This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Conservatives and Liberals Agree: End the Malignant, Symbiotic Relationship Between Big Government and Big Corporations
While many pretend that liberals and conservatives are too far apart to work together, there are actually many issues on which everyone can agree.
For example, both liberals and conservatives hate the malignant, symbiotic relationship between big government and big corporations:
Conservatives tend to view big government with suspicion, and think that government should be held accountable and reined in.
Liberals tend to view big corporations with suspicion, and think that they should be held accountable and reined in.
***
Conservatives hate big unfettered government and liberals hate big unchecked corporations, so both hate legislation which encourages the federal government to reward big corporations at the expense of small businesses.
Most Americans – whether they are conservative or liberal – are disgusted that virtually all of the politicians are bought and paid for. No wonder people of all stripes have lost all trust in our government.
And everyone hates government-enabled fraud. The big banks, of course, committed massive fraud. But the auditors, rating agencies and regulators also all committed fraud, which helped blow the bubble and sowed the seeds of the inevitable crash.
Both liberals and conservatives are angry that the feds are propping up the giant banks – while letting small banks fail by the hundreds – even though that is horrible for the economy and Main Street.
The Dodd-Frank financial legislation wasn’t a compromise where things landed somewhere in the middle between liberal and conservatives ideas. Instead, it enshrines big government propping up the big banks … more or less permanently.
Many liberals and conservatives look at the government’s approach to the financial crisis as socialism for the rich and free market capitalism for the little guy. No wonder both liberals and conservatives hate it.
And it’s not just the big banks. Americans are angry that the federal government under both Bush and Obama have handed giant defense contractors like Blackwater and Halliburton no-bid contracts. [And Solyndra and other solar companies]. They are mad that – instead of cracking down on BP – the government has acted like BP’s p.r. spokesman-in-chief and sugar daddy.
They are peeved that companies like Monsanto are able to sell genetically modified foods without any disclosure, and that small farmers are getting sued when Monsanto crops drift onto their fields.
They are mad that Obama promised “change” – i.e. standing up to Wall Street and the other powers-that-be – but is just delivering more of the same.
They are furious that there is no separation between government and a handful of favored giant corporations. [Indeed, Ben Bernanke has handed out more presents than Santa Claus to McDonald's Harley-Davidson, hedge funds and others.] In other words, Americans are angry that we’ve gone from capitalism to oligarchy.
As I noted Sunday:
The corrupt, giant banks would never have gotten so big and powerful on their own. In a free market, the leaner banks with sounder business models would be growing, while the giants who made reckless speculative gambles would have gone bust. See this, this and this.
It is the Federal Reserve, Treasury and Congress who have repeatedly bailed out the big banks, ensured they make money at taxpayer expense, exempted them from standard accounting practices and the criminal and fraud laws which govern the little guy, encouraged insane amounts of leverage, and enabled the too big to fail banks – through “moral hazard” – to become even more reckless.
Indeed, the government made them big in the first place. As I noted in 2009:
As MIT economics professor and former IMF chief economist Simon Johnson points out today, the official White House position is that:
(1) The government created the mega-giants, and they are not the product of free market competition
***
(3) Giant banks are good for the economy
And given that the 12 Federal Reserve banks are private – see this, this, this and this- the giant banks have a huge amount of influence on what the Fed does. Indeed, the money-center banks in New York control the New York Fed, the most powerful Fed bank. Indeed, Jamie Dimon – the head of JP Morgan Chase – is a Director of the New York Fed.
Any attempt by the left to say that the free market is all bad and the government is all good is naive and counter-productive.
And any attempt by the right to say that we should leave the giant banks alone because that’s the free market are wrong.
The [corrupt, captured government "regulators"] and the giant banks are part of a single malignant, symbiotic relationship.
Indeed, while most Americans are in favor of free market capitalism, we don’t have capitalism at the moment. Instead, we have socialism, fascism or crony capitalism, where the government allows a handful of companies to succeed by propping them up, covering up their fraud and handing them guaranteed profts … but allows everyone else to struggle.
»
- advertisements -
That's like, your oppinion, man. But its not even your oppinion so therefore you, like, stole it from somebody else.
Absolutely wrong.
If a mutation created by a corporation(or anyone else) appears on my property, the only question is how much they owe me for spreading their infected product on to my land.
No.
Spreading has little to do with it.
