Iraq War was being fought as retribution. Consider how bizarre the history of the 1940s would seem if America had attacked China in retaliation for Pearl Harbor.


True facts were easily available to anyone paying attention in the years after 2001, but most Americans do not bother and simply draw their understanding of the world from what they are told by the major media, which overwhelmingly—almost uniformly—backed the case for war with Iraq; the talking heads on TV created our reality. Prominent journalists across the liberal and conservative spectrum eagerly published the most ridiculous lies and distortions passed on to them by anonymous sources, and stampeded Congress down the path to war.


The result was what my late friend Lt. Gen. Bill Odom rightly called the “greatest strategic disaster in United States history.” American forces suffered tens of thousands of needless deaths and injuries, while our country took a huge step toward national bankruptcy. Economics Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz and others have estimated that with interest the total long-term cost of our two recent wars may reach as high as $5 or $6 trillion, or as much as $50,000 per American household, mostly still unpaid. Meanwhile, economist Edward Wolff has calculated that the Great Recession and its aftermath cut the personal net worth of the median American household to $57,000 in 2010 from a figure nearly twice as high three years earlier. Comparing these assets and liabilities, we see that the American middle class now hovers on the brink of insolvency, with the cost of our foreign wars being a leading cause.


But no one involved in the debacle ultimately suffered any serious consequences, and most of the same prominent politicians and highly paid media figures who were responsible remain just as prominent and highly paid today. For most Americans, reality is whatever our media organs tell us, and since these have largely ignored the facts and adverse consequences of our wars in recent years, the American people have similarly forgotten. Recent polls show that only half the public today believes that the Iraq War was a mistake.


Author James Bovard has described our society as an “attention deficit democracy,” and the speed with which important events are forgotten once the media loses interest might surprise George Orwell.


Consider the story of Vioxx, a highly lucrative anti-pain medication marketed by Merck to the elderly as a substitute for simple aspirin. After years of very profitable Vioxx sales, an FDA researcher published a study demonstrating that the drug greatly increased the risk of fatal strokes and heart attacks and had probably already caused tens of thousands of premature American deaths. Vioxx was immediately pulled from the market, but Merck eventually settled the resulting lawsuits for relatively small penalties, despite direct evidence the company had long been aware of the drug’s deadly nature. Our national media, which had earned hundreds of millions of dollars in advertising revenue from Vioxx marketing, provided no sustained coverage and the scandal was soon forgotten. Furthermore, the press never investigated the dramatic upward and downward shifts in the mortality rates of elderly Americans that so closely tracked the introduction and recall of Vioxx; as I pointed out in a 2012 article, these indicated that the likely death toll had actually been several times greater than the FDA estimate. Vast numbers Americans died, no one was punished, and almost everyone has now forgotten.


Or take the strange case of Bernard Kerik, New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani’s police commissioner during 9/11, later nominated by President Bush to be America’s first director of national intelligence, a newly established position intended to oversee all of our various national-security and intelligence agencies. His appointment seemed likely to sail through the Republican-controlled Senate until derailed by accusations he had employed an undocumented nanny. With his political rise having been blocked, the national media suddenly revealed his long history of association with organized-crime figures, an indictment quickly followed, and he is currently still serving his federal prison sentence for conspiracy and fraud. So America came within a hairbreadth of placing its entire national-security apparatus under the authority of a high-school dropout connected with organized crime, and today almost no Americans seem aware of that fact.


Through most of the 20th century, America led something of a charmed life, at least when compared with the disasters endured by almost every other major country. We became the richest and most powerful nation on earth, partly due to our own achievements and partly due to the mistakes of others. The public interpreted these decades of American power and prosperity as validation of our system of government and national leadership, and the technological effectiveness of our domestic propaganda machinery - our own American Pravda - has heightened this effect. Furthermore, most ordinary Americans are reasonably honest and law-abiding and project that same behavior onto others, including our media and political elites. This differs from the total cynicism found in most other countries around the world.


Credibility is a capital asset, which may take years to accumulate but can be squandered in an instant; and the events of the last dozen years should have bankrupted any faith we have in our government or media. Once we acknowledge this, we should begin to accept the possible reality of important, well-documented events even if they are not announced on the front pages of our major newspapers. When several huge scandals have erupted into the headlines after years or decades of total media silence, we must wonder what other massive stories may currently be ignored by our media elites. I think I can provide a few possibilities.


Consider the almost forgotten anthrax mailing attacks in the weeks after 9/11, which terrified our dominant East Coast elites and spurred passage of the unprecedented Patriot Act, thereby eliminating many traditional civil-libertarian protections. Every morning during that period the New York Times and other leading newspapers carried articles describing the mysterious nature of the deadly attacks and the complete bafflement of the FBI investigators. But evenings on the Internet I would read stories by perfectly respectable journalists such as Salon’s Laura Rozen or the staff of the Hartford Courant providing a wealth of additional detail and pointing to a likely suspect and motive.


Although the letters carrying the anthrax were purportedly written by an Arab terrorist, the FBI quickly determined that the language and style indicated a non-Arab author, while tests pointed to the bioweapons research facility at Ft. Detrick, Md., as the probable source of the material. But just prior to the arrival of those deadly mailings, military police at Quantico, Va., had also received an anonymous letter warning that a former Ft. Detrick employee, Egyptian-born Dr. Ayaad Assaad, might be planning to launch a national campaign of bioterrorism. Investigators quickly cleared Dr. Assaad, but the very detailed nature of the accusations revealed inside knowledge of his employment history and the Ft. Detrick facilities. Given the near-simultaneous posting of anthrax envelopes and false bioterrorism accusations, the mailings almost certainly came from the same source, and solving the latter case would be the easiest means of catching the anthrax killer.


Who would have attempted to frame Dr. Assaad for bioterrorism? A few years earlier he had been involved in a bitter personal feud with a couple of his Ft. Detrick coworkers, including charges of racism, official reprimands, and angry recriminations all around. When an FBI official shared a copy of the accusatory letter with a noted language-forensics expert and allowed him to compare the text with the writings of 40 biowarfare lab employees, he found a perfect match with one of those individuals. For years I told my friends that anyone who spent 30 minutes with Google could probably determine the name and motive of the likely anthrax killer, and most of them successfully met my challenge.


This powerful evidence received almost no attention in the major national media, nor is there any indication that the FBI ever followed up on any of these clues or interrogated the named suspects. Instead, investigators attempted to pin the attacks on a Dr. Steven Hatfill based on negligible evidence, after which he was completely exonerated and won a $5.6 million settlement from the government for its years of severe harassment. Later, similar hounding of researcher Bruce Ivins and his family led to his suicide, after which the FBI declared the case closed, even though former colleagues of Dr. Ivins demonstrated that he had had no motive, means, or opportunity. In 2008, I commissioned a major 3,000-word cover story in my magazine summarizing all of this crucial evidence, and once again almost no one in the mainstream media paid the slightest attention.


An even more egregious case followed a couple of years later, with regard to the stunning revelations of Pulitzer Prize winner Sydney Schanberg, one of America’s foremost Vietnam War reporters and a former top editor at the New York Times. After years of research, Schanberg published massive evidence demonstrating that the endlessly ridiculed claims of America’s Vietnam MIA movement of the 1970s and 1980s were correct: the Nixon administration had indeed deliberately abandoned many hundreds of American POWs in Vietnam at the close of the war, and our government afterward spent decades covering up this shameful crime. Schanberg’s charges were publicly confirmed by two former Republican House members, one of whom had independently co-authored a 500 page book on the subject, exhaustively documenting the POW evidence.


Although a major focus of Schanberg’s account was the central role that Sen. John McCain had played in leading the later cover-up, the national media ignored these detailed charges during McCain’s bitter 2008 presidential campaign against Barack Obama. One of America’s most distinguished living journalists published what was surely “the story of the century” and none of America’s newspapers took notice.


In 2010 Schanberg republished this material in a collection of his other writings, and his work received glowing praise from Joseph Galloway, one of America’s top military correspondents, as well as other leading journalists; his charges are now backed by the weight of four New York Times Pulitzer Prizes. Around that same time, I produced a 15,000-word cover-symposium on the scandal, organized around Schanberg’s path-breaking findings and including contributions from other prominent writers. All of this appeared in the middle of Senator McCain’s difficult reelection campaign in Arizona, and once again the material was totally ignored by the state and national media.


An argument might be made that little harm has been done to the national interest by the media’s continued silence in the two examples described above. The anthrax killings have largely been forgotten and the evidence suggests that the motive was probably one of personal revenge. All the government officials involved in the abandonment of the Vietnam POWs are either dead or quite elderly, and even those involved in the later cover-up, such as John McCain, are in the twilight of their political careers. But an additional example remains completely relevant today, and some of the guilty parties hold high office.


During the mid-2000s I began noticing references on one or two small websites to a woman claiming to be a former FBI employee who was making the most outlandish and ridiculous charges, accusing high government officials of selling our nuclear-weapons secrets to foreign spies. I paid no attention to such unlikely claims and never bothered reading any of the articles.


A couple of years went by, and various website references to that same woman—Sibel Edmonds—kept appearing, although I continued to ignore them, secure that the silence of all my newspapers proved her to be delusional. Then in early 2008, the London Sunday Times, one of the world’s leading newspapers, ran a long, three-part front-page series presenting her charges, which were soon republished in numerous other countries. Daniel Ellsberg described Edmonds’s revelations as “far more explosive than the Pentagon Papers” and castigated the American media for completely ignoring a story that had reached the front pages of newspapers throughout the rest of the world. Such silence struck me as rather odd.


Philip Giraldi, a former CIA official who regularly writes for this magazine, suggested he investigate her charges. He found her highly credible, and his 3,000-word article in TAC presented some astonishing but very detailed claims.


Edmonds had been hired by the FBI to translate wiretapped conversations of a suspected foreign spy ring under surveillance, and she had been disturbed to discover that many of these hundreds of phone calls explicitly discussed the sale of nuclear-weapons secrets to foreign intelligence organizations, including those linked to international terrorism, as well as the placement of agents at key American military research facilities. Most remarkably, some of the individuals involved in these operations were high-ranking government officials; the staffs of several influential members of Congress were also implicated. On one occasion, a senior State Department figure was reportedly recorded making arrangements to pick up a bag containing a large cash bribe from one of his contacts. Very specific details of names, dates, dollar amounts, purchasers, and military secrets were provided.


The investigation had been going on for years with no apparent action, and Edmonds was alarmed to discover that a fellow translator quietly maintained a close relationship with one of the key FBI targets. When she raised these issues, she was personally threatened, and after appealing to her supervisors, eventually fired.


Since that time, she has passed a polygraph test on her claims, testified under oath in a libel lawsuit, expanded her detailed charges in a 2009 TAC cover story also by Giraldi, and most recently published a book recounting her case. Judiciary Committee Senators Chuck Grassley and Patrick Leahy have publicly backed some of her charges, a Department of Justice inspector general’s report has found her allegations “credible” and “serious,” while various FBI officials have vouched for her reliability and privately confirmed many of her claims. But none of her detailed charges has ever appeared in any of America’s newspapers. According to Edmonds, one of the conspirators routinely made payments to various members of the media, and bragged to his fellow plotters that “We just fax to our people at the New York Times. They print it under their names.”


At times, Congressional Democratic staff members became interested in the scandal, and promised an investigation. But once they learned that senior members of their own party were also implicated, their interest faded.


These three stories—the anthrax evidence, the McCain/POW revelations, and the Sibel Edmonds charges—are the sort of major exposés that would surely be dominating the headlines of any country with a properly-functioning media. But almost no American has ever heard of them. Before the Internet broke the chokehold of our centralized flow of information, I would have remained just as ignorant myself, despite all the major newspapers and magazines I regularly read.


Am I absolutely sure that any or all of these stories are true? Certainly not, though I think they probably are, given their overwhelming weight of supporting evidence. But absent any willingness of our government or major media to properly investigate them, I cannot say more.


However, this material does conclusively establish something else, which has even greater significance. These dramatic, well-documented accounts have been ignored by our national media, rather than widely publicized. Whether this silence has been deliberate or is merely due to incompetence remains unclear, but the silence itself is proven fact.


A likely reason for this wall of uninterest on so many important issues is that the disasters involved are often bipartisan in nature, with both Democrats and Republicans being culpable and therefore equally eager to hide their mistakes. Perhaps in the famous words of Benjamin Franklin, they realize that they must all hang together or they will surely all hang separately.


We always ridicule the 98 percent voter support that dictatorships frequently achieve in their elections and plebiscites, yet perhaps those secret-ballot results may sometimes be approximately correct, produced by the sort of overwhelming media control that leads voters to assume there is no possible alternative to the existing regime. Is such an undemocratic situation really so different from that found in our own country, in which our two major parties agree on such a broad range of controversial issues and, being backed by total media dominance, routinely split 98 percent of the vote? A democracy may provide voters with a choice, but that choice is largely determined by the information citizens receive from their media.


Most of the Americans who elected Barack Obama in 2008 intended their vote as a total repudiation of the policies and personnel of the preceding George W. Bush administration. Yet once in office, Obama’s crucial selections—Robert Gates at Defense, Timothy Geither at Treasury, and Ben Bernake at the Federal Reserve—were all top Bush officials, and they seamlessly continued the unpopular financial bailouts and foreign wars begun by his predecessor, producing what amounted to a third Bush term.


Consider the fascinating perspective of the recently deceased Boris Berezovsky, once the most powerful of the Russian oligarchs and the puppet master behind President Boris Yeltsin during the late 1990s. After looting billions in national wealth and elevating Vladimir Putin to the presidency, he overreached himself and eventually went into exile. According to the New York Times, he had planned to transform Russia into a fake two-party state—one social-democratic and one neoconservative—in which heated public battles would be fought on divisive, symbolic issues, while behind the scenes both parties would actually be controlled by the same ruling elites. With the citizenry thus permanently divided and popular dissatisfaction safely channeled into meaningless dead-ends, Russia’s rulers could maintain unlimited wealth and power for themselves, with little threat to their reign. Given America’s history over the last couple of decades, perhaps we can guess where Berezovsky got his idea for such a clever political scheme.

The River Itchen is a river in Hampshire, England. It flows from mid-Hampshire to join with Southampton Water below the Itchen Bridge in the city of Southampton. The river has a total length of 28 miles (45 km), and is noted as one of the world's premier chalk streams for fly fishing, especially using dry fly or nymphing techniques. The local chalk in the earth provides excellent filtration and thus watercress thrives on the Itchen in its pristine crystal clear waters. It is designated as a Site of Special Scientific Interest and is noted for its high quality habitats, supporting a range of protected species including the endagered water vole,otter, brook lamprey and white-clawed crayfish..


The river is managed by the Environment Agency, whilst the Port of Southampton is the navigation authority for the tidal section below Swaythling..


During Roman Britain, the river may have been associated with the Celtic goddess Ancasta..


The source of the Itchen is situated just south of the village of Cheriton. Initially the river flows north, through the villages of Cheriton and Tichborne, before joining up with its tributaries the River Alre and the Candover Brook, just below the town of New Alresford. The river then flows west down the upper Itchen Valley passing the villages of Avington, Itchen Stoke, Itchen Abbas, Martyr Worthy, Easton, and Abbots Worthy. Before entering the historic city of Winchester it crosses Winnall Moors..


The river flows in several different channels through the city of Winchester, some of which come close enough to Winchester Cathedral to have caused serious problems to the building's foundations in earlier years. The main channel flows through Winchester City Mill and to the east of the city's Roman walls, along a promenaded reach known as 'The Weirs'..


The river then heads south, through a series of water meadows, passing the Hospital of St Cross, the villages of Twyford and Shawford (this is just south of Shawford), between the town of Eastleigh and the village of Bishopstoke and through Itchen Valley Country Park before reaching the northern suburbs of Southampton at Mansbridge. Between Winchester and Mansbridge, sections of the river were once deepened or widened as part of the long disused Itchen Navigation, and the former towpath forms part of the Itchen Way..


Monks Brook flows into the Itchen at Swaythling, and the river then passes under Woodmill Bridge and becomes tidal. Four further bridges cross the river before its confluence with the River Test estuary in Southampton Water..


Otterbourne is a village located approximately four miles (6 km) south of Winchester and eight miles (13 km) north of Southampton. In October 2002, its population was approximately 1,520, and there were 602 dwellings..


Famous people from Otterbourne include Chris Tremlett who plays cricket for England and Surrey..


Otterbourne is home here to the Hampshire headquarters of Southern Water. The 1980s office building (part of which is leased to the Audit Commission) is situated on the site of a large water supply works, which takes water from the River Itchen here and a number of boreholes. Otterbourne water supply works feeds a covered reservoir in the village, which in turn supplies most of the eastern side of Southampton..


The stones here are being used as a weir which is a barrier across a river designed to alter its flow characteristics. In most cases, weirs take the form of obstructions smaller than most conventional dams, which cause water to pool behind them, while allowing water to flow steadily over their tops. Weirs are commonly used to alter the flow of rivers to prevent flooding and measure discharge. In larger rivers they also help render them navigable..


A Culture of Intimidation

If Barack Obama didn’t directly order the harassment of his political enemies, he certainly encouraged it


In the wake of the Abu Ghraib prison scandal in Iraq during the Bush administration, the default assumption of the media was that it was a direct consequence of White House policies. Those who were particularly Bush/Cheney deranged imagined that the vice president himself probably spent his recreational time personally torturing Iraqi prisoners. But even more thoughtful people accused the administration of creating the environment in which the abuse could occur:


Defenders of the administration have argued, of course, that there is no “smoking gun”–no chain of orders leading directly from Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to Pfc. Lynndie England and her co-conspirators. But that reasoning–now largely accepted within the Beltway–betrays a deliberate indifference to how large organizations such as the military actually work. In any war, civilian leaders set strategic aims, and it falls to commanders and planners at successively lower levels of command to refine that guidance into executable orders which can be handed down to subordinates. That process works whether the policy in question is a good one or a bad one. President Bush didn’t order the April 2003 “thunder run” into Baghdad; he ordered Tommy Franks to win the war and the Third Infantry Division’s leaders figured out how to make it happen. Likewise, no order was given to shove light sticks into the rectums of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib. Nevertheless, the road to the abuses began with flawed administration policies that exalted expediency and necessity over the rule of law, eviscerated the military’s institutional constraints on the treatment of prisoners, commenced combat with insufficient planning, preparation and troop strength, and thereby set the conditions for the abuses that would later take place.


Similarly, while we still don’t know what the White House knew and when it knew it (and the president’s non-responsive answer to a question that wasn’t asked on Thursday not only failed to clarify the issue, but increased cause for suspicion), the administration certainly created an environment in which IRS functionaries might have thought it was their job to go after his political enemies. If they weren’t doing literally to them what the Abu Ghraib rogue soldiers were doing to individual Iraqi’s fundaments, they were certainly doing it figuratively. This is particularly true because by the very nature of their job, and the ideology of the limited-government groups, many of the IRS employees probably viewed them as their own political adversaries.


After all, one of the political goals of the 501(c)4 groups whose names contained the words “Patriot” or “Tea Party” was to simplify the tax code, if not to abolish the income tax altogether, an outcome that threatened the size and power, if not very existence of the “service” for which the IRS employees worked. It would be natural (and even simply human) for them to be suspicious of the motives of such groups, and to wish to thwart them.


Moreover, while all employees except two are career civil service, and not appointed by or directly accountable to the White House, that doesn’t mean that they are apolitical. As Tim Carney points out:


…being a “career civil servant” doesn’t mean you’re making a career out of the job, or that you’re not political.


In the past three election cycles, the Center for Responsive Politics’ database shows about $474,000 in political donations by individuals listing “IRS” or “Internal Revenue Service” as their employer.


This money heavily favors Democrats: $247,000 to $145,000, with the rest going to political action committees. (Oddly, half of those GOP donations come from only two IRS employees, one in Houston and one in Annandale, Va.)


IRS employees also gave $67,000 to the PAC of the National Treasury Employees Union, which in turn gave more than 96 percent of its contributions to Democrats. Add the PAC cash to the individual donations and IRS employees favor Democrats 2-to-1.


The Cincinnati office where the political targeting took place is much more partisan, judging by FEC filings. More than 75 percent of the campaign contributions from that office in the past three elections went to Democrats. In 2012, every donation traceable to employees at that office went to either President Obama or liberal Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio. (emphasis by author)


Add to that the revolving door between top IRS officials and Democratic staff positions that Carney also notes, and there will be a natural bias within the bureaucracy against groups and individuals who appear to be opposed to Democratic policies and goals. Now consider the multiplication effect of the intense vilification and calumnies against the Tea Party as racist, bigoted, homophobic John Birchers by much of the media over that time period. It would make perfect sense for a typical IRS employee to view them as a threat not just to their own job, but to the nation itself — they are enemies of the state. So when they claim that they’re not being political in giving more scrutiny to such groups, they probably believe it, just as many in the media are blind to their own partisan bias, because they are fish who don’t even see the water in which they swim.


Now, even with all of this natural tendency to do exactly what they did, a responsible administration would take care to set a tone from the top that such behavior was unacceptable. But “responsible,” at least in that sense of the word, has never been an accurate adjective for the Obama White House, and in fact its tone has exacerbated the situation, from the very beginning. Four years ago (almost to the day), the president made an unfunny joke about auditing people who merited his displeasure. A year or so later, in a similar “Ha ha” moment, he joked about sending predator drones after a pop music group. These sorts of things were occurring about the same time as he was exhorting Latinos to “go out and punish” their mutual enemies, and making it clear to Republicans that he was “keeping score.”


After the Supreme Court ruled against the administration in Citizens United (the case that some defending the IRS are claiming was the cause of the new scrutiny, despite the fact that it started before the caseloads began to increase), President Civility lectured them, a captive audience at the State of the Union speech, lying about the ruling to their faces (well, all right, to be fair, he may not have been lying — President Constitutional Scholar may have just been ignorant on the nature of the ruling). This undoubtedly made many in his government think that it gave them license to fight the ruling in the trenches against the sudden growth in enemies of the state it had spurred, since their president had said it was wrong.


Let me (as the president would say) be clear. I will be in no way shocked if emails are discovered showing that the White House actively ordered IRS officials to go after Tea Party groups, while green lighting his political allies. My only point is that, sadly, it wouldn’t have been necessary for them to do so.


When the Archbishop of Canterbury Thomas Becket was murdered in 1170, it wasn’t done at the direct order of King Henry II. It didn’t have to be. All it required was for the monarch to muse, aloud, “Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest?”


But sadly, while we have badly needed a better president for over four years, the real problem isn’t the men and women running the system, and it wasn’t a failure of the system — it is the system itself.


The Founders, in their wisdom, understood that the key to good government lay not in hoping that the governors would be angels, but to restrict its power, knowing that they would never be. We can fire employees, we can even jail them, but the problem won’t be solved until the power of the “service” is reined in vastly. Step one might be to re-ban government employee unions, including that of the IRS, because that’s part of the system we can fix, and this deserves that death penalty.


Ideally, of course, the income tax would be abolished entirely, but perhaps a simpler and (perhaps) more politically feasible solution would be to at least eliminate the corporate income tax, so that no one would have to justify their tax status to the bureaucrats. It’s not possible to prevent people, particularly people whose goal is power, from abusing it. All we can do is deprive them of it. Newtown didn’t justify any of the legislative attempts to disarm us that followed it, and even some who jumped on that bandwagon are now recognizing that we need control of government more than control of guns. But if this travesty of tyranny doesn’t lead to serious tax reform, and government reform, we will have missed a true opportunity.

This unusual shot from WD Hogan of stamps will mean a lot to the Philatelists among us! I have a great collection of stamps, many of them very old, but nothing as historic as these!


I have mapped the location as right in the middle of the GPO for this one, but I don't think we will claim the "location Identified" tag - please take note derangedlemur


When researching the date this photograph was taken on, I came across the Dáil record for Tuesday 28th February 1922. I think it makes for a fantastic read. MR. MICHAEL COLLINS (MINISTER OF FINANCE) (and just a few months before his death and the start of the Civil war) is presenting the audited accounts. The following participate in the debate, CATHAL BRUGHA, MR. DE VALERA, MR. HARRY BOLAND, MR. AUSTIN STACK, MR. SEAN T. O'KELLY, MADAME MARKIEVICZ, MR. JAMES N. DOLAN, MR. SEAN MACENTEE, and PRESIDENT GRIFFITH among others.


See the full details here - Dáil Record 28th Feb 1922


Here is a small extract:


CATHAL BRUGHA: In regard to a particular item I would like to ask one question. The item is for “Special Defence, £4,050.” On whose authority was that money expended, I would like to know?


MR. M. COLLINS: That was a rushed amount; it should not have been charged like this. It should have been charged as a separate item. The Dáil Cabinet has been apprised of it, and they know exactly what it is. It should not have been put down as it is.


CATHAL BRUGHA: It should not have been in the Defence at all.


MR. M. COLLINS: No, it should not. If these items had been vouched none of them would have appeared here at all; but I suppose the London office being rushed, and Mr. O'Brien being away, they overlooked the matter. However, I am sure the vouchers will soon arrive.


Photographer: W. D. Hogan


Collection: Hogan-Wilson Collection ,


Date: 17th February 1922


NLI Ref.: HOG226


You can also view this image, and many thousands of others, on the NLI’s catalogue at


Not the very best of photos, but I love it!


It contains lots of information, which sums up the last four years of my life.


P.S. Do click on the "11 notes" link below, to read more about the photo.


Location: Newton, Singapore


If you are going to sleep in a doorway, then a bakers is not the best choice. In order to be "baked fresh every day" bakers start work long before it gets light.


And for those not familiar with the "Pasty" here it is:


A pasty (/ˈpaesti/, Cornish: Hogen; Pasti), (sometimes known in the United States as a pastie or British pasty) is a baked pastry, a traditional variety of which is particularly associated with Cornwall, the westernmost county in England. It is made by placing uncooked filling typically of meat and vegetables, without meat in vegetarian versions, on a flat pastry circle and folding it to wrap the filling, crimping the edge to form a seal. After baking, the result is a raised semicircular comestible.


The traditional Cornish pasty, which has Protected Geographical Indication (PGI) status in Europe, is filled with beef, sliced or diced potato, swede (also known as a yellow turnip or rutabaga – referred to in Cornwall as turnip) and onion, seasoned with salt and pepper, and is baked. Today, the pasty is the food most associated with Cornwall, it is regarded as the national dish, and it accounts for 6% of the Cornish food economy. Pasties with many different fillings are made; some shops specialise in selling all sorts of pasties.


The origins of the pasty are unclear, though there are many references to them throughout historical documents and fiction. The pasty is now popular world-wide due to the spread of Cornish miners, and variations can be found in Australia, the United States, Mexico and elsewhere.


Despite the modern pasty's strong association with Cornwall, its exact origins are unclear. The term "pasty" is an English word borrowed from Medieval French (O.Fr. paste from V.Lat pasta) for a pie, filled with venison, salmon or other meat, vegetables or cheese, baked without a dish. Pasties have been mentioned in cookbooks throughout the ages; for example the earliest version of Le Viandier has been dated to around 1300 and contains several pasty recipes. In 1393, Le Menagier De Paris contains recipes for pasté with venison, veal, beef, or mutton.


Other early references to pasties include a 13th-century charter which was granted by Henry III (1207–1272) to the town of Great Yarmouth. The town is bound to send to the sheriffs of Norwich every year one hundred herrings, baked in twenty four pasties, which the sheriffs are to deliver to the lord of the manor of East Carlton who is then to convey them to the King. Around the same time, 13th century chronicler Matthew Paris wrote of the monks of St Albans Abbey "according to their custom, lived upon pasties of flesh-meat". A total of 5,500 venison pasties were served at the installation feast of George Neville, archbishop of York and chancellor of England in 1465.[9] They were even eaten by royalty, as a letter from a baker to Henry VIII's third wife, Jane Seymour (1508–1537) confirms: "...hope this pasty reaches you in better condition than the last one..." In his diaries written in the mid 17th century, Samuel Pepys makes several references to his consumption of pasties, for instance "dined at Sir W. Pen’s ... on a damned venison pasty, that stunk like a devil.", but after this period the use of the word outside Cornwall declined.


In contrast to its earlier place amongst the wealthy, during the 17th and 18th centuries the pasty became popular with working people in Cornwall, where tin miners and others adopted it due to its unique shape, forming a complete meal that could be carried easily and eaten without cutlery. In a mine the pasty's dense, folded pastry could stay warm for several hours, and if it did get cold it could easily be warmed on a shovel over a candle.


Side-crimped pasties gave rise to the suggestion that the miner might have eaten the pasty holding the thick edge of pastry, which was later discarded, thereby ensuring that his dirty fingers (possibly including traces of arsenic) did not touch food or his mouth. However many old photographs show that pasties were wrapped in bags made of paper or muslin and were eaten from end-to-end; according to the earliest Cornish recipe book, published in 1929, this is "the true Cornish way" to eat a pasty. Another theory suggests that pasties were marked at one end with an initial and then eaten from the other end so that if not finished in one go, they could easily be reclaimed by their owners.


In 2006, a researcher in Devon discovered a recipe for a pasty tucked inside an audit book and dated 1510, calculating the cost of the ingredients. This replaced the previous oldest recipe, dated 1746, held by the Cornwall Records Office in Truro, Cornwall. The dish at the time was cooked with venison, in this case from the Mount Edgcumbe estate, as the pasty was then considered a luxury meal. Alongside the ledger, which included the price of the pasty in Plymouth, Devon in 1509, the discovery sparked a controversy between the neighbouring counties of Devon and Cornwall as to the origin of the dish. However, the term pasty appears in much earlier written records from other parts of the country, as mentioned above.


n 1988, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Armed Forces told the UK House of Commons that the European Fighter Aircraft would "be a major project, costing the United Kingdom about £7 billion".[47] It was soon apparent that a more realistic estimate was £13 billion,[48] made up of £3.3 billion development costs[49] plus £30 million per aircraft.[50] By 1997 the estimated cost was £17 billion; by 2003, £20 billion, and the in-service date (2003; defined as the date of delivery of the first aircraft to the RAF) was 54 months late.[51][52] After 2003 the Ministry of Defence have refused to release updated cost estimates on the grounds of 'commercial sensitivity',[53] however in 2011 the National Audit Office estimated the UK's "total programme cost [would] eventually hit £37 billion".[54]

By 2007, Germany estimated the system cost (aircraft and training, plus spare parts) at €120m[clarification needed] and said it was in perpetual increase.[55] On 17 June 2009, Germany ordered 31 aircraft of Tranche 3A for €2,800m, leading to a system cost of €90m per aircraft.[4] The UK's Committee of Public Accounts reported that the mismanagement of the project had helped increase the cost of each aircraft by 75 percent. Defence Secretary Liam Fox responded that "I am determined that in the future such projects are properly run from the outset, and I have announced reforms to reduce equipment delays and cost overruns."[56] The Spanish MoD has put the cost of their Typhoon project at €11,718m as of December 2010, up from an original €9,255m and implying a system cost for their 73 aircraft of €160m

This was the Air Terminal in Buckingham Palace Road opposite Victoria Coach Station. Last time I went by it was the National Audit Office.

Flood Risk Management in England - National Audit Office For more information:>>>> flood risk management


Flood Risk Management in England




"Greater local discretion over how funding is targeted has the potential to improve value for money in flood risk management. Local bodies will have to meet the new expectations placed on them - including that of raising investment locally - while under the pressure of delivering on other newly devolved responsibilities. If these challenges are not met, the Department's reforms will have failed to fulfil their potential to increase levels of investment in flood management and value for money to the taxpayer."


Amyas Morse, head of the National Audit Office, 28 October 2011


The National Audit Office reports today that giving greater responsibility and discretion to local authorities to identify flood risk and target investment raises significant cha...

Dr. Chad Cronon & Virginia would probably agree after working with me... Most of my offensive behavior was part of the facade to get the confidence of my targets. However, no prodigy makes that passionate a sacrifice without their being something very fucking personal behind it. I had gotten so good at blending in with my own 'social camouflages' I needed help being regressed into my savant memory that literally re-lives whatever I remember. I got the help I asked for in the 'A Voice For Matthew A. Nestle' article. I was too old, too crippled, and new something was wrong because of the uncontrolled pelvic pain. I knew retire, write & teach.


If the offenders got the right help & programs designed specifically for them they could help give insight into ongoing investigations and advocate others with autism & victims of trafficking. There is probably a large percentage of the inmate population that are both autistic & trafficking victims. The stats support that. Especially in protected adults & minorities.


