AND THE THIRD ANGEL FOLLOWED THEM, SAYING WITH A LOUD VOICE, IF ANY MAN WORSHIP THE BEAST AND HIS IMAGE, AND RECEIVE HIS MARK IN HIS FOREHEAD, OR IN HIS HAND. *** REVELATION 14:9
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Working with faith
Working with faith"Instead of driving us apart, our very beliefs can bring us together," President Obama said yesterday at the National Prayer Breakfast.E pluribus unum, in other words.After the breakfast he announced an executive order establishing the new White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, and talked about the role faith-based and secular community organizations will play in our economic recovery.
"People trust them. Communities rely on them. And we will help them," he said.
The President named Joshua DuBois to lead the office, and also announced the creation of the President’s Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships -- a group of 25 religious and secular leaders, listed below.
"Whether it's connecting groups that are training people to do new jobs, or figuring out the role of faith-based organizations in combating global climate change, this office creates those partnerships in a way that's responsible, constitutional, and -- bottom line -- helps those in need," DuBois said.
We asked DuBois to talk a little bit more about the office. Watch the video below.
download .mp4 here
also available here
Members of the President's Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships:
Judith N. Vredenburgh, President and Chief Executive Officer, Big Brothers / Big Sisters of America
Philadelphia, PA
Rabbi David N. Saperstein, Director & Counsel, Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, and noted church/state expert
Washington, DC
Dr. Frank S. Page, President emeritus, Southern Baptist Convention
Taylors, SC
Father Larry J. Snyder, President, Catholic Charities USA
Alexandria, VA
Rev. Otis Moss, Jr., Pastor emeritus, Olivet Institutional Baptist Church
Cleveland, OH
Eboo S. Patel, Founder & Executive Director, Interfaith Youth Corps
Chicago, IL
Fred Davie, President, Public / Private Ventures, a secular non-profit intermediary
New York, NY
Dr. William J. Shaw, President, National Baptist Convention, USA
Philadelphia, PA
Melissa Rogers, Director, Wake Forest School of Divinity Center for Religion and Public Affairs and expert on church/state issues
Winston-Salem, NC
Pastor Joel C. Hunter, Senior Pastor, Northland, a Church Distributed
Lakeland, FL
Dr. Arturo Chavez, Ph.D., President & CEO, Mexican American Cultural Center
San Antonio, TX
Rev. Jim Wallis, President & Executive Director, Sojourners
Washington, DC
Bishop Vashti M. McKenzie, Presiding Bishop, 13th Episcopal District, African Methodist Episcopal Church
Knoxville, TN
Diane Baillargeon, President & CEO, Seedco, a secular national operating intermediary
New York, NY
Richard Stearns, President, World Vision
Bellevue, WA
(Return to the video)
Source: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog_post/working_with_faith/
New Adventist TV show addresses church and social issues
Cindy Tutsch, Chris Blake, Williams Costa Jr., Bettina Krause, and Kendra Haloviak on the set of "Intersection: Your Faith, Your World." The new panel discussion show launches this month and is produced by the Seventh-day Adventist Church. [photos by Megan Brauner]February 4, 2009 Silver Spring, Maryland, United States
ANN staff
The Seventh-day Adventist Church is launching a new television show this month, featuring panelists tackling subjects such as the role of women in the church, the influence of media on Christianity, and the relevance of marriage in today's society.
The series, titled "Intersection: Your Faith, Your World," will begin airing February 6 on the church's international satellite network, Hope TV. The programs will be available for download at intersection.adventist.org. The show is a series of about 100 episodes which will run Friday nights for two years, with re-runs available at other times of the week.
"The programs aim to explore issues which we all face in society, and as Adventist Christians in our faith community," said Rajmund Dabrowski, executive producer and communication director for the Adventist world church.
The roundtable program, initiated by world church President Jan Paulsen, will cover a range of topics including "Christians in a Culture of Indifference," "Becoming What We Watch," "Does Marriage Still Matter?" "Why Study the Bible?" and "The Art of Forgiveness" and "Christians and Politics."
The program is meant to serve as a starting point for discussions in small groups, Bible studies and Saturday morning classes, said Williams Costa Jr., the church's associate director for media production.
Dabrowski said the programs will also serve the purpose of introducing viewers unfamiliar with Adventism to the church's perspectives on issues.
"An exchange of views by experts will provide an open look, we hope, into what we think and how we approach our world as Adventists," he said.
Bettina Krause, senior producer for Intersection, will host the shows. The panels will consist of Adventist commentators, academics and professionals.
The airing dates for the programs are (all times are U.S. Eastern):
Friday, February 6 - 6 p.m.
Saturday, February 7 - 1:30 p.m.
Sunday, February 8 - 7:30 p.m.
Wednesday, February 11 - 9:30 a.m.
Friday, February 13 - 6 p.m.
Sabbath, February 14 - 1:30 a.m. & 1:30 p.m.
Sunday, February 15 - 12 a.m.
Source: "Source: Adventist News Network"
Panel Explores Tradition of Interreligious Dialogue
When Bishop John Carroll founded Georgetown University in 1789, he envisioned a Catholic and Jesuit institution that would reflect the emerging American tradition of religious tolerance. The institution would be open to every class of citizen from every religious background.
Nearly 220 years later, the university continues this tradition, fostering a diverse campus community with a deep commitment to spiritual inquiry and engagement through interreligious dialogue. This commitment took center stage at a recent panel discussion, “The Jesuit Commitment to Interreligious Dialogue,” held during Georgetown’s Jesuit Heritage Week celebrations.
Students gathered with campus religious leaders in Riverside Lounge on Feb. 6 to discuss the legacy of Carroll’s vision and Georgetown’s history of promoting the exchange of ideas between people of different faith traditions.
Daniel Madigan, S.J., a theology professor and an expert on Muslim-Christian relations, led the discussion, which also included Wasim Rahman, a Muslim chaplain-in-residence and Rabbi Harold White, the senior Jewish chaplain and a fixture at Georgetown for more than 40 years.
“Our commitment to interreligious dialogue begins with St. Ignatius,” said Madigan, an Australian Jesuit who came to Georgetown in 2007 after seven years as the founding director of the Institute for the Study of Religions and Cultures at Rome’s Pontifical Gregorian University. Madigan explored some of the foundations of the Society of Jesus’ work on interreligious relations. Part of that interreligious foundation, he said, stems from St. Ignatius’ belief that every person can have a personal relationship with God.
“That intuition, that conviction that each individual person, whatever their religious belonging may be, can have a relationship with God -- a direct relationship with God, (is) not simply through official channels and official ceremonies,” Madigan said. “…We take seriously the religious experience and religious faith of other people, even though those other people do not always fit in to the structures with which we are comfortable. “
Today, Georgetown continues the Jesuit tradition of respecting and engaging people of different faiths through a variety of programs, classes and academic centers such as the Berkley Center for Religion, Peace and World Affairs and the Prince Alwaleed Center for Muslim Christian Understanding and through what some have called the groundbreaking work of campus ministry.
