How Much is The Minimum Wage? (Video)

This funny rant by a Brit echoes what many in the US feel. 

Warning...the language is a bit rough but it only highlights this guy's passionate views.

Puerto Ricans Likely To Oust Dozens Of Lawmakers. A Model For The US? YES!!

Any of this chicanery sound familiar, Patriots? Puerto Rican citizens are showing that the people are the judges of their leaders. This can and should be a reality here in the US. We CAN take back our country.

Wake Up America!

Jan. 11, 2012, members of the house attend a session at the capitol in San Juan, Puerto Rico. A voter referendum will ask the people of the U.S. island territory if they want to amend their Constitution and fire dozens of members of their Senate and House of Representatives as a cost-savings measure, reducing the size of the legislature by almost 30 percent. The answer is almost certain to be a resounding yes.

Lawmakers in Puerto Rico have been accused of corruption, cocaine use and domestic violence, feeding scorn among a public already seething over a dismal economy and rampant crime.

Now, it may be payback time.

Voters on the U.S. island territory are being asked if they want to amend their Constitution and fire dozens of members of their Senate and House of Representatives, cutting costs and reducing the size of the legislature by almost 30 percent.

The answer is almost certain to be a resounding yes in the technically binding referendum.

"They should all be kicked out," said Miguel Garcia, a 58-year-old engineer, after the governor recently signed the bill authorizing the Aug. 19 referendum. "They don't do anything ... They think the people are blind."

It's a popular sentiment on the island, where local politics, especially the endless debate over Puerto Rico's relationship to the U.S., is an obsession.

In good times and bad, disdain for politicians is widespread. But Puerto Ricans have perhaps more reasons to complain given the number of scandals involving lawmakers and salaries that make them more highly paid than most of their U.S. counterparts. Their incomes put them in the upper echelon in an island where nearly half the people are poor and unemployment hovers around 16 percent in a recession-battered economy.

Add to the mix last year's record number of homicides, high costs for water and power and crumbling schools, and you get an electorate in a sour mood. Tens of thousands of Puerto Ricans have left in recent years in the largest exodus in decades.

"The government does not respect the people's wishes," said Pedro Villanueva, a 65-year-old retiree who voted in favor of a previous failed effort to eliminate one house of the legislature and make it unicameral. "The government does whatever it wants."

The legislation authorizing the referendum was passed by both houses, which are dominated by Fortuno's pro-statehood party. The idea of the referendum appealed to voters in an election year.

The measure would reduce the Senate from 27 seats to 17 and shrink the House from 51 seats to 39 starting in 2017. Fortuno says it would make the legislature more efficient.

In a November poll by Gaither International, one of the Caribbean's leading market research companies, 81 percent of respondents said they would go to the polls and vote in favor of the cuts. The survey of 1,150 people had a margin of error of 3 percentage points.

The majority of lawmakers from the opposition Popular Democratic Party oppose the proposed changes.

Sen. Cirilo Tirado said the cuts will make lawmakers less responsive to the people.

"It does not resolve anything," he said, arguing that the money saved would just be spent elsewhere.

"People have to understand that it's not just about eliminating legislators because 'I'm mad with the legislative assembly,'" he said. "They are going to lose representation before the executive system ... It is a danger to democracy."

Tirado said it would be easier for big business interests to sway a smaller legislature. But he agrees with those who say the salary and stipends that legislators receive are excessive.

Puerto Rican legislators receive $74,000 in base salary, behind only what legislators in California and New York make. The speaker of the Puerto Rico Senate makes nearly $111,000. Legislators also receive between $152 to $160 as a daily food stipend.

That pay irks Jaime Mendez, a 48-year-old truck driver who moved with his wife back to Puerto Rico from New York four years ago.

"They don't vote and they don't do anything," he said.

The Senate's budget is $38.2 million, while the House of Representatives spends $47 million. The government has not said how much would be saved if the referendum passes.