Women of all nationalities, African Americans, Hispanic & Latino, and other ethnic, cultural, religious, and persons with an affect indicative of severe abuse are grotesquely under & misdiagnosed because of the prejudices & bigotry of the predominantly white male governed practitioners...


Women, not men, diagnosed my autism and savant syndrome. Except Dr. Cronon. He and I lived together for months. He realized 4, or 5 months later after I regurgitated every detail of associated events between us. He was special because of his specialty in A.D.A. & Affirmative Action.


More at the office... I need to vett myself with these assertions on the stats. Give the pre-screened inmates a cup of Starbucks coffee & a pack of Camel Crush cigarettes and they will relax and give you all the details... Trust me on that.


Starbucks & Camel could D.O.N.A.T.E. their products in the interest of civilized help in autistic adults who were abandoned by medical stupidity & white male prejudices, and the abolishment of slavery. If the trafficking victims don't get help they repeat the cycle on their kids, or themselves in front of their kids. Which can be even more heartbreaking.


I just watched the Eric Garner 'I can't breathe' video. I put it off because I knew I would very much relate to it, even as a F.E.M.A.L.E. of Irish & Native American descent. The 'Trail of Tears' is far from over for any of us... This article is dedicated in loving memory to Eric Garner, Micheal Brown, Trayvon Martin, and Matthew A. Nestle all of whom died very unnecessary & brutal deaths due to profiling based on prejudices & bigotry.


Since I too, have damn near died as a result of these same bigoted attitudes because I am an autistic savant, I extend my prodigious condolences to the surviving families of Eric Garner, Michael Brown, Matthew A Nestle, and Trayvon Martin.


Today, I am bedridden with excruciating pelvic, back and pain in places you'd shudder to know about because of a ruptured uterine malignant neoplasm. The Boone Hospital ER Dr. Steven Scott didn't tell me I had the tumor but recorded that he made an emergency referral to Boone's only GYN clinic Women's Health Associates.


Now, I am a patient of Beth Sweeney's. We're trying to have an affair. She made an appointment with a GYN who comes to the Family Health Center once a month. Dr. Elizabeth Wilson, from Boone's Women's Health Associates. She falsified her records and billed me for a biopsy that didn't happen then sent me a postcard stating that the tumor was benign.


3 weeks later it ruptured. I am bleeding internally and externally, though no one told me. I am able to tell you now because of whistle blower doctors and nurses. These tumors were deliberately untreated because of police & patient profiling, homeless shelter scams with the Mizzou Good Ol Boys in public office making sure there's no oversight. and social workers profiling me. I am LGBT, Native, female and thus subhuman so I don't deserve treatment, to continue to be able to work and get an Obamacare plan to be able to pay for the tests, a very necessary biopsy, or even to know about the cancer.


I had medicated, and sat in my recliner, and said to myself "I hurt so bad I CAN'T BREATHE!" The autism makes the pain even more ungodly because it's another form of sensory overload. This causes rapid heart rate, or tachycardia. This makes breathing very uncomfortable. I have two inhalers that I have to use. With the savant syndrome, the pain triggers a satellite view of the memories of why I still have the rupturing tumor inside of me in the first place...


I am not attempting to trivialize the very unnecessary deaths of the aforementioned victims of police profiling. I am rewriting this article to authenticate that the suffocation of minorities via various forms of oppression & Hitlers Nazi Germany starvation tactics through network-centric warfare (social networking a.k.a. Sovereignty Commissions) is a serious epidemic that has amassed a holocaust via countless deaths adding up to mass genocide. I watched as 9 of my neighbors all tagged as 'Mentally Ill' died on Pfizers Neurontin/gabapentin


I am a Neurontin/gabapentin Holocaust Survivor perpetuated by U.S. President George W. Bush & University of Missouri Hospital, Green Meadows Clinic, Family Counseling Center & Boone Hospital Center, and millions of other hospitals and prescribers WORLDWIDE (per the Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg Report, Huffington Post, Reuters) climbing in bed with Pfizer Pharmaceuticals for financial kickbacks. I'm sad to say that I have clients who are still being pushed. The Neurontin/gabapentin suicide drug responsible for millions of deaths. Dr. Parks is both a provider and an admin using the University of Missouri Hospital; & Clinics, Family Health Center, Burrell Behavioral, Salvation Army Harbor House, and Nanette Wards Central Missouri Stop Human Trafficking Coalition with her police connections Columbia Police Department Asst. Chief Jeremiah Hunter & Det. Clint Nickels


That said I am autistic, with a savant syndrome. It's a 'syndrome' for many reasons. We suffer unimaginable reprisals for regurgitating truths no one cares to hear. I have a passion for humanitarian causes like abolitionism, the abolishment of police profiling, discrimination by anyone especially in any public or federally funded entity like hospitals, etc. All of these get adults & even worse, children killed. There is no bigger atrocity than the untimely death of a child via the hatred & prejudices of allegedly 'educated', licensed, and certified professionals.


I am an adult female mathematics prodigy. Dr. Temple Grandin audits 4 legged animal slaughter houses & stockyards. I audit human animal slaughterhouses & stockyards. I was trained by my father, and Dr. Chad Cronon who worked for the Human Rights Campaign who apparently got independent contracts from Dept. of Justice.


Our investigation during Ferguson into Mizzou frat boys Gov. Jay Nixon, Attorney General Chris Koster, and Dr. Joseph Parks- Mizzou Psych Professor, Psychiatrist, Hospital & Clinics admin and Mo HealthNet Division Director at The Missouri Department of Social Services has likely cost Dr. Chad Cronon his life.


I am supposed to be dead per my blood work and abnormal ECG's. I have mastered a diet and get black-market high powered antibiotics for the sepsis. That's what's saving my life. That and many very brave doctors and nurses who blew the whistle. Beth Sweeney was the first. But she was attacked for being in love with me, by a Klan indoctrinated Homeland Security Agent Darla Munoz-Gatoloai. I grew up around the corner from Darla in Little Dixie- Marshall MO near the Columbia MO area.


I have been creating exits for human & child trafficking victims for many years. I even went to prison to ensure a child pornographer had no grounds for appeal. Dr. Cronon had worked as a prosecutor in the same Orlando courthouse where the Brady Violations that sent me to prison were committed. Chad was threatened while I was residing with him and suspected Agent Munoz-Gatoloia was partially responsible. She openly published gay bashing posts on her Facebook page. She and I were connected on Facebook before & after I testified against Richard Edwin Beasley. I had been asked to conduct a special investigation by a navy Veteran. Beasley was trained in the Navy. I subsequently saved the life of Beasley probation specialist. Also a Naval officer.


I was told a lot of horrible things about Dr. Cronon, and my father. Both of whom were federal investigators investigating the University of Missouri Klan. I was told they were addicts and child molesters. Agents Munoz's favorite allegations... DOJ's OIG office refuses to conduct a proper investigation into her ties with the Mizzou Klan. She's a threat to National Security. I am being refused proper oversight because Agent Munoz was recorded being abusive based on my LGBT status, and she herself refused to do proper oversight and instead punished Beth Sweeney and I for being interested in a personal relationship. Then the Orlando Pulse Massacre made gay bashing very taboo, on a global level.


Meanwhile, I have been working with other savants. There is a cure for addiction, it's not addictive, and Big Pharma/Big Alcohol/Big Tobacco have no intentions of developing it. It could help Dr. Grandins work in animal sciences because animals & humans benefit from similar endocrinology.


Chad taught me that The War On Drugs was designed to maintain segregation based on the inaccurate stats that non-whites & liberals used drugs at a higher rate.


I am Native, LGBT, Autistic and a Female Savant. The refusals to give me cancer treatment are based on false allegations of demanding narcotics with no need for pain meds made by Dr. Hanna Govari on July 16th, 2014. All part of a Medicaid fraud scam. Then she notifies local police and Homeland Security.


The next day, July 17th 2014, Dr. Scott at Boone Hospital see's the tumor and no one tells me. Then it ruptures on December 1 2014 while a I am a patient at Family Health Center. They were prescribing up to 6 Tramadol, 6 Tylenol 3, and oxycodone A DAY to help the pain from the internal hemorrhaging and the damage done to the left kidney.


They new god damned well I was about to die and they knew I had cancer.


Then I record the Mizzou Dr. Adam Beckett rape me with a foreign object for 3 minutes, on audio, while I am going septic from the rupture. The new Title 9 admin hears the audio and fires him. But first has her investigators try to needle me about Chad and our work.


Gov. Jay Nixon, pardons my rapist and makes the University of Missouri re-hire the bastard.


Then the ACLU tells them to forgive $250,000 in medical bills because the records are falsified.


And all those medical bills are forgiven by BJC, Mizzou and family Health Center.


Then United starts an investigation in 2016 because of 27 ER visits for complications from the sepsis, chest pain, ECGs, CT scans, an ultrasound of my heart. Mizzou, BJC, and Family Health center are lying their asses off to united because they just got popped for 2 False Claims Act violations and paid $5.2M to United.


FBI won't do a formal interview and review the overwhelming evidence because of Homeland Security's audio recorded gay bashing that sanctioned all this brutality.


Now, Banner, Tenet, Honor Health, Dr. Copeland and AZ Gov. Douche-bag has got themselves messed up because I survived all the murder attempts... and now we have missing ECG's from John C. Lincoln's medical records, and bad ECG's at Dr. Copeland's Banner contracted clinic on C.A.S.S campus, bad ECGs at St. Lukes, and another at JCL with high D-Dimer... Visible cancer discolorations... AT THIS POINT.


And for the record... All the doctors at Mizzou and Boone gave me permission to record in Columbia because under their City Ordinance Chapter 12, ADA violations are a criminal offense. The audio has me announcing that I record all medical encounters as a reasonable accommodation under the ADA. Americans With Disabilities Act. As tax exempts they were prohibited from discrimination, anyway. So, your not using the audio is an excuse not to prosecute the doctors, the police, Darla, and now you and your cohorts here in AZ on this Banner unbundling scam.


All are Tenet affiliates. I also told them I worked for Chad. Mizzous' Title 9 Deputy Phil Shearrer who was recorded during my phone calls with him while he was investigating the audio recorded sexual assault by Dr. Adam Beckett at Mizzous' Women's and Children's Hospital ER. I was raped by Dr. Beckett with a speculum for 3 minutes as retaliation for investigating the fraudulent billing in my care and reporting it to the Missouri Board of healing Art Enforcement. I also sent emails explaining that I recorded the attempts by Beth Sweeney to hook up with me for a sexual encounter in our exam room at Family Health Center. I also explained that Beth falsified my medical records to reflect that I had terminated my care when I had only terminated her and asked for another provider who wouldn't confuse me with offers of friendship and then falsify my medical records to reflect that they were prescribing all that pain medicine for chronic back pain and bogus psychiatric evidence.


The fictional records from a subsequent exam at South Providence Family Medicine reflect that I was terminated from every Mizzou clinic in the surrounding area for writing doctors up to Healing Arts Enforcement. I recorded my calls with the South Providence Clinic manager. She made that emergency appointment with Dr. Schuster knowing I had written two of her providers up for the falsification of my medical records. But that was before I reported the audio recorded rape by Dr. Becket while I was going septic from the rupture of the malignant neoplasm that no one told me about.


I recorded Phil Shearrer, an officer of the court, demanding that I allow the Mizzou Civil Rights office to probe further into my work with Chad. I sent him an email that was cc:'d to Chad and the NAACP that I would not discuss any attorney client privileges, nor any of Chads other clients business with him in exchange for proper medical care. I also cc'd this email to the Title 9 executive Ellen Eardley.


I did send them an audio file of a conversation with Chad where he authenticates I am immunized & sworn. To knock down their bogus claims that I was delusional about my work with a civil rights scholar.


I also sent Chad and the NAACP an email expressing that if the local Mizzou football team were to strike against the discrimination and Jim Crow policies used by Mizzou, their frat boys in public office- Gov. Nixon, Attorney General Chris Koster, and Medicaid Dir. Dr. Joe Parks it would upset the entire local economy. They did the research and found that i was right.


A few weeks later they made it happen.


Death threats were rampant in November 2015.


In December 2015, Chad was found dead in his home where I resided with him at Rock Lake Country Club in Orlando, Florida.


And I am at Stage 4 with this untreated accelerated cancer. The Arizona Tenet Health, Dignity Health, Banner health, and Honor Health hospitals are refusing to follow the law, are submitting $100's of Thousands in False Claims to my United Healthcare insurance instead of treating my medical needs. Their criminal negligence are causing more and more harm via multiple metastasis in many lymph nodes, both lungs, both kidneys, and both sinuses.



View On Black


Newsweek: Obama better represents Catholics than does the Pope


WSJ: Unemployment Up from 4.8% to currently 9.5% (20% in MI) and expected to rise


Obama flies pizza chef to Washington, DC from St. Louis to cater a party for him and his pals at White House.


Obama: "We are out of money"


Obama: "Its Working"


Facts: Government has nationalized AIG, Chrysler, GM, Citibank and has its eyes set on Health Care


This administration and congress has already outspent all previous 43 presidents combined


"Stimulus" is spent on bailing out failed social experiments and entitlement sinkholes by state governments controlled by "progressives"


House passes largest Tax Increase in the History of America - they aim to tax the air we breathe


Charitable donation levels and business investments down as tax levels increase


Obamas plan vacation at Martha's Vineyard


Obama promised unemployment would not exceed 8% - now its 9.5% and rising


Obama said it was mandatory that the 10 to 20 trillion dollar (with debt servicing) "stimulus" was passed right away or we are doomed - it was voted on and passed without those voting in the affirmative for it even reading it.


Once passed, the vast majority of the "stimulus" spending is deferred to 2010 which coincidentally is an election year for the politicians who voted for passage. An inference is that the only crisis was the socialists getting reelected after their policy of fascism failed to turn around the economy. A study of history will reveal their concern - no fascist/socialist enterprise has been successful at improving the quality of life for its citizens at any time in human history. No civilization has successfully taxed and spent its way out of a recession in the history of humanity.


Those who hold America's debt are frantically calling for a "world currency", knowing full well, that the certain forthcoming hyperinflation in America will significantly devalue the US Dollar and their investments will then be worth pennies on the dollar.


Now, Obama says that health care must be nationalized right away or we are doomed.


Now, Obama says that Sotomayor must be confirmed right away or we are doomed.


Now, Obama says that Cap and Trade (destroy and nationalize the energy sector) bill must be passed right away or we are doomed.


Now, Obama says that trillions of dollars of new taxes must be passed right away or we are doomed. These new taxes are on top of the trillions of dollars in new taxes that were already included in his "stimulus" bill and budget.


Is there a pattern? Does "we" refer to his constituents or perhaps himself and his political cronies?


No civilization has reversed a downward unemployment spiral by shrinking its private sector and growing its government bureaucracy.


The countries who have tried the fascist/socialist experiment are now moving back to more capitialistic free market policies - why? because shrinking their private sector and burdening it with increased government confiscatory/redistribution policies created misery in the form of unemployment, loss of individual freedom, lower quality of life and medical care rationing, shortages and misery.


Biden: We have to keep spending money to keep from going bankrupt.


Obama: We must pass nationalized health care so we can reduce costs. (We must do it now or we are doomed)


CBO Chief: Health Bills To Increase Federal Costs


White House wants more power to set Medicare rates


When thinking about price controls, think of the supply and demand curves and remember that with a price control, it is impossible for a price to get into equilibrium. With that in mind, we can identify two problems that result from this.


1. A shortage/oversupply of the good. If there is a price ceiling, you have a shortage (a la gasoline during the price controls of the 70's.) If there is a floor, you have overproduction (a la ethanol. Which, granted, is subsidized, but that is effectively like a price floor). *Note* also consider the housing markets where rent control is present.


2. An inefficient allocation of resources. With ethanol being subsidized, we witnessed a massive increase in the price of corn. The market did not want this, and thus we saw an inefficient allocation of resources.


Should National Health Care pass in this country, I will not know where or when I will die, but I will know how - substandard medical care, denial of care, lack of r&d due to price controls and rationing emposed by the government - all based on decisions by bureaucrats, actuaries, accountants and political appointees who I do not know and who do not know me or my specific needs or wishes ... and more importantly do not care ... they care only about passing the next government audit cycle for cost control.




Analysis of Health Care Bill HR 3200 Print E-mail

Thursday, 06 August 2009 20:28


Below is a detailed, line by line, analysis of the Health Care bill (HR 3200) by CADC’s advisory board member, Mat Staver of the Liberty Council, and Dean of Liberty University School of Law.


Obama Health Care Plan Details


HR 3200 currently under consideration in the House of Representatives


*HC = "Health Care"


* Pg 22 of the HC Bill MANDATES the Government will audit the books of ALL EMPLOYERS that self insure!!

* Pg 29 lines 4-16 in the HC Bill - YOUR HEALTH CARE IS RATIONED!!!

* Pg 30 Sec 123 of HC Bill - THERE WILL BE A GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you get

* Pg 42 of HC Bill - The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your benefits for you. You have no choice!

* Pg 50 Section 152 in HC Bill - HC will be provided to ALL non-U.S. citizens, illegal or otherwise

* Pg 58 HC Bill – Government will have real-time access to individual’s finances and a National ID Health Care Card will be issued!

* Pg 59 HC Bill lines 21-24 Government will have direct access to your banks accounts for electronic funds transfer.

* Pg 65 Sec 164 is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in unions and community organizations (ACORN).

* Pg 72 Lines 8-14 Government is creating a Health Care Exchange to bring private health care plans under government control.

* Pg 84 Sec 203 HC Bill - Government mandates ALL benefit packages for private health care plans in the Exchange

* Pg 85 Line 7 HC Bill - Specs for of Benefit Levels for Plans = The government will ration your health care!

* Pg 91 Lines 4-7 HC Bill - Government mandates linguistic appropriate services.

* Pg 95 HC Bill Lines 8-18 The government will use groups i.e., ACORN & AmeriCorps to sign up individuals for government Health Care Plan

* Pg 85 Line 7 HC Bill - Specs of Ben Levels 4 Plans. #AARP members - Your health care WILL be rationed

* Pg 102 Lines 12-18 HC Bill - Medicaid Eligible Individual will be automatically enrolled in Medicaid. No choice.

* Pg 124 lines 24-25 HC No company can sue the government on price fixing. No "judicial review" against this government monopoly.

* Pg 127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill - Doctors/ #AMA - The government will tell YOU what you can make.

* Pg 145 Line 15-17 An employer MUST auto enroll employees into public option plan. NO CHOICE

* Pg 126 Lines 22-25 Employers MUST pay for health care for part-time employees AND their families.

* Pg 149 Lines 16-24 ANY Employer w/ payroll 400k and above who does not prov. pub opt. pays 8% tax on all payroll

* Pg 150 Lines 9-13 Businesses with payroll between 251k and 400k who do not provide public opt pays 2-6% tax on all payroll

* Pg 167 Lines 18-23 ANY individual who doesn’t have acceptable health care according to government will be taxed 2.5% of income.

* Pg 170 Lines 1-3 Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual taxes (Americans will pay).

* Pg 195 Officers & employees of HC Administration (GOVT) will have access to ALL Americans' financial and personal records.

* Pg 203 Line 14-15 HC - "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax." Yes, it says that.

* Pg 239 Line 14-24 HC Bill Government will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors, low income, poor affected.

* Pg 241 Line 6-8 HC Bill - Doctors, it does not matter what specialty you have, you’ll all be paid the same.

* Pg 253 Line 10-18 Government sets value of doctors' time, prof judg, etc. Literally value of humans.

* Pg 265 Sec 1131Government mandates and controls productivity for private health care industries.

* Pg 268 Sec 1141 Federal Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven wheelchairs.

* Pg 272 SEC. 1145. Treatment of certain cancer hospitals – Cancer patients - welcome to rationing!

* Page 280 Sec 1151 The government will penalize hospitals for what government deems preventable readmissions. (Incentives for hospital to not treat and release.)

* Pg 298 Lines 9-11 Doctors that treat a patient during initial admission that results in a readmission-Government will penalize you.

* Pg 317 L 13-20 PROHIBITION on ownership/investment. Government tells Doctors what/how much they can own.

* Pg 317-318 lines 21-25, 1-3 PROHIBITION on expansion- Government is mandating hospitals cannot expand.

* pg 321 2-13 Hospitals have opportunity to apply for exception, BUT community input required. Can you say ACORN?!!

* Pg335 L 16-25 Pg 336-339 - Government mandates establishment of outcome based measures. Health Care the way they want. Rationing.

* Pg 341 Lines 3-9 Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage Plans (Part B), HMOs, etc. Forcing people into Government plan.

* Pg 354 Sec 1177 - Government will RESTRICT enrollment of special needs people!

* Pg 379 Sec 1191 Government creates more bureaucracy – Tele-health Advisory Committee. Health care by phone/Internet?

* Pg 425 Lines 4-12 Government mandates Advance [Death] Care Planning Consultion. Think Senior Citizens end of life.

* Pg 425 Lines 17-19 Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney. Mandatory!

* Pg 425 Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3 Government provides approved list of end of life resources, guiding you in death.

* Pg 427 Lines 15-24 Government mandates program for orders for end of life. The government has a say in how your life ends.

* Pg 429 Lines 1-9 An "advanced care planning consult" will be used frequently as patient's health deteriorates.

* Pg 429 Lines 10-12 " advanced care consultation" may include an ORDER for end of life plans. AN ORDER from Government.

* Pg 429 Lines 13-25 - The government will specify which doctors can write an end of life order.

* PG 430 Lines 11-15 The government will decide what level of treatment you will have at end of life.

* Pg 469 - Community Based Home Medical Services=Non-profit orgs. Hello, ACORN Medical Services here!!?

* Pg 472 Lines 14-17 PAYMENT TO COMMUNITY-BASED ORG. 1 monthly payment to a community-based org. Like ACORN?

* Pg 489 Sec 1308 The government will cover Marriage and Family therapy. They will insert government into your marriage.

* Pg 494-498 Government will cover Mental Health Services including defining, creating, rationing those services.

* PG 502 Sec 1181 Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research Established. – Hello Big Brother – Literally.

* Pg 503 Lines 13-19 Government will build registries and data networks from YOUR electronic medical records.

* Pg 503 lines 21-25 Government may secure data directly from any department or agency of the U.S. who have any of your data.

* Pg 504 Lines 6-10 The "Center" will collect data both published and unpublished (that means public and your private info).

* PG 506 Lines 19-21 The Center will recommend policies that would allow for public access of data.

* PG 518 Lines 21-25 The Commission will have input from Health Care consumer reps – Can you say unions and ACORN?

* PG 524 18-22 Comparative Effectiveness Research Trust Fund set up. More taxes for ALL.

* PG 621 Lines 20-25 Government will define what quality means in health care. Since when does government know about quality?

* Pg 622 Lines 2-9 To pay for the Quality Standards, government will transfer money from other government Trust Funds. More Taxes.

* PG 624 "Quality" measures shall be designed to assess outcomes and functional status of patients.

* PG 624 "Quality" measures shall be designed to profile you including race, age, gender, place of residence, etc.

* Pg 628 Sec 1443 Government will give "Multi-Stake Holders" Pre-Rule Making input into Selection of "Quality" Measures.

* Pg 630 9-24/631 1-9 Those multi-stake holder groups include unions and groups like ACORN deciding health care quality.

* Pg 632 Lines 14-25 The Government may implement any "Quality measure" of health care services as they see fit.

* PG 633 14-25/ 634 1-9 The Secretary may issue non-endorsed "Quality Measures" for Physician Services and Dialysis Services.

* Pg 635 to 653 Physicians Payments Sunshine Provision – Government wants to shine sunlight on doctor but not government.

* Pg 654-659 Public Reporting on Health Care-Associated Infections – Looks okay.

* PG 660-671 Doctors in Residency – Government will tell you where your residency will be, thus where you’ll live.

* Pg 676-686 Government will regulate hospitals in EVERY aspect of residency programs, including teaching hospitals.

* Pg 686-700 Increased Funding to Fight Waste, Fraud, and Abuse. Do they mean like the government with an $18 million website?

* PGs 701-704 Sec 1619 If your part of health care plan isn’t in Government Health Care Exchange but you qualify for Federal aid, no payment.

* PG 705-709 SEC. 1128 If Secretary gets complaints (ACORN) on health care provider or supplier, government can do background check.

* PG 711 Lines 8-14 The Secretary has broad powers to deny health care providers/ suppliers admittance into Health Care Exchange. Your doctor could be thrown out of business.

* Pg 719-720 Sec 1637 ANY Doctor who orders durable medical equipment or home medical services MUST be enrolled in Medicare.

* PG 722 Sec 1639 Government MANDATES doctors must have face-to-face with patient to certify patient for Home Health Services.

* PG 724 23-25 PG 725 1-5 The same government certifications will apply to Medicaid and CHIP (your kids).

* PG 724 Lines 16-22 Government reserves right to apply face-to-face certification for patient to ANY other health care service.

* Pg 735 lines 16-25 For law enforcement, proposes the Secretary-HHS will give Attorney General access to ALL data.

* PG 740-757 Government sets guidelines for subsidizing the uninsured (That's your tax dollars people).

* Pg 757-762 Federal Government will shift burden of payments to Disproportionate Share Hospitals (DSH) to States. (Taxes)

* Pg 763 1-8 No DS/EA hospitals will be paid unless they provide services without regard to national origin.

* Pg 765 Sec 1711 Government will require Preventative Services including vaccines. (Choice?)

* Pg 768 Sec 1713 Government – Nurse Home Visitation Services (Hello union paybacks).

* Pg 769 11-14 Nurse Home Visit Services include economic self-sufficiency, employ adv, school-readiness.

* Pg 769 3-5 Nurse Home Visit Services - "increasing birth intervals between pregnancies." Government ABORTIONS anyone?

* Pg 770 SEC 1714 Federal Government mandates eligibility for State Family Planning Services. Abortion and State Sovereignty.

* Pg 789-797 Government will set, mandate drug prices, controlling which drugs brought to market. Bye innovation.

* Pgs 797-800 SEC. 1744 PAYMENTS for graduate medical education. The government will now control doctors’ educations.

* PG 801 Sec 1751 The government will decide which health care conditions will be paid. Can you say RATION!

* Pg 810 SEC. 1759. Billing Agents, clearinghouses, etc. req. to register. Government takes over private payment system.

* Pg 820-824 Sec 1801 Government will identify individuals ineligible for subsidies. Will access all personal financial information.

* Pg 824-829 SEC. 1802. Government sets up Comparative Effectiveness Research Trust Fund. Another tax black hole.

* PG 829-833 Government will impose a fee on ALL private health insurance plans including self-insured to pay for Trust Fund!

* PG 835 11-13 fees imposed by government for Trust Fund shall be treated as if they were taxes.

* Pg 838-840 Government will design and implement Home Visitation Program for families with young kids and families expecting kids.

* PG 844-845 This Home Visitation Program includes government coming into your house and telling you how to parent!!!

* Pg 859 Government will establish a Public Health Fund at a cost of $88,800,000,000. Yes that’s billion.

* Pg 865 The government will MANDATE the establishment of a National Health Service Corps.

* PG 865 to 876 The NHS Corps is a program where doctors perform mandatory health care for two years for part loan repayment.

* PG 876-892 The government takes over the education of our medical students and doctors.

* PG 898 The government will establish a Public Health Workforce Corps to ensure supply of public health prof.

* PG 898 The Public Health Workforce Corps shall consist of civilian employees of the U.S. as Secretary deems.

* PG 898 The Public Health Workforce Corps shall consist of officers of Regular and Reserve Corps of Service.

* PG 900 The Public Health Workforce Corps includes veterinarians.

* PG 901 The Public Health Workforce Corps WILL include commissioned Regular and Reserve Officers. HC Draft?

* PG 910 The government will develop, build, and run Public Health Training Centers.

* PG 913-914 Government starts a health care affirmative action program thru guise of diversity scholarships.

* PG 915 SEC. 2251. Government MANDDATES Cultural and linguistic competency training for health care professionals.

* Pg 932 The Government will establish Preventative and Wellness Trust fund- initial cost of $30,800,000,000 billion.

* PG 935 21-22 Government will identify specific goals & objectives for prevention & wellness activities. That means controlling YOU!!

* PG 936 Government will develop "Healthy People and National Public Health Performance Standards" Tell me what to eat?

* PG 942 Lines 22-25 More government? Offices of Surgeon General -Public Health Svc, Minority Health, Women’s Health

* PG 950- 980 BIG GOVERNMENT core pub health infrastructure including workforce capacity, lab systems, health info sys, etc.

* PG 993 Government will establish school based health clinics. Your kids won’t have a chance.

* PG 994 School Based Health Clinic will be integrated into the school environment. Say government brainwash!

* PG 1001 The government will establish a National Medical Device Registry. Will you be tracked?


Obama's Ongoing War on Inspectors General

By Ed Lasky

A cloud of suspicion hangs over the data Barack Obama and his team have been presenting us regarding the purported success of their own programs.


The figures presented regarding "jobs created and saved" have been contested. The new metric regarding jobs "saved" has been ridiculed as just a tactic to burnish the numbers. Analysts have looked at various expenditures and have shown in example after example that each job created is often temporary in nature, sometimes occurs overseas, and is often extremely expensive.


The figures regarding ObamaCare -- be they the costliness of the program, its effect on the deficit, or the number of uninsured -- are roundly considered suspect, if not an outright numerical analogy to snake-oil claims.


Climate change is another theological belief held by the higher-ups in this administration -- facts and figures be damned.


The problem is exacerbated when models are created to justify the ideological ends of proponents of various programs (the so-called hockey-stick model of climate change, for example). Models then have fudged numbers put in them to -- voilà! -- create the desired outcomes.


Mark Twain, who coined the phrase "lies, damn lies, and statistics," would certainly have had a great deal of raw material to use in his satirical screeds regarding politicians -- especially this bunch inspired by the mores of Cook County.


Taxpayers pay the price, of course. We always do.


But we have some people looking out for our futures in the government -- and these people have been subject to a great deal of pressure from the White House.


These are the inspectors general -- the unsung heroes of the government who monitor government agencies.


They take their duties to the taxpayers seriously. We are lucky to have them looking out for waste and corruption. For the last two years, they have stood up and reported on waste of taxpayer dollars and various other suspect activities.


This is precisely what seems to have earned them pride of place on Obama's ever-growing enemies list.


The latest one to report on Obama shenanigans is the inspector general for the Small Business Administration (SBA), who reports that the agency's numbers for "jobs saved" were either "unclear" or "misleading" and cannot be verified.


The SBA received over $700 million under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (the stimulus act). The federal agency was required to report on job statistics flowing from the stimulus. The SBA made loans to small businesses and was supposed to check on the number of jobs created.


The SBA did so monthly on its website. The inspector general audited these numbers and found them wanting -- to say the least.


From World Net Daily:


The inspector general reported that the loan programs' "lack of a definition for 'jobs retained' and the discrepancy in the forms used to collect job statistics from 7(a) borrowers and lenders has resulted in a performance metric with questionable clarity and transparency."


The inspector general, what is more, indicated that only one of the programs, the 504 program, even asked loan applicants how many jobs are to be saved. The other program, the 7(a) program, made something of a leap of faith as to jobs created.


"In the 504 loan program, where job creation and retention is a program criteria, applicants are required to report the number of current employees, jobs to be created in the next two years, and jobs to be retained because of the loan," the IG report said.


Applicants for the 7(a) program, meanwhile, were just asked to report on their application the number of employees at the time of application and the number of employees "if [the] loan is approved."


As the inspector general noted, as a result of this shoddy methodology, the report "results in unclear and misleading reporting."


I have written a series of columns that reveal a pattern. One inspector general after another faults the Obama administration for using suspect methodology to burnish its claims regarding job creation. At one point, Obama wanted to create a brand new $30-billion government program to grant loans to small business. The program was designed to be free of any oversight by inspectors general. This program had the potential to be a thirty-billion-dollar slush fund to channel taxpayer dollars to those people who are allies of the Obama administration.


This was not the first time the Obama team tried to elude oversight


Obama's Office of Management and Budget (OMB) threatened an inspector general for daring to tell Congress that the OMB was trying to slash his budget, crimping his ability to monitor spending and other actions by the OMB.


The administration fired Inspector General Gerald Walpin after he dared to report that Sacramento's mayor, a Democrat and personal friend of Barack Obama, had engaged in improper use of federal money.


