Immigration Fight at the AZ Corral

April 23, 2010

Arizona is in the grip of an anti-immigrant fever. Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, whose popularity was built on his tough enforcement tactics and willingness to defy the federal government, is on the edge of a run for governor. But even if he doesn’t, the state has a controversial new law that requires police to determine the status of anyone if there is a "reasonable suspicion” they are in the US illegally – and arrest them if documents can’t be produced. Hiring day laborers off the street has also become a crime.

Supporters see the law as an anti-crime measure and part of a larger campaign to secure the border. Opponents call it racial profiling and claim it is unconstitutional.

Gov. Jan Brewer, the Republican who replaced Janet Napolitano when she became Obama’s Homeland Security chief, waited as long as possible before taking a position on SB 1070. Caught between a conservative primary challenge and the prospect of her state becoming the target of a Latino-led boycott, her first step was to issue a border security plan of her own. It includes increased surveillance, redirecting stimulus money to local law enforcement, and a request to President Obama for more National Guard border support.

Then, on April 23, as large crowds protested in Phoenix and Tuscon, Brewer signed the bill. Arguing that she is responding to a crisis, she linked her decision to the drug war.

Latino members of Congress had urged Gov. Jan Brewer to veto. "When you institutionalize a law like this one, you are targeting and discriminating at a wholesale level against a group of people," Rep. Raul Grijalva said. More than 50,000 people signed petitions opposing the law, about 2,500 students from high schools across Phoenix walked out of school and marched to the Capitol, and nine college students were arrested during protests for chaining themselves to the Capitol building doors to pressure the governor.

Interim County Attorney Rick Romley called it an unfunded mandate that is “tearing the community apart” and pledges that, despite the law’s thrust, he will focus on organized crime syndicates engaged in human smuggling. Obama says it is “misguided.” But Arpaio accuses opponents of just not wanting to enforce immigration laws, and state polls reveal strong public support.

Tourism and business leaders worry that the law will discourage visitors and economic development, comparing it to what happened when another Arizona governor rescinded recognition of Martin Luther King Day as a holiday in 1987. At least $300 million in income was lost and the NFL pulled the Super Bowl from Phoenix. Eventually, voters approved the state holiday.

Despite the social and economic dangers, Arizona’s two US Senators, Jon Kyl and John McCain, don’t just support the move. They’ve unveiled their own 10-point plan, including 3,000 National Guardsmen to be deployed to the state's border, 24/7 monitoring by unmanned aerial vehicles, permanent addition of 3,000 Custom and Border Protection agents, and completion of 700 miles of fencing.

The Arizona legislation "is exactly why the federal government must act on immigration reform," argues state Democratic leader Jorge Luis Garcia. "We cannot have states creating a jigsaw puzzle of immigration laws. This bill opens the doors to racial profiling with the provision that allows an officer to ask for citizenship papers from someone who only looks illegal."

When Napolitano was governor, she vetoed similar bills. She was relatively tough on immigration, especially on businesses who hired undocumented people, imposing what she called a "business death penalty" – basically taking away licenses – from those violating an employer sanctions law twice. However, she opposed punishing immigrants who were already here and didn’t think much of a border fence. "You show me a 50-foot wall, and I'll show you a 51-foot ladder," she said.

Things have changed since she left. Whether or not the 77-year-old Arpaio runs for governor and wins the GOP primary (or the general election), immigration will remain front and center in state politics for the foreseeable future, potentially accelerating and certainly influencing the national debate over reform. The Arizona law also plays into the “state’s rights” thrust of the current anti-federal government surge.

Dangerous Tactics

Anti-immigrant sentiment is a persistent theme in US politics. In 1996, for example, when then-California Gov. Pete Wilson announced that undocumented pregnant women should be denied prenatal care, his underlying message was clear and brutal: If you’re “illegal,” get out of our country!

Wilson’s statement came at another dangerous time, one marked by resurgent racism, increased police brutality, vigilante violence, and rationalization of virtually any attack. In other words, we’ve been here before.

In the early 1980s, low intensity conflict (LIC) theorists constructed a Los Angeles insurrection scenario requiring a military response and sealing the nearby border. A decade later, the Border Patrol played a key role in the L.A. riots of 1992, deployed in Latino communities and arresting more than 1,000 people. Afterward, the INS began work with the Pentagon’s Center for Low-Intensity Conflict, and the line between civilian and military operations was largely erased.

Throughout the 1990s, Human Rights Watch accused the US Border Patrol of routinely abusing people, citing a pattern of beatings, shootings, rapes, and deaths. In response, INS detainees in a private jail rioted in June 1995 after being tortured by guards. After 9/11, the federal government considered placing US soldiers along the Mexican border.

But efforts to curtail immigration through tighter security have done little but redirect the flow into the most desolate areas of the border, increasing the mortality rate of those crossing. Between 1998 and 2004, at least 1,900 people died trying to cross the US-Mexico border. In recent years, Arizona has become the main entry point for undocumented immigrants into the US. An estimated 460,000 live in the state, but the total has dropped by at least 100,000, or 18 percent, since 2008.

In the last five years, around 200 people have died annually along the Arizona border in wilderness areas, according to medical examiner data compiled by Coalicion de Derechos Humanos. On the other hand, Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu charges that “numerous” officers have been killed by illegal immigrants, and that the violence has reached “epidemic proportions.” Although that’s true, the main spikes in crime have been in home invasions and kidnapping, both of which are linked to the drug war and organized crime based in Mexico.

Anti-immigrant activists deny charges of racism. But the facts tell a different story. Almost unlimited numbers of immigrants from mostly white, European countries are allowed into the US, while Latin Americans and Africans rarely even get tourist visas. And although sweatshops that employ undocumented workers are condemned, they aren’t often shut down, but merely raided, resulting in deportations. The owners may be fined, but they still come out ahead. After all, deported workers can’t collect back wages.

The Arizona law makes police go after anyone whose look or dress is “suspicious,” yet does little to toughen the employer sanctions legislation passed in 2007. That gave authorities the power to suspend or revoke the business licenses of employers caught knowingly hiring illegal workers and required all businesses to use E-Verify to check the work eligibility of new employees. Since then, only two cases have been settled in which the employers admitted guilty. All the new law says is that they must maintain those E-Verify records.

Border Wars

More than 150 years ago, at the end of a two-year war between Mexico and the US, the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was signed. Many Latinos still feel that the treaty, accepted under pressure by a corrupt dictator, was an act of theft violating international law. Mexico surrendered half its territory — now the Southwestern United States — and most of the Mexicans who stayed in the ceded region ultimately lost their land.

In a sense, that war never ended. Throughout the remainder of the 19th century, US officials, working closely with white settlers and elites, used often-violent means to subdue Mexicans in the region.

Once the region was “pacified,” border enforcement became a tool to regulate the flow of labor into the US. With the passage of the Immigration Act of 1924, the Border Patrol emerged as gatekeeper of a “revolving door,” sometimes processing immigrant labor, sometimes cracking down. The Bracero Program, which brought in Mexican agricultural laborers, was followed (and overlapped by) Operation Wetback, an INS-run military offensive against immigrant workers.

The border is still a battlefield. During recent decades, government strategies for combating undocumented immigration and drug trafficking have re-militarized the region.

The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) meshed neatly with more obvious aspects of low-intensity conflict doctrine. The definition of immigration and drug trafficking as “national security” issues has brought state-of-the-art military approaches into domestic affairs. But just as the projection of a “communist menace” was a smokescreen for post-war expansionism, a “Brown wave,” the “Drug War,” and terrorism have been used as pretexts for military-industrial penetration.

LIC doctrine uses diverse tactics — from the subtle and psychological (“winning hearts and minds”) to the obvious and brutal. Such flexibility requires the most sophisticated tools available, and the integration of police, paramilitary, and military forces. It also requires a plausible “enemy” — in this case, immigrants who can be accused of almost anything and abused with impunity.

In this kind of war, borders are ultimately unimportant. Battles are waged everywhere, even in communities far from a frontier. This blurs the line between police and the military, and further threatens basic rights.

Future Shock

Latinos soon will be the largest minority group in the US, according to Census Bureau predictions: at least 44 million, or 15 percent of the nation’s population. Although the biggest expansion will occur in states that draw the most immigrants — California, Texas, New York, Florida, Illinois, and New Jersey — the spill-over will reach from Atlanta to Minneapolis and Washington state. California is expected to undergo the most dramatic transformation — to at least 50 percent Latino and possibly only 32 percent white by 2040.

Overall, immigration is fueling US population growth, and the Census Bureau predicts a tripling of the Hispanic and Asian populations in less than 50 years. While the number of whites may increase by seven percent, the three largest minorities — Hispanic, Black, and Asian — are expected to rise by 188, 71, and 213 percent respectively. The bottom line is that these three groups are expected to constitute at least 47 percent of total US population by 2050. While such forecasts certainly have much to do with the current anti-immigrant climate, the trend won’t be reversed by race-motivated legislation.

Low-intensity war against non-white immigrants is especially evident along the US-Mexico border. It takes many forms: militarization, criminalizing the undocumented, repressive legislation, human rights violations, and cruel, discriminatory attacks on children and the poor. Arizona’s new law is the latest development – the toughest state law on illegal immigration yet.

According to Sen. Russell Pearce, architect of the plan, the idea is to wipe out the "sanctuary policies of cities.” He says that politicians and others have handcuffed the police, keeping them from finding and arresting those in this country illegally. State action is necessary, he adds, because of political failure in Washington. Democratic Sen. Rebecca Rios agrees that the federal government hasn’t done enough to secure the border, but doesn’t think this is the answer. "This bill does nothing to address human smuggling, the drug cartels, the arms smuggling,” she says. “It creates a lot of negative effects that none of us here want, she adds. "And, yes, I believe it will create somewhat of a police state."