“Georgetown was the first Catholic and first Jesuit university to appoint a full-time Rabbi to a teaching and chaplaincy position. It was also the first Jesuit and Catholic university to appoint a Protestant minister to a full-time position. And 10 years ago, it was the first Catholic and Jesuit university, in fact the only university, that had a full-time imam,” said White. “So you can see that Georgetown in its history, over the past 40 years, it’s really been at the forefront of interreligious dialogue and interreligious ministry.”
Muslim chaplain Rahman agreed.
“Georgetown values people who are of different traditions, it recognizes that society is diverse,” he said, discussing some of the values that attracted him to working as a Muslim chaplain at a Catholic and Jesuit university.
A chaplain-in-residence in Harbin Hall -- a residence hall predominantly made up of first-year students, Rahman works as a counselor and mentor and has experience in interfaith settings.
When discussing his decision to come work with Georgetown students, he addressed them directly saying, “(Georgetown recognizes) you should be exposed to the ideas I have to bring; you should be able to dialogue with me.”
The event capped a week of scholarly activities observing Jesuit heritage. Each year, Jesuit Heritage Week attempts to engage the university community in both intellectual and social events. In addition to discussions about interreligious dialogue, events included a discussion of personal experiences with spiritual exercises at Georgetown and a lecture on how contemporary concerns may complicate the traditional boundaries between religion and research.
“During Jesuit Heritage Week, this learning continues through fireside chats, panels and invitations to speak at various worship services,” said Philip Boroughs, S.J., vice president of mission and ministry. “We are privileged as a university to have such a vibrant and supportive interreligious community that forms leaders within faith communities and also leaders who are competent to engage one another across religious traditions.”
Source: Office of Communications (February 11, 2009)
News roundup: Lincoln's birthday; a deal on the stimulus

A done deal: Most papers carry the speedy agreement by a conference committee on the $790 billion stimulus package. The Wall Street Journal, which offers extensive coverage on the package, says the plan "may be only a down payment on the Obama administration's effort to turn around an economy that has shed 3.6 million jobs since December 2006." The Los Angeles Times says there were moments of "high drama" among Democratic leaders over just when a final deal had been struck. Republican lawmakers, meanwhile, "alleged that the Democrats had engaged in the same kind of 'midnight deal-making' that the GOP was accused of when it was the party in power." The Washington Post reports that many economists remain skeptical as to whether the bill will provide a significant boost to a sagging economy, "but in the near term, the compromise stands as the first major achievement of the new administration."
Posted by Doug Stanglin at 08:11 AM/ET, February 12, 2009
More than 600,000 without power from Ohio to NY
Ohio utilities were hit hardest, and most of those without power are expected to be restored by Friday. Utilities were also affected in West Virginia, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, Maryland, Virginia and Indiana.
American Electric Power Corp's AEP-Ohio reported by Thursday 167,500 customers without service.
First Energy, which serves Ohio, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, said 165,000 customers were without power, down from a peak of 390,000 in Ohio and Pennsylvania after Wednesday's big blow.
Allegheny Power said it had 147,000 customers without power in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Maryland and Virginia.
"Service restoration efforts are expected to continue in some parts of the service territory into the weekend. Additional crews have been called in and will be arriving throughout the day," AEP said on its website.
First Energy spokesman Chris Eck said the bulk of customers affected would have power restored by Friday.
The biggest chunk of the AEP outages in Ohio are in and around Columbus, the state's capital and its biggest city.
(Reporting by Bernie Woodall and Scott DiSavino; Editing by Christian Wiessner)
Done Deal? Or, a greater Ponzi Scheme?
- $7,000,000,000+ in 2008
- $7,000,000,000+ in 2009 (now)
I heard the morning's news reports; They're saying the Stimulus Package Bill is a "Done Deal". What they mean is that the Senators, and the Congressmen have made the bad medicine more palatable, and now it's ready to become a reality. Everyone will be satisfied: The politicians will get more money for their pet projects, and the bankers will get more funds to add to their coffers; Everyone will be satisfied, except the taxpayers who will have to foot the Bill. This will in effect drain the nation's resources beyond its defunct state. This will be possibly be the beginning of the end for the United States of America. Yet, the Maddoff swindle is derided as greed and malice, something that should not be tolerated. However, what the government is doing in collusion with the banks is considered a necessary evil. Are we to believe this convoluted riddle?
The Bill is just what they call it; A bill is what we're being handed, such as a bill of goods, or an additional bill you're responsible for. They get Bills, as in Dollars; Meanwhile, you get billed as in debt!
Maddoff's malevolent scheme was fraud. But, the Stimulus Package Bill is bad medicine to prevent a catastrophe, a cataclysm even. Wait, haven't we heard this same language used recently? So, change means more of the same? Don't you just hate these semantic, rhetorical ploys? I sure do! Especially, when they say one person's misappropriation of someone else's funds is a Ponzi Scheme, and another they call a Done Deal.
Remember, they all begin with Bill.
House and Senate Bill (+++++)
Billions of Dollars ($$$$$)
You get the Bill (-----)
P.S. The bill supposedly will allocate $46 Billion for the states; According to the latest reports just one state, California, is said to have a $43 Billion budget deficit!
"Take heed that no man deceive you"
1And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.
2And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.
3And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?
4And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.
5For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.
6And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.
7For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.
8All these are the beginning of sorrows.
9Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.
10And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.
11And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.
12And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.
13But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.
14And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
15When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)
16Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:
17Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:
18Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.
19And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
20But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:
21For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
22And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
23Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
24For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
25Behold, I have told you before.
26Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.
27For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
28For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.
29Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
31And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
32Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:
33So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.
34Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
35Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.
36But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
37But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
38For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
39And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
40Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
41Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
42Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.
43But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up.
44Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.
45Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his lord hath made ruler over his household, to give them meat in due season?
46Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing.
47Verily I say unto you, That he shall make him ruler over all his goods.
48But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming;
49And shall begin to smite his fellowservants, and to eat and drink with the drunken;
50The lord of that servant shall come in a day when he looketh not for him, and in an hour that he is not aware of,
51And shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Why Are Americans Ignorant of 'Agenda 21'?
Monday, August 07, 2006
Why Are Americans Ignorant of 'Agenda 21'?
by Joyce Morrison, News With Views, Aug 06, 2006
Last Updated: Monday, August 07, 2006 06:34:34 PM
The United Nations Agenda 21 was signed by the United States in 1992 and 14 years later, people are still in the dark. If you were to ask at random the question, "Have you heard of Agenda 21?" the answer would be an over-whelming "No," although it is being implemented in every local community.
Agenda 21 is a 40 chapter document listing goals to be achieved globally. It is the global plan to change the way we "live, eat, learn and communicate" because we must "save the earth."
"Its regulation would severely limit water, electricity, and transportation - even deny human access to our most treasured wilderness areas, it would monitor all lands and people. No one would be free from the watchful eye of the new global tracking and information system," according to Berit Kjos, author of Brave New Schools.
Maurice Strong, Secretary-general of the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro said, "...[C]urrent lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class - involving high meat consumption and large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and workplace air-conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable. A shift is necessary which will require a vast strengthening of the multilateral system, including the United Nations.