From the Wall Street Journal:


A George W. Bush appointee, Mr. Walpin has since 2007 been the inspector general for the Corporation for National and Community Service, the federal agency that oversees such subsidized volunteer programs as AmeriCorps. In April 2008 the Corporation asked Mr. Walpin to investigate reports of irregularities at St. HOPE, a California nonprofit run by former NBA star and Obama supporter Kevin Johnson. St. HOPE had received an $850,000 AmeriCorps grant, which was supposed to go for three purposes: tutoring for Sacramento-area students; the redevelopment of several buildings; and theater and art programs.


Mr. Walpin's investigators discovered that the money had been used instead to pad staff salaries, meddle politically in a school-board election, and have AmeriCorps members perform personal services for Mr. Johnson, including washing his car.


At the end of May, Mr. Walpin's office recommended that Mr. Johnson, an assistant and St. HOPE itself be "suspended" from receiving federal funds.


Recall Obama's taunt that if people brought a knife to a fight, he would bring a gun. In Walpin's case, he brought an axe -- since Walpin was fired from his job in the wake of his report on Johnson. But this was not enough punishment. Administration officials then went on the warpath as they heaped personal abuse on Walpin.


The war on the inspectors general continued. Maybe some inspectors generals did not get the memo that they were supposed to fall in line and ignore their professional obligations to taxpayers. Of course, the hypocrisy is palpable. Wasn't it Barack Obama who promised transparency in government?


Neil Barofsky, a Democrat, is the special inspector general of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP). He is another inspector general who found serious flaws behind administration claims. He thrashed the Treasury for relying on self-reporting by recipients of TARP money. He wrote that the bailout was falling short of many of its goals, like preserving home ownership and stimulating the economy. He also reported that the Treasury had switched accounting methods in order to promote the view that taxpayers would profit from the AIG bailout. One analyst depicted the Treasury's new accounting method as "Enron-style" accounting.


When companies switch accounting methods, a red flag is raised -- and short sellers of a public company's stock smell blood in the water. The funny business leads people to believe that officials are trying to present a false positive image regarding the business. Barofsky thought it was wrong and that the Treasury (Obama's Treasury) was failing.


What happened? I think we know the script by now. The administration heaped personal abuse on Barofsky.


Jen Psaki, who goes back to the Obama campaign, serves as the deputy communications director at the White House. And communicate she did.


On her blog, she attacked Barofsky:


Some people don't like movies with happy endings[.] ... How else to explain this week's report by Sigtarp? Rather than focusing on the growing evidence we've seen in recent months that TARP will be far less costly than anyone expected, Sigtarp instead sought to generate a false controversy over AIG to try and grab a few, cheap headlines.


The name calling and vilification continue for seven more paragraphs.


Here, we have Obama's modus operandi regarding inspectors generals -- the taxpayers' best friends and the unsung heroes in government.


One after another, inspectors general have been reporting that Obama's stewardship of taxpayer money has failed and that the administration has been using funny numbers to bamboozle the public into believing that the programs are succeeding. When the proverbial you-know-what hits the fan, the administration retaliates. The strategy seems to be to stop the criticism -- and to prevent it from happening in the first place, since whistle-blowers will fear what may happen to them if they tell the truth. Welcome to Chicago politics writ large.


Darrell Issa, the new chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, has announced plans to investigate how the administration has spent our money. He has also expressed a desire to expand the powers of inspectors generals. Lord knows they will need the power to counter the machinations of Barack Obama and Company.



The New Residence in Salzburg's Old Town, formerly also called Palazzo Nuovo, built by Prince-Archbishop Wolf Dietrich von Raitenau to the east of Salzburg Cathedral. The spiritual prince , who was then most in the entire Holy Roman Empire of German Nation, began with this first construction project in 1588 after the demolition of the local citizens and Domherrenhäuser .

Initially served as the first tracts of the New Residence houses of the brothers of the Prince-Archbishop . Perhaps this building was intended as a future permanent private property of the prince himself . In 1600, the Regent already moved despite the ongoing construction work his siblings in this house. As of the year 1600 two brothers of the Archbishop - probably after a previous internal family strife - leaving the city , also changed the intended use. Now the building for public purposes was supplied. It was probably intended as a representative hostel for foreign princes.

Today, the New Residence is home of the Salzburg Museum, Salzburg , the home depot is located there, it is also for the Salzburg Glockenspiel, a known historical percussion.

The proposed new residence place of Scamozzi

Originally from the east façade created around a courtyard with two lateral connecting arcades , another, planned by Vincenzo Scamozzi, two-story building (in the area of ​​today's Mozart Square ). The new residence, including the extension should complete the residence place as in the West. In the south of the proposed course should be in North-South direction ( !) of Scamozzi 's Cathedral are planned, which should be linked by an archway with both the new and the old residence. In the east, should logically be the old residence, in the north a building escape was probably planned. The place should be closed by a market building .

The facades of the New Residence

The facades of the new residence should obviously be similar to the architecture of the garden or the Dietrichsruh the main courtyard of the residence, mainly they are designed by pilasters . These vertical elements had the task to counteract the width of the tension arm overall building . The window should it be topped by changing pointed and segmented gable ; first part of the facade already had this shape. The exterior was completed in substantial parts but only under Markus Sittikus and Paris Lodron and now fell from much more sober : Simple, running under the windows, double straps replace the vertical design . The four corners of the building were decorated according to the desire of Wolf Dietrich with the arms of his grandparents : those of gender Medici, Hohenems, Raitenau and Sirgenstein .

The tower of the New Residence (since 1702 Carillon Tower )

The tower with carillon

The tower of New Residence was purposed by Wolf Dietrich von Raitenau and the building originally had 5 storeys. First it had a flat pyramidal roof with attached small drum dome. The tower was there provided just above the planned arcade in the Cathedral and the Old Residence. Through this transition was found that the tower was not built exactly in the middle of the facade .

In 1701, this tower of Archbishop Johann Ernst von Thun was placed an octagonal building with open arch arcades for the carillon , which is crowned by a dome roof. 1702 35 bells of Antwerp caster Melchior of Haze ( 1688-89 ) were then delivered together with playthings, the Salzburg court clockmaker Jeremias Sauter then put these items together. The three arches in front of the tower (northern yokes ) originate from the time of Johann Ernst von Thun, the continuation of these arcades to the south from the period around 1860.

The New Residence in history

The new residence was in the second half of the 17th Century used both as a farm building, on the other hand, as a building for the High Salzburg countryside . In one part of it housed the armory .

Instead of the former, fenced by a wall garden , let Max Gandolf of Kuenburg build today Kuenburg tract to another courtyard. In the first floor of the archiepiscopal court library was housed it out for a long time. The second floor was the Erbämtersaal (hereditary office hall) whose coffered ceiling has been preserved with its Arkantusrankenschnitzwerk (acanthus tendrils carving) from 1680. Archbishop Colloredo in 1786 let clear the armory in the new residence and largely rebuild the wing for administrative purposes.

After 1803, the new residence was used as Dikasteralgebäude and the Imperial and in the K. and K. Monarchy as an administrative building of the Hofkameralärars. Here the city and land rights, the mountain and Saline Directorate , the Fiscal Office, the Audit Office Books , the number Kameral Office and the State inspection of goods in 1824 were housed .

1850 Office space were created for the new Crown Land Salzburg here, which included a new assembly hall and facilities for the national court. In addition, post office and telegraph office were housed . After 1890, the New Residence formally received the status of a government building, nothing changed much during the First Republic. The rooms at the southeast corner , along with the former State Hall sala grande were destroyed in 1944 by a bomb attack, only the outer walls remained largely remained intact. After the war the building was cleared to the ground floor and rebuilt.

Later on, authorities were housed in the building. After 1990, the new museum concept of city of Salzburg was decided ( after several failed attempts ). In 2000, the space concept of the Salzburg Museum was ready and 2003 could begin the necessary construction work . According to the official statement of the New Residence finally opened the show with Viva! Mozart.

The resulting state rooms

On the second floor of the west wing , the state rooms , which are decorated with rich mirror vaults and colorful stucco , the Castello Elijah had it made in 1602 are (the following areas are continuously enumerated from north to south ) .

The Bishop Hall ( probably originally a small secret consistory ) has a brown wooden coffered ceiling with oval and three pass fields in the middle of a particularly rich coat of arms designed by Wolf Dietrich is. Earlier here were the portraits of all the archbishops full-length portraits from Markus Sittikus to Colloredo, of which the name of the hall is derived .

The virtues Hall ( originally probably the Studiolo) is a rectangular room with a coffered ceiling stucco, showing the allegorical figures. The three theological virtues thereby fill the center panels , while the four cardinal virtues are displayed in the side gusset panels. Noteworthy are also the portals from the time of Wolf Dietrich.

Glory Hall ( originally the Guardaroba ), which connects the west , has a square floor plan. Here can be found on the ceiling of the presentation of the halo with angel choirs playing music and cheering around the sign of God. The central image is surrounded by four rectangular fields with the representations of the Annunciation, the Visitation, the Adoration of the Child Jesus by the shepherds and the Presentation in the Temple .

The Ständesaal ( originally the great Secret Consistory, corner space to Mozart Square ) shows ancient representations of model self-sacrificing behavior : Horatius Cocles keeps the urgent to the Tiber bridge enemies , while the Romans demolish the bridge , Mucius Scaevola puts his hand in front of King Porsena into the fire, Marcus Curtius jumps into the flaming abyss ). Five surrounding medallions show busts .

To the south commander room (originally a bedroom) with the central crest of Wolf Dietrich on a gold mosaic ground is surrounded by four half-lenght portrait representations of Charlemagne, Godfrey of Bouillon, Charles V and Juan de Austria .

To the commander room again follows also the private bathroom. The room has an oval dome, with ceramic mosaic and stucco with four angels with palm branches . Noteworthy in the new residence next to the above mentioned areas is the rest of the magnificent coffered ceiling over the smaller sala seconda in the southwestern Ecksaal of Wolf-Dietrich- building.

SS.........Leftist.Government power and institutions used against political opponents to sway a presidential election

it's perfectly clear already.....corrupt rogue regime using third world tactics......nothing more ...nothing less.........EVERYONE involved needs to be put on trial and jailed


NYT: Obama Administration Knew of IRS Scandal 5 Months Before Election

by John Nolte 17 May 2013, 12:33 PM PDT


in no uncertain terms and with no hedging, The New York Times reports that the Obama administration was aware of the fact that the IRS was targeting Tea Party groups as far back as June of 2012. The Treasury Department's Inspector General confirmed that he told senior Treasury officials in June of 2012, a full five months before Election Day:

The Treasury Department’s inspector general told senior Treasury officials in June 2012 he was investigating the Internal Revenue Service’s screening of politically active organizations seeking tax exemptions, disclosing for the first time on Friday that Obama administration officials were aware of the matter during the presidential campaign year.


We still don’t know for sure what the President knew or when he knew it, but this does confirm that the administration was aware of the fact that Obama's political enemies were under fire by the IRS and covered that fact up during an election year.


As Lisa Meyers of NBC News told "Morning Joe" today, "Imagine if we -- if you can -- what would have happened if this fact came out in September 2012, in the middle of a presidential election? The terrain would have looked very different."


The first time President Obama was asked when he found out about the IRS scandal, he told the media that he learned of the news last Friday, the same way the rest of us did -- from the news media.


Thursday, a Bloomberg reporter asked the President when he or anyone else in the White House learned of the scandal. The President dodged the question.


With this latest news confirming when the Administration first learned of the IRS scandal, we now know that, along with Benghazi and the unfurling Associated Press scandal, there were three scandals brewing and unfolding in the White House during an election year. But we are only now hearing about them -- six months after Barack Obama was safely re-elected.



Treasury Knew of I.R.S. Inquiry in 2012, Official Says


WASHINGTON — Congressional Republicans, not resting with the Internal Revenue Service scandal, are moving to broaden the matter to an array of tax malfeasances and “intimidation tactics” they hope will ensnare the White House.


Republican charges range from the clearly questionable to the seemingly specious, and they grow by the day. On Friday, lawmakers sought to tie the I.R.S. matter to the implementation of President Obama’s health care law, which will rely heavily on the agency. Whether they succeed holds significant ramifications for Mr. Obama, who will soon know if he is dealing with a late spring thunderstorm that may soon blow over or a consuming squall that will leave lasting damage.


Representative Dave Camp, Republican of Michigan, the usually mild-mannered chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, set the tone Friday at Congress’s first hearing on the targeting of conservative groups by the I.R.S., laying out details, from the alleged threatening of donors to conservative nonprofit groups to the leaking of confidential I.R.S. documents.


In that context, he said, the screening of Tea Party groups for special scrutiny was not the scandal itself but “just the latest example of a culture of cover-ups — and political intimidation — in this administration.”


“It seems like the truth is hidden from the American people just long enough to make it through an election,” Mr. Camp said.


Taken aback, the ranking Democrat on the committee, Representative Sander M. Levin of Michigan, modified his prepared remarks to warn, “If this hearing becomes essentially a bootstrap to continue the campaign of 2012 and to prepare for 2014, we will be making a very, very serious mistake.”


Republicans raised a long list of issues. Mr. Camp contended, for instance, that a White House official’s divulging of a private company’s tax status constituted “a clear intimidation tactic.” The 2010 incident involved an offhand comment by the White House economist Austan Goolsbee that Koch Industries had not paid corporate income taxes because it pays taxes through the personal income tax code. As it turned out, that was not true, but the assertion was made in a discussion of tax reform ideas, not politics.


The Republicans also criticized the publication of donors to the National Organization for Marriage, a group opposed to same-sex marriage. That donors list surfaced mysteriously in March 2012 from a whistle-blower whose identity is still unknown. The whistle-blower apparently obtained it by simply requesting it from the I.R.S.


Linkage to the health care law came through Sarah Hall Ingram, a longtime I.R.S. official who has headed the agency’s Affordable Care Act implementation program since December 2010. Before that, she led the I.R.S.’s tax-exempt and government-entities division, which contained the political targeting effort.


“This is an audit, and it’s helpful,” Representative Tim Griffin, Republican of Arkansas, said of the investigation of I.R.S. targeting by the Treasury inspector general for tax administration, “but it’s the tip of the iceberg.”


But the inspector general made clear that effort did not reach the attention of high-level I.R.S. officials until 2011 at the earliest.


The inspector general gave Republicans some fodder Friday when he divulged that he informed the Treasury’s general counsel he was auditing the I.R.S.’s screening of politically active groups seeking tax exemptions on June 4, 2012. He told Deputy Treasury Secretary Neal Wolin “shortly after,” he said. That meant Obama administration officials were aware of the matter during the presidential campaign year.


The disclosure last summer came as part of a routine briefing of the investigations that the inspector general would be conducting in the coming year, and he did not tell the officials of his conclusions that the targeting had been improper, he said.


Treasury officials stressed they did not know the results until March 2013, when the inspector presented a draft.


“Treasury strongly supports the independent oversight of its three inspectors general, and it does not interfere in ongoing I.G. audits,” the department said in a statement Friday evening.


Still, Inspector General J. Russell George’s testimony fueled efforts by Congressional Republicans to ensnare Mr. Obama in the swirl of scandals suddenly besetting the White House. Representative Paul D. Ryan, the Wisconsin Republican who joined the national ticket as the vice-presidential candidate last year, said of the revelation, “That raises a big question.”


In March 2012, the Human Rights Campaign and the Huffington Post made public confidential tax documents from the National Organization for Marriage. The Human Rights Campaign said it obtained the documents from a “whistle-blower” who mailed them to the gay rights group’s Washington headquarters.


In a similar incident, ProPublica, an investigative journalism Web site, asked the I.R.S.’s Cincinnati office for the applications of 67 nonprofits, both liberal and conservative. When the I.R.S. responded, it inadvertently included applications for nine conservative groups that had not yet been granted tax-exempt status, a violation of confidentiality law.


When ProPublica realized what it had — including the application from Crossroads GPS, the conservative group founded by Karl Rove and other Republican strategists — it alerted the I.R.S., which warned the journalists that “publishing unauthorized returns or return information was a felony” punishable by up to five years in prison. ProPublica ProPublica redacted certain details and published the documents anyway.


Representative Peter Roskam, Republican of Illinois, hit on a different explanation. “On the one hand, you’re arguing today that the I.R.S. is not corrupt, but the subtext of that is you’re saying, ‘Look, we’re just incompetent,’ ” Mr. Roskam said. “It is a perilous pathway to go down.”


One release that turned out to be advertent was last Friday’s disclosure of the agency’s conservative targeting. Steven Miller, the ousted I.R.S. commissioner, confessed that the agency’s apology was prompted by a question planted by the agency at an American Bar Association meeting. At that meeting, Lois Lerner, the head of the I.R.S.’s division overseeing tax-exempt organizations, was asked about an inquiry into the targeting issue, eliciting an apology that quickly leaked out of the closed-door session. The I.R.S. then scrambled to issue a formal release on the issue.


Mr. Miller divulged that the exchange was not an impromptu apology but a planned exchange between Ms. Lerner and Celia Roady, a tax lawyer at the Washington office of the Morgan Lewis law firm. That revelation only underscored the ham-handed way the scandal has burst into view.


Under fire, Mr. Miller called the agency’s targeting of conservative groups “obnoxious,” but he told the House Ways and Means Committee it was not motivated by partisanship. And in testy exchanges, he said he had not misled Congress, even though he did not divulge the targeting efforts of a Cincinnati unit examining 70,000 applications for tax exemption.


He called the group’s centralization of applications from groups with names that included the words “Tea Party” or “patriots” simply “foolish mistakes” that “were made by people trying to be more efficient in their workload selection.”


The New Residence in Salzburg's Old Town, formerly also called Palazzo Nuovo, built by Prince-Archbishop Wolf Dietrich von Raitenau to the east of Salzburg Cathedral. The spiritual prince , who was then most in the entire Holy Roman Empire of German Nation, began with this first construction project in 1588 after the demolition of the local citizens and Domherrenhäuser .

Initially served as the first tracts of the New Residence houses of the brothers of the Prince-Archbishop . Perhaps this building was intended as a future permanent private property of the prince himself . In 1600, the Regent already moved despite the ongoing construction work his siblings in this house. As of the year 1600 two brothers of the Archbishop - probably after a previous internal family strife - leaving the city , also changed the intended use. Now the building for public purposes was supplied. It was probably intended as a representative hostel for foreign princes.

Today, the New Residence is home of the Salzburg Museum, Salzburg , the home depot is located there, it is also for the Salzburg Glockenspiel, a known historical percussion.

The proposed new residence place of Scamozzi

Originally from the east façade created around a courtyard with two lateral connecting arcades , another, planned by Vincenzo Scamozzi, two-story building (in the area of ​​today's Mozart Square ). The new residence, including the extension should complete the residence place as in the West. In the south of the proposed course should be in North-South direction ( !) of Scamozzi 's Cathedral are planned, which should be linked by an archway with both the new and the old residence. In the east, should logically be the old residence, in the north a building escape was probably planned. The place should be closed by a market building .

The facades of the New Residence

The facades of the new residence should obviously be similar to the architecture of the garden or the Dietrichsruh the main courtyard of the residence, mainly they are designed by pilasters . These vertical elements had the task to counteract the width of the tension arm overall building . The window should it be topped by changing pointed and segmented gable ; first part of the facade already had this shape. The exterior was completed in substantial parts but only under Markus Sittikus and Paris Lodron and now fell from much more sober : Simple, running under the windows, double straps replace the vertical design . The four corners of the building were decorated according to the desire of Wolf Dietrich with the arms of his grandparents : those of gender Medici, Hohenems, Raitenau and Sirgenstein .

The tower of the New Residence (since 1702 Carillon Tower )

The tower with carillon

The tower of New Residence was purposed by Wolf Dietrich von Raitenau and the building originally had 5 storeys. First it had a flat pyramidal roof with attached small drum dome. The tower was there provided just above the planned arcade in the Cathedral and the Old Residence. Through this transition was found that the tower was not built exactly in the middle of the facade .

In 1701, this tower of Archbishop Johann Ernst von Thun was placed an octagonal building with open arch arcades for the carillon , which is crowned by a dome roof. 1702 35 bells of Antwerp caster Melchior of Haze ( 1688-89 ) were then delivered together with playthings, the Salzburg court clockmaker Jeremias Sauter then put these items together. The three arches in front of the tower (northern yokes ) originate from the time of Johann Ernst von Thun, the continuation of these arcades to the south from the period around 1860.

The New Residence in history

The new residence was in the second half of the 17th Century used both as a farm building, on the other hand, as a building for the High Salzburg countryside . In one part of it housed the armory .

Instead of the former, fenced by a wall garden , let Max Gandolf of Kuenburg build today Kuenburg tract to another courtyard. In the first floor of the archiepiscopal court library was housed it out for a long time. The second floor was the Erbämtersaal (hereditary office hall) whose coffered ceiling has been preserved with its Arkantusrankenschnitzwerk (acanthus tendrils carving) from 1680. Archbishop Colloredo in 1786 let clear the armory in the new residence and largely rebuild the wing for administrative purposes.

After 1803, the new residence was used as Dikasteralgebäude and the Imperial and in the K. and K. Monarchy as an administrative building of the Hofkameralärars. Here the city and land rights, the mountain and Saline Directorate , the Fiscal Office, the Audit Office Books , the number Kameral Office and the State inspection of goods in 1824 were housed .

1850 Office space were created for the new Crown Land Salzburg here, which included a new assembly hall and facilities for the national court. In addition, post office and telegraph office were housed . After 1890, the New Residence formally received the status of a government building, nothing changed much during the First Republic. The rooms at the southeast corner , along with the former State Hall sala grande were destroyed in 1944 by a bomb attack, only the outer walls remained largely remained intact. After the war the building was cleared to the ground floor and rebuilt.

Later on, authorities were housed in the building. After 1990, the new museum concept of city of Salzburg was decided ( after several failed attempts ). In 2000, the space concept of the Salzburg Museum was ready and 2003 could begin the necessary construction work . According to the official statement of the New Residence finally opened the show with Viva! Mozart.

The resulting state rooms

On the second floor of the west wing , the state rooms , which are decorated with rich mirror vaults and colorful stucco , the Castello Elijah had it made in 1602 are (the following areas are continuously enumerated from north to south ) .

The Bishop Hall ( probably originally a small secret consistory ) has a brown wooden coffered ceiling with oval and three pass fields in the middle of a particularly rich coat of arms designed by Wolf Dietrich is. Earlier here were the portraits of all the archbishops full-length portraits from Markus Sittikus to Colloredo, of which the name of the hall is derived .

The virtues Hall ( originally probably the Studiolo) is a rectangular room with a coffered ceiling stucco, showing the allegorical figures. The three theological virtues thereby fill the center panels , while the four cardinal virtues are displayed in the side gusset panels. Noteworthy are also the portals from the time of Wolf Dietrich.

Glory Hall ( originally the Guardaroba ), which connects the west , has a square floor plan. Here can be found on the ceiling of the presentation of the halo with angel choirs playing music and cheering around the sign of God. The central image is surrounded by four rectangular fields with the representations of the Annunciation, the Visitation, the Adoration of the Child Jesus by the shepherds and the Presentation in the Temple .

The Ständesaal ( originally the great Secret Consistory, corner space to Mozart Square ) shows ancient representations of model self-sacrificing behavior : Horatius Cocles keeps the urgent to the Tiber bridge enemies , while the Romans demolish the bridge , Mucius Scaevola puts his hand in front of King Porsena into the fire, Marcus Curtius jumps into the flaming abyss ). Five surrounding medallions show busts .

To the south commander room (originally a bedroom) with the central crest of Wolf Dietrich on a gold mosaic ground is surrounded by four half-lenght portrait representations of Charlemagne, Godfrey of Bouillon, Charles V and Juan de Austria .

To the commander room again follows also the private bathroom. The room has an oval dome, with ceramic mosaic and stucco with four angels with palm branches . Noteworthy in the new residence next to the above mentioned areas is the rest of the magnificent coffered ceiling over the smaller sala seconda in the southwestern Ecksaal of Wolf-Dietrich- building.

by John Nolte 31 Jul 2012, 11:30 AM PDT


Well, this seems fair -- perfectly in line with Obama's socialist drive to spread the wealth.

After hundreds of innocent Mexicans died as a result of the Obama Administration flooding that country with thousands guns through the cynical and politically motivated Fast and Furious program, it's only fair for the White House to allow Mexican citizens to wreak havoc and misery here in America:


The Obama administration released illegal immigrants who went on to commit more crimes, including charges of 19 murders, 3 attempted murders and 142 sex crimes, the House Judiciary Committee said in a report Tuesday.


All told, the nearly 47,000 illegal immigrants the administration was notified of but declined to deport between 2008 and 2011 under its Secure Communities program had a recidivism rate of 16 percent, the committee said.


They were just part of the nearly 160,000 immigrants — most of them here legally — who were flagged by Secure Communities during the three year period but who were either not eligible to be deported or who the administration decided to release. Those immigrants went on to be charged in nearly 60,000 more crimes, according to the committee and the Congressional Research Service, which issued a report on the matter.


The findings stem from the Obama administration’s Secure Communities program, which was designed to identify immigrants who run afoul of the law and who the administration decides it wants to deport.


Equality, it's a beautiful thing.


By merely enforcing the immigration laws already on the books every single one of these crimes could've been prevented.


More blood on Obama's hands-- more blood the media will cover up because week seven of whining about Mitt Romney only releasing two years worth of tax returns is much bigger news than 60,000 preventable crimes, you know, if all you care about is reelecting Obama.





Napolitano: Terrorists Enter U.S. from Mexico ‘From Time to Time’

By Edwin Mora

July 30, 2012


( -- Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told Congress last week that terrorists intending to harm the American people enter the U.S. from Mexico “from time to time."


At a July 25 hearing of the House Homeland Security Committee, Rep. Ron Barber (D-Ariz.) asked Napolitano: “As you know, Madam Secretary, there have been anecdotal reports about material evidence of the presence of terrorists along our southern border. My question is, is there any credible evidence that these reports are accurate and that terrorists are, in fact, crossing our southern border with the intent to do harm to the American people?”


Napolitano answered: “With respect, there have been--and the Ababziar matter would be one I would refer to that's currently being adjudicated in the criminal courts--from time to time, and we are constantly working against different and evolving threats involving various terrorist groups and various ways they may seek to enter the country.”


“What I can tell you, however, is that that southern border--the U.S.-Mexico border--is heavily, heavily staffed at record amounts of manpower, materiel, infrastructure and the like, and we are constantly making sure we're doing all we can to make that border as safe as possible,” she said.


An August 2009 audit by the Government Accountability Office that focused on Customs and Border Protection (CBP) checkpoints said that in fiscal 2008 CBP reported “there were three individuals encountered by the Border Patrol at southwest border checkpoints who were identified as persons linked to terrorism.”


In April 2010, reported that FBI Director Robert Mueller told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, “In Detroit, Mahmoud Youssef Kourani was indicted in the Eastern District of Michigan on one count of conspiracy to provide material support to Hezbollah. … Kourani was already in custody for entering the country illegally through Mexico and was involved in fundraising activities on behalf of Hezbollah.”


Five years ago, in an August 2007 interview with the El Paso Times, then-Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell echoed what Napolitano told Congress last week about terrorist coming into the U.S. across the Mexican border.


“So, are terrorists coming across the Southwest border?” McConnell said in that interview. “Not in great numbers.”


“There are some cases?” asked the El Paso Times.


“There are some. And would they use it as a path, given it was available to them? In time they will,” said McConnell.


“If they're successful at it, then they'll probably repeat it,” asked the reporter.


“Sure,” said McConnell. “There were a significant number of Iraqis who came across last year. Smuggled across illegally.”


“Where was that?” asked the reporter.


“Across the Southwest border,” said McConnell.


Ahhh again many thanks to David Rostance for the classic photo on the left.......Just out of site is Belgravia Police Station opened 1993...Routemasters sadly stopped on this route in 2003 and in less than 2 weeks the Boris Bus will operate on this route...The National Audit Office is the building on the right but was Once Imperial Airways Empire Terminal as well as British Airways Victoria Air Terminal...1939...

Canon F1, FD 50mm 1:1,8

Forte 100 in Rodinal 1:50, 20ºC

9min, agitation 2x30"


Some time ago, the Bureau of Customs seized over P40.5M worth of ukay-ukay goods according to the news. As a misdeclared cargo during the shipment, initially they were thought to be fishing supplies but after further investigation, it came out to be bunches of used clothing.


This is not the first case that ukay-ukay goods are caught through any port in the Philippines. Most of them were turned over to typhoon and calamity victims after. When Tropical Storm “Sendong” hit Mindanao in 2012, the Bureau of Custom again donated 20M worth of smuggled used clothing.


Confessedly, Filipinos still could not understand why these imported items were tagged to be prohibited or illegal. Some find it reasonable to just let these goods enter the country since they are cheap and could benefit most of our poor people more.


But as a matter of fact, in the Philippine Law, Statutes and Codes, imported garments like ukay-ukay are prohibited and should be banned due to some reasons:


“REPUBLIC ACT NO. 4653 - an act to safeguard the health of the Filipino people and maintain the dignity of the nation by declaring it a national policy to prohibit the commercial importation of textile articles commonly known as used clothing and rags.”


In addition, Section 2, also states “... that used clothing and rags imported in violation of this Act shall be burned in the presence of a representative of the General Auditing Office, Department of Finance and of the Office of the President..."


If health—like getting some contagious diseases—is one of the major concerns why these used clothing is prohibited, then why the Bureau of Custom is donating all these as relief goods during the times of calamities like floods and typhoons?




It’s bad enough that the U.S. government is doling out a record amount of public assistance under President Obama, but now this; a new federal report reveals that it’s much worse than previously imagined because Uncle Sam is spending more than the medium national income to provide each impoverished household with welfare.


As crazy as this sounds, it’s all documented in a 15-page report released this month by the Congressional Research Service (CRS), which has a staff of about 900 lawyers, economists and scientists that conduct research and analysis for the United States Congress. In fiscal year 2011 the U.S. government doled out $1 trillion for welfare benefits, including $746 billion in federal funds and $254 in state matching funds. Either way, the cash comes from American taxpayers.


The astounding figure doesn’t even include Medicare and Social Security, only handouts like food stamps, cash welfare and medical insurance for the poor known as Medicaid. Here is a breakdown, according to the CRS; the government spent enough on welfare last year to cut a check for nearly $60,000 for each impoverished household it provided with benefits. If this isn’t insane, what is? The medium income in the U.S. is around $50,000! The official poverty line is an annual income of $23,021 for a family of four. Just do the math.


In 2011 about 16.8 million households qualified as living below the federal poverty level, which means that if the government’s welfare spending were equally divided between them, they would each get $59,523. That exceeds the pay of many hard-working Americans. The CRS also confirms that, under Obama, federal spending for low-income programs has skyrocketed.


Here are the figures; government spending for welfare ballooned 23%, from $563 million in 2008 to $692 million, in 2009. The administration attributes it to “recession-sensitive” programs such as Medicaid and food stamps. The reality is that the Obama Administration has been promoting food stamps like there’s no tomorrow, even offering states that sign up the most recipients cash bonuses. For example, Wisconsin got a $5 million performance bonus for its efficiency in adding food-stamp recipients to already bulging rolls.


A record number of people—46 million and growing—already get food stamps from the U.S. government and many don’t even qualify for the welfare benefit. Earlier this year a federal audit revealed that many who don’t qualify receive them under a special Obama Administration, “broad-based” eligibility program that disregards income and asset requirements.


The government’s food stamp program has gotten so out of control under President Obama that earlier this month a U.S. senator, who sits on the Senate Budget Committee, called for end to the madness, especially the administration’s aggressive promotion campaigns to recruit even more recipients. The lawmaker also questioned the U.S. government’s partnership with Mexican consulates to encourage foreign nationals, migrant workers and non-citizen immigrants to apply for food stamps and other welfare benefits.





A record 5.4 million workers and their dependents have signed up to collect federal disability checks since President Obama took office, according to the latest official government data, as discouraged workers increasingly give up looking for jobs and take advantage of the federal program.


This is straining already-stretched government finances while posing a long-term economic threat by creating an ever-growing pool of permanently dependent working-age Americans.


Since the recession ended in June 2009, the number of new enrollees to Social Security's disability insurance program is twice the job growth figure. (See nearby chart.) In just the first four months of this year, 539,000 joined the disability rolls and more than 725,000 put in applications.


