The Greatest Threat to America

They have caused disruption to and destroyed American democracy and our fundamental freedoms more than any terrorist group in the world.

They have sanctioned the murders of more Americans than any terrorist group in the world.

They punish the innocent, but take extraordinary measures to protect the guilty.

They operate in shadowy black disguises.

They are known to the FBI, the CIA, the NSA and the Department of Homeland Security, yet none of these agencies have made the slightest effort to stop them.

They are Antonin Scalia, John Roberts, Anthony Kennedy, Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, who currently comprise the “conservative” majority on the United States Supreme Court.

Before readers dismiss these opening paragraphs as mere hyperbole, they should examine some of the Supreme Court’s more egregious rulings.

This court endorsed the random drug testing of public school students who are not even suspected of abusing drugs, which means that thousands of innocent children across America are dragged from their classrooms everyday, ordered to reveal personal medical information, and forced to urinate as strangers listen to them doing so—intrusions into personal dignity and privacy that Scalia has described as “minimal.”

In addition, people arrested for certain crimes can be compelled to provide a sample of their DNA to government authorities, even though they have not been tried or convicted. Yet, in the case of District Attorney’s Office v. Osborne, the Supreme Court ruled that persons convicted of crimes have “no constitutional right to obtain post conviction access to the State’s evidence for DNA testing,” even though that testing could establish their innocence.

In other words, a system that claims people are “innocent until proven guilty” now requires people to provide DNA and/or other bodily fluids to prove their innocence, yet does not require the government to provide DNA evidence that could exonerate a wrongfully convicted person, even though a wrongful conviction means that the real perpetrator is free and potentially committing more crimes.

This is “judicial hypocrisy” and it’s tragic that karma isn’t more rapid and righteous, because nothing would be more beneficial than seeing Scalia, Roberts, Kennedy, Alito and Thomas entombed in the worst of America’s prisons, begging their attorneys to obtain the DNA evidence that could free them, only to be told that the “State” has refused to provide it.

The racism of the Supreme Court has been apparent throughout its history, from the now infamous Dred Scott decision, which threatened to expand slavery throughout the United States, to Plessy v. Ferguson, which gave constitutional blessing to the segregationist doctrine of “separate but equal.” And Scalia, Roberts, Kennedy, Alito and Thomas have continued this shameful tradition, in the cases of Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle and Meredith v. Jefferson County Board of Education, by endorsing the racial re-segregation of public schools. And, in an act of judicial callousness that insulted the memory of those who struggled and died during America’s civil rights movement, some of these so-called “justices” even defended their “racist opinion” by citing Brown v. Topeka, the landmark 1954 case that endorsed the desegregation of public schools.

Also, by upholding racial segregation in Plessy, the court essentially declared that African-Americans were second-class citizens. What followed from 1896, when Plessy was decided, until the civil rights era of the 1960s was a sordid history of lynching, beatings and other injustices directed primarily against African-Americans, as well as the denial of their most fundamental rights, including the right to vote, which supposedly had been guaranteed with the passage of the Fifteenth Amendment in 1870.

In Employment Division v. Smith freedom of religion came under attack when the court ruled that the government no longer had to prove it had a “compelling reason” to interfere with one’s religious practices. When the United States Congress attempted to restore this “compelling reason” requirement via the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), the court voided much of it on the grounds that Congress had exceeded its authority.

Three current members of the court - Scalia, Kennedy and Thomas - and two former members - O’Conner and Rehnquist - bloodied their hands, and (if there is such a thing as justice) damned themselves for all time, when they supported the coup of 2000 in the case of Bush v. Gore. Thanks to this corrupt decision, which illegally placed a sadistic, inept, venal and mendacious cabal of war criminals in the White House, thousands of Americans, and tens of thousands of Iraqis, have died in a war that was based upon nothing but lies. And in violation of UN resolution 1441, which DID not authorize war with Iraq.

But Scalia, Kennedy and Thomas were not satisfied with the partial destruction of democracy wrought by Bush v. Gore, particularly since democracy appeared to be restored during the 2008 presidential election. So, joining with Alito and Roberts, they decided to destroy it completely, along with most of the Bill of Rights, in the recent case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission by striking down laws that once limited the amount of money corporations could contribute to political campaigns.

Now corporations are free to buy and sell politicians like trading cards, and, since they control the bulk of the “mainstream” media, they can also ensure that any political messages contrary to theirs are unheard.

In other words, freedom now only belongs to those wealthy enough to afford it. This imposing body has determined that corporations were equal to natural citizens, and are entitled to the protections of the Bill of Rights. Overruling centuries of good law.

