Fine of $50,000 + prison for refusing to export to Israel

This was linked from Reddit today:

http://www.bis.doc.gov/complianceandenforcement/antiboycottcompliance.htm

“The penalties imposed for each “knowing” violation can be a fine of up to $50,000 or five times the value of the exports involved, whichever is greater, and imprisonment of up to five years. During periods when the EAR are continued in effect by an Executive Order issued pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the criminal penalties for each “willful” violation can be a fine of up to $50,000 and imprisonment for up to ten years.”

Apparently it’s illegal in the US to refuse to export products to the genocidal, apartheid state of Israel.  I should have assumed, considering the deep infiltration of Zionists in our government and corporate media, but somehow this still came as a shock.

Sinking of S. Korean Cheosan may be a staged provocation

Mike Rivero
What Really Happened
Thursday, May 27, 2010

What can I say; here we go again!

I hardly need to go down the list of lies used to start US wars. We have been though that over and over again.

Nor do I need to elucidate on the many reasons why the US Government is in desperate need for yet another war with which to scare the American people into acceptance of more takes and fewer rights and freedoms.

Michigan senators expected votes on HB 4961 toll privatization scam

How the Senate stands on DRIC (Detroit-Canada bridge expansion) and  HB 4961.
In the case of a tie, Lt. Gov Cherry would vote in favor:

Source: Gongwer interviews

Opsommer: Bill could create government sanctioned monopolies

From MI Rep Paul Opsommer

P3 LEGISLATION, DRIC BRIDGE TWO SEPARATE ISSUES SAYS OPSOMMER

“We run the risk of creating government sanctioned monopolies if we just turn existing infrastructure over to a concessionaire who then places tolls on it.
And if ownership is transferred to a mixed-government authority, we need to make sure those are Michigan-based governments. I do not want officials in Canada, Ohio, or Indiana setting our toll rates, exercising eminent domain, or making other decisions for our citizens.”

Read the entire article

Message from MI Rep Opsommer re: HB 4961 corporate toll giveaway

We should call this the Michigan Infrastructure Fire Sale Act (MIFS) or perhaps the Michigan Taxpayer Raping Act (M-TRAP).

Some background on this horrible piece of proposed legislation can be found here.

- – - – - -

Rep Opsommer sent this message earlier today:

No Vote Explanation for HB4961
What is No Vote Regarding: Passage
Date: 5/26/2010
Time: 7:02:28 PM

Rep. Opsommer, having reserved the right to explain his protest against the passage of the bill, made the following statement:

“Mr. Speaker and members of the House:

Legislative colleagues, simply put, this bill is about much more than just the DRIC. Much, much more. This is a vehicle bill that is attempting to use the DRIC as leverage for an unprecedented shift of power and authority from the legislative to the executive branch when it comes to the unilateral ability to be able to toll our citizens.

There is no reason it has to be this way.  We should be looking at the DRIC and PPP bills separately.  That is how we have done all the other toll bridges here in Michigan. But instead, it has been a conscious decision by MDOT to wrap the DRIC bridge up into broad public-private partnership legislation that would not only allow for the DRIC but would cause the Legislature to give up its authority to statutorily authorize tolling anywhere else in the state. I don’t know if this is because the governor wants to use the bill as leverage to keep Canada happy with the DRIC, or if she simply wants to have the unilateral ability to impose tolls on taxpayers with no other checks and balances, but either way it’s wrong.

I have a letter from the Attorney General’s office that shows that right now, today, MDOT can not toll a road or bridge or other infrastructure without legislative approval.  And you know what?  That is how it should be, and how we should keep it.

Whether tolling is done directly by MDOT or a private contractor, you want someone who has been elected by the people determining where to use that tool.  In fact, in cases where it is being done by a private contractor who is using toll rates not just to break even but also to create profits, I would think you would want to keep voter accountability even more. If toll rates go unfairly through the roof, who are taxpayers supposed to turn too? The Legislature will be powerless at that point; it would actually be players from outside of the state who would have the final word.