As a result, by April there were a total of 10.8 million people on disability, according to Social Security Administration data released this week. Even after accounting for all those who've left the program — about 700,000 drop out each year, mainly because they hit retirement age or died — that's up 53% from a decade ago.


To be sure, disability rolls have grown steadily as a share of the workforce since the 1990s (see nearby chart).


The main causes of this broader trend, according to a study by economists David Autor and Mark Duggan, are the loosening of eligibility rules by Congress in 1984, the rise in disability benefits relative to wages, and the fact that more women have entered the workforce, making them eligible for disability.


Their research found that the aging of the population has contributed only modestly to the program's growth.


But the big factor in the recent surge is the slow pace of the economic recovery after the severe recession. That has kept the unemployment rate above 8% and created an enormous pool of long-term unemployed and discouraged workers. More than 5 million people have been jobless for 27 weeks or more, nearly twice the previous high set in 1983, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.


"We see a lot of people applying for disability once their unemployment insurance expires," said Matthew Rutledge, a research economist at Boston College's Center for Retirement Research.


The number of applications last year was up 24% compared with 2008, Social Security Administration data show.


As the Congressional Budget Office explained : "When opportunities for employment are plentiful, some people who could quality for (disability insurance) benefits find working more attractive ... when employment opportunities are scarce, some of these people participate in the DI program instead."


The explosive growth in disability enrollment also "helps explain some of the drop in the labor force participation rate," noted economist Ed Yardeni on his blog.


In fact, the participation rate — the share of working-age people who have or are looking for a job — has fallen to 63.8% compared with 65.7% at the start of Obama's term.


Ironically, this drives down the unemployment rate, which simply measures how many people are looking for work but haven't been able to find it. When people quit looking or sign up for disability benefits, they no longer count as unemployed.


The problem is that few people who get on disability will ever participate in the labor force again. In fact, the vast bulk of those who exit Social Security Disability Insurance do so either because they hit retirement age or died.


As a result, the swelling ranks of the disabled can become a drag on the economy.


A White House report late last year noted that because "workers on SSDI rarely return to the labor force," this can result "in a loss to society of the economic contribution those workers could have made."


What's more, the explosive growth in enrollment is not only increasing the financial strain on the Social Security Disability Insurance trust fund — which is scheduled to go bankrupt in 2018 — it's boosting costs for Medicare as well, since SSDI enrollees can qualify for Medicare after two years. SSDI now accounts for more than 16% of Social Security's budget and more than 15% of Medicare's.


Reform ideas that would cut the ranks of those on disability have been bandied about for years. They include tightening eligibility rules, giving workers more options other than full-time disability and offering tax incentives for disabled workers to stay in the workforce.


The reforms so far have spurred little action. But with the program's bankruptcy looming just a few years off, and with the economy showing no signs of producing a surge in jobs, that indifference to reform may soon have to change


Read More At Investor's Business Daily:

Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook




Food stamp enrollment has climbed by nearly 10 million individuals since October 2009 — but the unemployment rate declined 2 percentage points from its peak level over that time,” the Republican Budget Committee staff explained in a statement.


They added that the reason for the increase is that the United States Department of Agriculture has “actively sought to increase the share of the eligible population receiving the benefit” via intense recruitment and promotion.


“The agency even produced a document teaching recruitment workers how to “overcome the word ‘No,’” the Republican staff noted. “Recruitment brochures boast that every $5 dollars in food stamps spending generates almost twice that amount in local economic benefit and that communities ‘lose out’ when eligible people do not enroll. USDA even cites ‘a sense that benefits are not needed’ as a recruitment barrier to overcome.”


Read more:



Spring of 1999. Proto-mrwaterslide, mrwaterslide the prequel, is riding high. He's the #2 man in a medium-sized hotel kitchen, making decent money. His chef likes him, thinks his cooking skills are decent, though sometimes his management style features a mallet when it should employ a gloved-hand, and a scapel.

One day, chef says, "Let's go for a ride." This is highly unusual.

They drive around town in the chef's car, and the chef informs not-yet-mrwaterslide that he is quitting; he's moving back to Kansas City, taking an executive position with a different company, and doubling his salary. "If you play your cards right," chef says, "you've got a chance to get my job."

Truth be told, NYM holds a less than stellar hand, and his execution is clumsy, at best. Among other transgressions, he burns (well, his minions burn) the beef for the Missouri Beef Council. Soon enough, the new chef is introduced. She is not the not-mrwaterslide.




The new chef is a Jewish lesbian dwarf. Actually, there's not a thing wrong with that. The old chef was Jewish too. In fact, mrwaterslide helped out at the old chef's daughter's bat mitzvah. And wasn't Greta Garbo a southpaw? If it's good enough for Greta Garbo, it's good enough for anybody. And the heighth disadvantaged deal---that short-statured guy in "Twin Peaks" was creepy, but he was creepy cool, you know what I mean? She does have a New Jersey accent, and that grates.

No, none of that is the problem with the new chef. The problem is, she hates men in general, and seems to hate not-mrwaterslide in particular. She does like knee-sallying, floor-licking, butt-scuffing, ass-kissing total-toadying men, and most especially she likes knee-sallying, floor-licking, butt-scuffing, ass-kissing total-toadying Jethro (we'll call him), the other sous chef. "We like our chicken cooked a little more than that," she'll say, directing a comment at mrwaterslide-not-even-thought-of. "Yeah," Jethro chimes in,

"we like our chicken cooked a little more than that."




Summer of 1999. It's time for NYM's semi-annual performance review. He gets a phone call from a corporate insider. "You're going to get your performance review," this person tells him. "It's going to be bad. Really bad. You need to just suck it up and take it."

The review takes place in the office of the Food and Beverage Manager. He's sitting at his desk, the new chef is there, and not-yet-mrwaterslide. The Food and Beverage Manager likes not-yet-mrwaterslide, but says little while the review unfolds.

How bad is it? There is a sliding scale from 1 to 5, 1 being the worst, 5 being the best. One score on the review concerns the hotel audit. The hotel received a !00% score on the audit. Not-yet-mrwaterslide gets a 3 for that slot.

That's the best score he gets. Everything else is a 1 or a 2.

Overall, he gets a "Needs Improvement." He has ninety days to turn things around. "You need to try to have a more positive outlook," the New Chef says.

They all stand up. The review is over. "You might want to think about finding yourself a new career," the New Chef says.




The Man Who Would Be mrwaterslide has a vacation scheduled. TMWWBm could be gone a month; the New Chef wouldn't miss him. She can't really fire him---the Food & Beverage manager won't let her. But she has no use for him. So off he goes. He's been planning this trip for months. He's going to go to Iowa, a state he may have driven through, but has never really explored. And of course, the point of the trip will be to buy photographs, to feed his new, obsessive hobby.

He drives up through central Missouri, stopping here and there. At one antique store, he buys a life-sized crayon (actually, a typical life-size crayon is about three-quarters life-size), but this one is on glass. It must be rare, as this is the only one he's ever seen. (Later, when he gets back from his trip and unpacks, NYm discovers that what he thought was one life-size crazyon on glass is actully two, vacuum-sealed together.)

So he motors up through central Missouri and into Iowa, does NYm, not really having any set itinerary other than his hotel reservations of an evening. On the map, he sees a little town on the Des Moines River, in southern Iowa, called Bentonsport.

It's listed as a National Historic District---must be some antique stores there..

And so, in Bentonsport, Iowa, at the Greef General Store (thank God for the Internet),

NYm wanders into a back room, and finds a little card file thing full of photos, and there's this photo, this wonderful photo, an instantaneous fireworks over the Statue Of Liberty, Hallelujah moment. It's on this distinctive white card stock (used by amateur photographers, someone has told us, though this info is unverified). There were other photos in the card file of the same size, on the same stock, but at ten dollars each, none called out. One that we remember was of a monument at Gettysburg.

On the back of this photo, it says, "going down shooting chutes at Independence Island, Harrisburg, Pa. (1)" Independence Island was an amusement park in the Susquehanna River at Harrisburg. It's now defunct.

What can I tell you, folks? It's just a perfect photo. Yes, it has a spot of foxing. Who cares? It's life. It's all of life, wrapped up into one single photo. I know you can see it.

Volvo B10M-62 - Van Hool Alizee C49FT .


New to this operator in April-1998 .


This shot is more difficult now on a sunny day , as we press towards Autumn . The shadow from the old BOAC Terminal ( now the National Audit Office ) is casting a longer shadow across this junction , unfortunately . Making the side dark compared to the front .

Digital Capital and Cloud Computing's Asymmetric Risks: In the 21st century, what is the most valuable capital we have, beyond our prized human relationships? We are conditioned to believe that the most valuable capital is financial in nature or manifest as physical assets with monetary value. Witness the somewhat irrational rush for gold assets in recent years or a frenzied craze for owning multiple residential and commercial properties across the world! The truth is that as we have been evolving rapidly as a global civilisation, the most valuable capital we possess right now is increasingly non physical. Digital Capital's value per gram can be infinite because it is weightless! The more creative the Digital Capital, the more infinitely valuable it becomes!


This Digital Capital adds value when it is innovative, dynamic and flowing. When we buy most new products, services and solutions -- tangible or intangible -- what we are paying for in terms of utility, design and functionality, is primarily a manifestation of Digital Capital -- a type of concentrated human intellectual creativity -- and not financial capital. Although, finance may have had some part to play in its creation as catalyst. Such is the power, reach and richness of Digital Capital, that most of the time old-fashioned finance and money also manifest as Digital Capital. All our bank accounts, no longer have physical ledgers beneath them, they simply exist by virtue of a digital data entry against our name. The same with most bonds, shares and other financial instruments.


The chief characteristic of Digital Capital is that it is useful, and adds value, if it is capable of being in motion. If any Digital Capital goes into hibernation, remains dormant, stagnant or cannot be accessed, it diminishes in value and tends towards zero value very fast. Live Digital Capital is much more prized than dormant, corrupted or dead Digital Capital, just like human beings. If Digital Capital falls into the wrong hands, it can appear as if humans have been kidnapped and are being held to ransom! Digital Capital is not the same as money, gold or other physical assets falling into the wrong hands, which are all replaceable. Digital Capital carries unique attributes and qualities that render human-like personality to it and this makes Digital Capital fundamentally irreplaceable.


If we look back a few years -- any time one wanted to type a letter, create a spreadsheet, edit a photo, or play a game, one had to go to the computer vendor, buy the software, and install it on one's computer, which was either standalone or part of an internal network. Nowadays, if one wants to look up restaurants on a search engine; find directions to a location; listen to music; watch a video; or sell product; all one needs is a computer with an Internet connection. Although these activities just require a computer, none of the content one is accessing or the applications one is running are actually stored on that local device -- instead they are stored at a giant data centre somewhere in the 'Computing Cloud'. And we don't give any of it a second thought! Just like we do not think twice about where the electricity is coming from when we plug an appliance into the wall. However, does the comparison between Digital Capital and electricity hold up to close scrutiny? No, not at all!


There is no question: the Personal Computer is giving way to a new era, the Utility Computing Age. However, it is naive to assume that Cloud Computing is like an electricity or gas utility. It is much more complex and risk prone because the outsourcing of sensitive Digital Capital is involved. Each electron or gas molecule is similar in utility to the next one, but this is not true for every byte of Digital Capital at all. Each Digital Capital byte may have unique characteristics. Digital Capital is the life blood of almost all organisations in the 21st century and is the crucial carrier of creativity, intellectual property, risk transfer as well as trust between parties. Contrary to popular myth, propagated in the context of cutting costs drastically, the reliability, availability, scalability and maintainability of Cloud Computing infrastructure and applications is still far from perfect. This leaves gaping holes, asymmetric threats and security risks in the areas of confidentiality, integrity, authentication and non-repudiation of outsourced Digital Capital storage, exchange and its transactions. Unless there is a code of conduct for handling Digital Capital by Cloud Computing vendors similar to bankers taking money deposits with independent regulatory oversight, we are setting ourselves up for huge national and corporate vulnerability in the 21st century. The strength of our organisations, manifest as brand value, is compromised by the weakest link. What if that weak link handles our Digital Capital and operates outside the control of our organisation and jurisdiction?


Cloud Computing is fraught with asymmetric security risks, which can cause havoc when manifest. A brand name built up over a century or more may lose credibility within a day. Why? Because the personal data of a million customer profiles with names, addresses, family member details, purchasing habits, has fallen into the wrong hands. Sound familiar? Digital Capital has unique and, in some cases, unquantifiable risk attributes. Hence, Cloud Computing requires risk assessment in critical areas such as data integrity, recovery, and privacy including identity management; and an evaluation of legal issues in areas such as electronic discovery, regulatory compliance and auditing.


Recently, the Chief Information Officer, of a major transnational group decided not to rely entirely on business software from a long-established software vendor and IT integrator that would have let their group own the technology. Instead, the CIO rented these indispensable digital products from a Search Engine vendor via an unconventional approach called 'Cloud Computing'. The incentive to do so was clear: cut costs drastically given the global economic downturn. After lengthy internal testing, the CIO became convinced that the Search Engine vendor could be trusted to provide critical software programs. However, the CIO wrote an internal memo to the CEO -- at the request of the compliance department -- that should the data fall into the wrong hands, the inherent risk of Cloud Computing will boomerang swiftly on the share price of the listed company amongst other unintended consequences! When we label the CIO as Chief Information Officer, we have put him in charge of Information and associated technology in our mind, which we treat as similar to the handling of electricity, gas, telecom or other utilities. However, when we recognise that the CIO is actually handling the crown jewels of our enterprise, then we may be minded to call him CDC or Chief of Digital Capital!


Cloud Computing is picking up significant traction, but before organisations jump on to the Cloud Computing bandwagon, they should consider the unique security risks this entails for their Digital Capital. The Cloud Computing wave is the most dramatic and critical change the mi2g Intelligence Unit's (mIU) Bespoke Security Architecture (BSA) team and the ATCA Research and Analysis Wing (A-RAW) have observed in the global business landscape since the original wave of the world wide web via the Internet in the mid-1990s. The original wave was about information dissemination, exchange and cyber transactions. However, Cloud Computing is going much further and significantly changing global business models by causing Digital Capital to be stored outside. In fact, the Cloud Computing wave is not just a wave, it has been compared to a Tsunami. What is causing this Cloud Computing Tsunami to unleash at such an accelerated pace despite the inherent asymmetric risks to an organisation's survival? Ask yourself this, what happens as in 2010 and beyond, organisations desperate to cut costs drastically:


. Forgo capital expenditures and instead purchase almost half of their IT infrastructure as an outsourced service; and

. Carry out at least half of the application software spending as a service subscription at a much reduced cost, instead of as a product license.


Thanks to the thousands of miles of fibre-optic cable laid down during the late 1990s, the speed of computer networks has finally caught up with the speed of computer processors. What the fibre-optic Internet does for computing is exactly what the Alternating-Current (AC) network did for electricity. Suddenly, computers that were once incompatible and isolated are now linked in a grid-like giant network or 'Cloud'. As a result, computing is fast becoming a utility in much the same way that the electricity grid did at the start of the last century. Rendered obsolete, the traditional Personal Computer is replaced by a simple terminal -- a 'Thin Client' that is little more than a monitor hooked up to the Internet. While that may sound far-fetched, in the corporate market, sales of these 'Thin Clients' have been growing at over 20% per year -- far outpacing that of conventional PCs. The simple truth is that Cloud Computing is becoming as big a part of our daily lives as much as mobile telephony and satellite navigation, albeit with unintended consequences for all forms of Digital Capital, identity management, corporate resilience, stakeholders' safety and security hazard.


In 2010, many ATCA decision makers expect Cloud Computing to become much more attractive and loom ever larger on their board-of-directors' horizon. In contrast with software which requires installing programs on disparate computers, Cloud Computing lets organisations have someone else run their software remotely for a monthly or annual fee, with users accessing the programs over live Internet connections. Cloud Computing isn't just a modern convenience -- it is becoming an enormous industry. This technology is cutting billions in costs whilst showering billions in revenues on companies that purvey it. The question is: who are the winners and who are the losers? New players and the incumbents or other unknown actors? Everyone from individuals to government agencies and multinational corporations can now simply tap into the 'Cloud' to get all the things they used to have to supply and maintain themselves. As computing moves online, the sources of power and money are increasingly manifest as enormous Computing Clouds of Digital Capital! Who is going to secure them?




We welcome your thoughts, observations and views. To reflect further on this, please respond within Twitter, Linked and Facebook's ATCA Open and related Socratic dialogue platform of HQR.


All the best


DK Matai


Chairman and Founder:, ATCA, The Philanthropia, HQR, @G140


To connect directly with:


. DK Matai:


. Open HQR:


. ATCA Open:


. @G140:


. mi2g:


- ATCA, The Philanthropia, mi2g, HQR, @G140 --


This is an "ATCA Open, Philanthropia and HQR Socratic Dialogue."


The "ATCA Open" network on LinkedIn and Facebook is for professionals interested in ATCA's original global aims, working with ATCA step-by-step across the world, or developing tools supporting ATCA's objectives to build a better world.


The original ATCA -- Asymmetric Threats Contingency Alliance -- is a philanthropic expert initiative founded in 2001 to resolve complex global challenges through collective Socratic dialogue and joint executive action to build a wisdom based global economy. Adhering to the doctrine of non-violence, ATCA addresses asymmetric threats and social opportunities arising from climate chaos and the environment; radical poverty and microfinance; geo-politics and energy; organised crime & extremism; advanced technologies -- bio, info, nano, robo & AI; demographic skews and resource shortages; pandemics; financial systems and systemic risk; as well as transhumanism and ethics. Present membership of the original ATCA network is by invitation only and has over 5,000 distinguished members from over 120 countries: including 1,000 Parliamentarians; 1,500 Chairmen and CEOs of corporations; 1,000 Heads of NGOs; 750 Directors at Academic Centres of Excellence; 500 Inventors and Original thinkers; as well as 250 Editors-in-Chief of major media.


The Philanthropia, founded in 2005, brings together over 1,000 leading individual and private philanthropists, family offices, foundations, private banks, non-governmental organisations and specialist advisors to address complex global challenges such as countering climate chaos, reducing radical poverty and developing global leadership for the younger generation through the appliance of science and technology, leveraging acumen and finance, as well as encouraging collaboration with a strong commitment to ethics. Philanthropia emphasises multi-faith spiritual values: introspection, healthy living and ecology. Philanthropia Targets: Countering climate chaos and carbon neutrality; Eliminating radical poverty -- through micro-credit schemes, empowerment of women and more responsible capitalism; Leadership for the Younger Generation; and Corporate and social responsibility.


The "E8 Album" photos are visual intersections of Spirituality, Science, Art and Sustainability!


The Holistic Quantum Relativity (HQR) Group is on:


Car Company Gets U.S. Loan, Builds Cars In Finland


With the approval of the Obama administration, an electric car company that received a $529 million federal government loan guarantee is assembling its first line of cars in Finland, saying it could not find a facility in the United States capable of doing the work.


Vice President Joseph Biden heralded the Energy Department's $529 million loan to the start-up electric car company called Fisker as a bright new path to thousands of American manufacturing jobs. But two years after the loan was announced, the job of assembling the flashy electric Fisker Karma sports car has been outsourced to Finland.


"There was no contract manufacturer in the U.S. that could actually produce our vehicle," the car company's founder and namesake told ABC News. "They don't exist here."


Henrik Fisker said the U.S. money so far has been spent on engineering and design work that stayed in the U.S., not on the 500 manufacturing jobs that went to a rural Finnish firm, Valmet Automotive.


"We're not in the business of failing; we're in the business of winning. So we make the right decision for the business," Fisker said. "That's why we went to Finland."


The loan to Fisker is part of a $1 billion bet the Energy Department has made in two politically connected California-based electric carmakers producing sporty -- and pricey -- cutting-edge autos. Fisker Automotive, backed by a powerhouse venture capital firm whose partners include former Vice President Al Gore, predicts it will eventually be churning out tens of thousands of electric sports sedans at the shuttered GM factory it bought in Delaware. And Tesla Motors, whose prime backers include PayPal mogul Elon Musk and Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, says it will do the same in a massive facility tooling up in Silicon Valley.


An investigation by ABC News and the Center for Public Integrity's iWatch News that will air on "Good Morning America" found that the DOE's bet carries risks for taxpayers, has raised concern among industry observers and government auditors, and adds to questions about the way billions of dollars in loans for smart cars and green energy companies have been awarded. Fisker is more than a year behind rolling out its $97,000 luxury vehicle bankrolled in part with DOE money. While more are promised soon, just 40 of its Karma cars (below) have been manufactured and only two delivered to customers' driveways, including one to movie star Leonardo DiCaprio. Tesla's SEC filings reveal the start-up has lost money every quarter. And while its federal funding is intended to help it mass produce a new $57,400 Model S sedan, the company has no experience in a project so vast.


There is intense scrutiny of the decisions made by the Department of Energy as it invests billions of taxpayer dollars in alternative energy. The questions come in the wake of the administration's failed $535 million investment in solar panel maker Solyndra. The company's collapse, bankruptcy and raid by FBI agents generated a litany of questions about how the Energy Department doles out billions in highly sought after green energy seed money.


A key question, experts and investigators say, is whether another Solyndra is in the offing.


In interviews, executives with Tesla and Fisker said comparisons to Solyndra are unfounded. Each said the government's investments will ultimately pay off by supporting a fleet of electric cars that will ease the nation's dependence on fuel and benefit the environment.


"It's absolutely a worthwhile risk," said Diarmuid O'Connell, vice president of corporate and business development for Tesla Motors. "I absolutely believe it was a good bet for American taxpayers." Tesla has said its mass production of the sedan will ultimately lead to profitability.


Henrik Fisker, the renowned auto designer who founded the car company that carries his name, said his company holds tremendous promise and has accumulated $600 million in private financing.


When asked directly by ABC News if taxpayers should worry about the more than $500 million in federal funds on the line, he was emphatic: "No, I don't think they need to worry about it," Fisker said. When asked if Fisker might be the next Solyndra, he said, "Absolutely not."


In a lengthy interview, Fisker said he apprised the Department of Energy of his decision to assemble the high-priced Karma in Finland after he could not find an American facility that could handle the work. They signed off, he said, so long as he did not spend the federal loan money in Finland -- something he says the company has taken care to avoid. He said the decision, ultimately, was to help prevent his company from following the path of Solyndra, which exhausted nearly all of its loan money on a high-tech solar manufacturing plant in Freemont, California.


"If you just start doing like what Solyndra did, making a factory in a place where it was too expensive to manufacture … [you] obviously fail," he said.


By some key measures, Tesla is ahead of Fisker. More than 2,000 of its first electric car, the Tesla Roadster, are on the road, while Fisker is just starting to get its first car into showrooms. And Tesla is further along in advancing a second, lower-cost car, the Model S. While both firms boast of big dollar private investments, Tesla's vulnerabilities are more publicly visible through its SEC filings, in contrast to the privately held Fisker.


Chelsea Sexton, a 20-year veteran of the electric car movement and an outspoken advocate for alternative fuel vehicles, said she can plainly see the risks, even though her husband works for Tesla.


"None of us with any experience in the industry think there's any sort of guarantee they'll make it," Sexton said of Tesla. "It looks pretty good right now, they're building out their plant, things seem to be on track, so we're all encouraged. But you know, we watched GM and Chrysler go bankrupt."


Energy Department officials said such loans, by their nature, are risky because the department is financing innovative, potentially game-changing technologies that could deliver long-term benefits. They said neither firm has missed a loan payment, or sought help from the department to restructure their lending agreements.

"Two years ago, critics said we shouldn't be investing in American auto manufacturing at all because the industry wouldn't survive," said Damien LaVera, an Energy Department spokesman. "They were wrong then and they're wrong today. From well-established names like Ford to innovative startups like Tesla and Fisker, America's auto industry is being reinvented. Continuing this turnaround demands more innovation, not defeatism. While supporting innovative technologies always carries a degree of risk, these investments deliver long-term benefits."


Yet an audit this year by the Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress, criticized the Energy Department for not keeping close enough tabs on its fleet of auto loans -- including those to Fisker and Tesla -- to ensure they meet benchmarks. The funding was issued under the $25 billion Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing loan program, one piece of a giant umbrella of DOE loans and loan guarantees going out the door.


"DOE cannot be assured that the projects are on track to deliver the vehicles as agreed," said the GAO report examining the department's ATVM program. "It also means that U.S. taxpayers do not know whether they are getting what they paid for through the loans."


Tesla and Fisker stand in rare company in securing the ATVM loans. To date, records show, more than 95 percent of applicants are still awaiting approval or have been rejected from the loan pool.


Between them, Fisker, at $529 million, and Tesla, at $465 million, have secured nearly $1 billion to jump-start production of their cars. Combined, the companies have already drawn down more than $300 million, Federal Financing Bank records show.


Industry watchers question whether the Department of Energy had the auto industry know-how to make an informed choice, and they worry that another government-backed failure could damage the very industry the program intended to help.


"I think we'll absolutely end up having our version of Solyndra in the transport world based on the way the DOE has, and seems to still be executing its loan program without enough veteran diligence in the process," Sexton said.


The majority of the DOE funding for Fisker is earmarked for the company to develop a less costly, mass market sedan, called Project Nina. Energy officials issued the loans for a car that, even two years later, has not been publicly revealed.


"A half billion dollars for a car that no one has seen a picture of, in the Fisker Nina, was a bit more surprising to people," Sexton said.


Fisker said the mass market car Nina has been designed and built, but it remains under wraps to maintain a competitive edge.


Heavyweight Support

Standing in a shuttered General Motors plant in Wilmington, Del., Vice President Biden proclaimed that a half-billion-dollar Department of Energy loan would transform the idled site into a production line for electric cars.


"Folks, we're making a bet," Biden said on Oct. 27, 2009. "We're making a bet on the future, we're making a bet on the American people, we're making a bet on the market, we're making a bet on innovation."


The announcement that the plant would re-open followed a heavy lobbying push by Delaware politicians from both parties, who cited the news as a sign of industry's turnaround. In September 2009, Republican Rep. Mike Castle wrote directly to Energy Secretary Steven Chu, saying the Fisker proposal had "great merit," and urging Chu to give the company "careful consideration" for the loan.


The governor and state politicians took turns, along with Biden, to proclaim the project to cheering blue-collar workers clad in jeans, caps and jackets. They said it would produce thousands of jobs and have cars rolling off the line by next year. Fisker said he remains convinced those jobs will come. While he has hired marketing, design and engineering teams in the U.S., the auto plant jobs in Wilmington right now number about 100.


The Department of Energy loan to Fisker closed in April 2010, and again Biden took center stage in a department statement announcing the loan. "The story of Fisker is a story of ingenuity of an American company, a commitment to innovation by the U.S. government and the perseverance of the American auto industry," said the vice president.


ABC News sent questions to the White House Monday and requested an interview with the vice president. Biden was not made available, but an official in his office said "the Office of the Vice President did not encourage the Department of Energy to choose any particular company over any other but, like others in the Administration, supported the Department's loan program and the creation of car manufacturing jobs in the United States."


Energy Department officials have been steadfast that politics never entered the picture and each project was screened by professionals and secured on the merits. And executives from Tesla and Fisker said they won government support because their projects had the best shot at success. They said the involvement of well-connected figures in their companies should not suggest they attempted to use special influence to secure the loans.


Both companies have political heavyweights behind them. One of Fisker's biggest financial supporters, records show, is the California venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers. The firm financially supports numerous green-tech firms, records show.


Kleiner Perkins partner John Doerr, a California billionaire who made a fortune investing in Google, hosted President Obama at a February dinner for high-tech executives at his secluded estate south of San Francisco. Doerr and Kleiner Perkins executives have contributed more than $1 million to federal political causes and campaigns over the last two decades, primarily supporting Democrats. Doerr serves on Obama's Council on Jobs and Competitiveness. Doerr has not replied to interview requests since March.


Former Vice President Al Gore is another Kleiner Perkins senior partner. Gore could not be reached for comment.


"Their major venture investor is Kleiner Perkins, who has Al Gore as a partner and is certainly politically connected in general," said industry observer Sexton. "Whether that played a role or not is up to the DOE to explain."


Tesla brings political pull, as well. A former Tesla board member, Steve Westly, is an Obama bundler who raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for the president in 2008 and for his 2012 re-election campaign. His Westly Group was also a financial supporter of Tesla Motors until Tesla went public in 2010, and Westly continues to back the company. Westly has declined interview requests since February, but has appeared in multiple conferences, forums and TV interviews publicly praising Tesla Motors.


Tesla's founder and CEO, Elon Musk, is a hearty political contributor who has primarily backed Democrats, including Obama. According to published reports, another Tesla investor is Nick Pritzker, a donor to Obama and a cousin of Penny Pritzker, the national finance chair of Obama's 2008 campaign.


O'Connell, the Tesla executive, said political muscle played no role in the company's award of the $465 million in loans, noting that the initial application was filed under Bush -- though landed under Obama.


'Demonstrated Track Record'

In Tesla's case, as in Fisker's, the government loan was broken into two parts.


The first chunk, for $365 million, is to finance a manufacturing facility for the Tesla Model S sedan, Tesla's lower-cost answer to its pricey Roadster.


The other $100 million funded a facility to manufacture battery packs and electric drive trains used by Teslas and other automakers, including the Smart For Two city car by Daimler. Tesla points to such partnerships - along with investments from Toyota and Panasonic - as signs that long established companies believe in its cars.


"We have a demonstrated track record on the financial side," O'Connell said, "that should give great comfort to the American taxpayer, as they think about a loan that's helped us to accelerate our business model."


Unlike Fisker, Tesla is a public company. Its SEC filings offer a more sober assessment of the obstacles it faces on the road to profitability.


Tesla has yet to turn a profit and suffered net losses in each quarter. "Since inception and through the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, we had accumulated net losses of $522.8 million," its most recent 10-K form shows.


It has no experience in high-volume manufacturing of electric cars, its filings say -- the very project it sees as the road toward profitability. Tesla said it encountered "significant delays" in launching the Roadster - and acknowledges that developing the Model S will be a more complex undertaking. The newer car is the project financed by DOE.


"We have no experience to date in high volume manufacturing of our electric vehicles," Tesla's SEC filings say. "Our future business depends in large part on our ability to execute on our plans to develop, manufacture, market and sell our planned Model S electric vehicle."


The Roadster was produced in small quantities with the body assembled by Lotus in the United Kingdom and final assembly by the company at its facility in Menlo Park, Calif. The Model S, by contrast, will have much greater volume and be manufactured in Fremont, Calif. The company said production will begin next year.


Industry observers say Tesla's grand plan to launch the Model S is fraught with challenges.


"They want to scale up production from 1,000 cars a year to 20,000 cars a year, [and] that's going to be a very hard trick for them to do," said Alex Taylor, a veteran auto industry analyst and writer. "They want to make most of their own parts; Detroit can't do that because it's too inefficient. And Tesla wants to own its own dealerships. Henry Ford tried that back in the 1920s and gave it up because it was too difficult."


Solyndra Execs Stonewall Congress Watch Video

Solyndra: A Loan to Nowhere Watch Video

WH Dodges Energy Company Questions Watch Video

O'Connell said the SEC filings present worst case scenarios. He said the company, and its major investors, believe the risk will reap rewards.


"It is a risky venture in the best heritage of some of the other great companies that have grown up in the Silicon Valley," he said. "This is a place where people propose ideas, finance those ideas, achieve milestones, attract a greater finance, and succeed along the way."


The New Residence in Salzburg's Old Town, formerly also called Palazzo Nuovo, built by Prince-Archbishop Wolf Dietrich von Raitenau to the east of Salzburg Cathedral. The spiritual prince , who was then most in the entire Holy Roman Empire of German Nation, began with this first construction project in 1588 after the demolition of the local citizens and Domherrenhäuser .

Initially served as the first tracts of the New Residence houses of the brothers of the Prince-Archbishop . Perhaps this building was intended as a future permanent private property of the prince himself . In 1600, the Regent already moved despite the ongoing construction work his siblings in this house. As of the year 1600 two brothers of the Archbishop - probably after a previous internal family strife - leaving the city , also changed the intended use. Now the building for public purposes was supplied. It was probably intended as a representative hostel for foreign princes.

Today, the New Residence is home of the Salzburg Museum, Salzburg , the home depot is located there, it is also for the Salzburg Glockenspiel, a known historical percussion.