In other words, the Global plan is for us to live on the level of third world nations. That means no box mixes or microwave meals, limited use of fuel of any kind, no air-conditioning and very little meat. When the cost of freon skyrocketed, when mad cow disease hit, the National Animal Identification System introduced, the price of fuel soared, it has become apparent that given time, these sustainable controls will be put into place - one way or another - and the Global Governance is powerful.
In 1992, Agenda 21 began to change our lives. In that same year, Al Gore wrote his book, Earth in the Balance. To advance his cause, he has now written another piece of fiction entitled, An Inconvenient Truth about global warming…..he even starred in the movie. He also thinks he invented the internet.
Although groundwork had been laid, it took a Bill Clinton to actually introduce something so invasive to our nation and get by with it without the public becoming aware. President Clinton appointed his "President’s Council on Sustainable Development" and he literally gave away the rights and freedoms the framers of the Constitution had provided.
People in the United States may not know about Agenda 21 and the President’s Council on Sustainable Development, but people around the world do. They know that Chicago has one of the greatest numbers of activities existing at the local, neighborhood and/or microregional level. They also know that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) monitors and promotes activities in this field through their Office for Sustainable Ecosystem and Communities.
Found on a Slovakian website: "To the leading countries in the field of development but especially of practical using of sustainable development indicators belong to the U.S.A. At the top level these activities are promoted by the President’s Council on Sustainable Development (1996), which defined a set of ten national goals toward sustainable development. These goals express in concrete terms the elements of sustainability. Alongside the goals are suggested indicators that can be used to help measure progress toward achieving them.”
Agenda 21 is certainly not a secret. The internet is full of how Agenda 21 has been fulfilled through Smart Growth planning, land use, sustainable development and extreme environmentalism. The so-called agenda is grant driven to your city council or county board in terms of sustainable, visioning, partners, tourism and stakeholders, along with consensus and other terms with the intent to make you believe we are running out of all our resources and we must do our part and "save for tomorrow. [See Agenda 21's Table of Contents.]
It has nothing to do about “saving anything” – it has everything to do with “control.” Sadly, very few congressmen even know Agenda 21 is actually running our country when they are voting to send grant money back home. Agenda 21 is incentive driven as the planners know that greed in the heart of man will be his downfall.
The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, better known as ANWR, has oil we need to be drilling for the security of our nation. Environmentalists don’t seem to understand we are dependent on foreign oil from nations who do not like us and our nation’s defense is at stake. The area where drilling would occur is just a dot in this vast land, yet they would gamble the strength of our nation in behalf of their favorite word --"pristine."
Source: http://www.illuminati-news.com/080706a.htm
U.N. Agenda 21 Preamble
1.1. Humanity stands at a defining moment in history. We are confronted with a perpetuation of disparities between and within nations, a worsening of poverty, hunger, ill health and illiteracy, and the continuing deterioration of the ecosystems on which we depend for our well-being. However, integration of environment and development concerns and greater attention to them will lead to the fulfilment of basic needs, improved living standards for all, better protected and managed ecosystems and a safer, more prosperous future. No nation can achieve this on its own; but together we can - in a global partnership for sustainable development.
1.2. This global partnership must build on the premises of General Assembly resolution 44/228 of 22 December 1989, which was adopted when the nations of the world called for the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, and on the acceptance of the need to take a balanced and integrated approach to environment and development questions.
1.3. Agenda 21 addresses the pressing problems of today and also aims at preparing the world for the challenges of the next century. It reflects a global consensus and political commitment at the highest level on development and environment cooperation. Its successful implementation is first and foremost the responsibility of Governments. National strategies, plans, policies and processes are crucial in achieving this. International cooperation should support and supplement such national efforts. In this context, the United Nations system has a key role to play. Other international, regional and subregional organizations are also called upon to contribute to this effort. The broadest public participation and the active involvement of the non-governmental organizations and other groups should also be encouraged.
1.4. The developmental and environmental objectives of Agenda 21 will require a substantial flow of new and additional financial resources to developing countries, in order to cover the incremental costs for the actions they have to undertake to deal with global environmental problems and to accelerate sustainable development. Financial resources are also required for strengthening the capacity of international institutions for the implementation of Agenda 21. An indicative order-of-magnitude assessment of costs is included in each of the programme areas. This assessment will need to be examined and refined by the relevant implementing agencies and organizations.
1.5. In the implementation of the relevant programme areas identified in Agenda 21, special attention should be given to the particular circumstances facing the economies in transition. It must also be recognized that these countries are facing unprecedented challenges in transforming their economies, in some cases in the midst of considerable social and political tension.
1.6. The programme areas that constitute Agenda 21 are described in terms of the basis for action, objectives, activities and means of implementation. Agenda 21 is a dynamic programme. It will be carried out by the various actors according to the different situations, capacities and priorities of countries and regions in full respect of all the principles contained in the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. It could evolve over time in the light of changing needs and circumstances. This process marks the beginning of a new global partnership for sustainable development.
* * * * *
* When the term "Governments" is used, it will be deemed to include the European Economic Community within its areas of competence. Throughout Agenda 21 the term "environmentally sound" means "environmentally safe and sound", in particular when applied to the terms "energy sources", "energy supplies", "energy systems" and "technology" or "technologies".
Source:http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/agenda21/english/agenda21chapter1.htm
22nd Governing Council (UN-HABITAT)
The Governing Council meets every two years to examine UN-HABITAT's work and relationships with its partners. The Council is composed of 58 member states. It is a high-level forum of governments at the ministerial level during which policy guidelines and the organisation's budget are established for the next two-year period.
The state of the Street
Commentary: Recognizing mistakes is key to future of financial institutions
By Todd Harrison
Last update: 12:13 a.m. EST Feb. 11, 2009
"That's the problem with money -- it makes you do things you don't want to do." -- Hal Holbrook as "Lou Mannheim" in "Wall Street"
NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- They say you're a reflection of the company you keep. That's unfortunate news for those working in the financial industry.
As the severity of the financial crisis starts to sink in, socioeconomic anxiety is building against those on Wall Street. Capitalism, the pride and joy of our free-market system, became an instant villain when an era of conspicuous consumption shifted to an age of austerity.
What some people fail to realize is the writing has been on the wall for years. While risk managers shoulder blame, culpability extends to policy makers who ignored the warning signs, and uneducated consumers who lived beyond their means throughout our last, lost decade.
To appreciate the magnitude of where we are, we must understand how we got here.
When I started in the financial industry, there was a fraternal bond of trust where transactions occurred in trading pits and over untapped phone lines. It was a time when your handshake meant something, and all you had was your name and your word. In retrospect, it was a time of great vulnerability.
After the tech bubble, a healthy and natural progression would have led us into recession. Alan Greenspan never allowed us to take that medicine, opting instead to inject the economy full of fiscal and monetary drugs. The resulting imbalance steadily built through the years and arrived at our doorstep with a thud. See Minyanville column.
It's not wise to mess with Mother Nature. We're now witnessing the other side of risk gone awry and the comeuppance of a scorned business cycle. While Washington wiggles through its next iteration of stimuli, we're left to remember that time and price are the only arbiters of our financial fate.
Last Wednesday, I offered that a monster move was coming for the market, based on the reception of the latest bailout bill. My gut was that the move would be higher -- a bear market bounce that catches traders leaning the wrong way -- but that is a different conversation than sounding an "all clear" to pile back into a bull costume. See Minyanville column.
