Flesh and Stone

What's new in male contraception research?

Mon, 03 Dec 2012 12:18:00 -0700

An organization called the International Male Contraception Coalition makes a strong case for male contraceptives on its website. Some of the obvious reasons one might pursue male contraception are the risk of cancer associated with female birth control pills, and the lack of efficacy of other forms of contraception. (One might add that men should be able to share in the joy and responsibility of contraceptives with their spouse or partner.)

A male birth contraceptive in injection and pill form is getting some attention from researchers.

Read more about the research underway here and here.

Progress in Health: Trending Treatments for Rare Diseases

Mon, 09 Apr 2012 07:33:00 -0600

by Jon Dawson

People suffering from rare diseases often find themselves up against a wall when it comes to treatments for their conditions. The National Institutes of Health indicates that a disease is rare if it affects less than 200,000 Americans. To date, scientists have found over 7,000 of these diseases. Because they are rare, insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies and the FDA have been less motivated to find treatments in the past. But this is beginning to change; people suffering from rare diseases are finding more people who are eager to solve these issues, researching and promoting possible treatment options.

Targeted Radiation Providing Hope for Chordoma

One such rare disease is chordoma, a slow growing bone tumor that is often resistant to radiation. These tumors tend to be found in the spine near the cervical or sacral areas. Surgery is the primary treatment option, providing the tumor has not begun to spread; but because of the sensitive location surgery isn’t always possible.

Proton therapy, a newly popular treatment which allows for a higher dose of radiation to be targeted directly to the tumor, is proving to be an effective way to treat chordoma. There are relatively few proton therapy centers in the United States, and the Indiana University Health Proton Therapy Center was the first center in the Midwest and Great Lakes regions. The combination of a high level of radiation and the accuracy of the treatment allows proton therapy to be a successful treatment for this condition when surgery isn’t an option.

Gene Therapy May Treat Rare Blood Disease

Gene therapy is another player in the treatment of rare diseases. Patients with hemophilia B, a rare blood-clotting disorder caused by a defective gene, are seeing promise from injections containing the correct form of the gene.

Gene therapy isn’t a new treatment, but over the past two decades it’s been met with a series of failures. The genes must be injected into the body via a virus, and the human immune system seems to be too effective at eliminating the virus before it can offer up its healthy genes. But in recent studies on hemophilia B patients, it appears gene therapy may be effective, as reported by The New York Times. Much more studies need to be done before this will be mainstream therapy for the condition, but for those who had little hope of a cure, this is promising research.

FDA Approval Proves Difficult

When patients face a diagnosis of a rare disease and a potential treatment option, it’s often the FDA that stands in the way of potential treatments. For example, eight-year-old twins Addison and Cassidy Hempel suffer from a rare disease called Niemann Pick Type C, which mimics Alzheimer’s disease in adults. Without treatment, the disease is eventually fatal.

The twins’ parents have been advocating tirelessly in hopes of finding a cure for their daughters and save their lives. When they found a treatment that was being studied on mice, they had to go through a huge amount of red tape in order to get FDA approval to try the medication on their girls. When the first trial did not work and a new delivery method was needed, they had to go through the process once again.

While these stories aren’t uncommon in the world of rare diseases, the FDA is trying to make changes: they’re recommitting the agency to spend time and money on developing cures for rare diseases, while eliminating some of the red tape that people pushing for approval must go through in order to get the treatments they need. By offering financial incentives to manufacturers, the FDA hopes to see more treatments for rare diseases reach the approval stage much faster. For patients and families like the Hempels, this is welcome news.

A diagnosis of a rare disease is life changing, but today patients and their families have even greater treatment options at their disposal and a government that is more willing to work with them. As medical technologies continue to advance, the outlook for those suffering from rare diseases is going to continue to improve. For around one in 10 Americans with a rare disease diagnosis, this is very exciting.

Jon Dawson is an attorney and professional writer living in Indianapolis. He blogs about law, technology, and health matters.

Injured photographer uses YouTube to request evacuation from Syria

Thu, 23 Feb 2012 12:51:00 -0700

Paul Conway, a photographer for the Sunday Times who was injured in a rocket attack in the Baba Amr district of Homs, Syria, on Feb. 21, appears in a YouTube video on Feb. 23. The rockets killed his colleagues journalist Marie Colvin, photographer Remi Ochlik, and 24 Syrian civilians.

In the video, Conway says he is being cared for by Free Syrian Army medical staff. A medical team member points to the three wounds Conway received in his leg and asks for assistance evacuating Conway so he can receive proper medical assistance and escape future attacks. Edith Bouvier, a reporter for Le Figaro, also appeared in a video pleading for emergency evacuation due to injuries received during the rocket attack.

Marie Colvin's final article in the Sunday Times, ‘We live in fear of a massacre,' published February 19, is accompanied by Conway's photography.

Virginia is for Misogynists

Wed, 22 Feb 2012 02:45:00 -0700

By Michael Collins

The Virginia legislature is about to enact a law that requires a transvaginal ultrasound procedure for all women who have abortions (except in the case of a medical emergency). Apparently, the legislators are unaware that the law violates existing sexual assault code or that Virginians oppose the law by a wide margin.

Here's the procedure.

