SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Hope Praytochange who wrote (121915)4/29/2008 10:30:47 PM
From: Land Shark  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 173976
 
What does Gordon Ramsay eat when in L.A.?
9:58 AM, April 29, 2008

RamsayCelebrity chef Gordon Ramsay has earned a dozen Michelin stars and oversees a growing chain of gourmet restaurants around the globe. So, now living in Los Angeles as he prepares to open yet another restaurant while shooting episodes for "Hell's Kitchen," where does Ramsay's refined palate lead him with hunger hits? Answer: In-N-Out.

In a story with the Scottish newspaper the Sunday Mail, Ramsay proclaims his love for American-style fast food while wolfing down two In-N-Out cheeseburgers:

"In-N-Out burgers were extraordinary. I was so bad, I sat in the restaurant, had my double cheeseburger then minutes later I drove back round and got the same thing again to take away."

By the way, Ramsay likes his In-N-Out burgers Animal Style.

-- Jesus Sanchez (with thanks to The Times' Richard Winton)



To: Hope Praytochange who wrote (121915)4/29/2008 10:35:39 PM
From: Land Shark  Respond to of 173976
 
Stalinesque Kangaroo Kourts:

Guantanamo cases aimed to pique U.S. imagination

By Jane Sutton Tue Apr 29, 5:26 PM ET

GUANTANAMO BAY U.S. NAVAL BASE, Cuba (Reuters) - A Pentagon legal adviser accused of improperly influencing the Guantanamo war crimes prosecutions dictated which cases would be tried based on how likely they were to pique U.S. public interest, a prosecutor testified on Tuesday.
ADVERTISEMENT

The prosecutor, Navy Lt. Cmdr. Timothy Stone, said in a sworn statement that the government-appointed lawyer, Air Force Brig. Gen. Thomas Hartmann, explained his selections this way:

"This case is going to seize the imagination of the American public and that case won't."

Stone's statement came a day after testimony from former chief prosecutor Air Force Col. Moe Davis, that the Guantanamo court set up to try foreign terrorism suspects had been tainted by politics and improper influence from senior officials.

Hartmann is a lawyer picked to provide impartial legal advice to the Pentagon appointee overseeing the Guantanamo court, Susan Crawford. He did not attend hearings at the U.S. naval base in Cuba this week and a court spokesman said Hartmann would have no comment.

Davis said Hartmann became the de facto chief prosecutor, rushing through some cases in order to influence U.S. and Australian elections and pushing prosecutors to file "sexy" cases to justify the existence of the widely criticized court.

In his testimony, deputy chief defense attorney Michael Berrigan described Hartmann as a bully who tried to overrule defense decisions and refused defense requests for experts and facilities to help prepare cases.

Berrigan said charges against six Guantanamo prisoners facing possible execution as September 11 plotters were drafted by civilian lawyers who worked for Hartmann, and that Hartmann had draft copies of the charges two weeks before military prosecutors signed them.

BIN LADEN DRIVER

The testimony came during pretrial hearings for Yemeni prisoner Salim Hamdan, who acknowledges he was Osama bin Laden's driver. Hamdan faces life in prison if convicted of conspiring with al Qaeda and providing material support for terrorism.

His lawyer, Navy Lt. Cmdr. Brian Mizer, asked the judge to dismiss the charges. "Mr. Hamdan cannot be tried in a system where politicians hold the final say over who is charged and what the charges will be," Mizer said.

The current chief prosecutor, Army Col. Lawrence Morris, portrayed Davis as a bitter man who quit his job because of a personality conflict with Hartmann and then tried to frame the dispute as an ethical conflict.

Morris said Hartmann could be "tactless" and "overbearing," but could not have influenced the case against Hamdan because those charges were filed before Hartmann took his present job.

The judge, Navy Capt. Keith Allred, did not indicate when he would rule. Hamdan's case is set for trial on May 28.

Defense lawyers asked the judge to block Hamdan's statements to interrogators from being used against him. The 2006 law authorizing the Guantanamo trials says defendants cannot be forced to testify against themselves in court. Defense lawyers said using earlier, coerced statements to interrogators would make a mockery of that protection against self-incrimination.

Hamdan was captured by anti-Taliban forces in Afghanistan in November 2001 and turned over to the United States. U.S. agents interrogated him at least 30 times over the next two years, both in Afghanistan and at Guantanamo.

Hamdan's lawyers said no one told him until more than two years later the FBI and other government agents who questioned him were gathering information to be used in a criminal prosecution that could lead to life imprisonment.

Hamdan said in an affidavit that interrogators beat him if they did not like his answers, but one prosecutor, Assistant U.S. Attorney John Murphy, said none of Hamdan's statements was coerced.

Among statements the defense wants to suppress is one in which Hamdan said he pledged a loyalty oath to bin Laden and felt "uncontrollable enthusiasm" while serving him.

Hamdan said he took a job driving for bin Laden because he needed money. Prosecutors say he was a trusted al Qaeda insider who ferried weapons for the group and helped bin Laden escape U.S. forces in Afghanistan.