It's not wise to mess with Mother Nature. We're now witnessing the other side of risk gone awry and the comeuppance of a scorned business cycle. While Washington wiggles through its next iteration of stimuli, we're left to remember that time and price are the only arbiters of our financial fate.
Last Wednesday, I offered that a monster move was coming for the market, based on the reception of the latest bailout bill. My gut was that the move would be higher -- a bear market bounce that catches traders leaning the wrong way -- but that is a different conversation than sounding an "all clear" to pile back into a bull costume. See Minyanville column.
Consider the rally off last Wednesday's lows, which was acute. Bank of America (BAC: 5.56, -1.33, -19.3%) tacked on 88%, Citigroup (C: 3.35, -0.60, -15.2%) added 28%, JP Morgan (JPM 24.62, -2.66, -9.7%) climbed 24% and the PHLX KBW Bank Index (BKX: 26.74, -4.30, -13.8%) , an aggregate of the banks, was up 30%.
There are two lenses best used for viewing what's on the horizon. There's the destination, for investors, and the path that we take to get there, for traders. Simply put, we've got a long road ahead, but there will be profound opportunities as we find our way.
For years, I was the most bearish guy in the room, telling anyone who would listen the wheels were going to fall off the wagon. Now, as the world wobbles for all to see, I find myself being more constructive and searching for opportunities in the new world order. See Minyanville column
The leaders coming out of a crisis are never the same as those who enter. We've seen that in spades as Bear Stearns (JPM: 24.62, -2.66, -9.7%) , Lehman Brothers, AIG (AIG: 0.92, -0.12, -11.5%) and Merrill Lynch (BAC: 5.56, -1.33, -19.3%) all trade as shadows of their former selves, if at all. As capacity is absorbed or eliminated, a leaner, more austere industry will emerge.
Inherent in that architecture is the unwinding of the intricate derivative machination, the destruction of debt, a conscious decision to allow weak institutions to fail and an infrastructure based on tangible metrics. Time and price will be the judge. Given the current social mood, we're in a race against ourselves.
The ramifications of our current choices will resonate far beyond the perception of Wall Street professionals. We're talking about the survival of the free-market system and capitalism as a whole. We're at a critical crossroads, with globalization on one side and geopolitical fragmentation on the other.
See both sides, respect the risks and remember that lucidity is necessary now more than ever. The result of our decisions won't just dictate profit and loss, it will shape the quality of life and the global landscape for generations to come.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Jewish group sued over 'Adventist' name
Rabbi Ben-Hayil Yellen and his wife, Heidi, run a small religious group called The Federation of Jewish Adventist Society. (Photo by Jamie Scott Lytle - Staff Photographer)Seventh-day Adventist Church says it has trademark on the term
VALLEY CENTER ---- What's the first thing that pops to mind upon hearing the word "Adventist"?
The Seventh-day Adventist Church, probably.
Leaders of the international Christian church with 15 million followers have a trademark on the word in the United States.
They say no one else can use it, not even a small Jewish society in North County.
The church filed a lawsuit Nov. 24 against The Federation of Jewish Adventist Society to force the Valley Center group to stop using the word in its name.
The Maryland-based leadership of the Seventh-day Adventist Church alleges trademark infringement and unfair competition in the suit, filed in San Diego federal court.
It argues that use of the word "Adventist" by any other group creates confusion.
But the Federation's leader, Rabbi Ben-Hayil Yellen, said the suit violates his religious rights.
The Jewish group has hired an attorney, but he said they don't have the money to fight a suit he called "unjust."
At his rural North County home on Wednesday, Yellen said that the Hebrew meaning of the word "Adventist" is central to his group's spiritual beliefs.
Yellen and his wife, Heidi, said that the word, when spoken with a different pronunciation, "AD-vent-ist," is an old Hebrew term referring to an earthen pot.
The Christian group's name is often pronounced "ad-VENT-ist."
And they believe that a specific vessel with Moses' signature on it is tied to the second coming of the Old Testament prophet Elijah and to the scriptural writings of Moses.
The couple said they teach that Elijah will be a direct descendant of King David, a biblical figure, and will carry the stone pot with him as proof of his identity.
"No matter what happens, our religious identity is with the word 'Adventist' ---- and we cannot just give it away," said Yellen, adding that he is a direct descendant of King David.
The suit is "taking away our religious freedom to identify ourselves with the prophet Moses," Heidi Yellen said.
A spokesman for the North American operations of the General Conference of the Seventh-day Adventist Church directed questions to attorney Nancy Dix, who said the lawsuit was filed to avoid confusion.
"It's really, in essence, an effort by the Seventh-day Adventist Church to protect its name and prevent confusion with another entity," Dix said Wednesday.
She said even the inclusion of the word Jewish in the name of the group doesn't negate any possible public confusion with the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
Dix said church leaders sent letters to the Jewish federation, asking it to cease using "Adventist."
The lawsuit, she said, was a last resort.
Webster's New World College Dictionary, Fourth Edition, defines the word "Adventist" as "a member of a Christian sect based on Adventism."
And Adventism, the dictionary states, is "the belief that the Second Coming of Christ will occur soon."
It will be up to the Seventh-day church to prove trademark infringement, said David Steinberg, who teaches a course on law and religion at Thomas Jefferson School of Law.
"The general bias is in favor of free speech and free use of terms of language," Steinberg said after reading the complaint. "And if someone is going to take the word 'Adventist' out of circulation, they really need to have a good reason, and they have to prove that people are being misled or confused by the use of the word.
"Would someone who read the name 'The Federation of Jewish Adventist Society' be confused and think this was a part of the Seventh-day Adventist Church? That is what the court will have to figure out."
The Yellens won't say how many members they have, but acknowledge their following is small.
The couple's home is the base for their group's operations, and the living room resembles a small church, with about 20 chairs lined up facing an altar.
Dix said it's the use of the word "Adventist" that matters, not the size of the church using it.
"I think it's about trying to protect the church's name and potential implication and inference that this organization is somehow affiliated with or sponsored by the (Seventh-day) church," Dix said.
The Life of Saul Alinsky
Alinsky's hard-nosed politics were shaped by the rough and tumble world of late 1930's Chicago. Back then, the city, still in the grips of the Great Depression, was controlled by the Kelly-Nash political machine and by Frank Nitti - heir to Al Capone's Mafia empire. In 1938, with a freshly minted graduate degree in criminology from University of Chicago, Alinsky went to work for sociologist Clifford Shaw at the Institute for Juvenile Research. He was assigned to research the causes of juvenile delinquency in Chicago's tough "Back-of-the-Yards" neighborhood. In order to study gang behavior from the inside, Alinsky ingratiated himself with Al Capone's crowd, and came to realize that criminal behavior was a symptom of poverty and powerlessness.
The Back-of-the-Yards neighborhood, setting of Upton Sinclair's The Jungle, was an immense slum in the shadows of Chicago's giant Union Stockyards, one of the largest factory complexes ever created. Its inhabitants were poor; they had no rights and no job security. In the course of one year, wages were cut three times. As Alinsky watched and decided that he could no longer stand by as a silent observer. He believed that widespread poverty left America open to the influence of demagogues and that the only antidote was active, widespread participation in the political process. Alinsky envisioned an "organization of organizations," comprised of all sectors of the community - youth committees, small businesses, labor unions and, most influential of all, the Catholic Church.
He consulted with Herb March, a union leader organizing stockyard workers for the CIO - the Congress of Industrial Organizations. He teamed up with Joe Meegan, a powerful organizer with strong links to the Catholic Church, through whom he was able to convince a powerful Bishop Bernard Sheil to join the fight against unfair labor practices. Alinsky also recruited leaders of previously hostile ethnic groups: Serbs and Croatians, Czechs and Slovaks, Poles and Lithuanians - always appealing to their mutual self-interests. Finally, on July 14, 1939, Alinsky and Meegan convened the first Back-of-the-Yards Council meeting, chaired by Bishop Sheil. The event was revolutionary in American history because it was the first time an entire community was organized. The union, the community and the Church became one and the same. More...
Alinsky led the Back-of-the-Yards Council in a series of successful pickets, strikes and boycotts, and in the process, won a mentor in CIO President John L. Lewis. In 1940, institutionalizing the concepts he had learned from Lewis, Alinsky formed the Industrial Areas Foundation - the IAF - an umbrella organization out of which new campaigns would be run. His book, Reveille for Radicals (1946), a manifesto which called upon America's poor to reclaim American democracy, became a bestseller.
By the 1950s, Alinsky had developed a clearly defined organizing philosophy and had won a reputation as champion of the disenfranchised. He began to organize in predominantly black communities, and in 1959, co-founded The Woodlawn Organization (TWO), which brought the struggle for civil rights to Chicago's South Side and challenged Mayor Richard J. Daley's powerful political machine through a radical voter registration drive. In 1965, Alinsky was invited to Rochester, NY to help the black community successfully take on Eastman Kodak over the issue of racial hiring.
By the late 1960s, Alinsky had become a folk hero to America's young campus radicals. In 1969, he set up a training institute for organizers and wrote Rules for Radicals, in which he urged America's youth to become realistic, not rhetorical radicals. In 1970, Time Magazine hailed Alinsky as "a prophet of power to the people," contending that Alinsky's ideas had forever changed the way American democracy worked. By the early '70s, Alinsky concluded that America's poor would have to ally themselves with the middle class, whom he was afraid would move to the right. Unfortunately, he never got to organize the middle class. On June 12, 1972 Alinsky died suddenly of a heart attack. He was 63 years old.
A passionate believer that social justice could be achieved through American democracy, Saul Alinsky methodically showed the "have-nots" how to organize their communities, target the power brokers and politically out-maneuver them. The lessons he taught people about the nature of power, imparted dignity to the poor and helped create a backyard revolution in cities across America. His work influenced the struggle for civil rights and the farm workers movement, as well as the very nature of political protest. He was a mentor to several generations of organizers like Ed Chambers, Fred Ross and Cesar Chavez. Alinsky's still thriving Industrial Areas Foundation became the training ground for organizers who formed some of the most important social change and community groups in the country.
ALINSKY'S ROOTS
The Council Of Laodicea In Phrygia Pacatiana 364 A.D.

What are the lost books of the Bible? They were texts and letters suppressed by early "Church Fathers". There was an important historical event, back in the 4th century. It is called the Council of Laodicea. It changed history two significant ways. At this council they determined what would and would not be considered canon. They decided what would and would not be included in the Bible or read at church. (Canon #60.)
It gets interesting when you consider the second implication of what was published. They published, in total, 60 cannons at this council, thus codifying church doctrine. During the 2nd and 3rd centuries, Christians were in the habit of keeping both Saturday and Sunday. In fact Ethiopian Christians still do today. During that time, Christians rested on the Sabbath (in the Lord) and had communion or fellowship on Sundays. The Church fathers at the Council of Laodicea were not opposed to Sunday services but were opposed to Christians Judaizing the Sabbath (see 29th Canon), Judaizing is what they labled Christians resting on the Sabbath day. At the Coucil of Laodicea, they published as doctrine that the practice of staying at home and resting on the Sabbath was sinful and anathema to Christ.
Satan managed to deceive well intentioned men to ignore the most important day of all. The day of having God dwell in the hearts of men! The true meaning of the Sabbath! If you read The Epistle of Barnabus, Chapter 13, you will see why in light of the 29th Canon they had to ban the text from the New Testament. There are sources today that quote the Epistle of Barnabus to justify going to Church on Sunday, but they completely miss the fact the text explains why one shouldn't trust going to a building made of hands as part of Sabbath worship. That is not how to obey God and keep the Sabbath. (Lev 23:3, Sabbath is to be kept in one's dwelling) The Church Fathers couldn't ban Sabbath keeping and then allow a text to become canon that admonishes Christians on the proper way to keep the Sabbath!"
CANON XXIX.
CHRISTIANS must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honouring the Lord's Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians. But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ.
CANON LX.
THESE are all the books of Old Testament appointed to be read: 1, Genesis of the world; 2, The Exodus from Egypt; 3, Leviticus; 4, Numbers; 5, Deuteronomy; 6, Joshua, the son of Nun; 7, Judges, Ruth; 8, Esther; 9, Of the Kings, First and Second; 10, Of the Kings, Third and Fourth; 11, Chronicles, First and Second; 12, Esdras, First and Second; 13, The Book of Psalms; 14, The Proverbs of Solomon; 15, Ecclesiastes; 16, The Song of Songs;17, Job; 18, The Twelve Prophets; 19, Isaiah; 20, Jeremiah, and Baruch, the Lamentations, and the Epistle; 21, Ezekiel; 22, Daniel.
And these are the books of the New Testament: Four Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John; The Acts of the Apostles; Seven Catholic Epistles, to wit, one of James, two of Peter, three of John, one of Jude; Fourteen Epistles of Paul, one to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, one to the Galatians, one to the Ephesians, one to the Philippians, one to the Colossians, two to the Thessalonians, one to the Hebrews, two to Timothy, one to Titus, and one to Philemon.
Books banned by the Council of Laodicea
Barnabas
I Clement
II Clement
Christ and Abgarus
The Apostles' Creed
I Hermas-Visions
II Hermas-Commands
III Hermas-Similitudes
Ephesians
I Infancy
II Infancy
Mary
Magnesians
Nicodemus
Paul and Seneca
Paul and Thecla
Philippians
Philadelphians
Polycarp
Romans
Trallians
Letters of Herod and Pilate
The Second Book of Adam and Eve
The Secrets of Enoch
The Psalms of Solomon
The Odes of Solomon
The Fourth Book of Maccabees
The Story of Ahikar
The Testament of Reuben
Asher
Joseph
Simeon
Levi
Judah
Issachar
Zebulum
Dan
Naphtali
Gad
Benjamin
60 Canons of the Synod of Laodicea
Sabbath: Sacred Rehearsal
The Epistle of Barnabus, Chapter 13
Sabbath through History
History of The Bible
Catholic Encyclopedia: Sunday
Catholic Mirror reprints: Rome’s Challenge
The Council of Laodicea
The Council of Laodicea -- History Of The Church
Original Christians
From Sabbath to Sunday
Constantine: Friend of Foe
Why was the Sabbath changed?
