Tuesday, September 10, 2024
Home Blog Page 353

Spain now faces a systemic, societal and sovereign collapse

by zerohedge.com

Marvin J. Ramírez

Spain’s financial system is at truly apocalyptic levels. If you’ve been reading me for some time, you know that Spain has already experienced a bank run equal to 18 percent of total deposits this year alone (another story the mainstream media is avoiding). However, what you likely don’t know is that an on annualized basis, Spain has experienced portfolio and investment outflows greater than 50 percent of its gdp.

To give this number some context, Indonesia only saw outflows equal to 23 percent of its GDP during the Asian Financial Crisis. Spain is experiencing more than DOUBLE this.

I’ve long averred that Spain will be the straw to break the EU’s back. By the look of things this is not far off. The country’s regional bailout fund has only less than €1 billion in funding left. As the below chart shows, this will barely make a dent in the regions’ debt problems:

Indeed, things are far far worse than is commonly know. Valencia for instance owes its pharmacies over €500 billion. In some areas there is no longer insulin. In the region of Andalusia some government workers haven’t been paid in eight months and are working for free while begging for food.

And Catalonia is pushing to secede from Spain entirely. Indeed, its pro-secessionist leader, President Artur Mas, just won the most recent election. And over 1.5 million of Catalonia’s 7.5 million inhabitants turned out for an independence rally in September.

Again, Spain as a country is finished. Things are so bad that British Airways (many wealthy Brits vacation in Spain) is putting a contingency plan for SPAIN to leave the Euro. Worst of all, it is clear EU and Spanish leaders have no clue how to deal with any of this. Their latest plan is for the country to cut the balance sheets of three nationalized banks by 50 percent sometime in the next five years. How will they do this? By dumping their toxic property assets into a “bad bank.”

The idea here is that somehow someone will want to buy this stuff. Spain already had to postpone the launch of the bad bank by a month because no one wanted to participate in it (despite the mainstream media claiming that the idea was popular which is untrue).

So, here we have Spain proposing that it can somehow unload a ton of garbage debts onto “someone” even though there is no “someone” to buy them. And the whole point of this exercise is to meet conditions so that Spain would qualify for another €40 billion in aid. €40 billion in aid… when Spain has experienced portfolio and investment outflows of more than €700 billion.

Indeed, things are so bad that the ECB has put the entire Spanish banking system on life support to the tune of over €400 billion Euros. To put this number into perspective, the entire equity base for every bank in Spain is only a little over €100 billion. Oh, and the country needs to issue over €200 billion in debt next year.

Syrian rebels: “When we finish with Assad, we will fight the U.S.

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com

A shocking report by McClatchy Newspapers’ David Enders reveals that the militants now on the front lines of the rebel uprising in Syria – supported by the Obama administration and other western powers – are Al-Qaeda terrorists who killed U.S. troops in Iraq and openly espouse their desire to “fight the U.S.” after they topple Bashar Al-Assad.

The official narrative at first attempted to deny the existence of Al-Qaeda terrorists in Syria altogether, before being forced to admit they were present but downplaying their role as limited and not characteristic of the rebel uprising.

However, Enders documents how Jabhat al Nusra, a group directly affiliated with Al-Qaeda, “has become essential to the frontline operations of the rebels fighting to topple Assad,” that the group is “critical to the rebels’ military advance” and how it conducts the “heaviest frontline fighting” in “battle after battle across the country.”

A journalist cited in the article also discovered “Nusra’s fighters on every frontline he visited.”

Jabhat al Nusra has claimed responsibility for numerous suicide bombings and other attacks that have killed hundreds of innocent people. Last weekend, disturbing footage emerged of one of their members slaughtering prisoners in cold blood. Extremist militants have also ransacked Christian churches and carried out sectarianbeheadings.

The article quotes one of the members of the group, who stated unequivocally, “When we finish with Assad, we will fight the U.S.!”

The journalist who heard the comment considered that it could have been a “joke,” but it didn’t appear to be much of a laughing matter when Syrian rebels were shown on camera proudly burning U.S. flags on two separate occasions recently.

As we previously documented, rebel supporters chanted anti-American slogans as they torched the American flag in Homs and Aleppo.

Another opposition fighter recently spoke of his desire to see the Al-Qaeda flag fly over the White House once the rebels are victorious across the region. Suffice to say, he didn’t appear to be joking.

