OBOF TYMHM & MORE Vol 14 No 32

WELCOME TO OPINIONS  BASED  ON FACTS (OBOF)

&

THINGS YOU MAY HAVE MISSED (TYMHM)

YEAR ONE

YEAR TWO

YEAR THREE

YEAR FOUR

 

OBOF YEAR FOUR INDEX
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-01	Jan. 02, 2014
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-02	Jan. 09, 2014
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-03	Jan. 15, 2014
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-04	Jan. 24, 2014
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-05	JAN 30, 2014
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-06	Feb. 06, 2014
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-06 EXTRA	Feb. 09, 2014
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-07	Feb. 13, 2014
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-08	Feb. 21, 2014
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-09	Feb. 27, 2014
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-10	Mar. 08, 2014
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-11	Mar. 13, 2014
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-11    EXTRA	Mar. 15, 2014
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-12	Mar.  21, 2014
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-13	Mar.  29, 2014
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-14	Apr.  03, 2014
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-15	Apr.  12, 2014
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-16	Apr.  19, 2014
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-17	Apr.  26, 2014
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-18	May  03,  2014
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-19	May  10,  2014
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-20	May  20,  2014
OBOF TYMHM Vol 14 - No 21	May 28,  2014
OBOF TYMHM Vol 14 - Ho 22	June 10, 2014
OBOF TYMHM Vol 14 - No 23	June 20, 2014
noteOBOF TYMHM Vol 14 - No 24	July  04, 2014
OBOF TYMHM Vol 14 - No 25	Aug. 04, 2014
OBOF TYMHM Vol 14 - No 26	Aug. 25, 2014
OBOF TYMHM Vol 14 - No 27	Sept. 03, 2014
OBOF TYMHM Vol 14 - No 28	Sept. 10, 2014
OBOF TYMHM Vol 14 - No 29	Sept.  14, 2014
OBOF TYMHM Vol 14 - No 30	Sept.  21, 2014
OBOF TYMHM Vol 14 - No 31	Sept.  29, 2014
OBOF TYMHM Vol 14 - No 32	Oct.    10, 2014

 

 

Agenda

 

1.  Note from Floyd.

2.  Greed - Power - Corruption.

3.  News about Social Security.

4.  Six years of resistance Keystone Pipe Line.

5.  The problem with limited wars.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NOTE  FROM  FLOYD

 

I sure hope there are some of you still sticking with me.  l have had a pretty rough 10 days and just have not been able to get my posting out to you.  I am sorry, but that is the way it is when you hit 90 and maybe even a little young.

 

I think you will find these postings to be interesting and worth your time.  I have written the first one and it speaks for itself, but I want to point out that it is really important and, I guess, I am a bit of a whistleblower. 

 

 

 

GREED IS THE FOOD

for

POWER & CORRUPTION

 

by Floyd Bowman

Publisher, OBOF

October 8, 2014.

 

I have had a long and difficult debate with myself as to whether I should write about this subject.  There are so many people involved, that could be touched, and who are totally innocent.  What I am going to write is based on MY PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OF FACTS THAT HAVE AND ARE OCCURRING.  I make this statement because I can not give you the information that would tell you how I obtained these facts, as that would put some innocent people in danger.  What danger?  I am not prepared to say.

 

There is a United States Senator who has been involved in politics for the past 54 years and now is the MOST POWERFUL AND CORRUPT SENATOR IN THE UNITED STATES  SENATE.  IN SOME WAY'S, HE IS MORE POWERFUL THAN EVEN THE PRESIDENT.  NO LEGISLATOR FROM HIS STATE, IN EITHER THE HOUSE OR SENATE, WILL VOTE ON ANY LEGISLATION, UNTIL HE TELLS  THEM HOW TO VOTE AND THEY CLEAR THEIR TALKING POINTS WITH HIM ALSO.  HE IS A VERY FRIGHTENING PERSON.   

 

He even controls everything that happens in his State from the Governor on down.  They don't vote or express any thoughts unless he OKs it.  MOST OF ALL, HE HURTS FINE PATRIOTIC CITIZENS OF HIS STATE, THAT HE SHOULD BE HELPING. 

 

I wrote the above after gaining this knowledge over the past four and one half years.  I don't know if this writing will do any good or not, or if it might be a little dangerous to me, but I don't care.  This man must be stopped.  He is Senator Jim Inhofe (R) of Oklahoma.

~~~

NEWS ABOUT SOCIAL SECURITY

 

 

During the past few years you have read a lot about the depletion of the Social Security Trust Fund.  Dr. Allen Smith has spent almost 100 % of his time the past 14 years trying to let the public know what has really happen to it.  Very few have paid attention, but during the past year or so, more and more people are realizing that what he has been saying, and proven, is true. 

 

Just recently EPOCH TIME, an international new syndicate covering 35 countries in 21 languages has picked up on Dr. Smith's writings and his most recent "The Big Dirty Secret."

 

 

From writings by Dr. Allen Smith.

October 6, 2014.

 

Former Secretary of the Treasury Tim Geithner wrote about the slush fund in his new book, “Stress Test.” Geithner wrote, “In treating Social Security like a slush fund, the federal government has borrowed, spent, and vowed to pay back the $2.5 trillion or so ‘surplus’ in payroll tax revenue it has siphoned out of Social Security.  The money has been spent, but the federal government has promised to pay it back.”

 

As secretary of the Treasury, Geithner also held the post of managing trustee of the Social Security trustees.  He signed the annual Social Security trustee’s reports and played a major role in determining the content of the reports.  Absolutely nobody has a better understanding of how Social Security has operated in recent years than Geithner.

 

By explaining the operation of Social Security in his new book, Geithner has publicly stated that the federal government has: (1) “siphoned” the surplus payroll tax revenue “out of Social Security,” and (2) the government has treated “Social Security like a slush fund.” Geithner became a whistleblower when he included this important information in his book.

 

The $2.7 trillion debt must be repaid in order for Social Security to remain solvent in the short run. Since much of the surplus revenue, from the payroll tax hike, ended up in the pockets of the super-rich, in the form of large income tax cuts, those people who benefited most from the Social Security scam should be the ones who pay higher taxes to repay the debt.

 

~~~

Six Years of Powerful Resistance

 to

 Keystone XL

Anastasia Pantsios

EcoWatch / News Report

Published: Wednesday 24 September 2014

 

 

 

Six years ago climate activists, Native American groups, ranchers, farmers, students and other began their ongoing campaign to block the proposed construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, intended to carry tar sands oil from Alberta, Canada to the Gulf of Mexico to be shipped overseas.

 

In that time, more than 2,000 activists have been arrested, more than 50,000 rallied in Washington, D.C. in February 2013 to protest the pipeline, and countless small groups have gathered in their own communities to demonstrate against it.  Because the pipeline is unbuilt, 1,818,530,000 barrels of tar sands oil remain in the ground, and more than one billion metric tons of CO2 has been keep out of the atmosphere.

 

Friend of the Earth has a counter that tracks the amount of oil untapped and the amount of carbon pollution prevented. You can follow it here.

 

 “Over the past six years, the Keystone XL fight has helped to galvanize a grassroots climate movement that is marching in the streets of New York City and beyond,” said Friend of the Earth president Erica Pica

 

“Before Keystone XL, a new fossil fuel infrastructure project was fait accompli. Americans are fed up with dirty air and water as well as being second-class citizens to corporate profits.  Across the United States, ordinary peoples are challenging pipelines, rail expansions, port expansions and liquefied natural gas facilities. Companies that wish to pollute our climate and threaten the health of millions of citizens in the pursuit of fossil fuels now have a fight on their hands, from teachers, native tribes and nations, farmers, nurses, scientists, students; activists all.”

 

The final decision to green-light the project now rests with President Obama, who is under pressure from corporations and Congress to do so. Opponents have shown their determination to continue blocking it as well.

