Will Thousands of Police Layoffs Unleash Chaos and Anarchy Across America?

That is the question asked by one Michael Snyder, the editor of a blog called "The Economic Collapse." Snyder, in a column posted last night, reports that a billboard in Stockton, California, is perfectly clear on that question: "Welcome to the 2nd most dangerous city in California. Stop laying off cops." The Stockton Police Officers Association plans to spend $20,000 on 20 more such billboards, because the city is considering a plan to lay off 53 officers to help close a $23 million deficit in its budget. But law enforcement in Stockton has already been slashed. A spokesman for the department told the local Fox-TV affiliate on Wednesday that "We absolutely do not have any narcotics officers, narcotics sergeants working any kind of investigative narcotics type cases at this time."

The report quotes a couple of city residents expressing near panic at the likely consequences of no drug investigations, and the police concur. "Drugs are a breeding ground for many other activities," the spokesman said, "and if these are going more and more unchecked, one would have to speculate that you're going to see a rise across the board in those types of criminal activities."

Snyder cites a number of other examples to make his point that police departments across the country are disintegrating, including a number not previously noted by this news service, including:

* Ashtabula County, Ohio where the sheriff's department has been slashed from 112 to 49 deputies. When a county judge was asked what people are supposed to do to protect themselves, he said "arm themselves."

* Illinois, where the director of the state police announced, earlier this year, that 460 troopers would be laid off and five regional headquarters would be closed by the fall.

* Toledo, Ohio, where 130 patrol officers were laid off because of a $20.7 million budget deficit.

* New Jersey, where more than half of 315 municipalities responded to a canvass by the New Jersey State Policeman's union that they were planning to lay off police officers.

Then there are the latest rounds of police and firefighter layoffs:

* Newark, NJ: Budget documents obtained by the Newark Star-Ledger show that the city is planning to lay off 181 to 263 police officers to close a $16.7 million deficit in its budget, in a city historically plagued by crime. Mayor Cory Booker said, yesterday, that the layoffs can be avoided if the police unions accept furloughs and other concessions. The police department has already taken actions to cut costs, such as the demotions of 107 officers to lower rank.

* Stockton, California: The police and firefighters union each filed new lawsuits against the city this week. The firefighters want a closed fire station reopened, and the police suit is over suspended pay hikes and shift changes they say were improper. Eighteen police officers have been laid off so far, and the city says another 40 will go if the firefighters win their case.

* Eureka, California: The police chief told the city council they're not taking about paper clips, when they talk about taking $1 million out of his department's budget. "We're talking 10 positions ... to say we can take out 10 positions within our department and not have that affect the citizens of Eureka is naive."

* East St. Louis, Illinois: City leaders announced last night that layoff notices will go out to 37 city employees, including 19 police officers and 11 firefighters, among others. They claimed that efforts will be made to save those jobs before the layoffs take effect on Aug. 1.

* Palm Beach County, Florida: The fire chief has reduced a $17 million shortfall in his budget to $4 million, but closing that remaining gap could cost 40-50 jobs in a department that already has 65 vacant firefighter positions.

Obama a Bigger Threat to Social Security Than Bush

Obama and his fiscal commission are a more serious threat to Social Security than was Bush's attempted privatization of Social Security in 2005, according to Social Security Works, a coalition of liberal and senior groups, reports The Hill. The fiscal commission (commonly known as the "Catfood Commission") is largely working behind the scenes, whereas Bush's proposal was defeated after a public debate (and one in which the LaRouche movement played a leading role, we should add).

"The American people wound up rejecting [Bush's plan], but it was democracy at work. He was putting his proposal out there, and the Democrats were solidly against it, as was most of the country," says Nancy Altman, co-director of Social Security Works. "The problem here is ... that if something is done, it will be by stealth." Altman points out that although the commission is holding monthly public meetings, it has divided itself into smaller groups, which talk policy behind closed doors.

Briefed on the accusation that Obama is operating by stealth, Lyndon LaRouche responded that it's true. And if he's doing this by stealth, LaRouche added, that means he's a crook. Like Nixon, he's a crook. Remember Nixon? "I'm no crook." Guess what? He was.

Is Madman Obama Going To Bomb Iran?

A flurry of propaganda has surfaced over the past 48 hours, indicating that, in the aftermath of the Obama-Netanyahu White House love-fest last week, the Obama Administration is seriously considering military action against Iran. If it were simply a matter of media black propaganda, the threat would be limited, at best, given U.S. military resistance to another Persian Gulf war. But, given the fact that the President is stark-raving mad, and given that several extremely well-informed Washington sources have confirmed a renewed consideration of an attack on Iran, coming directly from the White House, the matter has to be taken very seriously.

