Fiber Optic Cable System Vandalism A National Security Problem

 

More at Zennie62.com

At YouTube, Yahoo, MySpace, Metacafe, DailyMotion, Blip.tv, Stupid Videos, Sclipo, Viddler and Howcast

On Thursday April 9th a criminal incident impacting nearly a million people in three counties of Silicon Valley went largely unnoticed by the media, both mainstream and blogs, yet has enormous national security implications far beyond the scale and scope of September 11th 2001 or "9-11" and potentially impacting millions of Americans. What was it and why?

On that day, someone one or a group of people cut a fiber-optic and landline network placed beneath a manhole cover in San Jose, California. No one knows who did it, but the act crippled operations in hospitals, stores, banks, and supermarkets. No one could make a call using a cell phone or regular phone, or get information from the Internet. The full extent of the impact of this act is as of this writing not known, but imagine not being able to call the police or the fire department or your loved one for any reason especially if they need your help. And forget using "Skype", the Internet phone service, because access to the Internet itself was down.

That's what happened yesterday.

To explain the importance of this, I go back in time in my own life, to 1988.

Then, I worked a temporary job at a firm called "The San Francisco Consulting Group" (SFCG) in of course San Francisco, California, and which still exists. (I must report I write this without contact with anyone at the firm. My friend who was a partner there and told the firm to work with me, Michael Taylor, passed away due to brain cancer in 2003 and who's survived by his wife and my friend Sandra Taylor.)

In an innocent conversation the human resources representative discovered that the person hired to help them with spreadsheets - me - was using a software program called "STELLA", knew the modeling paradigm "System Dynamics" or "SD" and as it happens "SD" was used by SFCG, so my value immediately increased dramatically. Michael and his staff wanted to use System Dynamics to make this "economic soft landing" computer simulation for a client.

What was changing is the provision of access by long distance companies to the cable fiber-optic lines owned by AT&T. With all of these companies now able to "poach" off lines owned by AT&T, the firm was certain to lose money, the question was "how much."


At the time, the Internet was not invented by Al Gore, but the fact was then and is now that national communications depend on the same fiber-optic and coaxial cables that are mostly owned by AT&T and were vandalized in San Jose.

In 2006, I pointed to the communications system that was established as vulnerable to attack by a hacker. I wrote in my Zennie62.com blog:

The Old Economy firms are threatened by the continuation of a process that started almost 20 years ago: the constant and inexorable decrease in market value that they have suffered since the mid-80s. A chain of events started when the Federal Government forced the then-powerful AT&T to share its cable lines with other long distance providers as part of the breakup of AT&T. Ever since that point in the early 70s, the "Baby Bells" have been trying to slow the rate of decrease in market share and in any way.


Now, the only proof I have of this is rather powerful. In 1988 I was to be hired as part of a consulting team led by The San Francisco Consulting Group. I was to constuct a System Dynamics model of the US long distance telephone industry. That team was to determine how the market for long distance service was changing and how the client -- GTE -- should respond to this change. In other words, how they should achieve "a soft landing" as their market share decreased. The schematic I created for the model was formed to have a pattern of numerical behavior such that each long distance company was losing market share as new players arrived on the scene.


That was before the emergence of the Internet, which didn't become a major factor in how we communicate until 1995. But after that year, the number of Internet-equipped computers increased dramatically, as did the number of Internet-based services and companies. In 10 years, we've went from dial up to DSL to Broadband, and the one constant in this process has been the use of phone lines used by companies like AT&T.


Ever hungry for new forms of revenue generation, the firms that provide Broadband service -- and standard telephone service -- saw a way to cut off competition from the "Vonages" of the World: force them to pay for faster Internet speeds.

In this, they found the perfect driver to increase revenues and at the same time hamper the growth of the Global Economy. It's easier now than even before in our history for a small business to have a global reach using the World Wide Web. The cost barrier to entry for many is close to zero if one knows how to find the free services needed.


But from the perspective of thee AT&T's of the World, their revenue gain would be unescapable; absent a way of hacking the system, billions of users would have to pay them for faster access, thus introducing a new barrier to entry for small companies in the Global market.

To put it simply and to repeat my message folks, the fiber-optic cable lines that AT&T  created in the late 40s and up to the 80s and then had to share with new firms in the 90s and beyond, that sunk infrastructure of lines that carry the information that makes up what we call the World Wide Web, and the cell phone and telephone communications industry is still largely concentrated in the same system that was the victim of vandals in Silicon Valley on Thursday.  But when the matter of security has been discussed in the past, it was always from the perspective of stealing information from the network, not destroying it as was the case on April 9th. 

All the vandals did yesterday was open a manhole cover, go down below ground to the space under the streets that holds our fiber-optic system, find the lines, and cut them, then escape the scene of the crime just by climbing our and running away from the scene of the crime. Again, no suspects were captured as of this writing. No security camera was in place to "see" the crime. No locks on the manhole covers. Nothing. A group of people went in and then got out and crippled much of Silicon Valley's economy and lifestyle in the process. But it could have caused the loss of life just be not being able to contact and help someone in need.

And to add insult to injury, the talks about fiber-optic security that are available online only concern someone tapping the lines to get information, not destroying them altogether. The assumption is others will want to maintain the lines, but that's a terrible guess to make. This act of vandalism proves that there are people who want to cripple our economy and may have stumbled on something. We have to stop them.

How do we know this wasn't a dry run for some larger act of vandalism? Sorry to be a conspriracy theorist, but hey, I've got reasonable evidence to back my concern. I now state that a well-financed anti-USA terrorist effort could successfully cripple much of America's Internet and communications infrastructure in much the same way that vandals damaged fiber-optic cables on Thursday. Prove me wrong. Where's your counter-evidence?

This is such an important issue that the Federal Government, and specifically the Federal Communications Commission should work with the Department of Homeland Security to first eliminate the development of an Internet access system that's in the control of a few large corporations because of the problem of having such an important system concentrated in the hands of a few.  It's not that they're bad; it's a matter of protection. 

Municipalities should call for an end to Comcasts' exclusive control of cable access in cities like Oakland. The overall objective must be decentralization and redundancy (in other words having more than one of the same lines) of Internet-related access and control. We have to lay new lines of cable to act as a replacement and redundancy system for what's there now and make sure that those lines are secure from vandalism -- right now, given the events of Thursday April 9th, I write with great concern that our national system of fiber-optic cables is not secure and subject to attack.

I welcome anyone out there to prove I'm wrong. I already have my example of why I'm right in San Jose -- where's your proof?

Follow me on Twitter | Video on YouTube

Terry McAuliffe On The Clinton Nomination of Barack Obama

This is a video interview with now-former campaign finance chair Terry McAuliffe who commented on Senator Hillary Clinton's nomination of Barack Obama as President.  Terry also informs us that he's going "To Dizzyland."  

CNN's Donna Brazile Comes To SF For Obama Fundraiser July 15th, Palace

Donna Brazile, originally uploaded by AFSCME.org.

CNN's Donna Brazile Comes To SF For Obama Fundraiser July 15th, Palace Hotel

CNN's Donna Brazile is coming To San Francisco For a Fundraiser for the "Obama Victory Fund" July 15th from 12 noon to 1:30 PM at The Palace Hotel, (2 New Montgomery, downtown San Francisco and just off Montgomery BART Station), and you can join us with a $150 contribution or a $1,000 contribution for a VIP reception to host Ms. Brazile. To join us, just click on this link:

https://donate.barackobama.com/page/contribute/BrazileJuly15

And as you sign up and donate, type in "Zennie Abraham" in the field "PLEASE LET US KNOW WHO ENCOURAGED YOU TO MAKE THIS CONTRIBUTION:"

About Donna Brazile

Donna Brazile is Founder and Managing Director of Brazile and Associates, LLC and is the first African-American to direct a major presidential campaign, having done so for Gore-Libermann 2000. Brazile is perhaps best known as the weekly and at times daily contributor to CNN's "The Situation Room" and other CNN programs.

Recently, Brazile made news again as an active member of the DNC Rules Committee, where she told then-Clinton supporter and former Governor Jim Blanchard "my mama told me you gotta play by the rules."

Donna Brazile is the recipient of numerous awards and honors, including Washingtonian Magazine's 100 Most Powerful Women in Washington, D.C. and the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation's Award for Political Achievement.