A series of scandals also has damaged lawmakers' reputation.

In January 2009, former Sen. Jorge de Castro Font pleaded guilty to corruption for trading political favors for cash and services.

In early 2011, former Rep. Luis Farinacci stepped down after he was accused of domestic violence against his wife. A jury found him not guilty in June, and despite pledges to run again, Farinacci disappeared from the political scene.

Last February, House Majority Whip Rolando Crespo resigned after he said he tested positive for cocaine in a surprise and mandatory drug test.

Just this month, Rep. Jose Luis Rivera Guerra was referred to the ethics committee after acknowledging to reporters that he stole water and power from the government for his private residences.

"Voters are very mad with the government. And with good reason," said Noel Colon Martinez, an attorney and political analyst who once ran for governor as member of the Puerto Rican Independence Party.

But he argued that the referendum "does not address the real demands that the people are making of the legislative assembly." He favors a vote on having a part-time legislature with lower salaries and benefits.

The vote for a unicameral legislature in 2004 passed with 84 percent, but legislators challenged the vote in court and ultimately won their battle in the island's Supreme Court. Some voters fear this vote too will be bypassed, while others says nothing will improve even with a smaller legislature.

"I don't believe in politicians very much," said Laura Guzman, a 58-year-old administrative assistant. "Obviously not many of them are qualified. Bigger, smaller, if the people don't change, things will stay the same."

Article by Danica Coto, AP

The 30 US Corporations That Spent More On Lobbyists Than They Paid In Federal Taxes

These 30 companies have paid a combined negative $10.6 Billion in taxes over the last 3 years while reaping massive profits...in other words they have received tax return checks despite earning a combined $163.7 Billion! Their highly paid lobbyists have bribed Congress to give them tax breaks the average US citizen would steal for.

The amount of money these company’s lobbyists slipped under the table averaged out to almost $1 million for each member of Congress. Who said favors come cheap? Citizens take heed…your elected "representatives" are selling their favors for much more than a song…

Wake Up America! 

 General Electric spent the most on lobbying - $84 million - and got the biggest tax breaks - $4.7 million

A report by a corporate watchdog group has revealed 30 major US corporations that spent more money to lobby Congress than they paid in federal taxes in 2008, 2009 and 2010.

Many of the companies are household names -- massive conglomerate General Electric, aircraft maker Boeing and telecommunications giant Verizon Communications, as well as a dozen local utility companies.

Verizon Communications, parent company of the wireless provider, was near the top of the list of lobbying influence and corporate tax breaks

Instead of adding to the federal government's coffers, tax payers actually gave these 30 companies $11 billion in rebates and refunds over three years despite $164 billion in profits, according to Public Campaign, a nonprofit interest group that seeks to reduce the power of corporate money in politics. 

During the same period, these companies spent more than $475 million on lobbyists - both their own staffers and outside firms - and another $22 million on direct contributions to campaigns and parties.

Out of the 30 companies selected by Public Campaign, only one - the package carrier Federal Express - paid any taxes. FedEX shelled out just 1 percent of its profits for the period, well below the minimum corporate tax rate of 35 percent.

The biggest recipient of federal tax breaks was General Electric, which claimed a profit of about $10.5 billion and, instead of paying any taxes, received $4.7 billion in net rebates from the federal government.

Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), which supplies natural gas and electricity to two-thirds of California, raked in the second-biggest taxpayer payoff with slightly more than $1 billion. Verizon Communication raked in just shy of $1 billion in tax breaks.

These three companies also paid the most for lobbyists. GE spent $84 million, PG&E $79 million and Verizon Communications $52 million.

Public Campaign draws a straight line between the money spent on lobbying and the taxes that these companies avoided.

"At a time when millions of Americans are still unemployed and millions more make tough choices to get by, these companies are enriching their top executives and spending millions of dollars on Washington lobbyists to stave off higher taxes or regulations," the group's report says.