On July 15, Time magazine prominently featured a story by Joe Klein, headlined "An Attack on Iran: Back on the Table," in which it was reported that the Pentagon, for the first time, considers military action against Iran's nuclear program to be both feasible and possibly necessary. "Intelligence sources say that the U.S. Army's Central Command, which is in charge of organizing military operations in the Middle East, has made some real progress in planning targeted air strikes—aided, in large part, by vastly improved human-intelligence operations in the region," Klein wrote. He quoted an Israeli military source telling him, "There really wasn't a military option a year ago. But they've gotten serious about the planning and the option is now real." The source reported that the Israeli military has been consulted on the war planning, because the Obama Administration does not want Israel to act on its own, in attacking Iran. Klein added, "One other factor has brought the military option to a low boil: Iran's Sunni neighbors really want the U.S. to do it... Senior American officials who travel to the Gulf frequently say the Saudis, in particular, raise the issue with surprising ardor." Klein claimed that "For the moment, the White House remains as skeptical as ever about a military strike," but that, according to senior U.S. intelligence sources and one top Democrat, is no longer true. Reportedly, President Obama is personally talking about an attack on Iran, and views it as a potential boost for his 2012 reelection plans.

On July 15, the same day that the Klein story was posted, Spiegel Online published a very similar story under the headline "A Quiet Axis Forms Against Iran in the Middle East," by Alexander Smoltczyk and Bernhard Zand. They cited a strong push from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, for an attack by the United States on Iran, regardless of the blowback. Spiegel noted the recent speech by UAE's Ambassador to the United States, Yousef Al Otaiba, at an Aspen, Colorado forum, in which he aggressively promoted American military action to knock out Iran's nuclear capabilities. "A military attack on Iran by whomever would be a disaster," the ambassador said, "but Iran with a nuclear weapon would be a bigger disaster." While acknowledging that there would undoubtedly be a severe "backlash," "If you ask me, 'Am I willing to live with that versus living with a nuclear Iran,' my answer is still the same. We cannot live with a nuclear Iran. I am willing to absorb that [it] takes place at the expense of the security of the U.A.E."

Even Arnaud de Borchgrave, who, in recent years, has been a harsh critic of the Bush-Cheney preventive wars, and an opponent of military strikes on Iran, wrote on July 13 that "Global Sentiment Builds to Attack Iran." Citing the same Saudi and UAE statements that were reported by Time and Spiegel Online, de Borchgrave concluded: "The temptation for Obama to double down on Iran will grow rapidly as he concludes that Afghanistan will remain a festering sore as far as anyone can peer into a murky future, hardly a recipe for success at the polls in November. With a war in Afghanistan that is bound to get worse and a military theater in Iraq replete with sectarian violence, the bombing of Iran may give Obama a three-front war and a chance to retain both houses of Congress."

Obama Blames Everyone But Himself for His Failure

According to Democratic Party sources close to the Obama White House, the President and his crew of Chicago gang advisors are totally obsessed with the right-wing propaganda assaults, and read every word that comes out, and watch every snipe that appears on Fox TV. "They are so fixated on these right-wing attacks, and particularly on the Tea Party, that they are totally clueless about what is actually going on with the American people. They don't want to realize that it is their policies—the healthcare swindle, the bailout, the job losses, and the worse-than-useless financial reforms—that have turned the vast majority of Americans into Obama-haters." It has nothing to do with the so-called Tea Party or with the right wing of the Republican Party. "But you can't tell Obama or his Chicago advisors that." The source added that this is one more piece of evidence that LaRouche's psychological diagnosis of Obama as "Hitler in the bunker" is right on the mark.

Typical of the media promotion of the Obama White House obsessions, Sunday's Washington Post ran a column by Dana Milbank, promoting the Tea Party and highlighting the recently taken down Mason City, Iowa billboard, that featured pictures of Lenin, Hitler, and Obama. This hype is driving Obama and his White House inner circle deeper into the pits, the source observed. "Obama and his top aides think that Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and the Fox News crew are running the country. They are stark raving paranoid and totally misfocused." Of course, he added, the White House also reads every word written or spoken by Lyndon LaRouche, and that, also, drives them up the wall.

Argentina: British Colonialism and BP Are One and the Same

June 29, 2010 (LPAC)—Speaking June 24 before the UN's Decolonization Committee, Argentine Foreign Minister Hector Timerman slammed the British government for refusing to hold talks on the Malvinas Islands, which Britain illegally seized from Argentina in 1833. Defying numerous UN resolutions calling on both sides to engage in dialogue, the British government arrogantly argues, as Prime Minister David Cameron did three days ago, that there is nothing to discuss.