Sunday is NOT the Sabbath!
Our Understanding of the Sabbath
BREAKTHROUGH - Emerging New Thinking
In 1987, as Beyond War was building a global citizens' movement to raise awareness of the threat posed by the mentality of war in the nuclear era, over 30 scholars came together to produce Russian and English editions of Breakthrough: Emerging New Thinking, Soviet and Western Scholars Issue a Challenge to Build a World Beyond War. Now, almost 15 years later, new discussions are focusing on the ways in which 1989 was not only the end of an era but also the foundation for a profound change in the way we understand the planet as an interdependent system.
--------------------------------
About Breakthrough - From the book's original cover
Critical Acclaim for Breakthrough
Preface to the Online Edition - The Chief US Editor of Breakthrough, Martin E. Hellman, writes on where the book came from, what it is, and why it should be revisited today.
-------------------------------------------------------
About Breakthrough
True to its name, Breakthrough is unique in literary and scientific circles. This book not only shatters old mindsets by its content, but also breaks new ground through the challenging process of joint US-USSR authorship.
From diverse disciplines, experts come together to pioneer new thinking. "War is the issue for this generation and global thinking is the challenge," states the prologue to Breakthrough.
The authors examine such questions as: How can we overcome the inexorable forces leading toward a clash between the United States and the Soviet Union? How do we build a common vision for the future? How can we restructure our thinking to synchronize with the imperative of our modern world?
With a systematic and logical approach, Soviet and Western authorities define the terms of survival in the nuclear age:
- In international affairs, unilateral security and unilateral advantage must be replaced by universal security.
- Enemy stereotypes are obsolete. Common to both sides, they are engines that drive war.
- The concept of world revolution, pursued with aggressive messianic fervor by either side, can no longer be tolerated.
Two years in the making, Breakthrough is the result of thousands of hours of cooperative effort undertaken by Beyond War, a nonpartisan educational movement originating in the United States, and the Committee of Soviet Scientists for Peace Against the Nuclear Threat.
Never easy, at times painstaking, the process of bridging the chasm of differing cultures by uncovering common interests proves worth the effort. Breakthrough presents no only a joint superpower philosophy of the key to survival, but also a tangible symbol of what a world beyond war can be.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Critical Acclaim for Breakthrough
For the first time, a book on world politics and the future published simultaneously in the Soviet Union and the United States - and here are initial responses:
"An impressive and immensely valuable product of Soviets and Americans trying to surmount the mountains which separate our cultures in a search for a common way of thinking about the central threat to us all - nuclear weaponry and ... the ultimate obscenity of nuclear war. Our differences are real, but this book and the collaboration which produced it, are the only way to thread through them to produce a world in which all our children can live in safety."
William Colby, Former Director, CIA
"The publication of this book is in itself a remarkable event. The views expressed in it make it even more remarkable. It gives American readers an opportunity to acquaint themselves with some of the best and freshest thinking in the Soviet Union. It gives Russian readers an array of facts and arguments they have not usually encountered in Soviet works. A surprising milestone!"
Professor Alexander Dallin, Director, Center for Russian and East European Studies, Stanford University
"This book is a fascinating first of its kind. Since the greatest task of our time is that of avoiding a Soviet-American nuclear war that might end the human species, what can be more important than a collection of essays by both American and Soviet scholars who tackle the problem and, meeting on common ground, enlighten us all and give us hope."
Isaac Asimov, Writer
"Breakthrough is the story of an extraordinary and exciting adventure in cooperation and collaboration by scholars and authors of the United States and the Soviet Union as they examine together the thesis that war simply does not work anymore.... Your children and grandchildren and great grandchildren will thank you for seriously exploring this idea."
Mary Louise Smith, Former Republican National Chairman
"A promising and welcome beginning to what we must all hope will become the full presentation of all Soviet views in the West and all Western views in the USSR, as envisaged under the Helsinki Agreement."
Dr. Robert Conquest, Senior Research Fellow, Hoover Institution
"Breakthrough is very impressive. A stimulating collection of articles... Will hearten those who seek a common idiom for a Soviet-American dialogue."
Professor George W. Breslauer, Chair, Center for Slavic and East European Studies, University of California, Berkeley
"Any war raises the spectre of a possible nuclear holocaust. We can no longer tolerate war as an extension of political and economic struggle... That is what this book is all about."
Dr. Marvin L. Goldberger, Director, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, N.J.; Former President, California Institute of Technology
"Listen to what some wise people in various countries say... in Breakthrough: Emerging New Thinking."
Dr. Karl Menninger, The Menninger Foundation
"It will be all too easy for... many Americans to dismiss this joint project of Soviet and American scientists and scholars as reflecting Soviet cynicism and American naiveté. What in fact it shows is realistic recognition on the part of thinking individuals that war is no longer an available means toward any desirable end... These articles both expose the risks and explore the prospects for peaceful resolution of international differences."
Paul C. Warnke, Former Director, Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, Chief U.S. Negotiator for SALT II
"New ideas are desperately needed to stabilize East-West relations to avoid a nuclear war. The present book is an excellent source for such new thinking. It is of great value for anybody who is involved in these questions."
Professor Victor F. Weisskopf, Professor of Physics, M.I.T.
"What we share is far more important than historical differences which separate us. This book demonstrates that the world can be beyond war."
Dr. Edward L. Ginzton, Varian Associates, Inc.
Statement on Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act (Ron Paul)
Statement of Congressman Ron Paul
United States House of Representatives
Statement on Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act
February 3, 2009
Madame Speaker, I rise to introduce legislation to restore financial stability to America's economy by abolishing the Federal Reserve. Since the creation of the Federal Reserve, middle and working-class
Americans have been victimized by a boom-and-bust monetary policy. In addition, most Americans have suffered a steadily eroding purchasing power because of the Federal Reserve's inflationary policies. This represents a real, if hidden, tax imposed on the American people.
From the Great Depression, to the stagflation of the seventies, to the current economic crisis caused by the housing bubble, every economic downturn suffered by this country over the past century can be traced to Federal Reserve policy. The Fed has followed a consistent policy of flooding the economy with easy money, leading to a misallocation of resources and an artificial "boom" followed by a recession or depression when the Fed-created bubble bursts.
With a stable currency, American exporters will no longer be held hostage to an erratic monetary policy. Stabilizing the currency will also give Americans new incentives to save as they will no longer
have to fear inflation eroding their savings. Those members concerned about increasing America's exports or the low rate of savings should be enthusiastic supporters of this legislation.
Though the Federal Reserve policy harms the average American, it benefits those in a position to take advantage of the cycles in monetary policy. The main beneficiaries are those who receive access to artificially inflated money and/or credit before the inflationary effects of the policy impact the entire economy. Federal Reserve policies also benefit big spending politicians who use the inflated currency created by the Fed to hide the true costs of the welfare-warfare state. It is time for Congress to put the interests of the American people ahead of special interests and their own appetite for big government.