"You will lie down on a table with your knees bent and feet in holders called stirrups. The health care provider will place a probe, called a transducer, into the vagina. The probe is covered with a condom and a gel. … The health care provider will move the probe within the area to see the pelvic organs." Medline Plus

This isn't an option. It's a requirement for an abortion in the Commonwealth of Virginia. The law is clear:

"a qualified medical professional ... shall perform fetal ultrasound imaging and auscultation of fetal heart tone services on the patient undergoing the abortion for the purpose of determining gestational age." House Bill No. 462, Virginia Assembly (Also here)

The medical professional is then required to "offer the woman an opportunity to view and receive a printed copy of the ultrasound image and hear auscultation of fetal heart tone."

Women will not only suffer the invasive procedure, they will be asked to experience a vicarious reenactment.

When used for medical purposes, this procedure can determine the risks of miscarriage, infections, and isolate the cause of any vaginal bleeding. The procedure is used detect cancers, birth defects, and infections that impact fetal health. It is an accepted treatment in voluntary reproductive medicine.

The mandated transvaginal ultrasound procedure is not intended for any medical purpose. It is the consequence for seeking an abortion in the state that is credited as the source of the Bill of Rights in the United States Constitution.

Women who choose abortion will have to endure vaginal invasion, seek abortion in another state, or complete the pregnancy.

Procedure Violates Virginia Law Against "inanimate or animate object sexual penetration"

The Virginia Code states that penetration of the labia majora … [for] other than a bona fide medical purpose" is an act of "object sexual penetration." There is no routine medical purpose for a transvaginal ultrasound procedure prior to abortions. As described in the proposed law, the procedure "penetrates the labia majora … of a complaining witness." Since we can assume the complaints would be nearly universal, the new law violates existing law.

§ 18.2-67.2. Object sexual penetration; penalty.

A. An accused shall be guilty of inanimate or animate object sexual penetration if he or she penetrates the labia majora or anus of a complaining witness, whether or not his or her spouse, other than for a bona fide medical purpose, or causes such complaining witness to so penetrate his or her own body with an object or causes a complaining witness, whether or not his or her spouse, to engage in such acts with any other person or to penetrate, or to be penetrated by, an animal,,,: Virginia Code

Legislators in Violation of Virginia Law Against "attempted object sexual penetration"

By the very act of proposing a law that "penetrates the labia majora" the state legislators proposing the bill are, by current law, guilty of "Attempted … object sexual penetration." This is a Class 4 felony punishable by 5 to 20 years in prison and a $100,000 fine.

§ 18.2-67.5. Attempted rape, forcible sodomy, object sexual penetration, aggravated sexual battery, and sexual battery.
A. An attempt to commit rape, forcible sodomy, or inanimate or animate object sexual penetration shall be punishable as a Class 4 felony. Virginia Code

"Sanctioned Cruelty"

"History is replete with reigns of terror during which powerful institutions sanctioned atrocious behaviors. Consider the rape and plunder of defeated populations during the Crusades of the Middle Ages, or the execution of women during the Salem witch hunts in colonial America." FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, Feb 1992

The state sanctioned cruelty has already begun. Women who choose to have an abortion, for whatever reason, must now deal with the emotional turmoil of anticipating an object placed in their vagina for no purpose other than to satisfy the vulgar inclinations of the legislators who passed this bill. Women seeking to end a pregnancy arising out of trauma, e.g., rape, will be re-traumatized by the invasive procedure mandated by this bill,

The invasive procedure proposed by this bill, a clear violation of existing law, is intended to (a) discourage abortion and (b) punish and humiliate those who choose to have the procedure.

This Law is Not Unique

The mandatory invasion of a woman's body simply because she chooses to have an abortion is repellant and uncivilized. This law is not unique. Mark Adams pointed out that there are several processes sanctioned by the state for those in penal institutions. More than one million prison inmates have been raped, most anally, over the past twenty years. Juveniles have a high likelihood of raped within forty eight hours of placement in adult detention. Offensively invasive searches are routine. As Adams makes clear, the justice system is structured to allow all of this to go forward.

In the case of Virginia's law, there may be an opportunity to act. Existing law is clear actual and attempted "inanimate or animate object sexual penetration … [that] penetrates the labia majora" are crimes. The legislators either didn't know or didn't bother to reword the laws on "object sexual penetration." Their mere attempt to pass such a law is a crime. Any implementation of the law, starting with the first woman to seek an abortion, will compound the crime again and again.

It is difficult to fathom people who would even admit to fantasies similar to the events that this law creates. It is nearly impossible to imagine the type of people who would act in unison to make this the law -- one that will harass, humiliate, and traumatize women simply because they don't agree with those opposed to abortion.

END

This article may be reproduced with attribution of authorship and a link to this article.

The Money Party

The Pennsylvania Sexual Assault Scandal, the Second Mile Foundation, and Penn State

Fri, 11 Nov 2011 03:08:00 -0700

By Michael Collins

The current focus on Pennsylvania State University, its football program, and former coach Joe Paterno will be replaced by a more pervasive sexual assault scandal in the coming days and weeks. At-risk children and their often disadvantaged single parents were delivered up to a relentless sexual predator with exhibitionist tendencies as described in the findings of a special Commonwealth of Pennsylvania grand jury.

