Puppet MastersS


Eye 2

Wisconsin governor Scott Walker proposes budget that eliminates requirement that colleges report sexual assaults

Scott Kaufman
Raw Story
Fri, 27 Feb 2015 20:18 UTC
Image
Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker's proposed budget would not merely cut nearly $300 million from the University of Wisconsin system, it would eliminate the requirement that campus employees report sexual assaults they have witnessed, as well as the requirement that campuses report the number of sexual assaults to the Department of Justice, Jezebel's Natasha Vargas-Cooper reports.

In light of the recently discredited Rolling Stone article about an alleged gang-rape at the University of Virginia, the reporting of sexual abuse on campus has become a politicized issue — especially among conservatives.

Fox News contributor Stacey Dash claimed that women who were sexually assaulted at fraternity parties were "bad girls" who "like to be naughty" and "might go out and play and get hurt."

Universities in the Wisconsin system are currently required to report the number of sexual assaults — regardless of whether the victims are "bad girls" or not — to the Department of Justice. The Walker budget not only removes that mandatory report, but also the requirement that any university employee "who witnesses a sexual assault on campus or receives a report from a student enrolled in the institution that the student has been sexually assaulted report the assault to the dean of students."

The new Walker budget would simply "delete" those requirements without offering any alternative policy recommendation, as outlined in a section of the budget titled "DELETE LANGUAGE RELATED TO SEXUAL ASSAULT INFORMATION AND REPORTING" — in which the first word of every sentence is "delete."

"Delete the requirement," the budget's language states, "that each institution report annually to the Department of Justice (DOJ) statistics on sexual assaults and on sexual assaults committed by acquaintances of the victims that occurred on the campus of that institution in the previous years, and that DOJ include those statistics in appropriate crime reports."
Read More...
Bulb

US: Electricity price index hit an all-time high for January

Terence P. Jeffrey
CNS News
Mon, 02 Mar 2015 13:24 UTC
In contrast to the steep decline in the gasoline price index over the past year (which led to a decline in the overall Consumer Price Index), the seasonally adjusted electricity price index hit an all-time high in January, according to data released last week by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

In January, the seasonally adjusted price index for electricity was 212.290. That was up from 210.489 in December, which was the record up until then. Before that, the high had been the 209.341 recorded in March of last year.

The annual electricity price index set a record in 2014 of 208.020 up from 200.750 in 2013.
Image
In January, the average price for a kilowatthour (KWH) of electricity also hit an all-time high for that month of the year.

According to BLS, a KWH of electricity cost an average of 13.8 cents in January 2015, which was less than the 14.3-cent cost in June, July and August of 2014 (and 14.1-cent cost of September 2014) but more than the average cost of a KWH in any month—including the summer months—of 2013. In that year, the average price of a KWH peaked at 13.7 cents in the months from June to September.

The price of electricity tends to follow an annual pattern--rising in the spring, peaking in the summer, and declining in the fall.
Image
The rise in the electricity price index ran counter to the gasoline price index, the overall energy price index, and the overall Consumer Price Index, all of which declined in January as well as over the past twelve months.

"The energy index fell 9.7 percent in January, its seventh consecutive decline and the largest 1-month decrease since November 2008," said the Bureau of Labor Statistics in its press release on the CPI.

Comment: Food prices are up. Power prices are up. Living wages are down. It's best not to rely on the government for support when things take a turn for the worse.

Read More...
Megaphone

The West's whole case for sanctions against Russia is pure lies

Eric Zuesse
Washington's Blog
Fri, 27 Feb 2015 19:56 UTC
Image
U.S. President Barack Obama has stated many times his case against Russia — the reason for the economic sanctions. In his National Security Strategy 2015, he uses the term "aggression" 18 times, and 17 of them are referring specifically to only one country as "aggressive": Russia. However, not once does he say there what the "aggression" consisted of: what its target was, or what it itself was. He's vague there on everything except his own target: Russia.