It is shown down the page.
Either it is their infected product and as such, you have to answer why it is on your property. Or it is no longer their infect product or yours.
See the river example below. Done on purpose.
Absolutely wrong. Why should the burden be on the person who's land was infected to prove that the infection was caused by someone else?
If one thinks that their property has been unlawfully stolen, the burden is on them to prove it.
By your brilliant logic:
The person who lost control of their own property has a claim on innnocent bystanders who happened to have it blow onto them.
and a person could stand at a propertly line, through pounds of gold dust into the air in a windstorm, and bill the owner of the adjacent lot.
You've got your brain fixed around this little notion that ownership of property creates insurmountable imaginary problems, and it makes you look like an ideologue in an ideology of one.
Made me laugh.
Not my logic. By logics. It is very different.
The first example is too confused to mean.
The second example: billed for what? Please explain.
Imaginary problems? No. Property is a zero sum game and this comes with consequences.
US citizens are used to shoving the bad consequences of their actions onto others. This does not mean that those consequences do not exist.
What individual or group of indiviuals doesn't attempt externalization? Of course it is wrong but the leaders of you country also lie to you to attempt a continuation of it. Property may be a zero sum game but you are being disingenerous ignoring increases or declines in the income streams they produce. So there is no merits for even a debate with you where any viewer can gain knlowedge.
And I wouldn't be so pleased with how Americans will handle our problems. It will depend on how leadership of post 2013 deals with geopolitics. Glowing head and eating bugs for a year woudn't be something to celebrate and if you think this will be contained to just our shores, your delusional.
Nonetheless, as an American I depart for Europe by beginning of the year. Why? Because I know where the epicenter of where the largest casualties will occur and in what general timeframes.
Defenders of liberty are what we are as a people, even if some of us have to pay the price for allowing ourselves an awful debt nap induced delusion for twenty years.
Do I hear you speaking of risking your life for any of us, even globally? Of course not. I already told you, your shit stinks too. Runny or solid form is really all you are for or against. I am tired of playing in shit. We are done playing over here. You must not have gotten the memo.
So funny. When pointed out on what they consider flaws, US citizens love to kick in row z.
What people do not attempt externalization? Quite a lot actually. For example, some people might act on the ground they were them.
Please provide any example of the good King George the third trying to externalize his responsibility when the colonists attacked him.
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Defenders of liberty are what we are as a people, even if some of us have to pay the price for allowing ourselves an awful debt nap induced delusion for twenty years.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Defenders of liberty are what US citizens are? If so, please explain how the US started as a slaver nation.
US citizens have never defended freedom. They have furthered tyranny, whishing to stay on the good side of tyranny forever.
US citizens do not disagree with tyranny. They disagree with being tyranized.
King George hired Prussians. There.
The logic you were trying to portay is that enceoachment on property must be proven in a court of law to exist. Great. Let me know how I can get politically connected with the banking system to become a Supreme Court judge. Nope, I wish to be an honest lad and not externalize. So I try and vote when my politician is bribed. But to you all Americans externalize.
That is one of hundreds of examples. You are not worth my time anymore, even to shred your supposed 'logic'. And if Tyler doesn't cut the subtle recent Xenophobic bullshit, I will shred this entire service. Either be willing to die FOR your fellow man in battle or fall making excuses as to why you wouldn't do THAT are your real choices now.
You choose anything else in this kubaki play of East/West and you will become fodder for the titans.
http://michael-hudson.com/2011/10/occupy-wall-st-systemic-change-please/
Occupy Wall St – Systemic Change Please
when the exhibitionist finds himself dissatisfied
in the nudist colony, then what? i ask.
.
Amazon tribe has no language for time
http://www.australiangeographic.com.au/journal/amazon-tribe-has-no-langu...
.
""We've created these metaphors and they have become the way we think," he adds. "The Amondawa don't talk like this and don't think like this, unless they learn another language. For these fortunate people time isn't money; they aren't racing against the clock to complete anything, and nobody is discussing next week or next year; they don't even have words for 'week', 'month' or 'year'. You could say they enjoy a certain freedom."
"
Well in another proud moment of bi-partisanship - the Congress of the United States passed not 1, not 2 but 3 free trade treaties in a matter of hours. They will now advance to our "I feel your pain" President who will sign them. The Chamber of Commerce is positively gleeful.
