3 killed, 5 injured in Maryland mall shooting
RT
Jan 25, 2014
Police patrol outside a Sears store at Columbia Mall after a fatal shooting on January 25, 2014, in Columbia, Maryland. (AFP Photo/Jewel Samad)
A shooter opened fire at a mall in Columbia, Maryland on Saturday, killing two people and injuring one before apparently taking his own life, police say.
Four others were injured in the ensuing chaos. Howard County police say they do not know the motive behind the shooting. There is an indication that the suspect may have intended to kill more people.
“Because of concerns about any other weapons he may have or explosives, we are approaching this with an abundance of caution,” Howard County Police Chief Bill McMahon said, stressing that an investigation had just begun. “We’re getting assistance from some of our federal partners and making sure there are no explosives on the body of the deceased.”
Police have disabled what they described as “two crude devices that appeared to be an attempt at making explosives using fireworks.”
Maryland State Police patrol the Columbia Mall after a fatal shooting on January 25, 2014, in Columbia, Maryland. (AFP Photo/Jim Watson)
The victims were identified as Brianna Benlolo, 21, and Tyler Johnson, 25. Both were employees of Zumiez, the skate shop where the shooting took place. The name of the gunman has not yet been released.
“Investigators have tentatively identified the shooter and are following up on investigative leads. It is believed he died from a self-inflicted gun shot wound,” said the police statement
As the scene unfolded, customers were ordered by police to remain inside stores. The mall, which opens at 10:00 a.m. EST on Saturdays, was crowded with weekend shoppers.
The mall will remain closed on Sunday.
Naked Gold Shorts: The Inside Story of Gold Price Manipulation
By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts and David Kranzler
Global Research
Jan 18, 2014
The deregulation of the financial system during the Clinton and George W. Bush regimes had the predictable result: financial concentration and reckless behavior. A handful of banks grew so large that financial authorities declared them “too big to fail.” Removed from market discipline, the banks became wards of the government requiring massive creation of new money by the Federal Reserve in order to support through the policy of Quantitative Easing the prices of financial instruments on the banks’ balance sheets and in order to finance at low interest rates trillion dollar federal budget deficits associated with the long recession caused by the financial crisis.
The Fed’s policy of monetizing one trillion dollars of bonds annually put pressure on the US dollar, the value of which declined in terms of gold. When gold hit $1,900 per ounce in 2011, the Federal Reserve realized that $2,000 per ounce could have a psychological impact that would spread into the dollar’s exchange rate with other currencies, resulting in a run on the dollar as both foreign and domestic holders sold dollars to avoid the fall in value. Once this realization hit, the manipulation of the gold price moved beyond central bank leasing of gold to bullion dealers in order to create an artificial market supply to absorb demand that otherwise would have pushed gold prices higher.
The manipulation consists of the Fed using bullion banks as its agents to sell naked gold shorts in the New York Comex futures market. Short selling drives down the gold price, triggers stop-loss orders and margin calls, and scares participants out of the gold trusts. The bullion banks purchase the deserted shares and present them to the trusts for redemption in bullion. The bullion can then be sold in the London physical gold market, where the sales both ratify the lower price that short-selling achieved on the Comex floor and provide a supply of bullion to meet Asian demands for physical gold as opposed to paper claims on gold.
The evidence of gold price manipulation is clear. In this article we present evidence and describe the process. We conclude that ability to manipulate the gold price is disappearing as physical gold moves from New York and London to Asia, leaving the West with paper claims to gold that greatly exceed the available supply.
The primary venue of the Fed’s manipulation activity is the New York Comex exchange, where the world trades gold futures. Each gold futures contract represents one gold 100 ounce bar. The Comex is referred to as a paper gold exchange because of the use of these futures contracts. Although several large global banks are trading members of the Comex, JP Morgan, HSBC and Bank Nova Scotia conduct the majority of the trading volume. Trading of gold (and silver) futures occurs in an auction-style market on the floor of the Comex daily from 8:20 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. New York time. Comex futures trading also occurs on what is known as Globex. Globex is a computerized trading system used for derivatives, currency and futures contracts. It operates continuously except on weekends. Anyone anywhere in the world with access to a computer-based futures trading platform has access to the Globex system.