Besides taking away the tolling authority we already have, this bill is also too broad in terms of what it defines as a transportation facility.  Let me read to you the bill and how they define it:

“A public transportation facility means any NEW, or EXISTING, DOMESTIC, or INTERNATIONAL, highway, lane, road, bridge, tunnel, overpass, ramp, interchange, ferry, airport, vehicle parking facility, vehicle transportation facility, port facility, locks facility, rail facility, intermodal or other public transit facility, or any other equipment, rolling stock, site, or facility used in the transportation of persons, goods, substances, vehicles, information, or matter of any kind, and any building, structure, parking area, appurtenance, or other property necessary or DESIRABLE for the facility”

My colleagues, that is more than a mouthful.  It is literally anything that is not permanently nailed down in this state, and even then includes some of those things as well.  This is supposed to be a transportation bill?  Really? And it includes such things under the definition as a catchall phrase such as “matter of any kind”?  They should define it the other way, what are the things MDOT couldn’t define as a public transportation facility?  I’m not sure to be honest.  And to be clear, under their definition for all these things it includes not just new but also existing.  It includes domestic and out of state and international.  When it comes to condemnation, it also includes property not just necessary for the project, but also just merely desirable for the facility.  That even includes commercial uses like gas stations, restaurants, hotels, convention centers, and other things that would fall under the definition of being merely “desirable”.  So when a taxpayer has his or her private property taken away, and given to another private entity so that they can make a profit off of it, we can expect that the property may be taken away for a Speedway, or a McDonalds, or a Red Roof Inn, or a Kellogg Center type project that could all be part of any various toll bridge or toll road mixed projects.  Under the current bill these companies would not even have to pay property taxes.

My colleagues, when such a project gets plunked down in your back yard, if the Senate doesn’t stop it, you will have absolutely NO formal vote on that project.  You will have to tell your constituents that it is out of your hands.  Now, some people may like that.  I know where they have passed legislation like this in other states that the consultants actually sell that as a feature, that the legislature gets left of the hook. Well, Michigan legislators are better than that, and there is no way we should be allowing for that here.

Simply put, this takes away too much power from the legislature, power and oversight that it already has, and then also substantially broadens the power of what MDOT can do with that authority at the same time. And the real question is, what does that have to do with the DRIC?  Why not run bills like we have for the Blue Water bridge? The answer is quite simply that we could, and the only reason we aren’t is because the DRIC is being used as leverage to try to pass a bill that in its current form of robbing legislative power would have NO chance, a 0% chance, of passing out of this body on its own. No chance at all.

And why are we being pressured into feeling like we have to do this today?  Being pressured from sources from outside of Michigan? If it wasn’t for the fact that the main potential investor in all of this, the Ontario pension fund OMERS, was recently granted expanded powers by the Canadian government to provide investment management services I am not sure we would even be here. So when tolls are being paid in Michigan, tolls not just to break even mind you but also for profit, Michigan drivers could end up paying toll rates set to ensure that OMERS pensioners makes a high rate of return. We shouldn’t be making decisions on tolling Michigan taxpayers based off of the financial needs and a quest by a Canadian pension fund, the whole reason for the supposed $550 million dollar “loan” they are offering us in the first place, a loan that will have to be repaid by, you guessed it, Michigan tolling.

And now, there are reports that Ohio is getting involved, and has introduced a resolution supporting the DRIC.  Ohio?  Ohio is now going to tell us who MDOT should be allowed to toll?  Maybe we should also ask Indiana or Wisconsin what they think before we pass this bill as well. Maybe we should also check with Mexico to see where they want the NAFTA superhighway to go? At the end of the day, whose law is this anyway?  Well it is ours, or at least it should be.  Maybe some of you  just contracted out our legislative authority and laws as well.

To conclude, if we pass laws in Michigan that give MDOT unilateral tolling power in our state it should be because that is what the Michigan Legislature feels is right, not because of pressure from other states or countries.  And it should also not allow for “instrumentalities of government” from other countries and states to be able enter into contracts that could potentially determine the tolling rates and eminent domain location decisions taking place in Michigan.  Under this bill, new governmental authorities will be created, authorities that will be defined as an instrumentality of government that in some cases will include people from outside of this state.  The bill says that ownership of a project can in vested into these new creations. They will be the ones entering into the contracts.  People will be making decisions that don’t even live here and may not be citizens of our country, let alone our state.  These facilities should not just be publicly owned, but owned by the MICHIGAN public. Texas has put a moratorium on these based on their experience with Mexico for a reason, a moratorium that apparently we have not learned from or listened to.  For some reasons we appear to be in a race instead to be like California, which has little oversight and whose history on these projects is replete with problems. Even there, their law is nowhere near as broad as what has just passed out of the House.

I am also concerned that this bill will hamstring our local governments from being able to build roads.  In other states, like California, local government has had to first pay a penalty in order to build something simply because others might consider it as competition.  Can you imagine, paying someone else for the right to build on your own land? We are being sold that this is a panacea, that there is no risk to Michigan, and yet the bill passed today is nowhere near strong enough in ensuring that local governments won’t have to pay penalties like this in order to build in their own backyard or face injunctions to stop expansion or construction that is underway.

This version of the bill is the wrong way to go, and I vote resoundingly NO.

CSI mind control programming

I’ll tell you who the anti-american traitors are, it’s the actors in this propaganda piece-of-shit TV show.

These hollywood goblins should chug a big glass of fluorosilicic acid if they think it’s so great.  That’s the chemical they’re putting in our water to brain damage and sterilize us.  When you participate in this mind control psyop you’re guilty of giving those little boys osteoscarcoma (bone cancer). skeletal and dental fluorosis, reduced fertility, brain damage, and many other health problems.

This propaganda is disgusting and evil.   CSI actors, if you’re reading this, please just go kill yourselves.  You hurt little kids for money and you do not deserve to live.

And here is more scientific proof than you ever wanted that fluoride is toxic, especially to children.

Sodium fluoride’s effect on the male reproductive system

From fluoridealert.org

Toll privatization scheme in Michigan HB 4961 amounts to a tax paid directly to private corporations, without representation

Update (May 26/ 2010 7pm) This bill has passed the house, 56-51 and is going to the Senate.

Michigan House Bill 4961 [pdf] boils down to Taxation without Representation – turning the State’s right to levy taxes over to private international corporations, essentially ceding sovereignty over critial infrastructure.  The corporations will be able to levy highway tolls without oversight or regulation on US citizens, should this bill pass.

At an absolute minimum it allows the creation of a single high occupancy toll lane.   After the next repaving of an entire highway, tolls can be collected on all lanes.

Now that the financial elite have tanked our economy, they’re trying to buy up our infrastructure and property using their international corporations that operate above the law.

Some important exerpts from the bill:

… to abolish the office of state  highway commissioner and the commissioner’s advisory board and to transfer their powers and duties…

TO PROVIDE FOR PUBLIC-PRIVATE  TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES; TO AUTHORIZE PUBLIC-PRIVATE AGREEMENTS RELATING TO … TOLLING, OPERATING, OR  MAINTAINING A PUBLIC-PRIVATE TRANSPORTATION FACILITY

[allow private corporation to tax the use of public "transportation facilities" ... but what constitutes a transportation facility?]

“TRANSPORTATION FACILITY” MEANS ANY NEW OR EXISTING  HIGHWAY, ROAD, BRIDGE, TUNNEL, OVERPASS, RAMP, INTERCHANGE, FERRY,  AIRPORT, VEHICLE PARKING FACILITY, VEHICLE TRANSPORTATION FACILITY,  PORT FACILITY, LOCKS FACILITY, RAIL FACILITY, INTERMODAL OR OTHER  PUBLIC TRANSIT FACILITY, OR ANY OTHER EQUIPMENT, ROLLING STOCK,  SITE, OR FACILITY USED IN THE TRANSPORTATION OF PERSONS, GOODS,  SUBSTANCES, VEHICLES, …

[Wait for it, wait ....]

