ElGranFrijol

by Richard Henley Davis
http://www.economicvoice.com

Decorated war hero, Marine Sergeant Shamar Thomas voiced his objection to the New York Police Department’s treatment of Occupy Wall Street protesters.

Sergent Thomas’s impassioned speech to the officers was caught on video by various protesters who were being moved on by police officers who were allegedly threatening protesters if they did not move along.

Shamar pointed out to the mob of police officers who were intimidating the protesters that there was “No honour” in their actions and said “It takes a coward to harm an unarmed civilian” he went on to say “This is not a war zone, these are unarmed people, it does not make you tough to hurt these people.“

“If you want to go fight, go to Iraq and Afghanistan, Leave these people alone, they are US citizens, why are you doing this to our people?” said Seargent Thomas who then asked where in their (The NYPD officers present) contract does it justify hurting US citizens.

“I’ve been to Iraq 14 months for my people and you come here to hurt them, they don’t have guns, it doesn’t make any sense, how do you sleep at night? there is no honour in this, your here to protect them, protect us.“

“You’re all walking around in riot gear like this is a war, these people don’t have guns.”

Sergent Shamar Thomas is now an American hero not just for his service to his country but for his service to his country in defending civilians at home.

He may not be the last American soldier to find the oppression of the American government distasteful seeing as many soldiers have watched their friends and family pay the ultimate sacrifice for their country only to come home to find their country is no better than the one they have been away fighting against.

Whatever your feelings about America’s invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, there are brave young men and women out there fighting for what they were told was freedom, justice and the American way……….what happens if they come home and feel the same way as Sergeant Thomas?

Robert Reich

The president’s jobs bill doesn’t have a chance in Congress — and the occupiers on Wall Street and elsewhere can’t become a national movement for a more equitable society — unless more Americans know the truth about the economy.

Here’s a short (2 minute 30 second) effort to rebut the seven biggest whoppers now being told by those who want to take America backwards. The major points:

1. Tax cuts for the rich trickle down to everyone else. Baloney. Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush both sliced taxes on the rich and what happened? Most Americans’ wages (measured by the real median wage) began flattening under Reagan and has dropped since George W. Bush. Trickle-down economics is a cruel joke.

2. Higher taxes on the rich would hurt the economy and slow job growth. False. From the end of World War II until 1981, the richest Americans faced a top marginal tax rate of 70 percent or above. Under Dwight Eisenhower it was 91 percent. Even after all deductions and credits, the top taxes on the very rich were far higher than they’ve been since. Yet the economy grew faster during those years than it has since. (Don’t believe small businesses would be hurt by a higher marginal tax; fewer than 2 percent of small business owners are in the highest tax bracket.)

3. Shrinking government generates more jobs. Wrong again. It means fewer government workers — everyone from teachers, fire fighters, police officers, and social workers at the state and local levels to safety inspectors and military personnel at the federal. And fewer government contractors, who would employ fewer private-sector workers. According to Moody’s economist Mark Zandi (a campaign advisor to John McCain), the $61 billion in spending cuts proposed by the House GOP will cost the economy 700,000 jobs this year and next.

4. Cutting the budget deficit now is more important than boosting the economy. Untrue. With so many Americans out of work, budget cuts now will shrink the economy. They’ll increase unemployment and reduce tax revenues. That will worsen the ratio of the debt to the total economy. The first priority must be getting jobs and growth back by boosting the economy. Only then, when jobs and growth are returning vigorously, should we turn to cutting the deficit.

5. Medicare and Medicaid are the major drivers of budget deficits. Wrong. Medicare and Medicaid spending is rising quickly, to be sure. But that’s because the nation’s health-care costs are rising so fast. One of the best ways of slowing these costs is to use Medicare and Medicaid’s bargaining power over drug companies and hospitals to reduce costs, and to move from a fee-for-service system to a fee-for-healthy outcomes system. And since Medicare has far lower administrative costs than private health insurers, we should make Medicare available to everyone.

6. Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. Don’t believe it. Social Security is solvent for the next 26 years. It could be solvent for the next century if we raised the ceiling on income subject to the Social Security payroll tax. That ceiling is now $106,800.