When all of these folks agree on something with near unanimity - there is only one inescapable conclusion: The little people are going to be totally f--ked and the corporate overlords are being fed.
But let's all continue to play the R's vs. the D's game.
It would be ugly if something like Ron Paul with Dennis Kucinich as running mate spoils the game, correct ?
:-P
Is there already a party of RP deniers ?
Anyone think these 1%-ers will give up their free fiat money, monopolies and political domination voluntarily? No way in hell will even a remotely honest group of politicians get elected and live to tell about it. Our only hope is passive resistance on a truly massive scale. Meaning no voting, no spending, strikes, etc......deflation kills nearly everyone's wealth, even the rich who tend to be extremely leveraged. Inflation benefits the 1%-ers. That's why we have had non-stop inflation for decades.
Lovely article, so nice to see it. Left vs. right is what divides us and makes us easier to conquer. We must get over it if we want a better world.
GW, Imust commend you on a great piece of writing...I couldnt agree with you more. Maybe the talking heads on MSNBC and FOX can find some common ground...ya think?!
the more i read blogs the more i realize the idea of 'liberal' and 'conservative' is just baiting smart people to blame each other
.
and really, for the most part they only care about the community anyways
.
its the corporations and politicians vying for 'donations' to their 'causes' that starts all the 'wars'
Derp. Thats exactly what's in the Handbook for Human tax Farming
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k67_imEHTPE
Capitalism is an anachronism. An outdate and failed idea that people have attached themselves to with the loyal gusto generally reserved for hometown football teams. Communism is no different. Both ideas need to go into the trash because neither properly account for scarcity or limits to growth, and neither properly consider externalities such as the environment.
Sorry, no one can make believe a corporation has the right to dump toxins into a river or the air just so they can make a buck. Stealing from the commons and leaving only a cesspool in your wake to make a buck is a farce that has to be stopped or it will kill us all.
Sorry, no one can make believe a corporation has the right to dump toxins into a river or the air just so they can make a buck.
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
But property rights are a zero sum game. Some US citizens would like to make people believe that property rights are misused by corporations in terms of pollution.
Corporations in the large number of case apply perfectly property rights.
Here's an example:
a river. By property rights, the owner of the river split the river in various lots.
He keeps the upper lot, where all the water flows from and sells the rest.
The lots are numbered from 1 (upper lot) to bottom lot.
Now, property is a zero sum game. So two main directions:
-either the wather is owned by the same person
-water is owned by each lot owner as water flows through their lot, at the exclusion of every other lot owner.
Lets assess case two.
The upper lot owner builds a dam in his lot. Nothing wrong in that.
Every year, the dam water is released, causing flood all along the way downwards, on other people's lot.
Causality wants that this is an intended consequence. The dam release causes the floods.
But this is the unmediated approach. One forgets to apply property rights.
Who owns the water that is flooding each lot?
The answer: each lot owner as property is a zero sum game.
As long as water is on lot 1, the water is owned by owner one.
But as soon water leaves and goes to lot 2, the water is owned by the owner 2 and so on.
It makes that each lot (but number one) is devastated by the owner's own property.
The owner one has no responsibility in the doing as it is not his property that damages the other lots.
So here, a system of insurance has to be implemented so that people can insure against risks caused by their own property.
Pollution is the same.
Every subsequent lot owner to owner one inherits polluted water. As it is their own property, it is to them to depollute it.
Or if owner one owns the water, owner one is entitled to charge more to depollute the water.
"a river. By property rights, the owner of the river split the river in various lots."
As far as I know, no one person can own a river. All rivers, streams, etc. are publicly owned. That means even if a river is on a property owned by an individual, I can still fish in that river.
It pisses my lakeside neighbours off to no end that I can legally walk through all lakefront properties, as the access to river/lake law applies to the bankside as well.
But carry on your rant, if it makes you feel important in a small, peevish, kind of way...
This problem (I remember seeing it in high school) is beyond solution, just like everything else, so we must turn our lives over to benevolent masters, who eventually evolve into sadistic control freaks. Now our protectors hire child molestors to grope our kids at airports while they squeeze our genitalia to be sure it's real (happened to Ron Paul). You can't have a government with significant control over property rights without an army of sick goons bringing up the rear, at least not yet, ever in history.