Several major utility companies, which are government-regulated monopolies in their markets, top the list. In addition to PG&E, they include: American Electric Power - an electric company with customers in nine states across the country, Potomac Electric Power Company - the utility provider for Washington, DC and CenterPoint Energy - which operates in six states in the Midwest and southwest.

In all, 12 of the 30 companies on the list are utilities that provide electricity and natural gas to homes and businesses around the nation.

Companies That Spent More On Lobbyists Than They Paid In Taxes

Company	US Profits	Taxes Paid	Lobbying Expense
General Electric	$10.46 billion	- $4.737 billion	$84.35 million
PG&E	$4.855 billion	- $1.027 billion	$78.99 million
Verizon Comm.	$32.518 billion	- $951 million	$52.34 million
Wells Fargo	$49.37 billion	- $681 million	$11.04 million
American Electric	$5.899 billion	- $545 million	$28.85 million
Pepco Holdings	$882 million	- $508 million	$3.76 million
Computer Sciences	$1.666 billion	- $305 million	$4.39 million
CenterPoint Energy	$1.931 billion	- $284 million	$2.65 million
NiSource	$1.385 billion	- $227 million	$1.83 million
Duke Energy	$5.475 billion	- $216 million	$17.47 million
Boeing	$9.735 billion	- $178 million	$52.29 million
NextEra Energy	$6.403 billion	- $139 million	$9.99 million
Con. Edison	$4.263 billion	- $127 million	$1.79 million
Paccar	$365 million	- $112 million	$760,000
Integrys Energy	$818 million	- $92 million	$710,000
Wisconsin Energy	$1.725 billion	- $85 million	$2.45 million
DuPont	$2.124 billion	- $72 million	$13.75 million
Baxter International	$926 million	- $66 million	$10.45 million
Tenet Healthcare	$415 million	- $48 million	$3.43 million
Ryder System	$627 million	- $46 million	$960,000
El Paso Corp.	$4.105 billion	- $41 million	$2.94 million
Honeywell	$4.903 billion	- $34 million	$18.3 million
CMS Energy	$1.292 billion	- $29 million	$3.48 million
Con-Way	$286 million	- $26 million	$2.29 million
Navistar	$896 million	- $18 million	$6.31 million
DTE Energy	$2.551 billion	- $17 million	$4.37 million
Interpublic Group	$571 million	- $15 million	$1.30 million
Mattel	$1.02 billion	- $9 million	$840,000
Corning	$1.977 billion	- $4 million	$2.81 million
FedEx	$4.247 billion	$37 million	$50.81 million
Total	$163.79 Billion	- $10.6 Billion	$475.67 Million

Original Source

Scandal-Plagued Former California City Official Sues City for Failing to Pay $1.5 Million Salary

Ex-City Official, Robert Rizzo, along with a few other ex-officials, who cheated the small community of Bell, CA out of $6 million in exorbitant (self-voted) salaries and benefits, is now suing the city for back pay! Rizzo's greed surely knows no limits. 

Americans are sick and tired of these self-serving leaches. They need to be dealt with in the harshest of measures!

It is our opinion, this scumbag ought to be strung up by the good citizens of Bell. 

Note: See No Evil first covered this story back in July 2010. Click here for link

 

The former city manager of scandal-plagued Bell, Calif., filed a lawsuit against the city Monday, claiming his contract was breached when the city stopped paying him nearly $1.5 million in salary and benefits.

Robert Rizzo claims he's owed benefits and wages -- with interest -- because he hasn't been convicted of a felony and hasn't resigned his post, according to court documents he filed Monday in Los Angeles Superior Court.

According to the lawsuit, Rizzo hasn't been paid since a public meeting in July 2010, when the small, blue-collar community of Bell learned of his outsized pay packet.

Protesters were outraged by compensation of $100,000 to City Council members that met once a month, but it was Rizzo's $787,637 salary, along with numerous perks that amounted to almost $1.5 million a year, that it led furious residents to view him as the poster child for corruption in government.