The proposed new residence place of Scamozzi

Originally from the east façade created around a courtyard with two lateral connecting arcades , another, planned by Vincenzo Scamozzi, two-story building (in the area of ​​today's Mozart Square ). The new residence, including the extension should complete the residence place as in the West. In the south of the proposed course should be in North-South direction ( !) of Scamozzi 's Cathedral are planned, which should be linked by an archway with both the new and the old residence. In the east, should logically be the old residence, in the north a building escape was probably planned. The place should be closed by a market building .

The facades of the New Residence

The facades of the new residence should obviously be similar to the architecture of the garden or the Dietrichsruh the main courtyard of the residence, mainly they are designed by pilasters . These vertical elements had the task to counteract the width of the tension arm overall building . The window should it be topped by changing pointed and segmented gable ; first part of the facade already had this shape. The exterior was completed in substantial parts but only under Markus Sittikus and Paris Lodron and now fell from much more sober : Simple, running under the windows, double straps replace the vertical design . The four corners of the building were decorated according to the desire of Wolf Dietrich with the arms of his grandparents : those of gender Medici, Hohenems, Raitenau and Sirgenstein .

The tower of the New Residence (since 1702 Carillon Tower )

The tower with carillon

The tower of New Residence was purposed by Wolf Dietrich von Raitenau and the building originally had 5 storeys. First it had a flat pyramidal roof with attached small drum dome. The tower was there provided just above the planned arcade in the Cathedral and the Old Residence. Through this transition was found that the tower was not built exactly in the middle of the facade .

In 1701, this tower of Archbishop Johann Ernst von Thun was placed an octagonal building with open arch arcades for the carillon , which is crowned by a dome roof. 1702 35 bells of Antwerp caster Melchior of Haze ( 1688-89 ) were then delivered together with playthings, the Salzburg court clockmaker Jeremias Sauter then put these items together. The three arches in front of the tower (northern yokes ) originate from the time of Johann Ernst von Thun, the continuation of these arcades to the south from the period around 1860.

The New Residence in history

The new residence was in the second half of the 17th Century used both as a farm building, on the other hand, as a building for the High Salzburg countryside . In one part of it housed the armory .

Instead of the former, fenced by a wall garden , let Max Gandolf of Kuenburg build today Kuenburg tract to another courtyard. In the first floor of the archiepiscopal court library was housed it out for a long time. The second floor was the Erbämtersaal (hereditary office hall) whose coffered ceiling has been preserved with its Arkantusrankenschnitzwerk (acanthus tendrils carving) from 1680. Archbishop Colloredo in 1786 let clear the armory in the new residence and largely rebuild the wing for administrative purposes.

After 1803, the new residence was used as Dikasteralgebäude and the Imperial and in the K. and K. Monarchy as an administrative building of the Hofkameralärars. Here the city and land rights, the mountain and Saline Directorate , the Fiscal Office, the Audit Office Books , the number Kameral Office and the State inspection of goods in 1824 were housed .

1850 Office space were created for the new Crown Land Salzburg here, which included a new assembly hall and facilities for the national court. In addition, post office and telegraph office were housed . After 1890, the New Residence formally received the status of a government building, nothing changed much during the First Republic. The rooms at the southeast corner , along with the former State Hall sala grande were destroyed in 1944 by a bomb attack, only the outer walls remained largely remained intact. After the war the building was cleared to the ground floor and rebuilt.

Later on, authorities were housed in the building. After 1990, the new museum concept of city of Salzburg was decided ( after several failed attempts ). In 2000, the space concept of the Salzburg Museum was ready and 2003 could begin the necessary construction work . According to the official statement of the New Residence finally opened the show with Viva! Mozart.

The resulting state rooms

On the second floor of the west wing , the state rooms , which are decorated with rich mirror vaults and colorful stucco , the Castello Elijah had it made in 1602 are (the following areas are continuously enumerated from north to south ) .

The Bishop Hall ( probably originally a small secret consistory ) has a brown wooden coffered ceiling with oval and three pass fields in the middle of a particularly rich coat of arms designed by Wolf Dietrich is. Earlier here were the portraits of all the archbishops full-length portraits from Markus Sittikus to Colloredo, of which the name of the hall is derived .

The virtues Hall ( originally probably the Studiolo) is a rectangular room with a coffered ceiling stucco, showing the allegorical figures. The three theological virtues thereby fill the center panels , while the four cardinal virtues are displayed in the side gusset panels. Noteworthy are also the portals from the time of Wolf Dietrich.

Glory Hall ( originally the Guardaroba ), which connects the west , has a square floor plan. Here can be found on the ceiling of the presentation of the halo with angel choirs playing music and cheering around the sign of God. The central image is surrounded by four rectangular fields with the representations of the Annunciation, the Visitation, the Adoration of the Child Jesus by the shepherds and the Presentation in the Temple .

The Ständesaal ( originally the great Secret Consistory, corner space to Mozart Square ) shows ancient representations of model self-sacrificing behavior : Horatius Cocles keeps the urgent to the Tiber bridge enemies , while the Romans demolish the bridge , Mucius Scaevola puts his hand in front of King Porsena into the fire, Marcus Curtius jumps into the flaming abyss ). Five surrounding medallions show busts .

To the south commander room (originally a bedroom) with the central crest of Wolf Dietrich on a gold mosaic ground is surrounded by four half-lenght portrait representations of Charlemagne, Godfrey of Bouillon, Charles V and Juan de Austria .

To the commander room again follows also the private bathroom. The room has an oval dome, with ceramic mosaic and stucco with four angels with palm branches . Noteworthy in the new residence next to the above mentioned areas is the rest of the magnificent coffered ceiling over the smaller sala seconda in the southwestern Ecksaal of Wolf-Dietrich- building.

Published analysis on August 25, 2013, the 100th anniversary.


The century-old “unsolved” Mary Phagan murder mystery — the sadistic rape and ghastly murder of a Christian teenage girl, Mary Phagan and the subsequent lynching of her convicted killer, Jewish industrialist and pencil manufacturing superintendent Leo Frank — has now been successfully solved by legal and history scholars using the extensive 1913 official investigation and trial records (see the Leo Frank Ga Supreme Court records)


In this once-in-a-lifetime event, the book publishing, mainstream media, and ivory tower establishment of the academy — who have for decades and generations since 1913, promoted the racist hoax and anti-Gentile conspiracy theory that anti-Semites framed Leo Frank for the crime simply because he was Jewish and that the "blood of a Negro" was not enough to pay or atone for the crime — have been definitively proven to be wrong by the stenographed statements of Leo Frank himself (see: Leo Frank trial statement in brief of evidence).


The Jewish Daily Forward


It was recently revealed by two Jewish-American journalists in separate published articles that Abraham Cahan founder of 'The Jewish Daily Forward' (Forverts in 1914) interviewed Leo Frank who suggested it was not anti-Semitism, but instead "keystone cops" were the primary source behind his criminal case. Leo Frank also believed that Hugh Dorsey needed to bolster his legal career as prosecutor because he had a couple of recent "embarrassing" defeats in the courtroom. However an audit of Dorsey's legal career as Solicitor General in Atlanta proves that his prime directive and motive as prosecutor was seeking justice for victims of crimes, not about "winning or losing".


According to Paul Berger of The Jewish Daily Forward (August 30, 2013):


Cahan traveled to Atlanta in March 1914 to visit Frank in his cell [in Atlanta]. In the fifth volume of Cahan’s memoirs, published in Yiddish in 1931, Cahan relates that Frank told him the Atlanta police were desperate for a conviction. Mary Phagan’s murder presented a huge challenge for prosecutor Hugh Dorsey, who had just come off the back of two embarrassing courtroom defeats.


“Anti-Semitism is absolutely not the reason for this libel that has been framed against me,” [Leo] Frank told [Abraham] Cahan. “It isn’t the source nor the result of this sad story.”


Organized Jewry


Yet, even a century later Frank's defenders in both public and private schools, synagogues, churches, civic events, history conferences and the mainstream news-medium, over-use and exaggerate every sort of sectarian division as to why Frank was supposedly convicted, while distorting and suppressing the substantial evidence against him in the Leo Frank trial brief of evidence. Leo Frank they claim is a martyr of anti-Semitism.


The great breakthrough of our time is that since the legal records of the Leo Frank case have been scanned by Government researchers in Atlanta and put online (the 1,800 page Leo Frank Georgia Supreme Court records is published on, it is now possible for people who live far away from the Georgia legal records and archives office to learn why Leo Frank was really convicted and why his defenders, who say he is innocent, have been perpetuating a century of pathological lies - a web of lies involving many people, where men and women with academic credentials quote and re-quote each other, while providing almost copycat analysis of each other, but using variant words from the thesaurus' lexicon population. In other words Leo Frank's defenders all basically say almost exactly the same thing however using different words, sentence structures and syntax to repeat each others claims. This is called the web of lies and this is how politically correct academia works in the United States.


This quote sums up perfectly pro-Frank sentiment:


"When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic." - D. James


Leo Frank Incriminated Himself Beyond Escape


At the murder trial, a stupefying admission was made by the defendant, when he testified from the witness stand, amounting to what his detractors consider a pitiful cry of mercy that has the sheen and flavour of a confession. If this is indeed true, then the logical question is:


How many times in the annals of US legal history has similar happened?


Something very quietly climactic happened during the month-long People v. Leo M. Frank murder trial, held within Georgia’s Fulton County Superior Courthouse in the Summer of 1913 -- Mr. Leo Max Frank inadvertently revealed the solution to the murder mystery of Mary Phagan...


Here is how:


When Leo Frank mounted the witness stand on Monday afternoon, August 18, 1913, at 2:15 pm, he orally delivered an unsworn, four-hour, pre-written statement to the some 200+ people present in the audience of the courtroom.


The Epic Trial of 20th Century Southern Legal History


The spectators sat in the tight outer arena at one of the most astounding murder trials in the history of Georgia jurisprudence. Nestled deep within the hard butt-breaking pews of the courtroom were the luckiest of public spectators, defense and prosecution witnesses, journalists, officials, and courtroom staff.


Photo: Hugh M. Dorsey the Prosecutor (see Flickr)


Like gladiators inside an arena, in the center of it all, with their backs to the audience, seated in ladder-back chairs, were the most important principals. They were the State of Georgia’s prosecution team, made up of three members, led by Solicitor General Hugh M. Dorsey and Frank Arthur Hooper. Arrayed against them were eight Leo Frank defense counselors, led by Luther Zeigler Rosser and Reuben Rose Arnold.


The presiding judge, the Honorable Leonard Strickland Roan, sitting in a high-backed leather chair, was separated by the witness stand from the jury of 12 White men who were sworn to justly decide the fate of Leo Frank.


Crouched and sandwiched between the judge’s rostrum and the witness chair, sitting on the lip of the bench’s foot rail, was a stenographer capturing the examinations. Stenographers clicked away with pencil in hand throughout the trial and were changed regularly in relays.


Surrounding the four major defense and prosecution counselors were an entourage of uniformed police, plainclothes detectives, undercover armed security men, government staff, and magistrates.


Photo: Leo Frank posing for Collier’s Weekly (see Flickr).


The photo would later become the front cover for the 1915 New York Times best selling book 'The Truth About the Frank Case' by Charles Powell Connolly. In the picture, seated in a witness chair, the fingertips of Leo Frank’s left-hand are firmly clasped around the base of a cigar, vertically projecting upward from his groin region. The significance of Leo Frank’s left fist would be revealed when evidence from the Mary Phagan autopsy -- conducted in early May of 1913, by Dr. H. F. Harris -- was reported during the Leo Frank trial (Mary Phagan had been punched in her right eye causing her to fall backward and slam her head against the handle of a lathe in the metal room).


The first day of the 4-week-long Leo Frank trial began on Monday morning, July 28, 1913, and led to many days of successively more horrifying revelations. But the most interesting day of the trial occurred three weeks later when Leo Frank sat down in the witness stand on Monday afternoon, August 18, 1913.


The Moment Everyone Was Waiting For....


What Leo Frank had to say to the court became the spine-tingling climax of the most notorious criminal trial in US history, and it was the moment everyone in all of Georgia, especially Atlanta, had waited for.


Judge Roan explained to the jury the unique circumstances and rules concerning the unsworn statement Leo M. Frank was to make. Then, at 2:14 pm, Leo Frank was called to speak. When he mounted the stand, a hush fell as 250 spellbound people jammed in the courtroom. They were more than just speechless: They were literally breathless, transfixed, sitting on the edges of their seats, waiting with great anticipation for every sentence, and every word, that came forth from the mouth of Leo Frank.


But listening to his long speech became challenging at times. Little did they know Leo Frank had developed a reputation as a “gas jet” from his college days (see his 1906 Cornell University Senior Class Yearbook entry, p 79), and he lived up to it now with dense, mind-numbing verbiage.


Image: Leo Frank’s reputation as a champion “hot air artist” — and service as a debating coach — shown in his college yearbook entry.


Three Out of Nearly 3.5 Hours: Distractions and Endless Pencil Calculations


To bring his major points home during his almost four-hour speech (3 hours and 40 minutes to be exact), Leo Frank presented original pages of his accounting books to the jury. For three hours he went over, in detail, the accounting computations he had made on the afternoon of April 26, 1913. This was meant to show the court that he had been far too busy to have murdered Mary Phagan on that day nearly 15 weeks before.


One dispute emphasized by the defense was over how long it took Frank to do the accounting books: Was it an hour and a half as some said, or three hours? Can either answer ever be definitive, though? No matter how quickly one accountant works, is it beyond belief that another could be twice as fast?


The Ultimate Question Waiting to be Answered


Image: Little Miss Monteen Stover, 14 years old and 5’2” tall.


The most important unanswered question in the minds of everyone at the trial was this:


Where had Leo Frank gone between 12:05 p.m. and 12:10 p.m. on Georgia Confederate Memorial Day, Saturday, April 26, 1913?


This was the crucial question because Monteen Stover had testified she found Leo Frank’s office empty during this five-minute time segment – and Leo Frank had told police he never left his office during that time, when he claimed Mary Phagan was with him. And the evidence (state of digestion of the food in her stomach from the autopsy, hair on the lathe and blood on the floor) had already suggested that Mary Phagan was murdered sometime between high-noon and 12:15 p.m. in the metal-room on the same floor, located opposite of where Leo Frank works in his window-front office.


Two investigators had testified that Leo Frank gave them the alibi that he had never left his office from noon until after 12:45 p.m. If Leo Frank’s alibi held up, then he couldn’t have killed Mary Phagan during that time.


Everyone wanted to know how Leo Frank would respond to the contradictory testimony clashing with his alibi (Monteen Stover). And, after rambling about near-irrelevancies for hours, he did:


Now Gentlemen [of the jury], to the best of my recollection from the time the whistle blew for twelve o’clock [noon] until after a quarter to one [12:45 p.m.] when I went up stairs [to the fourth floor] and spoke to Arthur White and Harry Denham, to the best of my recollection, I did not stir out of the inner office [located at the front of the second floor]; but it is possible that in order to answer a call of nature or to urinate I may have gone to the toilet [located at the back of the second floor in the metal room].


Those are things that a man does unconsciously and cannot tell how many times nor when he does it.


Now, sitting in my office at my desk, it is impossible for me to see out into the outer hall when the [four foot tall] safe door is open, as it was that morning [on Saturday, April 26, 1913], and not only is it impossible for me to see out, but it is impossible for people to see in and see me there.


Source: Leo Frank Trial Brief of Evidence, 1913.


Frank stated — in complete contradiction to his numerous earlier statements that he’d never left his office — that he might have “unconsciously” gone to the bathroom during that time — placing him in the only bathroom on that floor of the building, the Metal Room bathroom, which is where Jim Conley had finally admitted that he first found the lifeless body of little Mary Phagan, and immediately adjacent in the Metal Room proper, where Mary Phagan’s blood (found on the floor) and hair (found on the machine handle) was found, and where the prosecution had spent three weeks at the trial proving that the murder had actually taken place there at approximately that time.


Frank gave himself 2 ways out:


Frank also stated that at the exact same time he was simultaneously in the metal room bathroom, he might have simultaneously been unseeable behind the four foot tall safe door in his office. Who could believe he was at two possible places at the exact same time? It had to be one or the other, but Monteen Stover said his office was empty, and mentioned no open safe door, so it tended to place Leo Frank in the metal room during the critical time.


The Eminent Coroner Paul V. Donehoo and his Jury of Six Men:


This was doubly amazing because weeks earlier Leo Frank had emphatically told the seven-man panel lead by Coroner Paul Donehoo, and represented via the six-man Jury at the Coroners Inquest, that he (Leo Frank) did not remember using the bathroom that day when at the factory.


The partially blind, but prodigious savant Coroner Paul Donehoo — with his highly-refined “B.S. detector” was incredulous as might be expected. Who doesn’t use the bathroom all day long? (especially a person who is a heavy coffee drink) It was as if Leo Frank was mentally and physically, albeit crudely and unbelievably, trying to distance himself from the bathroom where the body was later claimed to be found (Conley finally testified he first found the dead body of Mary Phagan in the men's toilet area of the metal room after Leo Frank allegedly confessed the assault to "Jim") .


Furthermore, on Sunday May 4th, 1913, Leo Frank had told Pinkerton detective Harry Scott — witnessed by police detective Mr. Black — that he (Leo Frank) was in his office every minute from noon to half past noon, and in State’s Exhibit B (Frank’s stenographed statement to the police on Monday Morning, April 28, 1913, see full text of it from August 2nd, 1913, Atlanta Constitution), Leo Frank never mentions a bathroom visit all day and said Mary Phagan was in his office between 12:05 p.m. and 12:10 p.m. maybe 12:07 p.m.


And now he had reversed himself!


Why would Leo Max Frank make such a startling admission, after spending months trying to distance himself from that part of the building at that precise time? Why would Leo Frank place himself in the men's toilet, when he watched Conley testify on the witness stand (August 4, 5, 6, 1913) that was the area where Jim found the dead body of Mary Phagan? That is a difficult question to answer, but there are some intriguing clews (Atlanta Constitution, 1913).


1) The testimony of Monteen Stover (who liked Frank and who was actually a supportive character witness for him) that Frank was missing from his office for those crucial five minutes was convincing. Few could believe that Stover — looking to pick up her paycheck, and waiting five minutes in Frank's business office for an opportunity to do so — would have been satisfied with a cursory glance at the room and therefore somehow missed Frank behind the 4ft tall open safe door as he had alleged (See State's Exhibit A, Defendant's Exhibit 61.)


2) The evidence suggests that Frank did not always make rational decisions when under stress: Under questioning from investigators, he repeatedly changed the time at which Mary Phagan supposedly came to see him in his office.


The four separate times Leo Frank said Mary Phagan arrived in his office:


First - On Sunday, April 27, 1913, less than 24 hours after the murder occurred, Frank told police that Mary arrived in his office on Saturday, April 26, 1913 at about 12:03 p.m.


Second - On Monday 48 hours after the murder occurred, Frank said Mary arrived "Between 12:05 p.m. and 12:10 p.m., maybe 12:07 p.m. (State's Exhibit B digest, and Atlanta Constitution, August 2nd, 1913 for full questions and answers)


Third - On May 5th and 8th at the Coroner's Inquest, Frank said Mary arrived about 12:10 p.m. to 12:15 p.m..


Fourth - And at his trial, Frank said Marry arrived between 12:12 to 12:17 p.m. (Because his stenographer changed her testimony at trial and said she left at "12:02 p.m.")


Wow, four separate times that kept inching minute by minute away from his initial statement of 12:03 p.m.


3) Leo Frank reportedly confessed his guilt to his wife the day of the murder (Albert McKnight's Affidavit in Leo Frank Georgia Supreme Court Records, and Magnolia "Minola" McKnight Affidavit, see State's Exhibit J in Leo Frank trial brief of evidence, 1913); he, if guilty, reacted out of all proportion and reason to being spurned by his teenage employee; and he maintained the utterly unbelievable position throughout the case that he did not know Mary Phagan by name, despite indisputably knowing her initials (he wrote them on the company books by hand) and interacting with her hundreds of times. Moreover, everyday that Frank went to the bathroom in the metal room, he passed by Mary's workstation by a matter of feet. Moreover, does the fact that Lucille Selig Frank (Leo Frank's wife) requested not to be buried next to her husband speak volumes about the veracity of State's Exhibit J and Albert McKnight's affidavit?


Even if only one of these lapses is true as described, it is enough to show a pronounced lack of judgement. A man with such impaired judgement may actually have been unable to see that by explaining away his previous untenable (and now exposed as false) position of “never leaving the office” with an “unconscious” bathroom visit, he was placing himself at the scene of the murder at the precise time of the murder. Thus are men who tell tales undone, even as they fall back upon a partial truth.


Georgia: Right to Refuse Oaths and Examination.


Why did Leo not permit cross-examination after his own long-courtroom Statement - under Georgia Law, since 1868 (Title VI), it WAS allowed (unsworn), IF the defendant agreed (source: Professor Allen Koenigsberg, Brooklyn College, 2013)


Under the Georgia Code, Section 1036, the accused has the right to make an unsworn statement and, furthermore, to refuse to be examined or cross-examined at his trial. Leo Frank made the decision to make an unsworn statement and not allow examination or cross examination.


The law also did not permit Solicitor General Hugh M. Dorsey or his legal team to orally interpret or comment on the fact that Leo Frank was not making a statement sworn under oath at his own murder trial. The prosecution respected this rule.


The jury knew that Leo Frank had months to carefully prepare his statement. But what was perhaps most damaging to Leo Frank’s credibility was the fact that every witness at the trial, regardless of whether they were testifying for the defense or prosecution, had been sworn-in, and therefore spoke under oath, and had been open to cross-examination by the other side — except for Leo Frank. Thus it didn’t matter if the law prevented the prosecution from commenting on the fact Leo Frank had refused cross examination, opting instead to make an unsworn statement, because the jury could see that anyway. Making an unsworn statement and refusing to be examined does not prove that one is guilty, but it certainly raises eyebrows of doubt about truthfulness.


The South an “Honor Bound” Society


Could a sworn jury upholding its sacred duty question Leo Frank’s honor and integrity as a result of what Southerners likely perceived as his cowardly decision under Georgia Code, Section 1036? If so, greater weight would naturally be given to those witnesses who were sworn under oath and who contradicted Leo Frank’s unsworn alibis, allegations, and claims. It put the entire case under a new lens of the sworn versus the unsworn defendant.


The average Southerner in 1913 was naturally asking the question: What White man would make an unsworn statement and not allow himself to be cross-examined at his own murder trial if he were truly innocent? Especially in light of the fact that the South was culturally White separatist — and two of the major material witnesses who spoke against Leo Frank were African-American, one claiming to be an accomplice after the fact turned accuser.


In the White racial segregationist Atlanta of 1913, African-Americans were perceived as second class citizens and less reliable than Whites in terms of their capacity for telling the truth.


Photo: Lucille Selig Frank, the wife of Leo Frank left. (see Flickr)


Today, we might ask: Why wouldn't Leo Frank allow himself to be cross examined when he was trained in the art and science of debating during his high school senior year and all through his years in college, where he earned the rank of Cornell Congress Debate Team coach? (Pratt Institute Monthly, June, 1902; Cornellian, 1903 through 1906; Cornell Senior Class Book, 1906; Cornell University Alumni Dossier File on Leo Frank, retrieved 2012)


Odd Discrepancies


illustration: Newt Lee at the Coroner’s Inquest Months Before


Most Leo Frank partisan authors omit significant parts of the trial testimony of Newt Lee and Jim Conley from their retelling of the Leo Frank Case. Both of these African-American men, former National Pencil Company employees, made clearly damaging statements against Frank.


The Negro Nightwatchman Newton "Newt" Lee:


The evidence Newt Lee brought forward was circumstantial, but intriguing — and never quite adequately explained by Leo Frank then, or by his defenders now.


Lee stated that on Friday Evening, April 25, 1913, Frank made a request to him, that he report to work an hour early at 4:00 p.m. on Confederate Memorial Day, the next day. The stated reason was that Leo Frank had made a baseball game appointment with his brother-in-law, Mr. Ursenbach, a Gentile Christian who was married to one of (Frank’s wife) Lucille’s older sisters. Leo Frank would eventually give two different reasons at two separate times as to why he canceled that appointment:


1) he had too much work to do, and 2) he was afraid of catching a cold, but the fact he never said both at the same time was a circumstance of minor suspicion.


Newt Lee’s normal expected time at the National Pencil Company factory on Saturdays was 5:00 pm sharp. Lee stated that when he arrived an hour early that fateful Saturday at 3:56 p.m., Leo Frank had forgotten the change because he was in an excited state. Frank, he said, was unlike his normal calm, cool and collected “boss” self. Normally, if anything was out of order, Frank would command him, saying “Newt, step in here a minute” or the like. Instead, Frank burst out of his office, bustling frenetically towards Lee, who had arrived at the second floor lobby at 3:56 pm. Upon greeting each other, Frank requested assertively that Lee go out on the town and “have a good time” for two hours and come back at 6:00 pm.


Newt Lee was tired:


Because Leo Frank on Friday asked Newt Lee to come to work one hour early, Lee had lost that last nourishing hour of sleep one needs before waking up fully rejuvenated, so Lee requested of Frank that he allow him to take a nap in the Packing Room (adjacent to Leo Frank’s front office). But Frank re-asserted that Lee needed to go out and "have a good time" for 2 hours. Finally, Newt Lee acquiesced and left for two hours.


At trial, Frank would state that he sent Newt Lee out for two hours because he had work to do. When Lee came back, the double doors halfway up the staircase were locked – very unusual, as they had never had been locked before on Saturday afternoons. When Newt Lee unlocked the doors and went into Leo Frank’s office he witnessed his boss bungling and nearly fumbling the time sheet when trying to put a new one in the punch clock for the night watchman – Lee – to register.


It left people wondering why an Executive Whiteman who had 5 years experience putting time cards into the punch clock was bugging out on it at that exact moment.


It came out before the trial that Newt Lee had earlier been told by Leo Frank that it was a National Pencil Company policy that once the night watchman arrived at the factory – as Lee had the day of the murder at 4:00 pm – he was not permitted to leave the building under any circumstances until he handed over the reigns of security to the day watchman. Company security necessitated being cautious – poverty, and therefore theft, was rife in the South; there were fire risk hazards; and the critical factory machinery was worth a small fortune. Security was a matter of survival.


The two hour timetable rescheduling – the canceled ball game – the inexplicable sudden security rule waiver – the bumbling with a new time sheet – the locked double doors – and Frank’s suspiciously excited behavior: All were highlighted as suspicious by the prosecution, especially in light of the fact that the “murder notes” – found next to Mary Phagan’s head – physically described Newt Lee, even calling him “the night witch.” And, the prosecutor asked, why did Leo Frank later telephone Newt Lee, not once but two or more times, that evening at the factory?


A Jewish “Racist” Subplot Against Two Negroes?


The substance of what happened between Newt Lee (and janitor James “Jim” Conley – see below) and Leo Frank from April 26, 1913 onward is most often downplayed, censored, or distorted by partisans of Leo Frank.


From the testimony of these two Black witnesses, we learn of an almost diabolic intrigue calculated to entrap the innocent night watchman Newt Lee. It would have been easy to convict a Black man in the White separatist South of that time, where the ultimate crime was a Black man having interracial sex with a White woman — to say nothing of committing battery, rape, strangulation, and mutilation upon her in a scenario right out of the book: Psychopathia Sexualis (available on


Photo: Luther Zeigler Rosser, Co-Leader for the Leo Frank defense and the Deliciously Racist Gambit.


The plot was exquisitely formulated for its intended audience, the twelve White men who would decide Leo Frank’s fate. It created two layers of Black men between Frank and the murder of Mary Phagan. It wouldn’t take the police long to realize Newt Lee didn’t commit the murder, and, since the death notes were written in Ebonics, it would leave the police hunting for another Black murderer. As long as Jim Conley kept his mouth shut, he wouldn’t hang. So the whole plot rested on Jim Conley – and it took the police three weeks to crack him using the third degree method (Good Cop verses Bad Cop).


The ugly racial element of this defense ploy is rarely mentioned today. The fact that it was Leo Frank, a Jew (and generally considered White in the racial separatist Old South), who first tried to pin the rape and murder of Mary Phagan on the elderly, balding, and married Black man Newt Lee (who had no criminal record to boot) is not something that Frank partisans want to highlight.


Leo Frank's sex-killer denialists also downplays the racial considerations that made Frank, when his first racially-tinged defense move failed and was abandoned, change course for the last time and formulate a new subplot to pin the crime on Jim Conley, the “accomplice after the fact.”


If events had played out as intended in the White Racial Separatist Atlanta of 1913, there would have likely been one or two dead Black men in the wake of the defense team’s intrigue.


Jim Conley knew too much. He admitted he had helped the real murderer, Leo Frank, remove the body of Mary Phagan after the fact. To prevent Conley, through extreme fear, from revealing any more about the real solution to the crime, and to discredit him no matter what he did, a new theory was needed. Jim Conley certainly was scared beyond comprehension, knowing what White society did to Black men who beat, raped, and strangled White girls.


The Accuser Becomes the Accused


Meet the Negro Custodian: James "Jim" Conley


The new murder theory posited by the Leo Frank defense was that Jim Conley assaulted Mary Phagan as she walked down the stairs from Leo Frank’s office (see Adolph Ochs Photo Archive at New York Public Library). Once Phagan descended to the first floor lobby, they said, she was robbed, then thrown down 14 feet to the basement through the two-foot by two-foot scuttle hole at the side of the elevator. Conley then supposedly went through the scuttle hole himself, climbing down the ladder, dragged the unconscious Mary Phagan to the garbage dumping ground in front of the cellar incinerator (known as the “furnace”), where he then raped, robed and strangled her.


But this grotesque racially-tinged framing was to fail in the end because of simple medical forensics: The scratchmarks all over Mary Phagan's body didn't bleed, it meant she was already dead before being brought to the basement and dragged from the cellar elevator shaft entry to the furnace dumping ground at the back of the factory. First responders noted that there were visible drag marks from the elevator shaft to where Phagan was dumped.


Now we Flash back to Newt Lee.


Investigators arranged for a conversation to take place between Leo Frank and Newt Lee, who were intentionally put alone together in a police interrogation room at the Atlanta Police Station. The experiment was to see how Frank would interact with Lee and determine if any new information could be obtained.


Once they thought they were alone, Leo Frank scolded Newt Lee for trying to talk about the murder of Mary Phagan, and said that if Lee kept up that kind of talk, Frank and he would go straight to hell.


Star Witnesses


The Jewish community has crystallized around the notion that Jim Conley was the star witness at the trial, and not 14-year-old Monteen Stover who defended Leo Frank’s character — and then inadvertently broke his alibi.


Leo Frank partisans downplay the significance of Monteen Stover’s trial testimony and Leo Frank’s attempted rebuttal of her testimony on August 18, 1913. Governor John M. Slaton also ignored the Stover-Frank incident in his 29-page commutation order of June 21, 1915.


Many Frank partisans have chosen to obscure the significance of Monteen Stover by putting all the focus on Jim Conley, and then claiming that without Jim Conley there would have been no conviction of Leo Frank.


Could they be right? Or could Leo Frank have been convicted on the testimony of Monteen Stover, without the testimony of Jim Conley?


However, It is a question left for speculation only, because no one ever anticipated the significance of Jim Conley telling the jury that he had found Mary Phagan dead in the Metal Room bathroom.


It was not until Leo Frank gave his response to Monteen Stover’s testimony – his explanation of why his second floor business office was empty on April 26, 1913 between 12:05 pm and 12:10 pm – that everything came together tight and narrow.


Leo Frank threaded the needle's eye of the prosecution's case and entrapped himself beyond escape.


Tom Watson resolved the “no conviction without Conley” controversy in the September 1915 number of his Watson’s Magazine, but perhaps it is time for a 21st century explanation to make it clear why even the Georgia Supreme Court ruled that the evidence and testimony of the trial sustained Frank’s conviction.


August 18, 1913: You Are the Jury


The four-hour-long unsworn statement of Leo Frank was the crescendo of the trial. (Later, just before closing arguments, Frank himself was allowed the last word. He spoke once more on his own behalf, unsworn this time also, for five minutes, denying the testimony of others that he had known Mary Phagan by name and that he had gone into the dressing room for presumably immoral purposes with one of the company’s other employees.)


The jury that convicted Leo Frank


Three Alleged "Confessions" Found in the Brief of Evidence, 1913.


It is important to understand that Leo Frank’s startling admission of his presence in the death room at the critical moment did not stand alone in the jury’s eyes. Conclusive as it was, it was not Frank’s only confession.


