Global-currency Call Gets Nod From Geithner, Others

Image via Wikipedia

Global-currency Call Gets Nod From Geithner, Others

Global-currency Call Gets Nod From Geithner, Others
Written by William F. Jasper
Friday, 27 March 2009 12:30

U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has given a nod of approval to China’s call for a global currency to replace the dollar, joining a chorus of international voices that include Russia, a United Nations panel, billionaire investor George Soros, and Kazakhstan — among others. Geithner’s remarks favoring the China proposal, delivered at a meeting of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) on March 25, surprised many, as the previous day both he and President Obama gave statements disapproving of any move away from the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency.

As reported here on March 24, Zhou Xiaochuan, the governor of China’s central bank, has called for scrapping the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency. On March 25, U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) scored Geithner for being deceptive about his true intentions concerning the China proposal. Rep. Bachmann's office issued a release declaring:

"Yesterday, during a Financial Services Committee hearing, I asked Secretary Geithner if he would denounce efforts to move towards a global currency and he answered unequivocally that he would," said Bachmann. "And President Obama gave the nation the same assurances. But just a day later, Secretary Geithner has left the option on the table. I want to know which it is. The American people deserve to know."

Asked today about a currency proposal from China at a Council on Foreign Relations event, Secretary Geithner stated he was open to supporting it. Despite attempts to clarify his remarks later in the day, the unguarded initial response calls into question his true intentions.

Here is the comment from the CFR meeting, entitled “A Conversation with Timothy F. Geithner,” to which Rep. Bachman refers:

QUESTIONER: Well, thank you. Wonder if you could comment on two related things. One, the Chinese government proposal about a global currency; and about the IMF regulations that were — the new IMF idea about, you know, very general agreements to borrow and having a faster ability to disburse to the [inaudible].

GEITHNER: On the first question, I haven't read the governor's proposal. He's a remarkably — a very thoughtful, very careful, distinguished central banker. Generally find him sensible on every issue. But as I understand his proposal, it's a proposal designed to increase the use of the IMF's special drawing rights. And we're actually quite open to that suggestion. But you should think of it as rather evolutionary, building on the current architectures, than — rather than — rather than moving us to global monetary union.

A transcript of the meeting is available from the CFR’s website here and a video link for the event can be viewed here. The moderator of the CFR event, investment banker Roger C. Altman (a top Treasury Department official in both the Carter and Clinton administrations), asked for clarification, which elicited from Geithner more praise for Communist China’s central banker:

ALTMAN: Let me just follow that up for one second. A number — I haven't read the governor's essay, either, but a slew of news reports interpreted his comments to suggest that the world needs a super reserve currency, and that the dollar, on some gradual basis, ought to be replaced in favor of that. And I wasn't entirely clear what your response was.

GEITHNER: Well, as I said, I haven't read his proposal, but I thought the initial reaction was sort of ahead of the details of the proposal I saw. The only thing concrete I saw was a reference to expanding the use of the SDR, but I look forward to reading his figures. As I said, I have tremendous respect for him. He's a really thoughtful, pragmatic guy, and he has a great record of credibility in China as a whole, so anything he's — he's thinking about deserves some consideration.

Secretary Geithner’s denials notwithstanding, Communist China’s proposals for the new currency reserve are indeed a scheme for “moving us to global monetary union.” It is an attempt to move us closer to the original vision of Lord John Maynard Keynes, the Fabian Socialist, architect of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank. Keynes had hoped to replace the dollar with a new global currency he called the bancor. That idea is being revived now in preparation for the London G20 conference next week, though most proposals call for a vast expansion of the IMF’s Special Drawing Rights (SDRs), which is more arcane and sounds less threatening than an actual global currency like Keynes’ bancor, or the “acmetal” proposed by Kazakhstan’s President Nursultan Nazarbayev. It is no small matter that Canadian economist Robert Mundell, who received the Nobel Prize for his key role in laying the groundwork for the euro currency, has endorsed Nazarbayev’s proposition. “It would be a very good idea if the G20 took that idea up in London,” Mundell said.

