Gov’t raids strike a controversial chord (OneNewsNow.com)

Gov’t raids strike a controversial chord

Russ Jones and Jody Brown – OneNewsNow – 8/31/2011 8:55:00 AMBookmark and Share

Gibson Hummingbird guitarThe legendary guitar manufacturer Gibson was recently raided by the U.S. Department of Justice. On Wednesday, August 24, heavily armed agents from the federal agency executed four search warrants on Gibson’s facilities in Nashville and Memphis in what some are calling an extreme abuse of power.

 

Reports claim Gibson is violating the Lacey Act with its guitars produced from rosewood and mahogany imported from India that are crafted by American workers in U.S. facilities. The intent of the law combats trafficking in “illegal” wildlife, fish, and plants, but Gibson CEO Henry Juszkiewicz tells OneNewsNow that the company has been using the wood for years.
 
“We have letters from a very high-level government agency in India that says that this product was allowable export,” he notes. “And in fact, we have been buying the same product for well over 17 years, regularly.”
 
Henry Juszkiewicz (CEO, Gibson Guitars)This is the second such raid in two years where Gibson employees were evacuated and computers and pallets of wood were confiscated. Gibson reports no charges have been filed from that 2009 raid, and that the government still holds the company’s property.
 
Meanwhile, competitor C.F. Martin & Company uses the same wood product, but has not endured similar investigations. “Wood that we are buying is being bought by other companies in the industry, and they have not had any kind of action — not so much as a letter or a postcard,” states Juszkiewicz.
 
In addition to questions about application of the Lacey Act, some are voicing concern about possible political intimidation. Chris Martin IV, CEO of the Martin guitar company, is a long-time Democratic supporter, donating tens of thousands of dollars to Democratic candidates. In contrast, Juszkiewicz has a long history of supporting Republican candidates.
 
In an interview with The Daily News in Memphis earlier this week, Juszkiewicz stated: “The federal bureaucracy is just out of hand. And it seems to be there’s almost a class warfare of companies versus people, rich versus poor, Republicans versus Democrats …. We feel totally abused. We feel the arrogance of federal power is impacting me personally, our company personally, and the employees here in Tennessee — and it’s just plain wrong.”
 
Juszkiewicz argues that the U.S. Lacey Act is only applicable when a foreign law has been violated. He believes his company is innocent of any wrongdoing.
 
In April 2009, First Lady Michelle Obama presented France’s first lady, Carla Bruni-Sarkozy, with a Gibson guitar as a gift. The Gibson “Hummingbird” acoustic guitar’s construction incorporates mahogany and rosewood from India.

Leftist tactics becoming routine and ever more “in your face” under the Obama administration. This is NOT the America the vast majority of Americans desire.. this is Tyranny.

The American Spectator : Preventive Care, Obamacare Style

The Right Prescription

Preventive Care, Obamacare Style

By on 8.24.11 @ 6:07AM

While President Obama rests up at Martha’s Vineyard, people
whose lives should be saved by new and existing cancer drugs are
driving from hospital to hospital in search of medicines in short
supply thanks in part to Obamacare’s implementation.

Over the past two years shortages have developed for over
180 drugs, including cancer treatments. The shortfall is the result
of stricter FDA regulation, government price controls on already
discounted but complex drugs, and policies that discourage the use
of new medications. Companies, facing lower prices, tighter
regulation and increasing government control over what drugs will
be used and when, are exiting the U.S. market and investing in
product development in China and India where, sadly, it is easier
and cheaper to produce next-generation medicines.

Stockpiling will only add to people’s suffering by replacing
market reforms with government micromanagement. Government planners
require months, if not years, to produce regulations, bids and
supply estimates that are usually overgenerous to compensate for
paltry prices. Government bungling was behind the failure of the
smallpox and H1N1 vaccine program and responsible for billions of
dollars in flu vaccines and antibiotics being dumped. The
same forces pushing stockpiling also
believe
commercializing medical discoveries is evil. It’s part of a larger
effort to nationalize the development of medicines that under
Obamacare is become institutionalized.

Indeed, the drug shortage is a product of a more troubling
trend. At a time when medical research could yield breakthroughs in
the treatment of obesity, Alzheimer’s, diabetes, and stroke, among
others, innovation has all but dried up. Most of the medicines
being used today were developed 30 years ago. Most of them have
generic competition. They have contributed greatly to increased
wellbeing but as the return on generic drugs fall, price controls
and regulation have created shortages.

Obamacare is making the commercialization of newer drugs
and devices more difficult.

Though new and faster methods to determine a technology’s
safety and effectiveness exist, Obama’s FDA still demands evidence
collected with science and statistical methods developed in the
19th century. To be sure, in the last two years new medicines for
AIDS, cancer, lupus and hepatitis have been developed. Yet, these
products should have been available sooner if not for FDA
nitpicking.

And now that they are finally approved, patients are
finding it next to impossible to access several new drugs and
genetic tests that would transform the quality of life and extend
survival for such illnesses as lupus, prostate cancer, and organ
transplantation.

Provenge, the first cancer vaccine, stalled at the FDA for
years. Once approved, it faced 18 months of additional delay while
the Obama administration figured out whether to pay for it. The
gauntlet cancer patients face with Provenge is being extended to
everyone waiting for a medical breakthrough under Obamacare. Before
a medical innovation can be used or paid for, the government will
now demand additional research demonstrating that a new product
will be more effective and cheaper than existing technologies.
Since most new products come from small start-ups with limited
cash, such a requirement means life-saving innovations will not be
available at all.

Similar regulations have been used to delay and deny
access to cancer drugs in England, Canada and Australia. Drugs such
as Avastin, Revlimid and Herceptin are barely used in Britain’s
cancer wards because government decided they were not valuable. The
people who could not use them are dead. Those — mostly in America
— that did are alive.

But now this de facto rationing is coming to America.
Before the cancer drug shortage there was the decision that women
under 50 should not get mammograms. Both Provenge and Benlysta, new
treatments for prostate cancer and lupus respectively, are hard to
come by because of uncertainty about reimbursement by health plans
and government.

The death and suffering flowing from such delays are the
result of policies promoted by those who want to use the FDA and
increased government control over medicine to slash access to new
technologies. In their mind, rationing of cancer drugs frees up
money to expand the welfare state. The shortage of old drugs is
simply one side effect of this malevolent strategy.

It would be simpler to claw back regulations and let
markets work. But stockpiling is part of a larger effort to
centralize the development and use of medical services. The
administration has gone silent on the wonders of Obamacare even as
it issues regulations and hires bureaucrats to replace free choice
with government edict. But it will emerge as a campaign and
social issue. In America no one should go without medicine
because they can’t afford it. And this shouldn’t be a nation where
people are denied treatments because their government makes
medicine impossible to produce or obtain.


Letter to the Editor

Think about it. This is the direction the current government intends to prod us… like sheep to slaughter. This is driving the average American into the ditch.. a Grand Canyon size ditch…

Pro-Al Qaeda brigades control Qaddafi Tripoli strongholds seized by rebels

Our accomplishment in Libya?

 

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report August 28, 2011, 11:47 AM (GMT+02:00)

Tags:  Libya   Muammar Qaddafi   Al Qaeda   Tripoli   NATO   NTC 
Abd Al-Hakim Belhadj, pro-Al Qaeda LIFG chief


Members of the Al Qaeda-linked Libyan Islamic Fighting Group – LIFG, are in control of the former strongholds of Muammar Qaddafi captured by Libyan rebels last Sunday, Aug. 21, debkafile reports from sources in Libya. They are fighting under the command of Abd Al-Hakim Belhadj, an al Qaeda veteran from Afghanistan whom the CIA captured in Malaysia in 2003 and extradited six years later to Libya where Qaddafi held him in prison.

Belhadj is on record as rejecting any political form of coexistence with the Crusaders excepting jihad.

