EFTA00702684.pdf

From: Gregory Brown To: undisclosed-recipients:; Bcc: jeevacation@gmail.com Subject: Greg Brown's Weekend Reading and Other Things.... 03/17/2013 Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2013 14:58:31 +0000 Attachments: Challengers_from_the_Sidelines_,_Understanding_America's_Violent_Far- Right„by_Arie_Perliger_—West_Pointt November_2012..pdf; The_Extraordinaty_Science_of_Addictive_JunIc_Food_Michael_Moss_NYT_February_20,_ 2013.pdf; The_Bliss_Point_-_March_2013.pdf; Watch_outfor_the_bliss_point_Nickie_Polson_Canada.com_March_8,_20 I 3.pdf; Dowiones_Hits_Record_High„Thanks_To_Strong_Performances_From_Smoke,_Mirrors_ Sectors_Huff_Post_03_09_13.pdf; Dwindling Deficit Disorder Paul ICrugman NYT March 10 2013.pdf; The high_costs_of_Medicare?s_low_pnce_s-David_Goldhill_TWP_March_10,_2013.pdf; What_Happens_to Social_Media_After_a Twitter Revolution_Lorenzp_Francdshi- BicchTerai_US World03_102013.pdr, Paulifyan?s_make- believe_budget_Eug_ene_Robinson_TWP_March_11,_2013.pdf; The_Worst_of_the_Ryan_Budgets_NYT_Editorial_March_12,_2013.pdf; The Heresy_Hunters_of_CPAC_Michael_Moynihan_The_Daily_Beast_Mar_13_2013.pdf; On_The_Brink_in_Italy_Liz_Alderman NYT March 11, 2013.pdf; Iraq_War_Cost_U.S._More_Than_$2_trilliorT,_Coula_GTow_to_$6_Trillion,_Says_Watson _Institute_Study_Daniel_Tratta_Reuters_03_14_2013.pdf; COST_OF_WAR_Project_The_Watson_Institute_- Brovvn_University_March_14,2013.pdf; SAC Capital_to_Pay_$616_Million_ininsider_Trading_Cases_Peter_Lattman_NYT_MAR CH_T5,_2013.pdf; Patti_LaBelle_bio.docx DEAR FRIENDS.... Lost in the worldwide hoopla of choosing a new Pope and a third Carnival Cruise Shipfiasco , almost unnoticed was the inflammatory speech last Tuesday by the President of Afghanistan Harmid Karzai, who he went over the top equating the U.S. with the Taliban as forces working to undermine the government, particularly given the tremendous resources the U.S. has provided to Karzai's government over the past decade -- and that he owes his position, as well as any progress that has been made to date -- to the U.S. As the U.S. prepares to withdraw the majority of its remaining troops, the country's security forces remain woefully unprepared to assume responsibility for the country's security, corruption remains endemic, and many observers admit that Afghanistan is in reality little better off today than it was when Karzai assumed power in 2004. With his leadership slated to end next year, there is little reason to believe that his successor will do any better in meaningfully addressing Afghanistan's plethora of problems. It appears that Karzai wants to be perceived as the 'great uniter' of Afghanistan's intractable ethnic and political factions, yet he has done little during his tenure to make this a reality -- and, in any event, no other leader of modern Afghanistan has been able to achieve the same. His chances of doing so now, with a year or so left in office, are zero. But it will be hard to convince the average Afghan that Karzai is a national hero when he invited the foreign military presence into their country, actively promoted its growth and stay, and has willfully courted foreign aid, which has made the country so EFTA00702684 dependent on the good will of others in order to function. Especially when life for the average Afghan has become more difficult under ICarzai's rule, and the Afghan people certainly know it. An internal report from the British Defense Ministry has concluded that the ongoing occupation of Afghanistan is "unwinnable in military terms," ruling that the NATO goals have largely failed and the survival of the Karzai government cannot be guaranteed. The report says that whenever international troops leave, they will be leaving Afghanistan with a "very weak economic base,"and NATO will be on the hook for large-scale support" of the government for many years. It goes on to compare the NATO occupation for Afghanistan to the previous attempt by the Soviet Union, saying there are "an extraordinary number of similarfactors"surrounding the two wars, and that commanders should learn the lessons of the Soviet war. Elaborating, they say both wars aimed at imposing "an ideology foreign to the Afghan people" and that both eventually abandoned it in favor trying to secure relative support for their respective propped-up governments as the only alternative to the mujaheddin, adding that the historical estimate of the NATO war would be, as with the Soviets', linked entirely to how long the government survived after they leave. So with the war in Afghanistan being the longest in US history, at the price of more than 2,06o US military casualties and more than 18,000 injured and costing more than $i trillion in American taxpayer's money, we seriously have to asked ourselves was this war worth it, especially in light of the gratitude shown in President ICarzai's latest comments. More importantly we have to call the War in Afghanistan for what it is.... A Huge Mistake.... In every way.... LET's REMEMBER: Ten years ago when President George W. Bush announced the invasion into Iraq in March 2003, the goal was to remove a dangerous dictator and his supposed stocks of weapons of mass destruction. It was also to create a functioning democracy and thereby inspire what Bush called a "global democracy revolution." The effort was supposed to be cheap -- to require few troops and even less time. Instead, it cost the United States $80o billion at least, thousands of lives and nearly nine grueling years ... Today in Fallujah, the site of two of the war's largest and most devastating military campaigns, the very best that can be said is that two years late to the party -- not 10 years early -- the Arab Spring has arrived. But the government the people are rising up against is the very one the U.S. installed. How depressing to look back on the months before the war in Iraq -- that nearly nine- year misadventure that left