A native of New Orleans, Louisiana, Brazile earned her undergraduate degree from Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge. She's also the author of Cooking With Grease: Stirring the Pots in American Politics

Please join us for this lunchtime discussion from 12 noon to 1:30 PM, Tuesday, July 15th.

Al Gore's Speech Endorsing Senator Barack Obama For President

Streaming Video by Ustream.TV

Stating that this election is too important to do otherwise, Al Gore officially endorsed Senator Barack Obama in a rosing speech given at Cobo Hall in Detroit this evening.

Jojned by Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm and Senator Obama, Gore was litterally blasted into emotional orbit by the crowd's yelling of "Yes We Can" again and again. Gore said that elections matter, reminding the crowd of Florida just by using its name. The Nobel Prize Winner then talked to the crowd explaining the importance of solving the crisis of Global Warming. He compared our current crisis to that facing "The Greatest Generation" of men and women who served during World War II, saying "That’s what the Greatest Generation did to win World War II, and then came home to start the Marshall Plan, unify Europe, create the United Nations and create the basis for peace and prosperity for decades."

The speech was stirring, to be sure.

MSNBC explains the significance of this event after showing Gore's speech:



This is the full text of Gore's speech:

Yes We Can!
Thank You, Governor Granholm, for your introduction and your great leadership. Thank you, Michigan, for supporting me in 2000. I’ll never forget it. Congratulations, Detroit, on the Red Wings victory in the Stanley Cup finals.

I speak to you this evening as a citizen as of the United States. I speak to you also as a citizen of the world because the outcome of this election will affect the future of our planet. For America to lead the world through the dangers we’re facing, to seize the opportunities before us, we’ve got to have new leadership. Not only a new president, but new policies. Not only a new head of state but a new vision for America’s future.

I want to begin with a few words to my fellow Democrats. We have just concluded an historic contest among the strongest field of candidates any political party has ever offered for the presidency of this country. An inspiring group of men and a woman with experience and vision, competence and boldness. Their vigorous competition has attracted record numbers of voters in every part of America, reinvigorated our democracy, and helped to rekindle the spirit of our country. And now we’ve made our choice.

As the general election begins, let us remember our obligation to honor our highest values of our democracy, and conduct this campaign in a spirit of respect for the Republican nominee.

[Audience Boos]

No, no! In that case, I’m glad I brought it up, because as Senator Barack Obama has said, John McCain is deserving of that respect. He has demonstrated bravery in war and as a prisoner of war, and has served in the House of Representatives and in the Senate for many years. Moreover, he has demonstrated a willingness to debate some critical issues, including the climate crisis, that many Republicans have refused to discuss at all.

But even as we acknowledge his long experience, we must and we will make our case that America simply cannot afford to continue the policies of the last eight years for another four.

And we all know that a long tenure in Washington, DC is the same things as judgment, wisdom, and vision. Nevertheless, the other party seems to think that age and experience are factors that will work in their favor during this campaign.

But our shared experience as a nation tells us otherwise. I remember when one prominent Republican wondered out loud whether the Democratic nominee, and “really is grown up enough to be president.” Another used the phrase, “naive and inexperienced.” Yet another said, “the United States cannot afford to risk the future of the free world with inexperience and immaturity in the White House.” Who are they talking about? Every single one of those quotations came from the campaign of 1960, when the Republicans attacked John Fitzgerald Kennedy for allegedly lacking the age and experience necessary to be president.

Richard Nixon’s slogan in that campaign was “experience counts,” to which John F. Kennedy responded, “to exclude from positions of trust and command all those below the age of 44, would have kept Jefferson from writing the Declaration of Independence, Washington from commanding the Continental Army, Madison from fathering the Constitution, and Christopher Columbus from even discovering America.” On January 20th, 1961, as a 12-year-old boy, I stood in the snow in front of the Capitol as John Fitzgerald Kennedy took the oath of office. I know what his inspiration meant to my generation and I feel that same spirit in this auditorium here tonight building all over this country this year. I feel your determination after two terms of the Bush-Cheney administration to change the direction of our country.

In looking back over the last eight years, I can tell you that we have already learned one important fact since the year 2000: take it from me, elections matter. If you think the next appointments to our Supreme Court are important, you know that elections matter. If you live in the city of New Orleans, you know that elections matter. If you or a member of your family are serving in the active military, the National Guard or Reserves, you know that elections matter. If you’re a wounded veteran, you know that elections matter. If you lost your job, if you’re struggling with your mortgage, you know that elections matter. If you care about a clean environment, if you want a government that protects you instead of special interests, you know that elections matter. If you care about food safety, if you like a T on your BLT, you know that elections matter. If you bought poisoned, lead-filled toys from China or adulterated medicine made in China, if you bought tainted pet food made in China, you know that elections matter! After the last eight years, even our dogs and cats have learned that elections matter.

And this election matters more than ever because America needs change more than ever. After eight years of lost jobs and lower wages we need change. After eight years of incompetence, neglect and failure we need change. After eight years in which our Constitution has been dishonored and disrespected we need change. After eight years of the worst, most serious foreign policy mistakes in the entire history of our nation we need change.

In September of 2002, I argued strongly that the invasion of a country that had not attacked us would be a mistake, and would divert attention, resources and resolve from the effort to track down and capture those who had attacked us. I argued that the occupation of Iraq would be dangerous and harmful for our country. And I well remember how few elected officials were willing to take that position in favor of protecting our national security by remaining focused on the right objectives. But I remember that an eloquent legislator in Springfield, Illinois named Barack Obama spoke up boldly and clearly with the force of reason and logic to join in opposition to that blunder. To those who still do not understand that the withdrawal of troops from the search for bin Laden in order to launch a misguided invasion of Iraq was a mistake, it’s time to say: We need a change. To those who want to continue making that same mistake over and over again indefinitely, it is important for us to say loudly and clearly with our votes this November: We need change. We intend to have change.

To those who want to continue borrowing money from China to buy oil from the Persian Gulf and burn it in ways that destroy our planet’s environment, it’s time to say: We need change. Barack Obama knows that we are too dependent on foreign oil and carbon fuels, and has proposed a plan to create millions of good new jobs and renewable green energy conservation and efficiency. Here in Detroit you know we need to revitalize our automobile industry with a commitment to plug-in hybrids and low-emission vehicles to solve the climate crisis and create the jobs of the future.

The future is ours: not to predict, but to create. But make no mistake: we need to change our policies on climate. Not too many years from now the next generation will look back at the decisions we make this coming November and the policies we put in place in January of next year. Were we to ignore the warnings of the scientists around the world and look the other way as the entire North Polar icecap melts before our eyes and the consequences we’ve been warned about unfolded, our children might then well ask: what were they thinking? Why didn’t they act? Why didn’t they choose change when they had a chance? It is my deep hope that they will ask another and very different question. I want them to look back on this historic year and ask: how did Americans in 2008 find the moral courage to rise and successfully solve a crisis that so many said was impossible to solve? How did they find the strength to change?

As Americans, we know that our democracy often moves very slowly, but we also know that when we must, we can shift gears quickly and suddenly pick up the pace to respond boldly to a great challenge. That’s what the Greatest Generation did to win World War II, and then came home to start the Marshall Plan, unify Europe, create the United Nations and create the basis for peace and prosperity for decades.

Many people have waited for some sign that our country is awakening once again. How will we know when a massive wave of reform and recovery and regeneration is about to take hold and renew our nation? What would it look like if such a change were beginning to build? I think we might recognize it as a sign of such change if we saw millions of young people getting involved for the first time in the political process. I think we might just recognize it if we saw that new generation casting aside obsolete and hurtful distinctions and reaching out to one another across the ancient divisions that have frustrated action in the past. I think we would know this change was coming if a new generation rejected the special interest politics of the past and the big money that fueled it, and instead used the internet to get small donations and unite Americans in a common effort to realize our common destiny. If we saw it coming, we’d recognize it by the words “Hope” and “Change.”

Perhaps we would recognize it if we heard a young leader rise up to say, “We’re not a red state America or a blue state America. We are the United States of America.” We would know that change was on the way if that young leader reached out not only to the supporters of the other candidates in his party, but also beyond partisan lines to Republicans and independents and said to us all: “America, our time has come!” I think we would recognize it in a candidate who, in response to those doubting our ability to solve the climate crisis and create a bright future, inspired millions to say, “Yes We Can.”