Despite the state’s libertarian streak, Arizona lawmakers apparently have other concerns. In addition to pushing through a roundup of “illegals” by any means necessary, they’re considering legislation that would require any future presidential candidate to produce a US birth certificate – a nod to the “birthers” who think Obama isn’t a citizen. The governor has already signed a law letting people carry concealed weapons without a permit, and another saying that federal laws don’t apply to weapons and ammunition manufactured wholly within Arizona.

The picture emerging is of a state that’s armed and paranoid, hostile to federal oversight, and suspicious of anyone who looks or talks like an outsider. The immigration law, along with other recent legislation, support for the “birther” movement, and the statement by J.D. Hayworth, who is challenging McCain, that same sex marriage laws would lead to men marrying horses is leading many people to ask: What’s wrong with Arizona?

In some respects, its situation is unique. Combined with its proximity to the border, there is the enormous growth of Phoenix, the arrival of so many transplants from Eastern cities and California, and a general disinterest in politics that has let things careen out of control. Turnout is low for primary elections, and the legislature is more conservative than the general public. This has created an opening for figures like Pearce, who has associated with Nazis, Hayworth and Arpaio, who have become influential political allies.

On the other hand, Arizona represents an extreme manifestation of the anger and reactionary sentiments roiling across the country. With the rise of a new state’s rights, anti-immigrant movement, the choice facing the state and the nation as a whole has become basic, between what Mexican author Jose Vasconcelos once called Universopolis – a place in which all the peoples of the world are melded into a “cosmic race” – and the Blade Runner scenario.

In Blade Runner, a prescient 1982 film, Los Angeles in the 21st century has become an ominous “world city” marked by cultural fusion and economic stratification, a sunless and polluted place, overcrowded with Asian and Latino drones who barely look up at the metal fortresses of the rich. USC professor Kevin Starr warned of this possibility, “a demotic polyglotism ominous with unresolved hostilities” in “L.A. 2000,” a city-sponsored report that touted it as “the” city of the future. In essence, that option is an advanced imperialist state, one that encompasses colonies within its own borders. Phoenix could go the same way.

Like Vasconcelos, author Salman Rushdie can envision a more optimistic, multicultural alternative. Immigrants may not so much assimilate as leak into one another, he suggests, “like flavors when you cook.”

Of course, this is precisely what frightens many angry, fearful people. For them the USA is hot dogs and apple pie, and they have no desire to change their diets. They want “their country” back, and with Sheriff Arpaio as an immigrant-hunting Wyatt Earp, plus a tough new law on the books, Arizona has become a flashpoint for that fight.

Related video: The Ballad of Sheriff Joe

MAVERICK CHRONICLES, 5/6/2011

This just in: Donald Trump is now demanding Osama Bin Laden’s long form death certificate. While we’re at it, let’s see some paperwork on the death of Trump’s campaign for president.

Finally, the bold absurdity of Sideshow Don has burst through the media bubble. As Trump fired another has-been on his “reality” show last Sunday, the real President ran a high-tech hit on the most wanted man in the world. That’s counter-programming.

It is also one way to get a second term as president, and pretty well buries the theory that Obama is a Muslim. Or a pacifist. He’s not just ready to talk trash. He puts contracts out on designated enemies – and follows the firefights in real-time. Apparently, he’s a stone cold executor-in-chief.

As CIA Director Leon Panetta acknowledged afterward, the mission was to kill bin Laden. No capture, no Board room, no trial. In this reality unless you actively surrender, you’re seriously fired. But hey, bin Laden could have been wearing an explosive vest. Match that, Meatloaf**.

It was also a big news week for Vermont. Passing universal health care, the first in the nation, and then, in a pop culture coup, prominent feature placement in Rolling Stone, in an issue with articles on Kevin Smith and Steven Tyler. Kind of a mixed message about health there.

The article, “The Fire Next Time,” is about the country’s creaky, cranky old nuclear reactors. Word is that they’re more dangerous than another Stones Tour.

But seriously, here are some questions raised by events this week: Why have the US and NATO intervened in Libya and not anywhere else? Does the killing of bin Laden really mean justice was done? And given how intrusive our online technology is becoming, should we be more worried?

This is a preview of Maverick Media’s Rebel News Round Up,* broadcast live at approximately 11:15 a.m. Friday on WOMM (105.9-FM/LP – The Radiator) in Burlington. This Week: Osama has left the building – justice or vengeance? Plus, Vermont’s big move on health care and Rolling Stone’s rap on Vermont Yankee, the danger of persuasion profiling, and why the West is only helping Libya’s rebels. Now the news…

VERMONT SCENE

Leading the Way on Health Care    In a historic vote on Thursday, April 28, the Vermont Legislature passed legislation for a first-in-the-nation universal health care system. The state Senate approved the plan for a single-payer system in a 21-9, party-line vote after four hours of debate. Conservatives tried unsuccessfully to muddy the victory with an amendment to deny health care to undocumented immigrants. But Vermont is about as far from Arizona as you can get.

Governor Peter Shumlin campaigned on a promise to create a state level single-payer system that would contain health care costs and guarantee universal access to medical. After the Senate vote, he celebrated the victory with an appearance on “The Rachel Maddow Show.”

Stuck in the Nuclear Age    Meanwhile, Rolling Stone reminded America that the Vermont Yankee nuke, a virtual twin of the Fukushima plant that went critical in Japan, got a 20-year license renewal even though “the reactor’s cooling tower had literally fallen down, and the plant had repeatedly leaked radioactive fluid.”

The article by Jeff Goodell says about 60 new nukes are in the works worldwide. But without taxpayer support, especially in the form of US legislation that limits the legal liability of plant operators if an accident does occur – otherwise known as the Price-Anderson Act of 1957 – no new reactor would ever be built in this country.

The longer a nuke keeps operating, however, the more profitable it can become. The NRC has helped by letting plant owners “uprate,” a euphemism for letting them run harder without safety improvements. Goodell writes: “Vermont Yankee, for example, was permitted to boost its output by 20 percent, eroding the reactor’s ability to cool itself in the event of an emergency.” These modifications put millions of people at a higher risk.

The article also discusses the biggest safety issue for old nukes, what to do with the waste. It was supposed to be moved to the Yucca Mountains in Nevada, but that proved unfeasible. Thus, tens of thousands of tons of irradiated fuel is being held in spent fuel pools across the country. “The release of just one-tenth of the radioactive material at the Vermont Yankee reactor,” write Goodell, “could kill thousands and render much of New England uninhabitable for centuries.”

Solutions? Get an outside agency to review safety and security at the older nukes. The NRC has proven itself to be compromised. Or else repeal the Price-Anderson Act and force the industry to take responsibility for the real risks. The nuclear renaissance will end immediately.

In the meantime, Vermont will work to stop Entergy in court, close Vermont Yankee in less than a year, and establish that States do have the right to protect their environment and their citizens from threats the federal government refuses to acknowledge.

PARANOIA DEPT.

Google is facing a $50 million lawsuit over location tracking. Should we be concerned about online privacy? Where is all this going?

The problem is called personalized profiling, an evolving aspect of online profiling of individual consumers. Obviously, when we search on the Internet for "used motorcycles" or gardening books, we’re not shocked when ads for those products appear at the edges of many websites we view. But retailers not only can personalize which products are shown, they can even personalize the way they are pitched.

Videographer James Valastro notes that in one experimental online bookstore, customers were encouraged to browse titles and mark a few for purchase as a way to test a new technique. By alternating the types of pitches — Appeals to Authority like “Malcolm Gladwell says you’ll like this,” Social Proofs like “All your friends on Facebook are buying this book”), and so on — marketers could track which kind of argument persuaded best for each person.

They also found that many people respond to the same type of argument in multiple domains. In other words, if you figure out how to sell someone books, you can use the same basic technique to sell them clothes. If that finding holds in future tests, your “persuasion profile” could someday have a major financial value: a surefire way to sell you on almost anything.

Persuasion profiling is a new concept and still being developed, but potentially offers quick, easily transferable, and targeted access to your personal psychological weak spots. Now how do you feel about Google tracking people?

Check back after the Friday broadcast for more news and commentary.

*Edited transcripts don’t include extemporaneous comments and last minute changes or additions.

** Meatloaf is one of the contestants hoping to be Trump’s protégé on his show, Celebrity Apprentice. This is as much authority as society has seen fit to give the deluded real estate brand name: he gets to fire Meatloaf.

Check out The Vermont Way: Restless Spirits and Popular Movements

MAVERICK CHRONICLES: 1/21/11

A NEW GLOBAL BOSS?

It’s been almost 40 years since President Nixon and Henry Kissinger opened up relations with China. Since then the People’s Republic – no, not Vermont – has avoided major conflicts, kept its military spending down, developed its manufacturing base, and raised millions out of extreme poverty. Along the way, when the US needed money China was more than willing to oblige.

But now the US is deeply in debt. It owes China about a trillion dollars, with more borrowing highly likely. Basically, China has become banker for the nation. As a result, its leaders now feel free to challenge US policies. They don’t agree on capping greenhouse gases and aren’t willing to go along on North Korea or Iran. Meanwhile, China is buying up raw materials – including so-called rare earth resources –while beginning to build up its military.