Abolishing the Federal Reserve will allow Congress to reassert its constitutional authority over monetary policy. The United States Constitution grants to Congress the authority to coin money and
regulate the value of the currency. The Constitution does not give Congress the authority to delegate control over monetary policy to a central bank. Furthermore, the Constitution certainly does not
empower the federal government to erode the American standard of living via an inflationary monetary policy.
In fact, Congress' constitutional mandate regarding monetary policy should only permit currency backed by stable commodities such as silver and gold to be used as legal tender. Therefore, abolishing the Federal Reserve and returning to a constitutional system will enable America to return to the type of monetary system envisioned by our nation's founders: one where the value of money is consistent because it is tied to a commodity such as gold. Such a monetary system is the basis of a true freemarket economy.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to stand up for working Americans by putting an end to the manipulation of the money supply which erodes Americans' standard of living, enlarges big government, and enriches well-connected elites, by cosponsoring my legislation to abolish the Federal Reserve.
Criminals infiltrating Canada's airports: RCMP
Suzanne Fournier, Canwest News Service
December 12, 2008
VANCOUVER -- A national RCMP inquiry has concluded that all of Canada's major airports have been infiltrated by organized crime.
The investigation, dubbed Project Spawn, examined hundreds of police files at Canada's eight largest airports between 2005 and 2007 and concluded hundreds of people were involved in criminal activity at airports, including almost 300 current or former airport employees.
More than 1,000 people not employed at an airport were still able to use connections for criminal purposes.
"Of the 58 organized crime groups included in this report . . . 60% were known to be utilizing Toronto international airport . . . followed by 50% at Vancouver International Airport," said the RCMP report.
The RCMP found the busy Vancouver airport to be highly active behind the scenes: the focus of 100% of counterfeit goods smuggling in Canada, all of the heroin smuggled from India, close to half of all cocaine smuggling in Canada, significant human trafficking and half of all organized crime activity in Canada.
Although the study didn't focus on terrorism, it warned that airport staff compromised by criminal activity can be easily exploited by sophisticated terrorist groups.
"[Airport] staff can be bribed to ignore criminality or paid large sums to assist in drug trafficking or theft," said the RCMP. "Once compromised, such employees may be . . . weak links . . . unable to stand up to terrorists."
Of the organized crime groups identified by the RCMP, 38 operated out of Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver.
The RCMP say gangs "corrupt existing employees or [place] criminal associates into the airport workforce."
Fewer than one per cent of employees in high-security airport areas are searched either on their way in or out.
Liberal MP Ujjal Dosanjh said the travelling public, which is still facing confiscation of tiny vials of lotion or tweezers by zealous airport security guards, "will have to see these as seriously frightening statistics."
Since the RCMP "worked backwards" from actual crime files to evidence of organized crime, the numbers probably represent the tip of the iceberg in terms of all criminal activity, Mr. Dosanjh noted.
Mr. Dosanjh criticized the fact federal agencies that do criminal background checks of airport employees don't share information with the RCMP, due to privacy laws.
The report sidesteps the issue, though it admits that "certain information about airport employees that would have been useful in identifying potential criminality . . . was not provided [to RCMP] by Transport Canada."
Don Ehrenholz, operations vice-president for the Vancouver Airport Authority, said "we will be working closely with Transport Canada and the RCMP to investigate what can be done to improve security at the airport."
Mr. Dosanjh said the lack of information-sharing has to stop.
"We wouldn't put someone in charge of say, missiles, with a questionable background, why would we not override the right to privacy in areas such as airport security?"
Chief Supt. Pierre Perron, director-general of criminal intelligence for the RCMP, told Canwest News Service that the report points out the need for greater co-operation and information-sharing between police and federal agencies.
"This report provides greater opportunities to engage our partners at the Vancouver airport, for example, to find solutions to the problem of organized criminal activity," said Chief Supt. Perron, noting that Vancouver is a major port of entry for southern Asia and some Latin American countries.
Chief Supt. Perron noted that "organized criminal operations in general have a transnational nature, meaning that they are working internationally and need to have access to points of entry in Canada, including airports."
Vancouver Province
© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald
Mafia millions buoying banks: UN
By Mark Heinrich , ReutersFebruary 9, 2009
VIENNA — Cash-rich Mafia groups have been channelling funds into banks desperate to survive the global credit crisis, the UN anti-crime chief said on Monday.
Antonio Maria Costa of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime said he had collected ample evidence to make such accusations.
"Consultations I've had with prosecutors and law-enforcement officials around the world show there is ample evidence that the banking system's illiquidity is providing a unique opportunity for organized crime to launder their money," Costa told Reuters.
"Just about every financial centre can be characterized as part of the problem," Costa said in the interview, but declined to name countries or banks involved, saying that was for prosecutors and other law-enforcement bodies to do.
Costa said a Vienna conference next month marking the 10th anniversary of a UN General Assembly special session on drugs would mull ways to boost steps against money laundering and ease the impact of drug gang profits on the integrity of states.
He said the multilateral Financial Action Task Force (FATF) formed in 1991 did much to help drive mafia money out of banks over the ensuing decade but that achievement was being challenged by the global hemorrhaging of legitimate credit.
"You have the supply — an organized crime industry with enormous amounts of cash, estimated at $322 billion in 2005, not any more stored in banks — and the demand, a banking sector strapped for liquidity," said Costa.
"This is a supply- and demand-driven situation. Our intuition, based on logic, is now supported by ample evidence."
Asked where cases were occurring, he said: "Traditionally, Europe and North America are the places where, as financial centres, most money would be laundered.
"What we are seeing," Costa said, "is the weakening of the strongest instrument embedded in the FATF campaign, and that is, 'Know your client'. That is, accept resources only from those you know, and if you don't do so, inform the authorities.
"It has been quite widely documented that because of the difficult financial situation of banking institutions, that principle has been weakened to the point of being indirect evidence of what we are (talking about)." Costa said many member states in his UNODC agency were saying the time was not yet right for additional measures against money launderers taking advantage of struggling banks.
"I insist that the (globalized) crime industry has become so gigantic, destabilizing so many countries, that it is emerging in areas where we have not seen it before. They're buying more than just industry, real estate, elections, power," he said.
"We will present some concepts and lines of action for member states to consider when ministers meet next month, related to the size and shape of organized crime and the threat it is now posing."
Costa raised the appearance of links between the liquidity crunch and organized crime cash flows at a closed gathering of financial industry professionals in Frankfurt in November.
Britain said in December that financial sector fraud had risen alarmingly, fifteen-fold, since its credit markets began seizing up but was typically committed by internal managers and suppliers rather than organized crime.
© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald
Munich and the Continuity Between the Bush and Obama Foreign Policies
While the Munich Security Conference brought together senior leaders from most major countries and many minor ones last weekend, none was more significant than U.S. Vice President Joe Biden. This is because Biden provided the first glimpse of U.S. foreign policy under President Barack Obama. Most conference attendees were looking forward to a dramatic shift in U.S. foreign policy under the Obama administration. What was interesting about Biden’s speech was how little change there has been in the U.S. position and how much the attendees and the media were cheered by it.
