Archive for June 30th, 2009
Found on Infowars
How sweet it is!
How would you like a job with a six figure salary and the ability to vote yourself an additional healthy chunk of taxpayer money to be used for “expenses?”
Need millions and millions each year to run your household?
Then become a member of the Congressional royalty and you too can wallow in the pork of nearly FOUR BILLION dollars to be used for “expenses.”
$3.7 billion divided by 535 members of Congress works out to a sweet $6.9 MILLION for each one of our Congressional “princes” to spend on “expenses.”
That’s one helluva lot of money for computers and printers…. and $400 dollar haircuts and custom made silk suits. Ever see one of your Congressional gas bags with a hair out of place or a rumpled suit while bloviating?
Thanks to Congress passing bills that eliminated oversight of Wall Street, many of us are having to do with less, a lot less and some with nothing at all, as they have lost their home.
But in the Never-Never Land of Congress, no such horrors as belt-tightening will ever come to the floor, as this year’s legislative branch spending bill is SEVEN PERCENT HIGHER than last year’s.
Amendments that were offered up to cut this massive pork project were shot down quickly. How dare anyone try and make Congress face reality!
BOTOX addict Speaker of the House Pelosi is getting over FIVE MILLION for her “expenses.”
Over 300 MILLION for employee tuition expenses. Which means you could hire your son or daughter, pay them a six figure salary to “work” and send them to school at the same time, and get the suckers… uh, I mean the taxpayers to pay for both in H.R. 2918.
Read thru this bill and you can see that Pelosi can easily double her expense money by picking up loose change from the committees she’s on and other artful dodges.
No wonder these jokers fight like cats and dogs to stay in office.
Who wouldn’t want a part-time job with a salary in seven figures?
Overall, the House bill totals about $3.7 billion — which is expected to increase to $4.7 billion when Senate items are added.
Found on Infowars
COMMENT: More blatant propaganda for total enslavement… does anyone remember that these chips were linked with causing cancer in lab rats? Now binge-drinkers are ready to become the lab rats for a petty convenience at the club?
The same RFID implants used to identify lost pets are now being adapted for use on you and me, and not how one might have originally expected. As with all pioneering technologies, it’s leisure pursuits that are getting the first stab at the tech.
Specifically: One beach-oriented Barcelona nightclub, the Baja Beach Club, is using the implants to free customers of the burdens of having to carry their purses or wallets. Makes sense: When you’re spending the day in a bikini and flip-flops, where do you keep your ID? Instead, the bouncer just scans your arm with an RFID reader, and you’re in. And since you can’t carry a credit card or cash either, the implants do double duty: You can pay for drinks with a quick scan of the chip. Chipped patrons also gain access to VIP areas of the club.
The implant procedure is simple and mostly painless (except for all the legal paperwork required): The area where the chip is injected is thoroughly numbed, then the glass capsule is injected beneath a layer of skin and fat on the arm.
Found on Cryptogon
Which Path to Persia? Options for a New American Strategy Toward Iran (PDF 1.2MB)
Analysis Paper Number 20
June 2009
Authors:
Kenneth M. Pollack
Daniel L. Byman
Martin Indyk
Suzanne Maloney
Michael E. O’Hanlon
Bruce Riedel
—
The Question of a Provocation
As noted above, in the section on the time frame for an invasion, whether the United States decides to invade Iran with or without a provocation is a critical consideration. With provocation, the international diplomatic and domestic political requirements of an invasion would be mitigated, and the more outrageous the Iranian provocation (and the less that the United States is seen to be goading Iran), the more these challenges would be diminished. In the absence of a sufficiently horrific provocation, meeting these requirements would be daunting.
For purposes of this analytic exercise, we assume that a U.S. invasion of Iran is not triggered by an overt, incontrovertible, and unforgivable act of aggression—something on the order of an Iranian-backed 9/11, in which the planes bore Iranian markings and Tehran boasted about its sponsorship.
First, this seems exceptionally unlikely given Iran’s history of avoiding such acts, at least since the end of the Iran-Iraq War. Second, were that ever to happen, the circumstances of an invasion would become almost easy—the United States would suddenly have enormous domestic and (perhaps grudging) international support for undertaking an invasion. Indeed, the entire question of “options” would become irrelevant at that point: what American president could refrain from an invasion after the Iranians had just killed several thousand American civilians in an attack in the United States itself?
RECENT POSTS