Syrian rebel fighters are routinely photographed wearing the Al-Qaeda motif. There are also innumerable You Tube videos that show opposition forces flying the Al-Qaeda flag – the same distinctive black flag with white Arabic lettering that was flown by rioters during anti-U.S. demonstrations in numerous countries earlier this year.

French Surgeon Jacques Bérès, who worked at a hospital in Aleppo commented that at least half of the militants he treated for injuries were Al-Qaeda terrorists whose goal is to impose sharia law across Syria and the whole region.

A German report estimated the figure of foreign fighters in Syria to be even higher – a staggering 95 per cent.

As we have also documented at length, the McClatchy piece emphasizes the fact that Jabhat al Nusra was responsible for killing U.S. troops in Iraq, noting how the group relies on, “the same people and tactics that fueled al Qaida in Iraq – an assertion that is borne out by interviews with Nusra members in Syria.”

“Among Nusra fighters are many Syrians who say they fought with al Qaida in Iraq, which waged a bloody and violent campaign against the U.S. presence in that country and is still blamed for suicide and car bombings that have killed hundreds of Iraqis since the U.S. troops left a year ago,” writes Enders.

The article asserts that the presence of these terrorists in Syria, “worries U.S. and other Western officials,” although it obviously wasn’t too much of a concern when the Obama administration signed off on over $200 million dollars in aid to the FSA rebels.

Nor was it much of a worry for the CIA when it helped the likes of Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar funnel heavy arms to rebel groups in the region.

Although the establishment media has billed the rebels’ cause as a democratic uprising, one of the leaders of Jabhat al Nusra quoted in the McClatchy piece, Iyad al Sheikh Mahmoud, made it clear that there would be no free elections in Syria once Assad is toppled.

“Eighty percent of Syrians want Islamic law,” he said, referring to sharia law, an arcane and inherently brutal system of justice, with harsh punishments for those deemed to have broken its moral code, including torture and execution for sins such as adultery, homosexuality and robbery. The law also stifles free speech as it criminalizes criticism of Islam, the Quran, and the prophet Muhammad.

Why is the Obama administration supporting armed thugs who have not only killed U.S. troops in Iraq on behalf of Al-Qaeda, but also advocate the imposition of sharia law across the entire middle east and the overthrow of the United States and its replacement with an extremist Muslim dictatorship?

(Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News).

Ron Paul’s farewell to the United States: Embrace liberty or face self-destruction – Part 3

by Marvin J. Ramirez

Marvin J. Ramírez

NOTE FROM THE EDITOR: Dear readers: I am introducing to you, a memorable speech, which I consider the speech of the century. It is by a man who I believe has the biggest conviction on liberty than any one I have ever known. This man is Congressman Ron Paul, who is leaving Congress after 36 years. Mike Adams, editor of Natural News, took the time to transcribe it. Because the text came out too long, El Reportero will publish it in parts for several weeks. I hope you will enjoy it, and see for yourself, how this man’s vision brings out the raw corruption of our political system, with the hope that we all can help stop on time, the destruction of our Republic. PART 2

Ron Paul’s farewell message to America: Embrace liberty or face self-destruction

by Mike Adams

Ron Paul’s recent farewell speech is arguable the single most important speech in American history. Dr. Paul lays out the fatal problems facing America while pulling no punches. This speech is a must-read piece by anyone who seeks to understand the real reasons why America remains in a downward spiral of social and economic failure under the endless growth of Big Government and runaway debt.

Here’s the full text:

Dependency on Government Largesse

Today we face a dependency on government largesse for almost every need. Our liberties are restricted and government operates outside the rule of law, protecting and rewarding those who buy or coerce government into satisfying their demands. Here are a few examples:

• Undeclared wars are commonplace.

• Welfare for the rich and poor is considered an entitlement.

• The economy is overregulated, overtaxed and grossly distorted by a deeply flawed monetary system.

• Debt is growing exponentially.

• The Patriot Act and FISA legislation passed without much debate have resulted in a steady erosion of our 4th Amendment rights.

• Tragically our government engages in preemptive war, otherwise known as aggression, with no complaints from the American people.

• The drone warfare we are pursuing worldwide is destined to end badly for us as the hatred builds for innocent lives lost and the international laws flaunted. Once we are financially weakened and militarily challenged, there will be a lot resentment thrown our way.

• It’s now the law of the land that the military can arrest American citizens, hold them indefinitely, without charges or a trial.

• Rampant hostility toward free trade is supported by a large number in Washington.

