Thursday, February 19, 2009

U.S. agents enter Stanford Financial Houston office


U.S. agents enter Stanford Financial Houston office
Tue Feb 17, 2009 6:00pm GMT


By Anna Driver

HOUSTON (Reuters) - Federal agents entered the Houston office of Stanford Financial Group on Tuesday, according to a Reuters eyewitness on the scene.

About 15 people, some wearing jackets identifying them as U.S. marshals, entered the lobby of Stanford's office in the Houston Galleria area, the eyewitness said.

Houston-based Stanford Financial Group, which says it oversees more than $50 billion (35.1 billion pounds) of assets, is being investigated by U.S. regulators, according to a person familiar with the matter.

The New York Times reported that U.S. securities regulators had accused three top Stanford executives, including Robert Allen Stanford, of fraud.

The Houston office of the U.S. Marshals Service had no immediate comment. A Stanford spokesman was not immediately available to comment.

(Reporting by Anna Driver; editing by John Wallace)



DIA Murals


DIA Murals
1993 - 1995


In Peace and Harmony With Nature


Commissioned by and on permanent exhibit at Denver International Airport
This is one of two sets of murals (four total)
Two smaller at 12 ft. x 15 ft. w
Two larger at and 12 ft. x 28 ft. w.


Smaller mural – The Present State of the Environment


Humanity, represented by multi-racial children, is shocked and saddened at finding our natural world in a trampled and abused state. Surrounding the youthful group are endangered or extinct wildlife species. The bewildered children view the Snow Leopard, said to be the most beautiful of the large cats, laid out lifeless before them displaying its exquisite fur and colors. To the left, a young girl gazes at a Great Auk in a display case, a vanished species made extinct in 1844. On the right front, a young boy touches a display case containing the last of the Passenger Pigeons, a species existing in immense numbers throughout the Eastern U.S., and finally extinguished in 1914. Shown also are a harpooned Gray Whale, a Kemp’s Ridley sea turtle enmeshed in a fishing net, and a wall mounted buffalo head. Fluttering over the central scene, is an agitated Quetzal bird, with parts of a display case ominously surrounding it, as if foretelling its extinction.


Behind these central images, a fire rages, consuming a rainforest, while in the foreground we see endangered plant life, such as the Holy Ghost Orchid, from Panama, the Flower of the Gods, South Africa and others. In the immediate foreground are three concrete coffins, each containing a young girl clutching cultural articles. These three girls symbolize our own humanity as victims of our self destruction, notably through war, slavery, genocide, exploitation and violence of all kind.


Larger mural – A Hopeful Future in which Humanity Rehabilitates the Environment


On this mural, I depict humanity, represented by children of the world arrayed in national or folkloric costumes. They move from both ends towards the center, and are shown smiling optimistically as they strive to rehabilitate our natural environment. On the background to this jubilant procession, are depicted various temperate zones of our planet beginning, on the extreme left with the ocean, temperate forests, frigid, tropical rainforest, and desert.
These “zones” are pictorially described with relevant geographical features, as well as wildlife indigenous to those regions. For example, the Quetzal bird signifies tropical rain or cloud forests, while the Snow Leopard is representative of frigid mountainous environments. Moreover, these different zones are shown as robust and healthy, as are the various wildlife species depicted. This portrayal is confluent with the ideal of a rehabilitated natural environment resplendent in all its beauty.


The elated children, in the colorful and lively costumes of thirty-two nations, move happily to where a special and unique flowering plant is about to be placed in the soil. This flower, its radiating leaves reflecting all the colors of the rainbow, reveal within its folds the configuration of a small white dove (reminiscent of the Holy Ghost Orchid). With this image, I sought to symbolize a new appreciation of our environment as a spiritual as well as a physical entity, a precious and delicate domain entrusted to our care.



Source: http://leotanguma.com/dia.htm

Denver Airport





"Travelers are in for a uniquely Colorado experience when they pass through Denver International Airport. The works of art that grace the airport create a journey through our state's history and diversity. Like all successful public art, the program at DIA exemplifies an expression of ourselves and provides an opportunity to educate others" - Mayor Wellington B. Webb

"What in God's name is that all about? Man, that's sick! - Doug McGivens of Glen Burnie, MD. while looking at the mural

"Ah, terrific...I don't need this right now. What a horrible thing to have up for people to have to look at!" - Karen D. from Broomfield, CO after her 8-year old daughter got upset at seeing the mural

"The damn sneaks" - Me, when I saw they painted over and changed some of the murals

An African woman in colorful native garb; a Native American woman who's heritage the airport's art supposedly celebrates; a blonde girl with cupid bow lips, a Star of David on her chest and a bible in her hands. Each lay dead in open coffins for your viewing pleasure. A burning city, children sleeping on piles of bricks, a line of mourning women in rags with dead babies, limp in their arms. A huge, looming military figure in a gas mask brandishes a sword and machine gun. Part of an actual note written by a child interred in a Nazi death camp. Strange words embedded in the floor with no explanation about what they mean. Welcome to Denver International Airport!
That's just the part you see up close, though. What you don't see are 8 sub-basements, low- and high- frequency sounds that make people sick, air vents jutting out of the surrounding barren acres of fenced lots that have barbed wire along their tops - pointing in. Whole buildings that were constructed below ground level and then buried as is, the excuse being they were "built wrong". An entire runway constructed, then buried under a layer of dirt and "forgotten". The layers of workers and companies who were fired so no one would have a Big Picture. And workers even reported seeing Aliens working there. Are you rolling your eyes and going, "Oh sure..Nazis? Aliens, too huh? CRIPES". Well, I have to admit when I got to that part I did, too. But there's a lot of credible stories about a lot of documented things, so we can start there. With the dead babies and buried buildings. As far as Reptilian NWO and Nazis...I'll mention it...ok? As far as the place being something Not Right Under There, I'm convinced. Except you'll have to take my word for some of it because when I re-researched things to update this section..well! It seems they painted over two of the four walls that make up this sick mural and altered part of one that's still there. But of course, I have pics, and so do a lot of others.

Part One: The Airport

The airport was built in 1995 on 34,000 acres (53 square miles; 137.593 Sq.km) in spite of the fact that Denver already had what everyone said was a perfectly fine airport - Stapleton - which was ordered closed when DIA was built so there "wouldn't be any competition". In fact the new airport has less gates and less runways than Stapleton did (I hope you're saying, "That makes no sense"...). All it does have is a lot more acreage. More acreage than an airport that size could possibly need. Most which sits unused. They say it's in case they need to do any future expansion. DIA is the 7th busiest airport in the US according to a 2002 Crain's Chicago Business report.

The initial cost of this New Beast was to be 1.7 billion dollars (with a "B") but by the time they were done playing games, having problems, getting bailed out and got extra government money (and money from private corporations on top of that), it cost about $4.8 billion - obscenely over budget. I have yet to meet a local who wanted the thing built, or didn't have a frothing, rabid story about the whole mess. Words used to describe the DIA were "buried in technical problems", "poor project management", "overwhelming complexity" and "America's most inconvenient airport". It was built in a high wind area (Stapleton hadn't been) that causes it to be shut down or flights delayed often. The extensive automated baggage system so was messed up, such a circus of errors that it was worse than unusable - it was an industry joke. But it had to be built, and built there. Some say the reason that this was built and there was no stopping it, no cost spared to do so and why it was so SO overbudget and took so many years is because it's really an underground military base and a civilian detainment camp.