Although the Citizens United ruling is deplorable and deserving of contempt, it is not surprising. The unified Republican opposition to health care reform has already demonstrated how the bulk of America’s politicians are controlled by special interest groups. The fact that many Democrats refused to endorse any health care reform proposal that included a “public option” for people unable to purchase health insurance in the private sector further illustrates how corporate influence has already transcended party lines.

What Scalia, Roberts, Kennedy, Alito and Thomas undoubtedly hope to accomplish by Citizens United is to purge the few politicians actually devoted to serving the public interest. Now these politicians will either succumb to the whims of their corporate masters, or find limitless amounts of money being provided to their political opponents.

In a nation of millions, it seems almost obscene that five biased, bigoted, corrupt, unethical and agenda driven individuals in black robes can destroy an entire system of government. And it is certainly contrary to what the Supreme Court was intended to be.

When the federal court system was created, a debate ensued over whether federal judges should be elected or appointed. It was ultimately decided that they would be appointed to lifetime tenures, removable only through death, retirement or impeachment. The hope was that federal judges would be immune from political party influences, act in accordance with the law, and protect the rights of racial, religious and political minorities, since they did not have to raise money in election campaigns or appease the majority in order to win the popular vote.

Unfortunately this hope was quixotic. The five so-called “justices” who weakened democracy in Bush v. Gore, and the five who destroyed it in Citizens United were all appointed by Republican presidents. In fact, Bush’s vice-president Dick Cheney was even Scalia’s “hunting buddy.” So it was not surprising when they ignored legal precedent and common sense to ensure that corporate rights and profits supplanted individual rights and needs.

Even conservative columnist David Broder acknowledged that the Citizens United ruling “extended itself far beyond what was necessary” and “may well be the best news Republicans have received since the 2000 ruling in Bush v. Gore.”

In law schools throughout America, Supreme Court opinions are dissected and analyzed as though they were commandments from Mount Sinai.

Attorneys, after all, are supposed to deal in facts, not in suppositions. But, given the cases I have cited in this article, the harm they have caused, and the harm they will cause, I believe there is enough evidence to conclude that Scalia, Roberts, Kennedy, Alito and Thomas are perhaps the most dangerous, despicable, conscienceless and evil individuals to ever disgrace the United States Supreme Court, and the biggest threat to democracy and the Bill of Rights in the history of the United States.

James Madison, one of America’s founding fathers, once said, “We are free today substantially, but the day will come when our Republic will be an impossibility . . . because wealth will be concentrated in the hands of a few. And when the day comes, when the wealth of the nation will be in the hands of the few, then we must rely on the best elements in the country to readjust the laws of the nation to the changed conditions.”

Some of the best elements in America did try to readjust the laws to minimize the potential for corporations to use their vast financial resources to purchase political influence. Unfortunately five of the worst elements in America - Scalia, Roberts, Kennedy, Alito and Thomas—have ensured (with apologies to Abraham Lincoln) that the government of the corporations, by the corporations, and for the corporations will cause the government of the people, by the people and for the people to perish from the earth.

This article was in part borrowed from an article by David R. Hoffman, an attorney and with which this author fully agrees.

American’s have lost those rights intended by and incorporated in our Constitution, exemplifying the basic traditions of our republic. We have lost those rights not by accident, but by design of evil men, and a court system that has floundered in inadequacy. The US Supreme court is an antiquated concept, controlled by politicians, who bestow the favors of unbridled terms of office to secure that which they support.

Why the surge in Afghanistan ? Conclusion

Conclusion of this 6 Part series

War during the Bush administration was inevitable, even as Clinton had alienated all prospects of resolving issues with Bin Laden, Bush would take advantage of the mid east anger, which they held, more rightfully then wrong, over their perception of American imperialism.

Money and Oil, coupled with the mind set of the elitist, and the teachings of a man whose political insight was damaged, Leo Strauss, and his followers so firmly implanted in the Bush administration, set the stage to influence every corner of the Bush mania.

They created the mix and the primary ingredient, the excuse to attack some country in the mid east. Iraq had always been the country of choice, but the Unocal Oil Pipe line, became the first priority. Just as quickly as we went into Afghanistan we made an about face and went into Iraq . We stopped looking for Bin Laden because our intelligence knew he had died on December 16, 2001, but he was still of use even in his death.

In Afghanistan there was need of a scapegoat, why not Bin Laden? As plans for war were already on the table, and this was long before Bush assumed office.

Bin Laden could also be used, even knowing he was already dead, as a fear card to attack Iraq . After all as the media so eloquently disclosed, he was behind the attacks on our troops.

Contrary to media and Bush administration propaganda, our research failed to uncover any real evidence that Bin Laden admitted to the 9-11 attacks against the WTC. In fact some of the evidence was incredible, and not in a positive way.