They came out in droves to let that anger be known at city meetings.

"In response, the City Council locked Rizzo out of his office and stopped paying Rizzo his salary and benefits due to him under his employment agreement," the lawsuit said.

Rizzo notified the city that he hadn't resigned, retired or terminated their agreement in August 2010, but never got a response, according to the lawsuit.

Prosecutors say Rizzo orchestrated a scheme to bilk the Los Angeles suburb out of more than $6 million.

Rizzo and seven other Bell city officials face charges of fraud and misappropriation of public funds. Rizzo has pleaded not guilty.

Bell Mayor Ali Saleh said he'd leave it to lawyers to talk about the legal merit of Rizzo's filing, but says "Rizzo's lawsuit is just another example of the gross disregard he has had towards all the working families in Bell and is just another distraction from the injustices Bell residents suffered under Rizzo."

Saleh expressed hope the lawsuit would be thrown out and that Rizzo would be found guilty of the criminal charges against him.

"The real atrocity is that taxpayers have to respect due process and spend precious tax dollars on defending ourselves from the same person who had a complete disregard for due process and misappropriated millions of taxpayer dollars," Saleh said.

Rizzo filed the lawsuit on his own behalf. Numbers for Rizzo's former homes in Huntington Beach, Calif., and Washington state were disconnected. A message left at the number listed for Rizzo on Monday's lawsuit filing was not immediately returned.

Rizzo's lawyer on fraud and other charges, James Spertus, said Monday that Rizzo's claim is just -- even if the outraged public may balk at paying Rizzo his salary.

"Thank God judges are not guided by emotion," said Spertus.

What Recession? Holder's Corrupt Justice Department Spent Nearly Half a Million on Refreshments

Eric Holder Is Incompetent & the DOJ is a Corrupt Agency! Not to mention completely insensitive to the plight of the average citizen. Spending $32 per person for Cracker Jacks, popcorn, and candy at one of their "conferences" is but one of the many examples of how this agency has lost touch with reality, sensibility, and morality.

Wake Up America!

If the 2008 financial crisis caused the nation to tighten its belt, the Justice Department didn’t get the memo.

The federal agency spent about $490,000 on food and beverages at 10 conferences, including $16 apiece for muffins, more than a dollar an ounce for coffee and $32 per person on snacks, according to a new report from the Justice Department’s inspector general.

The half-a-million-dollar tab represented more than 10 percent of the $4.4 million total cost of the events that were held between October 2007 and September 2009.

“Some conferences featured costly meals, refreshments, and themed breaks that we believe were indicative of wasteful or extravagant spending – especially when service charges, taxes, and indirect costs are factored into the actual price paid for food and beverages,” the report reads, citing a $76-per-person lunch at one workshop.

The inspector general made 10 recommendations to improve oversight and minimize conference costs, all of which were accepted by the Justice Department.

Republicans shook their head in disbelief.

"$16 muffins and $600,000 for event planning services are what make Americans cynical about government and why they are demanding change," said Sen. Chuck Grassley, the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

"The Justice Department appears to be blind to the economic realities our country is facing," he said. "People are outraged, and rightly so. The Inspector General's office just gave a blueprint for the first cuts that should be made by the (deficit-cutting) supercommittee."

The Justice Department implemented a new conference policy in April 2008 after a previous audit found wasteful spending at events held between October 2004 and September 2006. Among the examples were $53-per-person lunches and a $60,000 reception that served Swedish meatballs at $5 a piece.

In the September 2007 report, the inspector general said the agency had “few internal controls to limit the expense of conference planning and food and beverage costs at DOJ conferences.”

The latest report aimed to determine whether the new policy was working.

“Our assessment of food and beverage charges revealed that some DOJ components did not minimize conference costs as required by federal and DOJ guidelines,” the report reads.

In 2008 and 2009, the department hosted or participated in 1,832 conferences costing $121 million.