On the other hand, the two nations do share some vital interests. According to Robert Weil, author of Red Cat, White Cat: China and the Contradictions of Market Socialism, both want to stabilize the current global capitalist system. Where they disagree is on “the best means to carry out the exploitation of the working class” and division of the spoils. “China is challenging the US 'right' to dominate East Asia, economically, politically, and militarily,” Weil says. “This leads to a schizophrenic relationship and an increasingly dangerous rivalry.” Thanks to Sam Husseini for that quote.

Last week, as President Hu met with Secretary of Defense Gates, China simultaneously tested a new stealth fighter and publicly criticized US arms sales to Taiwan. The basic message – between the lines – is that the days of US dominance may be coming to an end – militarily and economically. Like many people in this country, Chinese leaders have serious doubts that the US economy will fully recover, that the borrowing will stop, or that it can regain its competitive edge.

So, the question for this week is: Are we seeing a basic power shift? If the US can’t even control its domestic bankers, how does it expect to deal with China? In short, does America, and perhaps the rest of the world, have a new boss?

This is Maverick Media’s Rebel News Round Up, broadcast live at approximately 11:30 a.m. Friday on WOMM (105.9-FM/LP – The Radiator) in Burlington.

This Week: Baby Doc vs. Haitian justice, one small step for space tourism, Julian Assange defends himself, an informer in Minnesota, a libertarian progressive movement, gun violence in Vermont, amending the constitution to control corporations, Burlington’s candidate gap, dead cows, and the rumor of the week.

Live Stream: http://www.theradiator.org/drupal/webcam.html
Call-in: (802) 861-9666

NATIONAL SCENE

BABY DOC COMES HOME

Former Haitian President Jean Claude Duvalier, who went into exile 25 years ago, made a surprise return from his refuge near Paris last Sunday. He only planned to stay in Haiti for a few days. But on Tuesday Haitian prosecutors charged him with corruption and embezzlement. Now he can’t leave.

The main charges against Duvalier stem from $4.6 million that his family held in Swiss bank accounts. Swiss authorities almost released the money to Duvalier in 2008, but authorities in Haiti blocked that. They argued that the money was part of hundreds of millions of dollars that Duvalier embezzled from the government.

The accusations are actually pretty mild against someone widely blamed for one of the darker chapters in Haitian history. Duvalier’s regime is accused of kidnapping, torturing and murdering thousands of political opponents. The case against Baby Doc represents a strong step by a country with a long history of ignoring horrendous abuses, one where leaders rarely face prosecution – , that is, if it goes anywhere.

Duvalier took control of Haiti in 1971 when he was 19, inheriting power after the death of his father Francois Duvalier, or Papa Doc, who mixed politics and voodoo. Their dynasty used a security force known as the Tonton Macoute to brutally repress opponents and dissidents. Baby Doc was forced to flee the country in 1986 when repression and social convulsion pushed Haiti to the brink of civil war. The outcome was the election of a priest, Jean Bertrand Aristide, who was forced into exile twice – during each of his terms as President.

For the record, Baby Doc, an un-elected dictator and former president for life, couldn’t have returned to Haiti without the cooperation of the US and France, according to Elizi Danto, president of the Haitian Lawyers Leadership Network. But Aristide, who was democratically elected, hasn’t been allowed to come home from exile in South Africa.

ANOTHER STEP FOR SPACE TOURISM

Virgin Galactic, the private spaceflight company started by Sir Richard Branson, had another modest success last week. Its commercial spaceship completed a second successful suborbital test. Dubbed the VSS Enterprise, it was carried high above the spaceport Branson has built in New Mexico, then released by a mothership called the WhiteKnightTwo. Sometime soon the Enterprise is expected to begin carrying six passengers and two pilots, taking them to the edge of space for a spectacular view of the Earth and several minutes of weightlessness. A short but very sweet $200,000 adventure vacation.

Meanwhile, the nearly completed Spaceport America – hub of Virgin Galactic's space travel operations – is being evaluated at the request of newly appointed New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez. The state-of-the-art launch site is located near Truth or Consequences – that’s the town’s name – and is expected to become fully operational this year.

Spaceport America works closely with a number of aerospace firms, including Lockheed Martin, to realize Branson’s dream of commercial travel into space. Branson also launched the Carbon War Room, which is where Burlington Mayor Bob Kiss made contact with Lockheed to discuss its interest in partnering with Burlington.

So, do we get a spaceport – or at least a few seats on the Enterprise? If not, how about some flight time on an F-35 – if they end up based at the airport?

COMCAST GETS ITS WAY (AGAIN)

If you’re worried about corporate consolidation – or democracy – you probably aren’t too pleased with the FCC’s decision to OK a merger between Comcast and NBC. Actually, it’s a takeover by Comcast. The decision was announced on Tuesday, with a few conditions. The Department of Justice has also said yes. With a 51 percent stake in NBC Universal, Comcast will own most of the network's channels, including CNBC and Bravo, as well as the Universal movie studio.

One condition is that Comcast gives up management of the portal website Hulu. It also has to promote competition in the video marketplace. According to the FCC approval letter, Comcast-NBCU must increase its news coverage, expand children's and Spanish language programming, offer broadband services to low-income people at reduced prices, and provide high-speed broadband to schools, libraries and underserved communities. It must also offer customers the option of having Internet service separate from a cable bundle - for the next seven years at least.

Democratic FCC Commissioner Michael Copps opposed the vote. He warned that it "reaches into virtually every corner of our media and digital landscapes and will affect every citizen in the land. It confers too much power in one company's hands." Senator Al Franken called the deal a "tremendous disappointment."

Bernie Sanders says the FCC and the DOJ have “ignored their mandates to protect the public interest and preserve competition" by approving the deal. "At a time when a small number of giant media corporations already control what the American people see, hear, and read, we do not need another conglomerate with more control over the production and distribution of news and other programming," Sanders says.

The American Cable Association estimates that the merger will cost consumers $2.4 billion over a nine-year period, with higher monthly cable bills and subscription costs. That’s something to keep in mind in Burlington, where some people say the city should sell off Burlington Telecom. If that happens, the Queen City may again become one small piece of a vastly expanded Comcast media empire.

WIKILEAKS FOUNDER SPEAKS OUT

The US Justice Department has established a secret grand jury in Virginia to indict Wikilweaks founder Julian Assange under a discredited espionage act. The obsolete law was used to arrest peace activists during World War I. Judicial experts call it a “deliberate set up” since this area of Virginia is home for many employees of the Pentagon, CIA, and Department of Homeland Security.

In Switzerland Rudolph Elmer, a banker who publicized private client data on WikiLeaks, has been found guilty of breaching banking secrecy and threatening former colleagues. But he was given only a suspended fine. The prosecution had called for an eight-month jail term.

Journalist John Pilger talked to Assange last week about this and other developments. Despite the threats, Assange claims the US is not WikiLeaks’ main technological enemy. That honor goes to China, he told Pilger. “China has aggressive, sophisticated interception technology that places itself between every reader inside China and every information source outside China,” Assange said. “We’ve been fighting a running battle to make sure we can get information through, and there are now all sorts of ways Chinese readers can get on to our site.”

The US is obviously out to get Assange. In fact, US Vice President Joe Biden has declared him a “high tech terrorist.” Yet Assange is just as worried about what will happen to Bradley Manning, the alleged whistleblower, who is being held in conditions that the US National Commission on Prisons describes as “tortuous.” Pilger calls Manning “the world’s pre-eminent prisoner of conscience.”

In 2008 candidate Barack Obama said government whistleblowers “are part of a healthy democracy and must be protected from reprisal.” Since winning, however, he has prosecuted more of them than any other president in US history.

“Cracking Bradley Manning is the first step,” Assange argues. “The aim clearly is to break him and force a confession that he somehow conspired with me to harm the national security of the United States. In fact, I’d never heard his name before it was published in the press. WikiLeaks technology was designed from the very beginning to make sure that we never knew the identities or names of people submitting material.”

According to Pilger, he added: “I think what’s emerging in the mainstream media is the awareness that if I can be indicted, other journalists can, too. Even the New York Times is worried. This used not to be the case. If a whistleblower was prosecuted, publishers and reporters were protected by the First Amendment that journalists took for granted. That’s being lost. The release of the Iraq and Afghanistan war logs, with their evidence of the killing of civilians, hasn’t caused this – it’s the exposure and embarrassment of the political class: the truth of what governments say in secret, how they lie in public; how wars are started. They don’t want the public to know these things and scapegoats must be found.”

The US State Department recently issued a warning to human rights activists, foreign government officials and business people identified in leaked cables about possible danger from exposure. This is propaganda, Assange claimed. In a letter to Congress, he noted, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has admitted that no sensitive intelligence sources have been compromised. NATO in Kabul has told CNN it couldn’t find a single person who needed protecting.

Javier Moreno, the editor of Spain’s El Pais, which has published WikiLeaks material, writes, “I believe that the global interest sparked by the WikiLeaks papers is mainly due to the simple fact that they conclusively reveal the extent to which politicians in the West have been lying to their citizens.”

Pilger’s favorite leak so far is from the Ministry of Defense in London. It describes journalists who serve the public without fear or favor as “subversive” and “threats.” He calls that a badge of honor.

INFORMER FOUND IN ANTI-WAR GROUP

In a new article, author Ron Jacobs reports that Minnesota’s AntiWar Committee, which was raided last September by the FBI for alleged “material aid to terrorists,” has learned that they had an informer in their midst since 2008. The informer went by the name Karen Sullivan and claimed to be a single parent and a lesbian. After getting involved in the Committee, she traveled to Palestine with two other members. When they reached Israel, however, they were told to turn back. The two who chose to stay were detained. “Sullivan” went back to the US.