The relentless deviate, former PSU defensive coordinator, Jerry Sandusky, is accused of sexually assaulting children for years. According to the grand jury, he gained easy access to children and early adolescents through the Second Mile Foundation which he founded in 1977 as a group home for "troubled boys." He continued the assaults at his home and in the PSU showers on at least one occasion. Since hiring Jack Raykovitz, PhD, a licensed psychologist, as president, the foundation has grown into a multimillion enterprise serving over 100,000 at-risk children throughout the state.

A picture of alleged serial abuser Sandusky came into clear focus in the Pennsylvania Statewide Investigating Grand Jury release of findings about victims 1 through 8. Sandusky selected the eight boys from the population of those served by the Second Mile Foundation, it is alleged. He would start with mentoring, move onto hosting the boys for overnights in a bedroom at his home, and initiate oral copulation and anal sex, according to the grand jury report.

A critical fact listed in by the grand jury concerns the legal counsel for both the foundation and PSU. Wendell Courtney was the legal counsel for both PSU and the Second Mile Foundation during the period covering 1998 through the end of 2009. Courtney served as PSU's primary legal counsel as a member of the law firm of McQuaide-Blasko. In January 2010, PSU hired a full time, in house counsel. During Courtney's service to the organizations, Second Mile founder, PSU coach (in 1998), and PSU coach emeritus (in 2002) Sandusky was twice investigated on charges of sexual assault. Neither investigation resulted in either organization terminating Sandusky's employment or access to facilities.

Where is the Sexual Assault Scandal Headed?

Penn State Scandal: Jerry Sandusky Rumored To Have 'Pimped' Boys To Donors: REPORT Huffington Post headline, November 10

This is a remarkable headline since it features rumors of incomplete investigations by unidentified reporters. The story that HuffPost says should break soon concerns Sandusky's Second Mile Foundation and its donors. There were other reports concerning this new direction of the story.

The foundation raises millions of dollars a year from corporate and individual donors in Pennsylvania for the most part. Funds support educational and "leadership" programs and retreats for at-risk youth throughout the state.

The 2010 foundation annual report features a county map of Pennsylvania with total individuals serviced by county. For some reason, the totals are about even for individuals served in Allegheny County, population 1.2 million, and Centre County, population, 153,000 (and home of PSU).

Was Jerry Sandusky procuring at-risk youth for foundation donors as suggested in the headline? If so which donors? Where and when did this happen?

PSU summarily fired the university president, senior executives, and Joe Paterno this week. As of today, long time Second Mile president, Jack Raykovitz, PhD, retains his position as foundation president. The members of the Honorary Board of Trustees, a list of Pennsylvania notables, are in the uncomfortable position of endorsing a tarnished foundation. Major donors listed in the annual report are seen as offering public financial support for a foundation that remains passive despite the clear need for organizational change.

Link

What about Victims 1 through 8 (and more)?

We have no way of knowing the level of help received by the reported Sandusky victims reviewed by the statewide grand jury. Any delays to much needed evaluation and treatment is a true shame.

There is a wealth of data concerning the mid and long term impact of adult sexual assaults on children. In summary, victims of childhood sexual abuse have a much higher incidence of depression (major depression, dysthymia), anxiety disorders, including posttraumatic stress syndrome, and substance related disorders. Bipolar youth are more likely to have their first mood episode earlier as a result of sexual assault as are youth with schizophrenia.

Long term problems trusting any authority (Judith Herman, MD) are common if the assailant is a trusted individual, as Sandusky was at the start of his alleged abusive relationships.

Sexual assaults victims are also more likely to be victimized again (revictimization) than are those without this history.

The full impact of adult sexual assault of children is inherently limited by the reluctance of victims to report the crimes.

At the very least, the reported Sandusky victims deserve immediate assistance with medical and psychotherapeutic care, without any strings attached by the organizations who so thoroughly neglected to identify, report, and stop the abuse. Victims should not be asked to wave future compensation to receive this care.

Any victims associated with programs of Second Mile Foundation, Sandusky, or PSU should have free court guardians appointed to assure that they're not victimized again by the wealthy and powerful through coercive legal tactics. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania should establish a fund immediately and a master of the fund who from out of state. Trials and settlements must be handled by competent courts outside of Pennsylvania.

The focus needs to shift to immediate identification and help for all victims and prompt investigation and prosecution of perpetrators.

END

This article may be reproduced with attribution of authorship and a link to this article.

The Money Party RSS

Michael Collins: Gaddafi Jihadist Rehab Program Spawns Rebel Military Leaders

Wed, 31 Aug 2011 20:48:00 -0600

Monday was the day we heard that the "US believes al-Qa'ida is on the verge of defeat after deputy leader's death" as The Independent headlined the story. It stood out as a sequel to the recent United States action in Pakistan, which brought us the news (but not the body) of a dead Osama bin Laden. It appears that a US operated drone killed Al Qaeda's top deputy, one Atiyah Abd al-Rahman, a Libyan citizen. After decades as a jihadist, Rahman is no more. But is that the end of al Qaeda?