Tell you what we can do to resolve this unresolvable problem. Let's dump all of the control freaks; making sure that people know the CFs are responsible for all of the suffering that is coming down. Then people will realize that THEY have to solve the world's problems, one small space at a time, and it will happen. Or not. But the alternative is tyranny.
We can accomplish this by returning to a system that is proven to work, localism, the Constitution. We didn't have a civil war in this country because we had too much freedom of action, we had one because in various ways and places people sought control over others through political and economic means, means at odds with free markets. Fascistic capitalism produces wars and social degradation.I don't think there is a single example of that happening to a free market society.
Localism? But US citizens refused localism. They expanded.
More fabled past. Slavery in the US was not government led by group led. US citizens patrolled slave huts during the war of Independence instead of fighting the war.
Nothing has been lost, the US has not changed one bit. The US is working as it used to work.
The US citizen nature is eternal.
Not really sure how to answer that. America is an amalgamation of people from all over the world. Are you suggesting that living in America confers a new nature on people? What are your thoughts about Islam? The US absorbed about 10% of the people kidnapped from Africa during the slave trade - of those who went to the 'new world'. Half of the victims were taken to the arab world, where most of the males were castrated. Did that echo through the ages as well, right into their genes?
The America supported by the typical American is 'relatively benevolent' in their eyes. Many are tapped only into a stream of information that broadcasts that idea constantly. The reality is different, and if everyone knew the truth, there would be revolution. I've met few who know even a part of it and are not outraged. Many feel helpless, many try to do something. Most of the rest, those still in the dark, are either that portion of humanity that cares about nothing aside from themselves, or they grew up in a world where government wasn't the tyranny it's become, and don't yet understand how serious things are. They still trust, unfortunately. That's America. A lot of us are ignorant but we're generally not rotten.
Waooooo, more non sequitur.
What has Islam to do with US citizenism?
As any other thing, when something benefit to people, it is benevolent to them.
Once again, another statement of the US version of general facts: once all the counter examples are removed, you are left with only true examples.
So yes, once all the cases of people for whom the US has been malevolent are removed, you are only left with cases of people for whom the US has been benevolent.
Great findings. Never noticed before 1776.
A new nature? No. But the US has been practising human selection on a large scale. So yes, from the diversity of human nature to the specifity of US citizen nature.
The free market is the natural evolution of things, absent coercion. If you want to have some sensible regulations RE the environment, that is perfectly sane and consistent with other necessary rules to protect property rights. If you want to go farther than that, you're agitating against human nature and asking for a mess.
The goal should be a system where people can feel free to reach their maximum potential, whatever that is, constrained by common sense rules upon which most people can agree. Most externalities are local, we don't need a monolithic state to derive code for every aspect of human existence, but that is what we have. It stifles real solutions by crushing any alternatives, and desires conformity and uniformity. If 'no one can believe' in a right to flagrantly pollute, why does DC have to dictate? Let us work it out, since we all agree.
RE limits to growth, that entire argument is meant as a means to control - the ultimate system of control, short of outright enslavement. Growth is what we do. If we hit limits, we may have a crash, but are those limits going to be hit over a weekend? The only forces that can derail societies overnight are human inventions: financial panics, wars, and the like. If a free market system is unable to meet certain demands, things will change. If that means people starve, that's life. But I don't see mass starvation much in history - absent government causation. In any event, the alternative to growing freely is a police state. Screw that, let's grow. That's what will eventually get us to spread ourselves elsewhere in the solar system, the next step.
Limits to growth are either hit or imposed. The latter means asshat bureaucrats ruling everything, and we will STILL hit the limits. Let's do it free and without leeches and looters holding us down.
The term "natural evolution" applies to the environment, but to apply it to a human concept such as "the free market" is disengenous at best. We don't have to hit the limits as hard if certain sectors weren't quite so greedy. It's simply rape and pilage when it comes to the real natual environment.
It is utterly stupid. Typical to US citizens who do not foot the bill of the bad consequences of their actions. Here is the limit: running short of non US citizens to absorb the bad consequences.
Property is a zero sum game. Pollution as such can not be dissociated from its vectors.
You cant own the pollution at the exclusion of the vector.
You either own both and in this case, it is natural you charge more to get the vector cleaned from pollution.
Or you dont own them and in this case, each person has to pay to clean their own share of property.
Causality is mediated by property rights in a property rights system. Had to remind that little fact.
But it is a US world order. Propaganda has to be cheap. And just as US citizens advocate for more debt to solve debt, they also advocate for more application of property rights to cure the ailments of property rights.
The system we have now is rife with coercion. It's not a free market, it's an attempt to stifle the free market in almost every meaningful regard. That is why it will fail, epically, alongside the general notion that vectors mean the government must control everything. We tried that, it's a total failure, and now it's on the cusp of genocide: mass starvation caused by interference in markets.
What allows the US to abuse the rest of the world? The free market? No, again, interference in the free market, the monetary system.
Your thinking seems to invariably lead to putting someone who thinks like you in charge, so that nothing goes wrong. I say let people be largely free to do as they will, failures will teach, successful things will be emulated. And without the crutch of government to lean on, we will start to think more for ourselves, and more about the future - no suckling crony state to rely on if we screw things up. A million people can find a solution to a problem without a concerted effort. A thousand experts working on it will usually make it worse. The desire for some to exert control with regard to 'acceptable growth' etc. is well established. This is the 2nd to the last great frontier for the control freaks, the final one being our minds.
I know I wont get an answer because US citizens are duplicitous. But arent you people never grow tired of posting cheap propaganda?
How should in a free market coercion not be marketed?
In a free market, if someone is able to coerce, has coercion capacity, how does it come that this person shall not be free to market his capacities and look and try to meet a demand for the capability?
The current market is a free market. US citizens love to add new conditions when it appears that the current state of society they wanted to achieve is achieved and has not (not suprisingly) delivered on its promises.
The US world order is based on a free market.
Market your force, genius. If it can be applied respectfully to others' lives and property, you're in business. In any event, free markets don't create the fact that you have force to sell, that's an existential reality. It's inherent in your being as a fully functioning person (stretch?). You want to change both human nature and biology? Dream big.
Projection is tough thing for US citizens. Who wishes for change?
I am not the one who removes coercion from the biz.
No, if force is applied in a way that it is profitable then you are in business.
And extorting the weak works. So does farming the poor.
Yes, they do work, but only where there is no respect for property. Property rights are the only firm foundation for any person's existence. And you're going to employ your own force to protect your own property - is that wrong too? Again, your problem seems to be not with markets or property, but with the existence of force.
And humans want to own things, if only a place to lay down. Your odd little universe is one where people supplicate to control freaks to secure the basic necessities of life. That's the alternative distribution method for necessities. You have one right in that system - the right to beg.
Say something responsive and logical or piss off. If you do, I'll reply. If you don't I'm ignoring repetitive BS. And I'm going to bed now, I'll watch for more drivel tomorrow. Fuck it, never mind. You've done little but repeat yourself.
More US citizenish gibberish.
What private property? The one US citizens stole from the Indians. If property rights are the only firm foundation for any person's existence, how do you explain the US?
US citizens have this capacity of denial. It is impressive.
Nobody needs to refer to some others, what they have done, it is irrelevant. All what people need to is to look at the US and see what has been done.
AnAnonymous said "...US Citizens stole from Indians..." I say, "So what?"
This behavior was no different than what the various indian nations were doing to each other before US Citizens arrived on the scene. The Crow, Cree, Sioux, Apache, Piegan, Shoshoni, Blood, Blackfoot, Flathead, and many, many other tribes were warring and raiding each other long before US Citizens entered the scene. Each tribe did what they did to secure precious resources/property from others.
I've never understood the bleeding heart sympathy for the American Indian. Where is all the love for the Jews -- perhaps the most persecuted people on earth. Or what about reparations for the Ukrainians -- who have had their lands stolen by the Greeks (Alexander) and the Hungarians (Attila the Hun) and Chinese (Ghengis Kahn) and Italians (Romans), and Iranians (Persian Empire), and the Germans (Hitler) and the Russians (Stalin).
Our world is governed by the aggressive use of force. Always has been. Always will be; until the second coming.
AnAnonymous said "...US Citizens stole from Indians..." I say, "So what?"
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
So what? Simple. Too simple by the way as US citizens propaganda can not hide this little fact. Too obvious.
Stealing is no respect of private property right.
Any claim that the US was built on the respect of property right is by thus voided.
And second, what has the US brought? What is the added value? US citizens are fond of claiming they are a unique experiment, something new.
If they have been behaving just as the others, where is the novelty?
The one overwhelming theme of your posts is the hartred for all things American. You dininish your own arguments by spewing your bias in every other sentence, and I believe you had some solid points.
There is not one square inch of land on the earth that can rightfully be claimed by a country or people as their original property. Humans as well as animials since time began have fought for territory. It is an undeniable fact and an unfortunate legacy that cannot be changed. Trying to use that as an arguement clouds reality.
In our somewhat evolved society, individual property laws are valid and do become the foundation for civilization. Defending your property is a natural behavior. Some go beyond that concept and that's where problems begin.
Jabbering imbecile.
Not having property rights is...
A complete stranger walking into your home, opening your fridge and demanding you re-stock it to his liking. You have no right to property so you can't even demand he leave...legally.
Idiot.
That particular farce is rightfully named as bad.
Even worse in my view is an extremist view such as let's say....Uh, well maybe, Uh, Carbon dioxide is a harmful toxin that must be regulated by a (surely) benevolent government?
FAIL.
If you can't spot that scam, it's time to start over at square one.
let me play devil's advocate, or the devil himself!, for
one second here, liberals and conservatives can agree on
something else. their power is jointly based on it, their privilege
and fortunes derived from it, together they agree it is systemically
essential and inviolable. what is it? usury. exploitation,
systemic, of labor and the legal tender itself. there the essential
problem and solution. the distinction between conservative and liberal
today is just about the distribution of the excesses of usury. the spoils
of fraud, systemic.
so?
of course i am ignoring the popular memes typically used to
distinguish the two camps of the predominant power elite, the
republicrats.
........
think consensus, committee, government bodies, oceans and planets.
even complex life forms ........
.
” bodies without souls will,
with their judgments,
give us rules
teaching us
how to die well. ”
.
leonardo da vinci
Let me try to change the way you think about one thing.
Labels are important, we classify everything in known reality. Neither conservatives nor liberals have gotten what they want. It's the democrats and republicans who get what they want, the republicrats, as you say.You should not confuse the three groups and shouldn't demonize liberals and conservatives, they are not the republicrats. The republicans and democrats who buck and expose the system are the genuine conservatives and liberals in congress, and there are precious few of them. Mutual respect for principled defense of 'truth', even when we don't agree, is a powerful unifying force; it's a large part of what will bring the left and right together, if that ever happens. Ideally the two groups can eventually agree to help defend one another from outside aggressors, and otherwise leave each other alone to seek their own way. That's the only way most people will be able to live in communities which are as closes as possible to their ideal, whatever that is.
Oh yes, we can see from the growth of the federal debt, the MIC and the FIRE complex over the last few decades just how much both liberals and conservatives hate the malignant, symbiotic relationship between big government and big corporations. Step off of (Lord) Palmerston's Plantation, dude. The left wing and right wing belong to the same bird of prey.
Conservatives haven't been in charge in this country since - Grover Cleveland? Maybe Coolidge - though I don't think he tried to end the Fed. Certainly not lately. Big difference between GOP apparatchiks and conservatives. Limbaugh, Levin etc. aren't conservative - they both support the deconstructive forces of banker occupation and endless shadowy war.
http://moseyalong.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=430
these walmartians are ready to do a 20 mile hike with a 40 pound pack and 200 rounds of ammo and a mbr.......doncha know..........
amerika is destroyed...........
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=V1T4Ac9nHeY
japanese suicide mission .......2011 version............working at fukushima...... God help us...
Last night they were talking about the japanese tuna industry and I guess that cnbc show was made before march 2011. good grief. japanese love their seafood and there they are dumping radioactive waste into the ocean. what are they thinking?
giri
and bless them all.
- Ned
What ever happened to that OWS movement. Haven't heard about it for days. Are we still interested in that?
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article29156.htm
.
Map: Occupy Wall Street Spreads Worldwide, Arrests on the Rise
—By the Mother Jones news team
mojo ....
http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/10/occupy-wall-street-protest-map
"what's this 'we', White Man?"
http://hotterthanapileofcurry.wordpress.com/2011/10/12/the-bullshit-iran...
alleged plot by iranians to kill saudi ambassador.........i figured this smelled. why would the iranians do this? it made no sense. but who else would benefit by this action? who else. the yids....mossad tries to hire mexicans to kill saudi amabassador and then try and make it look like iranians did it.........typical bullshit from these people...