As it turns out, Israeli authorities had prior knowledge of the visit and the plan to meet with Palestinian women. But no one in the group could figure out how this happened at the time. It now appears that “Ms. Sullivan” provided information to her handler, who forwarded it to US officials. From there it was apparently passed on to the Israeli government.

Jacobs concludes that the discovery of such an informer demonstrates that the government “will stop at nothing in their attempt to silence protest against their imperial designs.”

A LIBERTARIAN-PROGRESSIVE ALLIANCE?

An alliance of libertarian progressives could be the political movement of the future. According to Raw Story, the spark may be the greed of the ultra-rich, which could lead to a global youth resistance movement that breaks down old political boundaries. Ralph Nader sees a convergence of liberals, progressives and libertarian conservatives in the wake of a worsening financial crisis. On the Fox business channel, Nader recently called these shifting alliances "the most exciting new political dynamic" in the US.

How could this left-right movement begin? Maybe it already has, thanks to an alliance between Rep. Ron Paul, godfather of the Tea Party movement, and Sen. Bernie Sanders. The most conservative and most liberal members of their respective chambers have teamed up to propose cuts to the US defense budget and push a more thorough audit of the Federal Reserve, the private central bank which controls US currency. Sanders-Paul, now there’s a ticket.

VERMONT SCENE

GUN VIOLENCE COMES TO HIGH SCHOOL

Senseless gun violence isn’t restricted to the Wild West. On Tuesday morning a Vermont teenager was found dead inside a bathroom at Mount Mansfield Union High School. It appears as if he shot himself, although the police are withholding details while they investigate.

Fifteen-year-old Connor Menning was described as a conscientious athlete, a loyal friend, a polite and courteous young man who enjoyed team sports, especially lacrosse and football. “He was a very committed team player,” said Holly Stadtler, whose son played football and lacrosse with Menning.
His death, whether suicide or not, points to at least two things – easy access to guns puts teenagers at risk, and Arizona isn’t the only place with a problem.

MOVING TO AMEND

Lawyer and former Green Party Presidential candidate David Cobb visited Vermont last week to promote a campaign to amend the US Constitution. The goal is that corporations are no longer legally recognized as people. Cobb spoke in Burlington, Waitsfield and Montpelier, and met with a dozen state senators, 11 of whom who have agreed to support a Vermont resolution calling on Congress to initiate the amendment process.

Exactly a year ago, on January 21, 2010, the Supreme Court ruled that corporations are persons. Basically, the Court said that they have the same First Amendment rights to make independent expenditures as natural people, and restrictions prohibiting corporations and unions from spending their general funds on independent expenditures violated the First Amendment. In other words, they’re entitled by the Constitution to buy elections and even run the government.

But critics of the decision say that only human beings are people, while corporations are merely legal fictions. Here is the basic wording of the proposed resolution:

We, the People of the United States of America, reject the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United, and move to amend our Constitution to: 1) firmly establish that money is not speech, and that human beings, not corporations, are persons entitled to constitutional rights, 2) Guarantee the right to vote and to participate, and to have our vote and participation count, and 3) Protect local communities, their economies, and democracies against illegitimate "preemption" actions by global, national, and state governments.

There’s a good chance that a resolution with similar wording can be adopted in Vermont. But other legislative initiatives are also being considered in various states. In Vermont, for example, Jason Lorber (D-Chittenden) introduced H. 299 in 2009. Among several campaign finance provisions in his proposal are modifications to Vermont's public financing system and a provision to regulate reporting and disclosure of independent expenditures.

Last March, Vermont’s Senate Government Operations Committee introduced S.294, requiring sponsor identification information to be included on electioneering communications.

One of the most promising pieces of legislation has come from Maryland, Senate Bill 570. The proposal is to prohibiting a corporation from publishing or distributing campaign material in the State unless the material is true, the board of directors has decided that spending money is in the best interests of the corporation, and both the content of the campaign material and the expenditure have been approved by the stockholders in a vote.

So, maybe Vermont can go farther than recommending that Congress take action. How about some legislation with teeth?

BURLINGTON’S CANDIDATE GAP

Voters in the Queen City won’t have much of a choice in the City Council elections this March. Half the Council’s 14 seats are at stake, but according to Shay Totten, at best two of the seven races will be contested and just one progressive appears to be running.

Democratic and Independent incumbents in Wards 1, 2 and 5 will apparently run unopposed, as will first time Democratic candidates in Wards 4 and 6. There will be a race in Ward 7: Democrat Greg Jenkins will face off against Republican incumbent Vince Dober. The only Progressive on the City Council, another Vince – Vince Brennan, who was just elected in November to replace Ward 3 Progressive Marisa Caldwell – may also face a Democratic opponent.

The deadline for candidates is next Monday, so if you’re interested (and live in Burlington, obviously) there’s less than 100 hours left to get petitions signed.

RUMOR OF THE WEEK:

LANCE ARMSTRONG’S DRUG CONNECTION

According to Sports illustrated, Lance Armstrong may be indicted in a doping scandal. The FDA is currently investigating the period of 1999 to 2004, when Armstrong was a member of the team sponsored by the US Postal Service.

How serious is the inquiry? Very. If Armstrong is proven to be involved, the consequences would be stiff. “If evidence suggests that Armstrong was directing illegal doping activity,” reports Sports Illustrated, “the inquiry could result in charges against him of conspiracy, wire fraud, money laundering, racketeering, drug trafficking and defrauding the US government.”

SIGNS OF THE TIMES?

Sarah Palin was on the defensive this week, trying to prove she was the victim of the Arizona shootings. TV host Regis Philbin and politician chameleon Joe Lieberman announced their retirements, just as a 7.2 earthquake rocked Pakistan. Coincidence? Let’s hope so. And Chinese leader Hu Jintao met with President Obama. Reassuring, isn’t it, when the boss comes to town for a site visit?

Meanwhile the list of mass animal deaths continued to grow. Recent examples includes the dozens of birds found dead in Romania, 300 grackles – tall blackbirds, I’m told – that dropped from the sky in Alabama, and thousands of fish discovered dead in Maryland. Now what? Up to 200 cows have mysteriously been found dead in Wisconsin.

In this case, vets say the cows were probably wiped out by an infectious disease. But the exact cause is unknown at this point. They could have contracted a respiratory condition known as red nose - infectious bovine rhinotracheitis - or Bovine Virus Diarrhea. Police say there’s no risk of illness spreading to other animals or humans.

If you’re a conspiracy theorist, this looks like either another government experiment – or one more sign of the apocalypse. So far this year unexplained animal deaths have been reported in Sweden, the US, Great Britain and New Zealand.

Finally, in strange music news, there’s a new Internet hit – a tribute song to Sarah Palin and the Tea Party. There's a video: Check it out. And here are some of the lyrics:

She’s a cold blast from Alaska,
Ingrained with common sense.
She’s not a Harvard lawyer, but she knew what the Founders meant.
A cold blast from the North,
That freezes Congress in their tracks.
With God and the Tea party, she’s gonna take it back.
Sarah Palin, she won’t listen to their bunk.
Sarah Palin’s coming south to hunt some skunk.
Sarah Palin, she’ll throw them all in jail.

So, look out world. In the meantime, it’s week 525, 3675 days since the country was taken hostage in a court-ordered coup. This is Greg Guma with the Rebel News Round Up for January 21, 2011 on WOMM-LP. From Burlington in the People’s Republic of Vermont.

MAVERICK CHRONICLES: 1/14/11

WHY LOCKHEED LIKES VERMONT

Part One – Bernie Sanders’ Sandia Epiphany: Here’s Senator Bernie Sanders in 2009 talking about Lockheed Martin, the biggest defense contractor in the world. Lockheed and other top military contractors were guilty of what Bernie called “systemic, illegal, and fraudulent behavior, while receiving hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer money.”

Among other crimes, Sanders mentioned how Lockheed had defrauded the government by fraudulently inflating the cost of several Air Force contracts, lied about the costs when negotiating contracts for the repairs on US warships, and submitted false invoices for payment on a multi-billion dollar contract connected to the Titan IV space launch vehicle program.

A month later, however, he was in a different frame of mind when he hosted a delegation from Sandia National Laboratories. Sandia is managed for the Department of Energy (DoE) by Sandia Inc., a wholly-owned Lockheed subsidiary. At Sanders’ invitation, a delegation from Sandia was in Vermont to talk partnership and scout locations for a satellite lab. He had been working on the idea since 2008 when he visited Sandia headquarters in New Mexico.

In January 2010 he took the next major step – organizing a delegation of Vermonters. The group included Green Mountain Power CEO Mary Powell; Domenico Grasso, vice president for research at the University of Vermont; David Blittersdorf, co-founder of NRG Systems and CEO of Earth Turbines; and Scott Johnston, CEO of the Vermont Energy Investment Corporation, which runs Efficiency Vermont.

Despite concerns about Lockheed’s bad corporate behavior Sanders apparently didn’t think that inviting a subsidiary to Burlington meant helping them to get away with anything. Rather, he envisioned Vermont transformed “into a real-world lab for the entire nation” through a partnership. “We're at the beginning of something that could be of extraordinary significance to Vermont and the rest of the country,” he said.

More on Lockheed and Vermont later. This is Maverick Media’s Rebel News Round Up,* broadcast live at approximately 11:30 a.m. Friday on WOMM (105.9-FM/LP – The Radiator) in Burlington.

The Question this week: Is the empire collapsing? Then, the Arizona shootings and extreme speech, Digital ID plans, Tom Delay gets easy time, Aerial accidents on Broadway, Unraveling Lockheed’s Burlington plans, plus the rumor of the week.