We have such a nominee, we have such a leader! Yes we can! Ladies and gentlemen, the next President of the United States of America, Barack Obama.

AL GORE TO ENDORSE BARACK OBAMA TODAY

The event that many have been waiting for has happened. On his blog, former Vice President and Nobel Prize winner Al Gore has annouced that he will back Senator Barack Obama for President.

While some have complained about the timing of the event, saying it was about time, there's no question that it's an enormous development, which will start many thinking that Gore may be Obama's pick for Vice President.

After all, remember the woman I talked to who was with the "Gore Obama" movement? In this video, I asked her about switching that to Obama / Gore. Now, she's got no real choice.



Gore Asks Supporters To Contribute; So Do We

This is what Gore wrote on his blog:

A few hours from now I will step on stage in Detroit, Michigan to announce my support for Senator Barack Obama. From now through Election Day, I intend to do whatever I can to make sure he is elected President of the United States.
Over the next four years, we are going to face many difficult challenges -- including bringing our troops home from Iraq, fixing our economy, and solving the climate crisis. Barack Obama is clearly the candidate best able to solve these problems and bring change to America.
I've never asked members of AlGore.com to contribute to a political campaign before, but this moment and this election are too important to let pass without taking action.
That's why I am asking you to join me today in showing your support for Barack Obama by making a contribution to his campaign today:
https://donate.barackobama.com/support
Over the past 18 months, Barack Obama has united a movement. He knows change does not come from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue or Capitol Hill. It begins when people stand up and take action.
With the help of millions of supporters like you, Barack Obama will bring the change we so desperately need in order to solve our country's most pressing problems.
If you've already contributed to Barack Obama's campaign, I ask that you consider making another contribution. If you haven't, please join the movement right now:
https://donate.barackobama.com/support
On the issues that matter most, Barack Obama is clearly the right choice to lead our nation.
We have a lot of work to do in the next few months to elect Barack Obama president and it begins by making a contribution to his campaign today.

Peter Paul Trial - Al Gore, Bill Clinton, Chelsea Clinton Called As Witnesses; Hillary After Election

I just got a call from a friend who's been close to the Peter F. Paul v. Bill and Hillary Clinton Fraud case, and who reported that in the trial, which was to take place today, Judge Aurelio Munoz called for former President Bill Clinton and his daughter Chelsea Clinton to appear as witnesses, but that Senator Hillary Clinton did not have to appear until after the close of the presidential election.

The judge also called for former presidential candidate and now Nobel Prize Winner Al Gore to appear as a witness. This marks the first bad news for the fomer elected official who's become the father of the battle against Global Warming.

This development, which has not yet appeared in the major news headlines, is a major one in the now nine-year old case and scandal, which has went through various episodes and twists on its way toward today's developments.

It means that the history of Clinton scandals has finally impacted the campaign, because there's no logical way that this bit of important news can not be covered by major news outlets eventually.

But it also causes younger voters who may have broke for Clinton to be forced to look back at the Clinton past, because it impacts events of today.

Al Gore Has Private Meeting With President Bush - Press Secretary Dana Perino Doesn't Know What Was Discussed

This is the full transcript of today's White House Press Conference, where White House Press Secretary Dana Perino said she "did not psychoanalyze the President" in response to why President Bush met privately with Al Gore. Read the rest here.

Press Briefing by Dana Perino
James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

2:46 P.M. EST

MS. PERINO: Good afternoon. Sorry to be a little bit later today, but it was for good reason. I have a couple of statements by the President -- these are in his words -- one on Russia, and one on Senator Lott. And then I'll have a little bit of information for you about the meetings he's had today.

The first is a statement about Russia. The President's words: I am deeply concerned about the detention of numerous human rights activists and political leaders who participated in peaceful rallies this weekend. I am particularly troubled by the use of force by law enforcement authorities to stop these peaceful activities and to prevent some journalists and human rights activists from covering them.

The freedoms of expression, assembly and press, as well as due process are fundamental to any democratic society. I am hopeful that the government of Russia will honor its international obligations in these areas, investigate allegations of abuses and free those who remain in detention.

Now, secondly, on Senator Lott: For more than three decades Trent Lott has been an outstanding advocate in the United States Congress for both the people of Mississippi and every United States citizen. With service in the Republican leadership in both the House of Representatives and the Senate he has skillfully advanced legislation and effectively championed key principles of our party, including low taxes and a strong national defense.

Trent has worked to enhance the economic vitality of our nation and his home state throughout his career. By focusing on the important defense, transportation, infrastructure, agriculture and educational needs of Mississippi, he has helped bring new development and opportunity to his constituents. Throughout his service Trent has always been a leader, someone his colleagues have known they could count on to stay true to his principles while working cooperatively to achieve results for the American people. Trent enjoyed bipartisan respect because of his reverence for the institutions of Congress, and because Republicans and Democrats knew they could count on him to keep his commitments and his word. His immense talents will be missed in our Nation's Capital. Laura and I wish him and his wife Tricia all the best.

Stepping back into my own voice, the President today had good meetings with Israeli Prime Minister Olmert and Palestinian Authority President Abbas today. Representatives of more than 40 countries are gathering here tonight at the State Department and tomorrow in Annapolis to demonstrate the international resolve to seize this important opportunity to advance freedom and peace in the Middle East.

This conference will show the international support that exists for the Israelis' and the Palestinians' goal to start negotiations on the establishment of a Palestinian state and the realization of peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians. It will also provide an opportunity for the Israelis, the Palestinians and their neighbors to recommit to implementing the road map. And the conference will review Palestinian plans to build the institutions of a democratic state, and their preparations for next month's Donor Conference in Paris on the 17th.

The President is personally committed to implementing his vision of two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security, and looks forward to speaking tonight -- he will give a toast at the dinner -- and tomorrow in Annapolis.

Q Can you tell us what he's doing in these meetings? Is he giving a pep talk to these leaders? Is he asking them to make concessions? Could you give more description?

MS. PERINO: The President, in these meetings, is encouraging the two leaders. First and foremost, he is saying that he is proud of them, for them to get to this moment. These are two leaders who have the goal of two states living side by side in peace and security as their intention. This is the first time that we have had this, and that's why the President is encouraging them in these meetings to seize this opportunity.

One of the things that the President said in the meetings is that history is full of missed opportunities, because people would focus only on the downside. And he is encouraging them to work together, to use this as a launching pad for the negotiations that the two leaders have said that they want to conclude before the end of the President's term.

Q Was that the President who said history is full of --

MS. PERINO: That is exactly what he said. He said, "History is full of missed opportunities, because people just looked to the downside." And he encouraged them to seize the moment.

Q When you remarked on the President's deep concern for what's happening in Russia, and you cited some reasons why -- but the President, when referring to Pakistan, said that Musharraf had not crossed a line, even though many of the same kind of events -- jailing political activists, the media --

MS. PERINO: Remember, though, that was on the day -- that the President said that -- that was on the day that President Musharraf had just released 3,100 people who had been detained. And the President was referring to him working to get back on the path to a democracy. And so we had called for all of those who had been detained in Pakistan to be released immediately, as well, and for people to be allowed to gather, for the press freedoms to be returned. And in this regard, in terms of Russia, again, this is a country that the President believes will only be strengthened if more people have a say in the political process, if they hear more voices. And that's why he issued the statement today.

Q Can you describe for us what is happening with former Vice President Albert Gore being here with the President? Can you give us a little picture inside of the Oval?

MS. PERINO: I just left the meeting with President Abbas, and I did not have a chance to see Vice President Gore. But that meeting is, I think, underway as we speak, in the Oval Office.

Q You might want to go check in on it and come back and tell us about it. We'll wait.

MS. PERINO: I think the President has seen plenty enough of me today. The President and the Vice President are having a private meeting today. The President invited him to come and spend a little bit of time with him in the Oval Office prior to the event that he's having in the Oval Office, in order to give thanks to the Noble Prize recipients who have represented America so well, of which Al Gore is a part.

Q The former Vice President has been deeply critical of this President's conduct in several areas. Do you think they're still upset with one another? Is there still bad blood here?

MS. PERINO: I don't believe so. I know this President does not harbor any resentments. He never has. He's -- he was the one who picked up the phone to call Vice President Gore to make sure that he could make it to the event. He invited him to come and have a meeting with him prior to the Nobel Prize event, and I think he was very much looking forward to having the meeting.