 

“President Obama, the will of the people is clear: It’s not enough to delay this pipeline—it’s time to deny it,” said Pica.

~~~

The problem with America’s limited wars

 

By David Ignatius Opinion writer

Washington Post

 October 9 at 8:24 PM

 

 

What happens when an American plan for limited war against the Islamic State meets the savage reality of combat, as happened this week when the extremists pounded Kurdish fighters just inside Syria’s border with Turkey ?  The cry rose in Washington and abroad for more American military involvement. This is how conflicts that start off contained begin to escalate.

Here’s President Obama’s dilemma in a nutshell: He has proposed a strategy for dealing with the Islamic State that is, in the words of Harvard professor Graham Allison, “limited, patient, local and flexible.” This calibrated approach makes sense to Allison, one of America’s most experienced strategists, because it limits U.S. exposure in fighting an adversary that doesn’t immediately threaten the United States.

David Ignatius writes a twice-a-week foreign affairs column and contributes to the PostPartisan blog. View Archive

The problem is that military history, since the days of the Romans, tells us that limited war is rarely successful. Policymakers, when faced with a choice between going “all in” or doing nothing, usually choose a middle option of partial intervention.  But that leads to stalemates and eventual retreats that drive our generals crazy. The warrior ethos says, “If you’re in it, win it.”  The politician rounds the edges.

Allison argued recently in the National Interest that other nations should bear the brunt of this war: “If our friends and allies . . . to whom ISIS [the Islamic State] poses an imminent or even existential threat are unwilling to fight themselves, to kill and to die for their own interests and values, Americans should ask: Why should we?”

Frederic Hof, a former U.S. diplomat now with the Atlantic Council, sums up the bloody impasse on the Turkish-Syrian border as “a fine kettle of fish,” quoting a phrase used by comedians Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy.  He means that it’s a “confused, awkward, messy and even intractable situation,” with Americans and Turks, supposedly allies, castigating each other for taking insufficient action.

“Don’t fight the problem.  Decide it!” argued Gen. George C. Marshall, one of America’s wisest military leaders. In the Iraq-Syria case, this logic would identify the inescapable parameters of the conflict.  Turkey is a difficult ally but an essential one; doing nothing against the Islamic State would be unacceptably risky, but total war isn’t a realistic option; the U.S. campaign may have begun awkwardly, but that’s no reason to panic.

Military history is usually a story of persistence and will, as commanders muddle through the bad opening months of battle. Marshall’s experience in World War II was a classic example: The North African and Italian campaigns were one disaster after another, as Rick Atkinson explains in his brilliant trilogy about the war in Europe. The United States kept stumbling forward to the D-Day landings and pushed on to eventual victory.

The United States’ problem since World War II is that it has chosen to fight limited wars that had ambiguous outcomes, at best.  This was the case in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. Only in 1991’s Operation Desert Storm did the United States win a decisive victory, but it had limited objectives and faced a weak adversary. As Henry Kissinger recently observed, the fight against the Islamic State comes when the American public is already demoralized by this chain of non-success.

Frustration with no-win conflicts led Gen. Colin Powell to declare what came to be known as the “Powell Doctrine” — that America should go to war only when vital national security is threatened, the public is supportive, allies are on board and there’s a clear exit strategy. Obama, too, hoped to avoid frustrating, unpopular wars in Syria and Iraq. But his caution, however understandable, opened the door to the Islamic State.

I’d argue that, even in the current fog of policy, there’s a discernible path ahead.  Turkey is basically right in arguing for a buffer zone in northern Syria, protected by some kind of no-fly zone.  The United States should start by providing antiaircraft missiles to the CIA’s vetted and trained Syrian opposition fighters. This would boost the rebels’ popularity, in addition to stopping Bashar al-Assad’s planes.

A buffer zone would give the United States time to train a real rebel army that can push the Islamic State out of eastern Syria and hold the territory until negotiations someday bring a new Syrian government.  In Iraq, meanwhile, it will take months to train a Sunni force that can recapture Mosul and Fallujah, but the United States has at least stopped the extremists’ advance on Irbil and recaptured the Mosul Dam.

Obama wasn’t wrong to have opted for a limited, calibrated set of weapons in this fight.  But this doesn’t diminish the absolute requirement that he succeed with them.

~~~

If the good Lord is willing and the creek don't rise, I'll talk with you again, hopefully next week about this time.  All I can tell you is that I will certainly try.  I want to do this, and from the number of you who hit on it, I think you want it too.

God Bless You All

&

God Bless the United States of America

Floyd

 

 

Most news sources are funded by corporations and investors. Their goal is to drive people to advertisers while pushing the corporate agenda. NationofChange is a 501(c)3 organization funded almost 100% from its readers–you! Our only accountability is to the public. Click here to make a generous donation.