Infragard Interview w Matt Rothschild – Follow Up and Links

March 11, 2008 by inyourfaceradio

All this week www.InYourFaceRadio.net  is airing JD’s interview with the Progressive Magazine’s Matt Rothschild on Infragard.  

Infragard is little known arm of the FBI who is recruiting business owners on how to use “lethal force” and “shoot to kill” methods, on American citizens, in the event WHEN (not if) of Martial Law is declared.

Progressive Magazine ran it’s article exposing the under belly of Infragard.  The article “FBI Deputizes Business” is on the Progressive Magazines’s online website, www.progressive.org.

Follow up links

Feb 8th 2008 
Original Progressive Online Post
“FBI Deputizes Business:
http://progressive.org/mag_rothschild0308

Feb 15h, 2008
FBI rebuttal:  
http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel08/infragard021508.htm

March 1 2008
Progressive Online:
FBI Calls “Progressive’s” InfraGard Story “Patently False,” Author Responds
http://progressive.org/mag_wx030108

Infragard Website
http://www.infragard.net/

Infragard members Website: (click on Chapters)
http://www.infragardmembers.org/

*** JD’s Interview with Matt Rothschild *** 
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/inyourfaceradio

Is the ACLU on this?? What about the Freedom of Information Act? Or Congress … stay tuned.

Senator Hothead

March 8, 2008 by inyourfaceradio

Do you want this guy answering the phone at 4 am??

Senator Hothead Strikes Again

John McCain, showing a flash of the temper he is known for, repeatedly cut off a reporter Friday when asked whether he had spoken to Democratic Sen. John Kerry about being his vice president in 2004.

“Everybody knows that I had a private conversation. Everybody knows that, that I had a conversation,” McCain told the reporter. “And you know it, too. No. You know it, too. No. You do know. You do know.”

The reporter, Elisabeth Bumiller of The New York Times, was following up on a question McCain had answered at a campaign event Friday morning in Atlanta. Asked if he might consider Kerry as a running mate, since Kerry asked him in 2004, McCain said no.

Afterward, on a campaign flight, Bumiller said she looked in the Times’ archives and that McCain had denied talking with Kerry in a May 2004 story.

McCain interrupted, saying that everyone knew he had a private conversation, and he kept interrupting as she tried to follow up. McCain clearly was irate.

“I don’t know what you read or heard of, and I don’t know the circumstances,” McCain said. “Maybe in May of ‘04 I hadn’t had a conversation.”

Did he recall the conversation? “I don’t know, but it’s well-known that I had the conversation. It’s absolutely well-known by everyone. So do you have a question on another issue?”

Asked again about the conversation, McCain said, “No. No. Because the issue is closed, as far as I’m concerned. Everybody knows it. Everybody knows it in America.”

Could he describe the conversation? “No, of course not,” McCain said. “I don’t describe private conversations. Why should I? Then there’s no such thing as a private conversation.”

McCain is known for having a temper and has been dubbed “Senator Hothead” by more than one publication.

IYFR: Mount Shasta?

Border Fence To Bypass Property Of Wealthy Oilman Who Donated $35 Million To Bush Library

February 20, 2008 by inyourfaceradio

In October 2006, President Bush authorized the construction of a 700-mile border fence between the United States and Mexico. Now, however, the Department of Homeland Security’s construction plans are facing opposition from Texans who object to the fence cutting through their property. The Washington Post reports on the hard line the Bush administration is taking with these protesting landowners:

In December, officials sent warning letters to 135 private landowners, municipalities, universities, public utility companies and conservation societies along the border that had turned away surveyors. Landowners were given 30 days to change their minds or face legal action. More than 100 of them — 71 in Texas — let the deadline pass.

Over the past several weeks, U.S. attorneys acting on behalf of the Homeland Security Department have been filing lawsuits against the holdouts.

DHS has no problem pursuing elderly and struggling homeowners. In the small town of Granjeno (pop. 313), however, the border fence would, conveniently, “abruptly end” at the property owned by Dallas billionaire Ray L. Hunt.

It’s not surprising that the administration would be hesitant to upset Hunt, who was a Bush-Cheney campaign “Pioneer” in 2000. More recently, Hunt “donated $35 million to Southern Methodist University to help build Bush’s presidential library.” In 2001, Bush appointed Hunt to his Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, granting him “a security clearance and access to classified intelligence.”

Hunt, one of the wealthiest oilmen in the world, previously served on the board of Halliburton and was National Petroleum Council chairman between 1991 and 1994.

Daniel Garza, a 76-year old man who might lose his home to the border fence’s intrusion, noted, “I don’t see why they have to destroy my home, my land, and let the wall end there.” Pointing across the street to Hunt’s land, he added, “How will that stop illegal immigration?

IFYR: You expected different from King George?

FBI’s InfraGard – “When Martial Law Declared Shoot To Kill”

February 11, 2008 by inyourfaceradio

by Matthew Rothschild – February 7, 2008

Today, more than 23,000 representatives of private industry are working quietly with the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security. The members of this rapidly growing group, called InfraGard, receive secret warnings of terrorist threats before the public does—and, at least on one occasion, before elected officials. In return, they provide information to the government, which alarms the ACLU. But there may be more to it than that. One business executive, who showed me his InfraGard card, told me they have permission to “shoot to kill” in the event of martial law.

InfraGard is “a child of the FBI,” says Michael Hershman, the chairman of the advisory board of the InfraGard National Members Alliance and CEO of the Fairfax Group, an international consulting firm.

InfraGard started in Cleveland back in 1996, when the private sector there cooperated with the FBI to investigate cyber threats.

“Then the FBI cloned it,” says Phyllis Schneck, chairman of the board of directors of the InfraGard National Members Alliance, and the prime mover behind the growth of InfraGard over the last several years.

InfraGard itself is still an FBI operation, with FBI agents in each state overseeing the local InfraGard chapters. (There are now eighty-six of them.) The alliance is a nonprofit organization of private sector InfraGard members.

“We are the owners, operators, and experts of our critical infrastructure, from the CEO of a large company in agriculture or high finance to the guy who turns the valve at the water utility,” says Schneck, who by day is the vice president of research integration at Secure Computing.

“At its most basic level, InfraGard is a partnership between the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the private sector,” the InfraGard website states. “InfraGard chapters are geographically linked with FBI Field Office territories.”

In November 2001, InfraGard had around 1,700 members. As of late January, InfraGard had 23,682 members, according to its website, www.infragard.net, which adds that “350 of our nation’s Fortune 500 have a representative in InfraGard.”

To join, each person must be sponsored by “an existing InfraGard member, chapter, or partner organization.” The FBI then vets the applicant. On the application form, prospective members are asked which aspect of the critical infrastructure their organization deals with. These include: agriculture, banking and finance, the chemical industry, defense, energy, food, information and telecommunications, law enforcement, public health, and transportation.

FBI Director Robert Mueller addressed an InfraGard convention on August 9, 2005. At that time, the group had less than half as many members as it does today. “To date, there are more than 11,000 members of InfraGard,” he said. “From our perspective that amounts to 11,000 contacts . . . and 11,000 partners in our mission to protect America.” He added a little later, “Those of you in the private sector are the first line of defense.”

He urged InfraGard members to contact the FBI if they “note suspicious activity or an unusual event.” And he said they could sic the FBI on “disgruntled employees who will use knowledge gained on the job against their employers.”

In an interview with InfraGard after the conference, which is featured prominently on the InfraGard members’ website, Mueller says: “It’s a great program.”

The ACLU is not so sanguine.

“There is evidence that InfraGard may be closer to a corporate TIPS program, turning private-sector corporations—some of which may be in a position to observe the activities of millions of individual customers—into surrogate eyes and ears for the FBI,” the ACLU warned in its August 2004 report The Surveillance-Industrial Complex: How the American Government Is Conscripting Businesses and Individuals in the Construction of a Surveillance Society.

InfraGard is not readily accessible to the general public. Its communications with the FBI and Homeland Security are beyond the reach of the Freedom of Information Act under the “trade secrets” exemption, its website says. And any conversation with the public or the media is supposed to be carefully rehearsed.

“The interests of InfraGard must be protected whenever presented to non-InfraGard members,” the website states. “During interviews with members of the press, controlling the image of InfraGard being presented can be difficult. Proper preparation for the interview will minimize the risk of embarrassment. . . . The InfraGard leadership and the local FBI representative should review the submitted questions, agree on the predilection of the answers, and identify the appropriate interviewee. . . . Tailor answers to the expected audience. . . . Questions concerning sensitive information should be avoided.”

One of the advantages of InfraGard, according to its leading members, is that the FBI gives them a heads-up on a secure portal about any threatening information related to infrastructure disruption or terrorism.

The InfraGard website advertises this. In its list of benefits of joining InfraGard, it states: “Gain access to an FBI secure communication network complete with VPN encrypted website, webmail, listservs, message boards, and much more.”