(Editing by Michael Christie)



To: Hope Praytochange who wrote (121915)4/29/2008 10:50:21 PM
From: Land Shark  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 173976
 
U.S. Credit Card Debt Soars to Unprecedented Heights
By Heide B. Malhotra
Epoch Times Washington D.C. Staff
Apr 28, 2008

Studies indicate that credit card defaults and related write-offs increased drastically since 2006. (Tim Boyle/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON—Studies indicate that credit card defaults and related write-offs increased drastically since 2006. Today, lenders write off 33 percent more in credit card debt than they did two years ago.

Statistics show that about 35 percent of all credit card holders are already exhibiting signs of possible default. Late credit card payments result in fees many consumers can't afford.

Credit card debt accelerated to unprecedented heights since bank loans began to dry up due to mortgage defaults. Total U.S. credit card debt reached almost $800 billion in November 2007, up from around $680 billion in March of last year, according to the latest available government statistics.

In the aftermath of the U.S. mortgage crisis, the credit card bubble may be next to burst. In the past few years, banks have aggressively marketed credit card ownership and usage to consumers with limited income and low credit scores. Credit card standards remain lax, while loan standards have tightened to a degree.

More than 50 percent of senior loan officers said in a January 2008 Federal Reserve survey that they performed a more rigorous analysis before approving a mortgage or car loan over the prior three months. Only 14 percent said so in a mid-2007 survey of the same nature. Banks and lenders have tightened their lending standards following the collapse of the subprime market.

With borrowing venues drying up, American consumers may be drawn to credit card debt, creating defaults similar to those in the mortgage market. Credit card debt—much like mortgages—are bundled and sold by investment banks as asset-backed securities.

The Next Credit Crisis?

"Rising credit card debt since April 2006 amid the decrease in the mortgage expansion rate resulted in a substantial shift to credit card borrowing from mortgage debt," according to a recent report titled "House of Cards: Consumers Turn to Credit Cards Amid the Mortgage Crisis, Delaying Inevitable Defaults." The report was published by the Center for American Progress (CAP), a nonpartisan Washington, D.C.-based research institute.

The rules of the credit card game usually aren't transparent and are difficult to follow even by many sophisticated consumers. Just take any credit card agreement: Caveats are written in difficult-to-understand "legalese." Words like "late fees, annual fees, over-limit fees, cash-advance fees, balance-transfer fees, annul fees, setup fees, fees to pay balance by telephone," and so on, are confusingly sprinkled throughout the contract.

"Credit card debt tends to carry substantially higher costs than other forms of credit, due to myriad fees in addition to high interest rates. The result is that many borrowers unwittingly slide deeper and deeper into debt as they fall prey to the lack of transparency in credit cards," said CAP staff.

"Double-cycling" billing is one of the most abused features by some credit card companies. For example, the cardholder charges $500 to the card, then repays $400 and leaves a $100 balance on the card. In "double-cycling" billing, the interest charge accrues not only on the $100 balance, but on the full $500 for the month. The terms are hidden somewhere in the initial credit agreement.

Students Most Vulnerable

University students are the most vulnerable victims of unscrupulous credit card tactics, according to a survey conducted between October 2007 and February 2008 by U.S. Public Interest Research Group (PIRG), a Boston, Mass.-based public interest advocate.

The study found that 66 percent of surveyed students have a credit card, 55 percent rely on credit cards for their daily needs and school supplies, and 30 percent have their charges paid for by their parents.

About 74 percent of surveyed students want credit card companies to curtail their marketing practices and establish monthly limits on how much the students can charge. They also would like universities to stop providing personal information—such as home address, e-mail address, and phone numbers—to credit card companies.

Credit card companies also offer student event funding and other "freebies" to campus associations and students.

Students are beginning to fight back and file complaints through legal and other venues because of "cards with unfair terms or 'tricks and traps' that result in massive penalty fees and the imposition of punitive interest rates at APRs [annual percentage rates] as high as 36 percent or more," according to the PIRG report.

The report included a solicitation letter from a credit card company to The University of Iowa Alumni Association playing on the emotional side of the student in the first sentence: "Imagine the convenience of being able to purchase supplies for your classes, without worrying about carrying a lot of cash."

The University of Iowa alumni leaders told PIRG that they earned around $1 million annually from Bank of America in credit card purchases by their members. They turn over $200,000 to the university; however, "some of the money given to the school is payment for $145,600 worth of football tickets used by Bank of America Representatives and others."

Taking Action Against Predatory Marketing

Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ) initiated legislation in March 2008 called "The Credit Card Reform Act of 2008" that aims to stop predatory credit card marketing. So far, 11 consumer groups and unions have co-signed a letter in support of this legislation.

"We cannot allow predatory and deceptive practices in the credit card industry to continue as we did in the subprime mortgage market. We cannot allow the credit card problem to become the next foreclosure crisis," said Menendez in a press release.

Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) and Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), the chair of the House Financial Services Committee, introduced H.R. 5244, the "Credit Cardholder's Bill of Rights" in February 2008.

New York Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo charged First Premier Bank, based in South Dakota, with credit card fraud and fined the bank $105,000 in penalties last year. This bank also must make $4.5 million in restitution payments to customers it defrauded through its credit card program.

Ohio Attorney General Marc Dann went after Potbelly Sandwich Works, Citigroup, Inc., and Elite Marketing Group, Inc. for deceptive credit card practices on college campuses.