WikiLeaks, Pros, Cons and Poetic Justice.

Though I certainly do not condone and even condemn the unlawful release of stolen secret information, first because it is theft, and second, because it can hurt my country and trigger the assassination of my fellow citizens; I find some poetic justice in these WikiLeaks. Here’s how:

Probably before, but certainly since September 11, 2001, under the pretense of keeping our nation safe from terrorists, big brother has been scanning our cell phone calls and our emails, resulting in a great loss of our constitutional privacy rights. The government has also tried as much as it could and succeeded in avoiding most judicial review or supervision of its actions. I was hoping a more liberal president would put a brake on, or a stop to it. I was wrong.

Personally, I shouldn’t care, as I have nothing to hide, and everything I say or write can be read by anyone. I hate violence, and more so those who advocate it. I hate politicians and their relentless hypocrisy, egotism and greed. I don’t like organized religions and despise religious extremists or those who use religion as a preying tool on the weak. So, even though big brother will not find anything disturbing, illegal or dangerous in my exciting life, just knowing of the government’s constant trespass on my private life, does leave a bitter taste in my mouth.

Now, what I find poetic in the WikiLeaks is the following:

Firstly, big brother now realizes how it feels, when someone who is not expected to read your mail, or listen in your phone calls, does. Secondly, it shows to the general public (which is not always scholarly), that politicians cannot be believed or trusted, in revealing black on white the differences between what politicians tell us, what they tell each other, let alone what they think.

I understand that sometimes the government should not expose to the world certain of its global philosophies or perceptions; what is concerning, nonetheless, is that big brother was arrogant and complacent enough to trust that, while it could violate every citizen’s constitutional privacy rights with little supervision or control, “its” own communication means were safer than ours…

Is WikiLeaks the problem, or our American traitors?

I just read that “The Obama administration has told whistleblower WikiLeaks that its expected imminent release of classified State Department cables will put "countless" lives at risk, threaten global counterterrorism operations and jeopardize U.S. relations with its allies.”

But is WikiLeaks the real problem? We don’t hear about WikiLeaks releasing classified information from Iran, North Korea, Russia or Israel… Isn’t WikiLeaks some scapegoat?

Isn’t the real problem the American folks with secret clearance who should not have it, who commit theft, then treason? Do we place too much trust in the wrong people, or is it that our country that has more of its citizens in prison than any other country has a hard time organizing its law enforcement priorities?

Why blame WikiLeaks? Why not find the American government employees who steal and release the confidential information, and hang them like we used to do with traitors. Some may find it harsh, but let’s think for a moment. What should be done to those specially entrusted citizen who unlawfully distribute confidential material, when they know that its distribution, may endanger the lives of our citizens…

And these leaks did not always originated from the little guys…

Wuesthoff, not completely not-for-profit...sweet secret.

After a few curious citizens contacted the Florida Attorney General, and demanded the information which Wuesthoff’s attorneys were trying to hide from the public, someone decided that this information could not be hidden any longer.

"Trade secret" was the asinine excuse which delayed the release of the disbursement information was in fact a “sweet secret.”

Sandi Copes, communications director for the Attorney General  stated that “The records were released as a result of continued efforts by the Attorney General’s Office to be able to release the full version of the records requested.” which I read as follows: “We told Wuesthoff that by law, this information would have to be released eventually. The longer they try to hide their dirty little secret, the harder it is likely to bite them in the butt.”

Johnette Gindling, who, according to Florida Today, was the VP of MARKETING of the not-for-profit Wuesthoff prior to the sale and who is now the executive director of the Space Coast Health Foundation, the charity that replaced Rockledge-based Wuesthoff after the sale, said in a news release “rather than continue the legitimate but expensive legal effort to protect the personal privacy of former Wuesthoff leaders.” which should read as follows: “We were caught with our hands in the cookie jar and our pants down. We realized that it had been videotaped… so we had to stop the denial efforts.” Gindling continued, “The foundation board has objected to the disclosure on principle and based on solid legal arguments” which should read as follows: “Our lawyers came up with some laughably bogus concept of trade secret, as we were so ashamed to disclose that a non profit company can afford to distribute 10 million in golden parachutes, but the subterfuge failed as the public was not as stupid as we first thought it to be.” Finally, the marketer Gindling spoke of the future: “We’re still exploring what the foundation will be funding, but it ultimately will be to improve the health of all of Brevard County residents,” which should read as follows: “Looking forward to find some more folks profiting from this new not for profit foundation.”

So, now, let’s review Wuesthoff’s trade secrets:

1.     Miller, received $6.25 million. ($2.2 million of severance pay, and $3.2 million of retirement pay, $850,000 of employee benefits).

2.     George Fayer, a consultant received $973,000.

3.     Chantal LeConte, received $553,000.

4.     Gindling, Wuesthoff’s former vice president of marketing, received $370,000.

Fran Pickett, chair of the Space Coast Health Foundation, said the nine executives were rewarded because they were willing to stay on “through the sales process, keep the organization running at optimum level, and assist in the transition” to new ownership. Pickett said she expects it will have $30 million to $50 million, once all obligations are settled, including the trade secret payouts.

To conclude, let’s be optimistic, and assume they’ll be $30 million left once the obligations are settled. The executives will have received over 35% of the leftover amount… with Miller alone having received over 20%.

So that everyone understands better before they make their next donation to a non-profit organization; the fact that a corporation is not-for-profit definitely does not mean that its executives are.

Does a certain verdict over another validates our jury system?

Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani was found not guilty of 284 out of 285 charges over the 1998 bombings of US embassies in Africa; a narrow win for the feds according to some dreamers; an incredible spanking, according to moi! To condemn the verdict is to advocate one of the following three positions: 1. the evidence was not there, 2. the prosecution did a lousy job, or 3. our jury system does not work.

It appears the result of this trial is triggering some kind of panic. The government is reviewing its options; yet, Republican minds appear made up, with party figures condemning the verdict. Lindsey Graham, a senior Republican senator, said: "We are at war with al-Qaida. Members of the organization and their associates should be treated as warriors, not common criminals." What does this mean? We need to rig some courts where it would be easier to get the verdict we’d prefer? If the verdict was different, then the system worked well??

First, let me be completely clear about my position. I believe in the pure and simple destruction of any party advocating the use of violence to strengthen their position, and of those who attempt to disrupt societies through violence for ANY reason. I believe in self-defense and the defense of others, yet I dislike the idea of non-solidly justified wars. I do not believe in clean wars, or the self-imposition of rules, when we are the only ones to follow them. Finally, I definitely believe that those who were never deployed are never in a position to judge the actions of those who were.

Now, to get back to our politicians’ condemnation of the Ghailani’s trial’s verdict, such condemnation leaves me puzzled; because it questions the validity of our judicial system in general, and of our  jury system in particular.

One can like or dislike a verdict. One can think that some panels of jurors are rather a herd of lobotomized zombies. One can believe that the jury system is a big joke which makes society feel good about itself because of the false perception of fairness of our judicial system it creates. So, condemn the system, but not the verdict! In making the statement Graham made in response to the verdict he condemned, he simply questioned the validity of our jury system.

When your calculator’s gives you a 7 when you add 2 to 3, don’t condemn the result of your computation, replace your calculator.

Ethics trial's legal fee paid with funds unethically obtained?

New York Rep. Charles Rangel, reportedly used $393,000.00 from his National Leadership Political Action Committee, to pay for his defense in his ethics trial which starts tomorrow. According to the Post, such spending is a breach of congressional ethics, against House rules… How would he know? Our legislators are politicians, not politethicians! When we pick ours in Florida, we had to decide if we'd vote for the one who stole 6 figures or the one who stole 7 figures. We should first teach them the concepts of simple honesty before endeavoring to teach them about ethics.

What do you expect anyways, in a system which allows lobbyists. What is a lobbyist? A Legal Briber; a very well paid fellow with connections, legally allowed to buy legislators’ votes…

It's a science project, it's a plane, it's a pigeon on Jalapeno pepper, no! It's a mirage...

Some misadvised media folks suggested that the rocket which launch was observed yesterday on the West coast, might have been a plane. They may have tried to help the Pentagon in its mission of disinformation, however, the video shot by the news helicopter undoubtedly showed a rocket, a big rocket; definitely not a sparrow or a Cessna.

Hopefully the government is lying to us; because if it is not, we have some serious reason to be very concerned. If it was a launch planned by our fleet, I would be curious to know why the navy would plan a launch so close to our coast; particularly if it was a secret mission.

If a non-government entity can launch a rocket of this size, 30 miles from our coast, and 2 days later, the Pentagon, is still wondering as to what it was, then we are in serious danger, and our defense department better be revamped.
(The Department of Defense cost us 1.5 trillion in 2009, according to http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm)

Wanna save some trillions? Just ask the news helicopters to keep an eye on the borders and the coastlines for us, just like Sarah Palin does.

Wanna save more money, dissolve the Department of Defense, and equip the news helicopters with shotguns.

Disinformation is sometimes necessary, but it can be done intelligently. Whatever it was, just call it a “Missile Secret Exercise;” as this time, I really hope the Government is lying to us when the Pentagon tells us it is not knowing what it was…

According to Florida Today, the nonprofit Wuesthoff Health Systems was sold for $145 million to a for profit group; Health Management Associate, Inc. 

 Lawyers for Wuesthoff allegedly submitted details of the severance packages to the Florida Attorney General. Florida Today requested the records revealing the details.

One of Attorney General Bill McCollum’s assistant has been negotiating with Wuesthoff’ s lawyers to decide if said records should remain hidden from the public. The only logical reason for such sneaky behavior is that the amounts of these severance packages must be obscenely outrageous.

Instead of the requested information, Florida Today received a redacted worthless 40 page PDF file with names and amounts blacked out.