InfraGard members receive “almost daily updates” on threats “emanating from both domestic sources and overseas,” Hershman says.

“We get very easy access to secure information that only goes to InfraGard members,” Schneck says. “People are happy to be in the know.”

On November 1, 2001, the FBI had information about a potential threat to the bridges of California. The alert went out to the InfraGard membership. Enron was notified, and so, too, was Barry Davis, who worked for Morgan Stanley. He notified his brother Gray, the governor of California.

“He said his brother talked to him before the FBI,” recalls Steve Maviglio, who was Davis’s press secretary at the time. “And the governor got a lot of grief for releasing the information. In his defense, he said, ‘I was on the phone with my brother, who is an investment banker. And if he knows, why shouldn’t the public know?’ ”

Maviglio still sounds perturbed about this: “You’d think an elected official would be the first to know, not the last.”

In return for being in the know, InfraGard members cooperate with the FBI and Homeland Security. “InfraGard members have contributed to about 100 FBI cases,” Schneck says. “What InfraGard brings you is reach into the regional and local communities. We are a 22,000-member vetted body of subject-matter experts that reaches across seventeen matrixes. All the different stovepipes can connect with InfraGard.”

Schneck is proud of the relationships the InfraGard Members Alliance has built with the FBI. “If you had to call 1-800-FBI, you probably wouldn’t bother,” she says. “But if you knew Joe from a local meeting you had with him over a donut, you might call them. Either to give or to get. We want everyone to have a little black book.”

This black book may come in handy in times of an emergency. “On the back of each membership card,” Schneck says, “we have all the numbers you’d need: for Homeland Security, for the FBI, for the cyber center. And by calling up as an InfraGard member, you will be listened to.” She also says that members would have an easier time obtaining a “special telecommunications card that will enable your call to go through when others will not.”

This special status concerns the ACLU.

“The FBI should not be creating a privileged class of Americans who get special treatment,” says Jay Stanley, public education director of the ACLU’s technology and liberty program. “There’s no ‘business class’ in law enforcement. If there’s information the FBI can share with 22,000 corporate bigwigs, why don’t they just share it with the public? That’s who their real ‘special relationship’ is supposed to be with. Secrecy is not a party favor to be given out to friends. . . . This bears a disturbing resemblance to the FBI’s handing out ‘goodies’ to corporations in return for folding them into its domestic surveillance machinery.”

When the government raises its alert levels, InfraGard is in the loop. For instance, in a press release on February 7, 2003, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Attorney General announced that the national alert level was being raised from yellow to orange. They then listed “additional steps” that agencies were taking to “increase their protective measures.” One of those steps was to “provide alert information to InfraGard program.”

“They’re very much looped into our readiness capability,” says Amy Kudwa, spokeswoman for the Department of Homeland Security. “We provide speakers, as well as do joint presentations [with the FBI]. We also train alongside them, and they have participated in readiness exercises.”

On May 9, 2007, George Bush issued National Security Presidential Directive 51 entitled “National Continuity Policy.” In it, he instructed the Secretary of Homeland Security to coordinate with “private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure, as appropriate, in order to provide for the delivery of essential services during an emergency.”

Asked if the InfraGard National Members Alliance was involved with these plans, Schneck said it was “not directly participating at this point.” Hershman, chairman of the group’s advisory board, however, said that it was.

InfraGard members, sometimes hundreds at a time, have been used in “national emergency preparation drills,” Schneck acknowledges.

“In case something happens, everybody is ready,” says Norm Arendt, the head of the Madison, Wisconsin, chapter of InfraGard, and the safety director for the consulting firm Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc. “There’s been lots of discussions about what happens under an emergency.”

One business owner in the United States tells me that InfraGard members are being advised on how to prepare for a martial law situation—and what their role might be. He showed me his InfraGard card, with his name and e-mail address on the front, along with the InfraGard logo and its slogan, “Partnership for Protection.” On the back of the card were the emergency numbers that Schneck mentioned.

This business owner says he attended a small InfraGard meeting where agents of the FBI and Homeland Security discussed in astonishing detail what InfraGard members may be called upon to do.

“The meeting started off innocuously enough, with the speakers talking about corporate espionage,” he says. “From there, it just progressed. All of a sudden we were knee deep in what was expected of us when martial law is declared. We were expected to share all our resources, but in return we’d be given specific benefits.” These included, he says, the ability to travel in restricted areas and to get people out.

But that’s not all.

“Then they said when—not if—martial law is declared, it was our responsibility to protect our portion of the infrastructure, and if we had to use deadly force to protect it, we couldn’t be prosecuted,” he says.

I was able to confirm that the meeting took place where he said it had, and that the FBI and Homeland Security did make presentations there. One InfraGard member who attended that meeting denies that the subject of lethal force came up. But the whistleblower is 100 percent certain of it. “I have nothing to gain by telling you this, and everything to lose,” he adds. “I’m so nervous about this, and I’m not someone who gets nervous.”

Though Schneck says that FBI and Homeland Security agents do make presentations to InfraGard, she denies that InfraGard members would have any civil patrol or law enforcement functions. “I have never heard of InfraGard members being told to use lethal force anywhere,” Schneck says.

The FBI adamantly denies it, also. “That’s ridiculous,” says Catherine Milhoan, an FBI spokesperson. “If you want to quote a businessperson saying that, knock yourself out. If that’s what you want to print, fine.”

But one other InfraGard member corroborated the whistleblower’s account, and another would not deny it.

Christine Moerke is a business continuity consultant for Alliant Energy in Madison, Wisconsin. She says she’s an InfraGard member, and she confirms that she has attended InfraGard meetings that went into the details about what kind of civil patrol function—including engaging in lethal force—that InfraGard members may be called upon to perform.

“There have been discussions like that, that I’ve heard of and participated in,” she says.

Curt Haugen is CEO of S’Curo Group, a company that does “strategic planning, business continuity planning and disaster recovery, physical and IT security, policy development, internal control, personnel selection, and travel safety,” according to its website. Haugen tells me he is a former FBI agent and that he has been an InfraGard member for many years. He is a huge booster. “It’s the only true organization where there is the public-private partnership,” he says. “It’s all who knows who. You know a face, you trust a face. That’s what makes it work.”

He says InfraGard “absolutely” does emergency preparedness exercises. When I ask about discussions the FBI and Homeland Security have had with InfraGard members about their use of lethal force, he says: “That much I cannot comment on. But as a private citizen, you have the right to use force if you feel threatened.”

“We were assured that if we were forced to kill someone to protect our infrastructure, there would be no repercussions,” the whistleblower says. “It gave me goose bumps. It chilled me to the bone.”

IYFR ** ALERT** IRS E-MAIL SCAM

January 25, 2008 by inyourfaceradio

 Keep an eye out for this scam.

Notice that the “IRS” email address is .org not .gov as it should be

Internal Revenue Service <forms@irs.org> wrote:
 From: “Internal Revenue Service”<forms@irs.org>
Subject: Tax refund – Online form
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 10:07:47 +0800

Internal Revenue Service
      United States Department of the Treasury

After the last annual calculations of your fiscal activity we have
determined that you are eligible to receive a tax refund of $480.23.
Please submit the tax refund request and allow us 3-9 days in order to
process it.

A refund can be delayed for a variety of reasons.
For example submitting invalid records or applying after the deadline.

To access your tax refund, please click here

Best Regards,
Tax Refund Deparment
Internal Revenue Service 

© Copyright 2008, Internal Revenue Service U.S.A. All rights reserved.

Bush: “I’m Sure People View Me As A War Monger

January 20, 2008 by inyourfaceradio

In Riyadh today, the president danced a traditional sword dance with one of the princes of the royal familyIt was a public — and a little awkward — display of affection, all part of Bush’s first visit to Saudi Arabia aimed at repairing strained relations between the world’s biggest oil producer and the world’ s biggest oil consumer. The president sat down with “Nightline” co-anchor Terry Moran at one of the vast royal palaces, and it became clear who holds the cards right now in the oil markets, with the price up near $100 a barrel.. …”I have talked to these leaders face to face,” he said”I have asked them point blank, ‘Do you understand how difficult these issues are?’

The Pirate Bay vs. Big US Bucks

January 14, 2008 by inyourfaceradio

‘Intellectual property, is the oil of the twenty first century’  – Getty

If the Peer 2 Peer sharing company The Pirate Bay had it’s way, they would just as soon buy an island off the coast of England.

And that’s just what  The Pirate Bay  might have to do if the Swedish government bows down to big US media corporate (and it’s lobbying) money, the likes of Dreamworks, and stops The Pirate’s P2P sharing. Money talks globally, and the US media has plenty to throw around.

The Pirate Bay is a file sharing network where users put up content to share with other users. No content is hosted on any server at The Pirate Bay besides the .torrent file which contains no copyrighted material what so ever. According to previous similar court cases this is not illegal.