The newly-named Foreign Minister also took aim at British Petroleum (BP), charging that what it has done in the Gulf of Mexico is no different from the British government's trampling on Argentina's rights in the South Atlantic. "At a time when one of the worst ecological catastrophes has occurred in the Gulf of Mexico, as a result of the spill caused by British Petroleum's oil rig," he warned, "we shouldn't minimize or downplay the risk implied for our entire region, from an environmental standpoint, by the United Kingdom's colonialist adventure in the South Atlantic, based on the plundering of non-renewable natural resources." He expressed concern that British oil companies operating elsewhere—i.e., the Malvinas—may be cutting corners on safety standards, just as BP did in the Gulf of Mexico.

Timerman also offered his government's "full solidarity" to those Americans who have suffered from the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, while Argentina's UN Ambassador Jorge Arguello reminded the British government that the U.S. had declared its "neutrality" in the British-Argentine dispute—much to London's distress—and that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had offered to serve as a mediator between the two governments, during her visit to Buenos Aires last March.

Argentina's sovereign rights to the Malvinas are "irrenounceable," the Foreign Minister stated, appropriately referencing his country's longstanding anti-British sentiment, which dates back to the pre-Independence era of the early 19th century. In this year of Argentina's Bicentennial celebration, he pointed out, it is remarkable that "we are still debating a colonial issue...We are still debating what our heroes, our founding fathers did. It is an anachronism that there are still colonial powers in the 21st century."

Change is A-"Comin" part.1 Webcast 26 June 2010

Change is A-Comin June 26, 2010 LaRouche Webcast

 

Oil Spill: 'No One Is In Charge,' Says Rep. Gene Taylor

June 28, 2010 (LPAC)—"It's criminal what's going on out there," said Rep. Gene Taylor (D-MS), after a flight over the Mississippi coast in which oil could be seen moving into the Mississippi Sound, with no skimmers to be seen. "This doesn't have to happen," Taylor added, as reported by the Biloxi Sun Herald.

A scientist onboard the flight with Taylor, said that, with this scenario, there will be soon be oil on the beaches of the mainland. "There's oil in the Sound and there was no skimming," he said. "No coordinated effort."

"A lot of people are getting paid to say, 'Look! There's oil' and not doing anything about it," Taylor said. "There shouldn't be a drop of oil in the Sound. There are enough boats running around."

"Everybody's in charge, so no one's in charge," Taylor said. "If the President can't find anyone who can do this job, let me do it."

"I'm having a Katrina flashback," Taylor told a fellow passenger on the flight. "I haven't seen this much stupidity, wasted effort, money and wasted resources, since then." Later, he stated that Katrina wasn't preventable, but the disaster of oil reaching Mississippi beaches is preventable. Taylor had said earlier that if organized right, he believed a lot of small boats, working hard and working together, could contain the floating oil. He had submitted a detailed plan of action to BP and the Coast Guard, but he said he is concerned that the local Coast Guard commander doesn't have the authority to act without working through the Unified Command in Mobile.

Do Americans Have the Guts to Get Nero Obama Out of Office?

June 28, 2010 (LPAC)—As we head into this decisive week, which has both the end of the second quarter, and the scheduled ramming of the Fed dictatorship (Dodd-Frank) bill through the Congress, our crucial job is to disseminate the message from LaRouche's June 26 webcast, far and wide.

To the extent that it can be encapsulated, that webcast had two crucial aspects. First, LaRouche emphasized the death of the monetary system itself, and the crucial principles of physical economy which he has taken to a new level in his soon-to-be- published paper, "The Secret Economy's Outlook." These are the principles which must inform our organizing for the American system (Glass-Steagall) to replace that dead monetary system.

Secondly, as LaRouche stated repeatedly, there is no solution as long as British patsy Barack Obama remains in power in the White House. As the unemployment cutoffs merely underscore, this administration is heartless and evil. It is implementing a fascist policy. It has been clear since LaRouche pointed it out in April 2009, that Obama has a Nero complex, and it is now playing itself out. Those who couldn't see it had not read their Roman history.

It should also be clear that the removal of Obama is essential to changing the international geometry, of fascist austerity, which was adopted at the G8/G20 meetings over the weekend.