For those things (what Russia's "aggression" consists of), Obama's only statement that has been even as lengthy as moderately brief — since he has never presented it at any more length — was his interview with Fareed Zacaria of CNN on 1 February 2015, which happened to be a statement given only three days short of the first anniversary of his agent's, Victoria Nuland's, having selected, on 4 February 2014, whom the next leader of Ukraine would be, Arseniy Yatsenyuk (she called him "Yats") after the democratically elected and sitting Ukrainian President, Viktor Yanukovych, would become overthrown, which happened 18 days later, on 22 February 2014. (It was nothing like Czechoslovakia's "Velvet Revolution". This wasn't democratic; it was a coup.)

Obama said there, in this CNN interview, that the reason for the sanctions against Russia was that,
"since Mr. Putin made this decision around Crimea and Ukraine — not because of some grand strategy, but essentially because he was caught off-balance by the protests in the Maidan and Yanukovych then fleeing after we had brokered a deal to transition power in Ukraine — since that time, this improvisation that he's been doing has getting — has gotten him deeper and deeper into a situation that is a violation of international law, that violates the integrity, territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine, has isolated Russia diplomatically, has made Europe wary of doing business with Russia, has allowed the imposition of sanctions that are crippling Russia's economy at a time when their oil revenues are dropping. There's no formula in which this ends up being good for Russia. The annexation of Crimea is a cost, not a benefit, to Russia. The days in which conquest of land somehow was a formula for great nation status is over."
Read More...
Quenelle

Russian FM: Moscow will not give in to blackmail and threats - Will choose any option to respond to sanctions


Sputnik
Mon, 02 Mar 2015 19:47 UTC
Image
© Sputnik/ Evgeniya Novozhenova
Moscow reserves the right to respond to Western sanctions in any way it sees fit, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov told RIA Novosti.

Washington, Brussels and a number of their allies have introduced several rounds of economic sanctions toward Russia, accusing the country of interfering in the Ukrainian crisis. Moscow has dismissed the accusations and responded with a one-year ban on certain food imports from sanctions-imposing nations.

"We reserve to ourselves the maximum freedom of action in this regard. We cannot give in to blackmail and threats, we cannot stay apathetic amid off-handed attempts to pressure Russia with the goal of changing its foreign policy line," the official said.

Ryabkov also pointed out that US diplomats often resort to the phrase "all options remain on the table" to describe a situation in which the president or a high-ranked official considers different approaches to a given situation.

"This is said at different levels and is not considered discreditable... We are saying exactly the same, we are saying that all options remain on the table, and which one will be chosen depends on a variety of factors," the diplomat said.

Last week, US Secretary of State John Kerry suggested that the United States would likely expand sanctions against Moscow in the near future, despite the brokering by Russia two weeks earlier of a ceasefire agreement between Kiev forces and East Ukraine's independence supporters.
Read More...
Snakes in Suits

Fugitive Saakashvili calls for 'a second Maidan' in Georgia


Sputnik
Tue, 03 Mar 2015 15:01 UTC
Mikheil Saakashvili
© Sputnik/ Alexey Kudenko
The party led by Georgia's fugitive ex-president Mikheil Saakashvili, United National Movement (UNM), has announced that it is planning massive anti-government protests in Tbilisi, the country's capital, as the country faces economic issues following a devaluation of its national currency.

In a communique to his supporters, which has been circulated Georgian media, Saakashvili calls for mass protests similar to the 2013-2014 Euromaidan protests in Ukraine.
"Create a second 'Maidan,' cause chaos... there will be money and support."

Comment: Does this guy really think he has much support from the people?

Read More...
Pharoah

Best of the Web: Robert Fisk: 'There is no difference between the American and Israeli governments'

Robert Fisk
The Independent, UK
Tue, 03 Mar 2015 11:57 UTC
netanyahu
President of US-rael?
Uri Avnery is without doubt the most intellectual, philosophical, prescient leftist Israeli seer I have ever met. Like TS Eliot, he has a habit of using the fewest words to tell the greatest truth. Every essay he writes, this reader always says the same thing: Exactly! Yet, for the first time in 40 years, I disagree with the great man.