Under Swedish law, P2P websites are not illegal, but that didn’t stop the legal heads representing several motion picture and music companies from going to Washington to ask US leaders to “lean” on the Swedish government to change their P2P file sharing laws. What transpired nearly shut down The Pirate Bay for good.

Between the years 2003 and 2007, The Pirate Bay came under massive attack from MPAA and other recording artists.
Here are some Legal letters to The Pirate Bay from Dreamworks and others. 
*note – IYFR found TPB’s response to Dreamworks extremely amusing.

May 2006 – After much pressure from Hollywood and the US government, the Swedish government seized all the Pirate Bay servers. The Pirate Bay was back online only a few days after the raid whilst the police continued the investigation.

Dec 10, 2007 – To the dismay of companies like Dreamworks, Pirate Bay prevailed under existing Swedish law. The police investigation into The Pirate Bay has finally came to an end. There doesn’t appear to be any evidence that suggests The Pirate Bay is involved in any illegal activities.

Will big US corporate money pack up and go home? Hell, no. Not on your life. Spend money to make money … and change laws. And that’s exactly what Hollywood, and the US government, intend to do. Throw a sizable penny, and their weight, around Sweden to change Swedish law.

When asked if a change in law will stop from it’s nefarious deemed practices, co-founder of The Pirate Bay Fredrik Neij says “no, we’ll just buy an island.”

As of January 13th, 2008 that’s exactly what The Pirate Bay is considering. Should the Swedish government bow down to US big money, The Pirate Bay is planning to buy the 550 square metre principality of Sealand, a former British naval platform in the North Sea that has been designated a ‘micronation’ which they can then set up their own laws. Since it’s inception, The Pirate Bay has amassed a small fortune to the tune of $70,000 usd per month.  Not a viable option for many P2P websites.

The Pirate Bay has also recently released it’s documentary called “Steal This Film”. All five parts can be found on Youtube. It chronicles The Pirate Bay’s ongoing struggles and triumphs.

If  P2P filing share is to survive US corporate greed, owning an island might be the only way possible.

~ IYFR

Who Is The Real Ron Paul?

January 11, 2008 by inyourfaceradio
The New Republic
Angry White Man by
The bigoted past of Ron Paul.
Post Date Tuesday, January 08, 2008

If you are a critic of the Bush administration, chances are that, at some point over the past six months, Ron Paul has said something that appealed to you. Paul describes himself as a libertarian, but, since his presidential campaign took off earlier this year, the Republican congressman has attracted donations and plaudits from across the ideological spectrum. Antiwar conservatives, disaffected centrists, even young liberal activists have all flocked to Paul, hailing him as a throwback to an earlier age, when politicians were less mealy-mouthed and American government was more modest in its ambitions, both at home and abroad. In The New York Times Magazine, conservative writer Christopher Caldwell gushed that Paul is a “formidable stander on constitutional principle,” while The Nation praised “his full-throated rejection of the imperial project in Iraq.” Former TNR editor Andrew Sullivan endorsed Paul for the GOP nomination, and ABC’s Jake Tapper described the candidate as “the one true straight-talker in this race.” Even The Wall Street Journal, the newspaper of the elite bankers whom Paul detests, recently advised other Republican presidential contenders not to “dismiss the passion he’s tapped.”

Most voters had never heard of Paul before he launched his quixotic bid for the Republican nomination. But the Texan has been active in politics for decades. And, long before he was the darling of antiwar activists on the left and right, Paul was in the newsletter business. In the age before blogs, newsletters occupied a prominent place in right-wing political discourse. With the pages of mainstream political magazines typically off-limits to their views (National Review editor William F. Buckley having famously denounced the John Birch Society), hardline conservatives resorted to putting out their own, less glossy publications. These were often paranoid and rambling–dominated by talk of international banking conspiracies, the Trilateral Commission’s plans for world government, and warnings about coming Armageddon–but some of them had wide and devoted audiences. And a few of the most prominent bore the name of Ron Paul.

Paul’s newsletters have carried different titles over the years–Ron Paul’s Freedom Report, Ron Paul Political Report, The Ron Paul Survival Report–but they generally seem to have been published on a monthly basis since at least 1978. (Paul, an OB-GYN and former U.S. Air Force surgeon, was first elected to Congress in 1976.) During some periods, the newsletters were published by the Foundation for Rational Economics and Education, a nonprofit Paul founded in 1976; at other times, they were published by Ron Paul & Associates, a now-defunct entity in which Paul owned a minority stake, according to his campaign spokesman. The Freedom Report claimed to have over 100,000 readers in 1984. At one point, Ron Paul & Associates also put out a monthly publication called The Ron Paul Investment Letter.

Read full story: http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=e2f15397-a3c7-4720-ac15-4532a7da84ca

Decide for yourself.

Where Does Your Candidate Stand on the Issues Important to You?

January 8, 2008 by inyourfaceradio
For far to long we’ve pushed issues that really matter to us on the back burner and been swayed by MSM into picking our candidates for us.

ENOUGH!!

We at In Your Face Radio found the best website that matches YOUR IMPORTANT ISSUES with the candidate you’ve been supporting. Take The Test

Don’t let the MSM polls push you into someone who’s either popular or worthless to them. See how your candidate matches up to what’s important to you.

IYFR

ABC TO BAN DENNIS KUCINICH FROM DEBATES

January 5, 2008 by inyourfaceradio

01/05/08

ABC News is eliminating Republican presidential candidate Duncan Hunter and Democrats Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel from its prime-time presidential debates Saturday night because they did not meet benchmarks for their support.

Therefore, since ALL AMERICANS will not be represented by fascist media outlet ABC, In Your Face Radio will NOT be airing these debates.

The Democratic debate three days before the New Hampshire primary will include Iowa Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards and Bill Richardson. But NOT Dennis Kucinich. THIS IS A TRAVESTY.

After Democrats leave the stage in Republicans Mike Huckabee, John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney and Ron Paul will arrive for their own forum. <yawn>

ABC corporate whore Charlie Gibson will moderate both debates.

ABC, and most of MSM, should be eviserated.

What Patriotism Looks Like

December 18, 2007 by inyourfaceradio

IYFR: On 12/11/07 - Mike – Host of 9/11 Revealed made a stunning case during his appearance at the Fort Worth Texas city counsel, where he and Code Pink members, filed articles of impeachment against Bush and The “Dick” ..

Good Job Mike!

Bye Bye Music Industry Pie?

December 18, 2007 by inyourfaceradio

                                 2007: The Year The Music Industry Broke

In April, Trent Reznor released Year Zero, a concept album about a future society teetering on the brink of apocalypse. It was supposed to be a grand work of fiction, but it could just as easily have been about the music industry in 2007 — a bleak, burned-out world where the sky fell on a daily basis and the rivers ran red with the blood of record execs. (That the album didn’t sell well only furthers the analogy …)Make no mistake about it, 2007 was a b-a-a-a-d year for the industry. According to Nielsen SoundScan, album sales were down 15 percent from 2006 (a trend that’s continued for eight straight years now); big-name artists jumped ship in increasingly complicated — and messy — ways; and the powers-that-be seemed to get even more heartless and disconnected, thanks to a series of lawsuits, feuds and terrible decisions.

In fact, you could probably say that 2007 was Year Zero. Things started to change because they couldn’t possibly get any worse.

In the first installment of our three-part series on the future of the music industry that is rolling out this week, here’s a blow-by-blow recap of just how bad the year was …

January 14: The “Dreamgirls” soundtrack tops the Billboard albums chart with sales of just over 60,000 copies. It’s the lowest sales total for a #1 album in SoundScan’s 16-year run, beating the record set the previous week, when the soundtrack landed at #1 with sales of 66,000 copies.

January 30: Sony BMG announces that it has reached a proposed settlement with the Federal Trade Commission that would allow consumers to trade in CDs with the controversial self-installing “rootkit” antipiracy software — which the company had included without consumers’ knowledge — “through June 31,” according to a press release (of course, in keeping with the less-than-forthright spirit of the whole rootkit issue, there are only 30 days in June). The company also agrees to pay up to $150 to repair any damage to computers caused by users trying to remove the digital-rights-management software, which was revealed to cause serious security risks. The settlement also calls for Sony BMG to disclose any limitations on consumers’ use of the music CDs, and prohibits the company from collecting user information for marketing purposes and from installing software without users’ consent. Sony is also required to provide a way for users to easily uninstall the rootkit software.

March 5: In a blow to small Internet radio, the Copyright Royalty Board — made up of three copyright-royalty judges appointed by the librarian of Congress — significantly increases the royalties paid to musicians and record labels for streaming digital songs online, ending a discounted fee for small Internet broadcasters. Under the ruling, the current rate of $0.08 each time a song is played will more than double by 2010. In April, a coalition of webcasters, including National Public Radio, attempts to request a new hearing, but the Royalty Board rejects the appeal, and on July 15, the royalty hike goes into effect. In November, both AOL and Yahoo contemplate shuttering their Web radio services due to the increased royalties.

March 21: Paul McCartney leaves longtime label EMI to sign with Starbucks’ new record label, Hear Music. His album, Memory Almost Full, is released in June through both traditional retailers and more than 6,000 Starbucks locations in the U.S., and sells more than 160,000 copies in its first week. “For me, the great thing is the commitment and the passion and the love of music,” McCartney tells an audience of Starbucks shareholders. “It’s a new world now and people are thinking of new ways to reach the people, and for me that’s always been my aim.”

June 11: In a move that would have seemed unimaginable in the label-driven industry of old, Kelly Clarkson feuds openly with the head of her label — Sony BMG head Clive Davis, for decades one of the most powerful industry executives — and parts ways with her management company, the Firm, amid controversy about her upcoming album My December. Three days later, concert promoter Live Nation announces that Clarkson’s summer tour in support of the album has been canceled due to underwhelming ticket sales. My December hits stores later in the month, and sells more than 290,000 copies in its first week, giving Clarkson the #2 album in the country — behind the “Hannah Montana” soundtrack — but shows little staying power. Clarkson later apologizes for her remarks.

July 10: Canadian indie outfit Stars make their new album, In Our Bedroom After the War, available for download just 10 days after completing it — and some three months before its scheduled release date. The move is done with the blessing of their label, Arts& Crafts, and the album becomes a mainstay on the iTunes Music Store’s most-downloaded list.

July 15: Prince ticks off his U.K. record label and Britain’s Entertainment Retailers Association when he decides to release his new album, Planet Earth, for free with the Sunday edition of the British newspaper The Mail. It’s estimated that 2.27 million people receive the album, which helps boost sales of tickets for his 21-night stand at London’s O2 arena. “It’s direct marketing, and I don’t have to be in the speculation business of the record industry, which is going through a lot of tumultuous times right now,” Prince says.

September 19: Kanye West’s Graduation sells nearly 957,000 copies to claim the top spot on the Billboard albums chart. 50 Cent’s Curtis bows at #2 with sales of more than 691,000. Both are the best first-week numbers of 2007 (besting Linkin Park’s Minutes to Midnight, which scanned 623,000 copies in May), and Graduation notches the biggest first week in nearly two years — beating, interestingly, West’s Late Registration, which sold more than 860,000 copies when it was released in September 2005.

October 1: Radiohead shock fans by announcing on their blog that not only have they completed their much-anticipated new album, In Rainbows, but that “it’s coming out in 10 days,” via download — leading to reams of “this is a taste of the future of albums”-type commentary. The bandmembers, who have been free agents since the release of 2003’s Hail to the Thief, decide to release the album by themselves in two formats: download-only, which allows fans to name their price for the album, and as a deluxe “discbox” version (priced at approximately $80).

October 4: The Recording Industry Association of America wins its first case against file-sharing, when a jury finds 30-year-old Brainerd, Minnesota, resident Jammie Thomas guilty of copyright infringement. In question were 24 music files she allegedly posted on the peer-to-peer site Kazaa. Thomas is ordered to pay $220,000 in fines — or $9,250 per song file. Her lawyers appeal the ruling, on the grounds that it is “unconstitutionally severe,” but in December, the U.S. Department of Justice intervenes, urging the courts not to rule on the constitutionality of the damages, as “Copyrights are of great value, not just to their owners, but to the American public as well.”

October 8: Trent Reznor announces the end of his 13-year relationship with Interscope Records, writing on his site, “As of right now, Nine Inch Nails is a totally free agent, free of any recording contact with any label. … It gives me great pleasure to be able to finally have a direct relationship with the audience as I see fit.” He then goes on to write that there are “exciting times” ahead. And he’s not kidding: Within a week, he promises (threatens?) to scuttle Interscope’s release of a Year Zero remix album by leaking tracks from it to the Internet, then announces that he’s partnering with Saul Williams to release The Inevitable Rise and Liberation of Niggy Tardust! via download, and gets into a public argument with the Universal Music Group over the legality of a proposed fan-only remix site, before deciding to launch the site himself.

October 9: One day before downloads of In Rainbows are scheduled to begin, Radiohead send an e-mail to those who’ve ordered it, stating that the album will be encoded at 160 kilobits per second, a rate far inferior to their other LPs, which are all available for download at 320 kbps (or most MP3s floating around file-sharing sites like OiNK, for that matter). This angers many fans, who feel that the band duped them by not announcing the encoding rate upfront, and the bad feelings are only furthered when Radiohead’s managers give an interview to a British trade mag, in which they suggest the download version of In Rainbows is a promotional tool for the actual CD.

October 10: In Rainbows is made available for download. Over the next two months, much speculation ensues as to just how many people downloaded it and exactly how much they paid to do so: Early reports have more than 1.2 million fans downloading it at an average price of $8, though later findings by comScore, a company that measures consumer activity online, adds that more than 60 percent of downloaders paid nothing for the album. Neither Radiohead nor their publicists discuss the financial aspects of the download experiment, though the band does issue a statement dismissing comScore’s findings as “wholly inaccurate.”

October 16: Madonna finalizes a massive 10-year deal with Live Nation, believed to be worth $120 million. It’s the largest so-called “360 deal” in history, involving not only Madge’s future studio albums but her tours, merchandising, film and TV projects, DVD releases and music-licensing agreements. “For the first time in my career, the way that my music can reach my fans is unlimited,” Madonna says in a statement. “The possibilities are endless. Who knows how my albums will be distributed in the future?” The deal brings to an end the singer’s 25-year relationship with Warner Music Group, which has released all of her albums to date.

October 23: OiNK, “the world’s biggest source for pirated, pre-release albums,” is shut down after a two-year criminal investigation led by Interpol (the international police organization headquartered in Lyon, France … not the band). Officers raid the apartment of OiNK’s creator, a 24-year-old Brit named Alan Ellis, and seize the site’s servers in Amsterdam. Ellis is arrested on suspicion of conspiracy to defraud and copyright infringement, and the e-mail addresses of the site’s more than 180,000 users are made available to police — though it is not known whether they could face criminal prosecution as well. Ellis’ trial is scheduled to begin in February.

November 7: Thanks to a last-minute rule change by the folks at SoundScan, the Eagles’ Wal-Mart-only LP, Long Road Out of Eden, debuts at #1 on the Billboard albums chart with sales of more than 711,000 copies. The total nearly triples that of the country’s #2 album, Britney Spears’ Blackout, and gives the group — which hadn’t released an album of new studio material in 28 years — the second-highest debut of 2007.

November 27: Universal Music Group CEO Doug Morris gives a disastrous interview to Wired magazine, in which he compares the music industry to a character from the comic strip “Lil’ Abner,” calls college students who download music “criminals” and explains the industry’s inability to keep up with the Internet by saying, “There’s no one in the record company that’s a technologist. … It’s like if you were suddenly asked to operate on your dog to remove his kidney. What would you do?”

November 28: Reigning “American Idol” champ Jordin Sparks’ self-titled debut lands at #10 on the Billboard chart with sales of 119,000 copies. It’s the lowest first-week sales total for any “Idol” winner — by more than 180,000 copies.

December 3: Island Def Jam lays off nearly 6 percent of its staff. Rumors of axings at major labels like Sony BMG and the Universal Music Group begin to swirl — and at press time, it looked like they may have begun. The Warner Music Group announces that it has cut bonuses for employees, and Terra Firma, the private equity group that owns EMI (home to Capitol Records), reportedly makes “cutbacks a core part of its strategy.” There are also reports of massive reshuffling at labels like Epic, RCA and Arista.

December 31: In Rainbows is set to be released to retailers in the U.K. through XL Recordings. The U.S. release will come one day later, through TBD Records, an offshoot of the Dave Matthews-founded ATO Records.

IYFR: You think Net Radio is dead? Guess again.