It's remarkable that in our system of government we have this tradition where political rivals can put that behind them and get together and have a good conversation, and -- also the good of, in this case, Al Gore's focusing on climate change. The President has had a full seven years, with one more year to go, and I think that they'll probably have a good meeting.

Q In your statement, you said something the two had hoped for some sort of conclusion?

MS. PERINO: President Abbas and Prime Minister Olmert have both said that they would like to conclude this round of negotiations before the President leaves office.

Q Conclude it with what?

MS. PERINO: With getting to a permanent agreement for two states living side by side in peace and security.

Q Before the President leaves office?

MS. PERINO: That's what they've said.

Q So that's their timetable now?

MS. PERINO: That is what they've said.

Q Would you expect them to commit to that after tomorrow's conference?

MS. PERINO: I don't know what they all say tomorrow. I haven't seen their speeches, but they have said it publicly before, so I don't know why they would not say it -- and they both said it again in these meetings today, so I don't see why that would be any different tomorrow.

Q -- conclude an agreement by the end of the --

Q I'm sorry, they didn't say it to us. They said it to the President, though?

MS. PERINO: Yes. They said it in those meetings.

Q Does that mean actual creation of a Palestinian state by then, or just --

MS. PERINO: I think it's the negotiations in order to get to that point. And implementation of the road map, of course, has to be a part of this. This is -- it's going to be difficult, it's going to take some time, and I think we all have to be realistic about that. But this -- the President believes that the opportunity is right in order to seize this time, because you have two leaders who are willing to recognize that a Palestinian state is important not just for the Palestinians, but also for Israeli security. We have in President Abbas a person who wants to stop the violence, and doesn't believe that terror is a way to get to Palestinian security, and the type of life that they want to have and that they deserve. And so tomorrow

-- we'll have those speeches tomorrow, and then we'll hopefully have more for you later in the afternoon tomorrow.

Q On Russia, does the President, having embraced Putin so early in his administration, does he feel that he misjudged Putin? Is he disappointed?

MS. PERINO: This is a question that the President has gotten over and over again over the past several months. Here's the President's point: He believes that the best opportunity for Russia is to have a democracy. And there had been some movement towards democracy in many different areas, including in the press and certainly in the economy. But there have been steps backwards, as well.

Democracies aren't developed overnight. We know that from our own history. The President has a good relationship with Putin and he treats him with respect, and that is the best in order to work with them. Remember, we are working with Russia cooperatively on many different issues, including Iran, and Russia is part of the Quartet that is working towards Middle East peace. So we have a relationship with them. We have, and continue to be in communication and dialogue with them. And of course our embassy officials had been in contact with the Russian government there in Moscow.

Q And he doesn't feel that he misjudged him? I mean, after the seeming embrace of Ahmadinejad and all these anti-democratic measures, he doesn't feel that perhaps he judged Putin too early?

MS. PERINO: No, the President believes that what he saw in Putin is what is there. What is difficult when you're trying to establish democracies and freedoms across the world is that it just takes time, and it's difficult, and their history is not one of democracy and freedom and liberty. A middle class had grown up within Russia, and within Pakistan, and you have people who want to have a voice and to participate in the political process. And because of that, there sometimes might be uncomfortable government officials who are dealing with that and reacting in the wrong way.

Our obligation, as people who have the benefit of living in freedom and peace and liberty, is to help get them back on that path to a stronger democracy. The President believes the best way for Russia to prosper in the future is to have its people -- for the people that live in Russia, the opportunity to participate in the political process, to be able to have freedom of movement, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly -- and all of those things are just going to take some time.

Q Did Olmert and Abbas discuss specific steps, with the President, that they were prepared to offer as a sign of good faith, such as freezing settlements, those types of things?

MS. PERINO: These meetings were much more general, talking about the launch of the negotiations. Remember, Secretary Rice has been in the region eight or nine times this year alone, and those details are usually talked about in her meetings and, of course, David Welch, along with his counterparts, in the region. And so these meetings were a little bit more general in talking about the goal of this meeting, which is to start the negotiations, to launch the negotiations. And the President asked them to focus on the day after Annapolis, not just Annapolis, but where do they go the day after.

Q How does the President believe that peace can be reached without including Hamas in this equation?

MS. PERINO: The President believes -- there will only be one Palestinian state. And it is going to be difficult work, and it's going to take some time for the Palestinians to work through the situation with Hamas right now. They are under obligation to do that, and will have to -- will have to work with this international community.

Remember, one thing that is different about the conference tomorrow is that you have over 40 countries here, and you have Arab participation. And this is not so that the world can meddle in the negotiations, but so that they can support the negotiations. This agreement is going to be between the Israelis and the Palestinians. And at the end of that agreement, when they reach what they can agree on, then the world should support them. That is what the President talked about with them a lot, as well, which is that you have this opportunity, where you have international interests and support, as well as a Donors Conference that is coming up, and to have everyone at the table is an opportunity to get everything out, so that everyone can start working towards these negotiations that will take place over the next year.

Q But, Dana, when you talk about seizing an opportunity, why did it take the President almost seven years to take on a more active role in this process?

MS. PERINO: Ed, I think that anyone who -- I have seen the storyline over the past week as we've led up to this conference, and I think that, first and foremost, I would ask you just to take a step back and look at what the President has done. He was the first President to call for a Palestinian state. That was a big step. And the Palestinians recognize that, Israel recognized that; the world woke up to the fact that this President was the one that said --

Q He didn't --

MS. PERINO: -- in order to have a peace in the region, you had to have a Palestinian state.

Q Well, what if he did actually make that a reality, though? Of course it was a big step to say, I'm for that, but what if the President --

MS. PERINO: The President worked with -- well, look at the two leaders that the President is working with now. He helped President Sharon -- Prime Minister Sharon come along to this point. Now he has President Abbas who is willing to work with him. And the President did not try to broker this for them. He worked to help them get to this point together.

There have been some setbacks. Remember, August of 2006, Lebanon was in the middle of a war. And this caused great consternation between the Palestinians and the Israelis, and got them -- conceivably could have gotten them off track. But look at the measure of these two leaders, who are able to come back together, a year later, and say we are able to launch negotiations because we believe that we can get to a Palestinian state that would be better for both of our people.

Q But what about the fact of 2001 -- I mean, The New York Times this morning reports about the first National Security Council meeting the President ever had, he said that he didn't think a U.S. President should have such an active role, that it backfired on Bill Clinton to be so actively involved in the Mideast peace process. What's changed now that he's so actively involved --

MS. PERINO: I think we have a completely different circumstance now. You no longer have President Arafat, who the President labeled a terrorist. You don't have him in the way anymore. You have a leader in President Abbas who has denounced terror and violence --

Q You don't have --

MS. PERINO: Helen, can you please let me finish? You have a leader in President Abbas who has said that violence is not the way to get there, and that a Palestinian state is going to have to be one that is free from terror and violence. And he has denounced Hamas. Then you have, in Prime Minister Olmert, an Israeli who has said, we can see our way to getting through the road map and we believe that a Palestinian state is the way for us to have peace and security in our country, as well. And he's one of the first, after Sharon, to have said that and taken an active role.

So you have a very different circumstance right now. Remember, this is a decades-old conflict, and it is going to be difficult. The President believes this is an opportunity to try it. And again, he believes that history is full of missed opportunities because people only looked at the downside. But he thinks that we have got it to a point now where they have a chance of success.

Sheryl.

Q Dana, back to the meeting with Al Gore. I wonder just about the President's reasoning for inviting the former Vice President. Does he want to hear from the former Vice President about global warming, or does he view this as an opportunity maybe to make amends, or to reconcile the past? What is his thinking about what --

MS. PERINO: I didn't ask the President his psycho -- I didn't psychoanalyze the President to find out why he decided to invite Al Gore to the White House. There is an annual event in which the President invites the Nobel Prize winners -- American Nobel Prize winners to the White House. Al Gore happens to be one of those recipients this year. And I believe it was a presidential, gentlemanly and a friendly thing to do to invite Al Gore to the White House. They have a private meeting, and I'm not going to intrude on that. Obviously, President Gore -- Vice President Gore will bring up anything that he wants to bring up. But just remember --

Q But I'm asking, what does the President want to hear from -- does he want to know -- talk to him one on one?