Some interesting facts:

Even though the area is basically flat (with a stunning view of mountains all around, since it's in a valley), the expense and time was taken to extensively lower some areas and raise others. They moved 110 million cubic yards of earth around. This is about 1/3rd of the amount of earth they moved when they dug out the Panama Canal.
The airport has a fiber optic communications core made of 5,300 miles of cable. That's longer than the Nile River. That's from New York City to Buenos Aires, Argentina. The airport also has 11,365 miles of copper cable communications network.
The fueling system can pump 1,000 gallons of jet fuel per minute through a 28-mile network of pipes. There are six fuel hold tanks that each hold 2.73 million gallons of jet fuel. This is somewhere in the "no one will ever ever need this much" range.
Granite was imported from all over the world - Asia, Africa, Europe, North and South America - and used in making the main terminal floor. This is a ridiculous expense, especially when you're already over budget. They say, "The floor pattern echoes the roof design and subtly reinforces passenger flows". Ah...subliminal messages to move your ass. It might look pretty but would any of us know Chilean granite from Chinese granite? Or care? You can dye rock if it's colors you're after. Cheaper rocks. (I wonder what the "stones have power" people say about this...)
The huge, main terminal is Jeppesen Terminal, named after Elfrey Jeppesen, who was the first person to create maps specifically for aviation (the company is still in business today). This area is known as the "Great Hall"; it's said this is what the Masons name their meeting place.It is 900 feet by 210 feet big. This is over 1.5 million square feet of space. All told, there is over 6 million square feet of public space at DIA. The airport brags that they have room to build another terminal and two more concourses and could serve 100 million passengers a year. The airport flew 36 million in 2001.
The only way to get to the other two concourses/terminals from the Great Hall, or vice versa, is via the airport's train system.
There are more than 19 miles (30 km) of conveyor belt track, luggage transport cars and road in their own underground tunnels that move baggage and goods. They're so huge you can drive trucks through them, and some remain unused.
The entire roof of DIA is made of 15 acres of Teflon-coated, woven fiber glass. The same material is on the inside as a layer, also. The place looks like a bizarre (but kind of cool) scene out of "Dune", comprised of huge, spiked tent-like structures. The material reflects 90% of the sunlight and doesn't conduct heat. So you can't see into the place with radar or see heat signatures. I added helpfully.

And as I poked around I found some lovely, light reading entitled:"Technology for the United States Navy and Marine Corps, 2000-2035Becoming a 21st-Century Force"Volume 9: Modeling and Simulation 3 Potential Failures and Disasters for DOD's M&SBroad Observations: Intellectual and Technological InfrastructureComplex Systems and the Need for Humility"

(Hey, I like reading this stuff..don't make faces. DOD stands for Department of Defense, of course. And what do I see but:)

..."The study's terms of reference (Appendix A) asked for an identification of "present and emerging technologies that relate to the full breadth of Navy and Marine Corps mission capabilities," with specific attention to "(1) information warfare, electronic warfare, and the use of surveillance assets;.........The study should review the overall architecture of models and simulation in the DoD (DoN, JCS, and OSD), the ability of the models to represent real world situations, and their merits as tools upon which to make technical and force composition decisions....This increased complexity means that it will be harder to design systems and to predict their behavior. Some might argue that in the engineering domain, modern design tools should overcome these difficulties. While there certainly have been impressive advances (e.g., in computer-aided design), there is a feeling with at least some members of the engineering community interviewed in the course of the study that they have nearly reached the limits of complexity that can be addressed with current tools and methods. Challenging examples that could lie beyond current approaches include future generation networks and very large scale integrated circuits. Indications of the difficulty of building complex engineering systems are given by some of the well-known "disasters"-explosion of the Ariane missile, inability to build a next-generation air-traffic control system, outages in telephone and power systems, and even the problems with the baggage handling system at the Denver airport."

Perhaps the DIA does push the "limit of complexity" but that's only because the politicians and government designed it to be such a complex monster. It's not as if some engineering problem was posed and met like the Chunnel, the Petrova Towers in Malaysia, the Burj Al Arab hotel in Dubai or a hydroelectric dam. Why would the military give a hoot about the baggage problems the airport had? If you believe what you are told in the papers, most of the problem was because the people who built the system weren't the ones that were awarded the contract to run the thing. Hardly any "engineering" snafu. Or did their billion dollar underground base not work out as good as they had hoped?

P.S. Bolds added...Blogmam.

Share Christ's Suffering


1 Peter 4

1Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin;

2That he no longer should live the rest of his time in the flesh to the lusts of men, but to the will of God.

3For the time past of our life may suffice us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles, when we walked in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine, revellings, banquetings, and abominable idolatries:

4Wherein they think it strange that ye run not with them to the same excess of riot, speaking evil of you:

5Who shall give account to him that is ready to judge the quick and the dead.

6For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.

7But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer.

8And above all things have fervent charity among yourselves: for charity shall cover the multitude of sins.

9Use hospitality one to another without grudging.

10As every man hath received the gift, even so minister the same one to another, as good stewards of the manifold grace of God.

11If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

12Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you:

13But rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ's sufferings; that, when his glory shall be revealed, ye may be glad also with exceeding joy.

14If ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye; for the spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you: on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified.

15But let none of you suffer as a murderer, or as a thief, or as an evildoer, or as a busybody in other men's matters.

16Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf.

17For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?

18And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?

19Wherefore let them that suffer according to the will of God commit the keeping of their souls to him in well doing, as unto a faithful Creator.


Wednesday, February 18, 2009

U2 members against Bonos political campaigning and charity work


U2 members against Bonos political campaigning and charity work


February 18th, 2009 - 5:29 pm


Melbourne, Feb 18 (ANI): U2 vocalist Bono has revealed that his band members fear that his political campaigning and charity work might dissolve the Irish group.

The 48-year-old singer admitted that his band members guitarist The Edge, bass player Adam Clayton and drummer Larry Mullen Jr. are against his political and charity work.

It’’s dangerous. And it worries Larry, and it worries the whole band, if truth be told, The Herald Sun quoted him as saying.

But, you know, here’’s the thing - they thought, all of them, Larry, Edge, Adam, that my campaigning would sink the ship,” he added.

The band was particularly against their frontman meeting former US President George W. Bush.

“Edge pleaded with me right at the start not to meet Bush,” said Bono.

However, The Get On Your Boots singer insists that he is giving his 100pct to the band.

“When I”m with U2 doing U2 work, they have me 100 per cent or we would not be here now, he said.

I give my time to my family, my band and my interest in the wide world. It all seems to be fuel for me. My engine seems to be working better these days,” he added. (ANI)


Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor: recession may be jolt that selfish Britain needs


From The Times
February 14, 2009

Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor: recession may be jolt that selfish Britain needs


Alice Thomson and Rachel Sylvester


Pride, avarice, lust, anger, gluttony, envy and sloth: sometimes it feels as if Britain is in the grip of the seven deadly sins. There are arrogant politicians, greedy bankers, lecherous television presenters, furious trade unionists, obese children, competitive shoppers and an underclass of people who do not work. To the doom-mongers, British society is not broken, it is shattered.

According to the Archbishop of Westminster, the economic downturn could be the very thing that brings us to our senses. “It's the end of a certain kind of selfish capitalism,” Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor said. “This particular recession is a moment - a kairos - when we have to reflect as a country on what are the things that nourish the values, the virtues, we want to have ... Capitalism needs to be underpinned with regulation and a moral purpose.”

He will stand down soon as the head of the Roman Catholic Church in Britain, which he has been for nine years, but before he goes he wants to make one final plea to Britons to change their ways. He told The Times that he had advised Gordon Brown to complement his National Economic Council with a moral one, to “rediscover the things that make for a healthy society”.

He said: “One feels very sorry for those losing their jobs but in times of recession people have to rely on friends and neighbours and families and things that really matter to them. That may be a good thing. I think people did lose their way a bit. It has been difficult to bring up children with the kind of values we want. Let's face it, we now have a ‘me, me' society, a more consumerist society, a utilitarian society, and our values and virtues have become diminished.

Related Links
'Children are victims of our greedy society'
Church offers comfort but little economic joy
Brown slaps down Archbishop in debt row

“Some of it has got to do with having too much. If your worth just depends on your wealth, that is not healthy. Your worth should depend on who you are.”

Nothing exemplified this better than the bonus culture in the City. “I hope people have come to their senses. I don't know why they got such big bonuses. I would cut them out altogether.” Bankers, he said, “were just wanting to make profits but in ways that were rash, and they thought they could continue on this bonanza without querying their excesses. The industry is so focused on money. Unless that is underpinned with a moral sense and regulation that makes it clear money is only a tool for living, then it is wrong. I think sometimes there weren't enough controls on the City.

“Fred the Shred [Sir Fred Goodwin, the former head of RBS] wanted a quick fix. I don't condemn him; there are rich people but don't let money possess you. The best people, however rich, are keen to share it.”
He refused to single out the Government for blame, saying: “Everyone was cashing in. People kept borrowing as well as bankers lending. People kept shopping. I think shopping fills a void. If you have one car, you need two. Everyone wants the latest trainers and clothes. It is awful to go to a house and see in a corner hundreds of unused toys. It's so profligate. What children need is security and love, not huge amounts of money.
“Maybe the Church lost a bit of confidence. We should have said more. [The recession] is not a punishment of God but the consequences of living a certain way of life. If you live a life that is consumed by overindulgence and greed, you eventually pay a price.”