thousands of Americans (and more than loo,000 Iraqis) dead, that failed to deliver on even the simplest of promises of its progenitors -- and take note of how few public figures stood in its way. There were rare moments. In late September 2002, a few months before American troops would topple the government in Baghdad and set the U.S. on course for nearly a decade of insurgency and internecine conflict and improvised explosive devises, a wizened Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) stood on the floor of the Senate and urged his fellow lawmakers to pace themselves on the way to war. "The war fervor, the drums of war, the bugles of war, the clouds of war -- this war hysteria has blown in like a hurricane," Byrd warned. A month later, Sen. Paul Wellstone, the progressive icon from Minnesota, rose to the podium to object to a resolution that would authorize President George W. Bush to wage his war, absent the support of the United Nations. Gesturing forcefully, and punctuating his words with a deep knee bend, Wellstone warned that acting unilaterally would eventually be regretted. 'The pre- emptive, go-it-alone use offorce, right now, which is what the resolution before us callsfor, in the midst of continuing efforts to enlist the world community to back a tough, new disarmament resolution on Iraq, could be a very costly mistake," Wellstone said. He'd never know how right he was. A few weeks later, Wellstone's life was cut tragically short in a plane crash in his home state. By then, the two senators had earned the support of 19 Democratic colleagues (and a lone Republican) in voting against the Iraq war resolution. EFTA00702685 Wellston and Byrd, got it right in Iraq is short. A handful of lawmakers, some anti-war activists, some cooler heads at the U.N. who had been to Iraq looking for weapons of mass destruction and saw that there were none. A young state senator named Barack Obama, speaking before an anti-war rally in Chicago, said he didn't oppose all wars, just the "dumb" ones. They are joined by the small cadre of allies in print — the Washington Post's Walter Pincus, the national security bureau of Knight- Ridder -- who dared to doubt the mise en place of intelligence being hand-delivered to the press by an administration already girded for combat. How depressing to look back on those days and see not just the obvious -- Douglas Feith, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice; those who promised America would be "greeted as liberators" (Cheney), and who threatened nuclear "mushroom clouds" (Rice) if action didn't come imminently. But there also were still-popular and prominent figures who got it wrong. We now know that the strongest war advocates had just about everything wrong. There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Saddam Hussein had no links to al Qaeda. The U.S. was greeted not as liberators, but as occupiers. And nearly 1 million troops would be required to fight in the years of war. Still, can we forget Joseph Biden, then a venerated senator from Delaware, telling his colleagues in 2002 that "the world would be a better place without" Saddam Hussein? "I do not believe it is a rush to war," Biden said at the time. "I believe it is a march to peace and security." Or how about Hillary Clinton, then a first-term senator from New York, telling the Senate that "Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members.... Any vote that may lead to war should be hard, but I cast it with conviction." It was their fault, and the copious mainstream media columnists and journalists who joined them, as much as anyone, paved the way to nearly nine years of war -- a war of choice, an unnecessary and costly war, without which the world most certainly would be a better place. How depressing to think that so many who should have known better, so many who perhaps even did, fell on the wrong side of history's ledger. LET US NOT FORGET! Joshua Hersh Huffiegtoo Post ***** The Urban Dictionary defines Nickeling-and-Diming as: Traditionally used as part of the larger phrase "To be nickled and dimed to death", referring to the undesired price of upkeepfor a certain item. Morefundamentally, it refers simply to seemingly hidden ongoing expenses which, over time, add up to a large expense. Today's Congressional Republicans' strategy is to Nickel-and- Dime President Obama's policies to death with the ultimate goal of dismantling almost all of his accomplishments, as well as to eviscerate Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. Last year the tenants of this same Ryan plan was celebrated by the GOP as the "Pathway to Prosperity" campaign — cutting spending by $4.6 trillion through 2023, largely by rolling back President Obama's legislative accomplishments while also taking advantage of the savings they created. The 10-year spending plan released Tuesday by Rep. Paul Ryan is virtually identical to last year's GOP budget: It would defund President Obama's health-care initiative, end guaranteed Medicare coverage for future retirees and sharply restrain spending on the poor, college students and federal workers. EFTA00702686 The one big new development: Ryan's latest blueprint would balance the budget, producing a small surplus in 2023 — a goal achieved not primarily through deeper spending cuts, but by the addition of more than $3.2 trillion in new tax revenue. The tax hike is already in effect. Ryan (R-Wis.) merely adopts new revenue projections laid out by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office in the wake of a year-end deal to raise rates on income over $450,000. But the impact on his budget is huge. The changes that Ryan is proposing for Medicare (vouchers) and Medicaid (state block grants) would merely shift the health-care burden from the federal government to individuals and states. Because private health plans aren't as efficient as Medicare, total public and private spending