time*treat's Blog

London PM Gold Fix: Sept 11, 2001: $287.00
London PM Gold Fix: Sept 11, 2009: $1,008.25

London Silver: Sept 11, 2001: $4.18
London Silver: Sept 11, 2009: $16.89

DJIA Close: Sept 10, 2001: 9,605.51
DJIA Close: Sept 11, 2009: 9,605.41 <-- First Bank of Sealy/Serta STILL offers better service than this.
Plus they won't steal any of your dough under the guise of 'abandoned property' laws, or charge any fees.

Looks like that "historical return" the shills always talk about, in stocks, has indeed become .... history.
(Actually it never was true. The market is a less-than-zero-sum game, but that would take too much explanation for the shills; it involves actually knowing how the index is manip.. er... calculated vs. how a real person historically would have had to buy and sell the same underlying securities)

Oh, but a lump of metal pays no interest.

SOURCES: Kitco & Yahoo

(exerpt from)  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/currency/6152204/UN-wants-new-global-currency-to-replace-dollar.html

In a radical report, the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) has said the system of currencies and capital rules which binds the world economy is not working properly, and was largely responsible for the financial and economic crises.

It added that the present system, under which the dollar acts as the world's reserve currency , should be subject to a wholesale reconsideration.

In essence, the report calls for a new Bretton Woods-style system of managed international exchange rates, meaning central banks would be forced to intervene and either support or push down their currencies depending on how the rest of the world economy is behaving.

The proposals would also imply that surplus nations such as China and Germany should stimulate their economies further in order to cut their own imbalances, rather than, as in the present system, deficit nations such as the UK and US having to take the main burden of readjustment.

"Replacing the dollar with an artificial currency would solve some of the problems related to the potential of countries running large deficits and would help stability," said Detlef Kotte, one of the report's authors. "But you will also need a system of managed exchange rates. Countries should keep real exchange rates [adjusted for inflation] stable. Central banks would have to intervene and if not they would have to be told to do so by a multilateral institution such as the International Monetary Fund."

(report) http://www.unctad.org/Templates/Webflyer.asp?intItemID=1397&docID=11867
(from page 123 of the report) http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/tdr2009ch4_en.pdf

A step that would go much further than the introduction
of a substitution account would be to enable
a new “Global Reserve Bank” or a reformed IMF
to issue an “artificial” reserve currency, such as the
“bancor” suggested by Keynes in his Bretton Woods
proposals for an International Clearing Union.  The
new global reserve system could be built on the existing
system of SDRs.

-----------------------------------

The report is a couple hundred pages and includes many other good & kind suggestions (many in the form of additional taxes and regulations.)

Is the conspiracy still a theory?

(it's so safe, we made laws so you can't sue us)
http://www.hhs.gov/disasters/emergency/manmadedisasters/bioterorism/medication-vaccine-qa.html

(just-in-case document)
http://www2a.cdc.gov/phlp/docs/Facility%20Quarantine%20Order%20novelflu%20filled%20in%204-30-09.pdf

"There's no way to rule innocent men.
The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals.
Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them.
One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.
Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone?
But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system ..." --Dr. Floyd Ferris, in Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged (1957)

Lynching of Cynthia McKinney urged by ‘journalist’ trained and paid by FBI
www.sfbayview.com/2009/lynching-of-cynthia-mckinney-urged-by-%E2%80%98journalist%E2%80%99-trained-and-paid-by-fbi/

Of course that's not why he got in trouble; it was when he called for an attack on 3 fe(de)ral judges that the hammer came down.
www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/1709218,hal-turner-fbi-judges-081009.article

It's not what crime you commit, but who you commit it against. Oh, wait; it's not 'crime' when the D.C.Gang funds it.

(Well, that's one way to "keep costs down". The greenies should be pleased; it is "recycling", after all.)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8222732.stm

China is trying to move away from the use of executed prisoners as the major source of organs for transplants.

According to the China Daily newspaper, executed prisoners currently provide two-thirds of all transplant organs.

The government is now launching a voluntary donation scheme, which ithopes will also curb the illegal trafficking in organs.

But analysts say cultural bias against removing organs after death will make a voluntary scheme hard to implement.

We own your kids and know what's best for them ...

... unless they get sick, then it's your problem.

They're in SoCal. Wonder how soon before the GoonSquad visits them.

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/vaers/gardasil.htm

They're not called "side-effects" anymore; now they are "adverse events".

Deaths

As of June 1, 2009, there have been 43 U.S. reports of death among females who have received the vaccine. Twenty six of these reports have been confirmed, 9 are still under investigation, and 8 remain unconfirmed due to no identifiable patient information in the report such as a name and contact information to confirm the report. Confirmed reports are those that scientists have followed up on and have verified the claim. In the 26 reports confirmed, there was no unusual pattern or clustering to the deaths that would suggest that they were caused by the vaccine.

Hmmm, you have to die as part of a "cluster" (I'll leave that word alone) to be actually dead.

The company that makes this "product" is lobbying (and lining the pockets of governors) to have it "marketed" to males, too.

I won't even say why and how many ways dangerous this is going to be, in the wrong hands, other than to say "If you thought tazers were hazardous to your health ..."

Alles heil "States' Rights".

It's the policy, not whoever is currently pushing it.
Bad ideas usually remain so - except to partisan hacks. They have to know which party is pushing the bad idea before they can decide whether to oppose it or not.