Live Stream: http://www.theradiator.org/drupal/webcam.html
Call-in: (802) 861-9666

IS THE EMPIRE COLLAPSING?

About 103,000 new US jobs were reportedly created in December. That sounds promising, but it’s not enough to keep pace even with population growth. As a result, the official unemployment rate fell from 9.8 to 9.4 percent. But what really fell wasn’t the number of unemployed people but the number who are actively looking for work.

People who get discouraged and stop looking aren’t considered part of the work force by most statisticians. Therefore they aren’t counted as unemployed. So, the unemployment rate actually fell because the number of discouraged workers increased, not because employment rose.

The unemployment rate for short-term discouraged workers is actually 16.7 percent. When statistician John Williams (shadowstats.com) adds the long-term discouraged, US unemployment as of December goes to 22.4 percent. In other words, more than a fifth of the population.

And what are those 103,000 new jobs? Mainly domestic service work – waitresses and bar tenders, health care workers, and staffers in the retail and wholesale trade.The US has only 11 million manufacturing jobs left. That’s less than 9 percent of the total workforce. Despite the country’s heavy dependence on foreign manufacturing and creditors, the experts in Washington claim the US is still an economic superpower. But the reality is that US corporations have taken too many jobs offshore. That’s big business patriotism.

Last Friday Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke testified before the Senate Budget Committee. He warned that the government must get its budget deficit under control or “the economic and financial effects would be severe.” But how do you get the budget under control when the government, regardless of party or president, is committed to basically running the world? The Congress has just passed the largest military budget in history, and there is no indication that any of America’s wars and occupations are near an end.

The financial crisis isn’t over either. More foreclosures and financial sector troubles loom ahead, which will probably lead to more bailouts for those “too big to fail.” The dollar is also in danger. And the Republican prescription? Cut into Social Security and Medicare to pay for the wars and bailouts.

So, the question for this week is: Is the empire collapsing? Even if there is a modest recovery, are its days as the leading economic power in the world winding down?

NATIONAL SCENE

HATEFUL SPEECH AND VIOLENCE

Back in October, when I returned to radio, my first question of the week was whether extreme ideas and speech led to violent acts, and if those who spread hateful ideas are responsible when someone follows through.

Now we have the shooting spree in Tucson, in which six people including a child were killed, and 14 people were injured, including Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. The relationship between hateful speech and such attacks hasn’t been resolved – but the shootings have put the topic at the center of public attention and debate.

What happened in Arizona wasn’t an isolated incident. It was the culmination of a series of threats and attacks, most in response to Rep. Giffords’ support for health care reform. In November 2009, a visitor brandished a handgun during a "Congress on your Corner" event at a local Safeway. On March 22, 2010, just hours after Giffords cast her vote in favor of health care reform, a vandal jumped a gate and smashed the glass front door of her Arizona office. A few days later the now infamous map featuring Giffords' district in the crosshairs was posted by Sarah Palin's PAC. In announcing the map, Palin issued a tweet urging her supporters "Don't retreat. Instead — reload!” This week, through a spokesperson, Palin denied that the crosshairs targeting 20 Democrats who voted against health care reform represents gun sights. They were really surveyor’s markings. Right.

During last fall’s campaign season, Jesse Kelley, Giffords' Republican opponent, held an event in which he asked supporters to donate $50 in order to "shoot a fully automatic M16" to "get on target" and help "remove Gabrielle Giffords." Palin praised Kelly on Fox Business News, saying "I don't feel worthy to lace his combat boots."

Givern all that, should we be surprised about what happened?

ARIZONA CIRCLES THE WAGONS

How is Arizona processing its grief over the tragedy. I don’t want to over-simplify, but the legislature is debating whether to allow concealed weapons in colleges and universities. It’s beginning to look like the take away is “arm everyone.”

Even more telling is a new law designed to keep protestors away from the funerals of the six victims. Legislators from both parties want to make it illegal before the weekend to picket within 300 feet of any home, cemetery, funeral home or house of worship before, during or immediately after a ceremony or burial.

House Speaker Kirk Adams, a Republican from Mesa, has conceded that introducing, debating and approving such legislation so fast is "unprecedented.'' But that isn’t stopping them. An aide to Gov. Jan Brewer says she’ll sign the measure as soon as it reaches her desk.

WIKILEAKS AND DIGITAL IDS

Last week, if you recall, the rumor of the week was the idea that the Wikileaks controversy was a CIA conspiracy designed to crack down on the Internet. While that’s clearly a stretch, there is evidence that the government is using the situation to take some long-anticipated steps.

Case in point: White House officials say that President Obama plans to give the US Commerce Department authority over a plan to create an Internet ID. White House Cybersecurity Coordinator Howard Schmidt calls Commerce "the absolute perfect spot in the US government" to centralize efforts toward creating an "identity ecosystem." Civil libertarians can at least take solace in the fact that Commerce beat out the National Security Agency and the Department of Homeland Security. Now that would be scary.

The administration is currently drafting what it calls the National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace. "We are not talking about a national ID card," says Commerce Secretary Gary Locke. "We are not talking about a government-controlled system. What we are talking about is enhancing online security and privacy, and reducing and perhaps even eliminating the need to memorize a dozen passwords, through creation and use of more trusted digital identities." I must admit, the password idea does sound attractive.

Details are scarce. There might be a smart card or a digital certificate that proves online users are who they say they are. Digital IDs could be offered to consumers by online vendors for activities like financial transactions. But anonymity may still be possible and the ID itself will probably be created by private companies. Feel better?

TOM DELAY GETS OFF EASY

The crimes of former Congressional strongman Tom DeLay clearly merit hard time. Among other things, he rigged redistricting in Texas and funneled illegal corporate money into elections. In the resulting court case, he faced up to 99 years behind bars for money laundering, and another 20 for engaging in a criminal conspiracy.

The specific crime that led to his conviction involved the use political action committee to move $190,000 in corporate campaign contributions to the Republican National Committee. Now that Citizens United has opened the corporate floodgates for campaigns, such tactics may no longer be necessary. In the Delay case, the RNC distributed money to Republican legislative candidates in Texas. Those elections shifted state House control to the GOP. Then, at DeLay's behest, legislators redrew Congressional district lines in a way that favored Republican candidates so much that five Democratic incumbents were defeated in the 2004 election.

The defeated Democrats had survived the Republican sweep in 2002. Yet, in 2004, a better year for most Democrats, they lost. It wasn’t just shifting voter sentiment. The defeats were caused by DeLay’s subversion of the 2002 elections and the redistricting process. Unrepentant in court, he explained: "I fought the fight. I ran the race. I kept the faith."

And, in the end he got off easy. The former congressman was sentenced last Monday to three years in jail and ten years probation. Still, DeLay refuses to admit he did anything wrong. His attorneys are appealing the sentence.

AERIAL ATTRACTION

In New York theater circles the big story is Julie Taymor’s Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark. It’s the most expensive Broadway musical ever staged -- $65 million. Also the most dangerous. Last October an actor broke both wrists when he was catapulted across the stage. Another broke a toe. During the previews, a lead actress got a concussion when she was hit by a rope. A month ago someone fell off a 30-foot platform, fracturing his skull and breaking four ribs. He just got out of rehab.

Meanwhile, ticket sales have soared. Is it the music or the possibility of witnessing an aerial accident?

LOCKHEED & VERMONT

Part Two – A New Business “Partner”: Burlington Mayor Bob Kiss evidently reached a similar conclusion to Bernie Sanders last November when he signed a letter of cooperation with Lockheed Martin. The plan is to work together on sustainable energy projects. Burlington is the first city in the country to develop such a partnership. Similar to Sanders, Kiss says working with Lockheed will help Vermont remain a leader in addressing energy issues and climate change. Its military work and record of corporate crimes aren’t factors for him.

When I asked Kiss at a Neighborhood Planning Assembly last week whether the plans for the Burlington-Lockheed partnership and a Sandia satellite lab were related, he described the corporation’s offer as “serendipitous.” In short, it is just good fortune, a lucky coincidence, that Lockheed wants to work with Burlington, Sandia is creating a lab here, and Lockheed's F-35 may be stationed a few miles away at the airport.

It was a bit hard to accept. One reason is that the details of both deals were worked out at about the same time and sounded eerily complimentary. During a two-day field trip in early November, just before Kiss announced the Lockheed partnership, Sandia officials again met with Bernie at his office, this time to discuss specific areas for collaborations.

Sanders painted a rosy picture. Businesses, ratepayers and researchers will get a boost. A $1 million DoE planning grant is already in hand and more support from the Department of Energy will arrive as the project gains steam. Sandia Vice President Richard Stulen has confirmed Bernie’s pledge that no weapons development work would be involved. The focus, he promises, would be cutting edge research on cyber security, specifically a “smart grid” that can stop hackers.

Sandia sees Vermont’s energy infrastructure as an “ideal place” to create a model for the rest of the country. The Department of Energy is reportedly impressed with work underway in the state on forward-looking renewable energy technology, as well as a willingness to “tinker with related policies and regulations.” True to the Lockheed playbook, Sandia defines the lab’s mission as energy “security.” But the big carrot is the prospect of not only some jobs but a chance for Vermont businesses to get a “global competitive edge.”

The letter of cooperation between the city and Lockheed backs up this argument. Lockheed Martin Corporation Senior Vice President and Chief Technology Officer Dr. Ray O. Johnson has stressed national security and “the economic and strategic challenges posed by our dependence on foreign oil and the potential destabilizing effects of climate change.” The Burlington partnership, he says, will “demonstrate a model for sustainability that can be replicated across the nation."