He condemned the widening gap between rich and poor. “I admire the Prime Minister for feeling strongly about this ... but I have said to him that pouring money into things is not the only answer. You might give another half-billion to education, the health service or in benefits, but this is about people, motivation and encouragement.”

The benefits system, he said, undermined the family. “Clearly you have an obligation to look after people, whether one-parent families or broken families, but if all resources are put on them, it isn't right. Every social policy should have, at its heart, benefit to the family.” He said that much of the benefits system “obviously doesn't benefit people. The tax system must benefit the family. The greatest evil in this society is the breakdown of the family.”

He was worried that some single mothers were exploiting the system. “I am sure if you can get benefit from having another child, you might want quite a number of children for the money.” He was also concerned that mothers may be working too much. “I have nieces and I will be in big trouble if I say women shouldn't work but I think children should have a mother who is there. If I was living on an estate in Basingstoke or Slough, I wouldn't necessarily want to be at home all day long ... If a woman goes to university, she gets used to having equality and a career. You can't say, ‘No, you can't work', but I do think you have to make some choices.”

The Sixties had a lot to answer for. “Liberalism is fine as long as it doesn't become libertine. Casual sex is very dangerous. I get so angry about schools. They all seem keen to teach everything about sex. When I go into schools and talk to girls and boys, they say, ‘When I grow up I want to settle down, marry and have a family.' It is good to encourage that, not to say you must have sex right, left and centre and it will all be fine. It won't.”

On contraception, he said: “It is quite ridiculous to go on about Aids in Africa and condoms, and the Catholic Church. I talk to priests who say, ‘My diocese is flooded with condoms and there is more Aids because of them.' Education, healthcare and abstinence are much more important.”
Celibacy had been a sacrifice in his own life. “I would have liked to have been a father. I think good priests would also make good fathers. The sacrifice is very big but it is compensated by having a special relationship with the parish.”

Catholic adoption agencies should, he said, be allowed to turn down gay couples who want a child - something that is now banned under equality legislation. “I am against discrimination against homosexuals but ... we think the best way of bringing up a child is with a father and mother. [The law] is political correctness gone mad. Religious bodies and voluntary agencies shouldn't be discriminated against.”

There was a danger that politics was losing touch with faith. “Fifty years ago there was an underlying Christian ethic that was held by most MPs. That is not true any more. There's a tendency to utilitarianism, a rationalism that is not underpinned by anything,” he said. “Churchill didn't really believe in God but he called on God quite regularly to help the British Empire. Macmillan was very much a Christian, so was Margaret Thatcher.”

He was concerned about the rise of “militant secularism” - exemplified by the atheist adverts on buses and “that wretched God Delusion book”. He said: “There is a serious attempt by the [Richard] Dawkinses of this world to say we want as much right as the believers to post our unbelief.
“There's not enough weight given to Christianity in schools. Children should learn about Christmas before Diwali and Ramadan. People should not be afraid to say we are a Christian country.”

Roman Catholics could teach Muslims a great deal about integrating into British society, he said. “Even when I was a boy the country was a bit suspicious of Roman Catholics. Tony Blair thought that it would have been very difficult to convert while he was Prime Minister.” Things had changed, although not enough, he said. “If the heir to the throne can marry a Muslim or a Hottentot but can't marry a Catholic, that's ridiculous.” The next Coronation must, he said, be ecumenical. “Prince Charles is an Anglican so there should be an Anglican service - but it will have to include the other faiths in some way.”

The Church of England should be disestablished, he said. “If they think they are freer to preach the gospel by being disestablished, then I think they should disestablish.”

Would the Anglican and Catholic churches merge again? “That's what we're working for,” he said, “but not in my lifetime. Henry VIII really was terrible. I blame him for a lot.”

Curriculum Vitae

Born August 24, 1932, in Reading

Family Fifth son of George and Ellen Murphy-O'Connor. Two uncles, an aunt, two cousins and two brothers also went into the Church

Education Presentation College, Reading; Prior Park College, Bath. Began studying for the priesthood in 1950 at the Venerable English College, Rome. Ordained in 1956

Career Pastoral work in Portsmouth and Fareham. Appointed Rector of the Venerable English College 1971. Elevated to Monsignor in 1972. Became Bishop of Arundel and Brighton in 1977. Appointed Archbishop of Westminster in 2000

Quick-fire five


Rugby or football? Rugby. Even when I was ordained I used to play


Pasta or roast? I'm a pasta man


Elgar or Elvis? Elgar


Sistine Chapel or Westminster Cathedral? Westminster Cathedral


The English Patient or Casablanca? Casablanca


London or Rome? London is my home

Source:http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article5728972.ece

Strange Fire in the House of the Lord


Strange Fire in the House of the Lord


J. Lee Grady Newsletters - Fire In My Bones


We need to be careful. Current fads involving angels, ecstatic worship and necromancy could push us off the edge of spiritual sanity.


No one fully understands what Nadab and Abihu did to prompt God to strike them dead in the sanctuary of Israel. The Bible says they loaded their firepans with incense, ignited the substance and "offered strange fire before the Lord, which He had not commanded them" (Lev. 10:1, NASB). As a result of their careless and irreverent behavior, fire came from God's presence and consumed them.

Zap. In an instant they were ashes.


When Moses had to explain to Aaron what happened to the two men, he said: "It is what the Lord spoke, saying, ‘By those who come near to Me I will be treated as holy, and before all the people I will be honored'" (v. 3). Although we don't know the details of what Nadab and his brother did with the holy incense, we know they were careless and irreverent about the things of God.

"We want the miracles of God, but we also want the fear and reverence of God. We cannot allow this strange fire to spread unchecked."

This ancient story has relevant application for us today. We don't use incense or firepans in our worship, but we are expected to handle God's Word with care and minister to His people in the fear of the Lord. In other words: No funny business allowed. We aren't allowed to mix God's Word with foreign concepts or mix our worship with pagan practices.

Yet as I minister in various churches around this country I am finding that strange fire is spreading in our midst-even in churches that call themselves "Spirit-filled." Pastors and leaders need to be aware of these trends:

1. Deadly visitations. In some charismatic circles today, people are claiming to have spiritual experiences that involve communication with the dead. One Michigan pastor told me last week that some church leaders he knows promote this bizarre practice and base it on Jesus' experience on the Mount of Transfiguration. The logic is that since Jesus talked to Moses and Elijah on the day He was glorified, this gives us permission to talk to dead Christians and our dead relatives.

Although little is said about these experiences from the pulpit (since the average believer is not ready to handle this "new revelation"), people in some streams of the prophetic movement are claiming to have visitations from Aimee Semple McPherson, William Branham, John Wimber or various Bible characters. And we are expected to say, "Ooooooo, that's so deep"-and then go looking for our own mystical, beyond-the-grave epiphany.

That is creepy. Communication with the dead was strictly forbidden in the Old Testament (see Deut. 18:11), and there is nothing in the New that indicates the rules were changed. Those who seek counsel from the dead-whether through mediums and séances or in "prophetic visions"-are taking a dangerous step toward demonization.

2. Ecstatic rapture. Not long after ecstasy became known as a recreational drug, someone in our movement got the bright idea to promote spiritual ecstasy as a form of legitimate worship. The concept evolved from "spiritual drunkenness" to the current fad in which people gather at church altars and pretend to shoot needles in their arms for a "spiritual high." Some preachers today are encouraging people to "toke the Holy Ghost"-a reference to smoking marijuana.

I hate to be a party pooper, but the Bible warns us to "be of sound judgment and sober spirit" (1 Pet. 4:7). There is plenty of freedom and joy in the Holy Spirit; we don't have to quench it by introducing people to pagan revelry. Christian worship is not about losing control. Those who worship Jesus do it "in spirit and in truth" (John 4:24), and our love for God is not measured by how violently we shake or how many times we fall on the floor.

Recently I told a friend in Pennsylvania that when people get tired of this drug imagery it won't be long before we see some Christians having sexual experiences at the altar. "It's already happening," my friend said. He described a recent "worship concert" in which one of the musicians simulated sex while stroking a microphone and whispering sensual phrases to Jesus. What is next-orgasmic worship? God help us.

