Posted by: quiscus | October 23, 2010

October 23, 2010

1.  “What triggers the suicide bomber

Foreign occupation, not religious fervor, is the primary motivation behind this form of terrorism.

At the time, the prevailing narrative was that these attacks in Lebanon were the result of Shiite Muslim fundamentalism. It has become a common refrain over the last several decades that religion, and Islam in particular, is the primary cause of suicide bombings. This is an easy, convenient and clear argument that fits with the United States’ approach to the war on terror over the last decade.


There is just one problem with this argument: It’s wrong.

 

Research I and my colleagues conducted at the University of Chicago Project on Security and Terrorism, in which we analyzed each of the more than 2,200 suicide attacks that have taken place throughout the world since 1980, shows that though other factors matter, the primary driver of suicide terrorism is foreign occupation.

 

In Lebanon, for example, of the 32 successful suicide attackers from 1982 through 1989 whose ideology was identifiable, 22 were communists and socialists with no commitment to religious extremism; five were Christian. Religion served as an auxiliary recruiting tool, but the root cause of the attacks was foreign occupation, and the attacks were designed to coerce the occupying forces — Israel, France and the United States — to withdraw.”
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-pape-fgn-occupation-20101022,0,4494413.story

2.  “The Securitization Scam: Foreclosures and the Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems

The foreclosure crisis has set its sights on MERS, the Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, which files almost all of the foreclosure actions in behalf of lenders. The problem never anticipated by lenders is that the company has no legal standing to do such things. In addition they broke the law by not requiring a notarized document of transfer of title signed by the seller and buyer. That is because they did not own the loans. Only the owner of the loan can file. Thus, many of the titles are now subject to fraudulent conveyance. This means that foreclosure proceedings could be subject to legal challenge.

Another question is could the foreclosures done since 2007 be nullified? How could a settlement be arrived at in a few months when there are millions of homeowners involved. The banks, which obviously deliberately broke the laws, will be responsible for fines and settlement with injured parties could cost them more than $10 billion. While this scenario moves forward the banks still are acting like goons and violating laws, to get people out of homes.

The question is who has the loan paper and that is the note-holder. He or they are the only ones with legal standing to request a court to foreclose and evict. That all changed with the coming of MBS, mortgage backed securities. Loans were bundled into tranches or REMIC’s, a vehicle designed to hold the loans for tax purposes. These mortgages were cut into bits and pieces to satisfy the different tastes and needs of investors. During this process the note was not signed over to the bondholders, because the mortgage may have been split into pieces and no one could know which part would default first. Therefore the MBS held the note.

The bottom line is the banks had no legal right to foreclose and evict. That means the evicted can get their homes back. The new buyers are screwed because they have no legal standing because the banks sold them a house they did not own. The fraud committed by the foreclosure mills, at the behest of the banks, puts all foreclosures into question and even the status of those homeowners who are currently paying mortgages. That means if homeowners all stop paying their mortgages, they could end up owning their homes.”

http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=21585

3.  “GOP Plan Dramatically Reduces Social Security Benefits, Actuary Finds

A high-profile Republican budget plan would slash Social Security benefits in the long-run — perhaps even by up to half of what they are now, the program’s actuary concluded in a new study.

The Chief Actuary of Social Security analyzed a proposal from Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), the GOP’s ranking member on the budget committee, who could become its chairman in January, and found that new entrants in the US workforce could see massive decreases in their payouts upon retirement.

It was unveiled Wednesday by Rep. Earl Pomeroy (D-ND), chairman of the Ways and Means subcommittee on Social Security, less than two weeks before an election in which Democrats have elevated Social Security into a major campaign issue.


“The new analysis reveals that these proposals result in benefits cuts ranging from ten percent to as high as 50 percent,” Pomeroy said in a statement. “As I talk to seniors today about stretching their Social Security benefits with no cost of living adjustment in sight, they would not agree with describing cuts of this magnitude as ‘modest’.”


The Ryan “Roadmap for America’s Future,” the plan that was analyzed, has 13 co-sponsors (all Republicans). GOP leaders, including House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) have declined to fully endorse it but haven’t disavowed it, either.


A high-profile Republican budget plan would slash Social Security benefits in the long-run — perhaps even by up to half of what they are now, the program’s actuary concluded in a new study.”

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article26669.htm

Advertisements

Responses

  1. […] https://quiscus.wordpress.com/2010/10/23/october-23-2010/ […]


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: