Michael Bloomberg Strikes Again: New York City Bans Food Donations To The Homeless

The Jeenyus Corner | November 8 2012 | Orig. Source

NEW YORK (CBSNewYork) — Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s food police have struck again!

Outlawed are food donations to homeless shelters because the city can’t assess their salt, fat and fiber content, reports CBS 2’s Marcia Kramer.

Glenn Richter arrived at a West Side synagogue on Monday to collect surplus bagels — fresh nutritious bagels — to donate to the poor. However, under a new edict from Bloomberg’s food police he can no longer donate the food to city homeless shelters.

It’s the “no bagels for you” edict.

“I can’t give you something that’s a supplement to the food you already have? Sorry that’s wrong,” Richter said.

Continue reading

J. D. Heyes ~ Total Surveillance Police State – NYPD Reveals New Massive $40 Million Super Computer Spy System

Natural News | August 11 2012

Natural News ~  Statists and post-constitutionalists have a new ally: technology.

The total surveillance police state has finally arrived – in New York City, at least – following a marriage between NYC officials and Microsoft.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg, along with NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly, have unveiled a massive new $40 million spy system that literally puts the entire city under surveillance.

The Domain Awareness System, as it’s called, was designed by the NYPD and Microsoft to incorporate data from surveillance cameras, license-plate readers (did you know about these?), crime reports and radiation detectors to provide police with instant, real-time tracking capabilities.

And, of course, a massive new tool to spy on you 24/7/365.

“We’re not your mom and pop police department anymore,” banmaster-in-chief Bloomberg chirped as he introduced the system. “We are in the next century. We are leading the pack.”

Interestingly enough, this is more than just a technological marriage; it’s a business venture as well. After securing a deal with Microsoft to develop DAS, Bloomberg, Inc. went a step further. He set the venture up as a for-profit enterprise.

That’s right. According to the New York Daily News, NYC stands to earn 30 percent of the profits of sales of DAS to other cities.

Proliferation will be profitable

So, now it’s in NYC’s best interests to see DAS proliferated to as many cities in the U.S. (and the world) as possible.

Starting to get the picture? This is, without question, the largest expansion of the surveillance society in the history of the world. It’s the stuff that makes dictators green with envy (or smile from ear to ear, depending on which side of the surveillance screens they are on).

“For years, we’ve been stovepiped as far as databases are concerned,” Kelly told reporters at the unveiling. “Now, everything that we have about an incident, an event, an individual comes together on that workbench, so it’s one-stop shopping for investigators.”

“When I came back to the police department in 2002 I found that the department was still a very big user of white out and carbon paper,” Kelly said, according to WCBS-TV. “The technical revolution had bypassed the police department.”

Well, that certainly isn’t the case anymore.

“Using the new system, investigators will be able to access information through live video feeds and could potentially see who left a suspicious package behind just moments later,” the Daily News said.

Continue reading

The Fed Works for Banks, Not The Rest of America

Rep. Dennis Kucinich | Reader Supported News
November 30 2011

Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), a longtime advocate for reform of the Federal Reserve, is sharply criticizing the Federal Reserve today after Bloomberg news reported that the Federal Reserve secretly committed nearly $8 trillion in support to American and international financial institutions during the 2008 bailout. Kucinich recorded a video for his website before going to the floor of the House of Representatives to call upon Congress to reclaim its Constitution primacy over monetary policy.

View Video Here

Kucinich also called threats by ratings agency to downgrade U.S. debt a threat to our national sovereignty.

“The Federal Reserve extended extraordinary support to financial institutions that crashed the economy with reckless speculation, and on that support many of the firms made billions in profit and paid obscene bonuses. The Fed asked for nothing from these firms in return and that is because the Federal Reserve works first and foremost for the welfare of private financial institutions, not the American economy.