3. Angels among us. Angels have always played a vital role in the life of the church. They are "ministering spirits" sent to protect, guide and strengthen believers (Heb. 1:14). But suddenly angels have become the rage in some segments of our movement. People are claiming to see them everywhere, and often the stories don't line up with the Word of God.

During the Lakeland Revival last year in Florida, a man from Germany took the stage and claimed that an angel walked into a restaurant while he was eating a hamburger, took his intestines out and replaced them with a gold substance. Others have testified that angels took them to heaven and operated on them. And many are claiming that angels are dropping feathers, gold dust and precious gems on worshippers.

I know God can do anything. He can make an iron axe head float, hide a coin in a fish's mouth and use a little boy's lunch to feed a multitude. Those were genuine miracles that He can still do today. But we still have to use caution here. There are counterfeits. If we promote a false miracle or a false angel in the Lord's house, we are participating in strange fire.

I know of a case where a man was caught planting fake jewels on the floor of a church. He told his friends he was "seeding the room" to lift the people's faith. I know of others who have been caught putting gold glitter on themselves in a restroom and then running back in a church service, only to claim that God was blessing them with this special favor. Where is the fear of God when Christians would actually fabricate a miracle?

This is a time for all true believers with backbones to draw clear lines between what is godly worship and what is pagan practice. We want the miracles of God, but we also want the fear and reverence of God. We cannot allow this strange fire to spread unchecked.


J. Lee Grady is editor of Charisma. He will be ministering from Feb. 17-27 in England. If this article was forwarded to you, we encourage you to sign up to receive "Fire in My Bones" weekly in your own mailbox. Click here.


Tuesday, February 17, 2009

Bank Of America Makes $402 Million TARP Payment To US Government


Bank Of America Makes $402 Million TARP Payment To US Government

February 17, 2009: 04:18 PM ET


DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

Bank of America Corp. (BAC) on Tuesday said it made its first payment to the U.S. government due under the Troubled Asset Relief Program - totaling $402 million - in connection with the $45 billion in government investments the bank received from late 2008 through early 2009.

"It is our intention to pay back these loans as soon as possible," said Bank of America Chairman and Chief Executive Ken Lewis. "In the meantime, we are using these funds to support the U.S. economy by extending credit to individuals and businesses."

Nearly $223 million of the payment related to the government's investment in the financial services company under the Capital Purchase Program with an additional $50 million related to the federal government's $10 billion investment in its acquisition of Merrill Lynch & Co. The remaining $129 million was from the government's $20 billion investment last month to help facilitate the acquisition of Merrill Lynch.

Total cash dividend payments to the government in 2009 are expected to reach about $2.8 billion.

Looking to shore up its balance sheet, Bank of America has slashed its dividend twice since October, as the deepening woes of consumers have weighed on the retail bank as it grapples with rising delinquencies in everything from mortgages to credit cards to small business loans. The latest cut last month to a nominal 1 cent a share will save the company some $6 billion a year.

Bank of America shares closed down 12% to $4.90. In recent late trading, shares are up to $4.92.

-By John Kell, Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-5285; john.kell@dowjones.com


(END) Dow Jones Newswires
02-17-09 1618ET
Copyright (c) 2009 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.


Frebruary 17, 2009 "The Beginning Of The End"


February 17, 2009 is finally here.


The date was first mentioned in the summer of 2008;

It was constantly mentioned....Repetitiously...over, and over again.

They foretold that U.S. Television Stations would switch from transmission of programs in analog format to digital. Miraculously, last week an extension was legislated at the last minute; The switch was postponed or extended until June 2009.

However, In spite of the law several local T.V. stations will still stop transmitting in analog format this evening. Those without cable, satellite, or a converter box won't get that station's signal anylonger.


Today is not only important because of the Digital Switch (that didn't really happen); But, also because President Obama signed the Economic Stimulus Package. He didn't sign it in Washington D.C., on Capitol Hill; No, he decided to make a photo op of the occasion. Vice President Joe Biden looked on, as President Obama signed the bill into law at the Denver Museum of Nature and Science in Denver, Colorado. They showed the President signing the bill on the CBS Evening News; He signed it with a cursive "B".

Boy, all the ceremony, all those flags, all the suspense; for a "B"?


What a coincidence that the much anticipated day, the much dreaded day turned out to be a double whammy. Just a fluke? A case of happenstance? Well, I wonder?


This afternoon as I drove home, I tuned in on a talk show on the radio. They were discussing the Stimulus Package: One caller stated that someone told her that the only reason President Obama signed the bill in such haste was because Nancy Pelosi had to deliver it signed to the Pope; Another caller, asked if President Obama had read the bill before he signed it? (It's more than 800 pages)


It has truly been an interesting day. I wonder how much more change awaits us? I shudder as I ponder on whether more demands for additional Billions will come from Washington;

This time without a target date.

February 17, 2009. What a date? Should we celebrate?

I know I will remember this day vividly.


After signing the bill President Obama said, among other things:

"This is the beginning of the end".


I couldn't say it better, myself!

Arsenio.

And The Beat Goes On


By Lynn Stuter
February 17, 2009NewsWithViews.com


On September 22, 2008, in Green Bay, Wisconsin, Also Known As (AKA) Obama stated,


These are the types of reform I will pursue beginning on my very first day in office as President of the United States – political reform, government reform, and regulatory reform.
First, I’ll reform our special interest-driven politics. When I am President, I will start by closing the revolving door in the White House that has allowed people to use their Administration job as a stepping stone to further their lobbying careers.


I’ll make it absolutely clear that working in an Obama Administration is not about serving your former employer, your future employer, or your bank account – it’s about serving your country. When you walk into my administration, you will not be able to work on regulations or contracts directly related to your former employer for two years. And when you leave, you will not be able to lobby my Administration – ever. I will also institute an absolute gift ban so that no registered lobbyist can curry favor with members of my administration based on how much they can spend on a fancy dinner.


I’ll make our government open and transparent so that anyone can ensure that our business is the people’s business. As Justice Louis Brandeis once said, sunlight is the greatest disinfectant. As President, I will make it impossible for Congressmen or lobbyists to slip pork-barrel projects or corporate welfare into laws when no one is looking because when I am president, meetings where laws are written will be more open to the public. No more secrecy.


When there is a bill that ends up on my desk as President, you will have five days to look online and find out what’s in it before I sign it. When there are meetings between lobbyists and a government agency, we will put as many as possible online for every American to watch. When there is a tax bill being debated in Congress, you will know the names of the corporations that would benefit and how much money they would get. And we will put every corporate tax break and every pork-barrel project online for every American to see. You will know who asked for them and you can cast your vote accordingly.


Fast forward to January 26, 2009 and H.R. 1, otherwise known as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, a/k/a, the infamous “stimulus package”, dubbed the Porkulus Package by radio talk show commentator and AKA critic, Rush Limbaugh, who it seems, is a deeply embedded thorn in AKA’s side. So much so that AKA recently admonished Republicans that they should ignore Limbaugh if they intended to “get along” with him. Oh, my, my, but aren’t we full of ourselves! Must be that narcissism showing.


The “Stimulus” act was introduced on January 26, 2009 by Representative David Obey (D-WI) with nine co-sponsors: Barney Frank (D-MA), George Miller (D-CA), Charles Rangel (D-NY), Edolphus Towns (D-NY), Henry Waxman (D-CA), Bart Gordon (D-TN), James Oberstar (D-MN), John Spratt, Jr (D-SC), and Nydia Valazquez (D-NY).



Two days later it passed the House, 244 Democrats voting “yea,” 11 Democrats and 177 Republicans voting “nay.”



On February 10, 2009, it passed the Senate with 57 Democrats, 3 Republicans (Collins, Snow, Specter), and 1 Independent (Lieberman) voting “yea” and 37 Republicans voting “nay.”



The bill then went to conference, emerging as a joint-conference bill on February 12, 2009.



On February 13, 2009, the conference bill passed the House with 246 Democrats voting “yea,” 7 Democrats and 176 Republicans voting “nay.”
On the same date, the conference bill passed the Senate with 57 Democrats, 3 Republicans (Collins, Snow, Specter) and 1 Independent (Lieberman) voting “yea” and 38 Republicans voting “nay.”