His brigades were the principal rebel force in the operation for the capture of Qaddafi’s Bab al-Aziziya ruling compound on Aug. 23. Saturday, Aug. 27, those brigades overran the Abu Salim district of southern Tripoli taking it from the last pro-Qaddafi holdouts in the city. Many of the prisoners released from the local jail belonged to al Qaeda.
The LIFG chief now styles himself “Commander of the Tripoli Military Council.” Asked by our sources whether they plan to hand control of the Libyan capital to the National Transitional Council, which has been recognized in the West, the jihadi fighters made a gesture of dismissal without answering.

According to US and British media, at least half of the members of the NTC have moved from Benghazi to Tripoli, the key condition for the receipt of Qaddafi’s frozen assets and international aid. But there is no confirmation from our sources that this has happened. Tripoli is rife with disorder, awash with weapons and prey to reciprocal allegations of atrocities. Our sources doubt that the council will be able to assert control of – or even a presence in – Tripoli any time soon. US intelligence sources in Tripoli see no sign that the NTC will be able to persuade the Islamist brigades to relinquish control of the city in the near future – or even lay down arms.
Those arms are advanced items which British and French special operations forces gave the rebels, said a senior American source. Had those NATO contingents not led the Tripoli operation, the rebels unaided would not have captured Qaddafi’s centers of government.

A week after that dramatic episode, Tripoli’s institutions of government have wound up in the hands of fighting Islamist brigades belonging to al Qaeda, who are now armed to the teeth with the hardware seized from Qaddafi’s arsenals. No Western or Libyan military force can conceive of dislodging the Islamists from the Libyan capital in the foreseeable future.

Libya has thus created a new model which can only hearten the Islamist extremists eyeing further gains from the Arab Revolt. They may justly conclude that NATO will come to their aid for a rebellion to topple any autocratic Arab ruler. The coalition of British, French, Qatari and Jordanian special forces, with quiet US intelligence support, for capturing Tripoli and ousting Qaddafi, almost certainly met with US President Barack Obama’s approval.

For the first time, therefore, the armies of Western members of NATO took part directly in a bid by extremist Islamic forces to capture an Arab capital and overthrow its ruler.
An attempt to vindicate the way this NATO operation has turned out is underway. Western media are being fed portrayals of the rebel leadership as a coherent and responsible political and military force holding sway from Benghazi in the east up to the Tunisian border in the west.

This depiction is false. Our military sources report that the bulk of rebel military strength in central and western Libya is not under NTC command, nor does it obey orders from rebel headquarters in Benghazi.
This chaotic situation in rebel ranks underscores the importance of the effort the NTC has mounted to capture Sirte, Qaddafi’s home town, where most of his support is concentrated. Control of Sirte, which lies between Benghazi and Tripoli, will provide the NTC and its leader Abdul Jalil, with a counterweight for the pro-Al Qaeda brigades in control of the capital.

 

http://www.debka.com/article/21249/

 

Obama administration – Economics? Clueless

 Obama, and his administration, gave us a glimpse of their collective lack of financial acumen when they imposed the “Cash For Clunkers” plan early in his administration.  This proves the nagging fact.. no one in this administration has a clue when it comes to making clear and compelling decisions when it comes to financial matters.  Of supreme importance is the “appearance” of confidence.. Projecting “confidence” is the one thing that makes a “Con Man” effective..that, and the gullibility of the “mark”.

Clunker

 

“The person who calculated this bit of information is now and has been a professor at The University of West Virginia in Morgantown for the last forty some years.

A clunker that travels 12,000 miles a year at 15 mpg uses 800 gallons of gas a year.
A vehicle that travels 12,000 miles a year at 25 mpg uses 480 gallons of gas a  year.
So, the average Cash for Clunkers transaction will reduce gasoline consumption by 320 gallons per year.
The government claims 700,000 clunkers have been replaced so that’s 224 million gallons saved per year.
That equates to a bit over 5 million barrels of oil.5 million barrels is about 5 hours worth of US consumption.
More importantly, 5 million barrels of oil at $70 per barrel costs about $350 million dollars.
So, the government paid $3 billion of our tax dollars to save $350 million.
We spent $8.57 for every $1.00 we saved.