Reread LaRouche's answer to the question/comment on Obama's outright lies about the Dodd-Frank "reform" bill. It's a precise message that patriots will take to heart:

"The problem is the following, the practical problem. As long as this man is President, you will never change the direction, from that direction. It's a fact. That's why he's President. That's why he was made President. He's a British patsy, who fits the profile of the Emperor Nero. As I said last April. He is a carbon copy of the mentality of the Emperor Nero. He has always, since I made that declaration, has always behaved in a manner consistent with that—not because I predicted it, but because, that's what it was.

"Therefore, you have to get him out. We have various means of getting him out. We have the Chicago scandals, all kinds of scandals. But, and the best chance is right now—the kind of thing you're looking at today—you've got what's happened, as a by-product of this process, you had the unemployed, over the coming weeks, at least now scheduled, 2 million are cut off from their compensation checks.

"Now this is deliberate murder. And that's—these are the kinds of issues you have to deal with.

"See, the problem with the Democrats, and also the Republicans, is they will try to think of taking a position which will not hurt them in their relationship with the President, or the Presidency, in terms of things they want to deliver to their constituents. I think the shocker is, we're going to have to see what the effect is, of this cut of essentially, in the coming period of weeks—two million people are being thrown out, into destitution, as a by-product of this legislation process. Because it's going to take tough measures, and you're going to have to fry the rear ends of a lot of politicians to get this thing moving.

"And any Democratic leader who does not do that, should obviously be targetted, to say: 'You are out. We don't want you ever back again.' You have to make it very clear.

"You see, we're dealing with thing, as in the case in Texas, in the 22nd District, Democratic Party. The leadership of the Democratic Party in Texas is not all bad people. But the orders are coming from Obama by way of Chicago, and similar places, that these things will happen. And Obama is trying to run a reign of terror. And we're short of people, who are willing—in positions of power, to stand up against Obama.

"We have to understand, if we want to have a nation—and if we lose this nation, we'll lose civilization too, for a long time to come—Obama has to go. I've described exactly how he has to go. Get him out of there. To get him out of there, we have options. Don't talk about the conditions under which you get him out, get him out. Just don't shoot him. We don't want that mess. Just get him out of there. That's the issue. Are you willing to get rid of Obama? Or do you want a mustache on your lip too?"

Argentina's Economic Collapse - IMF take over.

Documentary on the events that led to the economic collapse of Argentina in 2001 which wiped out the middle class and raised the level of poverty to 57.5%. Central to the collapse was the implementation of neo-liberal policies which enabled the swindle of billions of dollars by foreign banks and corporations. Many of Argentina's assets and resources were shamefully plundered. Its financial system was even used for money laundering by Citibank, Credit Suisse, and JP Morgan. The net result was massive wealth transfers and the impoverishment of society which culminated in many deaths due to oppression and malnutrition. Official name: Memoria del Saqueo by Fernando Solanas 2003.

Argentina's Economic Collapse - Part 1 of 12  

First Tropical Storm Looms over Gulf—How Oil Spill May Intensify Hurricanes

June 26, 2010 (LPAC) —The National Hurricane Center said at 2:00 p.m. on Friday that it gives an 80% chance of the low-pressure center in the Western Caribbean, turning into a tropical storm. (It would be named Alex.) The definition of a low pressure zone is anything below 39 mile per hour winds; that or above, is a tropical storm.

In analyzing the likely effect of a hurricane on the massive oil spill, some meteorologists have pointed to the possibility of a phenomenon called explosive intensification. During hurricane season, the warm waters of the Gulf Loop Current can serve to produce a sudden decrease in the atmospheric pressure of a tropical cyclone, a phenomenon known as rapid deepening, or rapid intensification. The lower the pressure, generally the higher the winds and the more destructive the effect of a storm.

The fear is that if a significant amount of oil begins circulating in the Loop Current, the dark surface layer will help to warm the waters, contributing to rapid or even explosive intensification of any tropical cyclone passing over. The National Weather Service defines rapid deepening, or intensification, as a decrease of 42 millibars in less than 24 hours. If the cyclone drops at a rate of at least 2.5 millibars per hour for a minimum of 12 hours, it is known as explosive intensification. The fastest recorded rate of intensification was in 2005 when Hurricane Wilma dropped 53 millibars in less than 6 hours. That same year, Katrina and Rita also underwent extremely rapid intensification.

The current low-pressure center has formed between Honduras and Cuba, and is expected to be at the Yucatan Peninsula within a couple of days. It is not knowable yet, if this storm takes shape, where it might land on the U.S. Gulf coast. It is certain that storm winds and effects would drive oil-laden waters significantly inland in low-lying areas.

The Coast Guard says that a 5- to 7-day lead time is required for removal of the BP surface vessels, in case of any tropical storm. Recovery, burn-off skimming, and other operations would typically cease for 10 days during a storm episode.