On Tuesday, foreign affairs columnist for the Asia Times, Pepe Escobar, published a remarkable column outlining the command structure of the victorious NATO backed military leaders. Abdelhakim Belhaj, the lead commander of the rebels, and the two top regional commanders were once affiliated with the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LGIF). In fact, commander Belhaj was once the subject of a US led extraordinary rendition (aka torture) in Thailand. About the time the US planned to send Belhaj to Guantanamo Bay, the Gaddafi's government requested his return to Libya.

Terrorist Rehab, Libyan Style

At this point, you may be thinking, "Good grief, that's when the real torture started!" Au contraire! The request for repatriation came from none other than Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi, son of Libya's former dictator Muammar Gaddafi.

Saif, and others in the Gaddafi government, began a bold program of repatriating and rehabilitating individuals belonging to LGIF and other jihadist groups. Many fled Libya for Afghanistan where they fought with al Qaeda against the Soviet Union and then the United States Afghan effort. The LGIF had engaged in violent resistance to the Gaddafi regime. A large contingent of the LGIF fought the US in Iraq. According to reports, they "officially joined al Qaeda" in November 2007.

Saif Al Islam Gaddafi had a better idea:

"Saif Gaddafi worked hard to get individuals from the Muslim Brotherhood out of jail and paved the way for increase cooperation between the LIFG and the security services. This helped boost the level of mutual confidence between them." Combating Terrorism in Libya through Dialog and Reintegration, March 2010 p, 6

The gathering of terrorists in Libya served a purpose - terrorist rehabilitation or deradicalization, as the program termed it. Efforts focused on intensive dialog and debate between those employed by the Gaddafi regime and the terrorists. The main goals were a renunciation of violence and surrender of their weapons. From there, a holistic approach was applied to lay the foundations for a reintegration into Libya society. Psychological and social factors were included to reorient those detained as they adapted to a peaceful existence.

On graduation day in March, 2010, Saif Al-Islam presided over a formal press conference. As he freed 214 former members of LGIF, the Muslim Brotherhood, and other groups hostile to his regime, he said:

"Today is an important day because 214 prisoners are released. However, its greatest importance lies in the release of the group’s leaders, and therefore, today, we have reached the crest of the reconciliation and dialogue program. Thanks to the efforts of our brothers and the Gaddafi Foundation, 705 people were released including of course this group. Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi, Press Conference in Tripoli, March 23, 2010 p, 13

It was less than a year later that the February 17, 2011 days of rage marked the start of the Libyan rebellion led by the graduates of the deradicalization program. This was the same program initiated by Gaddafi's son and sponsored by the Gaddafi International Foundation for Charitable Associations.

The rehabilitation failed.

The Bush Administrations Gaddafi Rehab Program

Before Muammar Gaddafi and his son started their terrorist rehabilitation program, the Bush Administration conducted its own deradicalization effort with Gaddafi. On May 15, 2006, the US restored diplomatic relations with Libya. Then Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice said, "We are taking these actions in recognition of Libya's continued commitment to its renunciation of terrorism."

Time Magazine heralded the Gaddafi's conversion with a headline; Why Gaddafi is now a Good Guy. It noted that, "Even though Gaddafi has done little to loosen his dictatorship, British Prime Minister Tony Blair and French President Jacques Chirac, among other statesmen, have already visited Libya to signal the West's pleasure. President Bush, or his successor, could be next to visit the leader in his tent."

The diplomatic contacts went hand in hand with weapons and energy contracts and it was all good until those rehabilitated al Qaeda allies, the LGIF, began stirring the pot.

Now things have turned upside down again. The military leadership of the Libyan rebellion is wall to wall LGIF with their links to al Qaeda. The NATO military machine may have taken some advice from its deradicalized allies. There have been reports of NATO bombings in urban areas with a range of civilian casualties. Unfortunately, on May 10, the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Human Affairs stopped its tally of civilian casualties. That was our only chance to know how many Libyans had to be killed in the name of freedom.

So what about the end of al Qaeda announced Monday? What about a Libyan revolutionary military command infested by al Qaeda sympathizers? It doesn't really matter, it appears. The Libyan effort is about something more important - oil (Libya to honor all legal oil deals, August 24)

Just a few years after pronouncing Gaddafi civilized, the US now demands that he leave Libya. Instead of selling him billions in weapons, NATO forms an alliance with a revolutionary military command dominated by members of an organization with strong historical ties to al Qaeda. It is all about oil. Whoever has it is our friend. Those who had but could not hold the oil concession are forgotten.

The United States and Europe have no permanent friends or enemies, to borrow a phrase, just a permanent lust for oil. That can justify any sequence of events. Just bet on the winner and get the goods.

END

This article may be reproduced with attribution of authorship and a link to this article.

The Money Party RSS

The War on You

Sun, 31 Jul 2011 04:22:00 -0600

Let the word go forth from Washington! The corporate rulers occupying our nation's capital have declared war on just about every citizen.

Have no doubt: those in the upper ranges of the top 1% of wealth in this country (aka The Money Party) want to kick you to the curb.

They want to reduce your social security and make you go broke paying for medical care.

They want to lower your wages and trash your retirement.

They ignore the clear facts that we've had negative job growth since 2000 and the situation is just getting worse.

They want to ship jobs, factories, and entire businesses overseas and give companies that do that a big fat tax credit for doing so.