I’m pretty sure they will do a better job with our health care, though!”

Rick Perry tied to Agenda 21, globalist policies | Terri Hall | a mySA.com blog

Rick Perry may be good at invoking states rights and property rights, while disavowing ‘foreign creditors,’ but his actions as Texas’ longest serving governor tell a different story. Public private partnerships (or P3s) are part and parcel of the United Nations’ Agenda 21. Two of the purposes of Agenda 21 are to abolish private property and restrict mobility and P3s act as the vehicle to do it. Perry made P3s a centerpiece of his transportation policy since he stepped in as governor.

It started with the Trans Texas Corridor, known at the federal level as high priority corridors, corridors of the future, or the NAFTA superhighways. Just in Texas, it was to be a 4,000 mile multi-modal network of toll roads, rail lines, power transmission lines, pipelines, telecommunications lines and more. It was going to be financed, operated, and controlled by a foreign company granted massive swaths of land 1,200 feet (4 football fields) wide taken forcibly through eminent domain.

Called the biggest land grab in Texas history, it was going to gobble up 580,000 acres of private Texas land (the first corridor alone was to displace 1 million Texans) and hand it over to well-connected global players using P3s, who would gain exclusive rights to determine the route and what hotels, restaurants, and gas stations were along the corridor in a government-sanctioned monopoly for a half century. It was the worst case of eminent domain for private gain ever conceived.

Property rights shredded
The Trans Texas Corridor, and P3s in general, represent an imminent threat to private property rights. While lawmakers repealed the Trans Texas Corridor from state statute only months ago due to the public backlash, the re-named corridor (‘Innovative Connectivity Plan’) and its threat to property rights lives on through P3s. Two such projects underway by a Spanish developer, Cintra, will charge Texans 75 cents per mile in tolls (nearly $13 a day while Perry claims he hasn’t raised taxes or indebted Texans to foreign creditors) to access lanes on two public interstates — I-635 and I-820. A third project being developed by the same company for two segments on SH 130 is, perhaps, the only leg of the Trans Texas Corridor TTC-35 project that will ever be built.

While Perry distracted Texans and tea partiers with ‘emergency’ resolutions on state sovereignty during the 82nd legislature, P3s spread from transportation projects to virtually every other type of public infrastructure in a bill, SB 1048, passed by the Texas legislature which he signed into law June 17. Now all public infrastructure, including public buildings, schools, nursing homes, ports, mass transit, etc. can be auctioned-off to private interests in long-term sweetheart deals with taxpayer subsidies and profit guarantees using P3s.

P3s give a private corporation the power to tax the public, whether through charging tolls or other so-called ‘user fees,’ to access their own public infrastructure, and, perhaps more insidious,  allowing well-connected private entities to profit from concessions on land taken through eminent domain.

Why shouldn’t the original landowner be able to profit from developing his/her land instead of having the government take it in the name of a “public use” and give it to another developer, one with government connections? Perry’s administration of P3s is like his administration of his Emerging Technology Fund that’s been highly criticized for steering taxpayer money to Perry’s campaign donors — a case in point, Dan Shelley.

Shelley worked for Cintra, who had its sites set on developing the Trans Texas Corridor. Shelley lands a job as Perry’s aide, steers the $7 billion corridor P3 to his former employer Cintra, then goes back to work for Cintra. That’s how Perry does business — pay to play.

Texas “Open for Business”
While Perry is staking his campaign on Texas being the top net jobs creator, Perry’s version of Texas being “Open for Business” isn’t about low taxes and less regulation as much as it is about doing business with foreign companies, including selling off Texas’ sovereign land and public assets to foreign creditors, an issue which Perry’s first television ad uses to take aim at President Obama.

Aside from the P3s, Texas has 20 active deals going with the Chinese and has 32 foreign trade zones (FTZs), a vehicle to ease the flow of foreign goods into the United States that are chalk full of tax breaks for importers. Perry’s office promoted these FTZs in a document entitled Foreign Trade Zones: Texas Wide Open for Business and even dedicates a web site for Texas FTZs, www.TexasWideOpenForBusiness.com.