AKA is expected to sign the bill on Tuesday, February 17, 2009 in Denver, Colorado.


Dubbed by AKA and Congressional Democrats as a stimulus package, H.R. 1 is the largest pork barrel spending law ever passed. As introduced, the bill was 647 pages. It emerged from passing the House and Senate as 1400 pages of bill that remained, for the most part, unread by Democrats and Republicans alike. The conference bill, as passed, is close to 1100 pages of pork-barrel spending. Here is some of the pork barrel courtesy of Jeff Bennett, Federal Observer:



  • $2 billion earmark to re-start FutureGen, a near-zero emissions coal power plant in Illinois that the Dept. of Energy defunded last year because the project was inefficient
    A $246 million tax break for Hollywood movie producers to buy motion picture film
    $650 million for the digital television (DTV) converter box coupon program
    $88 million for the Coast Guard to design a new polar icebreaker (arctic ship)
    $448 million for constructing the Dept. of Homeland Security headquarters
    $248 million for furniture at the new Dept. of Homeland Security headquarters
    $600 million to buy hybrid vehicles for federal employees
    $400 million for the CDC to screen and prevent STD’s
    $1.4 billion for rural waste disposal programs
    $150 million for Smithsonian museum facilities
    $1 billion for the 2010 Census, which has a projected cost overrun of $3 billion
    $75 million for “smoking cessation activities”
    $200 million for public computer centers at community colleges
    $75 million for salaries of employees at the FBI
    $25 million for tribal alcohol and substance abuse reduction
    $10 million to inspect canals in urban areas
    $6 billion to turn federal buildings into “green” buildings
    $500 million for state and local fire stations
    $650 million for wildland fire management on Forest Service lands
    $150 million for Smithsonian museum facilities
    $1.2 billion for “youth activities,” including youth summer job programs
    $88 million for renovating the headquarters of the Public Health Service
    $412 million for CDC buildings and property
    $500 million for building and repairing NIH facilities in Bethesda, MD
    $160 million for “paid volunteers” at the Corporation for National and Community Service
    $5.5 million for “energy efficiency initiatives” at the VA “National Cemetery Administration”
    $850 million for Amtrak
    $100 million for reducing the hazard of lead-based paint
    $75M to construct a new “security training” facility for State Dept Security officers when they can be trained at existing facilities of other agencies.
    $110 million to the Farm Service Agency to upgrade computer systems
    $200 million in funding for the lease of alternative energy vehicles for use on military installations.
    State Medicaid Bailout: $87.7 billion Through 3 different mechanisms, the bill would provide additional federal funds to state Medicaid programs over the next 3 years. This is nearly $70 billion more than the governors asked President Obama for in December, and should be a loan to be repaid by the states.


And, as Mr. Bennett graciously concedes, that isn't all!


In the mix is a $1 billion allocation, under “Community Planning and Development” for community development block grants (CDBG). Liberal groups like La Raza and ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) are eligible for these funds. Another $10.7 billion is allocated to public housing, all or part of which fund allocations ACORN is also eligible to receive. This is beyond the $17.2 million in federal grants received by ACORN from HUD in December 2008, and the $2 million that Jeff Poor, Business and Media Institute, reported that ACORN received from Bank of America after it was bailed out by the taxpayers!

ACORN is currently under federal investigation for voter fraud! They are also a group with whom AKA has known association, both as a lawyer and an activist! Should we be surprised?

Here’s more pork:
$7.2 billion for Broadband to increase broadband access and usage in unserved and underserved areas of the Nation, which will better position the U.S. for economic growth, innovation, and job creation.

$1 billion total for NASA.

$3 billion total for National Science Foundation (NSF).

$2 billion total for Science at the Department of Energy including $400 million for the Advanced Research Projects Agency—Energy (ARPA-E).

$830 million total for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA).

$13 billion for Title 1 to help close the achievement gap and enable disadvantaged students to reach their potential.

$12.2 billion for Special Education/IDEA to improve educational outcomes for disabled children. This level of funding will increase the Federal share of special education services to its highest level ever.

$15.6 billion to increase the maximum Pell Grant by $500. This aid will help 7 million students pursue postsecondary education.

$53.6 billion for the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund, including $39.5 billion to local school districts using existing funding formulas, which can be used for preventing cutbacks, preventing layoffs, school modernization, or other purposes; $5 billion to states as bonus grants for meeting key performance measures in education; and $8.8 billion to states for high priority needs such as public safety and other critical services, which may include education and for modernization, renovation and repairs of public school facilities and institutions of higher education facilities.

$13 billion for Title 1 to help close the achievement gap and enable disadvantaged students to reach their potential.

$12.2 billion for Special Education/IDEA to improve educational outcomes for disabled children. This level of funding will increase the Federal share of special education services to its highest level ever.
$15.6 billion to increase the maximum Pell Grant by $500. This aid will help 7 million students pursue postsecondary education.

H.R. 1 was touted as a job creation bill. Only problem is, no one seems to know how many, if any, jobs will be created; and if those jobs are created, who will benefit.

What the government has done here is to grant themselves a loan, the money for which loan, debt service, and money to pay for the resulting government growth will come out of the already depressed economy. The total cost of the loan? Try $4.06 trillion over the next decade, broken down as follows: $789 billion for the loan, $744 billion in debt service on the loan, and $2.527 trillion in increased spending from new and expanded programs created by the bill. These figures come from the Congressional Budget Office.

Who will pay for that loan in its entirety and the resulting growth in government? It won’t be the government; it will be the American taxpayers.

The only way to stimulate the economy is to do the exact opposite of what occurred here: cut government spending, cut the size of government, and lower taxes.

After introduction, members of Congress were given no chance to read H.R. 1 before it was brought to the floor; everything was a “rush… urgent … an emergency”. Yet most of the money appropriated will not be spent until 2011, 2012 and beyond. Even so, the bill was rammed through with great haste, dispensing with rules governing the usual path of legislation through the House and Senate. The House/Senate conference bill was not posted gotten to members of Congress until the night of February 12, with no time for them to read the 1100+ pages before it was voted on February 13 by both House and Senate.

And counter to the claims made by AKA in his September 22, 2008 speech in Green Bay, Wisconsin, this bill is full of earmarks, full of pork, and he plans to sign it four days following its passage. There was no transparency and certainly no disinfecting sunlight; there was no public scrutiny; secrecy was the name of the game.

An interesting side-note: the speech by AKA, made in Green Bay, Wisconsin on September 22, 2008, does not show up among the speeches on the AKA/Biden campaign website. Must have accidentally gotten deleted.

Quite obviously, the amount of money that will eventually end up in the hands of AKA’s ACORN is just more of the special interest-driven politics AKA promised to rid us of.

In short, for all his claims, AKA is not to be believed; he is a man who says, “Believe what I say, look not at what I do!” In three short weeks he has shown himself as bad as, if not worse than, his predecessor whom he disparaged relentlessly.

At a time when America needs a strong leader, a strong voice, a man of integrity, it is apparent that AKA is not but an empty suit; a smooth talking con man with great oratory skills.

It is so apparent that one has to ask, “How long can this façade go on before his worshippers finally catch on?”

And how long before the Supreme Court and Congress can no longer ignore the fact that he is a usurper to the Oval Office?

Economist after economist has stated, bluntly, that the so-called “stimulus” package would make things worse, not better, for the American economy. The American people, overwhelmingly, told Congress, “Do not even think about doing this.” Yet Congress did it anyway.

When this country devolves into the inevitable depression that is coming, may the American people (and especially those who voted for AKA) remember who wrote this bill, who sponsored this bill, who supported this bill, and who voted for this bill.

It is the straw that will break the camels back.


© 2009 Lynn M. Stuter - All Rights Reserved

Source: http://www.newswithviews.com/Stuter/stuter143.htm

Majority Oppose Chapter 11 of NAFTA


Majority Oppose Chapter 11 of NAFTA

By Dana Gabriel http://www.borderfirereport.net/dana-gabriel/majority-oppose-chapter-11-of-nafta.html

A recent binational poll commissioned by the Council of Canadians, found that the majority of Americans and Canadians oppose provisions found in Chapter 11 of NAFTA. The poll found that 70% believe that energy corporations should not be allowed to sue governments for changes to policy that protect the environment and promote the public interest. Over half of the complaints filed under Chapter 11 of the agreement, have challenged environmental policies. Past polls have indicated that the majority also reject the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) and deeper integration into a North American Union. Continental integration is being achieved on many different levels and this includes through environmental commitments.