At a Washington, D.C., legal conference, the department spent $4,200 on 250 muffins -- or more than $16 apiece, the report said.

At another conference, the department's Office on Violence Against Women spent $65 per person at a lunch for 65 people. Coffee cost more than $1 an ounce. A snack break at the same conference cost $32 per person for Cracker Jack, popcorn and candy bars.

Article by Fox News

Bloomberg Denies Clergy From Offering Prayer at 9-11 Ceremony

New York mayor Bloomberg' decision to exclude clergy members from the 9-11 memorial "service" is flat-out UnAmerican! 

Who gave these ungodly politicians the right to decide how we memorialize our fallen citizens?

It is in GOD we trust...

 Wake Up America!

Memorial for Mychal Judge, New York Fire Department chaplain, and other firefighters lost in World Trade Center attack.

Some New York politicians and religious leaders are criticizing Mayor Michael Bloomberg for not offering clergy members a role in the high-profile ceremonies marking 10 years since the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center, The Wall Street Journal reported.

"This is America, and to have a memorial service where there's no prayer, this appears to be insanity to me," said Rudy Washington, a former deputy mayor under Rudolph Giuliani. "I feel like America has lost its way."

A spokewoman from Bloomberg's office told The Journal that the focus, as in past years, will be on the family members of the fallen. Rabbi Joseph Potasnik told the paper he understood the mayor's decision, saying, "I don't know how to make it possible for everyone to have a place at the table."

But opponents say faith played an important role in the country after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

There was a plethora of interfaith events, and New York Magazine even named New York Fire Department chaplain Mychal Judge, who died in the attack and is immortalized in a picture being carried from a tower, the "most famous victim of the World Trade Center attack."

City Council member Fernando Cabrera, who is a pastor at a Bronx church, told The Journal he was "utterly disappointed" by the absence of clergy.

"They were the spiritual and emotional backbone, and when you have a situation where people are trying to find meaning, where something is bigger than them, when you have a crisis of this level, they often look to the clergy," he said.

Article courtesy of FoxNews

Banks Always Get Their Bailout

 

When are we going to say enough is enough? When are we going to tell our elected leaders that their job is to represent OUR interests and not those of their rich taskmasters? When??

Wake Up America!  This is YOUR land.. Take It Back!!

The fix is always in with the Big Banks.

The biggest fix was when they were declared "too big to fail," which guaranteed they'd get a taxpayer bailout, even though some of them deserved to fail, or at least deserved to be broken up. But since they had their hooks in with the politicians, they got the bailouts.

They always get the bailouts.

The latest bailout is Greece. Now, you hear a lot about a bailout for Greece, but it's not for Greece -- it's a bailout for the banks, the banks that gambled on Greek debt. Banks bought Greek debt because the Greek bonds offered really high interest rates. They offered high returns, because they were really risky bets, just like the sub-prime instruments of a few years back. And just like the sub-prime market, the Greek bond market turned out to be too good to be true. The returns were spectacular because the underlying product was lousy.

But instead of taking their losses, the banks are relying on their collection agencies -- the IMF and their friends in government -- to get their money back. The fix is in, again.

So taxpayers -- both here and in Greece -- are going to be paying off rich bankers who made lousy bets, again! It's the scam of all time, and no one seems to care. No one, except us, and, hopefully, you.

Article by David Asman, FoxBusiness

Mysterious Fund Allows Congress To Spend Freely, Despite Earmark Ban (Video)

"This Land's not my land, this Land's not your land, this Land is their Land..." Or so it would seem.

Regardless what is voted for, Congress always seems to get its way. By hook or crook (pun intended) they will continue to spend taxpayer money on their own pet projects.

Wake Up America! You are being robbed blind!!

A little-known billion-dollar fund has been uncovered that allows Congress to funnel money to pet projects regardless of earmark restrictions.

The defense bill that just passed the House of Representatives includes a back-door fund that lets individual members of Congress funnel millions of dollars into projects of their choosing.

This is happening despite a congressional ban on earmarks -- special, discretionary spending that has funded Congress' pet projects back home in years past, but now has fallen out of favor among budget-conscious deficit hawks.

Under the cloak of a mysteriously-named "Mission Force Enhancement Transfer Fund," Congress has been squirreling away money -- like $9 million for "future undersea capabilities development," $19 million for "Navy ship preliminary design and feasibility studies," and more than $30 million for a "corrosion prevention program."

So in a year dominated by demands for spending cuts, where did all the money come from?

Roughly $1 billion was quietly transferred from projects listed in the president's defense budget and placed into the "transfer fund." This fund, which wasn't in previous year's defense budgets (when earmarks were permitted), served as a piggy bank from which committee members were able to take money to cover the cost of programs introduced by their amendments.

And take they did.

More than $600 million went to a wide number of projects, many of which appear to directly benefit some congressional districts over others.

For example, that $9 million for "future undersea capabilities development" was requested by Rep. Joe Courtney, D-Connecticut, whose district happens to be home to General Dynamics Electric Boat, a major supplier of submarines and other technologies to the U.S. Navy.

And the $19 million for "Navy ship preliminary design and feasibility studies"? Rep. Steve Palazzo, R-Mississippi, asked for that. His district's largest employer is Ingalls Shipbuilding -- a major producer of surface combat ships for the Navy.

Nothing in these expenditures appears to be illegal, but critics say they still may violate the spirit, if not the language, of the earmark ban.

"These amendments may very likely duck the House's specific definition of what constitutes an earmark, but that doesn't mean they aren't pork," says Leslie Paige of Citizens Against Government Waste, a government-spending watchdog group. The group believes if modification of the National Defense Authorization Act generated savings, that money should have been put toward paying down the deficit.

In their defense, supporters say the amendments offered by various members may very well represent good governance. The $30 million Rep. Betty Sutton, D-Ohio, set aside for corrosion prevention could go far to help tackle the Defense Department's corrosion problem, estimated to cost the military more than $15 billion a year.

However, there are two things worth considering: Sutton's request comes on top of the $10 million already included in the bill for corrosion related programs, and Sutton's district is home to The University of Akron, which created the country's first bachelor's degree program for corrosive engineering in 2008.

Then, on May 9, two days before the defense bill mark-up, it was announced that the Defense Department had given the University of Akron $11 million to build its new "National Center for Education and Research in Corrosion and Materials Performance."

Sutton was the biggest supporter of that new spending.

Click here to view video

Article by Cole Deines, courtesy of CNN

Top US Government Insider: Bin Laden Died In 2001. States 9-11 A False Flag Operation (Videos)

Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State under three different administrations Steve R. Pieczenik says he is prepared to tell a federal grand jury the name of a top general who told him directly 9/11 was a false flag attack.

Top US government insider Dr. Steve R. Pieczenik, a man who held numerous different influential positions under three different Presidents and still works with the Defense Department, shockingly told The Alex Jones Show yesterday that Osama Bin Laden died in 2001 and that he was prepared to testify in front of a grand jury how a top general told him directly that 9/11 was a false flag inside job.

Pieczenik cannot be dismissed as a “conspiracy theorist”. He served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State under three different administrations, Nixon, Ford and Carter, while also working under Reagan and Bush senior, and still works as a consultant for the Department of Defense. A former US Navy Captain, Pieczenik achieved two prestigious Harry C. Solomon Awards at the Harvard Medical School as he simultaneously completed a PhD at MIT.

Recruited by Lawrence Eagleburger as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Management, Pieczenik went on to develop, “the basic tenets for psychological warfare, counter terrorism, strategy and tactics for transcultural negotiations for the US State Department, military and intelligence communities and other agencies of the US Government,” while also developing foundational strategies for hostage rescue that were later employed around the world.