A recent Washington Post article documents Perry’s work to get Chinese government-owned telecommunications company Huawei, to base its U.S. operations in Texas, a company that the U.S. government has deemed a threat to national security noting that “three times since 2008, a U.S. government security panel has blocked Huawei from acquiring or partnering with U.S. companies because of concerns that secrets could be leaked to China’s government or military.”

Perry’s coziness with the Chinese and foreign investors exposes a huge weakness in his right flank — illegal immigration and open borders. The Trans Texas Corridor has been linked to the global plan to economically integrate North America, with the eventual goal of a common security perimeter modeled after the European Union. Perry ushered in in-state tuition for illegals and has long been an obstacle to immigration reform or any Arizona-style immigration law.

Perry’s record paints a much different picture than what candidate Perry would have us believe — that he’s a states rights, Constitutionally limited government conservative that’s responsible for the “Texas miracle.” In reality, he’s more like an Agenda 21 globalist willing to sell America to the highest bidder.

Share

Dare we examine the record? We know what Statism looks like.. and Perry seems to embrace the idea of putting aside private property rights… for the benefit of other private interests… Very troubling to think that he shares some Statist views that is at the heart of the U.N.’s Agenda 21. We don’t want or need Statist’s to be handed power.. we are witnessing how that works and we don’t need any more of it applied to us.

MAN FACES 2 YEARS IN PRISON FOR SHOOTING GRIZZLY WHILE DEFENDING FAMILY


There can be no more clear evidence that the Obama Administration is squarely behind the radical leftist set of “Mother Earth” values – not the values held by the vast majority of Americans.  His administration is imprisoned by an ideological blindness that turns common sense on it’s ear.  This odious abuse of power should be immediately terminated.  Those those involved in the attempted prosecution of this man should be summarily dismissed for abuse of power and never be allowed to hold positions in government again… they’re too far gone in their ideological madness.

Posted on August 25, 2011 at 7:22am by Tiffany Gabbay

This is quite a story. A man charged with unlawfully shooting and killing a grizzly bear in defense of his family, garnered so many supporters at his arraignment in U.S. District Court Tuesday that the judge had to move the hearing to a larger courtroom.

Even in the larger space, however, every seat was reportedly occupied as the man’s family, friends and neighbors vied for a place to show their support.

Jeremy M. Hill, 33, pleaded not guilty to killing the grizzly with a rifle on his 20-acre property near Porthill, Idaho, at the Canadian border.

Because the Endangered Species Act classifies the grizzly as a threatened species, Hill was charged with a misdemeanor.

The trial has been set for October 4 and Hill’s lawyer, Marc Lyons, said he plans to defend Hill on the basis of self-defense and protection of family.

Jeremy Hill’s father, Mike Hill, said his son was concerned for the safety of his children who were playing outside when the mother grizzly and her two cubs happened onto his property in May.

Hill has six children ranging in age from 14 years old to 10 months old and at least five were reportedly home when the grizzly appeared and was later killed.

CDAPress adds:

The bears had gone after some pigs in a pen that the kids had been raising, Mike Hill said.

He said his son shot one of the bears, then called authorities to notify them of the kill. The other two bears ran off.

He said his son could have just buried the animal and not said anything to law enforcement. He said his son is being penalized for coming forward.

“The charges are simply unjust,” State Sen. Shawn Keough (R-Sandpoint), who attended the heargin, told the CDAPress. “Hopefully common sense will prevail. It’s clearly an issue of protecting the family.”

According to her, the community has raised nearly $20,000 for Hill’s defense.

“Clearly, we have a problem with the ESA [Endangered Species Act] when situations like this happen.” Rep. Raul Labrador (R-Idaho) added. “We’re doing everything we can to make sure this man is treated fairly.”

According to CDA, the charge of killing a threatened species can carry a two-year prison sentence, a maximum fine of $50,000, and up to one year of probation.

(H/T: Drudge)

%d bloggers like this: