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
Cardinal William Levada, who was San Francisco archbishop from 1995-2005, has been named in a sex abuse complaint, along with the pope and others. (AP file photo)
Former San Francisco Archbishop William Levada is one of a group of top Vatican officials named in a sex abuse complaint filed this week with the International Criminal Court.
Representatives of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP) and the Center for Constitutional Rights on Tuesday called for an inquiry by the court, based in The Hague, Netherlands, into charges that the church hierarchy tolerated widespread sexual abuse on a global scale.
The complaint names Pope Benedict XVI, the now-Cardinal Levada and two other cardinals. Levada was archbishop of San Francisco from 1995 to 2005, and now heads the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which is responsible for overseeing abuse cases.
Levada has also been accused of suppressing clergy abuse cases while in San Francisco.
A statement from SNAP on Wednesday urged “investigation and prosecution of high-level Vatican officials for their roles in the on-going protection of perpetrators, hiding of crimes and the enabling of rape, sexual assault and torture of thousands of individuals around the world.”
The group also urged victims of clergy sexual abuse, as well as church employees with information about such crimes or attempts to cover them up, to come forward.
An attorney for the Vatican, in a statement to The Associated Press, denounced this week’s complaint as a “ludicrous publicity stunt and a misuse of international judicial processes.”
According to the AP, an investigation by the International Criminal Court would be highly unlikely, as the court has received nearly 9,000 independent proposals for inquiries since its creation in 2002, and has never opened a formal investigation based solely on such a request.
Pam Spees, an attorney for the Center for Constitutional Rights, conceded she was “not hopeful” an investigation would be launched by the court.
The prosecutor’s office said in a statement that it would study the evidence presented, but would first have to determine whether the alleged crimes fall under its jurisdiction.
As we dive into the campaign season leading up to the long, long awaited 2012 election, we are seeing an increasingly desperate communist Left looking to keep Barack Obama in the White House. As we have already seen, there is no lie brazen enough that Obama and other members of the communist Democrat party are unwilling to tell it with a straight face.
So, it is no surprise that we now have a website that looks like some kind of lying propaganda machine resurrected from the old Soviet Union and updated with modern technology. The website, which was created by Obama for America is called Attack Watch, and it claims to be about fighting “attacks” and “smears” against Barack Obama. Readers are encouraged to sign up for the feeds and to report any “attack” or “smear” on Obama that they come across anywhere in the media, on the Internet, and even in emails—yes, in personal emails.
From the Obama for America site is this teaser for Attack Watch,
“We’ve launched a new campaign resource today: AttackWatch.com.
If you’re worried about the increasing negativity of the attacks on President Obama and his record, now’s your chance to fight back with the facts. Visit AttackWatch.com to learn the truth about frequent smears, track new attacks as they happen, and report false allegations you’ve seen or heard.
We’ve heard it all since 2008, from lies about the Affordable Care Act to false rumors that the Obama administration hasn’t been an ally to Israel. These aren’t just unfounded allegations about the President—they’re attempts to derail the momentum of this movement and undermine everything we’ve accomplished together in the last three years.
Check out AttackWatch.com to help stop these attacks before they start.”
Oh, they had better believe we are most certainly hoping with all our might to derail the hell-born momentum and turn back all the “accomplishments” of the Obama administration!
When visiting the Attack Watch website, the reader, like Alice, is yanked down the rabbit hole and thrust into twisted adventures in Wonderland, where up is down, black is white and the truth is a lie. The discerning reader easily determines that what these people mean by “attacks” and “smears” is simply anyone telling the truth about the disaster for America that is called Barack Obama.
Since the site is just now getting started, there are only a handful of “attacks” listed with so-called “facts” that purport to debunk them. At the top, Glenn Beck is called out for his opinion that the Obama administration has betrayed Israel, one of our greatest allies. Now, let’s see about that.
“President Obama is a friend to Israel, despite unfounded claims to the contrary.”
Unfounded claims to the contrary? Is that so?
For “proof,” Attack Watch provides a few quotes, including one from Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak saying that he “can hardly remember a better period of support” for Israel than under the Obama administration. Yet, in an Associated Press news story from April 2010, the very same Ehud Barak is quoted as saying,
“But we also shouldn’t delude ourselves. The growing alienation between us and the United States is not good for the state of Israel.”
Boy, that’s a head-scratcher, isn’t it? U.S.support for Israel has never been better, and there’s a growing alienation between us?
So, what’s the reality here? Let us not forget the truth of Obama’s actions, which speak much louder than a strange sound bite from someone hoping to curry favor with the thuggish Obama administration.
“Public figures have made outlandish claims that President Obama is planning to use a United Nations treaty to take away legal firearms from gun owners in the US.”
Outlandish claims? Really?
Pardon me, but the Obama administration announced its support for the United Nations Small Arms Treaty, which would end up, as the Washington Times reported,
“…making it more difficult – if not outright illegal – for law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms.
… This U.N. treaty will lead to more gun control in America.
… The U.N. Small Arms Treaty opens a back door for the Obama administration to force through gun control regulations. Threats to the Second Amendment are as real today as ever.”
But, any Small Arms Treaty that comes out of the United Nations Office of Disarmament poses absolutely no threat to our Second Amendment rights according to Obama’s Attack Watch!
Perhaps the Obama administration is also hoping we will all get a collective case of amnesia and forget to remember the ongoing horrific scandal of the Fast and Furious gunrunner project which has seen U.S.government-provided weapons used by Mexican drug gangs to kill our own border agents and many Mexican citizens. This is an abominable program that no doubt has its origins at the highest level in our government.
Here is yet another criminal scandal for which the Teflon Obama administration will probably not be held accountable, and which is a transparent scheme to tear down our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.
“The point [of Fast and Furious] is to create a false idea—with false statistics to back it up—that American guns are the ‘problem’ and a large contributing factor to the animalistic violence near the Mexican border. The further purpose is to cause such violent chaos, which will spill over into the U.S.—as it has already—that American citizens and lawmakers will be duped and scared into believing that even more gun control legislation is necessary to curb the gun violence in Mexico and bleeding into America.
This is nothing more than yet another attempt by the communist Left to grab our guns. It is also one of the more despicable things I have ever seen from our government, and that’s saying a lot in light of the truly terrible things we have seen from Washington in recent years. The investigation into this matter could reveal that our own government and agencies conspired to use millions of taxpayer dollars to put guns in the hands of maniac drug gang members in Mexico, knowing full well that those guns would be used to kill Mexican and American citizens.”
Attack Watch naturally attempts to lie about the so-called “Affordable Care Act” or Obamacare, as it’s commonly known. The website makes this outrageous claim,
“The Affordable Care Act promotes quality, affordable health coverage for all Americans, regardless of the industry they work in or their union status.”
It is amazing that anyone would still believe socialized medicine—which is what Obamacare is—is better than our current medical system, even with all the fraud that occurs in the government-run Medicare and Medicaid programs. Where in the world does socialized medicine result in “quality, affordable” health care for all people? In truth, there is nothing good that can come from the monstrous Obamacare legislation.
RedState lays it out nicely in a column titled, “Ten Ways ObamaCare will Kill You.” The points are that Obamacare will kill jobs, kill choice, kill innovation, inevitably result in rationing, cause taxes to skyrocket, kill fiscal responsibility, kill state government budgets by forcing higher Medicaid costs on states, kill the private sector health insurance industry, kill quality care from doctors by bureaucratizing the entire system and cutting quality to cut costs, and finally it will kill our freedom.
We can plainly see that Attack Watch is simply a new version of the Fight the Smears website, which has this Obama quote at the top of its page,
“What you won’t hear from this campaign or this party is the kind of politics that uses religion as a wedge, and patriotism as a bludgeon—that sees our opponents not as competitors to challenge, but enemies to demonize.”
As I said, Obama and the Democrats have never met a lie they were afraid to tell.
Another item to note is that Attack Watch is using material from George Soros’ “nonprofit” Media Matters for America organization. It is certainly not news that Media Matters is a highly political tool of the communist Left which clearly violates the federal requirements for a 501(c)(3) entity, which is what Media Matters is.
According to the Internal Revenue Service’s regulations,
“To be tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, an organization … may not be an action organization, i.e., it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates.”
Oh, but, when has this administration and its minions in Media Matters ever let the law get in their way?
Now that I have given you an overview of this new communesque Obama website and refuted a few of its lies, any Obot out there can use the handy link to Attack Watch—which is included in the transcript of this broadcast at Dakota Voice—to report this radio commentary to the White House Gestapo Attack Watch.
Thank you, and good morning, comrades!
Gina Miller, a native of Texas, is a radio commentator. She also works with her husband installing and repairing residential irrigation systems and doing landscaping on the Mississippi Gulf Coast.
For the last couple of years there has been nothing but frustration for the
European countries that use the euro. Josef Joffe, editor of the German
newspaper Die Zeit, tells David Greene that debt-ridden countries like
Greece 'can't be on the dole forever."
DAVID GREENE, host: To talk more about the eurozone crisis, we called Josef
Joffe, who's editor of the German newspaper Die Zeit, and we reached him at his
office in Hamburg. Josef, thank you for joining us
JOSEF JOFFE: It's a pleasure.
GREENE: So I think it's safe to say over the last two years we've heard
nothing but frustration and bad news coming out of Europe when it comes to
talking about the eurozone currency. Can you just step back and remind us, what
was the original goal of this common currency? What were the benefits that
people were expecting?
JOFFE: The original goal was for Germany, whose currency was an enormous
re-evaluation pressure, and so the idea was to spread the pressure, so to speak,
and submerge the deutschmark in the euro. For Europe as a whole, it was
obviously, you know, it's like think about, you know, 50 states with 50
currencies. And so there was this practicality, and finally it was a kind of a
philosophical thing - with a common currency we were going, you know, a long way
towards eventually a more perfect union or, you know, United States of Europe.
GREENE: And was that the hope and dream of supporters of the eurozone, to end
up with the United States of Europe?
JOFFE: Well, certainly not. We're still in the EU. You know, we are 27
countries in the EU and 17 countries in the eurozone. That just tells you that
almost half didn't even want to get into the euro, such as a Britain, for
instance, or the Scandinavians. And the Brits are now quite happy not to be in
the euro.
GREENE: And you did sort of present in your writing this week of this no
man's land in the middle, that the eurozone will have to make a choice whether
to sort of separate again or all come together as one if it's going to succeed.
JOFFE: That's the inherent logic. As any economist will tell you, you can't
have monetary union without at least a kind of fiscal union. Like the United
States, where, you know, taxes and expenditures are set by a common government.
That was the birth defect of this construction, where the chickens are now
coming home to roost.
GREENE: And one of the other things that I read from you this week was the
idea that culture matters, and what we're seeing now is there's a huge cultural
gap that is being exposed by these problems.