It’s surely tempting to be a “model” for the nation, not to mention being offered enough money and technical expertise to help make it happen. But such a generous offer also opens up new lines of inquiry, like who exactly is making the offer, why here and now, and whether this eager partner can be trusted.

A related issue is whether it will be more difficult, or even possible, to say no to hosting Lockheed’s big ticket military project – the F-35 – if a close partnership with the corporation and its research lab is in place with the backing of Burlington’s Mayor and the entire Congressional delegation.

Part Three – A Flying Brick in the Green Mountains? For the past decade the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter has been Lockheed’s largest project. It’s also the largest project in the history of military aviation. As William Hartung explains in Prophets of War, winning the contract preserved Lockheed’s role as the leading producer of combat aircraft.

At first everyone wanted in – the US Air Force, Navy and Marines, the Royal Air Force and Navy, and seven other countries, Having so many buyers and partners was supposed to keep the unit cost down. But as the R & D proceeded, various capabilities and requests collided. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) added technical bells and whistles, hoping to produce a plane that could be used for not only for air-to-air fighting but also for air support and stealth missions. In other words, it was supposed to address the needs of three different military services and several foreign countries.

Lockheed’s problems with the plane came to a head in early 2010, only months after Defense Secretary Robert Gates proclaimed it a viable alternative to building more F-22 Raptors. Only 16 of 168 proposed test flights had been completed, and cost overruns were driving up the price as it became the costliest weapons program in Pentagon procurement history.

Last February South Burlington City Council Chair Mark Boucher sent a letter to the Air Force about the prospect that F-35s might be stationed at Burlington International Airport. Beyond expressing disappointment that the city wasn’t receiving enough notice about meetings, he wanted the military to know that many locals had problems with “bedding” the plane near them. Quite a few homes have already been torn down to make way for airport expansion. “Every home the airport acquires is one less available for a new working family in our City,” Boucher wrote.

There is also concern about the impacts of noise, light and other pollutants, and an increase in traffic as more military personnel arrive. At the very least, the city wants to see and hear an operational plane “so residents can judge the noise at landing and take-off,” hear the pitch of the engines, and see how it compares with the F-16.

The Air Guard responded by holding a public briefing for local leaders in April. Hundreds of residents showed up, many of them concerned about the plan. Sheryl Parker, coordinator of the fed’s Environmental Impact Study, was polite and seemed to say that lack of community support could be a factor in the final decision. But when asked if that meant fighters wouldn’t be based in South Burlington if enough people objected, she replied, "I wouldn't say that."

As it turned out, before the impact statement could be issued Senator Pat Leahy – who takes pride in bringing as much military money to Vermont as possible -- jumped the gun in November with what he considered good news. Without offering any specific reasons he announced that the airport had advanced to a two-member “short list” for the plane.

Congressman Peter Welch touted the Vermont Air Guard’s reputation, Leahy promised that the plane’s noise could be minimized, and Sanders saw the announcement as a “sign of the great national respect and admiration” for the Guard. But for F-35 critics like Juliet Buck, who has tracked the issue for months, the announcement meant something else. It had turned the environmental impact study into a pointless “dog and pony show.”

Funding is another matter. As Congress reconvened last week Defense Secretary Gates continued to insist that, despite years of delay and massive cost increases, the F-35 remains the “heart of the future of tactical combat.” But that didn’t stop him from putting forward a spending plan that includes cuts in the number of planes – “restructuring” in Pentagon-speak – to compensate for all the delays.

Ordering fewer planes doesn’t mean that the Pentagon is reconsidering anything, only that the cost of each will be even higher. Various military branches remain wedded to the plane, whatever the cost. As CBS put it in a December 2010 report, the F-35 is apparently “too big to fail.” Lockheed clearly sees it that way.

RUMOR OF THE WEEK:

BLACKBIRD DEATHS LINKED TO PHOSGENE – AND MURDER

Remember those red-wing blackbirds that died in Arkansas on New Year’s Day? Well, here’s a possible explanation – an Air Force KC-767 tanker aircraft transporting Phosgene poisonous gas to Afghanistan that malfunctioned shortly after takeoff from Little Rock Air Force Base.

The charge supposedly came in a report by Russia’s Foreign Military Intelligence Directorate. The story begins at the Pine Bluff Arsenal, also known as “America’s Arsenal,” a base that specializes in chemical-biological defense. In the past, Russia has accused the US of removing chemical agents from Iraq and taking them there for testing and, hopefully, destruction.

The US reportedly relocated an estimated 63,000 metric tons of the poisonous gas Phosgene from Iraq to Pine Bluff between 2003 and 2008. Phosgene is one of the most dangerous chemical weapons ever used. It can literally cause the lungs and respiratory system to explode.

Last September, the government began “accelerated” disposal of the gas by injecting it into the ground in central Arkansas, the Russians claim. Unfortunately, this caused hundreds of small earthquakes. Then the government decided to ship part of the stockpile – the Russians say “massive quantities” – to Afghanistan. Why? Apparently because this poison gas can no longer be legally manufactured by the US. And that makes it valuable as a Weapon of Mass Destruction, especially in a situation where the enemy is firmly entrenched in hostile terrain.

After the aerial release the dead birds were quickly removed by US Environmental Services workers wearing hazmat suits and gas masks. A US report says that cause of death was “trauma in the breast tissue, with blood clots in the body cavity and a lot of internal bleeding.” This is consistent with Phosgene exposure. It was actually the second “accidental” release of Phosgene in as many days. The day before, the same Air Force tanker allegedly had another “critical malfunction,” causing a release over the Arkansas River that killed over 100,000 fish.

What happened next, the Russian report allegedly says, was a murder to cover it all up. The victim was John P. Wheeler III, Special Assistant to the Secretary of the Air Force during the second Bush administration, and more recently Special Assistant for Air Force Installations, Logistics and Environment. Wheeler was brutally murdered and dumped in a landfill sometime last week. Delaware police are investigating.

The Wilmington News Journal reports that Wheeler was last seen riding an Amtrak train from Washington to Wilmington. According to Fox News, somebody initially reported that the body was dumped out of a refuse truck. Newark Police told Fox that nobody reported Wheeler missing before he was found.

Wheeler wrote one of the most important manuals on the effectiveness of biological and chemical weapons. In 2009 he was hired as a consultant to the Mitre Corporation. Its aviation development department creates computer systems used by the Air Force on aerial spraying planes. According to the Russian report, when Wheeler discovered what was happening with the Phosgene stockpiles, he went to Washington and threatened to expose the officials responsible. As a Vietnam Veteran he knew about US chemical and biological attacks in that conflict and had vowed to not let happen again.

His mistake, at least if you believe the rumor, was threatening to go public.

It’s week 524, 3668 days since the country was taken hostage. This is Greg Guma with the Rebel News Round Up on The Rose Show. January 14, 2011 on WOMM-LP. From Burlington in the People’s Republic of Vermont.

*This is an edited transcript and does not include extemporaneous comments and last minute changes or additons.

MAVERICK CHRONICLES, 12/17/2010

This week on Maverick Media’s Rebel News Round Up, broadcast live at approximately 11:30 a.m. Friday on WOMM (105.9-FM/LP – The Radiator) in Burlington. The Question: Do we prefer the virtual to the real? Looking back at 2010: celebrity misadventures, earthquakes and other disasters, corporate crimes, governing toward gridlock, return of the culture war, media breakthroughs, endangered humanity, and the rumor of the week.

.

Live Stream: http://www.theradiator.org/drupal/webcam.html
Call-in: (802) 861-9666

SEASON OF THE RICH: 2010 in Review

Rednecks out to back a witch
Two parties running in a ditch
Yes, it’s strange very strange
Must be the season of the rich

It was a time of corporate theft, natural disasters, cultural counter-revolution and a general retreat from reality. According to Time, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg is the person of the year. Personally, I still can’t decide whether social networking is like the invention of the telephone, just an excuse to gossip, or a way to collect information on people and make it feel like fun. Still, my personal choice for most influential person is Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. And both wunderkinds owe their prominence to the existence of the Internet. So, maybe that was the year’s defining characteristic – the power of cyberspace, eclipsing both inner and outer space. Strange, very strange. And it raises the question: In 2010 has the virtual officially become more compelling than the real?

The year actually started with more traditional media madness and misbehaving celebrities. In January the big talk in TV circles was another late night war. After failing at 10 pm, Jay Leno reclaimed The Tonight Show and Conan O’Brien was bumped from the lineup. Tiger Woods, who was already a major meal for the press cannibals, apologized for his sexual misadventures and decided to take a break from golf. Both he and Conan returned to the spotlight before too long. And, of course, there was the pleasant distraction of the Olympic Games in February. But more shattering events were already erupting.

Here are five of the year’s major story lines – some acknowledged, others under or misreported.

EARTH SENDS A MESSAGE

As the argument over climate change continued, deniers got more than their fair share of attention and the planet sent some pointed messages of its own. In January Haiti, which has endured centuries of environmental abuse, was hit with a devastating earthquake. Thousands died and millions continue to suffer. How much can one small country take, especially the poorest in the Western hemisphere? Less than a month later, on February 24, came an 8.8 Earthquake and tsunami in Chile. The body count was much lower, but the quake itself was one of the largest in recorded history.

Less than two months after that, on April 14, ash from an exploding volcano in Iceland disrupted air traffic across Europe. And on October 25, another earthquake created another tsunami, this one off the coast of Indonesia’s Sumatra. Hundreds died. Still, despite such calamities and another year of strange weather, little was done to prepare for more environmental upheavals in the future. Message from the planet ignored.