Continue reading

Democrat Calls for Hearing on ‘Secret’ Bank Loans from Federal Reserve

Vicki Needham (The Hill) | Common Dreams
November 28 2011

A top House Democrat is calling for a hearing with Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke following a report that the central bank secretly committed more than $7 trillion to save banks during the financial crisis.

Elijah Cummings

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee ranking member Elijah Cummings (Md.) sent a letter on Monday to panel Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) requesting the committee look into how banks “benefitted from trillions of dollars in previously undisclosed government loans provided at below-market rates.”

“Many Americans are struggling to understand why banks deserve such preferential treatment while millions of homeowners are being denied assistance and are at increasing risk of foreclosure,” Cummings said.

The request comes on the heels of a Bloomberg report that said the Fed secretly committed more than $7 trillion as of March 2009 to rescuing the nation’s top financial institutions, and that these banks “reaped an estimated $13 billion of income” on the below-market rates.

“Unfortunately, officials from many of these financial institutions declined to comment about these loans, including officials from Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, Bank of America, Citigroup, and Morgan Stanley,” Cummings writes.

Information about the loans was withheld from Congress as lawmakers debated and passed the Dodd-Frank financial regulatory reform bill and Consumer Protection Act of 2010, Cummings said. Banks also failed to disclose the information to their shareholders.

Continue reading

Occupy Wall Street Needs Michael Bloomberg

Keith Olbermann | Reader Supported News
November 17 2011

Keith Olbermann's 'Countdown' on Current TV, 06/02/11. (photo: Current.tv)

OPINION | First, as promised, a special comment on the events of Monday night at Occupy Wall Street at Zuccotti Park:

For the entirety of the life of our nation, democracy has been protected — not merely by the strenuous efforts of those of us who cherish it, but mostly, and most profoundly, by the limitless stupidity of those who would ration it, keep it for themselves and themselves alone, or destroy it.

The protests that ended the war in Vietnam reached critical mass only in 1970, when Governor James Rhodes of Ohio pounded on a desk at a news conference and called the student protesters at Kent State University un-American. They were not un-American, they were unarmed. And the next day, four were shot and killed by the National Guard and 10 days later, two more were killed at Jackson State.

Those protests had themselves only gone mainstream 20 months earlier, when Mayor Richard Daley of Chicago overreacted with mindlessness and sadism to the massing of demonstrators outside the 1968 Democratic convention and the whole world watched.

A century of the institutionalized, codified, legalized, pseudo-slavery that followed the real thing was fatally stricken only Governor George Wallace of Alabama used his inaugural address to promise, “Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever.” Within two years came the marches on Selma and the atrocities at the Edmund Pettus Bridge. And ten weeks after the first violence, the president had proposed the Voting Rights Act to Congress.

The mounting paranoia of three decades of scapegoating of — and fear mongering about — liberals, only ended when its last white knight self-destructed on the national stage of televised hearings, when Joe McCarthy questioned the loyalty of the US military and — towards one junior attorney — he revealed the depths of his cruelty and megalomania. And he revealed that — at long last — he, indeed, had no shame.

Pick any moment in our history — our history as a country founded by and invigorated by and re-invigorated by protests — and you will find men like George Wallace and Joe McCarthy and Jim Rhodes and Richard Daley. Go back further — to men like the owners of the Triangle Shirtwaist Company or the officials who sent the police to the Haymarket Square and the troops to the Pullman town or John Brown or George Grenville, the British politician who had a bright idea about the American colonies, an idea called the Stamp Act.

American freedom has not flourished in spite of these morons of history, it has flourished because of them — because they overreacted, because they under-thought, overreached, under-understood. We owe them our traditions of protest. We owe them our freedoms. We owe them our very independence. None of them ever understood that — around these parts anyway — suppression always creates the opposite of the effect desired.

Such a man is Michael Rubens Bloomberg, mayor of New York City and — as of today — the most valuable, the most essential, the most irreplaceable man inside the Occupy movement.