House Seats Up For Grabs in 2008

December 7, 2007 by inyourfaceradio

House 2008 Election Update

Definite House Retirements

District

Incumbent Party PVI Age Notes
AL-02 Everett R R+13.2 71 Will retire
AZ-01 Renzi R R+2.2 50 Will resign
CA-52 Hunter R R+9.3 60 Running for President
CO-02 Udall D D+8.1 58 Running for Senate
IL-11 Weller R R+1.1 51 Retiring
IL-14 Hastert R R+4.8 67 Retiring
IL-18 LaHood R R+5.5 62 Retiring
ME-01 Allen D D+6.2 63 Running for Senate
MN-03 Ramstad R R+0.5 62 Retiring (?)
MS-03 Pickering R R+14.1 45 Retiring
NM-01 Wilson R D+2.4 47 Running for Senate
OH-15 Pryce R R+1.1 57 Retiring

Potential House Retirements

District Incumbent Party PVI Age Notes
AK-AL Young R R+14.3 75 Under investigation
CA-04 Doolittle R R+10.9 58 Under investigation
CA-24 Gallegly R R+4.8 64 Botched a retirement attempt in 2006
CA-25 McKeon R R+7.1 70 Speculation
CA-41 Lewis R R+9.0 74 Under investigation
CO-05 Lamborn R R+15.7 54 Primary challenge
CO-06 Tancredo R R+10 62 Undecided
CT-04 Shays R D+5.4 63 Threatening retirement
DE-AL Castle R D+6.5 69 Health issues
FL-10 Young R D+1.1 78 Age issues/Speculation
IL-03 Lipinski D D+10.3 42 Primary challenge
IA-03 Boswell D D+1.4 74 Health issues
IA-04 Latham R D+0.4 60 Possible Senate run
IA-05 King R R+8.4 59 Possible Senate run
IN-07 Carson D D+8.7 70 Health issues
LA-01 Jindal R R+18.5 37 Running for Governor
LA-02 Jefferson D D+27.8 61 Indicted
MD-01 Gilchrest R R+9.8 62 Primary challenge
MD-04 Wynn D D+29.8 57 Primary challenge
MD-06 Bartlett R R+12.8 82 Age issues
MI-03 Ehlers R R+9.0 74 Speculation
NC-09 Myrick R R+12.2 67 Speculation
NJ-03 Saxton R D+3.3 60 Speculation
NY-23 McHugh R R+0.2 60 Speculation
OH-02 Schmidt R R+13.1 56 Primary challenge
OH-07 Hobson R R+6.0 72 Rumors
OH-16 Regula R R+3.6 84 Age issues/Speculation
TN-09 Cohen D D+18.1 59 Primary challenge
TX-04 Hall R R+17.1 85 Age issues
VA-11 Davis R R+0.6 59 Possible Senate run
WY-AL Cubin R R+19.4 61 Speculation

Note: Notice how many Republican seats are favoring Democrats than vice versa.

Online: How to Treat Detainee’s 101

December 6, 2007 by inyourfaceradio

IYFR:  How many at Gitmo have been charged?

Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, December 4, 2007

As the Supreme Court prepares to hear arguments this week on the rights of enemy combatants at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, the public is getting another peek at how detainees have been treated there.

A leaked copy of a March 2004 manual of Gitmo’s “Standard Operating Procedures” for Camp Delta was published yesterday by the Web site Wikileaks.org. It deals with everything a guard at Guantanamo would need to know, from how to remove detainees’ clothing when they first arrive (cut it off) to what guards should do if they find a detainee’s plastic foam cup with writing on it (confiscate it). Rolls of toilet paper are considered “comfort items” that can be given to detainees as rewards.

 The manual also confirms previous reports about dogs being used at the facility and detainees spending time in “segregation cells,” either as punishment or for intelligence gathering. The nearly 250-page document provides details about the daily operations at the facility in the days before the Abu Ghraib abuse scandal surfaced publicly. What happened at the prison in Iraq focused attention on the Guantanamo facility and its commander, Army Maj. Gen. Geoffrey D. Miller.

Much of the manual deals with how to treat detainees, with one section discussing how to handle their personal items. If items are damaged, for example, guards are directed to punish the detainee. With regard to “linen items” such as blankets, clothing, sheets or towels, the manual says, “If a detainee tears, rips, or otherwise damages this item or makes it into a weapon or self-harm device, it will be confiscated and the detainee disciplined for damaging or destroying government property.”

The manual discusses the facility’s “behavior management plan” for the first two weeks after a detainee’s arrival, when he has no access to the International Committee of the Red Cross or a chaplain: “The purpose of the Behavior Management Plan is to enhance and exploit the disorientation and disorganization felt by a newly arrived detainee in the interrogation process,” the manual says. “It concentrates on isolating the detainee and fostering dependence of the detainee on his interrogator.”

Navy Cmdr. Rick Haupt, a Guantanamo spokesman, said officials received a copy of the manual yesterday and are trying to authenticate it. Wikileaks also published a copy of the 2003 Guantanamo manual last month. Haupt said the manuals are constantly updated and that “things have changed dramatically” in the years since.

Marked “for official use only,” the manual is not meant for public release but contains little if any sensitive information.

While it is of some concern that the manual has been released, Haupt said, “it’s not typically considered a threat to national security. This type of unclassified information could give the enemy an edge up on how we do business so they in turn can develop their own tactics, techniques and procedures to train against us.”

Developed under Miller’s command, the manual is similar to the 2003 version of the same document, an electronic copy of which was left with officials at Abu Ghraib when Miller traveled there on an advisory visit in September 2003. Miller later commanded all detention facilities in Iraq as the abuse scandal was investigated in 2004.

In the 2004 manual, guards are warned not to teach the detainees songs or English phrases and not to take an active role in interrogations or to even listen to what is said during interrogations. Guards are also told not to talk about current events.

“Do not: (1) Discuss current world events or history with detainees, or within earshot of detainees, that could upset or influence detainee actions or attitudes, such as the situation in the Middle East, the destruction of the Space Shuttle, or information concerning terrorist groups or personnel.”

The manual is posted at http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Gitmo-sop-2004.

Bombs Away? Scott Ritter Says US To Bomb Iran in 2008

December 4, 2007 by inyourfaceradio

IYFR: Will Bush bomb Iran?

Scott Ritter seems to think so. Ritter  is either “in the know” or part of the ongoing art of fear mongering that’s taken hold in this country. Either way, it’s worth a read. You decided.

A former Marine Corps intelligence officer, Ritter served as chief United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq from 1991 to 1998 when he left as a pointed critic of the Clinton administration’s commitment to weapons inspection and its Iraq policy. Before the United States’ 2003 invasion, Ritter loudly disputed the Bush administration’s claims regarding weapons of mass destruction under Saddam’s control and predicted that, instead of the quick and easy war being promised, Iraq would turn into a quagmire, though not necessarily of the type he envisioned. His analyses have been embraced by both the right and the left at various points. He portrays himself as the straight-shooting analyst unconcerned by who supports him or whom he offends.

FULL STORY: http://www.metrotimes.com/editorial/story.asp?id=12059

Larry Craig – Brokeback Revisted

December 3, 2007 by inyourfaceradio

IYFR: This was too good to pass up … Thanks to Skewing the Chimp

 Dear Senator Brokeback:
   
  If you are so convinced that the Idaho Statesman is “out to get you” (or maybe its “out to out you?”) why dont you follow the time honored tradition of suing them?
   
  After all if they are making baseless, slanderous statements about your getting your knob polished by guys in toilet stalls, then you should have a legal right to sue.
   
  If thats the case, Brokeback, then why haven’t you sued?
   
  Or is the reason you have not sued because they have the goods on you and you’re trying to bullshit your way out of this mess you’ve created with your denials?
   
  Personally I could give a rat’s cheney because I love watching you squirm. Just thought I’d pass along that suggestion.

http://off2thetropics.blogspot.com


 

Yankee Come Home

November 26, 2007 by inyourfaceradio

IYFR: Another year? 10? When?

NO SHOCK: Why Democrats Might Lose in 2008

November 21, 2007 by inyourfaceradio

                                                          

For Congressional Democrats, the train has already left the station — and they’re not on board.A year after the election that gave them control of both houses of Congress, they are exposed as a feckless bunch of frauds posing as an opposition.

As long ago as last January, when the US death toll in Iraq was almost 1000 lower, and the civilian death toll in Iraq was over a hundred thousand lower, they could have brought an end to the conflict by simply refusing to approve any more money for the war.

Instead, they approved administration requests for several hundred billion dollars for expanding the number of troops from 140,000 to a current level of nearly 173,000—a post- invasion record.

They could have brought administration assaults on the Constitution to a screeching halt by initiating impeachment hearings against the president, the vice president, or against both of these criminal usurpers. Instead, the House leadership threatened anyone who might file impeachment bills with various punishments, reportedly ranging from loss of committee chairmanships to loss of access to Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee funding.

In the perverse “logic” of Democratic Party leaders, this do-nothing strategy was designed to bring Democrats a historic victory in 2008, when American voters, angry about the quagmire in Iraq, and disgusted with eight years of Republican misrule, would supposedly hand Democrats the presidency and health majorities in both houses of Congress.

But the American public is not that stupid. With Bush and Cheney leaving, they won’t buy a campaign based on running against those two disasters.

Polls are showing that the majority of Americans are at least as disgusted at Democrats in Congress as they are with the Republicans—maybe more so. Since last November, public approval of the new Democratic-led Congress has fallen from a post- election high of 65 percent to a current level of about 20 percent, depending on the poll. That’s lower than President Bush’s record low approval rating of 24 percent.