He has just suggested that Benjamin Netanyahu's agreement to address the US Congress at the invitation of Republicans tomorrow - two weeks before an Israeli general election - and Barack Obama's decision not to see the old rogue, has destroyed Israel's bipartisan support in America. For the first time, says Uri, Democratic politicians are allowed to criticise Israel.

Absolute Tosh.

Congressmen of both parties have grovelled and fainted and shrieked their support for Bibi and his predecessors with more enthusiasm than the Roman hordes in the Colosseum. Last time Bibi turned up on the Hill, he received literally dozens of standing ovations from the sheep-like representatives of the American people, whose uncritical adoration of the Israeli state - and their abject fear of uttering the most faint-hearted criticism lest they be called anti-Semites - suggest that Bibi would be a far more popular US president than Barack. And Bibi's impeccable American accent doesn't hurt.

Read More...
Stormtrooper

Cleaning house: Venezuela orders US embassy to reduce staff from 100 to 17

Girish Gupta and Lesley Wroughton
Reuters
Tue, 03 Mar 2015 22:09 UTC
Nicolas maduro
© Reuters/Carlos Garcia Rawlins Venezuela's President Nicolas Maduro gestures during a meeting with supporters at Miraflores Palace in Caracas, February 19, 2015.
Venezuela on Monday ordered the U.S. embassy in Caracas to reduce staff from 100 to 17 amid the worst diplomatic flare-up between the two ideological foes since socialist President Nicolas Maduro was elected in 2013.

Maduro, who like his predecessor Hugo Chavez frequently locks horns with Washington, has stepped up accusations in recent weeks that the United States is seeking to topple him.

The measures announced in response to alleged coup plotting are the most significant against Washington of Maduro's nearly two-year rule, though foes say they represent a timeworn tactic to distract Venezuelans from their economic troubles.

"They have 15 days to reduce the size of their embassy to 17 staffers," Foreign Minister Delcy Rodriguez said after a meeting with the U.S. Chargé d'Affaires Lee McClenny, Washington's most senior diplomat in Venezuela.

Maduro has said 100 staffers work at the embassy, an imposing ochre building perched on a hill overlooking Caracas. Venezuela has 17 staffers in Washington, according to Maduro, who says the embassies should be on par.

Maduro over the weekend he announced that his government had detained U.S. citizens, including a pilot, on suspicion of espionage. The pilot's identity remains unclear.

Comment: Fortunately, President Maduro is well acquainted with the US led tactics of regime change under cover of spreading 'democracy' and is taking no chances.

Read More...
Whistle

Canada's State Policeman's Bill: C-51, legal opinion

Clayton Ruby, Nader R. Hasan
Pacific Free Press
Tue, 17 Feb 2015 00:00 UTC
Bill C-51: A Legal Primer: Overly broad and unnecessary anti-terrorism reforms could criminalize free speech

6 muslims
© ahmadiyyatimes.blogspot.comArrestable! Legally at risk by Bill C-51
Six Muslim young adults stand in front of a mosque late at night in heated discussion in some foreign language. They may be debating the merits of a new Drake album. They may be talking about video games, or sports, or girls, or advocating the overthrow of the Harper government. Who knows? There is no evidence one way or the other. Just stereotypes. But the new standard for arrest and detention—reason to suspect that they may commit an act—is so low that an officer may be inclined to arrest and detain them in order to investigate further.

And now, officers will no longer need to ask themselves whether the arrest is necessary. They could act on mere suspicion that an arrest is likely to prevent any terrorist activity. Yesterday, the Muslim men were freely exercising constitutional rights to freedom of expression and assembly. Today they are arrestable.