Who else but a cliché like Bloomberg could take a protest beginning to grow a little stale around the edges and vault it back in the headlines, complete with mortifying scenes of police dressed as storm troopers, carrying military weapons, using figurative bazookas to kill figurative mosquitoes?

Who else but an archetype like Bloomberg could claim a group of protesters was making too much noise in a residential area and then choose to try to disperse them by bringing out LRAD audio cannons, machines that send painful waves of sound indiscriminately over the very same residential area?

Who else but a cartoon like Bloomberg could have become rich creating a multi-billion-dollar media and news company and then authorize illegally preventing reporters from witnessing police actions he claimed were utterly legal, and then authorize the arrests of four reporters at a church?

Who else but a human platitude like Bloomberg could have just gotten back from Jerusalem — and the dedication of a ten-million-dollar medical facility for which he generously paid — and then enabled the image of policemen seizing 5,500 books from the Occupy Wall Street library, and throwing them in a Dumpster as if the cops were book burners?

Continue reading

The Villain Occupy Wall Street Has Been Waiting For

Robert Scheer | Truthdig
November 17 2011

In the pantheon of billionaires without shame, Michael Bloomberg, the Wall Street banker-turned-business-press-lord-turned-mayor, is now secure at the top. What is so offensive is that someone who abetted Wall Street greed, and benefited as much as anyone from it, has no compunction about ruthlessly repressing those who dare exercise their constitutional “right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances” that he helped to create.

You would think that a former partner at the investment bank Solomon Brothers, which originated mortgage-backed securities, a man who then partnered with Merrill Lynch in the high-speed computerized trading that has led to so much financial manipulation, would have some sense of his own culpability. Or at least that someone whose Wall Street career left him with a net worth of $19.5 billion would grasp the deep irony of his being the instrument for smashing Occupy Wall Street, the internationally acknowledged symbol of opposition to corporate avarice.

But only in America is the arrogance of the superrich so perfectly concealed by the pretense of democracy that the 12th richest man in the nation can suppress dissent against corporate rapacity and expect his brutal actions to be viewed not as a means of preserving his own class privilege but as bureaucratically necessary to providing sanitary streets.

Even before he ordered the smashing of dissent by citizens peacefully assembled, Bloomberg denigrated their heartfelt message: “It’s fun and it’s cathartic,” he said of those huddled against the cold in a makeshift encampment, “… it’s entertaining to go and blame people. … It was not the banks that created the mortgage crisis. It was, plain and simple, Congress who forced everybody to go and give mortgages to people who were on the cusp.”

It is mind-boggling that Bloomberg still hypes the canard that the banks were forced to reap enormous profits from toxic securities. It is an embarrassing, dishonest position when the record of banker fraud in creating the housing bubble is so well documented in Securities and Exchange Commission lawsuits. Is Bloomberg unaware that the major banks have agreed to pay hefty fines in a meager compensation for their schemes? That he blames the victims of the securitization swindles and then orders the arrest of those who dare speak the truth is a tribute to his belief in the enduring power of the big lie.

Continue reading

Bloomberg Personifies What the Occupation Opposes

Glen Ford (Black Agenda Report) | Common Dreams
November 16 2011

New York’s mayor Michael Bloomberg justified clearing the tents and other materials of Occupation from Zuccotti Park, saying the protesters will now “have to occupy the space with the power of their arguments.” This is a strange kind of logic from the 12th richest man in America, who occupies City Hall for one reason only – because he has bought the office three times since 2001. Mr. Bloomberg’s $20 billion fortune maintains him in the Executive Mansion, not the power of his arguments.

Bloomberg was a lifelong Democrat until he found it more convenient to run as a Republican, and then as an independent – thus proving that money, not party, is what counts in New York, as in all American politics. Everything else is a diversion, and a lie. Bloomberg has used the mayor’s office to make the city more hospitable to his fellow economic one-percenters from all around the planet. But, in that sense, he is no different than the mayors of other American cities – including most of the Black ones – who collaborate in every rich man’s scheme to expel the poor in favor of wealthier populations. They’ve all got a lot of Bloomberg in them; they are operatives for whoever has the money.