on health care would almost certainly increase -- the opposite of what's needed in a country headed toward devoting $1 in every $5 of gross domestic product to health care. It is crucial that policy makers find ways to bring down medical costs, but there are ways to do this without leaving the elderly and poor with inadequate health care. Medicare could, for example, raise premiums for high earners, reduce payments to drug companies or drive competition by making public the prices it pays for drugs, devices and medical services. More and more people are realizing is that the "new" Ryan Budget requires Hollywood Accounting (smoke & mirrors) to make it work, as it proposes closing loopholes without saying which ones, simplifying the tax code by creating lowering the top tax bracket from 35% down to 25% with everyone else paying only 10%. When every sensible economist will tell you that one of the reasons why the country's deficit is so high is because taxes are too low. US corporate taxes is the lowest in the industrialized world — corporate taxes are expected to raise just 1.3 percent of G.D.P. this year, about a third of what it was in the 1950s. American taxes (all levels) are 26.9% of the country's GDP in comparison to Canada 32.2%, Germany 40.6, Israel 36.8%, Japan 28.3%, Australia 30.8%, Switzerland 29.4%, Brazil 34.4%, Denmark 49%, Sweden 47.9%, United Kingdom 39% and Mexico 39.7% - Heritage Foundation (Conservative think-tank). In stark contrast to the austerity the Republican budget pursues, Senate Democrats have propose investing $100 billion in a new economic stimulus program that would provide job training and set aside money to repair roads and bridges. Democrats said they would pay for the plan by closing loopholes in the tax code that benefit corporations and wealthy Americans which like Ryan's, I will believe it when I see it.... The Democrats' plan would meet their goals with an equal mix of deficit reduction through spending cuts and closing tax loopholes. Those cuts (which at least they specified) — about $975 billion worth — would include $240 billion in military spending and $493 billion on the domestic side, Democrats said. Notably, the plan will also include special fast-track instructions known as reconciliation that would ensure it could not be filibustered, meaning that the Senate would only have to come up with a simple majority of 51 votes instead of the 60 often required to pass legislation in the Senate. The Ryan budget was fully vetted in the 2012 presidential campaign. And the result was; Democrats won the White House and picked up seats in the Senate and House. Republicans can keep offering the same platform of spending and tax cuts to achieve prosperity and more and more people are realizing that it is total BS "The only way you can do that [decrease taxes, balance the budget, and increase military spending] is with mirrors...." EFTA00702687 — John B. Anderson (Illinois Congressman 1961-1881 & Independent Presidential candidate 1980) rr•rr US agriculture subsidies -- terrible The U.S. government is considering a plan to buy 400,000 tons of processed sugar. The scheme would constitute a double subsidy for "big sugar,"an industry that rivals tobacco in terms of its negative effects on American health. The horrendous morass that is U.S. agricultural subsidies amounts to $2O- billion (U.S.) annually. The programs, which arose from depression-era legislation designed to alleviate the economic effects of the dust bowl drought, have nothing to do with a free market economy and everything to do with powerful lobby groups. Subsidies for ethanol production, for example, are estimated at $5-billion per year, despite the consensus view among economists that the program amounts to burning food, with little or no positive impact on the environment. At least in that case, the ethanol industry has spurred research that may provide environmentally friendly developments down the road. Sugar subsidies are a different and far more insidious form of graft. Approximately 450,000 acres of Florida are planted with sugar cane each year, and not one would be profitable without the estimated $2-billion in subsidies doled out annually from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). The subsidies also serve to increase the retail price of sugar far beyond the free market cost if it was imported from outside the country. The recently-announced proposal for the government to buy sugar is particularly outrageous. The USDA loan program to the sugar industry — which creates between $700-million and $900-million in taxpayer losses annually according to the Government Accountability Office — was not enough this year. An 18 per cent fall in sugar prices means the already heavily-subsidized sugar corporations are set to default on these loans. The government purchase of 400,000 tons is designed as another subsidy that will prevent default. Worse, two thirds of Americans are classified as either overweight or obese, and increased sugar levels in processed food have been a major contributor to the problem. A recent New York slimes feature story highlighted the success food companies have had in generating increased sales by raising the sugar content in allegedly healthy foods like yogurt Heinz ketchup is 24 per cent sugar, and snack makers have found that even potato chips sell better when sugar is included as an ingredient. EFTA00702688 To date, congressional efforts to reduce subsidies to the sugar industry have been quietly squashed by lobby groups. The result is an industry that is wasting billions of dollars of U.S. taxpayer money to support the boom in type II Diabetes. SCOTT BARLOW Scott Barlow is a contributor to ROB Insight, the business commentary service available to Globe Unlimited subscribers. ***** As a baby-boomer who grew up during the Cold War and a lover of television spy dramas such as HOMELAND, MI5 and