They've been given so much for nothing for so long. Now, they're ready to take it all. It's their time!
<1--more-->
The most recent assault is the ridiculous debate about raising the debt ceiling. There should be no debate. Failing to raise the ceiling right now means deliberate default on debts, refusing to pay bills the government can pay. It's called fraud.

The pressing need to fix the budget is a separate issue. Reduced spending and increased revenues should come through broad public involvement and open debate. It mandates that the rulers behave like adults.

But this crisis isn't about putting together a real budget. It's about creating a budget that punishes you, your family, and friends. It's about taking your attention away from your vital interests to maximize income and control by The Money Party.

Were the leaders on either side of the debate serious, the Bush era tax cuts would be rescinded. These cuts on the top 1% were temporary. Guess what? Congress lied. When the temporary tax breaks ran out a few months ago, they were revived and renewed just when we had the greatest need for revenues.

The Money Party won't give up its wars either. Iraq and Afghanistan have added $4 trillion to the national debt of $14 trillion. Why not stop the wars? How hard is that to figure that out?

Getting rid of Bush tax cuts for the super-rich, ending the wars, and moving out of the recession/depression would be huge steps toward balancing the budget. But that won't happen with this Congress and this president. Why? That would cost the financial elite money for taxes and lost income for all those weapons they sell to support the wars.

The Attack on You Began in Earnest Just Years Ago

Congress repealed Depression era banking regulation that kept your banks from risky investments in 1999.

Congress enacted legislation in 2000 that allowed extremely risky investments in real estate and other derivatives, illegal for nearly a century.

In 2001, the big banks and Wall Street celebrated its newly purchased freedoms with a decade-long binge of fraud and risky investments. Like a greedy con artist, they took everything they could from people here and around the world until there was no more to take. We have now hit the wall thanks to them.

The outrageous expenses of wars based on lies caught up with us and shoved the deficit to new heights. The tax cuts for the top 1% took away revenues needed to balance the budget.

The money they steal from the Social Security surplus is no longer enough. They want to keep the tax in place for us and take an even bigger rake-off.

This crisis is manufactured by the ongoing greed of The Money Party. It is funded by the US Treasury. You pay for it, all of it.

End

This article may be reproduced with attribution of authorship and a link to the article.

The Money Party RSS

Congressional Criminal Conspiracy! Defaulting when you don't need to is a crime

Wed, 27 Jul 2011 19:51:00 -0600

If we defaulted on our debt when we were perfectly capable of paying it, we would be be prosecuted for fraud. But when Congress does it, they call it politics.

The crazies in the United States House of Representatives would have you believe it were so. They say fix that budget before we'll raise the debt ceiling. If we don't get our fix, they announce, there's no deal. We'll just default until things get straightened out. (Image: George Romero)

Let's see what would happen to you or me. We are unable to pay our bills, unless we tap a special line of credit that we've used in the past, one that has never failed us. We'll have to raise some money and cut some expenses too.

We're tired of paying bills and just want to stop for a while. We file for bankruptcy following all of the required procedures. The minute we file, we're granted an automatic stay on our debt. We are now protected, no bills to pay.

Then we get a few visits from creditors. They let us know that they know we can pay. Other people owed money show up also and ask, what is your problem? You owe us the money. You can pay and you will. The combination of angry creditors and recipients of our funds forces us to do what we could have done in the first place.

We tap the line of credit, cut expenses, and increase income. We make the payments we could have made all along. Once again, we have the choice of fixing things long term or repeating the process yet again.

What would happen to us? We would certainly hear from federal attorneys and the bankruptcy court. We lied to gain the stay. That's more than just inaccurate representations. It's fraud, a prosecutable offense. We would also hear from the creditors and recipients of our funds. They would demand restitution for damages based on any demonstrable harm from our fraudulent default.

In addition to criminal and civil consequences, we would be regarded as shady characters and real fools by our peers.

If Congress refuses to raise the debt ceiling, something it has done nearly seventy-four times since 1962, we will face similar consequences.

We have been accumulating significant debt since the Reagan administration, the claimed inspiration for many of the new members of Congress. Democrats and Republicans have participated in the annual tradeoffs of political benefits today versus neglected long term fiscal responsibilities. Robert Oak's article shows new expenditures contributing to the current debt. The main offenders are the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and the Bush era tax cuts. This represents 3.2 trillion in new debt.

What happens if the United States defaults on its debt?

The US dollar is the world's reserve currency. People all over the world rely on the stability of the dollar. Since the dollar is tied to the government, if the government defaults, so much for the dollar. It plunges in value. There will be a world reserve currency to follow and it won't be the dollar. This will translate into immediate hardship here and abroad.

The cost of everything will go up as a result of default. Why? The credit rating for the United States will be downgraded and cost of borrowing will increase substantially for governments - federal, state, local - and for business.

The cost of credit and the general disruption will have an immediate impact on unemployment. Remember 2009? It will be much worse.

Since the United States has no need to default, the act will tarnish our image even more than it has been tarnished by dysfunctional government, military aggression, and financial fraud perpetrated by Wall Street (see Numerian's article). We're not the only game in town. There are alternatives. Imagine a marginalized nation seen as the world's leading grifter.

The default is not necessary. When you can't pay your bills, you cut expenses that don't generate revenue, war and defense spending. You increase available revenues. The Bush era tax cuts were to expire by now. Put them back in force. Those in the top 1% of the income bracket have had a nice run (see graph rebelcapitalist.com). Let them pay their fair share.

Offer the public input through an open debate based on honest information. What is the impact of cutting spending in a time of recession? What should be cut? What should be increased? What does a serious budget look like, one that benefits the people and nation in the mid and long term?

If default takes place, it will be predicated on a conspicuous fraud, just like our example of the fraudulent default by the individual who had no need to default.

The debt ceiling and a balanced budget are entirely separate issues.

Anyone who behaves as though this is not the case is simply lying. Worse, they're the enemy of the vast majority of citizens.

END

This article may be reproduced with attribution of authorship and a link to this article

The Money Party RSS

Running Rupert to Ground – Vox Populi, Vox Dei

Mon, 18 Jul 2011 16:41:00 -0600

By Michael Collins

How will they get rid of Rupert Murdoch and his toxic enterprises?

July 4, 2011 may turn into the people's Independence Day. On that day, stellar journalist Nick Davies of the Guardian released his story; Missing Milly Dowler's voicemail was hacked by News of the World. Twelve year old Milly Dowler had been kidnapped with foul play feared. The Murdoch tabloid couldn't resist. News of the World (the News) hired a private detective to hack Milly's voicemail. Finding the mail box full, the News or its hired dick deleted existing messages to make room for new ones, all to fuel their ongoing coverage. The deleted messages raised hopes by Milly's parents that she was still alive and using her voicemail. (Image)

The Davies story elicited a reaction of near universal shock, outrage, and revulsion. Milly had already been murdered by the time the Murdoch paper began its illegal tapping.

The public revulsion resulted in immediate and fervent popular demands for justice. Those demands were compounded by follow-up stories on other Murdoch media hacking. As it turned out, the News also broke into the voicemails of war widows to capture their most intimate exchanges on the loss of fallen soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq. All in all, at least 4,000 citizens had their voicemails hacked to boost the Murdoch publication's circulation and profits.

Driven by broad public ire, Murdoch's empire began unraveling immediately. He became a target for those he'd tormented, particularly in politics. In just a few days, he became anathema for those he'd placed in power, indicating the focused intensity and force of public outrage. Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron fell in line with Labour Party Leader Ed Milliband's call to stop Murdoch's critical acquisition of pay TV network BSkyB. The Independent spoke of Murdoch having to abandon his United Kingdom media properties.

The crisis spread across the Atlantic when Senator John D. (Jay) Rockefeller demanded that law enforcement look into possible voicemail and other electronic surveillance of 9/11 survivors in the United States by Murdoch's News Corporation.

"I am concerned that the admitted phone hacking in London by the News Corp. may have extended to 9/11 victims or other Americans. If they did, the consequences will be severe." Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, July 12

The very next day the FBI announced an investigation. Ominously for Murdoch, Rep Peter King (R-NY), endorsed the effort immediately. King has been a friend of Fox for some time and a frequent guest on the network's news programs.

Ignored in all of this well justified outrage is the ultimate sin of the Murdoch media empire, enabling and encouraging the lethal invasion of Iraq by supporting the insane plans of former President George W. Bush and his collaborator, former Prime Minister Tony Blair. The war took a terrible toll in injuries and deaths of US forces. The anticipated civil strife that followed the invasion resulted in a million dead Iraqi civilians, several million refugees, and, at one point, five million orphans.

Forced Exist Strategies for Murdoch

The legal options in the United Kingdom are fairly straight forward. Two former News editors have already been arrested, Andy Coulson and Rebekah Brooks. Those devastating blows followed proposals in Parliament block Murdoch's acquisition, a near certainty now, and to break up his media empire. Murdoch beneficiary, PM Cameron, supported the former and may be forced to support the latter.

The public outrage in the UK shows no signs of waning. The pressure to do something dramatic will reach a fever pitch after Tuesday's hearings by the Culture, Media, and Sport Select Committee. Murdoch and others News Corporation luminaries will face a robust interrogation.

Murdoch has already withdrawn his bid for total control of the lucrative BSkyB cable network. He may lose the ability to keep his current 39% if he's found an "unfit person" for media ownership.

In addition, the UK has anti-bribery legislation that may apply, the Prevention of Corruption Act 1906. News Corporation and executives are vulnerable to charges under the act. A "corrupt transaction" [bribe] is defined as occurring when "any person corruptly gives or agrees to give or offers any gift or consideration to any agent as an inducement or reward" in return for a favor of some kind. Former chief executive of News International, Rebekah Brooks, already admitted "corrupt transactions" in 2003 (see below).

Beyond the specific admission by Brooks, there are a number of allegations that the London Metropolitan Police were bribed to limit and impede the investigations into the News phone hacking.

A combination of phone hacking plus violations of the Prevention of Corruption Act await Murdoch. This would go beyond what the The Independent suggested when it wrote of Murdoch, "abandoning his British media interests."

The rapidly unfolding catastrophe in the UK does something to Murdoch that he can ill afford. It shows that he is vulnerable.

Who shows any sympathy to a vulgar, amoral bully when his time is up?

Rockefeller's Broadside

Senator Rockefeller's demand for an investigation of News Corporation is a work of political art. How could a 20 year member of the Senate intelligence Committee raise a question about harassing victim families of the 9/11 attack without knowing the answer in advance? Was the 9/11 question raised to open the door for a broad based attack on Murdoch in the US?