When Bloomberg moved to end the 24-7 physical occupation of Zuccotti Park, it was not on the strength of his argument – which was full of lies and wholly unconvincing – but with the raw power of his police force and its monopoly on violence.

So Mayor Bloomberg, like all the rich man’s mayors in all the U.S. cities that are determined to end their local Occupations, pays his hypocritical respects to democracy and reason, when in fact his authority is nothing but an extension of the rule of capital.

Continue reading

Mike Bloomberg’s Marie Antoinette Moment

By Matt Taibbi (Rolling Stone Magazine) | RS_News
November 4 2011

Last year I had a chance to see New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg up close at the Huffington Post’s “Game Changers” event. I was standing right behind the guy when he was introduced by Nora Ephron, and watched as the would-be third party powerhouse wowed the liberal crowd with one zinger after another.

He started off with a crack about Ephron, saying he had agreed to say something nice about her book, which he blithely noted he hadn’t read. Still, he knew the title, “I Remember Nothing,” which he said he’d “heard is also the title of a new book by Charlie Sheen.” (He pronounced Sheen like “Shine”).

From there he cracked that he was honored to be a “Game Changer,” although he was only the last-minute replacement for Snooki. (Zing!) Then he went into a riff about Halloween.

“Does everyone have their costume?” he asked. (This is the old “Did you hear this? Have you heard about this?” Jimmy-Vulmer-style standup routine). “I thought about going in a… dress,” he began. “But then I decided I would just go as the fiscally-conservative, pro-choice, anti-smoking, anti-trans-fat Jewish billionaire mayor of the World’s Greatest City.”

The crowd roared. Bloomberg smiled, looked up, extended his hands, and said, “Maybe that’s just too much of a stretch, I don’t know.”

Man, I thought. This guy is really sure of himself. If there is such a thing as infinite self-satisfaction, he was definitely approaching it that night.

And it wasn’t hard to see why. Bloomberg’s great triumph as a politician has been the way he’s been able to win over exactly the sort of crowd that was gathering at the HuffPost event that night. He is a billionaire Wall Street creature with an extreme deregulatory bent who has quietly advanced some nastily regressive police policies (most notably the notorious “stop-and-frisk” practice) but has won over upper-middle-class liberals with his stances on choice and gay marriage and other social issues.

Bloomberg’s main attraction as a politician has been his ability to stick closely to a holy trinity of basic PR principles: bang heavily on black crime, embrace social issues dear to white progressives, and in the remaining working hours give your pals on Wall Street (who can raise any money you need, if you somehow run out of your own) whatever they want.

He understands that as long as you keep muggers and pimps out of the prime shopping areas in the Upper West Side, and make sure to sound the right notes on abortion, stem-cell research, global warming, and the like, you can believably play the role of the wisecracking, good-guy-billionaire Belle of the Ball for the same crowd that twenty years ago would have been feting Ed Koch.

Continue reading

Naomi Wolf | The Obligation to Peacefully Disrupt

By Naomi Wolf | Reader Supported News
22 October 11

The First Amendment and the obligation to peacefully disrupt in a free society.

FOCUS | Mayor Bloomberg is planning Draconian new measures to crack down on what he calls the “disruption” caused by the protesters at Zuccotti Park, and he is citing neighbors’ complaints about noise and mess. This set of talking points, and this strategy, is being geared up as well by administrations of municipalities around the nation in response to the endurance and growing influence of the Occupation protest sites. But the idea that any administration has the unmediated option of “striking a balance,” in Bloomberg’s words, that it likes, and closing down peaceful and lawful disruption of business as usual as it sees fit is a grave misunderstanding – or, more likely, deliberate misrepresentation – of our legal social contract as American citizens.