TINKER, TAILOR, SOLDIER, SPY, I strongly urge everyone who also love spy dramas to watch the new FX Network dramatic series, THE AMERICANS. Set during the Cold War period in the 198os, The Americans is the multi-layered story of Elizabeth (Keri Russell) and Philip Jennings (Matthew Rhys), two Soviet KGB officers posing as American citizens — married couple living in deep cover since their arrival in the early 196os, with two teenager born in the USA and raised with American values. The series premiered in the United States on January 3o, 2013, on the FX Network. The series has been renewed for a second season. Rob Brunner of Entertainment Weekly described it as "an absorbing spy thriller," while David Hinkley of the New York Daily News praised the pace, noting that "It's a premise that requires as much clever dramaticfootwork as you might expect, and creator Joe Weisberg, a former CIA agent, handles the challenge." Verne Gay of Newsday called it a "smart newcomer with a pair of leads that turns THE AMERICANS into a likely winner" and gave it a grade of an "A-". The renewal comes as no surprise, considering the Keri Russell/Matthew Rhys drama was FX's most- watched debut ever, garnering 5.11 million total viewers for its premiere. Seven episodes currently remain in the show's freshman season, and the series will return for a 13-episode second season in 2014. "THE AMERICANS' has quickly established itself as a key part FX's acclaimed drama line- up," FX President John Landgraf said in a statement. "Executive Producers Joe Weisberg, Joel Fields and Graham Yost and their collaborators are telling riveting and deeply emotional stories and the performances of Keri Russell, Matthew Rhys, Noah Emmerich and the entire cast are simply outstanding. The show is truly worthy of its widespread critical acclaim and we are confident that its quality will continue to yield a robust and passionate audience." Filming began for the first season in November 2012 2012 in the area of New York City. The production utilizes location shots to simulate a dramatic setting of Washington, D.C. As a result, its early filming was delayed by flooding caused by Hurricane Sandy. THE AMERICANS is one really great dramatic series with intelligently presented multi-layered plots with superb , well cast and played characters. The fast, unpredictable turns of plot make you anxious for the next week As such if you like television spy dramas, THE AMERICANS should not disappoint you. I give this new series.... a solid "A." As most of you know, I am a big fan of Bill Moyers and this week's show on Moyers & Company was an encore: Ending the Silence on Climate Change with scientist Anthony Leiserowitz, director of the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication, discussing his efforts to galvanize communities over what's arguably the greatest single threat facing humanity. Leiserowitz, who specializes in the psychology of risk perception, knows better than anyone if people are willing to change their behavior to make a difference. As Leiservowitz told Bill, "A pervasive sense up to now has been that climate change is distant — distant in time, and distant in space." 2012 was the hottest year on record. 2011 carbon dioxide emissions the highest on record; Arctic sea ice shrank to a record low; the world's largest trees are dying at an alarming rate, I could go on and on. Scientists are telling us that we are approaching a tipping point And they say that unless we slow the release of EFTA00702689 global emissionsfromfossilfuels, slow it enough to keep the planet's temperaturefrom rising by two degrees Celsius, or 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit, the earth's polar ice sheets will melt away -- with catastrophic consequences. Earlier this year two major scientific reports concluded that the rapid increase infossilfuel emissions makes that increase of two degrees Celsius all but inevitable. This headline in the "National Journal" spells it out: "It's Already Too Late to Stop Climate Change." 2011 was an all-time record year in the United States — we had 14 individual climate and weather related disasters that each cost this country more than $1 billion. That was an all-time record, blew away previous records. And in 2012 we had events ranging from the summer-like days in January in Chicago with people out on the beach, clearly not a normal occurrence, an unusually warm spring, record setting searing temperatures across much of the lower 48, one of the worst droughts that America has ever experienced, a whole succession of extreme weather events. And this doesn't include Hurricane Sandy. Leiserowitz says that there is no doubt that climate change is already happen and two decades of scientific study confirming that man-made carbon emissions have accelerated it. He says that we are currently scheduled, unless we change direction, to go through the two-degree mark. And in fact, we're heading on towards three, four degrees and perhaps even six degrees centigrade warmer than in the past. As you go things get much, much worse. Leiserowitz: And in fact, let me just use a simple analogy. Because people often will say, "Wow, you know,four,five degrees, that doesn't sound like very much. I mean, I see the temperature change morefrom night to day." But ifs the wrong way to think about it. I mean, think about when you get sick and you get a fever, okay. Your body is usually at, you know, 98.7 degrees. If your temperature rises by one degree you feel a little off, but you can still go to work. You're fine. It rises by two degrees and you're now feeling sick, in fact you're probably going to take the day off because you definitely don't feel good. And in fact, you're getting everything from hot flashes to cold chills, okay. At three you're starting to get really sick. And at four degrees and five degrees your brain is actually slipping into a coma, okay, you're close to death. I think