Overview: The Anti-Terrorism Act

Bill C-51,the Anti-Terrorism Act, 2015, would expand the powers of Canada's spy agency, allow Canadians to be arrested on mere suspicion of future criminal activity, allow the Minister of Public Safety to add Canadians to a "no-fly list" with illusory rights of judicial review, and, perhaps most alarmingly, create a new speech-related criminal offence of "promoting" or "advocating" terrorism. These proposed laws are misguided, and many of them are likely also unconstitutional. The bill ought to be rejected as a whole. Repair is impossible.

New offence of promoting terrorism

Bill C-51 creates a new criminal offence that likely violates s. 2(b) of the Charter. Newly proposed s. 83.221 of the Criminal Code provides as follows:
Every person who, by communicating statements, knowingly advocates or promotes the commission of terrorism offences in general—other than an offence under this section—while knowing that any of those offences will be committed or being reckless as to whether any of those offences may be committed, as a result of such communication, is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than five years.

Comment: According to author Peter Boer, the CSIS is renowned for unannounced workplace visits as a "legit investigative strategy" full of leading questions and intimidation. Under the most pressure are Arab and Muslim causes and communities as being threateningly "suspicious." Topics of interrogation include political beliefs, thoughts on current events and Afghanistan, opinions on the novel The Kite Runner, information on workers-aquaintences-family and, by the way, "mums" on the visit.

As of 2012, 80+ organizations endorsed ceasing of all cooperation with CSIS. The CSIS has also been accused of illegally monitoring conversations of Canadian citizens and visiting heads of state, while permanent residents are held without charge (on suspicions of "future" terrorism) and at risk of torture. It seems arrest for suspicion is considered evidence-based and not a serious violation of human rights. And what about oversight? Apparently a court can pre-authorize the violation of a right, allowing CSIS to exceed the law and not disclose to the victim.

Is Canada is taking a page from its neighbor's playbook? No doubt the whole Western pack will soon run true to form. Canada: (a) guilty until proven innocent, and (b) under suspicion it may advocate the terrorizing of its citizens sometime really soon! (C-51)

Read More...
Oscar

Best of the Web: All theater? Obama-Netanyahu 'fallout' planned in 2009

Tony Cartalucci
Land Destroyer Report
Mon, 02 Mar 2015 01:00 UTC
idf
In a 2009 US policy paper published by the corporate-financier funded Brookings Institution, it was made clear that the US was determined to provoke Iran into a conflict and effect regime change at any cost - up to and including an outright military invasion and occupation of Iran with US troops.

However, before it came to that, the Brookings Institution's policymakers explored other options including fomenting US-backed political unrest coupled with covert, violent force, the use of US State Department listed foreign terrorist organizations to carry out assassinations and attacks within Iran, and limited airstrikes carried out by either the US or Israel, or both.

In retropspect, 6 years on, all of these tricks have not only been attempted to one degree or another in Iran, but have been demonstrably employed in neighboring Syria to diminish its strength - which according to Brookings - is a necessary prerequisite before waging war on Iran.

And of particular interest - considering what appears to be a growing diplomatic row between the United States and Israel - is just how precisely the US planned to covertly back what would be made to appear as a "unilateral" Israeli first strike on Iran - an attack that appears to be in the process of being justified through a carefully orchestrated propaganda campaign now unfolding.
Read More...
Nuke

Lavrov notes serious progress in talks on Iran nuclear program


ITAR-TASS
Mon, 02 Mar 2015 01:09 UTC
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov
© EPA/SALVATORE DI NOLFI
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov on Monday noted serious progress in talks on Iran's nuclear program.

"At a meeting with [US Secretary of State John] Kerry and [Iranian Foreign Minister Javad] Zarif, we discussed a number of issues on the Iranian nuclear program," Lavrov said. "We noted serious progress reached at the talks of the P5+1 with Tehran."

"We discussed tasks we have to solve in order to achieve a result within the agreed time frames," he said.

Comment: Let's see what Netanyahu says to Congress tomorrow.

Read More...