The official record shows Leo Frank allegedly confessed to murdering Mary Phagan three times, though he would deny all three.


• Alleged "Confession" Number One — April 26, 1913: Leo Frank’s murder confession number one was made to Jim Conley when Leo Frank told him he had tried to “be with her” (have sexual intercourse with Mary Phagan) and she refused him. According to Conley, Frank then stated he had struck the thirteen-year-old girl and hit her too hard, she had hit her head against something. Some of Mary Phagan’s bloody hair was discovered on Monday, April 28, 1913, by Robert P. Barret on the handle of a lathe in the second floor Metal Room.


• Alleged "Confession" Number Two — April 26, 1913: According to the McKnight family (See: Albert's and Magnolia's Affidavit.), Allegedly Leo Frank confessed about murdering Mary Phagan to his wife Lucille Selig Frank on the evening of April 26, 1913, at around 10:00 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. Leo Frank said to his wife that he didn’t know why he would murder — and asked his wife for his pistol so he could shoot himself. Lucille told her family and her cook Magnolia "Minola" McKnight, about what happened that evening. Minola McKnight told her husband Albert McKnight who told his boss, because he had contacts in the Atlanta Police. Decades later, Lucille Selig Frank refused to be buried in the Frank-Stern family plot, next to her husband, leaving explicit instructions to the contrary. (see Oney, Features, 2003, 2004).


• Leo Frank Alleged Murder "Confession" Number Three — August 18, 1913: This is the “unconscious bathroom visit” statement delivered by Frank to the court in his unsworn statement, placing him unequivocally at the murder scene at the critical time. Frank would also reaffirm this admission in a newspaper interview published by the Atlanta Constitution on March 9th, 1914 (Read it).


Photo: The Presiding Judge Leonard Strickland Roan (1849 - 1915)


With Mercy — or Without?


Judge Leonard Strickland Roan gave the jury two options if they found the defendant guilty: ‘With Mercy’ or ‘Without Mercy.’ If there was any doubt of Leo M. Frank’s guilt, the judge and jury could have sentenced Frank to life in prison instead of sentencing him to death by hanging. When the jury unanimously sentenced Leo Frank to death by hanging after deciding on a verdict of guilt, Judge Roan had the legal option to downgrade the jury’s death sentence, and only give Leo Frank life in prison – that is, if Roan disagreed with the judgment. But Judge Roan agreed with their collective verdict and recommendation. Roan denied Leo Frank's petition for a new trial, rejecting 107 grounds.


Then and Now:


Many in the Jewish community, and other Leo Frank partisans, have suggested that Judge Roan doubted the verdict because of one of his apparently appeasing comments made orally to his former law partner, Luther Rosser. But if Roan actually doubted the verdict, he could have exercised his power many times to prevent Frank’s execution, and even given him a new trial if that would have served the cause of justice. But he did none of these things.


You are Hereby Sentenced to Hang on April 17, 1914; Happy Birthday Dear Leo, Happy Birthday to you:


Certainty of Leo Frank’s guilt was so strong that, after reviewing his trial testimony for months, the Fulton County Superior Court Judge Benjamin H. Hill, later re-sentenced him to die on his 30th birthday: April 17, 1914. Only absolute mathematical certainty of guilt warrants such a cruel sentencing date by a judge.


* * *


Appendix: Essential Reading


To gain a full understanding of the Leo Frank case, and the tissue-thin “anti-Semitic conspiracy” theories advanced by the media today, it is necessary to read the official record without censorship or selective editing by partisans. Here are the resources which will enable you to do just that.


• Leo M. Frank Brief of Evidence, Murder Trial Testimony and Affidavits, 1913


• Leo M. Frank unsworn trial statement (BOE, Leo Frank Trial Statement, August 18, 1913)


• Leo Frank trial, State’s Exhibit B, April 28, 1913 (BOE)


Original State’s Exhibit B:


Part 1 –


Part 2 –


Complete Analysis of State’s Exhibit B (required reading): The full review of State’s Exhibit B at the Leo Frank Research Library


• Leo Frank Case files from the Georgia Supreme Court, Adobe PDF format:


• Atlanta Constitution issue of March 9, 1914 (Leo Frank Answers List of Questions Bearing on Points Made Against Him, March 9, 1914)


• Compare the analysis of the bathroom statement by reading: Argument of Hugh M. Dorsey, followed by Argument of Mr. Frank Hooper — also compare with Tom Watson’s version


• Minola McKnight statement (Magnolia Mcknight, State’s Exhibit J, June 3, 1913) and cremation request in the 1954 Notarized Last Will and Testament of Lucille Selig Frank (Georgia Records Archives, 1954)


• 2D and 3D National Pencil Company floor diagrams (Defendant's Exhibit 61, and State's Exhibit A, 1913)


Image: The National Pencil Company in 3 Dimensions, State's Exhibit A.


3-Dimensional Floor Plan of the National Pencil Company from the Leo Frank Georgia Supreme Court File:


The Defendant Leo Frank’s Factory Diagrams Made on His Behalf:


2-Dimensional Floor Plan of the National Pencil Company in 1913.


Image: Defendants Exhibit 61, Ground Floor and Second Floor 2D Birds Eye View Maps of the National Pencil Company: Plat of the First and Second Floor of the National Pencil Company.


1. Images: State’s Exhibit A (Small Image) or State’s Exhibit A (Large Image).


2. Different Version: Side view of the factory diagram showing the front half of the factory


3. Bert Green Diagram of the National Pencil Company, Atlanta, Georgia, 1913, Available on


• James “Jim” Conley’s testimony (James Conley, Brief of Evidence, August, 4, 5, 6, 1913),


• Staged late defense version of Mary Phagan murder events by Jewish Media Mogul Adolph Ochs of the Jewish Newspaper the New York Times, Available on


• The Jeffersonian Newspaper 1914-1917 and Watson’s Magazine (August and September, 1915) series on the case, images posted on


• Defense and prosecution both ratify the original Brief of Evidence: Leo M. Frank, Plaintiff in Error, vs. State of Georgia, Defendant in Error. In Error from Fulton Superior Court at the July Term 1913. Brief of Evidence. Available on


• John Davison Lawson’s American State Trials, Volume X, 1918, Read the closing arguments here of Luther Zeigler Rosser, Reuben Rose Arnold, Hugh Manson Dorsey and Frank Arthur Hooper) Available on


• Required Reading: Mary Phagan Kean’s analysis of the Leo Frank Case: The Murder of Little Mary Phagan available on


The primary sources of the Leo Frank Case are available at and

An Excelsior Motorways Duple entering Victoria Coach Station. Background can be seen the BOAC Terminal , now in use as the National Audit office. (Collection)





Born in Chicago on October 26, 1947, Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton grew up in Park Ridge, Illinois, a solidly Republican suburb of Chicago. In 1964 she supported Republican conservative Barry Goldwater for U.S. President. The following year, she enrolled at Wellesley College in Massachusetts, where her political views would undergo a radical transformation.


Rodham was deeply influenced by a 1966 article titled "Change or Containment," which appeared in Motive, a magazine for college-age Methodists. Authored by the Marxist/Maoist theoretician Carl Oglesby, who was a leader of the Students for a Democratic Society, this piece defended Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro, and Maoist tactics of violence. Its thesis was that "certain cultural settings" (most notably American capitalism) were inherently inequitable and oppressive, and thus caused people to feel "pain and rage" that sometimes erupted into violence -- like that of "the rioters in Watts or Harlem" -- which was "reactive and provoked" rather than aggressive or malicious. Hillary later said that the Motive article had played a key role in her metamorphosis from Goldwater Republican in 1964 to leftist Democrat in 1968. During her years as First Lady of the United States, Mrs. Clinton would tell a Newsweek reporter that she still treasured the Oglesby piece.[1]


Following the June 1968 assassination of Democratic presidential hopeful Robert F. Kennedy, Hillary ended her affiliation with the Wellesley campus Young Republicans and volunteered in New Hampshire to work on the presidential campaign of antiwar candidate Eugene McCarthy. When McCarthy later dropped out of the Democratic primary, Hillary threw her support behind the Party's eventual nominee, Hubert Humphrey. From that point forward, wrote Barbara Olson in her 1999 book Hell to Pay, "Republicans were the enemy and the enemy was allied with evil -- the evils of war, racism, sexism, and poverty."[2]


While attending Wellesley, Hillary participated in a number of antiwar marches in the Boston area.




In 1969 Hillary wrote her 92-page senior thesis on the theories of radical Chicago organizer Saul Alinsky. A great admirer of Alinsky's activist tactics, she personally interviewed the famed author for her project and concluded her thesis by stating:


"Alinsky is regarded by many as the proponent of a dangerous socio/political philosophy. As such, he has been feared -- just as Eugene Debs [the five-time Socialist Party candidate for U.S. President] or Walt Whitman or Martin Luther King has been feared, because each embraced the most radical of political faiths -- democracy."


Her conclusion also included this sentence: “If the ideals Alinsky espouses were actualized, the result would be social revolution.”


Ultimately, Hillary's investigation of Alinsky's methods and ideals led her to believe that President Lyndon Johnson's federal antipoverty programs did not go far enough in redistributing wealth among the American people and did not give sufficient power to the poor.


When Hillary graduated from Wellesley in 1969, she was offered a job with Alinsky's Industrial Areas Foundation (IAF) in Chicago. She opted instead to enroll at Yale Law School. Nevertheless, she would maintain her allegiance to Alinsky's teachings throughout her adult life. According to a March 2007 Washington Post report: "As first lady, Clinton occasionally lent her name to projects endorsed by the [IAF].... She raised money and attended two events organized by the Washington Interfaith Network, an IAF affiliate."




At Yale, Hillary was strongly influenced by the radical theoretician Duncan Kennedy, founder of the academic movement known as critical legal studies, which, drawing on the works of the Frankfurt School, viewed law as a "social construct" that corrupt power structures routinely exploited as an instrument of oppression to protect and promote their own bourgeois values at the expense of the poor and disenfranchised. Advocates of critical legal studies were interested in revolutionary change and the building of a new society founded on Marxist principles.


During her time at Yale, Hillary became a prominent figure in the campus protest movement. She wore a black armband in remembrance of the students killed at Kent State in May 1970; she led demonstrations against the Vietnam War; and she led rallies demanding that tampons be made available in the women's restrooms on campus.


Hillary served as one of nine editors of the Yale Review of Law and Social Action, where she worked collaboratively with Mickey Kantor (who, more than two decades later, would serve as U.S. Trade Representative and U.S. Commerce Secretary under President Bill Clinton) and Robert Reich (who would serve as Bill Clinton's Labor Secretary from 1993 to 1997). "For too long," said the Yale Review, "legal issues have been defined and discussed in terms of academic doctrine rather than strategies for social change." The publication was replete with articles by or about such radicals as William Kunstler, Charles Reich (author of The Greening of America); Jerry Rubin (who wrote a piece exhorting parents to "get high with our seven-year-olds," and urging students to "kill our parents"); and Charles Garry (the civil rights attorney who defended Black Panther Party members accused of murder). The Fall and Winter 1970 editions of the Yale Review, on which Hillary worked as associate editor, focused heavily on the trials of Black Panthers who had been charged with murder. Numerous cartoons in those issues depicted police officers as hominid pigs.[3]


One of Hillary's Yale professors, Thomas Emerson (known as "Tommy the Commie"), introduced her to the aforementioned Charles Garry. Garry helped Hillary get personally involved in the defense of several Black Panthers (including the notorious Bobby Seale) who were then being tried in New Haven, Connecticut for the torture, murder, and mutilation of one of their own members. Though evidence of the defendants' guilt was overwhelming, Hillary -- as part of her coursework for Professor Emerson -- attended the Panther trials and arranged for shifts of fellow students to likewise monitor court proceedings and report on any civil-rights abuses allegedly suffered by the defendants. (Those abuses could then be used, if the Panthers were to lose their case, as grounds for appeal.) Striving to neutralize what she considered the pervasive racism of the American legal system, "Hillary was," as Barbara Olson observed in Hell to Pay, "a budding Leninist."[4]




In 1972 Hillary worked on George McGovern's presidential campaign and led a voter registration drive in San Antonio, Texas.


Also in 1972, she went to Berkeley to work as an intern at her hand-picked law firm: Treuhaft, Walker, and Bernstein. Founded by current or former members of the Communist Party USA, this firm had long acted as a legal asset not only for the CPUSA but also for the Black Panthers and other Bay-area radicals. Founding partner Bob Treuhaft, head of the California Communist Party, had been labeled one of the nation’s most “dangerously subversive” lawyers. According to historian Stephen Schwartz, "Treuhaft is a man who dedicated his entire legal career to advancing the agenda of the Soviet Communist Party and the KGB." Hillary did yeoman's work while learning at the feet of Treuhaft and his fellow masters. Associates say that Hillary, during her tenure with the firm, helped draftees get themselves declared conscientious objectors so they could avoid serving in Vietnam; they also contend that Hillary served VA interns seeking to avoid taking a loyalty oath to the United States.


Also in the early 1970s, Hillary developed a close acquaintanceship with Robert Borosage, who would later become a major figure in such leftist organizations as the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), the Campaign for America's Future, and Institute for America's Future. Hillary herself (along with Bill Clinton) would go on to develop close political ties with IPS; moreover, she would give that organization a great deal of money to further its cause.


In the early 1970s as well, Hillary began what would develop into a lifelong friendship with Marian Wright Edelman, founder of the Children's Defense Fund (CDF). After graduating from Yale Law School in 1973, Hillary moved to Washington and took a full-time position as a staff lawyer with CDF.


Edelman went on to help Hillary secure a coveted research position with the Carnegie Council on Children, where the young attorney assisted Yale psychology professor Kenneth Keniston in the production of a report (titled All Our Children) advocating a dramatic expansion of social-welfare entitlements and a national guaranteed income -- all in the name of children's rights. Moreover, the report maintained that the traditional nuclear family was not inherently preferable to any other family structure, and that society had an obligation to honor, encourage, and support alternate arrangements such as single-parent households. What really mattered, said the Council, was the network of professionals -- teachers, pediatricians, social workers, and day-care workers -- who would collectively play the most vital role in raising children properly. In short, the Carnegie Council preached that childrearing was less a parental matter than a societal task to be overseen by "public advocates" -- judges, bureaucrats, social workers and other "experts" in childrearing -- who could intervene between parents and children on the latter's behalf. According to the report, the role of parents should be subordinate to the role of these experts.[5]


Viewing America as an authoritarian, patriarchal, male-dominated society that tended to oppress women, children, and minorities, Hillary wrote a November 1973 article for the Harvard Educational Review advocating the liberation of children from "the empire of the father." She claimed that the traditional nuclear family structure often undermined the best interests of children, who "consequently need social institutions specifically designed to safeguard their position." "Along with the family," she elaborated, "past and present examples of such arrangements include marriage, slavery, and the Indian Reservation system." She added: "Decisions about motherhood and abortion, schooling, cosmetic surgery, treatment of venereal disease, or employment, and others where the decision or lack of one will significantly affect a child's future should not be made unilaterally by parents."[6]


Decades later, Hillary would take up these themes again in her 1996 book It Takes a Village, which stressed the importance of the larger community of adults -- many of whom are paid caretakers whose labors are funded by American taxpayers -- in childrearing.




in the summer of 1973, Hillary took the bar exam in both Arkansas (where she passed the test) and Washington, DC (where she failed). A total of 817 people took the DC bar exam that summer; 551 of them passed, and 266 failed.




In 1973 Hillary became a key inside member (along with more than 40 other attorneys) of the House Judiciary Committee's impeachment inquiry staff, which sought to advance the movement to impeach President Richard Nixon for his role in the Watergate scandal. With single-minded zealotry, Hillary worked on the investigation anywhere from twelve to twenty-four hours per day, seven days a week.[7] While preparing the articles of impeachment, however, she was eventually fired from the Committee staff because of her unethical behavior. The Committee's general counsel and chief of staff, lifelong Democrat Jerry Zeifman, supervised Hillary's work on the Watergate investigation in 1974 and concluded that she was a "liar" and "an unethical, dishonest lawyer." Her brief, Zeifman elaborated, was so rife with fraud that she would have been disbarred if she had submitted it to a judge. For extensive details pertaining to these charges, click here.




In October 1975 Hillary married Bill Clinton, whom she had met during her student days at Yale Law School.




In 1976 Mrs. Clinton worked for Jimmy Carter's successful presidential campaign. Soon thereafter, she found employment as an attorney with the Rose Law Firm in Little Rock, Arkansas, where she would continue to work until 1992. According to political analyst and former Clinton advisor Dick Morris, "She [Hillary] had no job offers in Arkansas and only got hired by the University of Arkansas Law School at Fayetteville because Bill was already teaching there. She only joined the prestigious Rose Law Firm after Bill became Attorney General, and made partner only after he was elected governor."


In 1978 President Carter appointed Mrs. Clinton to the board of the Legal Services Corporation (LSC), a federally funded nonprofit organization that functioned primarily as a vehicle for expanding the social welfare state and broadening the mandate for social welfare spending. According to Dick Morris: "The appointment was in exchange for Bill’s support for Carter in his 1980 primary against Ted Kennedy. Hillary became [board] chairman in a coup in which she won a majority away from Carter’s choice to be chairman.


Under Mrs. Clinton's leadership, LSC's annual budget more than tripled, from $90 million to $321 million. LSC used these taxpayer funds in a variety of ways -- most notably to print political training manuals showing "how community organizations and public interest groups can win political power and resources," and to finance training programs that taught political activists how to harass their opposition.[8]


During Mrs. Clinton's years on the LSC board, the Corporation also worked to defeat a California referendum that would have cut state income taxes in half; it called for the U.S. government to give two-thirds of the state of Maine to American Indians; it paid Marxist orators and folk singers to wage a campaign against the Louisiana Wildlife Commission; it joined a Michigan initiative to recognize "Black English" as an official language; and it sought to force the New York City Transit Authority to hire former heroin addicts so as to avoid "discriminat[ing]" against "minorities" who were "handicapped."[9]


As the 1980 presidential election drew near, and it became clear that Ronald Reagan might defeat the incumbent Jimmy Carter, LSC redirected massive amounts of its public funding into an anti-Reagan letter-writing campaign by indigent clients. After Reagan was elected in November 1980, LSC immediately laundered its assets -- some $260 million -- into state-level agencies and private groups so as to keep the funds away from the board that Reagan would eventually appoint. Hillary Clinton left LSC in 1981. [10]




Bill Clinton served as Governor of Arkansas from 1978 to 1980, and again from 1982 to 1992. Thus Mrs. Clinton spent a total of twelve years as Arkansas's First Lady. During that time, she continued her legal practice as a partner in the Rose Law Firm. In 1978 she became a board member of the Children's Defense Fund (CDF), and from 1986 to 1992 she served as chair of the CDF Board.


From 1982 to 1988 Mrs. Clinton also chaired the New World Foundation (NWF), which had helped to launch CDF in 1973. During her years at NWF's helm, the Foundation made grants to such organizations as the National Lawyers Guild, the Institute for Policy Studies, the Christic Institute, Grassroots International, the Committees in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador (which sought to foment a Communist revolution in Central America), and groups with ties to the most extreme elements of the African National Congress.


The facts are: When Clinton was considering not running for another term as Governor of Arkansas in 1990, Hillary said she would run if he didn't. She and Bill even had me take two surveys to assess her chances of winning. The conclusion was that she couldn't win because people would just see her as a seat warmer for when Bill came back licking his wounds after losing for president. So she didn't run. Bill did and won. But there is no question she had her eye on public office, as opposed to service, long ago.


Read more at Clinton was considering not running for another term as Governor of Arkansas in 1990, Hillary said she would run if he didn't. She and Bill even had me take two surveys to assess her chances of winning. The conclusion was that she couldn't win because people would just see her as a seat warmer for when Bill came back licking his wounds after losing for president. So she didn't run. Bill did and won. But there is no question she had her eye on public office, as opposed to service, long ago.





Hillary's Senior Thesis Is Made Off-Limits to the Public


When Bill Clinton became U.S. President in 1993, the Clintons asked Wellesley College to shield Hillary Rodham's aforementioned senior thesis (about Saul Alinsky) from public access. In compliance, Wellesley president Nannerl Overholser Keohane approved a policy that would make the senior thesis of every Wellesley alumna available in the college archives for anyone to read -- except for those written by either a "president or first lady of the United States."


Commencement Address


In the spring of 1993, shortly after her husband took his oath of office, Mrs. Clinton delivered the commencement address at the University of Texas. In her speech, she stated: "We are at a stage in history in which remolding society is one of the great challenges facing all of us in the West."


Hillary and Michael Lerner ("The Politics of Meaning")


That same year, Mrs. Clinton latched onto the phrase "the politics of meaning," an opaque concept coined by Michael Lerner that blended radical politics with New Ageish human potentialism. She invited Lerner to the White House, briefly making him her "guru" until the ridicule which this caused made her retreat from the connection. (In her autobiography, Mrs. Clinton strenuously avoids any mention of Lerner, or of Lerner's Tikkun magazine.)


The "Travelgate" Scandal


In May 1993, Mrs. Clinton became involved in a major controversy when she and President Clinton determined that seven employees of the White House Travel Office should be fired -- an unusual occurrence in an office where employees typically remained in their posts for many years. In turn, the Clintons gave the Travel Office business -- and the commissions that came with it -- to a cousin of President Clinton’s, Catherine Cornelius, who had a travel agency of her own.


Because simply handing over government business to a relative would have been politically untenable, so the Clintons concocted a story suggesting that the Travel Office had been rife with corruption, and that the workers there needed to be fired. While an audit of the Travel Office's finances found the record-keeping to have been below par, there was no evidence of corruption or embezzlement. Nonetheless, the FBI was pressured to make arrests, and the local U.S. Attorney was charged with prosecuting the employees for corruption.


White House denials of any scheme, and leaks by those involved, led to a firestorm of media criticism. Most of the Travel Office employees were eventually given other government jobs or retired. A prosecution for corruption of the head of the Travel Office, Billy Dale, ended in an acquittal. Clinton’s cousin was removed as new head of the Travel Office. A later report written by Independent Counsel Robert Ray concluded that, while she did not make any knowingly-false statements under oath, First Lady Hillary Clinton had made a number of inaccurate statements concerning the firings and her role in them.


The Health Care Task Force Scandal


Also during her early years as First Lady, Mrs. Clinton was put in charge of the 500-member Health Care Task Force which tried, in secret meetings and by stealth, to socialize medical care in the United States, a sector that represented approximately one-seventh of the U.S. economy. This modus operandi was in violation of so-called "sunshine laws," which forbid such secret meetings from taking place when non-government employees are present. Mrs. Clinton was sued by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons for these violations. The trial judge, U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth, ultimately ruled against her and the Clinton administration. In December 1997 Lamberth issued a 19-page report condemning as "reprehensible" the duplicity exhibited by Mrs. Clinton's Task Force. "The Executive Branch of the government, working in tandem, was dishonest with this court, and the government must now face the consequences of its misconduct," said Lamberth. "It is clear," he added, "that the decisions here were made at the highest levels of government. There were no rogue lawyers here misleading the court."


The linchpin of Mrs. Clinton’s healthcare plan was a mandate forcing all Americans to purchase insurance, and imposing a penalty on those who failed to comply. In November 2013, MIT professor John Gruber, who was a chief architect of the Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), said that Hillary Clinton's 1990s-era plan was "much more interventionist" than Obamacare, "much to the left of Obamacare," and "would have more radically changed our healthcare system."


Hillary and Radical Clerics


During the 1990s, Mrs. Clinton spent eight years faithfully attending Foundry United Methodist Church in Washington, D.C., which was then pastored by the Rev. Dr. J. Philip Wogaman. Wogaman had made his political worldview clear in his many writings and sermons over the years. For instance, in 1990, a year after the fall of the Berlin Wall, he wrote that “Christian socialism's critique of the excesses and brutalities and idolatries of the free market still need to be heard.” On an earlier occasion, he had lauded the “modest but real economic success” of Communist Cuba and China. As long ago as 1967, Wogaman had written: "The USSR is characteristic of the more tolerant Communist arrangements for religion. In Russia there are specific constitutional guarantees of freedom of worship, and some provision has even been made for the upkeep of churches and theological seminaries."


By no means was Wogaman the only radical cleric to be admired by Mrs. Clinton. In her 2004 memoir, Living History, Mrs. Clinton praised Rev. William Sloane Coffin Jr., who had served as Yale’s chaplain during Hillary's years at the law school, for his “articulate moral critique of American involvement” in Vietnam. That critique involved his traveling to Hanoi in 1972. Seven years later, he would make a friendly trip to Tehran, capital of the first modern Islamic theocratic state which had just stormed a U.S. embassy and kidnapped dozens of his fellow countrymen.


The Monica Lewinsky Scandal


A few days after rumors of Bill Clinton's extramarital affair with Monica Lewinsky first made headlines in January 1998, Mrs. Clinton made a January 27 appearance on NBC's Today Show, where she told interviewer Matt Lauer that the allegations had been fabricated by "this vast right-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced [that he would run] for President." Mrs. Clinton would echo this theme many times thereafter. In a June 8, 2003 interview with Barbara Walters, for instance, she characterized the Republicans who had led the 1998 impeachment of her husband as "a right-wing network" that "was after his presidency" and had resorted to "perverting the Constitution."




When New York Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan's 1998 announcement that he planned to retire from public life in 2000, Mrs. Clinton resolved to run for the seat Moynihan would be vacating. In October 1999 Hillary and Bill Clinton bought a house in Chappaqua, New York; their $1.35 million mortgage was secured by Democratic fundraiser Terry McAuliffe. Mrs. Clinton's Senate campaign was managed by Bill de Blasio.


In the 2000 U.S. Senate race in New York, Mrs. Clinton defeated Republican Rick Lazio by a 55-to-43 percent margin. Clinton carried the heavily Democratic New York City by 74 percent to 25 percent, which was more than enough to compensate for her losses in the suburbs (by 53-to-45 percent) and upstate (50-to-47 percent).


Notably, Clinton ran on the tickets of both the Democratic Party and the far-left Working Families Party (WFP), which was closely allied with ACORN. After receiving WFP's endorsement, Clinton, vowing to wage a “people's grassroots campaign,” told a cheering crowd of WFP-affiliated supporters: “I consider this the beginning of a partnership.”


During her campaign, Clinton spoke at numerous WFP events, most memorably at the Party's debut convention, held March 26-27, 2000 in Albany—an event which the Communist Party USA newspaper People's Weekly World approvingly called “a turning point in New York politics.” Also in attendance at the convention was a delegation of the Democratic Socialists of America, many of whose members belong to WFP.


“Candidates know that when they're on our [WFP] line, they're committed to certain things,” said Bertha Lewis, who, at that time, served as WFP's co-chair and ACORN-New York's executive director. Just days before Mrs. Clinton won her Senate seat in November 2000, Lewis noted: “Hillary knows that if she wins, we're going to be knockin' on her door. She won't be able to hide.” Of the 3.4 million popular votes Mrs. Clinton received from New Yorkers in that Senate election, WFP delivered 103,000.


That same year, WFP also endorsed Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore, winning 80,000 votes for him. “[T]here have been few candidates in history more supportive of our issues than Al Gore and Hillary Clinton,” proclaimed WFP campaign literature.


9/11 and the Iraq War


On September 12, 2001, Senator Clinton joined President Bush in condemning the previous day's terrorist attacks. On May 16, 2002, however, she went to the Senate floor to charge that Bush had known in advance about a possible 9/11-type plot but had done nothing to prevent it. "We have learned that President Bush had been informed last year, before September 11, of a possible plot by those associated with Osama bin Laden to hijack a U.S. airliner," said Mrs. Clinton.


In October 2002, Senator Clinton voted in favor of the Iraq Resolution which authorized President Bush to use military measures, if necessary, to force Saddam Hussein to comply with a United Nations Security Council Resolution to disarm. She was firm in her belief that Saddam posed a clear and serious threat to American national security, both in terms of his weapons programs and his affiliations with terrorists. On October 10, 2002, she said from the Senate floor:


"In the four years since the [weapons] inspectors left [Iraq], intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security. Now this much is undisputed.... Over eleven years have passed since the UN called on Saddam Hussein to rid himself of weapons of mass destruction as a condition of returning to the world community. Time and time again he has frustrated and denied these conditions. This matter cannot be left hanging forever with consequences we would all live to regret."


In September 2003, six months after the U.S. had routed Saddam's forces on the battlefield, Mrs. Clinton proudly defended her vote for the Iraq Resolution. According to a Washington Times report: "she said the intelligence she saw leading up to the war was consistent with intelligence from previous administrations and she checked out information with trusted Clinton administration officials." Moreover, Senator Clinton credited her husband for having bequeathed to President Bush the military that had so swiftly deposed Saddam.[11]


But a month later, as the U.S. struggled to suppress a ferocious insurgency in Iraq, Senator Clinton condemned President Bush's foreign policy as "aggressive unilateralism" that had been implemented "as a first resort against perceived threats and not as a necessary final resort."[12] With ever-increasing stridency, she began to charge that Bush had misled her, the Congress, and the American people about the extent of the threat posed by Saddam. In November 2005 she wrote an open letter to her constituents, which stated, in part:


"In October 2002, I voted for the resolution to authorize the Administration to use force in Iraq. I voted for it on the basis of the evidence presented by the Administration, assurances they gave that they would first seek to resolve the issue of weapons of mass destruction peacefully through United Nations-sponsored inspections ...


"Their assurances turned out to be empty ones, as the Administration refused repeated requests from the U.N. inspectors to finish their work. And the 'evidence' of weapons of mass destruction and links to al Qaeda turned out to be false.


"Based on the information that we have today, Congress never would have been asked to give the President authority to use force against Iraq. And if Congress had been asked, based on what we know now, we never would have agreed, given the lack of a long-term plan, paltry international support, the proven absence of weapons of mass destruction, and the reallocation of troops and resources that might have been used in Afghanistan to eliminate Bin Laden and al Qaeda, and fully uproot the Taliban."


But Mrs. Clinton's claim that she had been deceived into supporting the war, and that she had turned against it only upon subsequently becoming aware of that deception, was untrue. As David Horowitz explains:


"Starting in July 2003 ... the Democratic National Committee ran a national TV ad whose message was: 'Read his lips: President Bush Deceives the American People.' This was the beginning of a five-year, unrelenting campaign to persuade Americans and their allies that 'Bush lied, people died,' that the war was 'unnecessary' and 'Iraq was no threat.' ...


"In fact, the claim that Bush lied in order to dupe Democrats into supporting the war is itself the biggest lie of the war. Every Democratic Senator who voted for the war had on his or her desk before the vote a 100-page report, called 'The National Intelligence Estimate,' [NIE], which summarized all America's intelligence on Iraq that was used to justify the war. We live in a democracy; consequently, the opposition party has access to all our secrets. Democrats sit on the Senate Intelligence Committee, which oversees all of America's intelligence agencies. If any Democrat on that committee ... had requested any intelligence information Iraq, he or she would have had that information on his or [her] desk within 24 hours. The self-justifying claim that Bush lied to hoodwink the Democrats is a fraudulent charge with no basis in reality."


In June 2007, New York Times reporters Jeff Gerth and Don Van Natta, Jr., authors of Her Way: The Hopes and Ambitions of Hillary Rodham Clinton, wrote that Mrs. Clinton refused to say whether she had ever read the complete NIE report, which ... included caveats about Saddam's weaponry and doubts about any alliance he may have had with terror groups like al Qaeda.


Senator Clinton also took a highly noteworthy position against President Bush's January 2007 decision to deploy an additional 21,500 troops in a military "surge" designed to turn the tide of the Iraq War -- which had devolved into a bloody, deadly quagmire -- back in America's favor:

•In December 2006, when Bush was still contemplating the surge, Clinton said: “Everyone knows there is no military solution to the difficulties we face in Iraq. There has to be a broad-based comprehensive approach that includes resolving some of the political issues, bringing the region together.”

•According to The Daily Mail, Mrs. Clinton opposed the proposed surge because she "could not afford to be seen as hawkish when other Democrats -- especially [Barack] Obama, her presumed principal opponent [for the Democratic presidential nomination] -- were blaming President Bush for putting ever-more boots on the ground in the Middle East."

•In January 2007, Clinton told NBC's Today Show that the surge was "taking troops away from Afghanistan, where I think we need to be putting more troops, and sending them to Iraq on a mission that I think has a very limited, if any, chance for success."

•In August 2007, Clinton said: "The surge was designed to give the Iraqi government time to take steps to ensure a political solution to the situation. It has failed to do so. The White House's report in September won't change that. It is abundantly clear that there is no military solution to the sectarian fighting in Iraq. We need to stop refereeing the war, and start getting out now."

•When General David Petraeus issued a September 2007 report on the remarkably successful results that the surge was yielding, Clinton told Petraeus that his assertions required "a willing suspension of disbelief." Clinton also said that the charts (outlining the surge's progress) that Petraeus had brought to the House and Senate that same week provided merely "anecdotal" evidence and "don't ... tell the whole story."

•In April 2008, Clinton told Good Morning America that the troop surge had not worked: "Let's remember what we were told about this surge a year ago. That the whole purpose for it was to give the Iraqi government the space and time to do what it needed to do when it came to allocating oil revenues, improving services, coming to some political reconciliation. That hasn't happened."


In fact, the surge proved to be a monumentally important strategy that finally enabled the U.S. to emerge victorious in the war. Prior to the surge, it had not been uncommon for 3,000 or more Iraqi civilians and security-force members to die at the hands of terrorist violence during any given month. By May 2008, the monthly mortality figure stood at 19, and it fluctuated between 7 and 25 deaths per month over the ensuing 14 months.


On January 7, 2014, The Daily Mail reported that in his soon-to-be-released memoir, Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War, Robert Gates -- who had served as Secretary of Defense under both George W. Bush and Barack Obama -- wrote that Mrs. Clinton's opposition to the troop surge had been based on how she thought that position would affect her own political fortunes. For example, Gates described a "remarkable" exchange that he had witnessed, where "Hillary [speaking retrospectively] told the president that her opposition to the [2007] surge in Iraq had been political because she was facing him in the Iowa primary" and could not afford to be perceived as pro-war. Gates added that Obama had likewise "conceded vaguely that [his] opposition to the Iraq surge had been political." "To hear the two of them making these admissions, and in front of me," wrote Gates, "was as surprising as it was dismaying."


Economic Policies


During her years in the Senate, Mrs. Clinton consistently voted against proposed income-tax cuts -- most notably the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 and the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 -- depicting them as fiscally irresponsible measures that were designed to help only the wealthy. At a fundraiser in 2004, she told a crowd of financial donors: "Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you ... We're saying that for America to get back on track, we're probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."


After the passage of the aforementioned tax cut in 2001, Senator Clinton often stated that it had harmed the U.S. economy. In April 2003, for example, she claimed, "there is no escaping the wrongheaded, very destructive economic policies that this [Bush] administration has chosen to inflict on our country." The following month, she told the U.S. Senate: "We are in danger of being the first generation of Americans to leave our children worse off than we were."[13]


Contrary to her claims, however, the post-tax cut U.S. economy immediately produced federal tax revenues of unprecedented heights. As Steve Forbes said on March 20, 2006: "In 2003 ... those tax cuts ... set off the boom that we are having today, strong economy. We're the largest growing economy among large economies in the world. We've created ... nearly five million jobs and we've had a 4 percent-plus growth rate. That would not have happened without the tax cuts." Similarly, CNBC's Larry Kudlow said in February 2006: "[T]he reality is that the Bush tax-cut incentives continue to propel economic growth."








In the midst of bombed-out ruins at the fringes of Kabul, this building supply store with a joyfully painted door and roses planted in front, a sign of optimism just like this story by Rory Stewart published here:


"Regenerating Afghanistan: saving part of historic Kabul by establishing a craft school

To realise his dream of building a craft school to regenerate an ancient quarter of Kabul, Rory Stewart would have to sway sceptical officials, unite a staff of disparate ethnic groups and somehow secure international funding, all to a soundtrack of gunfire.


The mayor pointed to a map behind his desk, inscribed 'Master plan for Kabul 1976'. Drawn up by Soviet and East German planners, this remained his dream for the old city

At the beginning of 2006 I found myself sitting in the front room of a tailoring shop in Kabul containing a frayed pink Bokhara carpet, a safe, a feather duster, six glasses and a Thermos of green tea. A laminated brochure on the safe promised that I would conserve a section of the medieval city, improve living conditions, restore ancient buildings and create an academy for traditional crafts. I was listed as the chief executive of the Turquoise Mountain Foundation. There was, however, no other employee and I was not quite sure what I was doing.

My life to date had been more institutional: a brief period as an infantry officer in the Black Watch, and then service with the Foreign Office in Indonesia, the Balkans and as the coalition deputy governor of two provinces in southern Iraq. The only two years that I had spent outside government were from 2000 to 2002, when I took unpaid leave to walk from Turkey to Bangladesh. I had fallen in love with Afghanistan on that journey, and written a book about it.


When I returned in 2003 to work for the coalition in Iraq I often dreamt, while dodging mortars or emails from Washington, of moving back to a mud fortress in the Afghan mountains.

In Iraq I had been given $10 million a month to spend, delivered in vacuum-sealed packets. Every day Iraqis had demanded to know what we had done for them.

'We have restored 240 schools.’

'Apart from that, what have you done?’

'All the clinics and hospitals.’

'Apart from that…’

I had become used to crowds carrying banners that said death to the deputy governor. In 2004 the Prince of Wales had written to me suggesting that I establish a carpentry school to train street children and find them jobs. It was the only project I did that really appealed to Iraqi imaginations. Suddenly, we had the mayor and the police chief competing to give speeches to the students and all the Arab television stations filming the school.

The following year the Prince had suggested that I go to Afghanistan to establish a school to train Afghans in traditional crafts. I thought I could combine his interest in craft training with my own desire to save a poor community in Kabul. The Prince had raised seed money for the first six months of operations. Thereafter, I would largely be on my own. My first act had been to rent the room in the tailoring shop, and buy the Thermos and feather duster. Now I needed to start work.

The area I hoped to save was called Murad Khane and the man whom I had first met there was called Kaka (Uncle) Khalil. I called on him, the day after my arrival. He was wearing an old dark shalwar kameez, muddy white gym-shoes and a tweed jacket and, because he was a pigeon-master, his hands were scarred by beak marks and by the sharp thread with which he pinioned his birds’ wings.

Khalil was from the Qizilbash Shia minority, which had been persecuted for centuries, but like most of his neighbours he was a house-owner. All but one of the houses in the district had been passed down, father to son, for more than 100 years. This was the northern edge of the old city, the houses were built of mud brick and their courtyard walls were panelled in carved cedar wood. It was impossible to tell how many centuries people had lived in Murad Khane but Kabul was around before the visit of Alexander the Great.

We followed some children chasing a dog through the wasteland that formed the centre of Murad Khane. Two old men squatted in the open to relieve themselves. Nearby, three cooks were peeling onions. I watched a woman in a burqa clamber over a heap of rubbish into her courtyard because the garbage had submerged her entrance. Four acres of Murad Khane were covered in rubbish. There was no electricity, no water, no sewerage. One in five children died before they were five; most of the population could not read or write and life expectancy was about 40. Around the edge of the central landfill site ran a narrow bazaar, a couple of mosques, some bath-houses and about 60 mud-brick courtyard houses, crammed between the river and shabby six-storey 1970s shopping arcades.

In the bazaar I was introduced to Abdul-Hadi, one of the greatest carpenters in Afghanistan. He was 76 years old and had been selling fruit in the market for 15 years. War, material costs, declining quality and lack of contact with the outside world had all combined to destroy the market for Afghan woodwork. He had no students to whom he could pass on his skills. I explained to Khalil that my dream was to build a craft school in the centre of Murad Khane and use it as a catalyst to regenerate the neighbourhood. He suggested that I talk to the government and try to get international support.

It was now four years since the US-led invasion. The coalition was angry at the corruption, the heroin production, the violence in rural areas and the lack of economic growth and governmental control. They had decided to send more troops. Three thousand British soldiers were deploying to Helmand to replace 200 American soldiers. Soon, there would be more than 7,000. Meanwhile, the Taliban were re-emerging. It was already too dangerous to travel on the main road to the south. Kidnapping was increasing, bombs were beginning to go off in Kabul itself. The international community had prepared a $20 billion aid package. The military wanted it to go to the unstable areas of the south and east, the European Community wanted programmes only in 'gender, rural development and governance’, and the Afghan government demanded that all funds be placed in the central budget of the ministry of finance. Kabul was in ruins and its population had ballooned from a million to more than five million in four years, but no one wanted to support projects such as ours.

Officials from seven Afghan ministries, eight foreign embassies and four charities told me that my plans were unwise and possibly illegal. It was illegal to demolish a building in the old city; it was also illegal to rebuild there. Only charities could export tax-free traditional crafts, but charities were not permitted an export licence. The best craftsmen were semi-literate descendants of traditional craft families, but vocational qualifications could be given only to people who had graduated in Persian literature from high school. There was demand abroad for carved cedar and replicas of Afghan jewellery but the interior ministry banned the purchase of cedar and the culture ministry banned replicas.

A senior Pashtun lawyer confided that the real problem with Murad Khane was the inhabitants: 'dirty, illiterate, superstitious Shia criminals, who would be better pushed out’. He called them foreigners, because 'they only moved to Kabul in the early 18th century’. The new mayor had also been the mayor of Kabul in the 1970s. He had spent 15 years in Canada but had not learnt English. One of his first initiatives was to try to stop the women’s hour at the municipal swimming-pool on the grounds that women could not swim. When I mentioned Murad Khane he pointed to a map behind his desk, inscribed in Cyrillic master plan for kabul 1976. This 30-year-old scheme, drawn up by Soviet and East German planners, remained his dream for the old city. He wanted to demolish the ancient streets and courtyard mansions and replace them with concrete blocks.

The next official I met was equally determined to flatten the historic site. His resolve was apparently strengthened by understandings with property developers eager to launder their new, often heroin-derived wealth through the construction of skyscrapers.

But Kaka Khalil and the people of Murad Khane still seemed to share my belief that traditional Afghan art and architecture were beautiful, worthy of international admiration and could create jobs. I was determined to continue, even if the project seemed contrary to public policy, private interest and municipal regulations. The only way to do so was to rely on the community, make rapid improvements, and dare the government to demolish what we were rebuilding.

Many charities are founded with feasibility studies and seminars, strategy papers and grant proposals. Ours really began with a wrestler. Aziz had won the Afghan national wrestling championship in 1963, gaining a broken nose, cauliflower ears, damaged knees and the title 'Pahlawan’ or 'wrestler’. When I was not making much progress with the government, Khalil suggested I should talk to Wrestler Aziz. 'I am the sub-district chief, the keeper of the shrine,’ Aziz roared on our first encounter. 'I defend this area with my arms. I will make your project work. I challenge anyone to say I have ever taken a bribe.’ He paused and added in a stage whisper, 'But I am a bandit.’

I had seen a 200-year-old mud-brick mansion, where three goats browsed a courtyard littered with crates of bananas. The wooden shutters were carved with Mughal stars and floral arabesques, framed with delicate latticework. The wood was unpainted, and the plaster patterns lightly washed with lime. I explained that I wanted to rent the mansion and to restore it as our craft school. Aziz told me instead that I should rent two other houses. 'I will place you – the foreigner – at each corner, so the government will not send in the bulldozers. If you take the centre, the government will demolish the edges.’ The owner of the mansion would not rent to me, without agreement from the wrestler, so I had to follow the wrestler’s plan.

Next, I recruited staff. Even an uneducated Afghan who had attended a development training course and could speak passable English could earn $1,000 a month in Kabul. I could not afford those salaries.

My first employee, also called Aziz, had worked as a salesman in a Pakistani carpet shop and in the 'informal export sector’ during the Taliban period, which seemed to involve carrying semi-precious stones across mountain passes. But an old friend had employed him as a driver and said that he had once risked his life to save her from kidnapping. Within a week I had added an Afghan woman, a young radio operator from the north, a 50-year-old white-bearded engineer, a one-legged horseman, a high school literature teacher, a woodworker and a physically disabled academic administrator. Thus, respectively, I had appointed my logistics manager, office administrator, finance director, chief engineer, guard, calligraphy master, woodwork master and office manager.

One of them explained that he was working for me because 'other charities tell us we live in the wrong kind of houses, have the wrong breed of sheep, are unhealthy and uneducated; your project says traditional Afghan art and architecture is beautiful, worth preserving, will find admirers around the world and can generate incomes.’ Another confessed he just wanted a job.

None had had senior jobs in an international organisation; none spoke fluent English; the majority had not completed a high school education and I suspect they would not have been employed in any formal recruitment process. But I believed I could trust them.

Each employee built their own team. Within three weeks we had 40 staff and could no longer fit in the tailoring shop. An English businessman called David suggested that I could occupy and restore a 19th-century fortress, set above two acres of gardens. The owner now lived in Delhi, and David and his friends lived in the only occupied wing. We replaced ceilings, installed lavatories and repaired the underfloor heating system of the 19th-century bath-house so that we could bathe in the winter. In the garden we set up the first campus of our Institute of Afghan Arts, to train craftsmen, find them jobs and sell their products. This was a temporary home, while we were restoring the two houses recommended by the wrestler.

The early staff came from different social classes and from ethnic groups that had recently been at war. Each favoured their own: the manager from the persecuted Hazara minority hired a Hazara cook and translator, while Panshiri Tajiks came to dominate the driving pool. My personal relations with each, stretching back from my time walking across Afghanistan or through mutual friends, made it almost impossible for me to fire anyone.

I had to spend a great deal of time at weddings, lending money, trying to help their relatives and paying medical bills from my own pocket. But it proved a wonderful team: each was bound to me by some form of personal loyalty. Their eight separate origins meant that they kept an often jealous eye on each other, ensuring that as the organisation grew it could never be dominated by a single cabal.

I had reservations about appointing my landlord the tailor’s brother, Engineer Hidayat, to oversee restoration work, not only because he had little formal education or knowledge of architectural conservation but also because he came from a different ethnic group and a different sect of Islam from that of the community of Murad Khane. But when he walked over the rutted mud lanes of Murad Khane and met Pahlawan Aziz he seized him by the biceps and began a mock re-enactment of a wrestling match, laced with jokes and elaborate compliments. It was he who negotiated with the wrestler and who convinced me to follow the wrestler’s housing plans. We were rewarded with a petition signed by the 50 most senior members of the community asking us to work in the area. Henceforth, community support was our greatest defence against the municipality and the mayor, international policy shifts and greedy developers.

We decided it would be strategic to begin by shifting rubbish. The engineer conjured up a work-force and began. At this point the municipality director, wearing a lilac suit, appeared with police and a document ordering us to stop. Here then was the first test of our model. The police advanced with Kalashnikovs; the labourers fell back; I rummaged for dog-eared registration documents and the municipality director wrote in bold strokes on a clipboard. Behind me, I sensed a gathering crowd. An old man, whom I had not met before, stepped forward and shouted, 'How dare you stop these men? I remember when you last cleared the garbage: I was 10 years old and it was 1947.’ The wrestler shook the hands of the now-smiling police. The engineer put his arm around the lilac-clad director’s shoulders and walked him out of Murad Khane. The next day we received a letter from the municipality authorising us to proceed.

Foreigners had told me that Afghans were slow and inefficient. That was not my experience. Over the next 18 months, the engineer cleared more than 15,000 trucks of rubbish, dropping the street level by over seven feet and creating near-total employment. Then he levelled the streets, dug drainage and wells and laid paving, and began emergency repairs on 50 houses, making them watertight, propping walls, installing lavatories. This was not expensive work, since the materials were recycled mud – all the cost was in the labour – and I could initially cover that from the seed-funding money raised by the Prince of Wales.

Afghan shoppers began to come back into the area and the drug peddlers, who had long made Murad Khane one of their central markets, moved elsewhere, perhaps because clean, well-lit and populated streets were not a fitting environment for their customers. But the engineer’s real genius was political, in defusing the conflicts over jobs for relatives, wages and which properties should be repaired first. He dealt with things in his own style, grabbing an angry mullah by the beard after we had accidentally brought down the mosque wall. Astonishingly, the mullah laughed and forgave us.

Meanwhile, in order to cope with demands, our lack of funding and the shortage of professionals, I brought in more than 100 international volunteers, who came for a few months at a time, over a period of two years. A 22-year-old Dari-speaking American and a Dutch ceramicist in his seventies worked with a curator from the Tate and a Cuban urban planner. Many lived three to a room and we all ate at a common table. Sometimes we were woken by gunfire; a volunteer was walking 50 yards from a bomb that scattered body parts across the pavement; gunmen broke into a hotel and shot men in a locker-room that many of us used. But we were able to travel by yak in the High Pamirs, ski in the Hindu Kush and listen to old men hold forth in tea-houses in the old city.

Where we had no expertise we had to make things up. I had started with a few prejudices: in the absence of conservation architects on our team, I wanted the repairs to buildings to be visible but not too obvious. But that was hardly a coherent conservation philosophy. I thought the high temperatures in electric kilns eliminated all that was intriguing in the low-fired pots, but that didn’t help us win contracts from Trust House Forte, which wanted less fragile glazes. I didn’t think we should pay too much for international volunteers, but what about providing life insurance? Should the financial year start in January or April? Should we have a substantial document detailing our plans for urban regeneration and who should lead it: an architect? A planner? A property developer? Me?

It was clear that we needed to work quickly to prove to the government that the area and crafts were worth saving and to the community that we were serious, competent and helpful to them. Our initiatives multiplied, responding to sudden crises or the shifting expertise of our volunteers or the community’s demands.

Within a year we produced a traffic plan for Murad Khane, largely to placate the ministry; took an exhibition of calligraphy to a museum in Bahrain; built different designs of self-composting lavatories (one under a Nubian vault); and fitted earth buildings with new types of mud brick, solar panels and elaborately carved calligraphic doors. We created factory management systems around new carpentry equipment; launched IT and business courses for students; developed partnerships with Pakistani art schools; opened a rural museum for potters; and sold an Afghan carved suite to a client in London. Anna, our extraordinary young American development director, who had been working with Coventry Cathedral, recorded the recipes of the old city and designed a restaurant in a historic building that would provide employment and draw Afghan visitors back to the old city with good, affordable food. We wanted to start with Afghan tourists, since the security situation would not attract foreigners.

Some of the best ideas came from the community itself – such as the primary school, which we opened last year. Education is bad in Afghanistan: perhaps a quarter of teachers are illiterate and as recently as 2001 girls were not permitted to attend. There was no school and a great deal of domestic violence and drug abuse in some of the poor homes in Murad Khane, and a school would provide children not only with education but also with a safe haven during the day. But we were over-stretched and I was reluctant to launch something new. We argued and then we compromised: the community providing the land and the building while we focused on the teaching.

Within an hour of opening the doors we had 160 boys and girls, most of whom had never been to school before. Their smiles alone made me feel our project was worthwhile. Yet it was no easier than anything else in Afghanistan. The school would have remained second-rate if we had not hired better teachers, negotiated with the ministry of education, built new classrooms and introduced local history and art classes, city tours, adult literacy classes and extra mathematics. And much of this depended on foreign staff. The curriculum was reformed and the teachers were trained, for example, by the head of science from an inner-city school in Boston, Massachusetts.

The Institute for Traditional Afghan Arts began as an apprentice workshop for carpenters, calligraphers and potters with people huddled on rough benches, watching Master Abdul Hadi. A year later, there was a full timetable for the students including IT, English, business studies, Islamic art history and design. Our new business development section, whose aim was to generate income to sustain the institute into the future, launched catalogues and websites, won commissions from embassies, represented us at international trade fairs, sold coasters in Canada and a wooden library to Japan. The fashion chain Monsoon gave us money to train women in embroidery to sell in its stores. We began to sell Turquoise Mountain products through our website, We planted trees to make our timber source sustainable. We built a girls’ school near the potters’ community of Istalif (in addition to the primary school) for a fraction of the cost of a concrete building. At the start of the second year we had 650 applicants for 33 places.

It was only after a year’s work and once we had shown visible results that the relevant Afghan ministries began to support us. A new minister of education recognised the degree certificates from our school and registered us as a national higher education institute. Two decrees were issued to register the area as a protected historical site. Our architects trained engineers from the ministry of urban development and they in turn worked with us on land-use plans. Flattering profiles appeared. We were often on the Afghan evening news.

I was the only person aware that we were dangerously short of cash. I needed to raise thousands of dollars a day. I was able to support myself from income from my book sales, and I began to lend more of my own money to try to keep things going. Many had trusted us: donating land for our schools, working long hours, enrolling to learn complex skills in traditional crafts and architecture. But we had to slow the building projects, which meant laying people off at the onset of winter. I began to wonder what might be raised by selling our minivan or carpets.

By November 2006 I was only two weeks from having to give everyone a month’s notice and shut the charity down. I woke at three in the morning and felt very afraid. No one was used to supporting a brand-new organisation that was operating on this scale. Most donors required two years of audited accounts. As I walked to work, I was greeted by people – the gate-guard who had lost his leg to a landmine; the receptionist who needed a heart operation; and the driver who had been the first to leave his job to join us – and when they thanked me, I felt like a fraud. An objective examination of the costs and probabilities suggested that we should close. I continued through stubbornness, not reason. I flew back to Britain and left behind the conversations and the crises that I had loved in the old courtyards of Kabul for a life of fundraising. I made it a rule to return every fortnight, but I was on almost 300 flights over the next two years.

In countries I had never visited I waited for meetings that never happened. Once, when I made it past a secretary in a Gulf state, I was accused of terrorist financing and shown the door. Some of the wealthy would support us only if we changed what we were doing: to advocacy for women, or schools for the blind. If by luck they would support something we were doing, they could change their mind and suggest something that we were not. One boasted to me that after an exhaustive analysis of proposals he had ignored us and instead allocated hundreds of thousands of dollars to an Afghan woman who was running thousands of girls’ schools. I knew these schools did not exist.

I was hopeful about our chances with foundations created by young dotcom leaders and dedicated to 'social entrepreneurs’. They should not have been bound by the paperwork of government aid bureaucracies; it was their own money and they should have been able to take risk. But they wanted synergies and income streams and compared us on cost-per-unit metrics. They did not want to be distracted from their 'core mission’.

But we didn’t just do one core activity. We believed, for example, that to regenerate the bazaar we had to develop attractive sites for visitors; we had to train craftsmen to manufacture products to sell, teach the shopkeepers to read and write and count, give incomes to women, provide shelter, water and electricity. Our strength was our local knowledge: we had been in every house, employed someone from every family, worked alongside them, negotiated, shaped their aspirations and were shaped in turn. But there was no universal model: what worked for us might not work elsewhere.

The only way to convey our work is to get donors to visit because it is almost impossible to imagine the environment of the old city, or grasp how our many different activities come together without being on the ground. One of our best supporters was an 84-year-old American woman who immediately on arrival called on senior ministers and generals and forced them to act, establishing an orphanage, and bringing equipment to eliminate water-borne diseases. She clambered up stairs, over dangerous gaps in the roof, trudged through mud, interrogated our female students, and watched the customers buy the products that provided the income to sustain the project and listened to the community itself. But few people dared to come.

In the end we were saved by private generosity. An Afghan nightclub owner crossed a street in Washington, DC, to give me $1,000 because he had heard about us from his family in Kabul, a Swedish woman cycled up to our office to give us $50, our English volunteer did a skip-a-thon with an Afghan friend in Dorset. And the Prince of Wales was in touch weekly, writing to people on our behalf, arranging dinners and meetings, advocating Afghan government legislation and providing advice. It had been his idea in the first place, and it couldn’t have happened without his support.

Our largest donors gave from their private accounts, because their foundation bureaucracies were too restricted to be able to support us. Some had heard of us, others gave randomly with no prior contact. A lady talked to me about Afghanistan for 20 minutes over lunch in California, and later sent $1 million. Then she visited us and sent another million. The Canadian government became our first and most generous public donor. Finally, after three years and $12 million from donors, the Afghan government is now putting its own money behind us.

Last week, I stood in the central square of Murad Khane for the spring kite festival. For once I could move without sinking into the mud because the drainage and stone-paving has worked. We had grown in two years from one to 350 employees.

I noticed that the carving on the windows of the upper gallery of the great mansion needed to be redone: the Nubian vault had been removed from the lavatory of the jewellery school because of a rumour we were building a pagan temple. There was a new community donation box, outside the clinic that we had established for women who could not leave the area and did not want to see a male doctor. People had put in $30, which would cover prescriptions for the next two months. Three streets had agreed to take over the cost of rubbish clearance from us with each household contributing 30 cents a month; one had not. I noted that the students at the primary school had new uniforms.

The structures of government bureaucracies and philanthropic foundations often seem to exist to stop this kind of project. If it succeeds, it will not be a neat lesson in 'social entrepreneurship’, in management, or a new model for international development. And it seems surreally distanced from the ambitions and priorities of my former colleagues in the Army or the Foreign Office.

Rather, it is a story of sudden expressions of faith, acts of grand generosity and amateur flair. Ours was a local project in a mud city spun by an ageing wrestler, teased by volunteers, tugged by a grey-bearded engineer, deconstructed in conversations around a table at mealtimes.

After three years in Afghanistan, I am now dividing my time between Kabul and teaching human rights at Harvard. My hope is that I will continue to steer the project until it is completed and that I will be able to return in 30 years to admire the old city’s arts and architecture, and encounter a community whose lives are more just, prosperous and humane. But I cannot guarantee we will succeed. I have never had a more satisfying job. But I am not sure whether I would have the energy to do something like this again."

Rory Stewart is the author of 'The Places in Between’ and 'Occupational Hazards: My Time Governing in Iraq’, both published by Picador.







Three Convicted in Terror-Related Cases Later Granted U.S. Citizenship by Obama Administration

Friday, April 29, 2011

By Edwin Mora


( -- Three people convicted of crimes as a result of a terrorism-related investigation by the Department of Justice (DOJ) were later naturalized as U.S. citizens by the Obama administration, according to federal auditors.


The March 2011 audit (released on April 21, 2011) by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), entitled Criminal Alien Statistics: Information on Incarcerations, Arrests and Costs, shows that three individuals were among “defendants where the investigation involved an identified link to international terrorism but they were charged with violating other statutes [not directly related to terrorism], including fraud, immigration, drugs, false statements, and general conspiracy charges,” referred by DOJ as Category II terrorism-related cases.


The three individuals in question can be found in a DOJ list of unsealed terrorism-related investigations conducted from Sept. 11, 2001 through Mar. 18, 2010. There are 403 defendants on that list of which, according to the GAO, at least 43 percent were aliens--both legal (26 percent) and illegal (17 percent)--at the time they were charged with crimes.


“Prosecuting terror-related targets using Category II offenses and others is often an effective method--and sometimes the only available method--of deterring and disrupting potential terrorist planning and support activities,” explained the DOJ in the document that listed the defendants.


Staff members of GAO's Homeland Security and Justice team who worked on the audit told in an e-mail that the three individuals were naturalized as U.S. citizens under President Barack Obama.


“One of the individuals was naturalized in late 2009. The other two were naturalized in 2010,” says the e-mail from the GAO.


In the audit, the GAO analyzed the immigration status of the individuals on the DOJ list using information from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS), a component of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).


“Based upon our analysis of USCIS and DOJ data, three of the individuals on the DOJ list received U.S. citizenship after their convictions,” stated the GAO audit report. “Two were convicted of unlawful production of an identity document and one was convicted of transferring funds out of the country in violation of U.S. sanctions.”


“An individual applying for naturalization must demonstrate good moral character for a statutory period of time--from 5 years preceding the application up to admission to citizenship,” added the GAO. “This includes not having been convicted of crimes, such as murder, rape, drug trafficking, or other aggravated felonies prior to or during that period, as well as not having been convicted of other crimes during that period, such as certain drug offenses or convictions that led to 180 days or more of prison time.”


However, according to the USCIS, the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) says that in determining good moral character, the federal government can look further back than five years, adding that it “may take into consideration as a basis for such determination the applicant's conduct and acts at any time prior to that period.”


The INA, which allows a person who has been a permanent resident for at least 5 years to apply for naturalization, governs the eligibility requirements to be naturalized as a U.S. citizen, including establishing good moral character, the USCIS stated on its Web site.


“USCIS determined that each of these individuals were able to demonstrate good moral character within the required period of time and met all other requirements for naturalization,” stated the GAO.


In explaining why the individuals were allowed to become naturalized U.S. citizens, USCIS indicated that “the convictions were outside of the [five year] statutory period, were not aggravated felonies, and resulted in no prison time for the defendants; all required background checks were conducted and resolved with appropriate law enforcement agencies; and no national security, public safety, or other grounds of ineligibility existed.”


The GAO report was requested by Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), chairman of the House Judiciary Immigration and Policy Enforcement Subcommittee, and Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), ranking member of that panel.


In a press release about the report, King's office highlighted that "three individuals on DOJ's list of convictions resulting from international terrorism investigations were granted citizenships after their convictions" as a “key” finding of the GAO audit.


Previously operated by TNT Airways, the passenger/freighter aircraft have been brought up to the new C3 operating standard under an urgent operational requirement deal contracted with BAE Systems during 2012. Now in grey service markings, the aircraft carry the military registrations ZE707 and ZE708.

Acquired to help meet the UK's intra-theatre lift requirements inside Afghanistan, the transports have been purchased and modified under a programme worth an eventual £47 million ($72.7 million), according to figures released by the UK National Audit Office. They're assigned to the RAF's 32 (The Royal) Sqn, which already operates two BAe 146s in the -100 standard for VIP transport tasks from the service's Northolt base in north London.

Forensic science standards risk slipping since work was transferred to in-house police labs and private firms, the spending watchdog has warned.

The National Audit Office said many forces now used their own unregulated experts, and experienced firms risked being priced out of...







Conservatives are outraged at the IRS' disclosure late Friday that it had lost a trove of former administrator Lois Lerner's emails on the targeting of tea party groups, with one critic likening it to the infamous gap in a tape of President Richard Nixon's conversations during the Watergate scandal.

"Liars. They're such liars. Unbelievable," charged Washington attorney Cleta Mitchell, who is representing several groups in a federal lawsuit over the targeting in their applications for tax-exempt status. "This is outrageous. They're lying.


"This is like the 18-and-a-half minutes in Rose Mary Woods' tape," Mitchell said, referring to the gap in the audio tape of a June 20, 1972, conversation believed to have been held between Nixon and Chief of Staff H.R. Haldeman. "It's ridiculous. I just don't believe them."


Jenny Beth Martin, co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots, one of the groups that received its tax-exempt status after suing the IRS, said the revelation "doesn’t pass the smell test and smacks of obstruction of justice."


Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice, which is representing 41 targeted groups in a federal lawsuit against the IRS, said "this is insanity."


"Hollywood couldn’t write a script with any more scandal and intrigue than what is unfolding in the IRS targeting scandal," he said in a report on the organization's website.


And Rep. Darrell Issa, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, suggested that the White House was being dishonest in saying that the emails were lost.


"Isn’t it convenient for the Obama administration that the IRS now says it has suddenly realized it lost Lois Lerner’s emails requested by Congress and promised by Commissioner John Koskinen?" the California Republican asked in a statement. "Do they really expect the American people to believe that, after having withheld these emails for a year, they're just now realizing the most critical time period is missing?"


The Internal Revenue Service told Congress late Friday that it could not locate many of Lerner's emails prior to 2011 because her computer crashed that summer.


Lerner headed the IRS division that processed applications for tax-exempt status. The agency was found in May 2013 to have improperly scrutinized applications for tax-exempt status by tea party, religious, and other conservative groups. The screening generally involved unusual delays and detailed requests for information.


The scrutiny started in 2010 and continued to just before the 2012 presidential election. Besides the Tea Party Patriots, other groups targeted were True the Vote, the Houston-based organization that combats election fraud, and Crossroads Grassroots Policy Strategies, a nonprofit political group advised by Republican strategist Karl Rove.


Lerner, who retired last September because of the scandal, was found in contempt of Congress in May after refusing to testify before Issa's committee.


When she first appeared before the oversight committee not long after the scandal broke, Lerner denied wrongdoing but refused to answer questions, citing her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. She took the Fifth in a second hearing before the panel in March.


The Oversight Committee is one of three congressional panels that have been investigating the IRS scandal for more than a year. The others are the House Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Finance Committee.


The Justice Department and the IRS inspector general are also investigating.


Emails have since been disclosed showing that Lerner discussed working with Justice to prosecute nonprofits that she felt had "lied" about their political activities — and that the communications occurred within days of publicly acknowledging that the targeting had occurred.


In February, Koskinen, who took over the embattled agency in December, pledged to work with Congress on the various investigations.


The IRS said in a statement on Friday that it was able to generate 24,000 Lerner emails from 2009 to 2011 because Lerner had copied in other IRS employees. The agency said it pieced together the emails from the computers of 83 other IRS employees.


But an undetermined number are gone, the agency said.


Michigan Rep. Dave Camp, the Ways and Means Committee chairman, said that the missing emails primarily involve people from outside the IRS, "such as the White House, Treasury, Department of Justice, [Federal Election Commission], or Democrat offices."


"The fact that I am just learning about this, over a year into the investigation, is completely unacceptable and now calls into question the credibility of the IRS's response to congressional inquiries," Camp said in a statement. "There needs to be an immediate investigation and forensic audit by Department of Justice as well as the inspector general."


In addition, the IRS said in its statement that it had gone to great lengths cooperating with congressional investigations, spending nearly $10 million to produce more than 750,000 documents.


Overall, the IRS said it had produced 67,000 emails to and from Lerner, covering the period from 2009 to 2013.


"The IRS is committed to working with Congress," the agency said. "The IRS has remained focused on being thorough and responding as quickly as possible to the wide-ranging requests from Congress while taking steps to protect underlying taxpayer information."


The announcement drew the ire of many Republicans. Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch, the top GOP member on the Finance Committee, called the disclosure "an outrageous impediment" to its investigation.


"Even more egregious is the fact we are learning about this a full year after our initial request to provide the committee with any and all documents relating to our investigation," Hatch said in a statement. "And while the IRS has agreed to turn over additional documentation, I am still greatly troubled that the administration failed to notify the committee of this when they first became aware of it."


Mitchell called it standard fare for the Obama White House: a late-Friday afternoon release of major news.


"They do it over and over and over," she told Newsmax. "There are so many questions that are raised by this 'revelation.'"


They include, she posed: "Why are we just hearing this today, more than a year after the investigation started?


"What exactly are the FBI and NSA's forensics experts doing to retrieve this 'hard-drive crash'?" she added. "Do we believe that the FBI has not been called in — and that they have not been able to retrieve these 'lost' emails? There are so many things."


Mitchell said that she will be taking action next week in their federal lawsuit to prevent all federal agencies involved in the scandal — even Lerner's attorney, William Taylor III — from destroying any evidence in the case.


"We actually have remedies in federal court that Congress doesn't appear to have."


Read Latest Breaking News from



Nobody's buying the IRS story

by John Hayward 14 Jun 2014, 7:23 AM


In response to IRS Commissioner previously testified Lois Lerner emails were archived:


Not only did the Commish testify - under oath, I believe - that these emails were archived, but the IRS turns out to have explicit rules for making hard-copy backups of such correspondence. I'll repeat my immediate response upon learning of those rules: "Of course, given that the Obama Administration regards actual laws as mere suggestions, I can’t see any top officials paying a stiff price for ignoring inconvenient rules in a handbook. Or else the IRS will assure Congress it can expect those hard copies no later than June 2019, and sometime between now and then, it will regretfully announce that all the papers were consumed in a fire, or perhaps eaten by locusts."


Of course, everyone familiar with business and government IT practices called B.S. on this whole story in ten seconds flat. There's no way all of Lerner's emails were left unprotected on the hard drive of a single computer, without backups, in defiance of both government-wide and agency-specific rules, and only now does anyone think to inform Congress of this, over a year after the documents were demanded. If nothing else, IRS mail servers and their backups will have copies of the messages.


It shouldn't have taken anywhere near this long to provide two years' worth of email correspondence from properly maintained computer systems. I could do it myself in an hour, and while I probably don't have Lerner's volume of email (despite the repeated attempts of Hong Kong business magnates and Nigerian royalty to enlist my help with investing their millions) it wouldn't take me much longer if I did, and I'm not a top official in the mega-powerful agency that demands perfect record-keeping from everyone else.


Byron York is apparently hearing similar sentiments from his readership:


Over at National Journal, Ron Fournier is appropriately skeptical - his article is entitled "Did the IRS really lose Lois Lerner's emails? Let a special prosecutor find them" - but he still strains mightily to extend benefit of the doubt to the Obama Administration, even as it's clear his patience is wearing thin:


The announcement came late Friday, a too-cute-by-half cliche of a PR strategy to mitigate backlash. "The IRS told Congress it cannot locate many of Lois Lerner's emails prior to 2011 because her computer crashed during the summer of that year," The Associated Press reported.


Lerner headed the IRS division that processed applications for tax-exempt status. The IRS acknowledged last year that agents had improperly scrutinized applications for tax-exempt status by tea party and other conservative groups. The IRS also screened liberal groups, which Democrats claim as proof that there was no abuse of power.


Republicans lawmakers are prone not to trust any explanation from the White House. Their most conservative voters assumed from the start that the White House was targeting right-leaning groups for intimidation.


Do we really have to go over the details of the scandal again, or have Obama and his toadies done a good enough job of rewriting history? No, Ron, the IRS did not "also screen liberal groups." That talking point has been written into the Left's mythology of the IRS scandal, but the House Oversight Committee has made it abundantly clear that is not true. Liberal groups were belatedly added to the "Be On the Lookout" lists when people inside the Tax Exempt Organizations division realized how bad their pogrom against conservative groups looked. Only half a dozen left-leaning groups ever received any enhanced scrutiny, it wasn't comparable to what was done to Tea Party and pro-life groups, there were very solid non-political reasons for giving that tiny handful of left-wing groups a close look (i.e. they were reconstituted ACORN front groups) and crucially, they didn't get the endless slow-walking "no approval but no denial" treatment Obama's political enemies received.


And the reason "conservative voters assumed from the start that the White House was targeting right-leaning groups for intimidation" is that the IRS admitted as much. That's how all this started, with Lois Lerner's planted question at a tax conference, admitting improper use of IRS power to get out in front of a devastating internal audit. Everything said and done by the Administration since then has been an effort to take the sharp edges off the scandal by obscuring key facts, providing left-wingers with phony talking points, making a brief but hilariously transparent pretense of accountability (remember when Obama pretended to fire the temporary IRS commissioner who was leaving anyway... exactly the same way he pretended to fire an official in the early days of the VA scandal?) and most importantly, dragging the investigation out forever.


Here are the fruits of that strategy: long months after crucial documents were demanded by investigators, the IRS shrugs and says, "You know what? That stuff all got erased in a hard drive crash, like, um, three years ago or something." If the story hadn't been dragged out this long, the "loss" of those emails would have hit Washington like a nuclear blast. Instead, it's the epilogue to a story Obama and his media allies spent a year telling the American people was over.


Ron Fournier is right to call for a special prosecutor, and he wasn't timid about it, so good for him. But what does anyone expect to come of it, really? The IRS had a year to delete every trace of Lerner's dangerous correspondence; if we don't seize their systems with armed law-enforcement teams immediately, they'll have months more to finish the job while the wheels of investigative justice slowly grind along. The special prosecutor probably wouldn't have any results until after the midterm elections, well into Year Three of the IRS scandal. Lerner's just going to take the Fifth again, and so will everyone else that might take a fall. Corrupt Democrats like Elijah Cummings, who should not be allowed anywhere near either this investigation - or Congress, for that matter - will pile out of their clown cars to make the hearings a circus. And if that circus wobbles into the 2016 presidential election, we'll get to hear Hillary Clinton shriek "What difference, at this point, does it make?" all over again.


The grand lesson of the Obama years is that a Democrat president with a lapdog media can drag any scandal out until it dies of old age - becoming, at best, a partisan squabble in the collective memory of the lapdogs. Witness Politico's headline for their article on the latest developments: "IRS, Republicans clash over Lois Lerner emails." Oh, is that what this is? Just a bunch of Republicans yelling at the poor, defenseless IRS?


Bottom line: Obama's gambit to use the IRS as a political weapon worked. That means it's going to happen again.


National Audit Office

View On Black


HMS Ocean (L12) is een amfibisch transportschip van de Royal Navy en werd in 1998 in dienst genomen.



Aan de wereldwijde aanwezigheid van de Royal Navy kwam in de jaren zestig, met het verdwijnen van het "Empire", een einde. Voortaan zou de rol voornamelijk op de oceanen liggen bij het schaduwen en (indien nodig) uitschakelen van Russische onderzeeboten. Omvangrijke amfibische strijdkrachten werden derhalve steeds minder een vanzelfsprekendheid. Bezuinigingen eisten voorts hun tol op de omvang van de vloot. Rond 1970 werden vijf vliegdekschepen, waaronder de beide commando-carriers Albion en Bulwark, uit dienst genomen. Weliswaar kreeg van de 2 resterende vliegdekschepen de Hermes een secundaire taak bij het ondersteunen van amfibische acties met helikopters, maar in de praktijk was dit schip voornamelijk ingezet als kern van anti-onderzeeboot eskaders.

De amfibische capaciteit van de Royal Navy was in de jaren zeventig en tachtig van de 20e eeuw derhalve beperkt tot 2 doklandingsschepen van de Fearless-klasse en 6 kleine vrachtschepen.

Tijdens de Falklandoorlog werd het gemis van een helikoptercarrier voor het ondersteunen van een amfibische landing danig gevoeld. Reden waarom de Royal Navy een beroep moest doen op gevorderde vrachtschepen, die met veel kunst- en vliegwerk voor dat doel werden ingezet. Later in de jaren tachtig en negentig werd regelmatig één van de drie lichte vliegdekschepen van de Invincibleklasse ingezet voor het transporteren van mariniers. Een noodoplossing, want die schepen zijn daarvoor niet ontworpen en ontberen de accommodatie om troepen te huisvesten.

Pas na de val het IJzeren Gordijn en het einde van de Koude Oorlog, omstreeks 1989, lieten de budgetten ruimte toe om over een andere samenstelling van de marine na te denken. Ook de periode daarna, waarin o.a. de Golfoorlog plaatshad, maakte duidelijk dat een toekomstige rol voor de Royal Navy meer op het land, althans op het raakvlak zee en land, dan op de oceanen zou liggen.



Het ontwerp van de Ocean is gedeeltelijk gebaseerd op dat van de Invincible-klasse vliegdekschepen, maar zoveel mogelijk naar civiele stafeisen aangepast. Het schip heeft uitsluitend diesels als voortstuwing (en geen gasturbines), waardoor de maximum snelheid beperkt is tot ongeveer 18 knopen. Het schip heeft een vliegdek en hangar over de volle lengte en ruimte voor ongeveer 700 mariniers. Aan davits kunnen 4 landingsvaartuigen van het LCVP type worden meegenomen.

In 1993 werd met de bouw begonnen en in 1995 werd het schip te water gelaten. Op 20 februari 1998 werd het schip op de werf van Vickers Shipbuilding Engineering Ltd. door de Britse koningin in dienst gesteld.


Helikopters en vliegtuigen:

Afhankelijk van grootte: ongeveer 18 stuks. Meestal 12 transporthelikopters (Sea King en Chinook) en 6 Apache AH-64 gevechtshelikopters. Er zijn beperkte operatiemogelijkheden voor Harrier Gr.Mk.7 jachtvliegtuigen.



De Ocean is het zesde schip van deze naam. De vorige Ocean was een licht vlootvliegdekschip van de Colossus-klasse, dat op 30 juni 1945 in dienst werd gesteld. Op 3 december 1945 had dat schip de primeur van de eerste landing van een straalvliegtuig, een De Havilland Vampire, aan boord van een vliegdekschip.

Een zusterschip van de vijfde Ocean was de Venerable, die in 1948 als Karel Doorman bij de Koninklijke Marine in dienst kwam.

De Ocean arriveerde op 11 maart 2010 in Rotterdam, waar het schip een beleefdheidsbezoek aflegde na een NAVO-oefening.


HMS Ocean (L12) of the Royal Navy is an Amphibious assault ship (or Landing Platform Helicopter) or Helicopter carrier), the sole member of her class. She is designed to support amphibious landing operations and to support the staff of Commander UK Amphibious Force and Commander UK Landing Force. She is currently the largest ship in the Royal Navy.

She was constructed in the mid 1990s by Kvaerner Govan Ltd on the Clyde and fitted out at Barrow-in-Furness prior to first of class trials and subsequent acceptance in service. She was commissioned in September 1998 at her home port Devonport, Plymouth, Devon.

HMS Ocean returned from her 27,000 mile (43,500km) TAURUS 09 deployment to the Far East on 3 August 2009. After four weeks in port, she is currently conducting various training routines in UK waters.



An invitation to tender for a new helicopter carrier was issued in February 1992. In February 1993 The Times reported that the carrier faced cancellation due to budgetary constraints. However, at approximately the same time, British forces were engaged in operations in the Balkans, which saw the Royal Fleet Auxiliary's aviation training ship RFA Argus pressed into service as an LPH. Argus proved totally unsuitable in terms of accommodation and facilities needed for a large Embarked Military Force (EMF), which emphasised the need for a purpose built platform. On 29 March 1993 the defence procurement minister announced that development of the new LPH was proceeding.

Two shipbuilders competed for the contract - Vickers Shipbuilding and Engineering Ltd (VSEL) and Swan Hunter. On 11 May 1993 the government announced VSEL had won the contract. The build was to commercial standards, reducing costs significantly and leading to a construction spend of £154 million (£234 million as of 2010),[6], comparable to that of a Type 23 frigate. VSEL, a warship manufacturer, sub-contracted the build phase to the commercial Kværner yard in Govan, Glasgow.

The fact that VSEL's bid was £71 million lower than Swan Hunter's was the source of political controversy and lead to a National Audit Office investigation to determine whether the competition was fair. The report, published on 29 July 1993, stated that although VSEL did subsidise its bid the MoD was right to award the contract to VSEL because the subsidy was much smaller than the difference between the two bids; VSEL's bid was £139.5 million compared to Swan Hunter's £210.6 million. The Times also suggested that the subsidy was as little as £10 million. In anticipation of the report the Financial Times described the different philosophies adopted by the two bidders; While Swan Hunter viewed the ships as entirely military, "VSEL thought the design was basically a merchant ship with military hardware bolted on." VSEL's decision to sub-contract the build phase took advantage of lower overheads at a civilian yard as well as efficiency drives by its parent, Kværner. The cut-price build to commercial standards means that HMS Ocean has a projected operational life of just 20 years, significantly less than that of other warships.

Launched on 11 October 1995, she was subsequently named at Barrow by Her Majesty the Queen on 20 February 1998, prior to delivery to Devonport.

In her sea trial she managed to reach a top speed of 20.6 knots, however her usual top speed is 18 knots now totally fitted out and with the addition of new equipment.


Service history:

While Ocean was undertaking the warm water element of her first-of-class trials, she provided humanitarian assistance in Honduras following Hurricane Mitch.

During 2000 Ocean supported Operation Palliser in Sierra Leone, joining HMS Illustrious aiding the suppression of rebel activity with her own EMF and providing support facilities for the Spearhead battalion ashore.


HMS Ocean showing Landing Craft on davits and Stern Ramp deployed

On 17 February 2002, a unit of Royal Marines from Ocean accidentally landed in the San Felipe beach in the Spanish town of La Linea instead of Gibraltar causing a minor diplomatic incident as various media outlets labelled the mistake as an "invasion".

Ocean was part of a large Royal Navy task force deployed for Operation Telic, the UK contribution to the 2003 Iraq War. In the helicopter assault role she was accompanied by HMS Ark Royal.

In the summer of 2006, she was deployed as part of the task force involved in the Aurora exercises on the eastern seaboard of the United States.

In 2007, Ocean began her first long refit period. This was carried out by Devonport Management Limited at their Devonport Royal Dockyard facility and lasted around twelve months, during which period, Ark Royal took over the LPH role. HMS Ocean sailed from Plymouth on Wednesday 24 September 2008 to start sea trials, following this major period of maintenance and upgrading work. As part of that upgrade a PyTEC pyrolysising waste recycling unit was fitted.

On 18 February 2009, Ocean sailed from Devonport as part of the Taurus 09 deployent under Commander UK Amphibious Task Group, Commodore Peter Hudson, She is joined on this deployment by Landing Platform Dock HMS Bulwark, as Hudson's flagship, Type 23 Frigates HMS Argyll and HMS Somerset and four ships of the Royal Fleet Auxiliary.



US Marines ride an elevator into HMS Ocean's hangar deck during an exercise in 1999

Ocean was designed to provide the amphibious assault capabilities last offered by HMS Albion and Bulwark whilst in the Commando role. She can deploy an Embarked Military Force (EMF) of a Royal Marines Commando Group from 3 Commando Brigade supported by aviation and landing craft assets. The ships company includes 9 Assault Squadron from 1 Assault Group Royal Marines.

Ocean is also capable of limited Anti Submarine Warfare activities, supporting afloat training and acting as a base facility for other embarked forces including Counter-terrorism units.



The air group of up to 12 Sea King HC-4 medium-lift helicopters, six Lynx AH-7 light-lift/anti-Tank helicopters, and four Mk5 landing craft is provided by the Commando Helicopter Force. However, she can also support the Westland WAH-64 Apache operated by the Army Air Corps and helicopters of the Royal Air Force including the Chinook.

Ocean can transport up to 15 fixed wing Harrier aircraft of Joint Force Harrier in the ferry role, but is unable to operate as a fixed wing aircraft carrier.

Feds admit improper scrutiny of candidate, donor tax records, Justice declines to prosecute


The Treasury Department has admitted for the first time that confidential tax records of several political candidates and campaign donors were improperly scrutinized by government officials, but the Justice Department has declined to prosecute any of the cases.

Its investigators also are probing two allegations that the Internal Revenue Service “targeted for audit candidates for public office,” the Treasury’s inspector general for tax administration, J. Russell George, has privately told Sen. Chuck Grassley.

In a written response to a request by Mr. Grassley, the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, Mr. George said a review turned up four cases since 2006 in which unidentified government officials took part in “unauthorized access or disclosure of tax records of political donors or candidates,” including one case he described as “willful.” In four additional cases, Mr. George said, allegations of improper access of IRS records were not substantiated by the evidence.

Mr. Grassley has asked Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to explain why the Justice Department chose not to prosecute any of the cases. The Iowa Republican told The Washington Times that the IRS “is required to act with neutrality and professionalism, not political bias.”

The investigation did not name the government officials who obtained the IRS records improperly, nor did it reveal the identities or political parties of the people whose tax records were compromised. By law, taxpayer records at the IRS are supposed to be confidential.

The disclosures deal another blow to the IRS and the Obama administration, which are still grappling with revelations that IRS agents inappropriately targeted conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status for extraordinarily burdensome scrutiny during President Obama’s first term. Amid that furor over the abuse of the agency’s powers, the IRS has denied that the tax records of political candidates or donors were improperly accessed.

“The Justice Department should answer completely and not hide behind taxpayer confidentiality laws to avoid accountability for its decision not to prosecute a violation of taxpayer confidentiality laws,” Mr. Grassley told The Times. “With the IRS on the hot seat over targeting certain political groups, it’s particularly troubling to learn about ‘willful unauthorized access’ of tax records involving individuals who were candidates for office or political donors. The public needs to know whether the decision not to prosecute these violations was politically motivated and whether the individuals responsible were held accountable in any other way.”

A spokesman for the Justice Department did not respond to a request for comment Monday. Mr. Grassley has given Mr. Holder until July 26 to answer his questions.

In a letter July 3, Mr. George told Mr. Grassley that, of the four instances in which tax records were improperly accessed, three cases were determined to be “inadvertent.”

“In the fourth case, we presented evidence of a willful unauthorized access to the Department of Justice, but the case was declined for prosecution,” Mr. George wrote.

Of the three cases that the inspector general called “inadvertent” disclosures, Mr. George said his office referred one to Justice with a recommendation that no prosecution be brought. He said Justice officials agreed with his office’s assessment.

No reason was given for Justice’s rejections of prosecutions in the examples cited by Mr. George. In a July 12 letter to Mr. Holder, Mr. Grassley asked whether the attorney general knew about the cases, who in the Justice Department decided against prosecution, and with which parties the “victims” in the cases were affiliated.

“Although this may not be indicative of wide spread targeting, any instance is cause for concern,” Mr. Grassley wrote. “Even more alarming, in at least one instance TIGTA referred evidence of ‘willful unauthorized access’ to the United States Attorney’s Office, but criminal prosecution was declined. Decisions such as these directly impact the political process and should be subject to the scrutiny of the American public.”

The IRS did not respond to a request for comment on Mr. George’s findings.


Read more:

Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter



July 15, 2013

The Obama Doctrine of Control Through Dissension

By Jeannie DeAngelis


The president has more than proven that he is not a uniter. He is a committed divider. Jesus said, "If a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand." Hence, try as we might, it's getting harder to ignore what appears to be a burning desire on Obama's part to destroy the great and glorious house called America.


With an eye toward stepping in and reorganizing everything from our social and economic structure to the U.S. Constitution, it appears that Obama's plan to gain control involves stirring up discord and agitating every area of society to the point of near-collapse.

Barack Obama has managed to undermine the nation's unanimity through the deliberate fostering of racial, political, religious, and class-based conflict. In other words, the President of the United States is actively endeavoring to community-organize America to death.


Chicago-style troublemaker Barack Obama acquired his skill set while nestled close to the pedagogical breast of Rules for Radicals author Saul Alinsky. It was there that the president was schooled in the fine art of community organizing, and excelled as a top student.


Alinsky taught that in order to 'disorganize the old and organize the new' one must "stir up dissatisfaction and discontent" and "agitate to the point of conflict." Unfortunately, Alinsky's instructions are alarmingly similar to the president's leadership style.


Undoubtedly, Obama understands the Alinsky principle that teaches that in order "To organize a community you must understand that ... the word 'community' means community of interests, not physical community." That's why the president subtly stirs dissension in diverse places. His method is to "Pick...freeze...personalize... and polarize" a wide variety of groups, individuals, and philosophies


Therefore, in his unending quest to "fundamentally transform" America, Barack Obama has stealthily managed to expose many a raw nerve. Still, rather than make a blatant attempt to further divide Americans, the president cunningly pokes his finger into past grievances in hopes of creating festering sores he seems committed to exacerbating.


Proficient community organizer that he is, Obama inflames old hurts with veiled suggestions that incite hostility among factions, and then uses silence to offer tacit approval of the hate speech spouted by his allies. Those tried-and-true Alinsky polarizing tactics alienate those who disagree with Obama's agenda by portraying whole swathes of Americans as menaces to a national unity he purports to desire, but continues to undermine.


Yet even while employing doublespeak, blithe disregard for the facts, subterfuge, and occasional impulsivity, the president has been able to project the image to some of unifier as he carefully manipulates the tools of divisiveness to the benefit of his long-term agenda.

Obama darkly suggests that the Catholic Church is the arch enemy of women; Americans who just want immigration laws to be enforced and the border secured are dream-destroying xenophobes; excluding Democrat donors, rich people are portrayed as selfish parasites; pro-traditional marriage advocates are homophobes; gun owners are a threat to the safety of every American child, and the antagonistic beat goes on.


Now, in what appears to be the next phase, macro acrimony is being perpetrated on an increasingly micro level.

Based on his public response, it's apparent that Barack Obama, just as he did with Henry Gates, Jr. and Officer Crowley, must have felt that George Zimmerman, an Hispanic man originally assumed to be white, "acted stupidly" when defending himself against Trayvon Martin, a black teenager whom Zimmerman claims was trying to kill him.


America already knows that Obama believes that "if [he] had a son he'd look like Trayvon Martin." That fatherly declaration may have been a foreshadowing of the president's attempt to purposely foment racial unrest by dispatching the Department of Justice's Community Relations Service to descend on Florida to "work marches, demonstrations, and rallies related to the shooting and death of an African-American teen by a neighborhood watch captain."


And if that's not bad enough, the Obama Administration's "Insider Threat Program" is now promoting suspicion among federal co-workers by asking colleagues to spy on and report one another based on criteria that can only be described as wholly subjective.


Organized divisiveness masked as an attempt to keep America safe, the program asks federal employees and contractors to pay "particular attention to the lifestyles, attitudes and behaviors - like financial troubles, odd working hours or unexplained travel." The stated hope is that co-workers can predict whether "suspicious action" might indicate that the guy they've worked side-by-side with for the last 20 years has plans to do "harm to the United States."


As a result, federal workers have officially been added to a list of potential threats that already includes pro-life advocates, ex-military, Christians of all denominations, Tea Party activists, Conservatives, and just about any group on the planet that is perceived to pose problems for Barack Obama's progressive vision for an Alinsky-inspired "world not as it is," but as he thinks "it should be."


At the rate the Obama-instigated dissension is progressing, before long, American neighborhoods will devolve into combat zones and children will turn in parents for being enemies of the state. In the meantime, instead of asking the president about his favorite food, some journalist, kid or otherwise, should inquire of him how his constant fostering of disunity helps drive home the point that the state of our union is in need of stronger alliances?


Nevertheless, the Bible emphatically states that "A troublemaker plants seeds of strife." From the first day he was elected, the president has consistently sown seeds of strife, and, as a result, it has become clear that Barack Obama is indeed implementing Alinsky's strategy on a national level. Apparently the president hopes that if he stirs up enough dissension, America's great and glorious house will be unable to stand. Then, it will be on to the coup de grâce, when Barack Obama finally gets to implement the type of control he so fervidly desires.


Read more:

Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook


Title: Illinois Agricultural Association record [microform]

Identifier: 5060538.1923-1930

Year: 1923 (1920s)

Authors: Illinois Agricultural Association; Illinois Agricultural Association. Record

Subjects: Agriculture -- Illinois

Publisher: Mendota, Ill. : The Association

Contributing Library: University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

Digitizing Sponsor: University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign


View Book Page: Book Viewer

About This Book: Catalog Entry

View All Images: All Images From Book


Click here to view book online to see this illustration in context in a browseable online version of this book.


Text Appearing Before Image:

pARM BU|reau folks from all over Illinois gathered at Crystal Lake * Park, Ur()ana. June 29,' for the Fourth Annual I. A. A.-County Farm Bureau Pietiic- Due to the tact thpt The Record v»ent to press sev- eral days Before the big event, we could not tell you about it this titne. The story will appear in the next issue. -TrxT^fi FARM OUTINGS provide a two-week outing for city send in requests to youngsters during July or August has been made until July 15 This blank may be found convenient to fill out and send in. On account of the fact that the railroads X)ffer free transporta- tion only within a 200-mile radius of Chicago* applications can only be accepted within such territory. To Oatln|c| Nerretnry. I' 'I lllln»it« -\fcricpltDral Aaiioclatlotl. ' S s««ufh Ocarhorn SlrtN-f, I'hlcnito. llllnuiM We are till position to give a two! weck.-i*, vacation to.. Chieago c(iildr*'ii some time in Julji or Ausuat. rreferahty. Our choice of ay^ and sex )s a« fcUows Our. )ifatt.^t railway station t is unleratood that the Iial)ili:y in the *.-as«- of a<citl(-iit <lr**n went lions in t ie care and treatiiicnl of (Please name at I ^ast two optional stations) United I'ost ortice ]:ural Koute No. .but we could meet the ehlJ- Charities of Chicago assumes or Illness to any of the ehil- to lis: hnwev* r. ^e pledkre to .'Xenlrte proper preeau- these children. Hint tho childroD tmya and ^irls (rom 4 ttourself in the p(ace of a elum kiddie and imaSine what a farm outing would mjeah to you! One of the most enthilsiastic schools of instruction for so- licitors held for a long time was tlje one in Carroll county in June in preparation for the reorgan- ization campaign. Out of an at- tendance of 171, of whom 161' wpre eligible for membership. 163 agreements were signed. A bank- eij-farmer signed three agree- mients—one for each of his farms. Odds Against City Boys— i Girls In Popular Favor "Nobody wants a boy!" Strange as that-statement may seem, yet it appears to be the. case in reading the majority of applications from - farm bureau folks who are willfng to .gire ChlcaKo slums kiddies a two- week outing. In fact in the applications so far received, the demand for girls outnumbers the call for boys just four to one. Several are quite emphatic in tlieir demand for girls, others give the lasses as first choice but will take boys, while the small ma- jority are' requesting boys only. What's the reason? It can't be because of last summer's experi- ences with boys because tlie odds favored the girls then also. Then asain. the I. A. A. has had no complaints from farm bureau families who did "put up" with INATIONAL COUNCIL TO BE RESULT OF WHEAT CONFERENCE (Continued from page 1) .Mexander Legge, Chicago; H. B, Helm, Minneapolis; F. B. Wells. Minneapolis; Julius Fleischmann, New York; A. L. Taggart, Indian- apolis; Sydney Anderson, Minne- apolis; Harvey Sconce, Illinois; Dan Wallace. St. Paul; Judge Bingham. Louisville; T. Edson White. Chicago; and H. E. By- ram. Chicago. Endorse Co-Operation The conference went on record in support of co-operative grain marketing but split on the ques- tion of governmental price fixing. Representatives of the American Farm Bureau Federation votfd against any attempt to fix a defi- nite price on wheat ttirough gov- ernmental agencies. Speakers There were several prominent speakers during the two days' sessions. O. E. Bradfute, presi- dent of the American Farm Bu- reau Federation, urged one great national body of fafiiiers to bring about regulated production and better distribution of wheat, to- gether with a campaign for in- creased consumption. President Samuel Oompers of the American Federation of La- bor, made an especially strong address, emphasizing the necessity for farmers to lay more stress on organization. city laddies tor the two weeki last year. 1 In fact, it is a rather queer proposition. To be frank, the Outing Secre- tary of the I. A. A. doesn't like it. When slie saw itttle boys cry- ing last summer l)ecause their sis- ters went-to the country while* they had no chance, she decided ^ the boys were getting the worst j of the bargain. Now, Jo be truthful, does It look to you as if it's just ex- actly fair? "Let's give the boys a chance!"


Text Appearing After Image:

{•. Advisers In June , i Meeting At U. of I.; \ Club Tour Held Illinois farm advisers met atj the University of Illinois, Urbana, for their annual June meeting. Melvin Thomas, farm adviser of Coles county, presided at tht sessions. He is president of the state association of advisers. Tlie conference opened with an address, "Co-operative .Marketing as Demonstrated by Actual Expe- Volume 1 FORM PRO "COOP" MILK A sin. He described the advantages ; and pitfalls of co-operation and; stated that the ultimate aim |l. A. A. Advisl After Findir Favi its i.feuiuuaii-uieu uy Actual ii;xpe- j ^ r- t- rience," by Dr. Tlieodore .Mack- | Co-operafive L lin. of the University of Wiscon- , capitalized at ' place at Decatu 250 milk pro( milk'to that c co-operative marketing is to make . ''^'^ °^ *^* ^*' happier rural communities and i '^^ .J^ general improved conditions of ■ o""ty t arm farm life. Tours and inspections of the agronomy plots, animal husbandry and dairy departments, and ani- mal pathology and hygiene lab- oratories were made by the ad- visers to learn the latest results of experimentation. Several talks were delivered by members of the College of Agriculture faculty, and others. The annual boys' and girls' club tour was held at Urbana on June 22 when club members from a ; wide area of the state assembled with their leaders to visit the university and especially the va- rious departments of the College of Agriculture. Supervision Brings Cleanup At South St. Paul Market As a result of federal supervis- ion under the stockyards control act, nine out of the 30 3rms op- erating on the South ;?t. Paul Live stock market have been fined or suspended during the last two months. Twenty-two out of the 30 firms had had their books audited when this report was made. V_/S^ .5^ ^i?.a.a.— QUALFTY OF SERVICE Your State Association Gets Results Investigations of the I. A. A. Statistical Ser- vice presented before the State Tax Commis- sion last December resulted in a decrease of $557,217.65 in land taxes for 1922 alone. i. eration with tl Marketing De Dissatisfactio ent milk distri the city led up tion. . Produc been getting per quart for been retailing I new company cure a higher ducer and at greatly better 1 product for the An organizat nine with L. I man, was appo board of direc Ization is comt form a, stock Shares of stocl a par value of Before advis the Dairy Mari conducted a b' the retail milk catur and four were favorable company to si providing it is ized and prope Judging froi manifested by erg, the latest 1. A. A. family shows every pi Pen Whia Co-oper Presente At the July i ecutive Commi H. Thompson ^ith which Gov the Co-operatii to the committi mendation that one of the val the association, place the pen i hang it on i A. A. office.


Note About Images

Please note that these images are extracted from scanned page images that may have been digitally enhanced for readability - coloration and appearance of these illustrations may not perfectly resemble the original work.