there's an analogy here of that little difference in global average temperature just like that little difference in global body temperature can have huge implications as you keep going. And so unfortunately the world after two and especially after three degrees starts getting much more frightening, and that's exactly what the scientists keep telling us. But will we pay attention to those warning signs? Leiserowitz again: This is within our power. We have waited however a long time to really engage this issue and to get started. And unfortunately, and this is actually a core American value, it goes back to the founding of this country and it goes back to Benjamin Franklin, one of the leading lights of that time, who said - and every American knows this - "An ounce ofprevention is worth a pound of cure." A little action now is going to forestall much greater— the need for much greater action later. And that's exactly the nature of this problem, is that if we delay-- if we wait until we've reached three and four degrees, it's too late. At that point the climate system is locked. It's a massive system. The heat is already in earth's system, it's absorbed in the oceans, it's being absorbed by the ice systems. It's in the atmosphere, there is no magic vacuum cleaner that's going to suddenly pull the CO2 out and bring our temperatures back to what we consider normal. So that's why it's so imperative that we begin taking these actions now to forestall the worst effects that are going to happen decades to come. EFTA00702690 Climate Change is real, and as they use to say when I was a kid, "even Ray Charles can see it." But as Leiserowitz points out in the interview that until we start with a movement from the bottom up based on issues that effects us all it will be difficult to institute the national policies that are going to be required, much less the international policies that are also going to be required. So far the issue of climate science has been to direct political leaders to impose solutions on this country, on our states, at the world from the top-down. Now we need a movement from the bottom up to meet them halfway. Otherwise, the greatest challenge facing mankind today is not nuclear proliferation, population control and our growing deficits It is the tipping point when the polar ice caps melt, oceans warm and rise drastically altering weather patterns that changes the world as we know it today for every life-form on the planet. Scientists are warning us today.... And we should listen. One of the great things about living in California, like New York, you can come in contact with cool people and no better example of this is that my next door neighbors are Gene & Toni Bua. And although they don't have the fame of a Brad and Angelina, in serious acting and theater circles in Los Angeles they are the "real deal," having been together for 47 years, starting out as the young lovers in the television soap opera, 'Love of Lifer in New York and then moving to LA in the 1980s where they set-up the Gene Bua Acting School For Life, that over the years mentored thousands of young and seasoned actors (including the likes of Brad Pitt, Drew Barrymore and Katay Sagal), as well as writing hundreds of songs and writing and producing a number of musicals including "Pepper Street," which became the longest running musical in Los Angeles. Needless to say, it was always great to hear piano playing and singing across the hedges as their living room was often the sanctuary and incubator, for musicians, singers, song writers and composer's offerings. After 13 years of fighting Parkinson Disease, Gene Bua died last November and this week several hundred of his friends attended a memorial celebration chronicling his life and legacy in the loving tribute, "Anything Can Happen," written by his wife Toni and performed at the Colony Theater in Burbank California. And what I would like to share with you today is a poem written by his 44 year old son, the artist Justin Bua. My father has passed. I wanted to share this poem. R.I.P GENE BUA. UPON MY FATHER'S DEATHBED In his final breath he wanted to be one with his son. The unsung son. The forgotten one... But I am the sun. The solar truth, who knew his life's death. All that wasn't done, all that came undone, all that had purpose, purposely avoided in the empty ether of the his sun's atmosphere. In living he was afraid to see me in him. For I was him and he was me. Except his me was enslaved to having no memories. His me was a servant to time for a ruthless crime for which he did no time... Except eternity. As he lies with gnarled claws and brittle bones, joints like stones he looks out with a pitiful gaze onto his son and Into the sun. The fire of Aries bums bright scorching Libra's flight to the other side beyond the black tangled night. His frail frame slouches in linen sands. Tangled hands ail with jaundice strands. His eyes no longer see through his glass menagerie but rather through a kaleidoscope of his own final judgment. Passing before my own eyes, he realizes his real-eyes. Seeing all other matter has no matter. Only truth matters. His eyes genuflect to me. His bent, crippled lips tremble with sweetness as he kisses nectar on my head. My love softens only to know him for a moment unshackled. He sits still shaking in his stony sleep but he is running, cut loose from the veracious chains that forever suffocate his sleepless nights. He ambles naked alone but for a moment. EFTA00702691  I take his hand as we run together, dance and laugh under the sun's warmth. This past has passed, freedom at last. Sun warming. Souls interlocked. Forever together. My Father, don't go I love you so. He breathes his last breath into me. I exhale forgiveness. Justin Bua Born in Brooklyn, New York.... Gene Bua was larger than life. Trained at New York's Neighborhood Playhouse, Bua's career kicked off in his teenage years after famed