Policy Continuity: Iran and Russia
Consider Iran. The Obama administration’s position, as staked out by Biden, is that the United States is prepared to speak directly to Iran provided that the Iranians do two things. First, Tehran must end its nuclear weapons program. Second, Tehran must stop supporting terrorists, by which Biden meant Hamas and Hezbollah. Once the Iranians do that, the Americans will talk to them. The Bush administration was equally prepared to talk to Iran given those preconditions. The Iranians make the point that such concessions come after talks, not before, and that the United States must change its attitude toward Iran before there can be talks, something Iranian Majlis Speaker Ali Larijani emphasized after the meeting. Apart from the emphasis on a willingness to talk, the terms Biden laid out for such talks are identical to the terms under the Bush administration.
Now consider Russia. Officially, the Russians were delighted to hear that the United States was prepared to hit the “reset button” on U.S.-Russian relations. But Moscow cannot have been pleased when it turned out that hitting the reset button did not involve ruling out NATO expansion, ending American missile defense system efforts in Central Europe or publicly acknowledging the existence of a Russian sphere of influence. Biden said, “It will remain our view that sovereign states have the right to make their own decisions and choose their own alliances.” In translation, this means the United States has the right to enter any relationship it wants with independent states, and that independent states have the right to enter any relationship they want. In other words, the Bush administration’s commitment to the principle of NATO expansion has not changed.
Nor could the Russians have been pleased with the announcement just prior to the conference that the United States would continue developing a ballistic missile defense (BMD) system in Poland and the Czech Republic. The BMD program has been an issue of tremendous importance for Russians, and it is something Obama indicated he would end, or change in some way that might please the Russians. But not only was there no commitment to end the program, there also was no backing away from long-standing U.S. interest in it, or even any indication of the terms under which it might end.
Given that the United States has asked Russia for a supply route through the former Soviet Union to Afghanistan, and that the Russians have agreed to this in principle, it would seem that that there might be an opening for a deal with the Russians. But just before the Munich conference opened, Kyrgyzstan announced that Manas Air Base, the last air base open to the United States in Central Asia, would no longer be available to American aircraft. This was a tidy little victory for the Russians, who had used political and financial levers to pressure Kyrgyzstan to eject the Americans. The Russians, of course, deny that any such pressure was ever brought to bear, and that the closure of the base one day before Munich could have been anything more than coincidence.
But the message to the United States was clear: While Russia agrees in principle to the U.S. supply line, the Americans will have to pay a price for it. In case Washington was under the impression it could get other countries in the former Soviet Union to provide passage, the Russians let the Americans know how much leverage Moscow has in these situations. The U.S. assertion of a right to bilateral relations won’t happen in Russia’s near abroad without Russian help, and that help won’t come without strategic concessions from the United States. In short, the American position on Russia hasn’t changed, and neither has the Russian position.
The Europeans
The most interesting — and for us, the most anticipated — part of Biden’s speech had to do with the Europeans, of whom the French and Germans were the most enthusiastic about Bush’s departure and Obama’s arrival. Biden’s speech addressed the core question of the U.S.-European relationship.
If the Europeans were not prepared to increase their participation in American foreign policy initiatives during the Bush administration, it was assumed that they would be during the Obama administration. The first issue on the table under the new U.S. administration is the plan to increase forces in Afghanistan. Biden called for more NATO involvement in that conflict, which would mean an increase in European forces deployed to Afghanistan. Some countries, along with the head of NATO, support this. But German Chancellor Angela Merkel made it clear that Germany is not prepared to send more troops.
Over the past year or so, Germany has become somewhat estranged from the United States. Dependent on Russian energy, Germany has been unwilling to confront Russia on issues of concern to Washington. Merkel has made it particularly clear that while she does not oppose NATO expansion in principle, she certainly opposes expansion to states that Russia considers deeply within its sphere of influence (primarily Georgia and Ukraine). The Germans have made it abundantly clear that they do not want to see European-Russian relations deteriorate under U.S. prodding. Moreover, Germany has no appetite for continuing its presence in Afghanistan, let alone increasing it.
The More Things Change …
Most interesting here is the continuity between the Bush and Obama administrations in regard to foreign policy. It is certainly reasonable to argue that after only three weeks in office, no major initiatives should be expected of the new president. But major initiatives were implied — such as ending the BMD deployment to Poland and the Czech Republic — and declaring the intention to withdraw BMD would not have required much preparation. But Biden offered no new initiatives beyond expressing a willingness to talk, without indicating any policy shifts regarding the things that have blocked talks. Willingness to talk with the Iranians, the Russians, the Europeans and others shifts the atmospherics — allowing the listener to think things have changed — but does not address the question of what is to be discussed and what is to be offered and accepted.
Ultimately, the issues dividing the world are not, in our view, subject to personalities, nor does goodwill (or bad will, for that matter) address the fundamental questions. Iran has strategic and ideological reasons for behaving the way it does. So does Russia. So does Germany, and so on. The tensions that exist between those countries and the United States might be mildly exacerbated by personalities, but nations are driven by interest, not personality.
There has been no misunderstanding between the United States and Russia that more open dialogue will cure. The Russians see no reason for NATO expansion unless NATO is planning to encircle Russia. It is possible for the West to have relations with Ukraine and Georgia without expanding NATO; Moscow sees the insistence on expansion as implying sinister motives. For its part, the United States refuses to concede that Russia has any interest in the decisions of the former Soviet Union states, something Biden reiterated. Therefore, either the Russians must accept NATO expansion, or the Americans must accept that Russia has an overriding interest in limiting American relations in the former Soviet Union. This is a fundamental issue that any U.S. administration would have to deal with — particularly an administration seeking Russian cooperation in Afghanistan.
As for Germany, NATO was an instrument of rehabilitation and stability after World War II. But Germany now has a complex relationship with Russia, as well as internal issues. It does not want NATO drawing it into adventures that are not in Germany’s primary interest, much less into a confrontation with Russia. No amount of charm, openness or dialogue is going to change this fundamental reality.
Dialogue does offer certain possibilities. The United States could choose to talk to Iran without preconditions. It could abandon NATO expansion and quietly reduce its influence in the former Soviet Union, or perhaps convince the Russians that they could benefit from this influence. The United States could abandon the BMD system (though this has been complicated by Iran’s recent successful satellite launch), or perhaps get the Russians to participate in the program. The United States could certainly get the Germans to send a small force to Afghanistan above and beyond the present German contingent. All of this is possible.
What can’t be achieved is a fundamental transformation of the geopolitical realities of the world. No matter how Obama campaigned, it is clear he knows that. Apart from his preoccupation with economic matters, Obama understands that foreign policy is governed by impersonal forces and is not amenable to rhetoric, although rhetoric might make things somewhat easier. No nation gives up its fundamental interests because someone is willing to talk.
Willingness to talk is important, but what is said is much more important. Obama’s first foray into foreign policy via Biden indicates that, generally speaking, he understands the constraints and pressures that drive American foreign policy, and he understands the limits of presidential power. Atmospherics aside, Biden’s positions — as opposed to his rhetoric — were strikingly similar to Cheney’s foreign policy positions.
We argued long ago that presidents don’t make history, but that history makes presidents. We see Biden’s speech as a classic example of this principle.