Pieczenik also served as a senior policy planner under Secretaries Henry Kissinger, Cyrus Vance, George Schultz and James Baker and worked on George W. Bush’s election campaign against Al Gore. His record underscores the fact that he is one of the most deeply connected men in intelligence circles over the past three decades plus.

The character of Jack Ryan, who appears in many Tom Clancy novels and was also played by Harrison Ford in the popular 1992 movie Patriot Games, is also based on Steve Pieczenik.

Back in April 2002, over nine years ago, Pieczenik told the Alex Jones Show that Bin Laden had already been “dead for months,” and that the government was waiting for the most politically expedient time to roll out his corpse. Pieczenik would be in a position to know, having personally met Bin Laden and worked with him during the proxy war against the Soviets in Afghanistan back in the early 80′s.

Pieczenik said that Osama Bin Laden died in 2001, “Not because special forces had killed him, but because as a physician I had known that the CIA physicians had treated him and it was on the intelligence roster that he had marfan syndrome,” adding that the US government knew Bin Laden was dead before they invaded Afghanistan.

Marfan syndrome is a degenerative genetic disease for which there is no permanent cure. The illness severely shortens the life span of the sufferer.

“He died of marfan syndrome, Bush junior knew about it, the intelligence community knew about it,” said Pieczenik, noting how CIA physicians had visited Bin Laden in July 2001 at the American Hospital in Dubai.

“He was already very sick from marfan syndrome and he was already dying, so nobody had to kill him,” added Pieczenik, stating that Bin Laden died shortly after 9/11 in his Tora Bora cave complex.

“Did the intelligence community or the CIA doctor up this situation, the answer is yes, categorically yes,” said Pieczenik, referring to Sunday’s claim that Bin Laden was killed at his compound in Pakistan, adding, “This whole scenario where you see a bunch of people sitting there looking at a screen and they look as if they’re intense, that’s nonsense,” referring to the images released by the White House which claim to show Biden, Obama and Hillary Clinton watching the operation to kill Bin Laden live on a television screen.

“It’s a total make-up, make believe, we’re in an American theater of the absurd….why are we doing this again….nine years ago this man was already dead….why does the government repeatedly have to lie to the American people,” asked Pieczenik.

“Osama Bin Laden was totally dead, so there’s no way they could have attacked or confronted or killed Osama Bin laden,” said Pieczenik, joking that the only way it could have happened was if special forces had attacked a mortuary.

Pieczenik said that the decision to launch the hoax now was made because Obama had reached a low with plummeting approval ratings and the fact that the birther issue was blowing up in his face.

“He had to prove that he was more than American….he had to be aggressive,” said Pieczenik, adding that the farce was also a way of isolating Pakistan as a retaliation for intense opposition to the Predator drone program, which has killed hundreds of Pakistanis.

“This is orchestrated, I mean when you have people sitting around and watching a sitcom, basically the operations center of the White House, and you have a president coming out almost zombie-like telling you they just killed Osama Bin Laden who was already dead nine years ago,” said Pieczenik, calling the episode, “the greatest falsehood I’ve ever heard, I mean it was absurd.”

Dismissing the government’s account of the assassination of Bin Laden as a “sick joke” on the American people, Pieczenik said, “They are so desperate to make Obama viable, to negate the fact that he may not have been born here, any questions about his background, any irregularities about his background, to make him look assertive….to re-elect this president so the American public can be duped once again.”

Pieczenik’s assertion that Bin Laden died almost ten years ago is echoed by numerous intelligence professionals as well as heads of state across the world.

Bin Laden, “Was used in the same way that 9/11 was used to mobilize the emotions and feelings of the American people in order to go to a war that had to be justified through a narrative that Bush junior created and Cheney created about the world of terrorism,” stated Pieczenik.

During his interview with the Alex Jones Show yesterday, Pieczenik also asserted he was directly told by a prominent general that 9/11 was a stand down and a false flag operation, and that he is prepared to go to a grand jury to reveal the general’s name.

“They ran the attacks,” said Pieczenik, naming Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Stephen Hadley, Elliott Abrams, and Condoleezza Rice amongst others as having been directly involved.

“It was called a stand down, a false flag operation in order to mobilize the American public under false pretenses….it was told to me even by the general on the staff of Wolfowitz – I will go in front of a federal committee and swear on perjury who the name was of the individual so that we can break it open,” said Pieczenik, adding that he was “furious” and “knew it had happened”.

“I taught stand down and false flag operations at the national war college, I’ve taught it with all my operatives so I knew exactly what was done to the American public,” he added.

Pieczenik re-iterated that he was perfectly willing to reveal the name of the general who told him 9/11 was an inside job in a federal court, “so that we can unravel this thing legally, not with the stupid 9/11 Commission that was absurd.”

Pieczenik explained that he was not a liberal, a conservative or a tea party member, merely an American who is deeply concerned about the direction in which his country is heading.

Article by Paul Joseph Watson, PrisonPlanet

Watch the video interview Dr. Pieczenik below. Note: They are broken down into 7 parts.

 

Big Oil Still Ripping Us Off At The Pumps, Congress Still Ripping Us Off As Our "Leaders"

The following article is by Sarah Hodgdon of the Sierra Club. Well worth the read. The message is clear. Congress is in the back pocket of big oil. They do NOT represent you... they only care about their monied "friends" and getting re-elected. 

Wake Up America!!

Shill, Baby, Shill: Big Oil Still Getting Big Tax Breaks

Yesterday I watched the U.S. House of Representatives shill for Big Oil again by passing a bill allowing more drilling in our waters with less oversight and accountability. At the same time, House leadership blocked a vote to end billions of dollars in government tax breaks for the industry.

Meanwhile, the oil industry just posted billions in profits in their first quarter reports, with Exxon reporting $10.7 billion in profit, Shell raking in $6.9 billion, Chevron posting $6.2 billion, Conoco Phillips announcing $3.03 billion and BP taking in $5.5 billion.

When is our country going to end special treatment for Big Oil and get serious about moving beyond oil?

Polls show that, overwhelmingly, Americans want to end Big Oil's tax breaks:

• A recent NBC/Wall Street Journal poll found that 74 percent of voters support eliminating tax breaks to oil companies.

• A March 2011 survey by polling firm Greenberg Quinlan & Rosner Research revealed almost 70 percent of Americans supported ending Big Oil subsidies even when they were presented with opposition arguments that it would increase the price of gas.

Big Oil is raking it in, and hard-working Americans are feeling the pain at the pump and then watching the oil industry benefit even more on tax day to the tune of $4 billion in subsidies.

But the House leadership continues the giveaways because they're getting something in return as well. Four of the five Big Oil companies have since given $280,000 in campaign contributions to their congressional benefactors - a small price to pay, considering their return on investment at taxpayers' expense. (Treehugger's Brian Merchant had a good piece on this yesterday, too).

We all thought House Speaker Boehner had a moment of clarity when he recently said he was willing to end the oil industry's tax breaks. He told ABC News that, "We're in a time when the federal government is short on revenues. We need to control spending but we need to have revenues to keep the government moving. And they [Big Oil] ought to be paying their fair share."

Boehner bravely held that position for about five minutes before recanting.

We need real leadership in Congress that will stand up to Big Oil and support the American people's call to eliminate Big Oil tax loopholes.

It's time to invest in 21st century clean, efficient vehicles and transportation. We need to build 21st century transportation infrastructure and make cars that get at least 60 miles per gallon by 2025, trucks with a 15 percent improvement in fuel economy, and we need to invest in electric cars. Domestic manufacturing of these cars and trucks and a modern transportation network will dramatically cut our dependence on oil, save consumers thousands of dollars at the pump, create jobs and restore America's manufacturing might.

One thing remains clear: we cannot afford the status quo.  

America's leaders need to act immediately to break our nation's dangerous dependence on oil.

Link to article here