composer Richard Rodgers plucked him to play the lead in the Broadway revival of "The Boysfrom Syracuse," and went on to receive honors from the White House, United Nations, six California mayors and the Los Angeles. And like myself family seems to have played second fiddle to his mastery of putting people in touch with their genuine feelings to evoke the expressions of what lives in their hearts. We should all hope to be Gene Buas THIS WEEK's READINGS I wanted to include this last week but thought that it might be a data overload and have include it this week. Attached please find Challengersfrom the Sidelines (Understanding America's Violent Far-Right) by Arie Perliger — which was commissioned by THE COMBATING TERRORISM CENTER AT WEST POINT in 2012. This study is more than a hundred pages and is a serious analysis of why anti-government sentiment is currently growing so rapidly in America and how to combat/address it. It starts with the following story: Oklahoma state trooper Charles J. Hanger was patrolling interstate highway I-35 in the morning hours of 19 April 1995 when he suddenly observed an old yellow Mercury Marquis with no license plates. After signaling the driver to park the car on the sideway, Hanger approached the car, and his suspicions were instantly raised. Not only were the plates missing, but the driver also reacted in an unusual manner. Instead of waiting within the car as most people would do, he stepped out and started calmly engaging the state trooper in conversation, admitting he had neither insurance nor license plates. The driver also admitted that he had a knife and a loaded handgun in his possession, the latter without an appropriate license. In the state of Oklahoma, these infractions result in immediate detention. To complete the unusual picture, the driver was wearing a shirt printed with provocative phrases. The front of the shirt quoted the words shouted by John Wilkes Booth after shooting Abraham Lincoln: "Thus, always, to tyrants,"and on the back was Thomas Jefferson's statement: "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." As expected, the driver, Timothy James McVeigh, was arrested and taken to the Perry District Detention Center to await trial for illegal possession of a firearm. However, three days later, the FBI concluded that this was the least of his crimes. Apparently, McVeigh was responsible for the most devastating terrorist attack on US soil until then. Little more than an hour before he had been arrested, McVeigh had driven a Ryder truck loaded with over 650o pounds of explosives and parked it near the Alfred P. Murrah Federal building in Oklahoma City. The subsequent explosion, two minutes after 9am, had almost completely destroyed the northeast side of the building, although failing to raze the building as McVeigh had hoped. One hundred and sixty-eight people, including 19 children, were killed. Hundreds were injured. The city of Oklahoma, and large parts of the country, were in a state of shock and disbelief. The FBI investigation revealed that the attack was not the act of a single fanatic, but an operation planned by a small network consisting of four people,6 all with ties to the American far-right EFTA00702692 subculture. Motivated by their rage, frustration and resentment towards the federal government, they decided to take matters into their own hands. For them, the only way to raise the awareness of the American public of what they perceived as the growing corruption and incompetence of the federal government, as well as its increasing tendency to violate civil and constitutional rights, was by conducting a dramatic mass-casualty attack, killing as many representatives of the Federal government as possible. Although unique in its impact and in the level of destruction it caused, the case of McVeigh's network is not exceptional in terms of the social, political, economic, and contextual conditions that fostered its members' radicalization. As in many other violent political groups, the background and the radicalization process of the network's members appear to be associated with a supportive social enclave, sentiments of alienation from the mainstream culture and political system, personal financial and mental crises, and previous experience with exercising extreme violence. Hence, evidence suggests that the use of theory deriving from the political violence and terrorism literature is valuable in deciphering violent manifestations of the American far-right. However, does the scale of the phenomenon justify a closer and more rigorous examination? Or are we dealing with a marginal phenomenon? Looking at recent trends of far-right violence in the United States could facilitate the formulation of an answer. Until the attack in Oklahoma, very few people noticed that the previous years (1994-5) had been characterized by a striking rise in the number of violent attacks by American far-right groups. After a relatively quiet 1993 in which the American far-right was almost non-active (only nine attacks), no less than 75 attacks were perpetrated in the following year, with another 3o attacks in the first three months of 1995. What occurred in Oklahoma was not a random, isolated attack but part of a wave of far-right violence which was fueled by specific political and social conditions. Although following "OKBOMB," the US government significantly augmented the resources and measures employed to detect and dismantle violent and potentially dangerous far-right associations, far-right groups did not cease to exist. Some of them adapted to the growing governmental scrutiny by shifting to milder, less militant activities; others formed new organizational entities in place of the old ones, hoping to deter suspicion. Combined with the emergence of the Jihadi threat, this facilitated a prevailing sense that the far right was in decline. However, this apparent interlude is over. In the last few years, especially since 2007, there has been a dramatic rise in the number of attacks and violent plots originating in the far-right of American politics. Does this reflect the return of far-right violence? And if so, should we expect, as in previous waves, the emergence of groups which will be willing to initiate mass casualty attacks, similar to the one perpetrated by McVeigh and his associates? The current study will assess the current and future threat from the far right by providing answers to three core questions: 1) What are the main current characteristics of the violence produced by the far right? 