The only political entity with a lower approval rating than the Democrats in Congress at this point is Vice President Dick Cheney, currently at 11 percent, but being more popular than a blood-thirsty, power-crazed lunatic with a nuclear fetish is a pretty sorry claim to fame.

The dire situation facing Democrats is masked currently by the fake “excitement” being generated by all the corporate media coverage of the so-called “race” for the Democratic presidential nomination—coverage that is artificially skewed towards just two or perhaps three of the candidates, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards. This coverage creates the illusion of some kind of groundswell of public excitement about the Democratic candidates. In fact none of them fares particularly well against Republican candidates, At this point, given the disastrous history of seven years of Republican rule in Washington, with the economy staggering, the dollar in freefall, oil prices at record levels, the country $8 trillion in debt, mortgage defaults at depression levels and the war in Iraq still without an end in sight, any Democrat should be trouncing any Republican candidate in the polls. Instead, the so-called “leading” Democrats are all neck-and-neck with their potential Republican opponents. (Evidence of how out-of-whack the corporate media coverage of the Democratic campaign is was provided at the CNN debate in Nevada last Sunday, when even in an auditorium packed with supporters of Clinton and Obama, the biggest applause came when Dennis Kucinich, a candidate almost ignored by the moderator Wolf Blitzer, when he called for impeachment, and for ending the war immediately.)

The reason for this disconnect from reality is that while Democratic voters, as always, can be expected to go dutifully to the polls next November and cast their votes for whatever compromised and weak candidate their party puts up to run, the independent vote which put Democrats over the top in the 2006 off-year congressional elections is gone.

Those voters, many of whom have long harbored a powerful antipathy towards both parties, towards the government, and towards the corporations that dominate the political process, came out in record numbers and voted Democratic in November, ’06 because, sick of the Bush/Cheney administration, sick of five years of a phony “war” on terror, and sick of three years of the Iraq War, they turned to the Democrats, even in traditional “red” states and congressional districts, in hopes that the Democrats would do what they were promising to do: end the war and defend the Constitution.

Now they have seen that this hope was misplaced. The Democrats had no intention of doing either thing, and indeed seem to be happy to see the war and the Bush administration continue through the next election.

But 2008 will not be 2006. In 2006, those independents had reason to at least hope that the Democrats would really be different, that they would really act like an empowered opposition, that they would really do something to turn the country around.

In 2008, independents and even many Democratic voters know that the Democrats will not be different from Republicans in any meaningful way on the two key issues—ending the war and restoring the Constitution. Not only will the likely Democratic presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, not end the war in Iraq. Because she is a woman, and has made it clear she wants to be perceived as being as tough as any guy, she is as likely as Bush to expand the war to Iran or some other country during her first term of office—maybe even more likely, if Bush doesn’t do it first.

As for Congress, Democrats may be in for a big shock in 2008. Expecting major gains in both houses, they may find themselves surprised if the independent voters who came out for them in 2006 stay home, and leave the field to Republicans and nativist independents who base their votes on issues like immigration and an unreasoned fear of terror—both issues that the Republican candidate plan to stoke.

There is still time for the Democrats to recover, but they won’t do it on their own. The leadership of the party has lost its connection to the American people and to reality, and is living in a world of image management, corporate pandering and inside-the-Beltway machinations.

With an overwhelming majority of Americans clearly in favor of an immediate end to the Iraq war, and a similar majority in favor of impeachment hearings against both Bush and especially Cheney, it is clear that the entire electoral situation would change overnight if Democrats in Congress announced that there would be no more funding bills for the Iraq War—only for withdrawal—and that impeachment hearings were beginning.

This is not going to happen, though, without an even more forceful mass movement by the American people.

What we need is a tsunami of mail and phone calls to Democrats in Congress demanding both things. We need marches on the local offices of Democratic members of Congress. And finally we need mass resignations from the Democratic Party, with voters making the point directly and unambiguously that people are leaving the party until it acts decisively to end the war and to begin impeachment proceedings.

No more symbolic votes. No more posturing. Only action.

IYFR: Kucinich is not only the right choice, he’s  the only choice.

Tania Head Exposed As 9/11 Scammer

November 16, 2007 by inyourfaceradio

Tania Head

Tania Head told one helluva story. One of just 19 survivors from at or above the impact points of the planes that hit the World Trade Center on 9/11/01, she was a living miracle and a symbol of strength and compassion.

According to Head, she was on the 78th floor of the south tower when Flight 175 struck the building between the 78th and 84th floors.

Head was knocked out cold. When she came to she began to crawl through the hellish wreckage. Along the way, she met a dying man. The hideously burned stranger gave Tania Head his wedding ring and asked her to take it to his wife.

A mysterious man wearing a red handkerchief saved Tania Head’s life shortly after this poignant encounter. He snuffed the flames leaping from the clothes on the injured woman’s back.

Through her terrible descent from that part of the south tower that yielded so few survivors, Tania Head held one talismanic image in her mind. Her vision of the white dress she would wear on her upcoming wedding day kept her alive. She had Dave, her fiancé, and their marriage to look forward to.

The brave Tania didn’t know at the time that Dave was already dead. He’d been killed instantly when American Airlines Flight 11 struck the north tower 17 minutes before the impact of Flight 175.

For the last 6 years or so, this was Tania Head’s story of surviving 9/11 — with a few variations.

Until just a few days ago.

That was when the New York Times called foul on her story in a major way.

The woman who told this tale while volunteering as a tour guide at Ground Zero, who was a leading member of the World Trade Center Survivors’ Network, was apparently lying about everything.

Including her name. From the Times, an article published 9/30/07:

Yesterday, La Vanguardia, a newspaper in Barcelona, reported that Ms. Head had been known there as Alicia Esteve Head. Ms. Head told colleagues in New York that scars and marks on her arm were from the terror attack. La Vanguardia quoted an unnamed former colleague as saying that Ms. Head said the scars were from a high-speed crash in a Ferrari.

“She used to say that they had to look for the arm and reattach it,” the colleague is quoted as saying in the article.

Among other descriptions of her parents, Ms. Head has said that she is the daughter of a Spanish diplomat. La Vanguardia reported that Ms. Head’s family was well known and that her father and brother had served prison terms for their roles in a financial scandal in 1992 in the Catalonia region of Spain…

Alicia/Tania had been a secretary for a company named Hovisa in the late 90s. As “Tania” she’d claimed to have high-level jobs and degrees from schools like Harvard and Stanford. No one at either school could verify her attendance.

Alicia/Tania’s story has been fascinating to many because they find it hard to conceive of someone creating such a huge deception without a motive. Yet so far, no one knows of Head having profited from her act.

She seems to have simply done it for the attention.

I don’t find that hard to believe. I’ve met “Tanias” before. In fact, I knew one woman who even resembled this person. She was short but very heavy, and her overall persona was quite warm and inviting. But you quickly learned that 90% of everything that came out of this person’s mouth was fiction. It became a kind of party game among those of us who were wise to her to catch her in inconsistencies (she couldn’t keep track of any of her stories — her father died, came back to life, died again, was on his deathbed… it was that bold), and make her squirm a bit by asking about them.

It hasn’t been pointed out too much since the story of Tania Head broke, but she was also involved in some way with the New York Writers’ Coalition. You won’t find much mention (if any) of Head on that groups’ website now.

But in a stroke of psychic irony, Tania Head was at one time the fiction editor for the NY Writers’ Coalition’s e-zine, Plum Biscuit.

Strangely, she may have revealed more about herself in that capacity than she intended. For instance, Head wrote the following about one of the pieces she’d selected for the issue she edited, a story titled “The Most Beautiful Name” (with emphasis added): “I was very drawn to the wit and perception of this story from a woman’s point of view. It provides an insider look at the lies we must tell to make life bearable.”

And Head wrote a personal recollection that was once posted on the Coalition website that seemed to point directly to her youth in Spain: “Paella.” From the piece:

The thought of food instantly took me back to memories of summers in Mallorca. Paella is a typical dish from Spain made of rice and cooked in a large round pan over a slow fire. It would fascinate me to watch the cook prepare it from scratch…

[. . .]

Summers in Mallorca were days of hot sun, crystal clear sea, golden sand, good food, cool summer breeze in the evenings, the sound of crickets endlessly chirping, olive trees to climb, boat trips, dancing, laughing, playing, crisp air, blue Mediterranean views, sunsets and dreaming of the prince charming we would share them with in the future, and happiness, lots of happiness…

Figuring that a person who is an alleged pathological liar might tend to go whole hog with the endeavor, I searched as best as I could for any sign of Head having plagiarized “Paella” and found none. None in English, that is. As Head apparently speaks excellent English, the idea that she might have stolen the piece from a Spanish writer and just evaded plagiarism detection by translating did occur to me. I’m not good enough with Spanish to suss it out if she did.