• Supporters of sanctions, currency manipulation and WTO trade retaliation, call the true free traders “isolationists.”

• Sanctions are used to punish countries that don’t follow our orders.

• Bailouts and guarantees for all kinds of misbehavior are routine.

• Central economic planning through monetary policy, regulations and legislative mandates has been an acceptable policy.

Questions

Excessive government has created such a mess it prompts many questions:

• Why are sick people who use medical marijuana put in prison?

• Why does the federal government restrict the drinking of raw milk?

• Why can’t Americans manufacturer rope and other products from hemp?

• Why are Americans not allowed to use gold and silver as legal tender as mandated by the Constitution?

• Why is Germany concerned enough to consider repatriating their gold held by the FED for her in New York? Is it that the trust in the U.S. and dollar supremacy beginning to wane?

• Why do our political leaders believe it’s unnecessary to thoroughly audit our own gold?

• Why can’t Americans decide which type of light bulbs they can buy?

• Why is the TSA permitted to abuse the rights of any American traveling by air?

• Why should there be mandatory sentences — even up to life for crimes without victims — as our drug laws require?

• Why have we allowed the federal government to regulate commodes in our homes?

• Why is it political suicide for anyone to criticize AIPAC?

• Why haven’t we given up on the drug war since it’s an obvious failure and violates the people’s rights? Has nobody noticed that the authorities can’t even keep drugs out of the prisons? How can making our entire society a prison solve the problem?

• Why do we sacrifice so much getting needlessly involved in border disputes and civil strife around the world and ignore the root cause of the most deadly border in the world-the one between Mexico and the US?

• Why does Congress willingly give up its prerogatives to the Executive Branch?

• Why does changing the party in power never change policy? Could it be that the views of both parties are 7214essentially the same?

• Why did the big banks, the large corporations, and foreign banks and foreign central banks get bailed out in 2008 and the middle class lost their jobs and their homes?

• Why do so many in the government and the federal officials believe that creating money out of thin air creates wealth?

• Why do so many accept the deeply flawed principle that government bureaucrats and politicians can protect us from ourselves without totally destroying the principle of liberty?

• Why can’t people understand that war always destroys wealth and liberty?

• Why is there so little concern for the Executive Order that gives the President authority to establish a “kill list,” including American citizens, of those targeted for assassination?

• Why is patriotism thought to be blind loyalty to the government and the politicians who run it, rather than loyalty to the principles of liberty and support for the people? Real patriotism is a willingness to challenge the government when it’s wrong.

• Why is it is claimed that if people won’t or can’t take care of their own needs, that people in government can do it for them?

• Why did we ever give the government a safe haven for initiating violence against the people?

• Why do some members defend free markets, but not civil liberties?

• Why do some members defend civil liberties but not free markets? Aren’t they the same?

• Why don’t more defend both economic liberty and personal liberty?

• Why are there not more individuals who seek to intellectually influence others to bring about positive changes than those who seek power to force others to obey their commands?

• Why does the use of religion to support a social gospel and preemptive wars, both of which requires authoritarians to use violence, or the threat of violence, go unchallenged? Aggression and forced redistribution of wealth has nothing to do with the teachings of the world great religions.

• Why do we allow the government and the Federal Reserve to disseminate false information dealing with both economic and foreign policy?

• Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority?

• Why should anyone be surprised that Congress has no credibility, since there’s such a disconnect between what politicians say and what they do?

Mexican duo ‘Jesse and Joy’ celebrates Grammy nod

by Hispanically Speaking News

Jesse and Joy duoJesse and Joy duo

Mexican duo Jesse and Joy have added one more success to a fruitful year of international recognition by being nominated for a Grammy Award in the Best Latino Pop category for their album “Con quien se queda el perro?”

The siblings are competing in the category with Guatemalan singer-songwriter Ricardo Arjona (“Independiente”), Puerto Rico’s Kany Garcia (“Kany Garcia”) and Colombians Juanes (“MTV Unplugged Deluxe Edition”) and Fonseca (“Ilusion”).

The nominations for the prestigious prize bestowed by the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences were announced Wednesday evening in Los Angeles.

This year, Jesse and Joy already walked away with five Latino Grammys at the Nov. 15 awards ceremony in Las Vegas and that same week it was also announced that they were nominated in five categories for Premio Lo Nuestro awards.

The performers of “Corre!” (a success on the social networks with almost 100 million views on YouTube), “La de la mala suerte” and “Me voy” are continuing their international tour in Mexico and soon will give concerts in Latin America, the United States and Spain.