Chapter 11 of NAFTA grants foreign investors the right to sue member nations, if they feel that their profits have been restricted. Corporations have used this new power to challenge and even overturn labour, health and environmental laws. This new poll demonstrates that there is a desire for significant changes to be made to NAFTA. President Barack Obama has promised to renegotiate labour and environmental provisions under the agreement. Chapter 11 severely undermines our sovereignty. In many cases it is not being used to defend trade, but rather to challenge and override domestic laws.

When an investor files a suit under Chapter 11 of NAFTA, it does not mean that they will win. Increasingly, it is being used to intimidate and threaten governments who in many instances wish to avoid arbitration. In August of 2008, Dow Agrosciences served a notice of intent under Chapter 11. This was due to the province of Quebec’s decision to ban the sale, as well as certain uses of lawn pesticides containing the company’s active ingredient 2,4-D. Many support the ban and this includes medical and environmental officials. The province of Ontario is also working on a similar measure. Perhaps feeling that their case might be weak, Dow has not proceeded any further. They also might be waiting for several long standing cases to be settled that could set new precedents. Many feel that more stringent standards should be imposed by provincial health regulators. Chapter 11 undermines the decision making process of democratically elected governments. Through the SPP, pesticide regulations are being harmonized and as a result, Canada has lowered its standards.

North American integration is being accomplished through trinational environmental commitments. In June of 2008, the Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) was established to assist in coordinating environmental policies and it is closely tied to NAFTA. It is also being used to implement elements of the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation. The CEC is working in conjunction with the governments of Mexico, the U.S., and Canada, setting up a continental strategy to identify environmental concerns. This could be used to further bind the three countries together, using the environment as the pretext. It is also another example of putting more power in the hands of unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats and organizations. Unfortunately, many solutions being offered to combat environmental issues are in the form of more taxes and more governmental control over our lives.

Canada does not have a national carbon cap-and-trade system in place, but some provinces have begun working on a shared market. There is a push to create a North American integrated carbon market. Recently, the European Union proposed a global system for trading carbon credits. They are urging developed nations to sign on, in an effort to curb greenhouse gas emissions. Such a global tax would definitely generate billions of dollars, but it would also be a financial burden for many. My fear is that any global solution could very well be at the expense of our freedoms and sovereignty.

NAFTA best serves corporate interests and does not represent true free trade. You know something is drastically wrong when Chapter 11 of the agreement essentially grants corporations more rights than national citizens. It might be popular to blame trade deals for all our economic woes, but they are only one part of our failed economic system. Congressman Ron Paul, who also ran as a Republican presidential candidate, explained it like this. “Free trade is not complicated, yet NAFTA and CAFTA are comprised of thousands of pages of complicated legal jargon. All free trade really needs is two words: Low tariffs. Free Trade does not require coordination with another government to benefit citizens here.” Could it really be that simple? Forget about renegotiating NAFTA. The time has come to scrap the trade accord in its entirety!

Tom Hanks Saves the Vatican


Tom Hanks Saves the Vatican

Posted at: 2009-02-17 09:08:00.0
Author: James Martin, S.J.


At least he’s not saying that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene, that Opus Dei murders people and that the Vatican has misled believers about Christ for 2,000 years.


Here’s a trailer and behind-the-scenes look at the new Ron Howard film “Angels & Demons,” which looks marginally less silly than “The Da Vinci Code” (as does Mr. Hanks’s hair.) The flick opens on May 15, and promises to be another smash hit worldwide.


Apparently, the Illuminati are planning to blow up the Vatican in a fit of pique. Note how many time “the church” is mentioned in the first few seconds of this clip, and not in a good way. “Some believe that the Illuminati are still with us in secret,” says Howard. Some say that Dan Brown has been trading in anti-Catholic tropes (and yes, I've read the book) that would be greeted with outrage by other groups. But just some.

James Martin, SJ

Source: http://www.americamagazine.org/blog/entry.cfm?blog_id=2&id=8495297B-1438-5036-4F77069DCB30A9C1



P.S.

First the book by Dan Brown, now the Movie...

This film has been anticipated for so long, and promoted immensely that in can only be a masterpeice.....of deception.

"The hand is quicker than the eye"!

Arsenio.

Adolfo Nicolas: "We belong to the church"


Adolfo Nicolas: "We belong to the church"
Posted at: 2009-02-17 17:22:00.0

Author: James Martin, S.J.


Adolfo Nicolas, the superior general of the Society of Jesus, recently visited the Jesuits' California Province, on the occasion of its 100th anniversary. He spoke to a wide variety of groups--9 days, 11 cities and 30 different sites--and had an extensive press conference for representatives of the Catholic media, in the Jesuit community at the University of San Francisco, on Feb. 4. The California Province has posted this
link here. And a video of his conference here.

An excerpt:

"Q. How is the relationship between the Society and the Vatican different under Pope Benedict than under his predecessor?

A. I would answer almost in the same way: It is as different as the persons involved are different. The personality of Benedict XVI brings in new accents and a new style. John Paul II was a man who liked to be with other people. He almost never had a meal alone. Benedict XVI likes to eat alone because he is a thinker, and these are the times when he can think. I just hope he enjoys his food.

Their personalities are very different as are the experiences they have had. One comes from Poland, the other from Germany, and the histories they came through are different. I’m different from Kolvenbach just as he differed from his predecessor. Things keep changing.

At this moment, my relationship with Benedict XVI is quite open; it is a relationship of trust but not of political change. Many people think that is there a shift in power from Opus Dei to the Society of Jesus. I don’t think so. This pope is very discerning, and he moves on personal choice, with all the risk but also with all the limitations that this brings. This isn’t a choice for the Society of Jesus; instead, it is a choice for Father Federico Lombardi [the Vatican’s press director], whom he trusts, and for Father Luis Ladaria [the secretary of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith], whom he trusts. Therefore, we continue to have an open dialogue and to be in a relationship that is the best. We should neither be too close nor too distant. We belong to the Church. We are a part of it."

James Martin, SJ




P.S. Bolds added for emphasis..... Arsenio.

Can two walk together, except they be agreed?


Amos 3


1Hear this word that the LORD hath spoken against you, O children of Israel, against the whole family which I brought up from the land of Egypt, saying,
2You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities.
.
Can two walk together, except they be agreed?
.
.
4Will a lion roar in the forest, when he hath no prey? will a young lion cry out of his den, if he have taken nothing?
5Can a bird fall in a snare upon the earth, where no gin is for him? shall one take up a snare from the earth, and have taken nothing at all?
6Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done it?
7Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.
8The lion hath roared, who will not fear? the Lord GOD hath spoken, who can but prophesy?
.
.
9Publish in the palaces at Ashdod, and in the palaces in the land of Egypt, and say, Assemble yourselves upon the mountains of Samaria, and behold the great tumults in the midst thereof, and the oppressed in the midst thereof.

10For they know not to do right, saith the LORD, who store up violence and robbery in their palaces.

11Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; An adversary there shall be even round about the land; and he shall bring down thy strength from thee, and thy palaces shall be spoiled.

12Thus saith the LORD; As the shepherd taketh out of the mouth of the lion two legs, or a piece of an ear; so shall the children of Israel be taken out that dwell in Samaria in the corner of a bed, and in Damascus in a couch.

13Hear ye, and testify in the house of Jacob, saith the Lord GOD, the God of hosts,

14That in the day that I shall visit the transgressions of Israel upon him I will also visit the altars of Bethel: and the horns of the altar shall be cut off, and fall to the ground.

15And I will smite the winter house with the summer house; and the houses of ivory shall perish, and the great houses shall have an end, saith the LORD.


G-20 needs joint efforts, not talk of a 'new order'


Nicolas Sarkozy (Pool photo by Benoit Tessier)



POLITICUS
G-20 needs joint efforts, not talk of a 'new order'



By John Vinocur
Published: February 16, 2009


PARIS: Nicolas Sarkozy talks of a meeting to "remake capitalism."

Giulio Tremonti, Italy's finance minister, only a little less bombastically - his country's shrillest register is always held in reserve for Silvio Berlusconi - has called for "new rules so that a new world economic order" can be born.