In addition to the Comex, the Fed also engages in manipulating the price of gold on the far bigger–in terms of total dollar value of trading–London gold market. This market is called the LBMA (London Bullion Marketing Association) market. It is comprised of several large banks who are LMBA market makers known as “bullion banks” (Barclays, Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank, Goldman Sachs, HSBC, JPMorganChase, Merrill Lynch/Bank of America, Mitsui, Societe Generale, Bank of Nova Scotia and UBS). Whereas the Comex is a “paper gold” exchange, the LBMA is the nexus of global physical gold trading and has been for centuries. When large buyers like Central Banks, big investment funds or wealthy private investors want to buy or sell a large amount of physical gold, they do this on the LBMA market.
The Fed’s gold manipulation operation involves exerting forceful downward pressure on the price of gold by selling a massive amount of Comex gold futures, which are dropped like bombs either on the Comex floor during NY trading hours or via the Globex system. A recent example of this occurred on Monday, January 6, 2014. After rallying over $15 in the Asian and European markets, the price of gold suddenly plunged $35 at 10:14 a.m. In a space of less than 60 seconds, more than 12,000 contracts traded – equal to more than 10% of the day’s entire volume during the 23 hour trading period in which which gold futures trade. There was no apparent news or market event that would have triggered the sudden massive increase in Comex futures selling which caused the sudden steep drop in the price of gold. At the same time, no other securities market (other than silver) experienced any unusual price or volume movement. 12,000 contracts represents 1.2 million ounces of gold, an amount that exceeds by a factor of three the total amount of gold in Comex vaults that could be delivered to the buyers of these contracts.
This manipulation by the Fed involves the short-selling of uncovered Comex gold futures. “Uncovered” means that these are contracts that are sold without any underlying physical gold to deliver if the buyer on the other side decides to ask for delivery. This is also known as “naked short selling.” The execution of the manipulative trading is conducted through one of the major gold futures trading banks, such as JPMorganChase, HSBC, and Bank of Nova Scotia. These banks do the actual selling on behalf of the Fed. The manner in which the Fed dumps a large quantity of futures contracts into the market differs from the way in which a bona fide trader looking to sell a big position would operate. The latter would try to work off his position carefully over an extended period of time with the goal of trying to disguise his selling and to disturb the price as little as possible in order to maximize profits or minimize losses. In contrast, the Fed‘s sales telegraph the intent to drive the price lower with no regard for preserving profits or fear or incurring losses, because the goal is to inflict as much damage as possible on the price and intimidate potential buyers.
Senate committee OKs industrial hemp bill
Sun-Commercial: News
Jan 26, 2014
Associated Press
INDIANAPOLIS — Allowing farmers to grow hemp in Indiana could help boost the economy and dispel myths about a crop that can be used to make everything from paper to car parts, supporters told lawmakers Friday.
The testimony helped convince the Senate’s agriculture committee to unanimously approve a bill that would enable farmers to legally grow industrial hemp, but only if they or the state gets federal approval. Hemp is marijuana’s non-intoxicating cousin but it cannot be grown under federal law, though many products made from hemp, such as oils and clothing, are legal.
The bill’s sponsor, Sen. Richard Young, D-Milltown, said hemp fields flourished in Indiana before and during World War II, but petrochemical industries and other industries later lobbied against hemp — which can also be used to make fuel — to cut competition.
“This is a plant that has been used for centuries throughout the world and has tremendous potential,” Young said.
But lingering stereotypes have haunted efforts to legalize the crop ever since, said Neal Smith, chairman of Indiana National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. He wore a pin with showing the five-branched hemp leaf, which looks almost identical to a marijuana leaf but has two fewer branches.