“Brown in the Windy City” Tells of How Mexicans, Puerto Ricans Came to be in Chicago

A new book published by the University of Chicago deals with the issue of immigration and integration of Mexicans and Puerto Ricans after World War II in this city.

“Brown In The Windy City: Mexicans and Puerto Ricans in Postwar Chicago” is the work of Lilia Fernandez, a history professor at Ohio State University.

Fernandez tells the story of the growth of these important communities and their difficult integration into the political dynamic of the Midwestern metropolis.

With figures and anecdotes, the author, who is of Mexican descent, details the problems that both communities have had to work through to be able to forge their own identities and carve out political space for themselves.

Both Mexicans and Puerto Ricans encountered racism and the hostility of other ethnic groups when they arrived in the city, and they had to put up with poorly-paid manual jobs, a lack of social services and schools that did not recognize their culture.

Although prior to the 1940s there was a small Mexican community in the city, this group began to arrive in large numbers during the war as guestworkers.

The Puerto Ricans began arriving almost at the same time seeking opportunities that were not available on their native island.

Chicago’s Mexican and Puerto Rican communities had to face displacement in the 1950s and ‘60s under programs of “urban renewal.”

The Puerto Ricans were the first, pushed out of the now-exclusive residential zone of Lincoln Park and into poor neighborhoods like Humboldt Park and West Town.

Then, the city also displaced about 4,800 Mexican-Americans who were living in the Near West Side to make room for the campus of the University of Illinois at Chicago.

Fernandez discusses how the community struggles began to orient Hispanics to seek their own path and forge their own identity.

“As a result of these experiences, already by 1980 the majority of the Mexican-Americans and Puerto Ricans in the central neighborhoods like Humboldt Park, West Town, Pilsen and La Villita consciously and intentionally were identifying themselves as ‘another’ race in the political landscape,” she told Efe.

Did they understand the Latino vote?

by José de la Isla
Hispanic Link News Service

MEXICO CITY —John M. Ackerman warned about political quicksand in a Los Angeles Times essay. Ackerman edits the Mexican Law Review, he is a professor at the Autonomous University of Mexico and currently a visiting scholar at American University in Washington, D.C.

A plausible scenario is that Republicans have realized they will never get more than a sliver of the Latino vote, perhaps for generations (if the party lasts that long) instead of a larger helping of the Latino vote in the future.

After all, Romney only got 21 percent of Latinos voting for him.

The quicksand for Latinos is that a lethargic President Obama has to deliver little because he has Latinos in his hip pocket and doesn’t have to fully deliver because he’s not running again. Latinos are the ones sinking.

But the headline, “Latinos need immigration reform, not crumbs,” announcing Ackerman’s essay in the Times should have read the other way around, “Republicans Need Immigration Reform, Not Crumb-Bums.”

While Republicans do seem to have a death wish, a lot of damage control is in order to not further hurt the fabric of society.

Proof of their last rites were uttered by South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham who mumbled about English as some kind of requirement for citizenship. This is both insulting because of its implications about being lazy, dumb, and discourteous. It is dangerous because it’s really a statement about culture-dominance, implies ethnic inferiority, and gives solace to hate groups.

Also, it’s based on a lie. Instead, language acquisition has never been at a faster pace in this country. People who listen to Graham on this and believe him are either lazy about the facts, don’t understand because they are dim, or discourteous for which there is no excuse.

Other Republican leaders on the whole are not any better. Even two out-going senators, who have nothing to lose, miss an opportunity to set their party straight. Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison (Texas) and Jon Kyl (Ariz.), introduced the Achieve Act that does not reform but represses.

It would cut back on those who are eligible for citizenship, increase deportations, promote racial profiling, apply English-only, repress Latino studies, encourage persecutions by state and local authorities, and encourage new border security when such measures have proven they work best to keep good people out and crooks doing land-office business.

What the Republicans need is immigration reform of substance and not of paranoia, in order to counteract a tepid President Obama, who is no reformer but an accommodater, a late adapter, another leader who would rather look good than do good.

The charade about so-called “immigration” reform begins all over again.

With it is a misleading interpretation what the Latino vote was all about.

First of all, don’t forget this was not the first or second time Latinos have been influential, if not decisive, in presidential elections, but have been for a half century. The real “Sleeping Giant” is not them but an American public that has not known how to interpret the American electorate as it incubates.