This is a very telling endorsement. Mundell and his colleagues laid most of the groundwork for the euro in secret and only succeeded in foisting the euro upon the peoples of Europe through deception. For decades, the architects of the Common Market and European Union denied that they were seeking monetary or political union, or anything that would harm national sovereignty; now it is pointless to deny that the EU central government in Brussels has usurped virtually all sovereign powers.

As we have noted in several previous reports on this subject over the past months, the globalist choir has been laboring mightily to build up a “mandate” for the London G20 confab to propose “Supersizing the IMF,” which would entail transferring vast new monetary and regulatory powers to the IMF, making it the equivalent of a global Federal Reserve System. Beyond that, the same choir has unleashed a host of proposals to exploit current economic and political crises to further empower the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, and other international institutions, some even calling outright for world government. That is the real agenda for many of the world leaders and their one-world sherpas who will be attending the London summit.

[Caption]

Powered by ScribeFire.

Related articles by Zemanta

• The Education of Timothy Geithner (mydd.com)
• Loose Lips Devalue the Dollar (unitedliberty.org)
• Currency king (news.bbc.co.uk)
• We're Starting to Doubt the Dartmouth Econ Department: (brothersjuddblog.com)
• Obama, Geithner: Recession Requires Global Action (abcnews.go.com)
• G-20 Pledge "Sustained Effort" On Global Financial Crisis (huffingtonpost.com)
• Careless Whispers (windsofchange.net)
• G-20 Countries Pledge Sustained Action (cbsnews.com)

Obama's Mansion, Saddam's Money

by Daniel Pipes
Philadelphia Bulletin
October 29, 2008

Barack Obama appears to have personally benefited from funds originating in Saddam Hussein's regime. It's a complicated connection, but one that deserves the consideration of Americans voters. Nadhmi Auchi (left) with Illinois' governor, Rod Blagojevich, in 2004.

Two similar figures, Nadhmi Auchi and Antoin S. "Tony" Rezko, served as the intermediaries. Both are Middle Eastern males of Catholic Christian heritage who left Baathist dictatorships for Western cities (Auchi from Iraq to London, Rezko from Syria to Chicago). Both became successful businessmen who hobnobbed with politicians and promoted Arab interests. Both have been convicted of taking kickbacks and both stand accused of other shady dealings.

Auchi, born in 1937, is the more successful. When young, he joined Saddam in the Baath Party. He founded his main financial instrument, the General Mediterranean Holding SA in 1979 – revealingly, while still in Iraq. A year later, he emigrated to the United Kingdom. GMHSA now describes itself as a diverse group of 120 companies with consolidated assets of over US$4.2 billion. The Sunday Times (London) recently estimated Auchi's personal wealth at £2.15 billion, making him the 27^th richest person in Britain. He garnered many honors along the way.

On the dark side, a French court in 2003 convicted Auchi of taking kickbacks in the Elf Affair and handed down a suspended jail sentence and fine. One analyst, Hector Igbikiowubo, calls this "probably the biggest political and corporate sleaze scandal to hit a western democracy since World War II." Also in 2003, one of Auchi's firms was accused of taking part in a price-fixing cartel of prescription medicines. In 2004, a report by the Pentagon's International Armament and Technology Trade Directorate found "significant and credible evidence" that Auchi organized a conspiracy to offer bribes to win mobile telephone licenses in Iraq. He was barred from entering the United States in 2005.

Rezko, born in 1955, arrived in the United States in 1974 to study civil engineering. After some work on road construction projects, he went into the fast-food business, then into real estate, with help from Auchi. His political involvement began in 1983 with a mayoral campaign, after which he acquired a taste for cultivating up-and-coming politicians, notably Obama and the current governor of Illinois, Rod Blagojevich. Tony Rezko (left) with Illinois' junior senator, Barack Obama.

Rezko too has extensive legal problems, starting with a June 2008 conviction on sixteen counts of taking kickbacks from companies wanting to do business with the State of Illinois. He also stands accused of evading Las Vegas gambling debts and using false information in the sale of his pizza businesses. In contrast to Auchi's wealth, Rezko is said to be over $50 million in debt.