By Southern Avenger

Yep.

http://www.courthousenews.com/2009/08/04/California_Won_t_Accept_Its_Own_IOUs.htm

SAN FRANCISCO (CN) - Small businesses that received $682 million inIOUs from the state say California expects them to pay taxes on theworthless scraps of paper, but refuses to accept its own IOUs to paydebts or taxes. The vendors' federal class action claims the state istrying to balance its budget on their backs.
     Lead plaintiffNancy Baird filled her contract with California to provide embroideredpolo shirts to a youth camp run by the National Guard, but never waspaid the $27,000 she was owed. She says California "paid" her with anIOU that two banks refused to accept - yet she had to pay Californiasales tax on the so-called "sale" of the uniforms.
     The classconsists mostly of small business owners, many of whom rely on incomefrom government contracts to keep afloat. They say California has usedthem as "suckers" as it looks for a way to bankroll its operationswhile avoiding its own financial obligations.
     "Instead ofseeking funds through proper channels, the State has created anightmare," the class says. "Many of these businesses will not surviveif they are required to wait until October 2009 to have these forcedIOUs redeemed by the State."
     The class claims the state isviolating the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. It demands thatCalifornia be ordered to honor its own IOUs, plus interest. They arerepresented by William Audet.

One-way "money" transaction ripping off We_The_Sheeple with scrip? Even democrat "Gray" Davis didn't pull that when he was governor.

(Had to happen eventually)

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/18/science/18dna.html

By ANDREW POLLACK
Published: August 17, 2009

Scientists in Israel have demonstrated that it is possible to fabricate DNA evidence, undermining the credibility of what has been considered the gold standard of proof in criminal cases. The scientists fabricated blood and saliva samples containing DNA from a person other than the donor of the blood and saliva. They also showed that if they had access to a DNA profile in a database, they could construct a sample of DNA to match that profile without obtaining any tissue from that person.

“You can just engineer a crime scene,” said Dan Frumkin, lead author of the paper, which has been published online by the journal Forensic Science International: Genetics. “Any biology undergraduate could perform this.” http://www.fsigenetics.com/article/S1872-4973(09)00099-4/abstract

Dr. Frumkin is a founder of Nucleix, a company based in Tel Aviv that has developed a test to distinguish real DNA samples from fake ones that it hopes to sell to forensics laboratories.

The planting of fabricated DNA evidence at a crime scene is only one implication of the findings. A potential invasion of personal privacy is another.

Using some of the same techniques, it may be possible to scavenge anyone’s DNA from a discarded drinking cup or cigarette butt and turn it into a saliva sample that could be submitted to a genetic testing company that measures ancestry or the risk of getting various diseases. Celebrities might have to fear “genetic paparazzi,” said Gail H. Javitt of the Genetics and Public Policy Center at Johns Hopkins University.

Tania Simoncelli, science adviser to the American Civil Liberties Union, said the findings were worrisome.

“DNA is a lot easier to plant at a crime scene than fingerprints,” she said. “We’re creating a criminal justice system that is increasingly relying on this technology.”

John M. Butler, leader of the human identity testing project at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, said he was “impressed at how well they were able to fabricate the fake DNA profiles.” However, he added, “I think your average criminal wouldn’t be able to do something like that.” ["Average" criminals aren't our concern]

The scientists fabricated DNA samples two ways. One required a real, if tiny, DNA sample, perhaps from a strand of hair or drinking cup. They amplified the tiny sample into a large quantity of DNA using a standard technique called whole genome amplification.

Of course, a drinking cup or piece of hair might itself be left at a crime scene to frame someone, but blood or saliva may be more believable.

The authors of the paper took blood from a woman and centrifuged it to remove the white cells, which contain DNA. To the remaining red cells they added DNA that had been amplified from a man’s hair.

Since red cells do not contain DNA, all of the genetic material in the blood sample was from the man. The authors sent it to a leading American forensics laboratory, which analyzed it as if it were a normal sample of a man’s blood.

The other technique relied on DNA profiles, stored in law enforcement databases as a series of numbers and letters corresponding to variations at 13 spots in a person’s genome.

From a pooled sample of many people’s DNA, the scientists cloned tiny DNA snippets representing the common variants at each spot, creating a library of such snippets. To prepare a DNA sample matching any profile, they just mixed the proper snippets together. They said that a library of 425 different DNA snippets would be enough to cover every conceivable profile.

Nucleix’s test to tell if a sample has been fabricated relies on the fact that amplified DNA — which would be used in either deception — is not methylated, meaning it lacks certain molecules that are attached to the DNA at specific points, usually to inactivate genes.

In his own words, not some Taitz fake birth-cert hack-job.

The problem is can you get the American people to say this is really important and force their representatives to do the right thing. That requires mobilizing a citizenry. That requires them understanding what is at stake, and climate change is a great example.

When I was asked earlier about the issue of coal… under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket… even regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad, because I’m capping greenhouse gasses, coal power plants, natural gas… you name it… whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to retro-fit their operations.

That will cost money… they will pass that money on to the consumers. [No. They will pass the cost on to consumers - t*t] You can already see what the arguments are going to be during the general election. People will say Obama and Al Gore … these folks... they're going to destroy the economy. ["People" will be right, but also ignored ... Then, later, "People" will be invited on to the morning news-talk shows and asked "How do we fix it?" and expected to provide a "painless" answer in 45 seconds or less.]

This is going to cost us 8 trillion dollars or whatever [what-ever.] their number is. If you can’t persuade the American people that, yes, there is going to be some increase on electricity rates on the front end, but that over the long term [longer than you want to know], because of combinations of more efficient energy usage [because you can't afford it] and changing light bulbs [made in China] and more efficient appliances [also made in China], but also technology improving how we can produce clean energy that the economy [Need I say whose economy?] will benefit.

If we can’t make that argument persuasively enough, you can be Lyndon Johnson. You can be the master of Washington. You’re not gonna get that done.