Now the funny part:

"Certain financial data in the documents has been identified as trade secret protected information and redacted pursuant to Section 815.045, Florida Statutes (2010)”

In other words, it appears that the Attorney General, in cahoots with Wuesthoff Health Systems’ lawyers has decided to hide from the public the likely golden parachutes distributed to Wuesthoff executives, under the pathetic disguise that these numbers are trade secrets. Do they really consider that the public is that stupid to buy their bullshit?  

Is it me or?: Voting was complicated! Now, it becomes impossible...

Is it me or?: Voting was complicated! Now, it becomes impossible...: "I remember the good old times when people could vote FOR someone, because there was someone to vote for… Two years ago, it all changed, as m..."

Is it me or?: Blind Justice’s Seeing Eye dog… does not always sm...

Is it me or?: Blind Justice’s Seeing Eye dog… does not always sm...: "On 10/14/2010, the Brevard County State Attorney’s office filed a third degree felony against Leauntie S. Cole for making a false statement,..."

Is it me or?: McCance and God say homosexuality is a sin; Simon ...

Is it me or?: McCance and God say homosexuality is a sin; Simon ...: "Mr. McCance, the elected Vice President of the Midland School Board, in Arkansas, was caught posting some very harsh comments expressing his..."

Is it me or?: Have pen; will work for bananas. Who are scribblin...

Is it me or?: Have pen; will work for bananas. Who are scribblin...: "In Washington, DC, in March of this year, the House passed Rep. Bruce Braley's (D-Iowa) Plain Language Act (HR 946). It requires the federa..."

Is it me or?: Costa Rica exposed about their love of Sea Turtle ...

Is it me or?: Costa Rica exposed about their love of Sea Turtle ...: "Pretty pathetic to discover that after all the efforts we make in the U.S. to try saving these beautiful creatures, either they don't realiz..."

Is it me or?: Have pen; will work for bananas. Who are scribblin...

Is it me or?: Have pen; will work for bananas. Who are scribblin...: "In Washington, DC, in March of this year, the House passed Rep. Bruce Braley's (D-Iowa) Plain Language Act (HR 946). It requires the federa..."

Is it me or?: McCance and God say homosexuality is a sin; Simon ...

Is it me or?: McCance and God say homosexuality is a sin; Simon ...: "Mr. McCance, the elected Vice President of the Midland School Board, in Arkansas, was caught posting some very harsh comments expressing his..."

Is it me or?: Have pen; will work for bananas. Who are scribblin...

Is it me or?: Have pen; will work for bananas. Who are scribblin...: "In Washington, DC, in March of this year, the House passed Rep. Bruce Braley's (D-Iowa) Plain Language Act (HR 946). It requires the federa..."

Is it me or?: Costa Rica exposed about their love of Sea Turtle ...

Is it me or?: Costa Rica exposed about their love of Sea Turtle ...: "Pretty pathetic to discover that after all the efforts we make in the U.S. to try saving these beautiful creatures, either they don't realiz..."

Costa Rica exposed about their love of Sea Turtle egg omelettes.

Pretty pathetic to discover that after all the efforts we make in the U.S. to try saving these beautiful creatures, either they don't realize what they are doing in Costa Rica or they don't care. American tourism being a large portion of the country's income, if we start boycotting the country, they may start acting about this serious concern and outlawing the carnage.

Aha, maybe we have just discovered why the sea turtle is going extinct & it is not global warming. !!!!!!!....

 

Have pen; will work for bananas. Who are scribbling our ballots' questions?

In Washington, DC, in March of this year, the House passed Rep. Bruce Braley's (D-Iowa) Plain Language Act (HR 946). It requires the federal government to write documents in simple, easy-to-understand language.

The bill passed the House by a widely bipartisan margin of 386-33. I am wondering if the 33 losers simply did not understand the act, were playing solitaire, do not speak English, were asleep, or believed that it is better when the commoners can’t comprehend what they (our fine politicians) are doing, or yet if it makes their peckers appear bigger than they really are.

"There is no reason why the federal government can't write these forms and other public documents in a way we can all understand," Braley said. "Writing government documents in plain language will increase government accountability and will save Americans time and money. Plain, straightforward language makes it easy for taxpayers to understand what the federal government is doing and what services it is offering.”

Agreed? Wholeheartedly! This is a Federal Act, however, and it does not seem to affect our breed of super intelligent and highly educated Floridian ballot material writers…

Now, can someone tell me who are those fine scholars who came up with the following garbage appearing on our ballots tomorrow? (BTW, the other amendments are from the same vein.)

Example:  (read at your own risk)
Creation of Preamble for the Brevard County Charter

Currently the Charter commences with Article 1, entitled "Creation, Powers and Ordinances of Home Rule Charter Government". Shall the Charter be amended to create an introductory Preamble by moving language from the existing Section 1.1 of the Brevard County Charter into the new Preamble?

Senior conio, in Ingles por favor!