Murdoch is clearly a toxic force in politics and a menace to rational governance even by the standards of oligarchs. His propaganda for the Iraq invasion left dead and injured, a shattered reputation for the nation, diminished effectiveness overseas, and added four trillion dollars in debt. The Tea Party movement with its cast of borderline politicos is out of control. Sarah Palin's targeting rhetoric was closely associated with the assassination attempt on Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, (D-AZ).

Most recently, the fruit of the Fox fueled Tea Party juggernaut, the Republican majority in the House of Representatives, showed a willingness to take the nation and the world into a devastating economic depression with their impossible requirement for a balanced budget before raising the US debt ceiling. This indicates a massive disconnect with reality.

Murdoch's News Corporation has the power to create all of this havoc and more. It is autonomous and subject only to the profoundly distorted political whims of its tottering leader. Murdoch mischief amounts to very real threats that are unacceptable for those with the ability to put Murdoch out of business.

Running Murdoch Out of the US

If Murdoch's time has come, a variation of this scenario is available as you read these words.

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) is used to prosecute bribes of foreign officials. Created in the late 1990s, the act was signed by thirty-four nations, including the US and the UK. The Justice Department has used the act frequently in recent years.

News Corporation's Rebekah Brooks has already admitted giving cash to the London Metropolitan Police at a 2003 public hearing. Brooks was editor of the News at the time.

Federal prosecutors have combined the FCPA with The Travel Act of 1961 to increase the penalties and convictions for foreign bribery. Brooks is a citizen of the UK. However, her acts are the ultimate responsibility of Murdoch's News Corporation, incorporated in Delaware and headquartered in New York City. The act outlaws travel and communications from one state or country to another country with the intent of violating the law. Federal prosecutors can indict perpetrators using applicable state law. New York State law classifies bribing a public official as a felony as is interfering with the administration of justice.. Therefore, News Corporation could be charged with felonies under The Travel Act, FCPA, and New York criminal code.

Here is the Brooks testimony admitting cash payments to the London police. Also at the inquiry was Andy Coulson, News of the World Editors, 2003-2007. Brooks was editor of the News form 2000-2003.

Culture, Media, and Sport Select Committee, March 2003 Video-Guardian.co.uk

Committee: And I might just ask have they [the News] ever paid the police? Just the one element of whether you ever pay the police.

Brooks: We have paid the police for information in the past and it's been …

Committee: And will you do it in the future.

Brooks: It depends on…

Committee: Will you operate within the code and within the law.

Andy Coulson: We operate within the code and within the law and if there's a clear public interest and the same holds for private detectives, for subterfuge, for video bags, whatever you want to talk about…

Committee: It's illegal for police officers to receive payment

Coulson: No, no, no, we don't, I just said, ‘within the law.'

This testimony fits in neatly with the accusations that the News paid off London police to slow-roll the phone hacking investigation.

If they want Murdoch, they've got him. Wide spread speculation that Murdoch is subject to indictment will drive down News Corporation shares, costing Murdoch billions, and threaten the viability or even profitable sale of his US properties. The picture may turn grim very soon for the once but not future grand master of media manipulation.

The Voice of the People

Public reaction in the UK has put the entirety of Rupert Murdoch;s British holdings at risk. Since July 4, the public reduced the press overlord who made and controlled British politics to the status of a flight risk. Can Murdoch relax for a moment in his London mansion knowing that if he ever faces a trial, he will surely have a jury that would do everything it could to make sure he served the rest of his life in a British prison.

These rapid and dramatic shifts have much more to do with the outrage of citizens than with the popular proposals of Labour Leader Ed Miliband that would break up News Corporation's UK operations. This leader is following the people.

The prospect of a similar public outrage in the US is currently a function of the FBI investigation. Confirmation of the shameless act of spying on the families of 9/11 victims would cause an eruption of anger that would spread across the nation at warp speed. Murdoch would be finished here, one way or another.

Powerful forces will work against this, challenging Rockefeller and others who are, without much doubt, intent on sending Murdoch away. Questioning News Corporation exploitation of 9/11 families is a charge, a deep mark, that will firmly attach to the Fox news outlets, cable, broadcast, and print properties for decades.

The people of the United Kingdom found their voice and demonstrated that they cannot be stopped when they act in unison. The precedent is set. For decades, the citizens of the United States have not had a moment where their unified will caused a rapid policy change. If the opportunity arises, manufactured or not, the precedent may be set here and generalize to broader interests. It is time to stop the extraction of nearly all of the nation's wealth and power by the very few at the expense of the overwhelming majority.

END

This article may be reproduced entirely or in part with attribution of authorship and a link to this article.

The Money Party RSS

Is News Corp Finished - Senator Rockefeller Tells Feds to Investigate Fox Hacking of 9/11 Victims

Wed, 13 Jul 2011 08:09:00 -0600

There are some crimes so universally offensive that even mentioning the suspected crime has devastating effects. Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) raised just such a question yesterday. In a brief press statement, the Senator said:

"The reported hacking by News Corporation newspapers against a range of individuals - including children - is offensive and a serious breach of journalistic ethics. This raises serious questions about whether the company has broken U.S. law, and I encourage the appropriate agencies to investigate to ensure that Americans have not had their privacy violated. I am concerned that the admitted phone hacking in London by the News Corp. may have extended to 9/11 victims or other Americans. If they did, the consequences will be severe." Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, July 12 (Image: NASA)

Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation has used voicemail hacking and other forms of privacy intrusion in the United Kingdom as far back as 2002. The goal is to get the most intimate insider information, stay ahead of the news cycle, and beat the competition. Where better to get information than the voicemails and other electronic data belonging to those in the news. The News of the World, Murdoch's flagship paper, hacked the voicemails of a kidnapped 12 year old, the widows of fallen soldiers, and even the powerful. In 2006, the Murdoch papers invaded the private medical records of former Labour Party leader Gordon Brown.

A July 4 article by Nick Davies of the Guardian ignited the most recent focus on illegal actions by the Murdoch papers with the revelation about the phone hack of the 12 year old kidnapping-murder victim, Milly Fowler. The outrage and subsequent revelations have laid waste to News Corporations plans for the total acquisition of a highly successful pay per view entertainment network, BSkyB.

Rockefeller’s statement comes just five days after reports by London’s Daily Mirror claiming that a Murdoch UK paper sought hacking services targeting the phone traffic and voicemails of 9/11 victims. Davida Collins of the Mirror wrote:

“This investigator is used by a lot of journalists in America and he recently told me that he was asked to hack into the 9/11 victims’ private phone data. He said that the journalists asked him to access records showing the calls that had been made to and from the mobile phones belonging to the victims and their relatives.” Daily Mirror, July 7

The yet to be verified source said that the investigator making the inquires was particularly interested in the phone data on British 9/11 victims.

John Del Signore of The Gothamist said this of the Mirror’s reporting: “Of course, this has only been reported in The Mirror, which is reveling in its rival's downfall, and eager to see Murdoch's bid for full control of British Sky Broadcasting go down in flames.”

Senator Rockefeller is a long standing member of the Senate Select Intelligence Committee and was its chairman from 2007 through 2009. It’s not likely that he relied on the Daily Mirror newspaper to form the basis for his concerns. It is highly unlikely that Rockefeller issued this brief but potent release without some evidence that the charges have merit. At this point, the Senator is just asking questions, in a public and very pointed way.

Rockefeller is not known for grandstanding or histrionics, although he can be very forthright at times. He chaired the Senate intelligence committee when it released a report on intelligence before the Iraq invasion, Rockefeller said:

“In making the case for war, the Administration repeatedly presented intelligence as fact when in reality it was unsubstantiated, contradicted, or even non-existent. As a result, the American people were led to believe that the threat from Iraq was much greater than actually existed.” Senate Intelligence Committee Unveils Final Phase II Reports on Prewar Iraq Intelligence June 5, 2008

A horse, a horse, my kingdom for a horse! Richard III

Murdoch will need more than a horse to retreat from the bloody battlefield that he created of his own free will. During the just ten days following the explosive Guardian report on phone hacking by Murdoch’s News of the World, he has sustained repeated attacks on his UK media properties, pending deals, and his personal integrity. Now a senior, well connected US Senator is questioning his integrity.

Last week, the man Murdoch helped elect Prime Minister, David Cameron, indirectly defended Murdoch, then abandon him yesterday. PM Cameron took just two days to agree with the July 7 motion in Parliament to oppose Murdoch’s “must have” acquisition of pay cable giant BSkyB. The PM’s surrender is all the more significant since it was put forward by his harshest critic, Labour Party leader Ed Miliband.

All the while, the evidence of sleazy and scandalous behavior of the Murdoch papers has expanded geometrically.

Rockefeller’s statement is the harbinger of corporate death. Every time a real reporter is within shouting distance of Murdoch, the questions will be asked

"Mr. Murdoch, sir:"

Did you hack the phones or other media of 9/11 victims?

How many?

What possessed you to do that?

How many other invasions of privacy have the foot soldiers for your media empire conducted?

Is anyone safe from the spying of News Corporation?

Murdoch’s answers matter less than the fact that Senator Rockefeller's statement opens the door to devastating inquiries. Increasingly, Murdoch will be seen as a toxic entity, someone requiring great distance, a Uriah Heep of the corporate elite. He’s simply not bankable anymore or fit for civil company.

But at long last, Murdoch has no shame. That requires a moral center, a set of beliefs consistent with the importance and integrity of civil discourse and governance.

Murdoch has inflicted great pain on the world and never flinched, never apologized. He is, after all, the owner of Fox News. Murdoch worked hand in hand with former President George W. Bush to justify the invasion of Iraq. Many who believe Saddam Hussein was behind the 9/11 attacks got that information from the drumbeat of misinformation provided by Murdoch’s US media outlets.

The war cost lives, caused suffering, and has a lot to do with bankrupting the nation. It also cost the lives of a million Iraqi civilians who died in the civil strife directly caused by the war.

Murdoch never apologized for his central role of supporting the Iraq invasion or for the needless death and carnage that followed. Why would he apologize for hacking phones to invade the lives of innocent citizens caught in a big news story or those at the top of society and politics. His character is now his destiny.

END

This article may be reproduced entirely or in part with attribution of authorship and a link to this article.

The Money Party RSS