Some kinds of disruption in a free republic are not “optional extras” if the First Amendment governs the land, as it does ours, and are certainly not subject to the whims of mayors or local police, or even DHS. Just as protesters don’t have a blanket right to do everything they want, there is absolutely no blanket right of mayors or even of other citizens to be free from the effect of certain kinds of disruption resulting from their fellow citizens exercising First Amendment rights. That notion, presented right now by Bloomberg and other vested interests, of a “disruption-free” social contract is pure invention – just like the flat-out fabrication of the nonexistent permit cited in my own detention outside the Huffington Post Game Changers event this last Tuesday, when police told me, without the event organizers’ knowledge and contrary to their intentions, that a private entity had “control of the sidewalks” for several hours. (In fact, the permit in question – a red carpet event permit! – actually guarantees citizens’ rights to walk and even engage in political assembly on the streets if they do not block pedestrian traffic, as the OWS protesters were not.)

I want to address the issue of “disruption,” as Bloomberg is sending this issue out as a talking point brought up on Keith Olbermann’s Coundown last night: the neighbors around Zuccotti Square, says Bloomberg, are feeling “disrupted” by the noise and visitors to the OWS protest, so he is going to crack down to “strike a balance” to address their complaints. Other OWS organizers have let me know that the Parks Department and various municipalities are trying to find a way to eject other protesters from public space on a similar basis of argument.

Please, citizens of America – please, OWS – do not buy into this rhetorical framework: an absolute “right to be free of disruption” from First Amendment activity does not exist in a free republic. But the right to engage in peaceable disruption does exist.

Citizens who live or work near protest sites or marches have every right to be free of violence from protesters and they should never be subjected to destruction of property. This is why I am always saying to OWS and to anyone who wants to assemble: be PEACEFUL PEACEFUL PEACEFUL. Be respectful to police, do not yell at them; sing, don’t chant; be civil to pedestrians and shop owners; don’t escalate tensions; try to sit when there is tension rather than confront physically; be dignified and be nonviolent.

Continue reading

Is Bank of America Headed for the Glue Factory?

By Mike Whitney (CounterPunch) | Reader Supported News
22 October 11

Photo: alertsec.com

Why is Bank of America moving derivatives from Merrill Lynch to an insured subsidiary? Is it because the derivatives could blow up at any time leaving Merrill with gigantic, unsustainable losses? If that’s the case, then it would make perfect sense to shift them into a depository institution that’s covered by the FDIC. That way, the taxpayers would wind up paying for the damage and no one would be the wiser. It’s like a stealth bailout, right? The only problem is that Bloomberg let the cat out of the bag, so now everyone knows what’s going on. And that’s going to be a very big problem for B Of A. Here’s a clip from the Bloomberg article:

“Bank of America Corp. (BAC), hit by a credit downgrade last month, has moved derivatives from its Merrill Lynch unit to a subsidiary flush with insured deposits, according to people with direct knowledge of the situation.

“The Federal Reserve and Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. disagree over the transfers, which are being requested by counterparties, said the people, who asked to remain anonymous because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly. The Fed has signaled that it favors moving the derivatives to give relief to the bank holding company, while the FDIC, which would have to pay off depositors in the event of a bank failure, is objecting, said the people. The bank doesn’t believe regulatory approval is needed, said people with knowledge of its position.

“Three years after taxpayers rescued some of the biggest US lenders, regulators are grappling with how to protect FDIC-insured bank accounts from risks generated by investment-banking operations. Bank of America, which got a $45 billion bailout during the financial crisis, had $1.04 trillion in deposits as of midyear, ranking it second among US firms.” (“BofA Said to Split Regulators Over Moving Merrill Derivatives to Bank Unit”, Bloomberg)

There are two things worth noting in this article. First, according to Bloomberg, “the transfers (of derivatives) are being requested by counterparties.” Well, how do you like that? In other words, the investors on the other side of these contracts want Merrill to put them under an insurance umbrella provided by the FDIC.

Continue reading