2) What type of far-right groups are more prone than others to become involved in violence? How are the characteristics of those particular far-right groups correlated with their tendency to engage in violence? 3) What are the social and political factors associated with the level of far-right violence? Are there political or social conditions that foster or discourage violence? The first part of the study provides a contextual foundation by conceptualizing the American far right and then depicting its ideological and organizational/operational development. The second part analyzes the violence and radicalization processes in the different streams of the violent American far right using a comprehensive dataset that documents American far-right violence in the last 22 years. The last part of the study is an assessment of the future trajectory of American far right violence. EFTA00702693 Last week while watching an interview about how processed foods are designed and modified so that they appeal to the Bliss Point, a term that I didn't know, so I looked it up. Wildpedia: In economics, a 'bliss point' is a quantity of consumption where any further increase would make the consumer less satisfied. It is a quantity of consumption which maximizes utility in the absence budget constraint. In other words, it refers to the amount of consumption that would be chosen by a person so rich that money imposed no constraint on his or her decisions. AND In the formulation of food products using food optimization, the bliss point is the amount of an ingredient such as salt, sugar, or fat which optimizes palatability. Realizing that this is just a partial explanation, I dug a little further. It turns out that in the Junk and Process Food Business - The Bliss Point - is when food is engineered and designed by adding the ideal amount/combination of salt, sugar, fat and other additives to the point that make our brains respond to the endorphins which are genetically designed to reward nutrients and dopamine that can become an unbelievably powerful addiction to our neurotransmitter in our brain — taste bud. In combination, sugar, fat, and salt act synergistically: combinations are far more addictive than any single one alone. Mice, for instance, will work as hard to get a mixture of corn oil and sugar as they will to get cocaine. The food industry tries very hard to make each food contain combinations of 2 or 3 of these nutrients at their Bliss Points. It's done to encourage us to buy the food again, because we really like it. That's why it's so hard to stay away from some of these foods. For those of us who are sensitive to the power of endorphins and dopamine, it becomes virtually impossible not to over-eat. For nutrients that we like and therefore seek out, there is a particular concentration that makes food most palatable. • Too little sugar, and it's not sweet enough. Too much, and it's too sweet. The "just right" amount is the Bliss Point. • Too little salt, and it's not salty enough. Too much, and it's too salty. The "just right" amount is the Bliss Point. • Too little fat, and it's too bland. Too much, and it's too rich. The "just right" amount is the Bliss Point. These are nutrients that have been so important to us in our evolutionary history that Natural Selection favored genetic variations that 1. Enable us to taste these nutrients 2. Make our brains respond with a "reward" [we like it, it tastes good] • The Reward Center of the brain gives us a little jolt of endorphins for our reward • Endorphins are the endogenous morphine-like chemicals that work on the same neuronal receptors as opiate drugs 3. Make our brains remember what we did to get that reward, and make us want to do it again • This is run by the neruotransmitter, dopamine • Reward-seeking actions can become unbelievably powerful, which is what addiction is. EFTA00702694 When food companies are engineering/designing for taste and not for nutrients, it in itself is not a problem, as long as we the public understand what the ingredients are and how they affect our bodies. But my fear is that when food processors have to make a choice between health and profits believe me when is say public consumers will end up with the short straws... even if these choices lead to obesity, high blood pressure, diabetes and other diseases currently plaguing our country, especially our young.. Last week the country received very encouraging economic news with the Dow closing a week ago Friday at 14,397.07 more than double of what it was four years ago. Also the Labor Department data showed 236,000 jobs were added in February. January's numbers were revised down, but the figures from December were increased. All told, monthly gains have averaged more than 200,000 jobs since November. and the unemployment rate dropped to 7.7 percent, the lowest in four years. With both housing starts and home values their highest since 2008. And corporate America has horded more than $3 trillion. But as I pointed out, the numbers don't tell the entire story, as profits in corporate America as soaring and the rich are getting richer, while From 2009 to 2011, average real income per family grew modestly by 1.7% but the gains were very uneven. Top 1% incomes grew by 11.2% while bottom 99% incomes shrunk by 0.4%. Hence, the top