The sad fact is, all the attention given to Head’s deceptions may still play into the base need that prompted her to begin lying in the first place — a habit that likely began in childhood: desperately seeking attention. The need to set one’s self apart from everyone else, to be special, different is so great in someone like that it is hard for most people to really fathom their behavior.

But it is possible that the kind of desperation fueling that need has also turned on Head, now — for she got caught in the kind of fib no one can evade or excuse. She’s doing the only thing she can do, if she truly didn’t commit a crime — hiding.

Alicia Esteve “Tania” Head may not be a cruel or vicious person. It is more likely that she is an astonishingly desperate, lonely woman who came from Spain to America and slowly became so immersed in her fantasy life, in her fictions, that she forgot what was real and what was not.

Unfortunately, Ms. Head chose the wrong signal event in American history to screw around with — 9/11. As a result, any forgiveness from families of victims, from real survivors will be a long time coming, if it ever comes at all. If she hasn’t switched off her phone and canceled her e-mail accounts because of death threats yet, I suspect she will soon.

Some wounds simply stay raw, no matter how much time has passed.

Too bad “Tania” did get that before she took her fiction in the wrong direction. Her life right now might be much more bearable.

IYFR

Facebook – Federal Human Data Mining Program

October 29, 2007 by inyourfaceradio

IYFR has received several requests to look into online personal data mining from reputable and popular sites including: MySpace – Facebook – Pal Talk and Paypal.  In our recent search we found this video about Facebook on You Tube.  You decide.

HR 1955 – Thought Crime Bill Takes Hold

October 28, 2007 by inyourfaceradio

Here’s your police state, folks. Can’t get any plainer than this.

http://www.roguegovernment.com/news.php?id=4682

House Passes Thought Crime Prevention Bill
10-25-2007
Lee Rogers

The U.S. House of Representatives recently passed HR 1955 titled the
Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of
2007. This bill is one of the most blatant attacks against the
Constitution yet and actually defines thought crimes as homegrown
terrorism. If passed into law, it will also establish a commission
and a Center of Excellence to study and defeat so called thought
criminals. Unlike previous anti-terror legislation, this bill
specifically targets the civilian population of the United States and
uses vague language to define homegrown terrorism. Amazingly, 404 of
our elected representatives from both the Democrat and Republican
parties voted in favor of this bill. There is little doubt that this
bill is specifically targeting the growing patriot community that is
demanding the restoration of the Constitution.

First let’s take a look at the definitions of violent radicalization
and homegrown terrorism as defined in Section 899A of the bill.

The definition of violent radicalization uses vague language to
define this term of promoting any belief system that the government
considers to be an extremist agenda. Since the bill doesn’t
specifically define what an extremist belief system is, it is
entirely up to the interpretation of the government. Considering how
much the government has done to destroy the Constitution they could
even define Ron Paul supporters as promoting an extremist belief
system. Literally, the government according to this definition can
define whatever they want as an extremist belief system. Essentially
they have defined violent radicalization as thought crime. The
definition as defined in the bill is shown below.

..(2) VIOLENT RADICALIZATION- The term ..violent radicalization’ means
the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for
the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance
political, religious, or social change.

The definition of homegrown terrorism uses equally vague language to
further define thought crime. The bill includes the planned use of
force or violence as homegrown terrorism which could be interpreted
as thinking about using force or violence. Not only that but the
definition is so vaguely defined, that petty crimes could even fall
into the category of homegrown terrorism. The definition as defined
in the bill is shown below.

..(3) HOMEGROWN TERRORISM- The term ..homegrown terrorism’ means the
use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group
or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within
the United States or any possession of the United States to
intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian
population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in
furtherance of political or social objectives.

Section 899B of the bill goes over the findings of Congress as it
pertains to homegrown terrorism. Particularly alarming is that the
bill mentions the Internet as a main source for terrorist propaganda.
The bill even mentions streams in obvious reference to many of the
patriot and pro-constitution Internet radio networks that have been
formed. It also mentions that homegrown terrorists span all ages and
races indicating that the Congress is stating that everyone is a
potential terrorist. Even worse is that Congress states in their
findings that they should look at draconian police states like
Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom as models to defeat
homegrown terrorists. Literally, these findings of Congress fall
right in line with the growing patriot community.

The biggest joke of all is that this section also says that any
measure to prevent violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism
should not violate the constitutional rights of citizens. However,
the definition of violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism as
they are defined in section 899A are themselves unconstitutional. The
Constitution does not allow the government to arrest people for
thought crimes, so any promises not to violate the constitutional
rights of citizens are already broken by their own definitions.

..SEC. 899B. FINDINGS.

..The Congress finds the following:

..(1) The development and implementation of methods and processes that
can be utilized to prevent violent radicalization, homegrown
terrorism, and ideologically based violence in the United States is
critical to combating domestic terrorism.

..(2) The promotion of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism,
and ideologically based violence exists in the United States and
poses a threat to homeland security.

..(3) The Internet has aided in facilitating violent radicalization,
ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process in
the United States by providing access to broad and constant streams
of terrorist-related propaganda to United States citizens.

..(4) While the United States must continue its vigilant efforts to
combat international terrorism, it must also strengthen efforts to
combat the threat posed by homegrown terrorists based and operating
within the United States.

..(5) Understanding the motivational factors that lead to violent
radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence
is a vital step toward eradicating these threats in the United
States.

..(6) The potential rise of self radicalized, unaffiliated terrorists
domestically cannot be easily prevented through traditional Federal
intelligence or law enforcement efforts, and requires the
incorporation of State and local solutions.

..(7) Individuals prone to violent radicalization, homegrown
terrorism, and ideologically based violence span all races,
ethnicities, and religious beliefs, and individuals should not be
targeted based solely on race, ethnicity, or religion.

..(8) Any measure taken to prevent violent radicalization, homegrown
terrorism, and ideologically based violence and homegrown terrorism
in the United States should not violate the constitutional rights,
civil rights and civil liberties of United States citizens and lawful
permanent residents.

..(9) Certain governments, including the United Kingdom, Canada, and
Australia have significant experience with homegrown terrorism and
the United States can benefit from lessons learned by those nations.

Section 899C calls for a commission on the prevention of violent
radicalization and ideologically based violence. The commission will
consist of ten members appointed by various individuals that hold
different positions in government. Essentially, this is a commission
that will examine and report on how they are going to deal with
violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism. So basically, the
commission is being formed specifically on how to deal with thought
criminals in the United States. The bill requires that the commission
submit their final report 18 months following the commission’s first
meeting as well as submit interim reports every 6 months leading up
to the final report. Below is the bill’s defined purpose of the
commission. Amazingly they even define one of the purposes of the
commission to determine the causes of lone wolf violent
radicalization.

(b) Purpose- The purposes of the Commission are the following:

..(1) Examine and report upon the facts and causes of violent
radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence
in the United States, including United States connections to non-
United States persons and networks, violent radicalization, homegrown
terrorism, and ideologically based violence in prison, individual or
..lone wolf’ violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and
ideologically based violence, and other faces of the phenomena of
violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based
violence that the Commission considers important.

..(2) Build upon and bring together the work of other entities and
avoid unnecessary duplication, by reviewing the findings,
conclusions, and recommendations of–

..(A) the Center of Excellence established or designated under section
899D, and other academic work, as appropriate;

..(B) Federal, State, local, or tribal studies of, reviews of, and
experiences with violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and
ideologically based violence; and

..(C) foreign government studies of, reviews of, and experiences with
violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based
violence.

Section 899D of the bill establishes a Center of Excellence for the
Study of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism in the United
States. Essentially, this will be a Department of Homeland Security
affiliated institution that will study and determine how to defeat
thought criminals.

Section 899E of the bill discusses how the government is going to
defeat violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism through
international cooperation. As stated in the findings section earlier
in the legislation, they will unquestionably seek the advice of
countries with draconian police states like the United Kingdom to
determine how to deal with this growing threat of thought crime.

Possibly the most ridiculous section of the bill is Section 899F
which states how they plan on protecting civil rights and civil
liberties while preventing ideologically based violence and homegrown
terrorism. Here is what the section says.

..SEC. 899F. PROTECTING CIVIL RIGHTS AND CIVIL LIBERTIES WHILE
PREVENTING IDEOLOGICALLY-BASED VIOLENCE AND HOMEGROWN TERRORISM.

..(a) In General- The Department of Homeland Security’s efforts to
prevent ideologically-based violence and homegrown terrorism as
described herein shall not violate the constitutional rights, civil
rights, and civil liberties of United States citizens and lawful
permanent residents.

..(b) Commitment to Racial Neutrality- The Secretary shall ensure that
the activities and operations of the entities created by this
subtitle are in compliance with the Department of Homeland Security’s
commitment to racial neutrality.

..(c) Auditing Mechanism- The Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Officer
of the Department of Homeland Security will develop and implement an
auditing mechanism to ensure that compliance with this subtitle does
not result in a disproportionate impact, without a rational basis, on
any particular race, ethnicity, or religion and include the results
of its audit in its annual report to Congress required under section
705.’.

(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of contents in section 1(b) of such
Act is amended by inserting at the end of the items relating to title
VIII the following:

It states in the first subsection that in general the efforts to
defeat thought crime shall not violate the constitutional rights,
civil rights and civil liberties of the United States citizens and
lawful permanent residents. How does this protect constitutional
rights if they use vague language such as in general that prefaces
the statement? This means that the Department of Homeland Security
does not have to abide by the Constitution in their attempts to
prevent so called homegrown terrorism.

This bill is completely insane. It literally allows the government to
define any and all crimes including thought crime as violent
radicalization and homegrown terrorism. Obviously, this legislation
is unconstitutional on a number of levels and it is clear that all
404 representatives who voted in favor of this bill are traitors and
should be removed from office immediately. The treason spans both
political parties and it shows us all that there is no difference
between them. The bill will go on to the Senate and will likely be
passed and signed into the law by George W. Bush. Considering that
draconian legislation like the Patriot Act and the Military
Commissions Act have already been passed, there seems little question
that this one will get passed as well. This is more proof that our
country has been completely sold out by a group of traitors at all
levels of government.

An Insight From Ronald Reagan

October 24, 2007 by inyourfaceradio

Finally, something Reagan was right about!


“A moment I’ve been dreading. George (Bush Sr.) brought his ne’re-do-well son around this morning and asked me to find the kid a job. Not the political one who lives in Florida. The one who hangs around here all the time looking shiftless. This so-called kid is already almost 40 and has never had a real job. Maybe I’ll call Kinsley over at The New Republic and see if they’ll hire him as a contributing editor or something. That looks like easy work.”

– Ronald Reagan in his published diaries, written May 17, 1986

Rudy’s Spends $5,370 In Hotel Tab

October 18, 2007 by inyourfaceradio

Giuliani Spends Big Bucks for Posh Hotels


Rudy Giuliani prefers posh hotels, water views and chartered planes.

Rudy Giuliani likes to travel in style.

That’s what can be deduced by looking through Giuliani’s campaign spending report, which shows the former New York mayor has routinely stayed in posh hotels while on the road, and seems to lack confidence in the quality of commercial air carriers.

Whether it was $2,010 at the Greenbrier Hotel in West Virginia, $4,034 at La Costa Resort and Spa in Carlsbad, Calif., or $5,370 at the Fairmont Hotel in San Francisco, the former mayor found himself top-notch lodging. (At the Fairmont, The Trail got a glimpse of the candidate’s large suite — it had a fantastic view of the bay, overlooking Alcatraz Island.) Water views seem to be a prized asset for Giuliani — during an early trip to New Hampshire, the former new york mayor stayed at the Wentworth by the Sea resort, a AAA Four-diamond resort that advertises “postcard-perfect views of the waterfront” in Portsmouth.

He also spent more than $565,000 reimbursing various corporate supporters for private jet travel. The biggest chunk of those flights came via Elliott Asset Management, a New York hedge fund known by some as a “vulture fund,” so-named because they buy debt cheaply from cash-starved countries, and then sue them for the full repayment. The head of the firm, Paul Singer, is in charge of Northeastern fundraising for Giuliani.

Giuliani spent another $800,000 on charter jet travel.

One campaign supporter who has raised significant sums for the Giuliani campaign said yesterday he doesn’t much care how much the former mayor is spending on the trail. “I don’t give a damn whether he’s staying at Motel 6 or Ritz Carlton,” the Giuliani bundler said. “What I care about is where he is in the polls.”

Matthew Mosk

IYFR: John Edwards get a $400.00 hair cut, so why does Rudy get a pass?

Yoko Unveils the “Imagine Peace Tower” 10/09 – John’s 67th Birthday

October 7, 2007 by inyourfaceradio

Yoko Ono will unveil the Imagine Peace Tower in Reykjavik, Iceland, on Oct. 9 — on what would have been husband John Lennon’s 67th birthday.

“This is something that we spoke about 40 years ago,” Ono told The Associated Press by phone this week before heading for Iceland. “Our dream is finally coming true.”

The Imagine Peace Tower is a stories-tall beam of light that will emanate from a wishing well bearing the words “imagine peace” in 24 languages.

The tower will be lit each year from Oct. 9 to Dec. 8, “so it has the feeling of the shortness of life, but the light is eternal,” Ono said.

Ono, 74, came up with the concept for the light tower in 1965. Lennon was interested, she said.

“He was visualizing then that it would probably become a reality one day,” she said.

When she turned 70, Ono decided she needed a place to keep the thousands of wishes she had collected through the “wish trees” she had set up at gallery shows around the world.

“I was collecting the wishes for world peace, of course,” she said. “I thought: ‘I have to put them in a tower or something … a peace tower.”‘

With that, she set out to make her conceptual light sculpture a reality. Engineers from Iceland and Japan worked from her design to build a 55-foot platform beneath a 6 1/2-foot-tall wishing well that houses nine spotlights.

The tower sits on the coast of the Island of Vioey.

Ono said she chose Iceland “because it is a very eco-friendly country” that relies on geothermal energy.

“It’s so beautiful,” she said. “There’s a certain strangeness to it. I would like to say it’s magical.”

The wishes Ono has collected — about 495,000 so far — will be buried in “capsules” around the tower, each topped with a tree. “Eventually it will be like a forest,” she said.

Wishes can be submitted by mail or through the Imagine Peace Web site.

“This is the biggest birthday present I gave to John,” Ono said. “He’s very, very happy about it, I know.”

Check out Sean Lennons way cool website – www.seanonolennon.com

IYFR: HAPPY BIRTHDAY JOHN – IMAGINE! 

The Democrats Who Enable Bush

October 7, 2007 by inyourfaceradio

By Helen Thomas – Oct. 4th 

President Bush has no better friends than the spineless Democratic congressional leadership and the party’s leading presidential candidates when it comes to his failing Iraq policy.

    Those Democrats seem to have forgotten that the American people want U.S. troops out of Iraq, especially since Bush still cannot give a credible reason for attacking Iraq after nearly five years of war.

    Last week at a debate in Hanover, N.H., the leading Democratic presidential candidates sang from the same songbook: Sens. Hillary Clinton of New York, and Barack Obama of Illinois and former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards refused to promise to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq by 2013, at the end of the first term of their hypothetical presidencies. Can you believe it?

    When the question was put to Clinton, she reverted to her usual cautious equivocation, saying: “It is very difficult to know what we’re going to be inheriting.”

    Obama dodged, too: “I think it would be irresponsible” to say what he would do as president.

    Edwards, on whom hopes were riding to show some independence, replied to the question: “I cannot make that commitment.”

    They have left the voters little choice with those answers.

    Some supporters were outraged at the obfuscation by the Democratic front-runners.

    On the other hand, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, and Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., are more definitive in their calls for quick troop withdrawals.

    But Biden wants to break up Iraq into three provinces along religious and ethnic lines. In other words, Balkanize Iraq.

    To have major Democratic backing to stay the course in Iraq added up to good news for Bush.

    Now comes a surprising Clinton fan.

    President Bush told Bill Sammon – Washington Examiner correspondent and author of a new book titled “The Evangelical President” – that Clinton will beat Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination because she is a “formidable candidate” and better known.

    Sammon says Bush revealed that he has been sending messages to Clinton to urge her to “maintain some political wiggle room in your campaign rhetoric about Iraq.”

    The author said Bush contends that whoever inherits the White House will be faced with a potential vacuum in Iraq and “will begin to understand the need to continue to support the young democracy.”

    Bush ought to know about campaign rhetoric. Remember how he ridiculed “nation building” in the 2000 presidential campaign? Now he claims he is trying to spread democracy throughout the Middle East.

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is another Democratic leader who has empowered Bush’s war.

    Pelosi removed a provision from the most recent war-funding bill that would have required Bush to seek the permission of Congress before launching any attack on Iran. Her spokesman gave the lame excuse that she didn’t like the wording of the provision. More likely, she bowed to political pressure.

    Is it any wonder the Democrats are faring lower than the president in a Washington Post ABC approval poll? Bush came in at 33 percent and Congress at 29 percent.

    Members of Congress seem to have forgotten their constitutional prerogative to declare war; World War II was the last time Congress formally declared war.

    Presidents have found other ways to make end runs around the law, mainly by obtaining congressional authorization “to do whatever is necessary” in a crisis involving use of the military. That’s the way we got into the Vietnam and Iraq wars.

    So what are the leading Democratic White House hopefuls offering? It seems nothing but more war. So where do the voters go who are sick of the Iraqi debacle?

IYFR: We can answer that Helen: DENNIS KUCINICH