INFORMATION, OR MATTER OF ANY KIND…

[data cables are included in "transportation facilities?!"  This bill would allow sale and private taxation of network (internet/data) infrastructure as a "transportation facility" based on "congestion."  Data cables are already leased by big cable/telcos so what does this mean for them?]

… INCLUDING THE SALE OF REVENUE BONDS …

[turn the business holdings into a fiat financial market; enable fractional lending based on expected future revenue, destabilizing the business]

…

“INSTRUMENTALITY OF GOVERNMENT” MEANS A LEGAL PUBLIC  ENTITY CREATED OR EMPOWERED TO CARRY OUT FUNCTIONS COMMONLY CARRIED  OUT BY UNITS OF GOVERNMENT

…

THE AGREEMENT SHALL PROVIDE THAT THE OWNERSHIP  OF A TRANSPORTATION FACILITY WITHIN THIS STATE SHALL BE VESTED IN  AN INSTRUMENTALITY OF GOVERNMENT AND THAT TITLE TO THE  TRANSPORTATION FACILITY SHALL NOT BE ENCUMBERED

[the corporation will have complete "unencumbered" control]

…

NO PROVISION OF A  PUBLIC-PRIVATE AGREEMENT SHALL ALLOW THE PUBLIC TO BE DEPRIVED OF  THE USE AND BENEFIT OF A TRANSPORTATION FACILITY EXCEPT AS  NECESSARY TO IMPLEMENT TOLLS OR OTHER CHARGES …

[the corporation has the authority to deny access if you don't pay the toll]

A TOLL MAY BE  IMPOSED ON A HIGHWAY ONLY IF IMPOSED FOR THE USE OF NEW HIGHWAYS,  OR THE USE OF EXPANDED HIGHWAY CAPACITY BEYOND HIGHWAY CAPACITY IN  PLACE ON THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE AMENDATORY ACT THAT ADDED THIS  SECTION.

[tolls may be levied for any expansion or heavy traffic (?)]

TOLLS AND OTHER CHARGES IMPOSED FOR THE USE OF A  TRANSPORTATION FACILITY ARE NOT SUBJECT TO REGULATION BY ANY OTHER  GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY.

[the tolling will not be regulated by the government]

NOTHING IN THIS SECTION SHALL BE CONSTRUED TO  ALLOW THE CONVERSION OF ANY NONTOLL OR NONUSER-FEE LANES EXISTING  ON THE EFFECTIVE DATE … WITH THE EXCEPTION OF A HIGH-OCCUPANCY VEHICLE LANE THAT MAY BE OPERATED AS A HIGH-OCCUPANCY  TOLL LANE FOR VEHICLES NOT OTHERWISE MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR  USE OF THAT LANE.

At a minimum, if this passes, the corporation(s) will create high occupancy toll lanes.  Initially this allows them to just take one lane and turn it into a private toll lane.  If we let this pass, how easy will it be to expand it to 2 “managed lanes,” or 3, or the whole highway?

When the highway needs repaving, will the private company dictate who gets the contracts? And how do we select which private company gets to take control in the first place? Well, anything goes according to this:

ANY COMPETITIVE SELECTION PROCESS THAT THE DEPARTMENT  DETERMINES TO BE APPROPRIATE OR REASONABLE …  USING A COMPETITIVE  SELECTION PROCESS WHEN TO THE EXTENT PRACTICABLE

….

INFORMATION SUBMITTED UNDER SUCH A  PROMISE OF CONFIDENTIALITY SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO DISCLOSURE UNDER  THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT

[The bidding process will be competative to the extent that the government determines is "reasonable," but you'll never know because whatever we say is "private negotiations" will be exempt from FOIA requests]

A newer version of the bill (pdf) has been released that is substantially the same but provides for “public hearings” to receive user input; amounting to no real oversight or accountability.