In that sense, the Nov. 6 election was the second “voto castigo” Latinos cast in presidential elections. It was not an unprecendented vote for Obama but also the flip side, an unprecedented vote against Romney.

President Obama was the beneficiary of it, the same way George W. Bush was when the Latino vote in Florida turned against Al Gore in 2000 to punish him and the Democratic Party because of the Elian González affair, when INS troopers forcibly took the child from family to return him to Cuba.

Florida Latinos remembered at election time the same way national Latinos remembered the despicable characterizations and lies about Latinos, their families and friends by right-wingers and Republicans.

Ackerman in his Times essay is right on policy and wrong on politics.

For now, suffice it to say, Republican wrong-headedness need not be treated even as crumbs. They are the unintelligible jabberings in an unintelligible foreign language of policy interests so out of touch they arrogantly act as if they won.

That kind of behavior will lead to the next well-deserved voto castigo for not understanding humility before the voters and the public.

(José de la Isla, a nationally syndicated columnist for Hispanic Link and Scripps Howard news services, has been recognized for two consecutive years for his commentaries by New America Media. His next book, The Rise of Latino Political Power, will appear early in 2013. Reach him at joseisla3@yahoo.com.)

Find this column in Spanish and more news and commentary at www.HispanicLink.org.

Boxing

The Sport of Gentlemen

Saturday, December 15 – London, England

Lightweights: Ricky Burns (35-2, 10 KOs) vs. Liam Walsh (13-0, 10 KOs)

Saturday, December 15 – Nuerburg, Germany

Super middleweights: Arthur Abraham (35-3, 27 KOs) vs. Mehdi Bouadla (26-4, 11 KOs).

Monday, December 31 – Tokyo, Japan

Junior lightweights: Takashi Uchiyama (18-0-1, 15 KOs) vs. Bryan Vasquez (29-0, 15 KOs);

Super flyweights: Pigmy Kokietgym (21-2, 13 KOs) vs. Kohei Kono (27-7, 10 KOs);

Super flyweights: Yota Sato (25-2-1, 12 KOs) vs. Ryo Akaho (19-0-2, 12 KOs).

Monday, December 31 – Osaka, Japan

WBA minimumweight title: Ryo Miyazaki (17-0-3, 10 KOs) vs. Pornsawan Porpramook (27-4-1, 17 KOs).

2012 NDAA expands power of military para detener a los ciudadanos

by Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com

In response to widespread outrage over the National Defense Authorization Act passed last year, Congress is said to be working on a more Constitution friendly version of the legislation. The latest version was overwhelmingly approved by the House Armed Services Committee on May 8 and introduced the following week.

“This year, through the incorporation of the Right to Habeas Corpus Act, the bill makes clear beyond a shadow of a doubt that every American will have his day in court,” a press release issued by the Armed Services Committee states.

Is the NDAA 2013 an improvement over the previous version? At first glance, it would seem so. Consider the following clause included in the bill:

Nothing in the AUMF [Authorization for the Use of Military Force] or the 2012 NDAA shall be construed to deny the availability of the writ of habeas corpus or to deny any Constitutional rights in a court ordained or established by or under Article III of the Constitution for any person who is lawfully in the United States when detained pursuant to the AUMF and who is otherwise entitled to the availability of such writ or such rights.
However, according to Bruce Afran, a lawyer for a group of journalists and activists suing the government over the NDAA 2012, this is merely smoke and mirrors.

Because there are no established rules allowing a citizen to exercise the right to a civilian trial, as guaranteed by the Constitution (specifically, the Sixth Amendment), detained citizens have no way to gain access to lawyers, family or a civilian court after they are detained by the military.

“The biggest thing about the [2012] NDAA was that you weren’t getting a trial … Nothing in here says that you’ll make it to an Article III court so it literally does nothing,” Dan Johnson, founder of People Against the NDAA, told Business Insider on Thursday. “It’s a bunch of words, basically.”

“The new statute actually states that persons lawfully in the U.S. can be detained under the Authorization for the Use of Military Force [AUMF]. The original (the statute we are fighting in court) never went that far,” Afran explained. “Therefore, under the guise of supposedly adding protection to Americans, the new statute actually expands the AUMF to civilians in the U.S.”

Although Kentucky Senator Rand Paul is being portrayed as a savior by offering up language that would “affirm the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution and limit the indefinite detention of Americans,” more than a few observers of his co-sponsored amendment to the NDAA say the effort does not go far enough.