MS. PERINO: I don't know. Sheryl, I did not psychoanalyze the President --

Q It's not psychoanalyzing --

MS. PERINO: Yes, it is. It is. It's a friendly and neighborly thing to do to invite someone to come to the White House. It's not something that was calculated. I guess that's my point. The President didn't make a calculated decision to invite Al Gore to the White House. The President was inviting him because he was part of the award winners, and because he does want to talk with him. Again, as I say, we have a great tradition in this country of political rivals being able to put the past behind them and to work together for the benefit of the American people.

Mark.

Q Yes, Dana, what's the status of the statement that the Israelis and Palestinians are hoping to try and issue tomorrow and have had such a devil of a time trying to --

MS. PERINO: As I understand it, they continue to talk about it and to try to work towards it. But as Steve Hadley said to you yesterday, that the document is -- would be a nice thing to have, but it's not critical to this meeting, that they can launch the negotiations without a document. So if they get one it would be a good thing, but it's not critical.

Q Are they going to -- how are we going to know it's all over? And are you going to brief there?

MS. PERINO: There's a full schedule that we can provide to you. But the President and President --

Q In Annapolis?

MS. PERINO: Yes, in Annapolis. President Bush, President Abbas and Prime Minister Olmert will each give speeches. And then the President will return to the White House. There will be a briefing tomorrow -- we're trying to figure out the timing of that because it could be a little bit later again, just given the circumstances. But you will certainly get information. And then we'll see if there's anything else to provide for you on Wednesday.

Q Tomorrow's speech, can you give us a sense of what the President is going to be saying tomorrow? The main theme -- well, we probably know what the main theme is, but what --

MS. PERINO: You have the main theme, given what I've said to you today, but there will a little bit more detail --

Q He's going to push, prod, beg, plead --

MS. PERINO: I think, encourage. I would describe it as encourage. And hopefully later today we'll be able to provide you a little bit more on the speech. It's being finalized now.

Go ahead, Jim.

Q Mortgages: The administration policy towards this financial crisis -- if you agree it's a crisis -- seems to be very reactive. We'll have a negative headline, and the President will appear in the Rose Garden, or Secretary Paulson will give an interview to the Wall Street Journal. But there doesn't seem to be a proactive policy. I mean, nothing is happening on the Senate side of the Hill and --

MS. PERINO: Jim, Jim --

Q What do you guys --

MS. PERINO: I know you don't come around very often, missed a few things. The President, back on August 31st, had a large announcement regarding the issue. We do see it as a very significant problem. That is why we --

Q I was here August 31st --

MS. PERINO: -- and we are implementing our side of what we can do through the executive branch. The fact that the Senate hasn't moved is not the President's fault. This is -- that is a congressional matter, and I would refer you to them.

Q It seems like this is -- as I said, it's reactive.

MS. PERINO: That's not -- Jim, in addition to that, Secretary Paulson and Secretary Jackson also created the Hope Now program, which worked with the private sector in order to help people who were at risk of losing their homes. In addition to that, we were able to get the FHA to be able to do risk-based pricing so that more people could get insurance for those homes. What we would like to see is Congress take the additional step of moving forward on the legislation. And we hope that when they get back on December 3rd that they will begin that process.

Q One of the heads of the Financial Committee is out campaigning for President. I mean, has the President --

MS. PERINO: Again, that is a congressional matter, Jim, and if you want to place blame of inaction --

Q I don't want to place blame. I'm just wondering --

MS. PERINO: -- it's not here. It's at the Congress, and they're going to have make those decisions and they'll have to answer to the American people if they don't act.

Q I'm not trying to place blame, I'm just --

MS. PERINO: I'm going to move on.

Olivier.

Q Dana, any talk in today's meetings about a possible presidential trip to Israel or the Palestinian Territories? What conditions --

MS. PERINO: They did not talk about any future travel.

Q Does the President want to go before he leaves office? And are there any conditions that need to be met before he goes?

MS. PERINO: Again, they didn't talk about travel. Obviously, the President enjoyed his trip very much to the region when he went as governor. He has not been as President. I am sure it is something that the President, if he could fit it into the -- into the next year's activities, would consider it. But they didn't talk about it today, and before -- I won't pre-announce that.

Q Is it tied at all to progress on the peace process?

MS. PERINO: All I can tell is that there was no talk of travel today.

Wendell.

Q Were you hinting that you might release excerpts of something of the speech later today?

MS. PERINO: I would try to do that. I'll see if I can do that. Look, it's being finalized now, and some of these speeches, especially ones that are dealing with matters that are very sensitive and which people have a lot of interest and vested interest, it takes a little while to get things finalized. I would try to get some excerpts out today if I can, but I can't promise.

John.

Q One of the Vice President's former advisors said that -- said last week that this trip, or this attempt to broker a peace process, is a distraction from vital U.S. interests. He said that things like Iran, North Korea are more central to U.S. interests. Does the President disagree with that view?

MS. PERINO: I think the President sees this in terms of, if you step back and look at it in terms of a larger vision, the President believes that trying to establish a Palestinian state, with two states living side by side in peace and security, is good for the entire region, and hopefully will lead to a more comprehensive peace in the Middle East; that moderate forces are coming together.

North Korea is an issue that is also on the President's table, and we have Ambassador Chris Hill, who is actively working that through Secretary Rice. There should be more of a -- more information coming out regarding that. In terms of the time line, I believe it's December 31st that we have to have additional movement there.

And in Iraq, we have the President, just this morning, signing the Declaration of Principles with Iraq. So there's -- we can talk and chew gum at the same time.

Go ahead, John.

Q Thank you, Dana. Two questions about Pakistan, if I may.

MS. PERINO: Okay.

Q You said two weeks ago that the administration was in touch with former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto about things. Are they also in touch with former Prime Minister Sharif, who arrived there yesterday?

MS. PERINO: John, I don't know. I'd have to check.

Q All right. The other thing I wanted to know, speaking of Benazir Bhutto, her niece, the poet, Fatima Bhutto, wrote a lengthy article in The Los Angeles Times last week, warning the United States about involvement with her aunt, and reminding us of the corruption charges and that she might have been complicit in the murder of her own father, Prime Minister Bhutto's brother. Are you aware of that, and do you have a reaction?

MS. PERINO: I didn't -- I missed that article in The Los Angeles Times, and so, I'll have to pass.

Q So you're not aware of anything Fatima Bhutto said?

MS. PERINO: No, I don't know her.

Go ahead, Les.

MS. PERINO: Yes, thank you, Dana. Two questions. The Washington-Annapolis-Washington meeting has been called a quote, "peace conference." My question: How does the President believe it can be a real peace conference when the Saudi Foreign Minister has announced that Saudis will not even shake hands with the Israelis?

MS. PERINO: The President is pleased that so many countries are coming to the conference, including the Arab nations. And this is a step forward, so we'll take it from there.

Q Saudi Arabia has just sentenced a 20-year-old female victim of gang rape by seven men to 200 lashes because she was in a car with a man not her husband, brother, or father. And my question: Since this sentence has been strongly denounced by Democrat candidates, Clinton, Obama, Biden and Edwards, surely the President does not expect you, as a lady, to have no comment on this Saudi atrocity, does he?

MS. PERINO: I don't think it matters if you're a female or a male. I think that the situation is very discouraging and outrageous. There is an appeals process and we hope that the verdict changes. It is certainly not consistent with the judicial reforms that the Saudis have said that they would undertake.

Victoria.

Q Stephen Hadley said yesterday that President Bush would not propose his own ideas, with regard to the conference. Does President Bush have specific, concrete ideas for how to bring about the two-state solution?

MS. PERINO: Well, yes, and he announced those in 2002, when he announced the road map. And so we'll have the negotiations, and the road map is part of this discussion, and you have to have pieces of it implemented in order to get to a permanent solution.

Q Well, if he has specific ideas, why is he not now putting them forward, and why would Stephen Hadley say something like that?

MS. PERINO: I think -- what I believe what Steve Hadley meant -- and I've been talking with him, and I've been in the meetings -- is that the President is not going to try to solve this problem for them. This is for the Israelis and Palestinians to solve. The President laid out the road map of which people around the world, including the Israelis and Palestinians and the United States, plus the Quartet, have all bought into. And those are the specifics that we look to when we think of what the President's involvement is.

Q So we think that his diplomacy would not help?