i% captured 121% of the income gains in the first two years of the recovery. It appears that we now have a five-tier economy: The Super Rich who are doing beyond the beyond. The Rich who are doing better than ever. The ever dwindling Middle Class who have seen their adjusted incomes decrease over the past three decades. The Working Poor who are living/surviving paycheck to paycheck. And the unemployed, elderly and poor who are increasingly being shun by both political parties. The Wall Street Journal recently reported that the market for luxury goods is booming. The newspaper characterizes this as evidence of the economic robustness, connecting "The economy has bounced back from recession" to "As a result, wealthy Americans are spending freely on expensive clothing, accessories, jewelry and beauty products." The Wall Street Journal quotes HSBC luxury-goods analyst Antoine Belge, "Trends in luxury consumption in the U.S. have continued to outperform overall consumer trends" This is actually evidence that you and most of the people you know are getting left, far behind, in the post-crash economy. The average participant in the overall American economy isn't fooled by any of this. They well know what Matt Phillips points out at Quartz, household incomes 'haven't gone anywhere but down." As Phillips relates, "Real median US household income -- that's "real," as in "adjusted for inflation" -- was $50,054 in 2011, the most recent data availablefrom the US Census Bureau. That's 8% lower than the 2007peak of $54,489." As The Huffington Post pointed out last week in - Dow Jones Hits 'Record High' Thanks To Strong Performances From Smoke, Mirrors Sectors - We are led, then, inevitably, to a conclusion that we allfeel, but no one says aloud. The American middle class, in other words, no longer lives in a financial economy. But the gold-standard economic metrics that we hold out as the key measurements ofprosperity -- the economy of Wall Street, of gross domestic productfigures, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average is purelyfinancial. For the time being, assume that you and everyone who you care about is screwed. Congratulations. And as I would like to add, like everything else numbers, like ideology can often mask the real issues and last week's encouraging numbers did EFTA00702695 reflect the pain and suffering that half of America is currently suffering and no amount of tax breaks or stock market gains will cure. The real remedy is jobs, jobs, jobs, and more jobs and if the Private Sector isn't generating them, then government should, as jobs have a multiplier effect on the economy and on the population as a whole. And as I pointed advocated last week, with the cost of borrowing at an all time low the federal government should embark on rebuilding the country's crumbling infrastructure which will both boost the economy and leave a stronger country for future generations. Included this week is an article in the New York Times by Michael Moss — The Extraordinary Science ofAddictive Junk Food. The New York Times' article exposes the clever and surprisingly immoral ways the food industry manufactures foods to rival hard drugs for their addictive potential. Well worth the read, the article discusses "designer sodium", the genesis of the ideal kid's lunch, and the search for the morphine-like "bliss point" in soda. One scientist's description of Cheetos, in particular, highlighted the extraordinary detail that goes into what we see as a normal, familiar food: "This," Witherly said, "is one of the most marvelously constructedfoods on the planet, in terms ofpure pleasure." He ticked off a dozen attributes of the Cheetos that make the brain say more. But the one he focused on most was the puffs uncanny ability to melt in the mouth. "It's called vanishing caloric density," Witherly said. "Ifsomething melts down quickly, your brain thinks that there's no calories in it ... you can just keep eating itforever." Nearly all widely available foods, from Cutie clementines to the dozens of Pringles flavors, have been exquisitely manufactured to appeal to our primal need for salt, fat and sugar, and for our just-as- ancient yearning to get the most calories for the least amount of labor. We're all hungry and lazy. Anyone looking to introduce new and untested food — in-vitro meat, for instance — would do well to remember that food science has already perfected the art of hooking consumers on whatever they care to feed us. Also I have include several other snippets for you to peruse, as our taste buds are being manipulated beyond most people's imaginations. I love to read Paul Krugman because in addition to having the technical understanding and depth of a Nobel Laureate, he also has the compassion of someone who understands that economists and politicians should look beyond the numbers as they are only part of the equation, when the real story is the effect on the public and private sectors and people in general. This week in an op-ed in the New York Times - Dwindling Deficit Disorder — he points out that the continued fixation on budget deficits and austerity and that deficit spending is actually appropriate in a depressed economy — especially in a period of low interest rates. People still talk as if the deficit were exploding, as if the United States budget were on an unsustainable path; in fact, the deficit is falling more rapidly than it has for generations, it is already down to sustainable levels, and it is too small given the state of the economy. Starting with the raw numbers. America's budget deficit soared after the 2008 financial crisis and the recession that went with it, as revenue plunged and spending on unemployment benefits and other EFTA00702696 safety-net programs rose. And this rise in the deficit was a good thing! Federal spending helped sustain the economy at a time when the private sector was in panicked retreat; arguably, the stabi