On Thursday evening, the “Senate voted on Amendment No. 3018 to the National Defense Authorization Act sponsored by Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah), and co-sponsored by Sen. Rand Paul, which protects the rights prescribed to Americans in the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution with regard to indefinite detention and the right to a trial by jury,” Paul’s Senate web page explainds.

“Senator Paul’s amendment – for all the good that it does – doesn’t go far enough. Read the text of the proposal again. There is not one word of repeal or abolition or revocation of the indefinite detention of Americans from the NDAA,” writes Joe Wolverton for the New American.

A previous attempt to placate critics of the NDAA resulted in the Gohmert Amendment (House Amendment 1126) stating that the NDAA will not “deny the writ of habeas corpus or deny any Constitutional rights for persons detained in the United States under the AUMF who are entitled to such rights.”

“This amendment, like the one offered by Senator Paul last week, displays an indefensible use of vague language that would make it vulnerable to challenge in any court in any state in the Union, but somehow adds to its appeal among the Republicans in Congress,” Wolverton comments.

A handful of efforts to make the NDAA constitutionally friendly are little more than a public relations gimmick to silence critics. The NDAA is essential if the government is going to silence critics and disappear activists and other enemies of the establishment.

The bottom line, Bruce Afran said, is that the latest iteration of the NDAA “is still unconstitutional because it allows citizens or persons in the U.S. to be held in military custody, a position that the Supreme Court has repeatedly held is unconstitutional.”

The indefinate detention section of the NDAA must be repealed entirely. Anything short of that is treason.

Nicaragua using nearly $40 million loan to improve transporttion system

by Hispanically Speaking News

flag

Nicaragua will improve the efficiency and safety of its transportation system and advance regional integration with a $39.2 million loan approved by the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB).

The project will help reduce vehicle operating costs, increase travel speeds, reduce accident rates and will conduct studies on the impact of climate change on infrastructure. Other components include institution building, road maintenance and road safety.

Some 437,000 vehicles travel over the national road system, carrying more than 13 million tons of freight annually, of which more than 38 percent is foreign trade cargo.

A major component of this project includes the improvement of 44.6 kilometers of roads from La Paz Centro-Malpaisillo (37.2 km), of the primary trunk network, in the departments of León and Chinandega; and the Miralagos-Cuyalí (7.47 km) highway, of the primary feeder network, located in the Department of Jinotega.

The country’s road network system is characterized by poor conditions of both paved and unpaved roads. This translates into high transport costs, posing an obstacle to national efforts to boost economic growth and reduce poverty.

According to data from the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure (MTI) published in the Red Vial Nicaragua report of 2011, the road network has a total length of 23,647.1 km, of which only 3,150.8 km
(13.3 percent) is paved.

Indigenous textile art meeting in Bolivian sucre

by Prensa Latina

The Third Indigenous Textile Art Meeting entitled “Knitting the People’’s Soul” and Fair in Reverse Order were transferred on today to Plaza 25 de Mayo square in Sucre, capital of the southern Chuquisaca department.

More than 400 craftspeople from 82 communities of the nine departments of the country are participating in the meeting.

The Culture Ministry organized the event, with the objective of knowing the best ways of valuing their fabrics, works of art and obtain the benefits that communities deserve, said Fair in Reverse Order Representative Mora Canal said.

This last part of the Fair is called In Reverse because suppliers offer their products to craftspeople.

This meting began on Saturday in the Tarabuco municipality, to the South of Sucre, also the Bolivian constitutional capital.

Sucre’s Mayor Gregorio Ignacio highlighted the presence of farmer indigenous and Afro-Bolivian people, as Chuquitano, Guarayo, Ayoreo, Yampara, Quechua, Aymara, Yuyacare, Jalka and others.

The third meeting of Original Indigenous Textile Art will go on until Dec. 4.

United Nations threatens Colorado, Washington state over marijuana decriminalization laws

by J. D. Heyes

Likely empowered by a U.S. administration that favors the kind of nanny state politics a ruling global entity would no doubt embrace, the head of the United Nations’ International Narcotics Control Board feels comfortable telling federal officials they should move to challenge measures in Colorado and Washington that decriminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana for adults 21 and over.

Raymond Yans lectured the voter-approved measures – part of the United States’ democratic process, something most UN member countries are not familiar with – send “a wrong message to the rest of the nation and it sends a wrong message abroad.”