MS. PERINO: Victoria, he just had two meetings -- one bilateral meeting this morning at 11:00 a.m. and another one at 1:00 p.m. He has a trilateral meeting tomorrow. He's giving a toast at the State Department tonight. The President is actively involved, as this past 48 hours has shown, and the next 24 will show. And the President said that he will continue to be committed, and that Secretary Rice will be in the region and she speaks for him when she is out there.

Paula.

Q I have a question on executive action. This is specific to the Office of Government Ethics, and specifically, there's a few provisions in here dealing with the disclosure of classified information to unauthorized persons, as well as making false statements about any knowledge of that. I'd like to know, since the President has authorized -- and only the President is authorized to allow the disclosure of this information to unauthorized persons -- why, when he became aware that this happened, did he not remove from office any members of the executive branch that either disclosed this information, or had knowledge that it happened?

MS. PERINO: Paula, we have gone through this so many times, I'm just -- I don't have anything to add to the public record.

Q Well, I just have to ask about the timing, because prior to the criminal investigation by Patrick Fitzgerald, the President said that anyone that was involved in the disclosure of the identity of Valerie Plame would not longer work for the White House. And it was only after that criminal investigation began that he changed the ground rules to anybody that commits a crime will no longer work for the White House.

MS. PERINO: Paula, the person who revealed her name has said so publicly, and that person did not work at the White House.

Q But there was also the person that told Scott McClellan that he was not involved. And he was.

MS. PERINO: Thank you.

END 3:13 P.M. EST

Gore / Obama Supporter - Gore Endorse Obama?

I asked the person in my video about Al Gore endorsing Barack Obama and had a hard time getting a straight answer out of her, but I did learn a lot about the Gore / Obama effort -- it seems that, as she said, it's there idea and a dream. But for me, it's really more than that as they have signs and shirts and a website.

They're really activists. The bottom line is that I can't remember an election where there were so many fringe groups formed around "dream tickets" -- can you?

Mancow Mueller, Clinton / Peter Paul Story Death Threat - Recorded Discussion - EJFA.Org

This is an update of our earlier story on the death threat Radio Talk Show Host Mancow Mueller says he received after he had former Hollywood business man Peter Paul on his show Friday.

I've just received from a source a copy of the radio show audio file where Mancow discusses the death threat he received with James Nesfield of the Equal Justice Foundation (ejfa.org) on Mancow's radio show, Monday, October 29th.

Here's what was said in text form:



Mancow: Listen, I had a guy on named Peter Paul on Friday.
James Nesfield: Yes. I know.
Mancow: Last week. And want to tell you, I had, a, uh, a very high level call over the weekend, and it was very frightening to me.
And..
James Nesfield: It should be.
Mancow: And I'm being sincere.
James Nesfield: No. I believe it. I...Listen. We were at our ISP, where we host the site. We had a attack from Russian and Chinese hackers.
Mancow: My. Uh. My family was threatened. And it was uh. I know the source, and it's a very dangerous source, and I'm really, uh, nervous about talking about your video, cause I think some very powerful people are going to be very upset about me talking to ya.
James Nesfield: You're right. I've been threatened too.

The "movie" they're talking about is called "Hillary Uncensored" and it's a detailed and hard-hitting documentary that has been playing to audiences at colleges around the country. It's drawn a large web-based following , and is continuing to be offered for view by any group that will ask.

What is the movie about? Well, I like WorldNetDaily's description:

"Hollywood filmmakers normally inclined to support candidates such as Sen. Hillary Clinton are working quietly behind the scenes to put the finishing touches on a documentary alleging the New York Democrat committed felonies to get elected and assisted her husband in defrauding a major donor."

The "major donor" is Peter Paul, and you can learn more about the story here.

The rest of the conversation is in the audio file below.

The audio file is here:

Mancow On Death Threat

Please listen to it. But you may be asking what the "so what" is here? Well, some have claimed that the Clintons have a way of associating themselves with people who in some way eliminate those who can block their path to power. Or as one blogger put it, "This is what happens when you have dirt on the Clintons."

The point is, if this can even be connected to the Clinton's it spells m-a-j-o-r t-r-o-u-b-l-e if the news is spread to a wide audience. It speaks to a lust for power that may even be greater than Hillary Clinton's desire to serve the American People.

Al Gore Should Endorse Barack Obama If He's Not Going To Run For President

As you know unless you've crawled under a rock, Al Gore was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize , and the media's immediately speculating on what his plans will be -- in other words, will he run for President?

Gore has stated several times that he will not run and that at some point in the future, he will endorse a candidate running for President.

Gore should endorse Barack Obama, and not just because Barack's the best candidate, but because Senator Obama -- of all the candidates -- is the only one who signed the Live Earth pledge, encourages his supporters to do so , and takes Gore's efforts so seriously he consistently refers to them and to the Global Climate problem on the campaign trail.

Moreover, Senator Obama's energy plan is specifically designed “to combat global warming and achieve energy security." In fact, the campaign website states...

"Global warming is real, is happening now and is the result of human activities. The number of Category 4 and 5 hurricanes has almost doubled in the last 30 years. Glaciers are melting faster; the polar ice caps are shrinking; trees are blooming earlier; oceans are becoming more acidic, threatening marine life; people are dying in heat waves; species are migrating, and eventually many will become extinct. Scientists predict that absent major emission reductions, climate change will worsen famine and drought in some of the poorest places in the world and wreak havoc across the globe. In the U.S., sea-level rise threatens to cause massive economic and ecological damage to our populated coastal areas.:

By contrast, Senator Hillary Clinton did not have her supporters back the Live Earth pledge or give it attention on her website. And while she mentions her admiration for Gore, she does so with a caveat that she does not agree with all of his ideas -- like what?

She said ....

"You know, I have a great deal of respect for Vice President Gore. He has been beating the drums and sounding the alarm of global warming for many, many years. He has never given up on his mission to try and raise awareness and to get the country to take action. I may not agree with everything he proposes -- I don't agree 100 percent with anything that any one person proposes -- but I am certainly grateful to him for being such a public spokesman."

Well, now that spokesman is a Nobel Prize-winner. Gore should back Barack Obama.

Al Gore Wins Nobel Peace Prize - BREAKING NEWS

Gore, U.N. Body Win Nobel Peace Prize
By Howard Schneider and Debbi Wilgoren

Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, October 12, 2007; 5:52 AM

Former Vice President Al Gore Jr. was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize today along with a United Nations panel that monitors climate change for their work educating the world about global warming and advocating for political action to stop it.

The Norwegian Nobel Committee characterized Gore as "the single individual" responsible for convincing world governments that climate change was real, caused by human activity, and posed a threat to society.

Gore has focused on the issue through books, promotional events and his Academy Award-winning documentary "An Inconvenient Truth." The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, incorporating the work of some 2,000 scientists, has been monitoring evidence of climate change and possible solutions since 1988. The panel is a joint project between the United Nations Environment Program and the World Meteorological Organization.

Between the science showcased by the panel and Gore's advocacy, the two helped "build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change," the committee said.

"Whereas in the 1980s global warming seemed to be merely an interesting hypothesis, the 1990s produced clear scientific support."

As with last year's award to Bangladeshi banker Mohammad Yunus, whose pioneering use of small loans to the very poor helped contribute to the stability of developing nations, this year's prize focused on an issue not directly related to war and peace, but which was seen as critical to maintaining social stability.

The panel said that global warming "may induce large-scale migration and lead to greater competition for the earth's resources. Such changes will place particularly heavy burdens on the world's most vulnerable countries. There may be increased danger of violent conflicts and wars, within and between states."

Highlighting those risks, and the role of man in both creating and mitigating them, has defined public life for Gore, 59, since he lost the closely fought presidential election in 2000 to President Bush.

From that difficult race, in which he won the popular vote but lost the electoral college in a case ultimately decided by the Supreme Court, he emerged as a controversial figure -- ridiculed by opponents as an environmental extremist, and hailed by supporters as "the Gore-acle" for his foresight on issues like the Internet and climate change.

The Nobel is a vindication that could impact the upcoming presidential race: Gore's supporters have repeatedly urged him to enter the race, and the luster of the peace prize may add to that push.

But the former vice president, whose background includes a Harvard education and deep roots in Tennessee politics, has seemed disinclined to enter the fray. He has focused more on undertakings like last summer's "Live Earth" concerts, which promoted environmentalism in a series of star-studded rock and roll shows around the world.