That sounds messianic. And it's a problem.

When it comes to looking toward the G-20 summit meeting April 2 in London, where Barack Obama will meet with the representatives of 19 of the global economy's greatest powers, the misery of having no game-turning solution for the international economic and financial crisis is creating an over-compensating language of excessive expectations, illusion, and it's-not-my-responsibility positioning.

Officially, the London summit's goals are reasonable and far from being written in letters of flame. Its logo shows a shadowy picture of a darkened earth viewed from outer space, with just the trace of a beacon glimmering from what looks like Britain. Underneath are the modest aims - Stability, Growth and Jobs.

Today in Europe
Kosovo marks 1 year since independence declaration
New effort to win EU acceptance for genetically modified crops
Papal decisions touch off global firestorm among Catholics
.
Nice work if you can get them, even small doses. But what happens when Sarkozy tells the world, as he did once again at the Munich Security Conference on Feb. 7, that the summit's purpose is "remaking capitalism?"

You run the risk, especially in Europe where Sarkozy commands attention, of diverting attention away from the national efforts needed to right wounded economies and devaluing the practical steps the summit may achieve. Not to mention creating the allure of a global ideological struggle.

Listen to this from Henri Guaino, the French president's special counselor, who writes Sarkozy's most important speeches, and who expects the G-20's concrete results will include "the moralization of world finance."

Talking to French reporters about the summit, he said: "It will be an important step in the remaking of capitalism. In this new economic game, the state will have a greater role to play. Never before has the question of our civilization been posed as clearly! Remaking capitalism, that's a policy for civilization!"

In another, less illuminated register, Angela Merkel has called for the establishment of a charter of good practice for international finance and the creation of a world economic council as an oversight body.

It's not beyond imagination to think that Gordon Brown could support Merkel's grand idea, but a British prime minister chairing a G-20 meeting - wanting above all to save London's place as Europe's free-wheeling financial center - could hardly insist on a binding international control mechanism that would diminish London's allure.

Obama is in a parallel situation. He knows an irreplaceable part of his campaign financing came from Wall Street. And that America, traditionally, feels vastly cozier with capitalism's risk-taking, laissez-faire element than Europe.

(Mitch McConnell, the Republican Senate leader, a Kentuckian, was totally at ease last week in cursing the new president's $787 billion economic stimulus package as the "Europeanization of America.")

So re-read Obama's Inaugural Address. He tells Americans and the world the question is not "whether the market is a force for good or ill. Its power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched."

"This crisis has reminded us that without a watchful eye, the market can spin out of control."

Yet there's no reference in the speech to the enforced international control of markets that would reach beyond the Western players to somehow take in Saudi Arabia, China, Russia, India and Brazil.

Now look at Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner's carefully worded statement on that "watchful eye" distributed after the meeting of finance ministers from the G-7, or the West's leading industrial countries, in Rome on Saturday.

In it, Geithner said, "We need to begin the process of comprehensive reform of our financial system and the international finance system.... While this is a responsibility of national governments, our markets are global and therefore national efforts cannot be fully effective without international cooperation to implement higher standards."

Greater joint efforts - but hardly the stuff, concerning capitalism, of revolution or rebirth, or, you might say, of dramatic change.

The phrases recognizing the prime "responsibility of national governments" and the enhancement of "national efforts" - which sound like America saying it will be the sole judge of its market prerogatives - will not enchant those in Europe (cf. Guaino) who insist on seeing Obama's victory in part as a "revolt against Wall Street and pressure to be done with an era."

That's not at all to say nothing significant can happen in London. Rather the opposite.

Another French view of what might take place at the summit involves the G-20 bringing greater unification of international accounting rules, closer regulation of tax havens, hedge funds, and (why not?) the remuneration of bankers. Agreements might also touch on rating agencies, an area whose total control by American institutions has brought deep criticism.

This French voice even suggested last week that all the "new order" talk - save us, please - is really a matter of searching out domestic political cover.

In France, Germany and Italy, where the label capitalist has never been an easy one to wear, right-of-center politicians in power have reached for I-share-your-rage positions to hold off the left during a year in which they face either national or European parliamentary elections.
In normal times, that would be political business as usual. But this is a different moment, one of disappearing points of reference. There is a swelling sense of helplessness, and near total uncertainty about where the right answers lie.

In the next month, at preparatory meetings and debates running up to the G-20 summit, possible calls for moral crusades to purify economics and finance, or just fiddling at the edges of their deep problems, seem sure to make things worse.

.
.

The new world order


Written by Paul Wells on Monday, February 16, 2009 10:50


The new world order


The U.S. says it will do more for its allies, writes Paul Wells, but it wants more, too


For all the assorted domestic and foreign woes weighing down on it, the administration of U.S. President Barack Obama is still in the relatively sunlit early days when it can afford to plan a few steps ahead. So when Vice-President Joe Biden showed up at the Munich Security Conference with a sunny and soothing speech, his largely European audience should have known other emissaries with a darker message wouldn’t be far behind.

By itself Biden’s was an extraordinary speech, and when he delivered it on Saturday morning to the world’s foreign policy elite in a packed ballroom at the Bayerischer Hof hotel, it was obvious why Barack Obama had chosen him for the No. 2 slot. Biden enhances the credibility of his boss’s foreign policy message simply by being the guy who delivers it. A veteran U.S. senator, he knows the Munich crowd well. He has attended the annual weekend getaway in the Bavarian capital many times. He knows it is a more focused, less ostentatious and arguably more important gathering than the glittering World Economic Forum in Davos. A perfect place for the Obama team to road-test its message to the world.

Biden entered to a standing ovation, paused to engulf Javier Solana, the European Union’s foreign policy representative, in a bear hug, and chatted for long minutes with Henry Kissinger. Then he headed to the podium to deliver a basic message: Obama wants to make America a more deserving partner for its traditional allies.

“America will not torture,” he said. “We will uphold the rights of those we bring to justice. And we will close the detention facility at Guantánamo Bay.” He opened his kit bag of Helping Words, offering to “engage,” to “listen” and to “consult.” He promised talks with the bellicose regime in Iran, increases to foreign aid and a global environmental strategy. Catnip for European listeners who had waited long years to see the back of George W. Bush.

Biden barely hinted at the quid pro quo that everyone knew was coming. “America will do more—that’s the good news. The bad news is that America will ask more from our partners as well.”

To find out what “more” entailed, the Munich crowd had to wait only a day. The bill was delivered by David Petraeus, the four-star general in charge of the U.S. Central Command and therefore of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Richard Holbrooke, the veteran diplomat who serves as Obama’s special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan.

“I would be remiss if I did not ask individual countries to examine very closely what forces and other contributions they can provide,” said Petraeus. And if anyone was unsure what might help, Petraeus had brought along a wish list, like a blushing bride who had registered at the Counterinsurgency Boutique. “More intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance platforms,” he said. “More military police, engineers and logistics elements. Additional special-operations forces and civil-affairs units. More lift and attack helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft. Additional air medevac assets, increases in information operations capabilities, and so on.”

How could this much new effort be needed in a war that is already in its eighth year? It fell to Holbrooke to deliver the grim explanation: much of the work of the first seven years was wasted and counterproductive. “Let’s not kid ourselves,” he said in the conference’s closing minutes. “The task ahead of us is far, far more difficult than anything that has been said this morning. I have never, in my experience in the U.S. government that started in Vietnam, ever seen anything as difficult as the situation that confronts the countries involved in Afghanistan and Pakistan at this point.”

The “story of Afghanistan,” Holbrooke said, is full of pledges to do more and coordinate better that lead nowhere. In the U.S. government’s foreign-assistance program, “I have never seen anything remotely resembling the mess we have inherited.” He concluded: “In my view it’s going to be much tougher than Iraq.”

Pages: 1 2 3 4


.

Monday, February 16, 2009

Japan's economic downturn is worst in 35 years

Pedestrians walk past foreign luxury good stores in Toyko’s Ginza shopping district. Japanese consumers have cut their spending for three straight quarters.
(EVERETT KENNEDY BROWN, EPA)
February 16, 2009


The nation's GDP shrinks at an annual rate of 12.7% in the fourth quarter. Analysts say the trouble is likely to intensify as Japan's exports plunge.