THE COMMISSION SHALL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AT LEAST ONCE EVERY 5 YEARS TO RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENT AND INPUT WITH REGARD TO THEN EXISTING PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES ….

After the next repaving, all highway lanes can be turned into toll lanes.   Signing this bill will inevitably turn our Michigan highways into private revenue streams for multinational corporations, not to mention ports, rail, and network infrastructure.  This is infrastructure we’ve already paid to build, and need to maintain ourselves in order to sustain the local economy by hiring local workers and companies.

People from Michigan, it is absolutely critical that we reject this bill.  We can not let them hand our infrastructure over to international corporations as many other states have.  In the long run Michigan will lose on this deal in a big way.

They mean business and will do whatever is necessary including paying off our elected officials.  Call your representatives and let them know we’re watching!

- – - – - – - – - – - – -

From MI Rep Paul Opsommer:

OUT-OF-STATE MEDDLING WORSENS HB 4961

May 24, 2010

State Rep. Paul Opsommer today criticized Canadian and Ohio officials for pushing legislation that would allow the Michigan Department of Transportation to toll virtually anywhere in Michigan.

“At the end of the day, whose law is this anyway?” asked Opsommer, R-Dewitt. “Canada’s understandable need to be part of border discussions is now being eclipsed by their off-base efforts to support the Ontario pension fund, and now we have resolutions being introduced involving the Ohio Legislature as well. If we pass laws in Michigan that give MDOT unilateral tolling power in our state it should be because that is what the Michigan Legislature feels is right, not because of pressure from other states or countries.”

Opsommer made his comments in response to a recent news story that officials in Ohio are advocating for their resolution SR 223 in support of the Detroit River International Crossing. The bill in Michigan that would allow for that, HB 4961, would also give new power to MDOT at the expense of the Legislature. HB 4961 is also criticized for allowing “instrumentalities of government” from other countries and states to enter into contracts that could potentially determine the tolling rates and eminent domain decisions taking place in Michigan.

“It has been a conscious decision by MDOT to wrap the DRIC bridge up into broad public-private partnership legislation that would not only allow for the DRIC but would cause the Legislature to give up its authority to statutorily authorize tolling anywhere else in the state,” Opsommer said. “I don’t know if this is because the governor wants to use the bill as leverage to keep Canada happy with the DRIC, or if she simply wants to have the unilateral ability to impose tolls on taxpayers with no other checks and balances, but either way it’s wrong.”

The Ambassador Bridge, Blue-Water Bridge and all other tolled facilities in Michigan received their tolling authority through stand alone bills authorized by the Legislature. Opsommer cited a recent letter from the attorney general’s office that concurs that MDOT currently only has the ability to toll where the Legislature has given its formal approval.

“Whether tolling is done directly by MDOT or a private contractor, you want someone who has been elected by the people determining where to use that tool,” Opsommer said. “In cases where it is being done by a private contractor who is using toll rates not just to break even but also to create profits, I would think you would want to keep voter accountability even more. If toll rates go unfairly through the roof, who are taxpayers supposed to turn too? The Legislature will be powerless at that point; it would actually be players from outside of the state who would have the final word.”

Opsommer also pointed to international pressure from Canada as having an unfair influence on the process.

“If it wasn’t for the fact that the main potential investor in all of this, the Ontario pension fund OMERS, was recently granted expanded powers by the Canadian government to provide investment management services I am not sure we would even be here,” Opsommer said. “We shouldn’t be making decisions on tolling Michigan taxpayers based off of the financial needs and a quest for high returns by a Canadian pension fund. The DRIC and HB 4961 should be treated as two entirely separate issues.”

The National Motorists Association has endorsed a substitute version of HB 4961 that would ensure the Michigan Legislature still retained its tolling authority over MDOT and other instrumentalities of government from outside of the state.

“It is essential to not pass any version which does not provide for specific legislative approval for any public-private partnership that will involve direct tolling for the users,” said Jim Walker of the National Motorist’s Association. “Should the H-6 unfortunately pass in the House, I hope the Senate will have the courage to fix this issue.”