Al Gore's Live Earth- Tickets and Info - Concert In New Jersey And Worldwide

Live Earth's coming to New York Giants Stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey. Before we wax on abou the event, you can get tickets with a click on LIVE WORLD .



Now, about Live Earth:

According to Wikipedia, ..Live Earth is the name for a series of concerts of pop and rock music featuring various artists planned to take place on Saturday July 7, 2007 to give cause to global warming.[1] The concerts have the intent of bringing together more than 150 of the world's most popular music acts and drawing a worldwide audience of 2 billion people, making it one of the largest global events in history. The umbrella organization for the event is a new global movement under the name Save Our Selves (SOS).

The plans for the Live Earth concerts were announced at a media event in Los Angeles on February 15[2], 2007 by the former Vice President of the United States Al Gore and other activist celebrities. The inspiration for promoting the cause using the vehicle of benefit concerts comes from many similar events over the past 25 years including the 1985 Live Aid concerts and the 2005 Live 8 concerts and it will be the longest show ever to be recorded in the world records.

Projected temperature increase for a range of greenhouse gas stabilization scenarios (the coloured bands). The black line indicates 'best estimates'; the red and the blue lines the likely limits. From the work of the IPCC, 2007.

In addition to raising awareness of global warming, on June 28, 2007, it was revealed that Live Earth is to be the launch event for the Live Earth Call to Action.[3] During the concerts people will be asked to support the following 7-point pledge:[3]
To demand that my country join an international treaty within the next 2 years that cuts global warming pollution by 90% in developed countries and by more than half worldwide in time for the next generation to inherit a healthy earth;

To take personal action to help solve the climate crisis by reducing my own CO2 pollution as much as I can and offsetting the rest to become 'carbon neutral;'

To fight for a moratorium on the construction of any new generating facility that burns coal without the capacity to safely trap and store the CO2;

To work for a dramatic increase in the energy efficiency of my home, workplace, school, place of worship, and means of transportation;

To fight for laws and policies that expand the use of renewable energy sources and reduce dependence on oil and coal;
To plant new trees and to join with others in preserving and protecting forests; and,

To buy from businesses and support leaders who share my commitment to solving the climate crisis and building a sustainable, just, and prosperous world for the 21st century.

In subsequent interviews Al Gore indicated that the concerts would mark 'the beginning of a three year campaign worldwide to deliver information about how we solve the climate crisis'[4][5] and that 'the prospects for every future generation depend on us understanding, hearing and acting upon this information.'[4]

Further information on the issues raised by the concerts are published in The Live Earth Global Warming Survival Handbook, written by environmentalist David Mayer de Rothschild the handbook is the companion book to the Live Earth concert listing 77 tips or skills that people can use to help stop climate change [6] [7].

Profits from the book will be donated to the Alliance for Climate Protection, as will some of the profits from the concerts.[8]

Hillary Clinton, Stan Lee, and Peter Paul = Campaign Finance Problems

Peter Paul v. Senator Hillary Clinton is an Internet trail of past Clinton problems still unsolved, particularly one involving Senator Clinton's run for the New York Senate in 2000 and her involvement with Peter Paul.

The most recent history of this case had Paul v. Clinton issuing oral arguments in a LA-based California Appeals Court last Friday, September 7th. The court should rule next week if Senator Clinton has to return as a witness in this civil business fraud case.

But who's Peter Paul? Paul is an entrepreneur who worked to get Bill Clinton to join the then-new Stan Lee Media company as a rainmaker, and of which Paul was 66 percent owner in 2000.

But this case has two parts -- the business fraud portion (where Paul claims that Former President Bill Clinton was to be a part of Stan Lee Media, but didn't join the firm even though he alledgedly promised to do so as a quid-pro-quo for Paul's financing of the gala), and the campaign finance portion, which is described below.



Apparently, Hillary Clinton's campaign understated contributions from Mr. Paul totalling over $772,000. At first, the campaign claimed that they'd never heard of Peter Paul, then Senator Clinton claimed she'd met him , but never had conversations regarding his contribution to her Senate run.

The video evidence shows otherwise, as does this webpage containing her deposition and letter of thanks to Mr. Paul for hosting what's reported to be the largest private event ever held for a candidate running for office.

This new evidence could wreck her run for President.

The full story is captured below, and comes from the Hillary Clinton Accountablity Project:

Key leaders of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), including DNC Chair Ed Rendell, DNC Convention and DNC Chair Terry McAuliffe, DNC California Regional Chair Stephanie Berger, and former White House Deputy Chief of Staff Harold Ickes, recruited businessman Peter Paul as a major donor to the DNC.

They induced Paul to underwrite, host and produce fundraising events for the campaigns of Al Gore and Hillary Clinton in order to pursue his efforts to hire Bill Clinton when he left the White House.

Reportedly upon learning that Paul was going to be exposed by The Washington Post as having de-frauded Fidel Castro -- a felony -- Paul claims that they then conspired with the Clintons to hide Paul's various contributions from the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and the public, and obstructed the Federal investigation that led to the indictment of Hillary Clinton's finance director David Rosen.

Peter Paul's reported contributions to Democratic campaigns included the following:

1. After discussing with Peter Paul how he might best form a business arrangement with Bill Clinton, DNC Chair Ed Rendell persuaded Paul to commit $150,000 in Stan Lee Media stock to the DNC for Al Gore's presidential campaign. This contribution was made directly through Rendell, and was never reported to the FEC as a Memorandum Contribution as required by law.

2. Paul also agreed to underwrite and produce Al Gore's first major Hollywood fundraiser, which was held at the Beverly Hills Hotel on June 8, 2000 and attended by some 200 people. Ed Rendell attended with Gore, but the DNC never reported the "in kind" contribution made by Paul in paying all the expenses for the event to the FEC as required by law. [See the invitation]

3. Under the direction of DNC Regional Chair Stephanie Berger, Peter Paul made $150,000 in improvements to his house between May and June, 2000, in preparation for Paul and his business partner Stan Lee to host a DNC fundraiser that featured President Clinton and included a Clinton sleepover at Paul's house.

4. Encouraged by Rendell and DNC Chair Terry McAuliffe, Paul also made a commitment to donate $150,000 in Stan Lee Media stock to Hillary Clinton’s Senate campaign in order to host a VIP luncheon fund raiser for Hillary at Spago Restaurant on June 9, 2000. The event raised more than $20,000 in "hard money" for the campaign, including $2,000 from Paul's wife that has never been reported or returned. No Memorandum Contribution report of his commitment or any report of Paul's "in-kind" contribution of expenses for the luncheon fundraiser were ever filed with the FEC by Hillary's campaign.

5. Under the direction of DNC Regional Chair Stephanie Berger, Paul also underwrote the Gershman Tea Fundraiser for Hillary Clinton in Bel Air on June 9, 2000, an event attended by Hillary and her "friend" Susie Buell Thompson, Larry King, Melanie Griffith, Olivia Newton John, Morgan Fairchild, Sean Young, and many other celebrities. No report of Paul's "in-kind" contribution of expenses for the tea fund raiser were ever filed with the FEC by the DNC or Hillary's campaign.

6. With the encouragement of President Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Ed Rendell, Terrence McAuliffe, and Harold Ickes -- all of whom attended the event, Peter Paul produced and underwrote the Hollywood Gala Farewell to President Clinton fundraiser for Hillary Clinton's Senate campaign.

7. Rendell, Bill and Hillary Clinton persuaded Paul not to publicly contradict false statements that Hillary's Senate campaign made to the media regarding Paul's relationship with Hillary, Bill and the campaign. Rendell called Paul twice, on August 15 and 17, after stories in the Washington Post quoted a Hillary spokesman misrepresenting Paul's role in the campaign and the contributions he made in three separate fundraisers. Both Clintons wrote glowing personal letters to Paul on August 18, two days after permitting their spokesman to disparage Paul in the Post, as a message to Paul to go along with their deceptions in order to preserve his multi-million dollar investment in their relationship. [See Hillary letter, Bill letter]

8. DNC officials laundered Stan Lee's $100,000 contribution to Hillary’s campaign through the NY Senate 2000 Committee so that Hillary could pay the down payment to Gala concert producer Gary Smith. Stan Lee testified under oath in a deposition in February, 2005 that he never intended to make any contribution to the NY Senate 2000 Committee or Hillary's campaign, he merely borrowed $100,000 for that purpose from Stan Lee Media at Peter Paul's request on July 28, 2000, and that when the loan was due to be paid in November, 2000 to Stan Lee Media, Stan Lee made the payment by trading checks for $100,000 with Paul, normally a serious violation of election laws.