CORPORATIONS GO TOXIC

Not to be outdone by nature, big businesses demonstrated that they’re ready to compete at creating chaos and putting humans at risk. They weren’t creating many jobs, but they certainly produced a few disasters. As Haiti reeled Toyota launched the year’s recall mania. Honda, Ford, even Lexus soon joined the club.

Here’s a partial list of the product recalls from our less-than-safe free market: Tylenol, Rolaids, cheese and eggs, cribs, strollers, car seats and kids medicine, pet food and 27 million pounds of meat and poultry processed for human consumption. Actually, in terms of food recall it may have been the year of egg: half a billion eggs were pulled after 2400 people were hit with salmonella contamination.

Other notable food recalls included lobster, chopped celery from a San Antonio processing plant that was linked to at least four deaths, more than a million pounds of salami and Italian sausage after people in 44 states got sick (the culprit turned out to be black pepper used to coat the meats), lettuce possibly contaminated with e. coli, salmonella and listeria, and lunch meat and frozen vegetables distributed by Walmart. (Some packages of veggies included a special bonus – shards of glass.)

But these mishaps pale when compared to the April 5 mine explosion in West Virginia, the Chilean miners trapped underground from August 4 to October 13, or the big Kahuna – the Gulf oil spill. On April 20, the Deepwater Horizon oil platform exploded. Eleven people working on the rig died right away. We may not ever know the full body count. The spill spread for months, damaging the US coastline, killing wildlife, and briefly prompting doubts about offshore drilling. Heck of a job, BP.

FROM CHANGE TO GRIDLOCK

You had to know it would be a rough year when, right out of the box, the Supreme Court announced its Citizens United decision, clearly one the year’s defining moments. Corporate funding of candidate ads couldn’t be limited anymore under the First Amendment. For a century corporate leaders couldn’t spend a company’s general funds in elections. They had to set up separate political action committees. But Citizens United says that corporations have the same First Amendment rights as real people, and restrictions violate those rights. Result: the 2010 elections saw an explosion of corporate money in campaigns, much of it anonymous. Obama went after the Supremes for that decision in his State of the Union, which probably didn’t help. They’re likely to become even more partisan in any future decisions about things like health care reform and gay marriage.

At first it looked like this would be a landmark year for legislation. Health Care Reform – not perfect, but perhaps a step in the right direction – became law on March 23. Four months later, the Democrats muscled through a financial reform bill. Elena Kagan, a pragmatic political player, joined the Supreme Court in the summer. But as the year proceeded it became tougher and tougher to get anything done. By December Republicans were vowing to block everything until the richest two percent get to keep their current tax rate. We had gone from modest reform to hostage taking in less than nine months.

RETURN OF THE CULTURE WAR

Most pundits saw the May primary victories of Tea Party and Palin-backed candidates as a key sign that some kind of revolution was brewing on the right. But I’d argue that the handwriting was on the wall by February 18. That was the day 53-year-old Joseph Stack, a software engineer, flew a small plan in an IRS building in Austin. Stack died in the crash but left a suicide note that explained his reason: he was upset about the government.

Another early warning was the April 23 signing of Arizona’s harsh "Papers Please" immigration law, which set off a national chain reaction of resurgent xenophobia. A few weeks later Rand Paul beat an establishment Republican candidate in the Kentucky Senate primary. The Tea Party was on the electoral map. Its endorsed candidates also scored upsets in Alaska, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Nevada, New York, South Carolina and Utah. A strange new and somewhat uncontrollable force was gaining momentum.

By mid-summer we were in a political zombie movie. Anything could spark an attack of the brain-dead. On August 13, they declared a fatwa on what came to be known as the Ground Zero Mosque. Extremists competed for months to see who could be more anti-Muslim. Meanwhile, Glenn Beck transformed himself again – from rodeo clown (it’s just a hobby) to talk show host, and now televangelist and self-appointed savior of the nation. On August 28, he took the show to Washington, attempting to appropriate the civil rights movement by holding a rally on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. Angry, middle-aged pudgy white folks were demanding “their” country back. Finally.

If the high water mark came in the spring, the low point was in October, when Senate candidate Christine O’Donnell produced a TV ad to explain that she isn’t a witch. Now, I’ve known some witches, and I have to agree. She’s no witch. She’s something else – a celebrity politician and professional narcissist, the latest media creation. They don’t have to win or do anything to be influential. In fact, the crazier and more irresponsible the better.

The Republicans came out on top on November 2, taking over the US House in the biggest swing in more than half a century. Then, as if it was a sign from above, former big wheel Tom Delay was convicted of crimes he committed while helping to run Congress. For some it was a warning of what lies ahead, for others just more evidence that there’s a vast conspiracy out there, trying to impose justice on a righteous right-wing movement that won’t be restricted by radical, socialist ideas – like fairness, facts and honesty.

NEW MEDIA PUSHES THE ENVELOP

As I mentioned at the start, this was a banner year for the Internet. But let’s not forget Rolling Stone, which published a remarkable cover story on June 23. Their feature on General Stanley McChrystal, who was running the war in Afghanistan, was so frank that he was forced to resign. By this time Wikileaks had already released a video that vividly demonstrated the unnecessary brutality that has been a feature of US wars. More leaks were still ahead, building toward a climax in late November. The big document dump, which still continues, exposes all manner of diplomatic hypocrisy and scheming. We’re heard about less than 1 percent of those 250,000 State Department cables.

No wonder there’s so much pressure to prosecute and repress. Too much transparency and we might see right through our overseers. Wouldn’t be prudent, even during a year when right-wingers were so eager to attack the government and talk revolution and freedom. I guess those leaks are just a bit too real.

AN ENDANGERED SPECIES?

Obviously, this isn’t the whole story of 2010. But it’s probably fair to say that the year was rife with contradictions – and danger. Class war and cultural reaction, cyberspace power and creeping repression. Where are we heading? Too early to tell. But science did provide one intriguing clue. On December 2, NASA announced the discovery of a new life form, one that thrives on arsenic. Called GFAJ-1, it’s a microbe that apparently substitutes arsenic for phosphate in its DNA. One implication: across the universe, alien creatures could be bubbling up, not limited by our terrestrial chemistry.

On Earth, arsenic is a dangerous poison, enough like phosphorus that the human body will mistakenly take it up and circulate it into cells. Not helpful. For humans it’s a crafty poison. Any organism able to tolerate it in high doses is both fascinating and vaguely threatening.

So, the future holds untold possibilities. But some of them could be deadly for human beings – including the rich. Strange indeed. As George Carlin once said, maybe the Earth backed the development of humans so that we could provide it with plastic. Now that there’s enough, we may no longer be necessary.

RUMOR OF THE WEEK: THE BLOB IS BACK

If I'm being too negative for the season, how about this – the rumor of the week: They’re working on a sequel to The Blob. In 1958, Steve McQueen figured out that the alien Jello could only be stopped by cold temperature. They froze the sucker and sunk it at the North Pole. As long as the ice remained, we were safe. But the flick did end with a question mark. So, guess what? Climate change. The ice is melting and that deadly blob is on its’ way back.

James Franco is set to play Steve, an angry rebel hacker trying to get enough people to believe that the planet is in trouble. Blobs is set for release next summer, most likely on Independence Day. As mini-blobs spread out across the planet Steve organizes a band of cyber warriors to get the warning out. Will we go viral – or extinct? Eventually a blob is about to engulf the White House. But the rebels’ Wikiblobs Alert is reaching critical mass. And then Interpol breaks in, drops a hood over Steve’s head, and ships him to an undisclosed location. Will humanity survive?

Don’t want to spoil the ending but they say it’ll be in 3D. An Armageddon-load-of-fun for the whole family.

MAVERICK CHRONICLES: 11/19/2010

This week on Maverick Media’s Rebel News Round Up, broadcast live at approximately 11:30 a.m. Friday on WOMM (105.9-LP – The Radiator) in Burlington. The Question: Will Vermont Yankee close in 2012? Then, getting physical at the airport, unemployment insecurity, the US as a Banana Republic, medical marijuana in Arizona and Vermont, art and the economy, Bernie Sanders welcomes Sandia Labs, and the rumor of the week.

Live Stream: http://www.theradiator.org/drupal/webcam.html
Live Call-in: (802) 861-9666

WILL VERMONT YANKEE CLOSE IN 2012?

If you believe the struggle over the Vermont Yankee nuke plant closing in two years has ended, think again. Just because the legislature voted, that doesn’t mean that the nuclear industry is ready to walk away.

The day after the mid-term elections Entergy announced that it wants to sell the 38 year-old nuke. The idea seems to be to present a better PR image, even better rates, so that the plant’s license can be extended – by just a few years. At first.

Not likely? Perhaps, with new voices like Anthony Pollina and Phillip Baruth in the state legislature. But the strategy is to muddy the waters, to somehow get people to forget that it’s been one bizarre incident after another at the plant, compounded by lying about leaks. However, unless the legislature actually does something – like setting up a high level waste fund and generally making Entergy or any company that wants to buy the plant responsible – the industry will fight to keep that piece of Vermont available as a site, if not now then sometime in the future, and hope they can change public opinion.

So, the question for this week – really the question for the next session of Vermont’s legislature – is this: Will Vermont Yankee actually close in 2012?

NATIONAL SCENE

GETTING PHYSICAL AT THE AIRPORT

Just in time for the holidays, traveling by plane has become a bit more titillating. Would you prefer a virtual strip search or a public stroking?