In three steps, these corrupt businessmen tie the Democratic Party presidential candidate to the executed Iraqi tyrant:

1. Saddam Hussein made use of Auchi: Auchi's fortune largely grew through his Iraq government connection, much of it sub rosa. In the 1980s, he procured Italian military ships. By 1993, the Italian banker Pierfrancesco Pacini Battaglia testified about Auchi bribing Iraqi officials for an Italian engineering company and called Auchi "one of the most important intermediaries in the affairs of Middle Eastern countries." Auchi is also a major shareholder in BNP Paribas, the French bank deeply implicated in the U.N.'s corrupt Iraq oil-for-food program.

2. Auchi made use of Rezko: Rezko lobbied for Auchi to be allowed into the United States. A wholly-owned GMHSA subsidiary, Fintrade Services Inc., transferred a loan of $3.5 million on May 23, 2005 to Rezko.

3. Rezko cultivated Obama: Rezko offered Barack Obama a job in 1990, which Obama declined. Still, Rezko persisted, hiring him for legal work and hosting in 2003 an early fundraiser that, writes David Mendell in Obama: From Promise to Power, proved "instrumental in providing Obama with seed money" for his nascent U.S. Senate campaign. Then, on June 15, 2005, just twenty-three days after receiving Auchi's $3.5 million, Rezko partnered with Obama in a real estate deal: while Rezko's wife paid the full asking price, $625,000, for an empty adjoining lot which they then improved, subdivided, and partially sold to Obama, Obama acquired a mansion for $1.65 million, $300,000 under the asking price.

Summing up: Barack Obama's house purchase depended on favors from Rezko, flush with a "loan" from Auchi, whose fortune derived in part from Saddam Hussein's favor.

When seen in the context of Obama's other dubious connections (Ayers, Davidson, Wright, Khalidi, et al.), this network is all the more alarming.

---

Oct. 29, 2008 update: Additional details and updates on this subject are available at "More on the Links between Obama and Saddam Hussein."

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

"Supersized" IMF or "Global Federal Reserve"

Image via Wikipedia

The G20 Push to "Supersize" the IMF

The G20 Push to "Supersize" the IMF
Written by William F. Jasper


The big push to “supersize” and transform the International Monetary Fund (IMF) into a global Federal Reserve System has been developing in elite political and economic circles for months. The campaign is now intensifying in the final weeks leading up to the London Group of Twenty (G20) Summit in April. Op-eds in major newspapers, speeches by leading politicians, and papers and roundtables by globalist think tanks are all pushing the same ideas, to wit:

1) The IMF should be given huge new infusions of capital through member country “subscriptions.”

2) The IMF should be encouraged to issue debt bonds to finance global loans.

3) The IMF should be “legitimized” by giving China and other emerging nations weighted votes in IMF policies.

4) The IMF should be given vast new global financial regulatory powers.

What they are proposing is economic central planning on a global scale, a sort of international Federal Reserve, which would be a major step toward world central government. These new global powers are necessary, say the advocates, because the economic crisis we face is global. The glaring questions they don’t answer is where will we find: a) brilliant beings with god-like wisdom who can do the impossible and choose the right policies that will foster global prosperity; and b) incorruptible beings with angelic virtue who will not abuse the awesome powers to enrich and empower themselves?

Our current economic crisis can be laid at the feet of the Federal Reserve and the coterie of central bankers and commercial financiers who designed, promoted, and oversaw the destructive debt economy of the past two decades. For years, former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan, “the Maestro,” was lionized and celebrated as the architect of global prosperity. Now that the house of cards he and his fellow central bankers constructed has collapsed, he publicly admits that he was not so brilliant after all. He claims he did not foresee the mortgage collapse and was mystified by fraudulent derivative products like CDOs (Collateralized Debt Obligations).

If Greenspan and associates were so colossally ignorant regarding the dangers of practices they were promoting, should we really be granting them even greater powers for economic malpractice on a global scale? An even darker (and seemingly forbidden) consideration is this: what if the policies that brought about the current economic crisis were not the result of ignorance? What if they were planned specifically to bring about the predictable (and predicted) crisis that we now find ourselves in, with a pre-planned follow-up “solution” that would entail vast new powers for the same individuals and institutions that had created the crisis in the first place? If that is the case, then we are not dealing merely with culpable ignorance, which is bad enough in itself, but with massive corruption and criminal conspiracy — or all of the above: culpable ignorance, massive corruption, and criminal conspiracy.

At any rate, concentrating global economic power in a few hands, as the IMF “supersizers” propose, is the very definition of tyranny. For, despite empty promises and boilerplate blather about “transparency” and “accountability,” the proposals provide no genuine checks and balances. The IMF as Global Fed would be about as accountable as our Federal Reserve, which refuses to divulge to Congress and the American people where trillions of dollars in Fed loans have gone.

Here are some of the major promotionals for “supersizing” the IMF. Most of these are aimed at an elite audience of opinion molders and policymakers so that an international chorus of movers and shakers will have the momentum of “world opinion” flowing in the globalist direction by the time the G20 Summit rolls around in April.

• On January 28, Edwin M. Truman of the Peterson Institute for International Economics, writes an op-ed for VoxEU (and carried elsewhere) entitled, “IMF Reform: An Unfinished Agenda.”

• Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd was given prime op-ed space in the Wall Street Journal on February 11, for a piece entitled, “Renewing the IMF.”

• Lord Peter B. Mandelson, formerly the European Union’s trade commissioner and now the U.K.’s secretary of state for business, enterprise and regulatory reform, addressed the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) on February 17 (“A Conversation with Peter B. Mandelson”) on the global economic crisis.

• On March 4, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown called for a "global New Deal" in a speech before a joint meeting of the U.S. Congress and in remarks the day before at the White House.

• On March 6, the Wall Street Journal reports on a new IMF proposal for a "binding code of conduct across nations" (“IMF Urges Global Financial Rules”).

• In a February 26 column, entitled “ A Message for the G20,” Martin Wolf, financial editor of the Financial Times issued another in his series of editorials in favor of supersizing the IMF. Wolf wrote the column to propose what he thinks President Obama should tell the G20 summiteers. According to Wolf:

The world now needs change it can believe in. Only Barack Obama, the US president, can provide the desired leadership: he is untainted, popular and leader of the country that, for good and ill, remains central. The opportunity for Mr. Obama is now, as the G20 'sherpas' prepare the draft text. He needs to write urgently to his fellow heads of government. Something like this would be perfect.

“My fellow leaders, Franklin Delano Roosevelt abandoned his London summit. I wish to make ours the moment at which we save ourselves. Let us resolve to bequeath renewed prosperity to posterity, not a collapse of the global economy we inherited….

“So what must we now do?...

“Fifth, to get through this crisis and improve the functioning of the entire global system we need much larger, more effective and more legitimate international insurance and monitoring systems. The starting point has to be with a big increase in the resources of the International Monetary Fund and restructuring of voting rights in the institution….

“As Morris Goldstein of the Washington-based Peterson Institute for International Finance argues, we need a “grand bargain” — a phrase picked up by Gordon Brown, the UK’s prime minister. The core of that bargain is surely clear to us all. “Finally, we must put in train comprehensive reform of the structure not just of regulation, but of global finance itself. We need to push this process forward in London.…"

The Financial Times’ Martin Wolf is one of the most influential economic mandarins on the planet. A regular attendee of the secretive Bilderberg gatherings, he is viewed in knowledgable circles as a principal mouthpiece of the international banking establishment. Along with his Financial Times colleague Gideon Rachman, he is a (sometimes) out-of-the-closet world-government advocate. World-famous British author Frederick Forsyth relates that he once attended an exclusive closed meeting at the Financial Times at which the former Bundesbank president stated, “You will have to abandon the British nation state because the future has no provision for the nation state within it.”

The Financial Times never breathed a word of this meeting or the words of the German central banker to its readers. Like the New York Times, The Economist, the Wall Street Journal, and most of the “mainstream media,” the Financial Times is a very important part of what Forsyth referred to as “a very powerful cabal in our country that is quite literally dedicated, fanatically, to a futuristic dream. It’s a vision, it’s a dream, it’s an imagined utopia.” That “utopian” dream would become a dystopian nightmare for nearly everyone on this planet, if the plans to supersize the IMF are allowed to succeed.