JOFFE: Yeah, you know, you call it, you know, the northern Protestants versus
Catholic Club Med. And these two camps have always obeyed different social
contracts. The Germans in particular, and the Dutch, we're pretty tight-fisted
and try to maintain fiscal discipline, and the Club Med countries, from Spain to
Greece, went on living like they had before, which was a happy-go-lucky, spend
more than you take in. And the nice thing was that, you know, why scrounge if
you can borrow, because the euro - and that is kind of a perverse effect of the
euro - made money much cheaper for the Greeks and Italians, and so now they
could borrow at more like German rates. And that, of course, accelerated the
march into doom, where we are now.
GREENE: There's the idea out there that more productive northern European
economies, like Germany, might split off on their own and form a new bloc, which
would end the eurozone as we know it.
JOFFE: The fear is a twin fear. One, you know, once you start unraveling
this, then where does the unraveling stop? And then there's a more tangible kind
of thing - if Greece goes and defaults and the banks start tottering, where will
that end? It will just tear one huge hole into the European and thus the global
financial system.
GREENE: Is anyone out there thinking twice about this grand experiment and
saying we've got to do something else?
JOFFE: Nobody would attack Europe as such, but the carping is targeted at
something else, something below that. It is we can't bail out Greece anymore. We
can't just stop this. We can't put countries on the dole forever. That is where
the European debate or the thrust of the critics is to be found now.
GREENE: Josef Joffe is editor of the German newspaper Die Zeit and he joined
us from his office in Hamburg. Josef, thank you for talking to us.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by a
contractor for NPR, and accuracy and availability may vary. This text may not be
in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Please be aware
that the authoritative record of NPR's programming is the audio.
Heinrich Schutz 1585 - 1676. Tekst etter Salme 145. Tilrettelagt av Ludvig Nielsen. Dirigent: Sverre Valen. Sangen er fra albumet "Lovsang under Kirkehvelv".
(TextofPsalm145AdaptedbyLouisNielsen.Conductor:SverreValen.The songisfrom the album"WorshipinChurchVaults")
People taking part in a demonstration against proposed budget cuts in public education hold up giant pairs of scissors to symbolise the cuts in central Madrid.
Madrid - Thousands of teachers packed central Madrid on Wednesday to protest against spending cuts they estimate at two billion euros - part of government measures to cut the budget deficit.
Banging drums and blowing horns, many wore green T-shirts bearing the slogan, “Public education for all”, and carried banners proclaiming, “We are not for cutting” or “Families for the teachers”.
The march on the Education Ministry coincided with the first day of the academic year in state-run secondary schools and centred on plans to make teachers spend more time in the classroom, reducing the need for temporary staff.
Unions have also called for two days of strikes in state schools in the capital on September 20 and 21, and will hold a rally in Madrid on October 22.
Education budgets are controlled by regional governments, whose spending lies at the heart of concerns about Spain's ability to slash its budget deficit and avoid sinking into a debt crisis like Greece or Ireland.
Austerity measures have alienated many supporters of the Socialist government, which is expected to lose the November 20 parliamentary election to the conservative People's Party.
Unions say the cuts will mean 13 000 temporary teachers joining the four million unemployed in Spain, which at 20.9 percent has the European Union's highest jobless rate.
They also say the cuts will undermine the education system, which suffers from one of the highest drop-out rates in Europe with about 30 percent of school leavers aged under 16 years.
Several marchers said the cuts would prevent them from splitting up large groups and allow less time for tutoring, library and laboratory work, or to hold workshops.
“What it will most affect is children with difficulties,” said Ana Siguenza, 53, a vocational training teacher, who has worked in Madrid schools for 35 years.
One centre-right commentator said claims children's education would suffer were ill-founded.
“The teachers say education will suffer if they are forced to teach an extra two hours a week,” said Jose Folgado, economist and Popular Party mayor for Tres Cantos, near Madrid.
“The children learn better if the real teachers, and not the temporary teachers, teach less hours? It doesn't make sense.”
The teachers' rally follows a march by unions last week against austerity measures and months of protest by the “Indignant” movement, consisting mostly of young people aggrieved by high unemployment.
Europeans have taken to the streets in several member countries of the 17-nation euro currency union as their governments cut spending on pensions, health and education to rein in a debt crisis which threatens to engulf the region. - Reuters
"If I'm this frustrated, I know other parents have to be as frustrated. These kids have to be in school," said Theresa Keel. She's the parent of two Lansdale Catholic HS students.
Keel launched the Facebook page -- Catholic Parents Respond -- urging other parents to send a strong message to the Archdiocese by withholding their tuition payments until the strike is over.
"All the parents of these high school students need to stand up and say, 'You need to listen to what we want. We're paying these bills, you need to listen to us. We want our kids in school," Keel said.
Roughly 700 educators with The Association of Catholic Teachers union have been on the picket line for eight days. Their big-ticket issues are money -- a 14.5 percent salary, and job protection. They don't want the Archdiocese to replace fully employed teachers with part-timers and they're worried about more schools closing.
The union has said teachers will go back to work if the Archdiocese will agree to mediate their differences. So far, the Archdiocese is not willing to move in that direction.
"The bottom line is, we want our kids back in school," said Diane Babbe, an Archbishop Wood parent. "This is not doing them any good."
Two of Solyndra’s top executives will skip Wednesday's House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing on the solar company's financial failures but have agreed to appear the week of Sept. 19, according to oversight subcommittee Chairman Cliff Stearns.
Brian Harrison, Solyndra's president and CEO and Chief Financial Officer Wilbur Stover requested the delay and told House GOP aides late Monday they’re not planning to invoke their Fifth Amendment rights when they appear next week.
"That's what we understand. But that could change," Stearns told POLITICO.
FBI agents searched Harrison’s home earlier this month as part of an investigation with the Energy Department’s inspector general regarding Solyndra’s handling of $535 million in federal loan guarantees.