9. Rendell and Clinton staffers continued working through October to keep Paul "on the reservation" until after the election. They failed to show Paul the campaign's fraudulent October 15 report to the FEC, which hid Paul as Hillary's largest contributor, and avoided asking Paul for any accounting or designation of his donative intent. By so doing, they conspired to have Paul aid and abet their fraudulent FEC report.

10. Starting on August 15, 2000, Hillary Clinton led a coverup of her own actions, those of President Clinton, and those of DNC leaders regarding the contributions of Peter Paul. The Clintons induced Paul to aid and abet Hillary's false statements to the media and the FEC, and caused three false reports to be filed with the FEC that intentionally hid the identity of her largest contributor and the true amount of his contributions. Even after being served with a civil suit, a demand letter, an FEC complaint, the publication of syndicated news columns by Robert Novak, and an ABC 20/20 expose detailing Paul's allegations, Hillary, her campaign Treasurer Grossman, and her lawyer David Kendall all continued the coverup by causing a third fraudulent report to be filed on July 30, 2001. This false report was filed in direct response to a specific FEC inquiry regarding the accounting of the Hollywood Gala.


Since that time, Hillary has deflected any accountability from herself, Bill Clinton and her Finance Treasurer, Andrew Grossman, by misleading Federal Investigators during the investigation that led to the indictment of David Rosen. Ed Rendell, now the Governor of Pennsylvania, has misrepresented his role in these events to the media according to Peter Paul.

Paul also says that former DNC-Chair Terry McAuliffe misrepresented his own actions to Justice Department officials to whom Paul had detailed McAuliffe's role. The Rosen jury ruled that David Rosen was not culpable for the fraudulent FEC reports filed by Hillary Clinton's campaign, because he had no legal duty to make any reports and in fact did not sign any reports to the FEC. This decision in no way alters the uncontested fact that three FEC reports made by Hillary's 2000 Senate campaign were in fact fraudulent. They remain uncorrected, and the illegal contribution omitted from those reports of more than $1.2 million, according to the FBI, has not been refunded as required by law.

Further investigation by the Justice Department and the Senate Ethics Committee is required to determine the full extent to which Hillary's campaign and DNC leaders may have misled federal investigators and obstructed justice.

Here's the video evidence:



This video just surfaced April 11th of this year 2007 because according to the website it was withheld from being presented as evidence since 2001.

The site reads: "This tape was withheld by the U.S. Attorney in New York from 2001 until April 11, 2007, when it was released to Paul's attorneys at the US Justice Foundation, depriving three federal investigations of this evidence of Hillary Clinton's role in the campaign finance frauds for which her finance director David Rosen was indicted in 2005."

This is the full transcript of the video which you saw above -- "SL" is Stan Lee; HRC is Hillary Rodham Clinton; PP is Peter Paul.

SL: Don’t ask, just accept the thanks!
HC: No, no, whatever it is that you are doing, is it ok that I thank you? (Laughs)
I think it’s tremendous. We’re having a good time trying to help out.
HRC: Well, I’m very appreciative and it sounds fabulous. I got a full report from Kelly uh today when she got back and she told me everything that you’re doing. And it just sounds like it’s going to be a great event!
PP: I think this is worthy of the kind of title that we’re giving it as THE Hollywood gala salute to president William Jefferson Clinton.
HC: Oh, that’s wonderful!
PP: And I think that the community shows up will be a tremendous accolade to the kind of impact that he’s had on Hollywood during your collective administration.
(:51)
HC: Oh I thank you for that. I think that so many positive things have happened and we just have to keep working to extend and expand it. I’m just very much looking forward to it ‘cause I think it’s not only going to be successful, I think it’s going to be fun!
PP: We certainly hope so. And Aaron and all of us are working diligently to make sure that it’s going to be a lot of fun and that you will enjoy it.
HC: Now, I understood that you were going to be parachuting in, Peter, is that wrong?
PP: Yes, and I’m going to be carrying these flares with me—the red white blue—on a parasail. But you have to catch me! (Laughter)
HC: And I heard Stan was going to be shot out of a cannon (laughing)
SL: And towards Europe! It’s the only way they’ll get rid of me.
AT: Mrs. Clinton? You wouldn’t believe. I saved some of the messages from people that are coming. Like Jimmy Smits, Rosie O’Donnell, the Judds. They leave messages that go over five minutes on the machine. The only reason why they’re doing it is because of you. They only care about you. That it means more to them than anything. Like the Steenburgens, Danson are calling from back East. They wanna sell tickets. It’s like the most unbelievable response on your behalf. Isn’t that great!?
(2:10)
HC: Oh, Aaron! Thank you!
SL: I thought myself that it was because we were offering everyone a free comic book but I guess I was wrong.
Aw, I think that’s a big draw myself. It’s certainly the reason I’m coming.
SL: Aha. Bless your heart!
HC: And you know, Aaron, I’m sooo grateful because I know how hard you’ve worked on it because it’s your constant effort and outreach You know, I talked with Cher(?) and she was just great! Said she was really so excited. And I hadn’t talked to her so you must have done a really good job selling it to her.
SL: Well, he tells me it’s because he was promised to him that he’ll be the next Secretary of State!
HC: You weren’t supposed to tell anybody that, Aaron!
(Laughing)
AT: I thought it was our secret.
HC: Well, Stan, what we haven’t told you is that you’re going to be the next Secretary of Defense.
SL: Well, I expected that.
HC: Well, the superheroes are a lot cheaper than the missile defense system.
(Laughter)
SL: Hillary, you’re wonderful!
(3:16)
AT: We’ve got people like Cher and others that have really never done anything before that are like coming out in full force knowing this is for your Senate race, it’s unbelievable.
HC: I’m just thrilled. I’ll check in with you from time to time because I know that putting something like this together is challenging even when people are enthusiastic and looking forward to doing it. It’s still, there’s so much work that’s involved.
SL: But in your case, it’s very gratifying. You know, my wife wants us to move to New York so that we can vote for you.
HC: This is a very good plan!
(Laughing)
(3:50)
Maybe we could get a great migration, a country caravan, of literally tens of thousands of people. I think that sounds like our next big project.
SL: I don’t wanna say that it’s happening, but if you tried to hire a moving van right now in L.A., you couldn’t get one.
(Laughter)
4:18
PP: Well, we did lobby for the X-men vote and all of the X-men have agreed to—because they’re all NY residents—so all the X-men will be voting for you.
HC: That’s great!
(Laughter) SL: Oh, yeah, you’ve got the mutant vote right around the world.
HC: Well, some people think I’m the mutant candidate so I should have it.
(Laughter)
AT: One other thing I wanted to tell you—a couple people confirmed today that like I’ve never been able to get in all my events—like Brad Pitt and Nicholas Cage—are some of the people coming to give tributes.
HC: Oh, wow. That’s fabulous! Oh, Aaron, this is going to be so terrific. Well, you just let me know if there’s anything that I need to do. And I know you and Kelly talk all the time, so she’ll be the person to convey whatever I need. But I just wanted to call and personally thank all of you. And I’m glad you are all together so I could tell you just how much this means to me.
End of call.

In this video below, Stan Lee clams that he did not donate money to the Clinton campaign...



This is a huge problem and it comes right on the heels of Senator Obama's record and legal fundraising totals, which have scared the heck out of the Clinton camp. To me, it seems that there were a lot of players with divergent agendas leading to a complex set of deals, which in turn may run counter to campaign finance laws.

The Clintons need to welcome a full vetting of this issue so the American People are informed and we can move on. I also causion readers doing research to be compete in their look; because some right-wing interest have taken up this case as a kind of cause, it's easy to just dismiss it, but that would be a mistake.

UPDATE: I just located this video by "Doug From Upland" called "Hillary's Greatest Nemesis" and it explains in detail the events leading to the civil lawsuit coming to LA Superior Court this year. It also includes a segment on how the mainstream media protects Senator Clinton.

This is the video:



Stay tuned to this Bat Channel for more updates.