Kentucky passed similar legislation last year, and eight other states have done the same, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
The 1970 Controlled Substances Act requires hemp growers to get a permit from the Drug Enforcement Administration. The last permit was issued in 1999 — and expired in 2003 — for an experimental plot in Hawaii. U.S. Sens. Rand Paul and Mitch McConnell of Kentucky are co-sponsoring legislation that would federally legalize industrial hemp farming.
The economic benefits remain unclear, however, and whether Indiana would receive a permit is uncertain.
[…CONTINUE READING THIS ARTICLE]
[h/t: ActivistPost]
Mark of the Beast for your feast? Microchipped food texts you when it spoils
by J.D. Heyes
Natural News
Jan 25, 2014
(NaturalNews) Technology continues to improve our lives, but as we’ve often reported here at Natural News, technology – the Technology Age, for lack of a better term – is also a double-edged sword.
Consider new technology that essentially allows your food to notify you when it is spoiled. No, we’re not making that up.
Some analysts wonder if it is akin to the mark of the beast for your dinner table.
As reported by Britain’s The Telegraph:
Computer chips in futuristic food packaging could warn consumers when their food is about to go off, it has been reported.
Scientists have developed the gadget that can be inserted into packets of perishable foods, which will be able to assess when the contents are nearing their use-by date, an EU committee of peers has heard.
In a separate report, Britain’s Daily Mail said the technology would enable your food to – get this – text you when it is approaching its shelf life:
If you have trouble deciding what to have for dinner, help could soon be at hand – with your food texting to tell you it needs eating.
Scientists have developed a computer chip that can be inserted into food packaging and is able to assess when the contents are nearing their use-by date.
VIDEO — Kiev Face-Off: Ukraine opposition urges snap elections, refuses president’s offer
RT
Jan 25, 2014
Opposition leaders called for an early presidential election following a Saturday meeting with the government, where top government posts were offered to protest leaders and a review of the constitution was promised. Around two hundred policemen, besieged in a convention center in Kiev, have been allowed to leave the building. RT’s Peter Oliver has more from Kiev. READ MORE http://on.rt.com/98vkah
RT LIVE http://rt.com/on-air
Senate Challengers Bring NDAA Issue to the Forefront
by Dan Johnson
P.A.N.D.A. People Against The NDAA
Jan 26, 2014
BOWLING GREEN – Activists around the nation have raised warnings about the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)’s detention provisions, sections 1021 and 1022, since the law was signed on December 31st, 2011. Alarm about those citizen detention provisions has now reached a Texas Senate race, and two challengers are vying for the support of the NDAA Resistance.
Dwayne Stovall, a candidate for U.S. Senate, released a public statement standing with Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) against the “fast-tracked” 2014 NDAA on January 25. Senator Cruz opposed the 2014 NDAA because there was no fix to the detention provisions in 2012:
“The Constitution does not allow President Obama, or any President, to apprehend an American citizen, arrested on U.S. soil, and detain these citizens indefinitely without a trial. When I ran for office, I promised the people of Texas I would oppose any National Defense Authorization Act that did not explicitly prohibit the indefinite detention of U.S. citizens. Although this legislation does contain several positive provisions that I support, it does not ensure our most basic rights as American citizens are protected.”
Stovall noted:
“(January 25, 2014) – Tea Party-endorsed candidate for U. S. Senate, Dwayne Stovall, vigorously opposes the NDAA legislation recently fast-tracked through the Senate and passed with Sen. John Cornyn’s approval. The 493-page legislation embodies much of what is wrong with the federal government and highlights the reason that John Cornyn frequently gets it wrong for Texas…”
Yet although Stovall is challenging current Senator John Cornyn, a pro-NDAA Senator, he will be facing a further challenge from Congressman Steve Stockman (R-TX). Congressman Stockman is an amici curiae on Hedges v. Obama, a Federal lawsuit challenging the 2012 NDAA, section 1021, as unConstitutional. Though it is implied, Stovall does not go so far as to mention the detention provisions in his press release, while Congressman Stockman has put words to action. It remains to be seen which candidate takes a stronger stance against the 2012 NDAA this election.