7. It’s unfair that lower-income Americans don’t pay income tax. Wrong. There’s nothing unfair about it. Lower-income Americans pay out a larger share of their paychecks in payroll taxes, sales taxes, user fees, and tolls than everyone else.

Demagogues through history have known that big lies, repeated often enough, start being believed — unless they’re rebutted. These seven economic whoppers are just plain wrong. Make sure you know the truth — and spread it on.

New York Observer Exclusive Occupy Wall Street Unaired Fox Footage

Occupy Wall Street What the corporate media do not want you to see!

By Sarah Anderson, Chuck Collins, Scott Klinger, Sam Pizzigati
ips-dc.org

Guns don’t kill people, the old saw goes. People do.

By the same token, corporations don’t dodge taxes. People do. The people who run corporations. And these people — America’s CEOs — are reaping awesomely lavish rewards for the tax dodging they have their corporations do.

In fact, corporate tax dodging has gone so out of control that 25 major U.S. corporations last year paid their chief executives more than they paid Uncle Sam in federal income taxes.

Click here to read more.. »

WASHINGTON — Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) voted against beginning debate on a measure that would have the Senate declare the rich should share the pain of debt reduction Thursday, a day after arguing that it’s the poor and middle class who need to do more.

“I hear how they’re so caring for the poor and so forth,” Hatch said in remarks on the Senate floor Wednesday, in reference to Democrats. “The poor need jobs! And they also need to share some of the responsibility.”

Hatch’s comments were aimed at a motion that passed 74 to 22 to start debating a non-binding resolution that says millionaires and billionaires should play a more meaningful role in reducing the nation’s debt.

Just one Democrat, Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), voted against having the debate. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), who had previously called the resolution “rather pathetic,” nevertheless voted to move ahead on it.

But it was Hatch whose remarks Wednesday raised the idea that the wealthy are already doing too much, even as the nation’s effective tax rates are at modern lows since the Bush administration slashed rates in 2001 and 2003. In his view, it seems, the middle class and poor should be picking up the slack.

“The top 1 percent of the so-called wealthy pay 38 percent of all income tax. The top 10 percent are paying 70 percent of all income tax,” Hatch said. “The top 50 percent pay somewhere near 98 percent of all income taxes. 51 percent don’t pay anything,” Hatch said, suggesting the payroll taxes that the poor and middle classes pay towards Social Security yields them an especially generous benefit.

“Democrats say they [the 51 percent] pay payroll taxes. Well, everybody does that because that’s Social Security. They pay about one-third of what they’re going to take out over the years in social security,” Hatch railed. “Obamacare — a family of four earning over $80,000 a year — gets subsidies. Think about that. That’s what we call the poor?”
Story continues below

Hatch hedged that the the poorest of the poor shouldn’t have to pay taxes. But he was clear that people who qualify for subsidies because they can’t afford things like health care should dig deeper.

“Now, we don’t want the really poor people who are in poverty to have to pay income taxes,” he said. “But 51% of all households. And that’s going up, by the way, because of our friend down in the White House and his allies.”

By MG Siegler
Techcrunch.com

Now that the WWDC keynote is over and I’ve had a little bit of time to reflect, I’ve been thinking about what excited me the most from today’s announcements. The list is long, no doubt. But I think I’m going to have to go with something that surprised me – while at the same time making me look smarter than perhaps I really am. (Again, just perhaps.) iMessages.

As one of the core new features highlighted today in iOS 5, iMessages has one purpose: to kill SMS. That is, traditional carrier-controlled text messages. iMessages will do this by replacing SMS with a service that Apple is in control of across all of their iOS devices. And here’s the real death blow: iMessages will be completely free.

Click here to read more.. »

By Ben Smith, Maggie Haberman
Politico.com

Rep. Michele Bachmann’s prospective 2012 campaign appears increasingly set on a collision course with former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin.

The coming confrontation is being driven by a belief in Bachmann’s camp that the same grassroots, conservative primary voters and caucus-goers may have to choose between the two women—and that they will choose Bachmann if she presents herself as a more seasoned, reliable, and serious conservative than her high-profile rival. The apparent effort to draw distinctions broke into the open Tuesday when her new top strategist, Ed Rollins, dismissed Palin as “not serious” in a radio interview.