By Don Lee
February 17, 2009

Reporting from Taipei, Taiwan -- With Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton beginning a tour of Asia this week in Tokyo, Japan's economy is suffering from its worst downturn in 35 years, and its prime minister is hanging by his nails to keep his job.

Japan's economy, the second-largest in the world after that of the United States, shrank at an annual rate of 12.7% in the final three months of last year, the government said Monday. It was the biggest contraction since a surge in worldwide oil prices precipitated an economic crisis in 1974.

Japan's prime minister, Taro Aso, had said just last week that "our wounds are shallow" compared with the economic pain in other countries.

But the fourth-quarter report showed Japan's economic output plunging much more steeply than that of the U.S. or the European Union -- and analysts say the trouble is likely to intensify.

"I think the overall situation will continue into the third and fourth quarter this year," said Masaru Hamasaki, a strategist at Toyota Asset Management in Tokyo. "And even if there is a recovery, it will probably be weak."

The main reason: Like China, South Korea and Taiwan, Japan has relied heavily on exports, especially to the U.S., to drive economic growth. When the credit crunch sapped the American economy and consumers pulled back last year, Asia's exports collapsed.

Exacerbating matters for Japan has been an increase in the value of the yen, which has tended to make Japanese goods more expensive in foreign markets.

In December, Japan's total exports fell at the sharpest pace on record, and its exports to the U.S., Europe and the rest of Asia each plummeted more than 35% from a year earlier.

The data confirmed a spate of grim news in recent weeks from Japan's biggest companies, including Toyota Motor Corp.'s first operating loss in 70 years and layoffs of tens of thousands of workers by NEC Corp., Nissan Motor Co., Sony Corp., Toshiba Corp. and others.

Even before those job cuts, Japan's unemployment rate jumped to 4.4% in December from 3.9% in November, mainly because of staff reductions at small and medium-size businesses as well as the elimination of many temporary jobs.

But slumping exports aren't the only factor to blame. With inflation's return to Japan last year after a long absence, real wages have declined. As a result, even though Japanese consumers have reduced their famously high rate of savings, they trimmed their spending for three straight quarters. That's something that didn't happen even during the "lost decade" of the 1990s, when the economy collapsed after a property-and-stock bubble burst.

"The problem isn't that consumers aren't loosening up, but [it's that] they don't have money," said Richard Katz, editor of the Oriental Economist Report, a New York-based newsletter focusing on Japan and U.S.-Japan relations.

Whether Japan is looking at another long, protracted period of economic malaise will depend largely on when the U.S. gets back on its feet. Analysts also see Japan's future now more than ever riding on China, which too is reeling from sagging global demand.

For its part, Japan can take some comfort in that its banks are in better shape than they were during the 1990s -- and in better shape than many of their U.S. counterparts, which are suffering from a housing-related financial crisis.

"This time [Japan's] financial system is quite stable," said John Vail, chief global strategist at Nikko Asset Management in Tokyo.

But the nation's political system is as deadlocked as ever, making it tough to push through the kind of large fiscal stimulus plans adopted by China and the U.S. The latest economic data could put more pressure on Japan's prime minister, Aso, and his ruling Liberal Democratic Party to add to two stimulus packages announced last year totaling about $70 billion.

The prime minister's public-support ratings have fallen below 10%, Japanese television reported over the weekend. That could prompt the opposition to press for Aso's removal before elections this fall.

In her first stop in Asia as President Obama's chief diplomat, Clinton is expected to talk with America's longtime ally on a variety of issues, including climate change and regional security, particularly tensions on the Korean peninsula.

The global economic crisis is certain to be high on the agenda as well, both in Japan and as Clinton moves on to Indonesia, South Korea and China later in the week. One reason, analysts say, is that the economic situation increases the threat of protectionism.

"The most important thing each nation can promise the other is to stem protectionist policies," said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Economy.com. "If protectionist sentiment boils over, it will undermine the global economy further."

Zandi added that the U.S. could also signal that it would not object if the Japanese were to pursue policies to weaken the yen, which has gained 18% in value against the dollar since August.

Clinton touched on the economy today, her first full day in Tokyo, in remarks before 200 U.S. diplomats and their families at the U.S. embassy, Reuters reported.

"These are hard times economically for the Japanese people, just as it is in many places around the world," she said. "I am absolutely confident we will navigate our way through these difficulties."

Most analysts don't think Japan is looking at another lost decade. But with its reliance on exports and perpetually weak domestic demand, the country's fate lies in large part with others.

"In many ways," Katz said, "it's not in Japan's hands."

don.lee@latimes.com
.
.

New World Order



New World Order
By Justin Fox Thursday, Feb. 05, 2009

In recent weeks, the world has been politely standing by and watching how things play out with the fiscal stimulus and latest bank-bailout plans in Washington. Yes, there's been some grumbling overseas about "buy American" provisions in the stimulus bill, but for the most part, officials elsewhere don't want to step on the toes of a new President to whom they are favorably disposed. They also don't want to endanger legislation that they hope will help jump-start the global economy.

Just wait a couple of months, though. Politicians from Beijing to Berlin to Brasília see the current crisis as the product of a messed-up global financial infrastructure dominated by the U.S., and they will soon be pushing for big changes--whether Americans like them or not.

All this will begin to gel on April 2, when the newish international organization known as the G-20--the leaders of 19 of the world's biggest national economies, plus the European Union--meets in London. An unofficial meeting has already taken place, at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, where G-20 officials (with the conspicuous exception of those from the U.S.) made speeches, conversed in the halls and gave a sense of the direction in which the world outside the U.S. wants to head. (Read TIME's special report on Davos 2009.)

The global discussion of the financial crisis is strikingly different from the one in the U.S. Here there's still something of a debate over whether the mess is the result of too much government interference in the housing market or too little government regulation of financial markets. In the rest of the world, that's no debate: inadequate and inconsistent financial regulation is uniformly blamed. What's more, a consensus seems to have emerged among the world's finance ministers and central-bank bosses that the chief underlying cause of the crisis was an unbalanced and out-of-control system of global capital flows in which some big-spender countries (namely the U.S.) ran up huge debts while big savers (China and India, for example) hoarded surpluses.

On the regulatory front, the path to a new global approach is pretty clear. Last spring the leaders of the G-7, a club of wealthy nations, agreed to create a "college of supervisors" to more closely coordinate regulation of multinational banks. The Group of Thirty, an influential organization of current and former central bankers and financial regulators, recommended in January that "systematically significant" financial institutions (those that are too big to fail) be identified in advance and subjected to higher capital requirements and tougher regulation. (See who's to blame for the financial crisis.)

Yet regulators around the world were already jointly setting bank-capital standards before the current crisis hit. A lot of good that did us. So there is also much talk about the need for a new architecture--"a new Bretton Woods" was a phrase that echoed around Davos--to rein in global financial flows.

Bretton Woods is the mountain resort in New Hampshire where in 1944 the Allied nations met--with the U.S. calling almost all the shots--to plan a postwar financial system. The Bretton Woods creations included the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank and a quarter-century of fixed exchange rates built around a U.S. dollar that was linked to gold. The fixed exchange rates and gold standard unraveled in the 1970s, and ever since we've had a system in which the IMF occasionally steps in to help countries in currency crises (usually imposing harsh terms in the process) but exercises no real control over the global financial system.

After the emerging-market currency collapses of the late 1990s, in which IMF aid wasn't much help, the lesson that emerging economies such as China and India took was that they needed to build up gigantic reserves of U.S. dollars to protect their currencies. To build those reserves, they ran big trade surpluses, which were in turn enabled mainly by record trade deficits in the U.S., which were in turn enabled by massive borrowing from around the world. It was an extremely unbalanced financial ballet, and it has now come crashing to the ground.

In the view of many outside the U.S. (and some within), the only way to limit such excesses is through a bigger, more powerful IMF that can act as a central bank to the world--and knock heads when needed. While everybody agrees that this new IMF needs to be less dominated by the U.S. and Western Europe, things get controversial as soon as you go past voting rights. Should capital flows be restricted? Should there be limits on trade deficits and surpluses? Should the IMF be able to order around even the U.S.? If the answer to any of these questions is yes, global capitalism will have entered a new and dramatically less freewheeling era.

To read Justin Fox's daily take on business and the economy, go to time.com/curiouscapitalist

See the best business deals of 2008.
.
Source: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1877388,00.html
.