Last month, the company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection and laid off 1,100 workers.
House Republicans envisioned the Solyndra officials as their star witnesses in an investigation aimed at exposing one of the poster children for the Obama administration's "green jobs" agenda. Stearns, a Florida Republican, said he was willing to give the officials more time in light of the other investigations.
"They're in the middle of a bankruptcy. They're snowed under. I respect that," Stearns said. "A little bit of leniency here to get the truth I'm willing to do if they give us the truth."
Stearns added that he’s hopeful the company officials will still testify. "I think their lawyers might say we're going to think this over,” he said.
In a statement, Solyndra cited “legal complexities arising from last week’s activities and the urgency of the bankruptcy proceedings,” as the reason for the postponement.
“The company is in direct communication with the committee staff and working with them on a future date for Mr. Harrison and Mr. Stover to voluntarily appear,” Solyndra added. “Given that it is in the best interest of all creditors, including the U.S. government, to attempt to gain maximum value for the Solyndra assets, either via sale of the whole company or in parts, including its intellectual property, it is in the best interest of all interested parties for them to remain in California to engage with potential purchasers.”
Two senior Obama administration officials are still on the agenda for Wednesday's hearing: Office of Management and Budget Deputy Director Jeffrey Zients and Jonathan Silver, the executive director of the Energy Department's loans programs office.
Rep. Diana DeGette, the ranking member of the oversight panel, said that she's also anxious to hear from Solyndra officials as well.
"I think it's important that they do come and testify and I look forward to hearing what they have to say," she said. "I think having Solyndra in there to talk about their perspective of the loan and what happened to their company would add to our examination of this whole issue.” This article first appeared on POLITICO Pro at 3:49 p.m. on September 13, 2011.
Striking teachers picket outside Wilson High School next to a sign announcing an upcoming back-to-school night, Tuesday, Sept. 13, 2011, in Tacoma, Wash. School was closed for 28,000 students Tuesday after teachers in Washington state's third-largest school district voted to strike Monday night. (AP Photo/Ted S. Warren)
September 14, 2011
TACOMA, Wash.—Leaders of Washington state's third-largest school district are asking a judge to order hundreds of striking teachers back to work as thousands of students spend a second day out of class.
A Superior Court hearing has been scheduled Wednesday on the Tacoma School District's request for an injunction to order nearly 1,900 teachers back to work. The district contends that public employees cannot legally strike under state law. Tacoma Education Association spokesman Rich Wood says union lawyers will be ready with a response.
Classes have been canceled for Tacoma's 28,000 students since the strike began Tuesday. Strike issues include teacher pay, class size and the way the district's teachers are transferred and reassigned. Tacoma teachers had been working without a contract since school started Sept. 1.
Human rights lawyers and victims of clergy sexual abuse said they would file a complaint on Tuesday urging the International Criminal Court in The Hague to investigate and prosecute Pope Benedict XVI and three top Vatican officials for crimes against humanity for what they described as abetting and covering up the rape and sexual assault of children by priests.
The formal filing of nearly 80 pages by two American advocacy groups, the Center for Constitutional Rights and the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, marks the most substantive effort yet to hold the pope and the Vatican accountable in an international court for sexual abuse by priests.
A spokesperson at the court said that the prosecutor’s office will examine the papers, “as we do with all such communications.” The first step will be “to analyse whether the alleged crimes fall under the court’s jurisdiction,” Florence Olara, the prosecutor’s spokeswoman said.
Complaints about the Vatican and child abuse by Catholic priests have been received at the court before, court records showed. But Ms. Olara said that details are not normally disclosed by the court unless a case goes forward.
Lawyers familiar with the I.C.C. said that it was unlikely that complaint against the Vatican would fit the court’s mandate to prosecute war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. But even an examination of the issue by the prosecution office would appear to serve the plaintiffs’ goal of getting international attention for the case.
A Vatican spokesman was not immediately available for comment.
Vatican officials have often said that the decisions about priests accused of abuse are made by bishops — not by the Vatican hierarchy — and that the church is far more decentralized than is widely believed.
But the lawyers and abuse victims who are taking the case to the international court say their action is necessary because all the cases brought against priests and bishops in various countries have not been sufficient to prevent the crimes from continuing.
“National jurisdictions can’t really get their arms around this,” said Pamela Spees, a lawyer with the Center for Constitutional Rights, who helped prepare the filing. “Prosecuting individual instances of child molestation or sexual assault has not gotten at the larger systemic problem here. Accountability is the goal, and the I.C.C. makes the most sense, given that it’s a global problem.”
In addition to Pope Benedict XVI, the filing asks the court to prosecute Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Vatican’s secretary of state; Cardinal Angelo Sodano, the previous secretary of state and the current dean of the College of Cardinals; and Cardinal William Levada, who is head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Vatican office designated to receive cases of clergy sexual abuse that are forwarded by bishops.
A central question is whether the accusations will fit the court’s criteria. The International Criminal Court has jurisdiction over war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide committed after July 1, 2002, when the court opened. It is independent of the United Nations and has jurisdiction in the 117 countries that so far have ratified the Rome Statute that created the court. Italy, Germany and the Netherlands are signatories, while the Vatican and the United States are not.
The filing against the Vatican cites five cases in which priests have been accused of abuse in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the United States; the priests in these cases are from Belgium, India and the United States.
Ms. Spees said she hoped to convince the court that the cases were within its jurisdiction, because they involve abuses that she said were “systematic and widespread,” and because the pope and two of the three cardinals named in the filing are from nations that are signatories to the Rome Statute.
Experts in international law said they thought the court’s chief prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, would be reluctant to accept the cases because of thorny jurisdictional questions, as well as political and religious sensitivities.
They said that the sexual abuse of minors by Roman Catholic priests was sufficiently heinous and numerous to meet the court’s standards. The question is whether the facts show that the Vatican officials actually perpetuated the abuse.
Mark Ellis, executive director of the International Bar Association, which is based in London, said he thought that the Court would open a preliminary investigation to determine whether it has jurisdiction — and that it would probably conclude that it did not.
“Crimes against humanity means acts that are committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population,” Mr. Ellis said. “What you’re looking at is really a policy, in which the government or the authorities are planning the attack.”
“When you look at the concept of why and how the I.C.C. was created, I just don’t think this fits,” he said. “But the filing does something that’s important. It raises awareness. Ultimately the plaintiffs will elevate this in the public eye and it will force the court to respond.”
Marlise Simons contributed reporting from Paris and Rachel Donadio from Rome.
President Obama, center, is given a tour of Solyndra by Executive Vice President Ben Bierman, right, as Chief Executive Officer Chris Gronet, left, walks along at Solyndra Inc. in Fremont, Calif. FBI spokesman Peter Lee says agents executed multiple search warrants on Thursday morning as part of an investigation with the Department of Energy's Office of Inspector General. (AP Photo/Paul Chinn, Pool, File)
By Jim Snyder and Christopher Martin - Sep 12, 2011 12:59 PM ET
Solyndra LLC’s workers making solar-power panels in a California factory subsidized by U.S. taxpayers showed “the promise of clean energy isn’t just an article of faith,” President Barack Obama said on a visit to the company in May 2010.
Two months before Obama’s visit, accounting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP warned that Solyndra, the recipient of $535 million in federal loan guarantees, had financial troubles deep enough to “raise substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern.”
The Obama administration stood by Solyndra through the auditor’s warning, the abandonment of a planned initial public offering and a last-ditch refinancing where taxpayers took a back seat to new investors. That unwavering commitment has come under increasing scrutiny since the company’s travails culminated in its filing for bankruptcy protection on Sept. 6 and a raid on its headquarters by the Federal Bureau of Investigation two days later.
“People including our government put blinders on and did not want to believe in the obvious,” Jonathan Dorsheimer, an analyst in Boston for Canaccord Genuity Inc. of Vancouver, said in an interview with Bloomberg Government. “The fact that the government chose Solyndra as their white horse is mind- boggling.”
‘Merit-Based Decision’
Selection of companies to receive U.S. backing are “merit- based decisions made by career staffers at the Department of Energy, and the process for this particular loan guarantee began under President George W. Bush,” Eric Schultz, a White House spokesman, said in an e-mailed statement Sept. 1. “Every project that receives financing through the Energy Department goes through a rigorous financial, legal and technical review process.”
The House Energy and Commerce Committee, which has been investigating the Solyndra award since February, has scheduled a hearing on the loan guarantees for Sept. 14.
“We smelled a rat from the onset,” Representatives Fred Upton, a Michigan Republican and the committee chairman, and Cliff Stearns, a Florida Republican and chairman of the investigation subpanel, said in a statement Aug. 31 when the company announced it had dismissed 1,100 employees and planned to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization.
A day before Solyndra ceased operations, the Energy Department turned down the company’s request to renegotiate the U.S. loan agreement, saying “a second restructuring was not feasible,” according to a memo from committee Republicans.
Stimulus Legislation
Originally authorized by Congress in a 2005 energy law, the loan guarantee program to encourage the development of clean- energy sources didn’t choose its first recipient until it was revamped under Obama’s 2009 stimulus legislation. Trade groups such as the Solar Energy Industries Association and the American Wind Energy Association lobbied Obama, urging in a letter that he prevent “further delay.”
Energy Secretary Steven Chu pledged during his Senate confirmation hearing to speed the approval of applications for the federal backing.
Solyndra, identified during Bush’s administration as a promising applicant, received the Energy Department’s first loan guarantee after Obama took office. Solyndra was given conditional approval in March 2009 and the award became final that September.
Easier, Lighter
The goal was to help the Fremont, California-based company develop its cylinder-shaped solar devices, which convert sunlight into electricity using a thin film made mainly of copper, indium, gallium and selenium. Standard solar panels are flat and made from silicon.
The company said its product was easier to install and lighter, giving it an edge over conventional panels, especially for large rooftops that can’t handle the weight of flat panels.
Solyndra used the U.S. backing to build the manufacturing plant Obama visited, shutting an older facility executives said couldn’t produce panels efficiently enough to compete in a market increasingly dominated by cheaper Chinese imports.
The company disclosed the “going concern” warning by PricewaterhouseCoopers, its accounting firm, in a Securities and Exchange Commission filing on March 16, 2010.
“The company has suffered recurring losses from operations, negative cash flows since inception and has a net stockholders’ deficit,” PricewaterhouseCoopers said.
In June 2010, the month after Obama’s visit, Solyndra executives withdrew a planned $300 million initial public offering.
Value ‘Evaporated’
The challenge facing Solyndra only increased as prices of the silicon used in conventional solar panels from China fell, declining 30 percent this year, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance.
“When polysilicon prices dropped Solyndra’s value proposition evaporated,” Joseph Berwind, managing partner of Alternative Energy Investing LLC in Summit, New Jersey, and the author of “Investing in Solar Stocks,” said in an interview.
By December 2010, Solyndra was a month away from running out of cash, according to a government document obtained by Bloomberg News.
In what turned out to be a final effort to save the company, the Energy Department agreed to take a back seat to funds from new investors to keep the solar plant operating.
Public, Private Investors
Under the terms, $75 million in private financing will be paid ahead of all but $150 million of the federal government’s stake from any revenue from the sale of the company or its assets if Solyndra is liquidated, according to the January document. The government loaned about $527 million to the company by the time it shut down.
Solyndra also put up more collateral to the government, including intellectual property.
After “a due-diligence effort” to “determine if the company still had a viable business” the Energy Department concluded it “believes that the restructuring plan represents the best possible course of action to achieve the highest return on its invested capital,” according to the document.
House Republicans noted Solyndra’s financial troubles in a February 17 letter to Energy Secretary Chu announcing their investigation into the loan-guarantee program.
Kaiser Investment
Since then, Republicans have pointed to connections between Solyndra and billionaire George Kaiser, an Obama campaign fundraiser. The George Kaiser Family Foundation, a charitable organization based in Tulsa, Oklahoma, holds about 36.7 percent of the company, according to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Kaiser made 16 visits to the president’s aides since 2009, according to White House visitor logs.
“George Kaiser is not an investor in Solyndra and did not participate in any discussions with the U.S. government regarding the loan,” the foundation said in an e-mailed statement on Sept. 1.
As Solyndra struggled to stay afloat, it worked to reassure lawmakers. The company spent $480,000 this year to lobby Congress, according to Senate records.
In July, days after Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Committee subpoenaed the White House for documents related to the loan guarantee, Solyndra retained Glover Park Group LLC, a public relations and lobbying firm of former congressional and White House aides based in Washington, to introduce executives to members of the committee, according to Senate records.
Solyndra Forecasts
A July 13 letter from Solyndra to the Energy committee said revenue had increased to $140 million from $6 million in 2008 and was projected to almost double again in 2011.
On July 21, at a news conference at Glover Park’s offices, Solyndra Chief Executive Officer Brian Harrison said policy makers should “separate Solyndra and its business results from the political process that is ongoing.”
Democratic Representatives Henry Waxman of California and Diana DeGette of Colorado said in a letter Sept. 8 that Harrison assured them in a meeting less than two months ago that the company was in a “strong financial position.”
The House Energy panel has asked Harrison to testify at this week’s hearing along with Jonathan Silver, who heads the Energy Department’s loan program, and Jeffrey Zients, deputy director of the White House Office of Management and Budget.
*Please see below for a correction (marked with an asterisk) to a typo in the transcript.
10:58 A.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Please, everybody, have a seat, on this beautiful morning. It’s wonderful to see all of you here.
On Thursday, I told Congress that I’ll be sending them a bill called the American Jobs Act. Well, here it is. (Applause.) This is a bill that will put people back to work all across the country. This is the bill that will help our economy in a moment of national crisis. This is a bill that is based on ideas from both Democrats and Republicans. And this is the bill that Congress needs to pass. No games. No politics. No delays. I’m sending this bill to Congress today, and they ought to pass it immediately. (Applause.)
Standing with me this morning are men and women who will be helped by the American Jobs Act. I’m standing with teachers. All across America, teachers are being laid off in droves — which is unfair to our kids, it undermines our future, and it is exactly what we shouldn’t be doing if we want our kids to be college-ready and then prepared for the jobs of the 21st century. We’ve got to get our teachers back to work. (Applause.) Let’s pass this bill and put them in the classroom where they belong. (Applause.)
I’m standing here with veterans. We’ve got hundreds of thousands of brave, skilled Americans who fought for this country. The last thing they should have to do is to fight for a job when they come home. So let’s pass this bill and put the men and women who served this nation back to work. (Applause.)
We’re standing here with cops and firefighters whose jobs are threatened because states and communities are cutting back. This bill will keep cops on the beat, and firefighters on call. So let’s pass this bill so that these men and women can continue protecting our neighborhoods like they do every single day. (Applause.)
I’m standing with construction workers. We’ve got roads that need work all over the country. Our highways are backed up with traffic. Our airports are clogged. And there are millions of unemployed construction workers who could rebuild them. So let’s pass this bill so road crews and diggers and pavers and workers – they can all head back to the jobsite. There’s plenty of work to do. This job — this jobs bill will help them do it. Let’s put them back to work. Let’s pass this bill rebuilding America. (Applause.)
And there are schools throughout the country that desperately need renovating. (Applause.) We cannot — got an “Amen” over there. (Laughter and applause.) We can’t expect our kids to do their best in places that are literally falling apart. This is America. Every kid deserves a great school — and we can give it to them. Pass this bill and we put construction crews back to work across the country repairing and modernizing at least 35,000 schools.
I’m standing here with small business owners. They know that while corporate profits have come roaring back, a lot of small businesses haven’t. They’re still struggling — getting the capital they need, getting the support they need in order to grow. So this bill cuts taxes for small businesses that hire new employees and for small businesses that raise salaries for current employees. It cuts your payroll tax in half. And all businesses can write off investments they make this year and next year. (Applause.) Instead of just talking about America’s job creators, let’s actually do something for America’s job creators. We can do that by passing this bill. (Applause.)
Now, there are a lot of other ways that this jobs bill, the American Jobs Act, will help this economy. It’s got a $4,000 tax credit for companies that hire anybody who spent more than six months looking for a job. We’ve got to do more for folks who’ve been hitting the pavement every single day looking for work, but haven’t found employment yet. That’s why we need to extend unemployment insurance and connect people to temporary work to help upgrade their skills.
This bill will help hundreds of thousands of disadvantaged young people find summer jobs next year — jobs that will help set the direction for their entire lives. And the American Jobs Act would prevent taxes from going up for middle-class families. If Congress does not act, just about every family in America will pay more taxes next year. And that would be a self-inflicted wound that our economy just can’t afford right now. So let’s pass this bill and give the typical working family a $1,500 tax cut instead. (Applause.)
And the American Jobs Act is not going to add to the debt — it’s fully paid for. I want to repeat that. It is fully paid for. (Laughter.) It’s not going to add a dime to the deficit. Next week, I’m laying out my plan not only to pay for this jobs bill but also to bring down the deficit further. It’s a plan that lives by the same rules that families do: We’ve got to cut out things that we can’t afford to do in order to afford the things that we really need. It’s a plan that says everybody — including the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations — have to pay their fair share. (Applause.)
The bottom line is, when it comes to strengthening the economy and balancing our books, we’ve got to decide what our priorities are. Do we keep tax loopholes for oil companies — or do we put teachers back to work? Should we keep tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires — or should we invest in education and technology and infrastructure, all the things that are going to help us out-innovate and out-educate and out-build other countries in the future?
We know what’s right. We know what will help businesses start right here and stay here and hire here. We know that if we take the steps outlined in this jobs plan, that there’s no reason why we can’t be selling more goods all around the world that are stamped with those three words: “Made in America.” That’s what we need to do to create jobs right now. (Applause.)
I have to repeat something I said in my speech on Thursday. There are some in Washington who’d rather settle our differences through politics and the elections than try to resolve them now. In fact, Joe and I, as we were walking out here, we were looking at one of the Washington newspapers and it was quoting a Republican aide saying, “I don’t know why* we’d want to cooperate with Obama right now. It’s not good for our politics.” That was very explicit.
THE VICE PRESIDENT: It was.
THE PRESIDENT:I mean, that’s the attitude in this town — “yeah, we’ve been through these things before, but I don’t know why we’d be for them right now.” The fact of the matter is the next election is 14 months away. And the American people don’t have the luxury of waiting 14 months for Congress to take action. (Applause.) Folks are living week to week, paycheck to paycheck. They need action. And the notion that there are folks who would say, we’re not going to try to do what’s right for the American people because we don’t think it’s convenient for our politics — we’ve been seeing that too much around here. And that’s exactly what folks are tired of.
And that’s okay, when things are going well, you play politics. It’s not okay at a time of great urgency and need all across the country. These aren’t games we’re playing out here. Folks are out of work. Businesses are having trouble staying open. You’ve got a world economy that is full of uncertainty right now — in Europe, in the Middle East. Some events may be beyond our control, but this is something we can control. Whether we not — whether or not we pass this bill, whether or not we get this done, that’s something that we can control. That’s in our hands.
You hear a lot of folks talking about uncertainty in the economy. This is a bit of uncertainty that we could avoid by going ahead and taking action to make sure that we’re helping the American people.
So if you agree with me, if you want Congress to take action, then I’m going to need everybody here and everybody watching — you’ve got to make sure that your voices are heard. Help make the case. There’s no reason not to pass this bill. Its ideas are bipartisan. Its ideas are common sense. It will make a difference. That’s not just my opinion; independent economists and validators have said this could add a significant amount to our Gross Domestic Product, and could put people back to work all across the country. (Applause.) So the only thing that’s stopping it is politics. (Applause.) And we can’t afford these same political games. Not now.
So I want you to pick up the phone. I want you to send an email. Use one of those airplane skywriters. (Laughter.) Dust off the fax machine. (Laughter.) Or you can just, like, write a letter. (Laughter.) So long as you get the message to Congress: Send me the American Jobs Act so I can sign it into law. Let’s get something done. Let’s put this country back to work.
Thank you very much, everybody. God bless you. (Applause.)
Religion, in a variety of ways, has moved to the forefront of the Republican primary campaigns. The list of candidates includes several Protestant evangelicals, two Mormons and two Catholics. On “life” issues, all of these candidates proclaim themselves to be anti-abortion; but Catholic teaching emphasizes an extensive range of life issues beyond abortion—from stem cell research to hospital care to opposition to torture and to the death penalty.
Among the candidates, Gov. Rick Perry of Texas is the one who in his speeches and writing has most publicly identified himself with Jesus Christ. At the same time, although most politicians support the death penalty, Mr. Perry’s record stands out for its severity.
Governor Perry has overseen the execution of 234 persons in 11 years, more than any other governor in modern history. And he is proud of this. “If you don’t support the death penalty and citizens packing a pistol, don’t come to Texas,” he once wrote. He vetoed a bill that would have spared the mentally retarded and criticized a Supreme Court decision that ruled out executing juveniles. His most controversial decision was to allow the execution in 2004 of Cameron Todd Willingham, who had been convicted of killing his three daughters in 1991 by burning down his own house. An independent investigator concluded that the initial examination of the fire was based on junk science and shoddy techniques and that Willingham could not be guilty. But when the investigator presented the report to Governor Perry, he ignored it and allowed the execution to proceed that very day.
That is not the moral or religious leadership expected of a president.
Family Matters
In advance of Hurricane Irene, government officials began using an unfamiliar phrase to describe preparations for the storm. Press releases distributed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency highlighted the “Federal Family’s Preparation and Response.” On Aug. 28 Janet Napolitano, the secretary of homeland security, announced that “the entire federal family is working as one to support the affected states.”
The administration’s critics were quick to respond. Ed Henry, the White House correspondent for Fox News, tweeted: “Branding alert: Interesting how WH dropped word ‘government’...calling it ‘federal family.’” “If my ‘family’ was $14 trillion in debt I’d put myself up for adoption,” Michelle Malkin sneered. The phrase may be part of a re-branding campaign, but it is not new. Both George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush used the term at different times. Even the now infamous Michael D. Brown, the director of FEMA in 2004, referred to the “federal family” in remarks before Hurricane Katrina.
Catholics know, of course, that the government is not a family and cannot pretend to be one. Pope Benedict XVI recently reiterated the church’s teaching that family and marriage are the foundation of society. Yet sometimes, especially in times of emergency, the nuclear family needs support. That support can come from the church or other charitable institutions, but also from the government. For some people—elderly widows, abused children, the disabled—public institutions are the only entities that can provide the help they need. This simple but contentious fact was confirmed in the wake of Hurricane Irene, when government workers played an essential role in rescue and recovery. Call them family, neighbors or civil servants; the name does not matter. What matters is that they were there.
An iBishop?
On Aug. 24 Steve Jobs announced his resignation as the chief executive officer of Apple Inc., which he co-founded in the 1970s. Much laudatory commentary followed. Mr. Jobs changed the world of movies and music and books. He did not supply new plots and images but changed how the people watched what they wanted to see. He did not compose new tunes and lyrics but changed how the world received, stored and played music. He did not write new books but changed how the world read and kept and reread those books. The entrenched music and publishing industries felt threatened and resisted but eventually came around, seeing that Mr. Jobs was ultimately working with them.
“Mr. Jobs did not so much see around corners; he saw things in plain sight that others did not,” wrote David Carr in The New York Times. Steve Jobs saw what modern people wanted before they knew they wanted it. And he knew how to make it available and attractive. The Apple store on Fifth Avenue in New York is open 24 hours a day.
One hears that young people want what the church has to offer, but they cannot find it in that church. The delivery system fails. Imagine a Bishop Steve Jobs. What would his diocese—the Diocese of Appleton, perhaps—look like? How would entrenched interests react to his challenge? What is out there in plain sight that he would see and point out to fellow church leaders? How would he change not the message, not the content, not the words but the delivery system? The human side of the church could use the energy of new vision.
Pres. Obama delivered a speech on U.S.-Muslim relations from Cairo University. The President called for renewed Middle East peace talks as well as an agenda for economic and social development in the region.
WORLD police body Interpol has called for the arrest of fugitive former Libyan leader Mummar Gaddafi for his alleged crimes against humanity, following a request by the International Criminal Court (ICC).
Interpol said it had issued a "red notice" for the arrest of Gaddafi, his son Seif al-Islam and his intelligence chief Abdullah al-Senussi, one day after ICC prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo asked for the agency's help.
The international police organisation asked its 188 member countries "to take all measures consistent with their national laws to help the ICC locate and apprehend Gaddafi".
The "request for Interpol 'red notices' will significantly restrict the ability of all three men to cross international borders and is a powerful tool to help in their location and arrest," Interpol secretary-general Ronald Noble said.
"Gaddafi is a fugitive whose country of nationality and the International Criminal Court want arrested and held accountable for the serious criminal charges that have been brought against him," Noble said.
A "red notice" by the international police co-operation agency, which is based in the central French city of Lyon, seeks the arrest for an extradition or surrender of a person to an international court based on an arrest warrant.
On June 27, ICC judges agreed to Moreno-Ocampo's request for arrest warrants against Gaddafi, 69, Seif al-Islam, 39, and Senussi, 62, for crimes against humanity committed by Libyan troops on their orders, using "lethal force" to quell the uprising against his regime. Interpol secretary-general Ronald Noble
V. P. Joe Biden, 47thVice President of the United States
Biden is the first Roman Catholic and the first Delawarean to become Vice President of the United States. ..
Biden was born in Scranton, Pennsylvania,[1] the son of Joseph Robinette Biden Sr. (1915–2002)[2] and Catherine Eugenia "Jean" Finnegan (1917–2010).[3] He was the first of four siblings[1] in a Catholic family, of Irish and English descent (with roots in County Londonderry).[4][5][6][7] He has two brothers, James Brian Biden and Francis W. Biden, and a sister, Valerie (Biden) Owens.[8] His great-grandfather, Edward F. Blewitt, was a member of the Pennsylvania State Senate.[9] ...
Biden attended the Archmere Academy in Claymont,[13] where he was a standout halfback/wide receiver on the high school football team; he helped lead a perennially losing team to an undefeated season in his senior year.[10][14] He played on the baseball team as well.[10] During these years, he participated in an anti-segregationsit-in at a Wilmington theatre.[15] Academically, Biden was undistinguished,[10] but he was a natural leader among the students.[16] He graduated in 1961.[13]
Biden attended theUniversity of Delaware in Newark, where he was more interested in sports and socializing than in studying,[10] although his classmates were impressed by his cramming abilities.[15] He played halfback with the Blue Hens freshman football team,[14] but he dropped a junior year plan to play for the varsity team as a defensive back, enabling him to spend more time with his out-of-state girlfriend.[14][17] He graduated with a Bachelor of Arts with a double major in history and political science in 1965,[1] ranked 506th of 688 in his class.[18]
He went on to receive his Juris Doctor from Syracuse University's College of Law in 1968,[19] where by his own description he found it to be "the biggest bore in the world" and pulled many all-nighters to get by.[15][20] During his first year there, he was accused of having plagiarized 5 of 15 pages of a law review article. Biden said it was inadvertent due to his not knowing the proper rules of citation, and he was permitted to retake the course after receiving a grade of F, which was subsequently dropped from his record.[20] He was admitted to the Delaware Bar in 1969.[19]