Photo: AP Images

Related articles:

"Supersizing" the IMF

Agenda Behind Brown's "Global New Deal"

Greenspan Wrongly Faults Free Market for Crisis

Economic Bubbles (by Ron Paul)

Powered by ScribeFire.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Rodrik roundtable: Rein in the banks (economist.com)
• Will Truman Policies Prevail at Treasury? (blogs.wsj.com)
• Upcoming G-20 Summit: 'Stakes Are Enormous' (huffingtonpost.com)
• Alan Greenspan Vouches for Nationalization (businesspundit.com)
• Rodrik roundtable: A new era (economist.com)
• Review: The Obama Deception by Alex Jones (riseuprochester.org)
• Bernanke: "Too Big to Fail" Needs to End (mymortgageinsider.com)

Obama Bows to EU Demands on Stimulus

Image via Wikipedia

Obama Bows to EU Demands on Stimulus

Obama Bows to EU Demands on Stimulus
Written by William F. Jasper
Thursday, 05 February 2009 15:15

Obama Bows to EU Caving in to pressure from the European Union, President Barack Obama signaled this week that he wanted “Buy American” provisions struck from the so-called economic stimulus package now going through Congress. The $819 billion plan, which passed on the House of Representatives on January 28, requires the use of U.S.-made iron and steel in public works projects. This set off a “quiet fury” among politicians in the European Union, who have denounced the provisions as “protectionism,” even though they are proceeding with protectionist measures of their own on products ranging from auto parts to dairy products.

The British Telegraph reported:

Obama officials are under pressure from what European diplomats in Washington describe as a discreet but outspoken campaign of "quiet fury" from America's closest allies….

European Commission representatives and diplomats from the British, French, Canadian and Mexican embassies in Washington have all launched an intensive lobbying operation to convince senators to strike the provisions from the bill they will debate this week.

A Western diplomat in Washington made clear that otherwise a trade war was in prospect. "The EU has said it will not stand idly by and let this happen. I've not heard words that strong from Brussels in 20 years," the official said.

"This is a very serious situation and there are very strong emotions here pushing for some form of protectionism. The Americans have been made very aware of our concerns and if we need to make things very explicit about what we will do, we will spell things out in words of one syllable.

In response to the uproar from EU officials, President Obama went on national television to announce he was anxious to avoid a trade war with Europe.

"I think we need to make sure that any provisions that are in there are not going to trigger a trade war," he said in a February 3 interview with ABC. "I think it would be a mistake though, at a time when worldwide trade is declining, for us to start sending a message that somehow we're just looking after ourselves and not concerned with world trade," he told Fox News in a separate interview.

The following day, EU Trade Commissioner Catherine Ashton told Reuters she was encouraged by President Obama's decision to alter the language in the legislation. "I'm encouraged by the words of President Obama, he realizes — like we do in Europe — that we need to trade our way out of the current economic difficulties. Trade is part of the solution as it acts as a stimulus," Ashton said.

On February 4, the Senate responded to the president’s and the EU’s wishes by watering down the “Buy American” language. After rejecting an amendment by Sen. John McCain to remove the clause altogether, the Senate voted to soften the language to say that any preference for domestic manufacturers in the federally funded projects "be applied in a manner consistent with US obligations under international agreements," a reference to NAFTA, the WTO, and other U.S. trade agreements.

However, it seems that the U.S. concession will not cause the EU to back off from its own protectionist measures. According to a Reuters report, a spokesman for the EU Commission said Obama's conciliatory stance would not affect Brussels' decision to offer export subsidies for EU dairy products, which has also angered other trading nations.

"There is no deal. Barack Obama's decision to look at altering the Buy American clause in no way affects the EU's dairy decision," the commission spokesman said.

The stimulus bill, which has climbed to over $900 billion in the Senate version, must go back to the House of Representatives for re-approval.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Obama wants to avoid 'trade war' (news.bbc.co.uk)
• Why is this guy still around! (theangryhedgehog.com)
• Barack Obama to dilute 'Buy American' clause in stimulus package to avoid trade war (telegraph.co.uk)
• Sunday Talking Heads: March 8, 2009 (firedoglake.com)

Better Not Mess with Mother Nature!! hahaha!!

Al Gore (via last.fm)

Blizzard Disrupts Global-warming Protest

Blizzard Disrupts Global-warming Protest | Print |
Written by William F. Jasper
Tuesday, 03 March 2009 13:49

Global warming rally hit by snow! They came. They saw. They were conquered — by Mother Nature. Hundreds of global-warming protesters descended on Washington, D.C., on Monday, March 2 to shut down the coal-fired Capitol Power Plant, which provides electrical power to Congress and a number of government buildings. Their plans were iced, however by temperatures that dipped into the teens, accompanied by a blizzard that dumped several inches on the nation’s capital. Schools and businesses were closed and many official government events were cancelled.

The protest, billed as “Mass Civil Disobedience,” called on protesters to break the law by blockading the gates to the power plant so that it could not operate. Organized and sponsored by Capitol Climate Action, the rally was supposed to have received a pep talk from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, but her appearance was cancelled by weather that prevented her flight to Washington, D.C.

Dr. James Hansen, the NASA scientist and global-warming gadfly, endorsed the March 2 event and urged Americans to join in the civil disobedience to “take a stand on global warming” and “send a message to Congress and the president.” In a video on the Capitol Climate Action web page, Hansen declares that global warming is an “emergency” caused by burning carbon fuels. “The only practical way to solve the problem,” says Hansen, “is to phase out the biggest source of carbon — and that's coal."

Hansen’s political activism came under fire from Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.), who urged Hansen to rethink his plans. "If he wants to have a demonstration concerning global warming, coming to the Capitol is not a right choice," Rohrabacher, a member of the House's Committee on Science and Technology, told FOXNews.com. "The bottom line is if Hansen wants to protest global warming, he should go to the National Cathedral and take it up with God rather than going to Capitol Hill." Rohrabacher added that Hansen "obviously doesn't feel comfortable with the restraints that come with being a scientist rather than a political activist. Most of us have always thought he has been hiding behind a scientific facade, and really, he was a political activist all along."

As noted previously by The New American, Hansen has been caught several times falsifying data in order to promote the political agenda favored by the climate-change activists. In addition to which, he regularly misrepresents facts through gross exaggeration and apocalyptic alarmism.

While Dr. Hansen, the “scientist,” is not comfortable with allowing facts to speak for themselves, apparently, he is very comfortable associating with the extremists of the far left of the environmental movement. His fellow endorsers of the March 2 protest include the usual Marxists (Noam Chomsky, David Korten, Code Pink, SDS-Students for a Democratic Society), anarchists (Mike Roselle, The Ruckus Society), radical enviros (Greenpeace, Rain Forest Action Network, Earth First!), Malthusians (Paul Ehrlich), and Hollywood Left (Susan Sarandon, Martin Sheen, Mike Farrell, Daryl Hannah).

Capitol Climate Action calls for shutting down all coal-fired power plants in the country. Their website declares: “Senate majority leader Reid and Speaker Pelosi promised Thursday to switch the Capitol Power Plant off coal. Now we need them to promise to do the same thing to every other coal-fired power plant in America. If this one’s too dirty, so are all the rest!”

The same web page bears this headline quote from Al Gore promoting civil disobedience in the service of pseudo-environmentalism: “I can’t understand why there aren’t rings of young people blocking bulldozers and preventing them from constructing coal-fired power plants.”

So, what would Hansen, Chomsky, Sarandon, Gore, et al, replace all of our coal-fired plants with? Solar and wind power, which can provide only tiny a fraction of the power our industrial society uses and needs. Presumably, the Capitol protesters returned from their escapade to homes warmed by evil coal, oil, gas, and nuclear power.

Photo: AP Images

For related articles, go to:

NASA's James Hansen Pushes Carbon Tax in Letter to Obamas

Global-warming Doomsayer Wants to Try Oil Company Execs

Whatever Happened to Global Warming?

Heat or Cold: Which Is More Deadly?

[x] close

Powered by ScribeFire.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Capitol Hill coal power plant targeted by environmentalists (guardian.co.uk)
• Green Diary Rescue & Open Thread (dailykos.com)
• Power Shift is What Democracy Looks Like (takepart.com)
• Massive Protests Against Coal Power Plants in D.C. Today (takepart.com)
• Susan Sarandon Says End Coal on March 2 (coal-is-dirty.com)
• Direct action in the climate movement on the rise (coal-is-dirty.com)
• The idiocy of trying to solve the financial crisis without addressing the environmental one (isiria.wordpress.com)
• Representatives Try To Outmaneuver Impending Coal Protest (huffingtonpost.com)