He suggested in an interview with POLITICO that Bachmann would profit from the contrast.

Bachmann will “be so much more substantive,” Rollins said. “People are going to say, ‘I gotta make a choice and go with the intelligent woman who’s every bit as attractive.'”

“I’m not afraid of Palin,” he said, adding the strategy would have been the same for Mike Huckabee.

Click here to read more.. »

By Guest Blogger
Wired.com

Texting removes the vocal cues we once used to overanalyze if someone liked us. Now we have to look at 140 to 160 characters — and with less raw data to work with, our overanalyzing hits a whole different level of insanity. One key aspect of that insanity is reading way too much into every nuance of every text message, especially punctuation. So … here are the clues his/her punctuation choices are sending (and also the clues you’re sending right back).

1. Period.

Meaning: You don’t want to keep going back and forth all night.

In texting, you don’t have to end a sentence with any punctuation. It’s totally acceptable to just let it dangle. So using a period gives a certain air of finality to a statement. Compare:

I’m heading out to the party now.

I’m heading out to the party now

In the first one, the meaning is clear: we’ve had our back-and-forth over text, but I have plans, and they do not include continuing this conversation — period. In the second one, without the period, it feels much more open-ended — I’m heading out to the party now but who knows what I’m doing later, and you just might be part of it. Periods end things. Leaving one out keeps things open.

2. Exclamation Point!

Meaning: Something between playful and desperate, depending on usage.

The exclamation point is the most valuable punctuation mark you have in your arsenal, but it’s also the most dangerous. When used properly, a single exclamation point can set a light tone, convey excitement, and even demonstrate interest. Compare:

Sounds good. Not sure if we’re going but I might see you at the party. If you leave, let me know

Sounds good. Not sure if we’re going but I might see you at the party. If you leave, let me know!

The person in the second example seems far, far more interested in getting together … and did it without changing a word.

Click here to read more.. »

By Ed Pilkington
Guardian.co.uk

The underground world of computer hackers has been so thoroughly infiltrated in the US by the FBI and secret service that it is now riddled with paranoia and mistrust, with an estimated one in four hackers secretly informing on their peers, a Guardian investigation has established.

Cyber policing units have had such success in forcing online criminals to co-operate with their investigations through the threat of long prison sentences that they have managed to create an army of informants deep inside the hacking community.

In some cases, popular illegal forums used by cyber criminals as marketplaces for stolen identities and credit card numbers have been run by hacker turncoats acting as FBI moles. In others, undercover FBI agents posing as “carders” – hackers specialising in ID theft – have themselves taken over the management of crime forums, using the intelligence gathered to put dozens of people behind bars.

So ubiquitous has the FBI informant network become that Eric Corley, who publishes the hacker quarterly, 2600, has estimated that 25% of hackers in the US may have been recruited by the federal authorities to be their eyes and ears. “Owing to the harsh penalties involved and the relative inexperience with the law that many hackers have, they are rather susceptible to intimidation,” Corley told the Guardian.

“It makes for very tense relationships,” said John Young, who runs Cryptome, a website depository for secret documents along the lines of WikiLeaks. “There are dozens and dozens of hackers who have been shopped by people they thought they trusted.”

Click here to read more.. »

By Bianco Bosker
Huffingtonpost.com

Apple has revamped the software that powers its iPhone, iPad and iPod touch to include, for the first time ever, a major integration with a social network — but not the one you might think.

For the social media features in the new version of its iOS operating system, Apple, the world’s most valuable technology company, did not partner with Facebook, the world’s largest social networking site.

Instead, the Cupertino company opted to team up with Twitter, a micro-blogging service that has around half as many members as Facebook and remains far from attaining its mainstream status.

Twitter will be built in to iOS 5 and integrated across multiple Apple applications. By signing into Twitter just once, users will be able to instantly send tweets containing photos, videos, links and more.

Experts suggest the Facebook snub stemmed from Apple’s desire to maintain control over the user experience and preserve its direct relationship with its customers, aims that clashed with Facebook’s own ambitions.

Click here to read more.. »