The T& A – sorry TSA, or the Transportation Security Administration – recently announced a proposal to use full-body X-ray machines to check out air travelers at some airports. The problem is that the machines show detailed images of naked bodies and provide a dose of low level radiation. That’s the virtual strip search option.

The other choice is a very up-close-and-personal pat down. It’s the kind of frisking that used to be reserved for serious suspects of crimes. Now anyone who wants to board a plane is a suspect. That’s apparently the new definition of reasonable suspicion. And anyone who objects to both options? Well, they’re not going anywhere for Thanksgiving, at least on an airplane.

One person recently made headlines by threatening to have a screener arrested if his “junk” was touched. Fat chance. Many more people are angry. But look at it this way: if you’re looking for a short not-so-sensual massage in a public place, now you know where to go.

FORWARD TO THE PAST

Part One: Unemployment. In less than two weeks, on November 30, the federally funded program that provides emergency unemployment insurance benefits will expire. At the moment it gives additional weeks of benefits to people whose 26 weeks of state-funded unemployment run out before they can find work. But unless Congress steps in all federal unemployment insurance benefits will end in 40 states. The number of weeks available in the other states will also shrink. The result? Several hundred thousand people who exhaust their state benefits every month will receive no more help, and many of the 5 million workers now getting federal emergency benefits will lose their remaining weeks. Welcome back to the 19th Century.

Part Two: Income. It’s Banana Republic time. The richest one percent of people in this country now take home almost 24 percent of the income. That’s up from around 9 percent in 1976. The US now has a more unequal distribution of wealth than many traditional Banana Republics, including places like Nicaragua, Venezuela and Guyana.

In 1980 – 30 years ago – the CEOs of the largest American companies earned an average of 42 times as much as the average worker. By 2001 they were getting 531 times as much. But the most astounding statistic could be this one: From 1980 to 2005, more than 80 percent of the total increase in US incomes went to the richest one percent.

ARIZONA GETTING HIGHER

One of the strangest political twists this season is that Arizona, ground zero in the fight over immigration and home for millions of aging sun worshippers, has approved a medical-marijuana program. State health officials expect people to be getting relief by next summer.

What bothers me is that I left Arizona before this happened. On the other hand, what I like is that this version of medical-marijuana includes a provision to set up dispensaries.

So far no one has challenged Prop. 203. But every sheriff and county attorney across the state, plus several top state officials, came out against it. If nothing changes, Arizona will be the 15th state to legalize marijuana for medicinal use, though they don’t know where the money to fund the program – about $800,000 – will come from. Ongoing costs will be covered by fees charged to dispensaries and patients.

During the campaign, one of the main arguments was about whether patients could get marijuana for "chronic pain." The proposition talked about "a chronic or debilitating disease or medical condition or its treatment that produces . . . severe and chronic pain." Opponents see this as a loophole.

Once patients receive a doctor's recommendation, under the new regime they will be able to register for ID cards and then receive up to 2 1/2 ounces of marijuana every 14 days from non-profit dispensaries. If they live at least 25 miles from a dispensary, they can grow up to 12 marijuana plants of their own. Up to 124 dispensaries will be allowed, but local communities will get to decide what kind – cultivating facilities, retail stores or infusion facilities like marijuana bakeries.

Now, if we can just get enough people in Arizona stoned, we may be able to settle the immigration debate.

VERMONT SCENE

GRASS IN THE GREEN MOUNTAINS

Vermont also has a medical marijuana law. But here you can only have two ounces at a time, or two mature plants and seven immature ones. It’s illegal to operate a motor vehicle while high, by the way. You know who you are. But more important, no provision for dispensaries was included in the law. So, right now people have no legal way to fill their prescriptions.

How can you qualify for a medical prescription? Step one: you have to suffer from a serious or terminal illness whose symptoms or effects have been treated. Step Two: You have to see a doctor for at least six months before he can recommend, in writing, that you get medicinal marijuana. Step Three: You have to become a registered patient. That means completing a Registered Patient Application Form, having your physician complete a Department of Public Safety medical verification form, paying a $50 application fee, and waiting up to 30 days to be notified.

About the dispensary problem, something Arizona and other states are managing to handle, Governor-elect Shumlim is on record in favor.

Considering Vermont’s reputation, its other marijuana laws are pretty harsh. Get caught with less than two ounces and you can receive up to six months in jail and a fine of up to $500. First-time offenders can get their sentences deferred. But get caught twice and you could be sentenced to two years in jail and a fine of up to $2,000. Same goes for being caught with more than two ounces or cultivating more than three plants. The more weight, the bigger the penalty. More than a pound equals up to five years. More than 10 pounds could get you 15 years in the slammer.

What’s the result? According to a report by Doctor John Gettman, the arrest rate for marijuana offenses in Vermont went up over 4 percent annually from 2003 to 2007. But rather than reducing use, it rose. Basically, penalties and enforcement have little impact.

Last year, two bills that would have reduced the penalty for an ounce or less, from up to six months jail time to a $100 civil fine, failed after House Judiciary Chairman Bill Lippert neglected to schedule a hearing. Obvious question: Was he high? A bill proposed by Sen. Jeanette White to establish dispensaries also stalled. But the new governor was a sponsor of that bill, so things look a bit better for next year. Now, focus everyone…

IS SANDIA THE CAMEL’S NOSE?

Like any other member of congress, Bernie Sanders likes to bring home the bacon in the form of new business and jobs. That’s apparently why he was pleased last week to announce progress in bringing a satellite operation of Sandia National Labs to Vermont. According to his website, he’s “spearheading” the effort to “transform our state into a real-world lab for the entire nation.” The promises include “increased energy efficiency, utility bill savings, a state-of-the-art ‘smart grid,’ and an engineering resource for Vermont companies to help them create jobs.”

“We're at the beginning of something that could be of extraordinary significance to Vermont and the rest of the country," said Bernie.

One problem: Sandia is part of the mega military contractor Lockheed Martin, and its top national security mission is “nuclear weapons to ensure a safe, reliable nuclear deterrent.” Once upon a time it was a player in the development of the Atomic bomb. Today its primary job is to develop, engineer, and test the components of nuclear weapons, although it also conducts research and development in energy and environmental programs, as well as the safety of critical national infrastructures.

Peace activists like Joe Gainza don’t think this is the type of business the state needs, or that Sanders should be crowing about. In a recent e-mail, Gainza asks: “Is this the kind of business we want in Vermont? Do we want the nuclear camel’s nose inside our tent?”

If you want to check out Sandia, it has a website at www.sandia.gov. Or you can leave Bernie a question or message on his site. Is it just more jobs improving energy efficiency and developing clean technologies, or is the leader of the Vermont left inviting a central player in the military-industrial complex to set up shop in Vermont?

ARTS = BIG MONEY

As I reported recently, Vermont businesses bring in at least half a billion dollars a year in defense contracts. But guess what part of the Vermont economy is almost as large? The arts. A new study commissioned by Main Street Landing in Burlington concludes that the economic impact from the arts is around $443.5 million annually.

The study was done by Doug Hoffer, who just lost a race for State Auditor. He used Census information and data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Average wages in the arts aren’t great, he admits. But “people work in the field because they love it,” he says. “It gives them something more than a paycheck.”

He also says he was surprised by the size of the number. And that doesn’t include the impact of restaurants and bars. “Unfortunately, meals, rooms, alcohol and sales taxes are only reported monthly, so it’s not possible to analyze food and beverage sales on days with and without performing arts events,” Hoffer writes. “However, it is obvious that food and beverage sales increase significantly on nights with arts events.”

Decriminalize pot and that figure will be even higher. Just a thought.

RUMOR OR THE WEEK:

CHINA HIJACKED THE INTERNET

We considered several candidates. For example, Donald Trump may run for President. But that rumor came from Trump, which violates “rumor of the week" rules on conflict of interest. How about the rumor that movie star Ryan Reynolds is the sexiest man alive? First question, who’s Ryan Reynolds? But that one was disqualified because it came from People Magazine. So my research team at the Center for Perception Regulation (CPR) settled on this:

China may have hijacked 15 percent of all Internet traffic for 18 minutes last April. The score supposedly included confidential emails from NASA and the army. This rumor comes from a security report delivered to the US Congress on Wednesday. Of course China denied it. But if true, this would be one of the biggest hijacks of sensitive information in the history of the Internet.

What do we know? Well, earlier this year Google said it would stop censoring results on its Chinese search engine after a sophisticated cyber attack, supposedly sponsored by the Chinese government, was directed at the company. Google also claims that it has evidence of at least 20 companies that have been infiltrated from China.

The Christian Science Monitor reports that some group in China may be the culprit in cyber attacks on at least three US oil companies The incidents, kept secret after they occurred 2008, involved Marathon, ExxonMobil, and ConocoPhillips. The companies didn’t realize how serious their problem was until the FBI alerted them. The Feds said that proprietary information had been flowing out to computers overseas. According to former cyber-czar Richard Clark, corporations think that the “millions of dollars they have spent on computer security systems means they have successfully protected their company’s secrets.” They’re wrong. Intrusion detection and prevention systems sometimes fail.

The report to Congress said that about 15 percent of global internet traffic was routed through Chinese servers earlier this year. Information was allegedly rerouted at a small Chinese ISP called IDC China, then passed to China Telecom. This included encrypted mail from the US Senate and Defense Department. Dmitri Alperovitch, a threat analyst at McAfee, called it "one of the biggest – if not the biggest hijacks – we have ever seen." No one except China Telecom knows what happened, he said. "The possibilities are numerous and troubling, but definitive answers are unknown."

But hey, don’t worry. Enjoy the upcoming holidays and, if you need a thrill, go to an airport and get screened.