In an interview with The Associated Press, Yans said he would like to see Attorney General Eric Holder “take all necessary measures” to ensure that marijuana possession remains illegal throughout the United States.

Does the UN remember that Obama inhaled?

Currently, both states are awaiting the implementation of plans to regulate and tax the drug because officials there are waiting to see if Washington will assert its federal authority in the matter. At present, pot is a Schedule I controlled substance, in the same category as LSD and heroin.

The federal Drug Enforcement Administration has said that marijuana has a high potential for abuse and “no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States,” the New York Times has reported.

Yans’ outrage makes us wonder here at Natural News if he read reports back in 2006 when then-U.S. Sen. Barack Obama told the American Society of Magazine Editors that he did, in fact, smoke marijuana.

“When I was a kid, Iinhaled,” he said. “That was the point.”

Also, is Yans oblivious to the fact that the Netherlands has essentially legalized pot by decriminalizing both its possession and sale? Or that Portugal, in 2001, became the first European country, according to Time magazine, “to officially abolish all criminal penalties for personal possession of drugs, including marijuana, cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine?”

At the time, critics of the policy change warned that drug use would skyrocket in a nation where hard drug use was already the highest on the continent. But a subsequent study by the libertarian-leaning CATO Institute in 2009 found no appreciable increase in usage.

In fact, in the years after personal possession of drugs was decriminalized, illegal use among teens in Portugal dropped while rates of new HIV infections caused by the sharing of dirty needles also fell.

The number of people seeking treatment for drug addition; however, more than doubled – but that figure was an acceptable alternative to incarceration because the Portuguese government had previously determined that treating offenders would be cheaper than jailing them.

“Judging by every metric, decriminalization in Portugal has been a resounding success,” Glenn Greenwald, an attorney, author and fluent Portuguese speaker, who conducted the research, told Time. “It has enabled the Portuguese government to manage and control the drug problem far better than virtually every other Western country does.”

“I think we can learn that we should stop being reflexively opposed when someone else does [decriminalize] and should take seriously the possibility that anti-user enforcement isn’t having much influence on our drug consumption,” Mark Kleiman, author of the forthcoming When Brute Force Fails: How to Have Less Crime and Less Punishment, and director of the drug policy analysis program at UCLA, told the magazine.

‘If our people really want it, we need to do it right’

A number of U.S. politicians have begun to see it that way.

A year ago, the governors of Washington and Rhode Island – Democrat Christine Gregoire and Republican-turned-Independent Lincoln Chaffee, respectively – petitioned the federal government to reclassify marijuana as a drug with acceptable medical uses, “saying the change is needed so states like theirs, which have decriminalized marijuana for medical purposes, can regulate the safe distribution of the drug without risking federal prosecution,” the Times said.

“The divergence in state and federal law creates a situation where there is no regulated and safe system to supply legitimate patients who may need medical cannabis,” the governors wrote in a letter to Michele M. Leonhart, the DEA administrator.

“What we have out here on the ground is chaos,” Gregoire told the Times. “And in the midst of all the chaos we have patients who really either feel like they’re criminals or may be engaged in some criminal activity, and really are legitimate patients who want medicinal marijuana.”

“If our people really want medicinal marijuana, then we need to do it right, we need to do it with safety, we need to do it with health in mind, and that’s best done in a process that we know works in this country – and that’s through a pharmacist,” she added.

Homeowners still waiting on billions in foreclosure relief

Wells Fargo Shareholders Meeting Protest San Francisco.

by Ngoc Nguyen

Thanks to a federal program, homeowner Pretti Hilton could be getting just what she needs to resolve her longstanding foreclosure case: : a referee.
Under the Independent Foreclosure Review program, eligible homeowners can request a review of their foreclosure file by a third-party consultant. If the independent auditor finds that the bank made errors in processing their foreclosure, the homeowner can recoup money – from $500 to as much as $125,000.
For Hilton, who has been fighting foreclosure of her home for nearly four years, the program offers a ray of hope.
So far, her attempts to work with her lender, Bank of America, on modifying her home loan to produce a lower monthly mortgage payment, have failed. In fact, the bank tried to auction off her property several times. If she were to lose her two-bedroom home in Moreno Valley, California, says Hilton, she and her two sons — a 15-year-old and a disabled 27-year-old – would be on the street.

“The stress is astronomical,” she says, adding that she is taking medication for hypertension, something she’d never done before. “I don’t believe I was blessed with a house in order to lose it…. I will not go down without a fight.”

A home health worker, Hilton says her income took a hit with state budget cuts to programs that subsidize in-home care. When she got back on her feet, she resumed making mortgage payments, which by then included late fees.

But even after paying off the late charges, she says, her bank did not lower the monthly payment back to the original amount. Because of that discrepancy and others, Hilton says she hasn’t paid her mortgage for three years, and her case is still in limbo.

Then Hilton received a letter in the mail about the Independent Foreclosure Review program run by the Federal Reserve Bank and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). Hilton applied for the program two months ago, and says she’s “expecting to hear something soon.”

But the wait could be longer than Hilton originally expected.

More than a year after its launch, the program has yet to pay out any compensation, and just a fraction of the requested reviews have been completed.

Last April, federal regulators ordered the nation’s biggest banks to overhaul their foreclosure procedures in the wake of the “robo-signing” scandal – when it came to light that banks were approving foreclosures without verifying the underlying documents. As a result, the banks were required by the government to offer third-party reviews of foreclosure cases to their customers who request it, and hire independent consultants to do the work.

Of the more than 4.4 million homeowners who were potentially eligible for the program who were sent letters, about 250,000 requested a review. Banks were also ordered to “look back” at a representative sample of cases, accounting for another 159,000 homeowners, bringing the total number of reviews to more than 400,000.

Bryan Hubbard, a spokesman for the OCC, says about 260,000 reviews are underway. According to an interim report released in June, consultants had completed just 11,000 reviews.

“No compensation has been approved yet because we have not reached that point in the review process,” Hubbard says.

In June, regulators came up with a compensation pay scale, attaching dollar amounts or other remedies to a list of about a dozen possible errors made by the banks. If consultants determine that a homeowner suffered financial harm, they will recommend what type and amount of relief should go to the borrower. The banks then need to submit a “remediation plan” to regulators, and then the checks can go out, Hubbard says.

“We hope that remediation will begin in the fourth quarter of this year, but continue through 2013,” he says. As of yet, the banks have not submitted those plans to regulators.

The most common complaints prompting a request for review, Hubbard says, involve denials of loan modifications, improper and incorrect fees, timeliness of payments and disputes in amounts owed.

In Hilton’s case, if a review of her file found she was wrongfully denied a loan modification, the foreclosure would be halted and the bank would have to grant or deny her application, and compensate her either $2,500 or $10,000.
Compensation to individual homeowners is capped at $125,000, but the total amount the banks would have to pay out to all homeowners is “unlimited,” Hubbard says.

The independent review program contrasts with a parallel but separate restitution program instituted earlier this year as a result a multi-state lawsuit. The National Mortgage Settlement promised homeownerswho were financially harmed by bank errors a “one-size-fits-all” check of about $2000. It set a “low bar to get some benefit,” according to Paul Leonard, director of the Center for Responsible Lending’s California office. The compensation would shrink as more homeowners tap the fund.

In contrast, the federal program, says Leonard, is a complement to that.

“[It] takes a fine-toothcomb approach to really identity specific borrowers harmed and how much harm they actually suffered,” Leonard says.

Although it doles out stiffer penalties for errors, and mandates that those deficiencies in each bank’s foreclosure process be fixed, recent revelations have come to light that the independent reviews may be flawed. ProPublica revealed cozy ties between the banks and the third-party consultants that were hired to conduct the reviews, resulting in bank employees trying to influence the outcome of reviews.

News reports also revealed that the third-party consultants are reaping record profits through their contracts with the banks.

“The purpose of this [independent review process] was to remedy financial harm to borrowers; it wasn’t meant to be ‘The Consultants Full-Employment Act,’” Leonard says.

“The irony is, it appears that they [the banks] are going to spend a lot more money [on] paying for the consultants…[than] providing remedies to borrowers.”

He adds, “Nobody knows for sure [how much money will be paid to homeowners]. No money has been put into the pocket of borrowers yet.”

With the deadline to file a request for review under the federal program looming (Dec. 31), housing counselors say more effort is needed to publicize the program to eligible homeowners. Any homeowner whose primary residence was in any stage of foreclosure in 2009 or 2010, and whose mortgage was serviced by participating loan servicers, is eligible to request a review.

Maria Cabildo, president of East LA Community Corporation, says her organization has helped just a handful of people apply for the program. Unfortunately, she adds, many homeowners mayhave simply tossed the letter from federal regulators informing them of the program, thinking it was a scam. She says many of her clients have been inundated by mailings from mortgage scammers.