In either case, thanks to the work of activists and grassroots organizers throughout the country sounding the alarm, it appears the NDAA will be a key issue in the minds of both voters and candidates in at least one U.S. Senate race.
You can make it an issue in every race. Show up at your town hall, ask hard questions, and show up at the debates. Make the NDAA a key issue in every race, and little by little, town by town, city by city, we can win this.
Until then, the Resistance marches on.
http://pandaunite.org/takeback
Dan Johnson is the Founder and National Director of People Against the NDAA
Towards the Destabilization and Breakup of Thailand?
by Tony Cartalucci
Global Research
Jan 25, 2014
The Economist has recently floated a narrative that the current Thai regime could flee to the north and “separate” the region from Thailand. Far from a legitimate government seeking to “preserve democracy,” it a Western-backed proxy regime carrying out the tried by true modern imperial agenda of divide and rule.
First, it should be remembered that the Economist publishes paid-for op-eds. It is not news, it is not analysis, it is simply the message told by the highest bidders – the corporate-financier interests of Wall Street and London. These interests are passed to the Economist via their impressive network of lobbying firms. The Economist itself sits among the corporate membership of large Wall Street-London policy think-tanks like the Chatham House, right along side these lobbying firms.
In their latest article, “Political crisis in Thailand: You go your way, I’ll go mine,” one of these lobbying firms comes to mind – fellow Chatham House corporate member Amsterdam & Partners. Robert Amsterdam is currently representing deposed dictator, accused mass murderer, and convicted criminal Thaksin Shinawatra, as well as his “red shirt” enforcers. It claims:
Indeed, many red shirts say Bangkok is already lost. Mr Suthep has nearly free rein there, closing down most government offices. The police have charged him with insurrection and seizing state property, but no attempt has been made to arrest him. The imposition of a state of emergency for 60 days may not make much difference.
Thus most red shirts in the north and north-east now contemplate—indeed they seem to be preparing for—a political separation from Bangkok and the south. Some can barely wait. In Chiang Mai a former classmate of Mr Thaksin’s says that in the event of a coup “the prime minister can come here and we will look after her. If…we have to fight, we will. We want our separate state and the majority of red shirts would welcome the division.” Be afraid for Thailand as the political system breaks down.
Thaksin Shianwatra is at the very center of Thailand’s current political crisis which includes the ongoing “Occupy Bangkok” campaign that has paralyzed the government for now nearly 2 weeks, and has drawn out the largest street protests in decades. Pro-government rallies have fizzled and many of the regime’s supporters, including rural farmers have in fact joined the opposition after being cheated in a vote-buying rice subsidy scam that has gone bankrupt and left them unpaid now for nearly half a year.
Why Secession is Impossible & Why the Lie is Being Repeated in Economist
It was in 2010 that the Asia Foundation conducted its ”national public perception surveys of the Thai electorate,” (2010′s full .pdf here). In a summary report titled, “Survey Findings Challenge Notion of a Divided Thailand.” It summarized the popular misconception of a “divided” Thailand by stating:
“Since Thailand’s color politics began pitting the People’s Alliance for Democracy’s (PAD) “Yellow-Shirt” movement against the National United Front of Democracy Against Dictatorship’s (UDD) “Red-Shirt” movement, political watchers have insisted that the Thai people are bitterly divided in their loyalties to rival political factions.”
The survey, conducted over the course of late 2010 and involving 1,500 individuals, revealed however, a meager 7% of Thailand’s population identified themselves as being “red” Thaksin supporters, with another 7% identifying themselves only as “leaning toward red.”
Graph: Up from 62% the year before, the public perception of the military as an important independent institution stood at 63%. Even in in the regime’s rural strongholds, support stood at 61%. The only individually polled group that did show majority support for the military, was the regime’s tiny “red” minority, but even among them, 30% still supported the army. .
PN 