Even as the passport of TWO 9-11 hijackers were found in the rubble intact. Intact while the rubble had been reduced to fine particulates of sand, unbelievable, yet so many of us fell into this intelligence void.

It’s as if the Passports belonging to the alleged hijackers, Satam al-Sugami, and Mohamed Atta were each placed, then found, on the street minutes after the planes they were aboard crashed into the World Trade Center towers. If in fact they were even aboard those planes. Passports could not have survived those crashes and the resultant fires.

The fireballs created by the WTC attacks melted structural steel that was designed to withstand heat of 2000 degrees F. They completely destroyed both airplanes and their cockpit voice-recorders (situated at front)*and* the black-box data recorders (located in the rear of the aircrafts). They vaporized human bone and flesh.

And yet those same fireballs somehow weren't strong enough to do anything to a pair of surviving passports found in pristine condition. No surface scratches, scuffs, abrasions or burns.

So consider, are we fools for not asking the right questions?

The media however in their frenzy to support the administration, gave up their right and entitlement, to investigate and report, instead read prepared scripts provided by the administration officials, just as they continue to this day. Never once did anyone from the media question the allegations that were used to support the war with Iraq . Let alone questioning the tapes where Bin Laden allegedly admitted his complicity in the planning and implementation of the WTC attack.

What Bush needed however, aside of an excuse, was a force to bring the nation together, that force was the Fundamental Christian Right, who fell right into the trap. Hitler used this same Christian following to support his political agenda along with his rise to power.

The republicans used religion and the tactic of fear to generate the fervor for war. No one questioned anything, the people fell right in line, and if you didn’t, there was the ongoing threat, supported by the patriot act! you are either with us or against us!

Wars are political devices that use religion to draw a nation together. This was personified during the 2000 to 2008 term of George W. Bush, and long before by Leo Strauss. Of the few books Bush is said to have read, one in particular was written by Strauss.

George W. Bush is the perfect example of a leader that used religion and deception to garner support for war, the neoconservative extreme right wing of the Fundamentalist Christian movement marshaled and motivated their own people to support the mid east war machine, then took control over the military, and combined patriotism, moral servitude, and the military to launch one of the greatest travesties of American history and with it a complete disenfranchisement of a people.

Obama will follow in the footsteps of Bush, he is after all the newly elected puppet, and we by now know who pulls those strings. His administration is a through over of the last. War will continue, until we as a people say stop, we have had enough. Until we refuse to accept the deception of those who seek to control us, and to place us in harms way. Until we learn to ask the right questions, and after we have received those answers, to seek the truth.

We in good conscience and in the name of the various gods we affirm have no right to take over governments, to marshal support for regime change, to put puppets in office to do our bidding, this is imperialism, and, we have become imperialists!

The Wall Street Bankers: Aaron Burr, and Alexander Hamilton

Very few know its history: Chase traces its roots back to the founding of The Manhattan Company by Aaron Burr on September 1, 1799, in a house at 40 Wall Street.

After an epidemic of yellow fever in 1798, in which coffins had been sold by itinerant vendors on street corners, Aaron Burr established the Manhattan Company, with the ostensible aim of bringing clean water to the city from the Bronx River but in fact designed as a front for the creation of New York's second bank, rivaling Alexander Hamilton’s, Bank of New York.

In addition to being fierce political and personal rivals, Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton competed in business, with Burr's Bank of the Manhattan Company competing against Hamilton's Bank of New York. In 1804, their rivalry erupted into a duel, leading to the death of Alexander Hamilton. The dueling pistols are owned by the successor company of Chase Manhattan. They are currently on display on the executive conference floor of the JP Morgan Chase building at 277 Park Avenue in New York City.

Chase National Bank

Chase National Bank was formed in 1877 by John Thompson. It was named for former United States Treasury Secretary and Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase, although Chase did not have a connection with the bank.

The Chase National Bank acquired a number of smaller banks in the 1920s, through its Chase Securities Corporation. In 1926, for instance, it acquired Mechanics and Metals National Bank.

It’s most significant acquisition though was the Equitable Trust Company of New York in 1930, the largest stockholder of which was John D. Rockefeller, Jr. This made it the largest bank in America and indeed the world.

Chase was primarily a wholesale bank, dealing with other prominent financial institutions and major corporate clients, such as General Electric, which had, through its RCA affiliate, leased prominent space and become a crucial first tenant of Rockefeller Center, rescuing that major project in 1930. The bank also is closely associated with and has financed the oil industry, having longstanding connections with its board of directors to the successor companies of Standard Oil, especially Exxon Mobil, which are also Rockefeller holdings.

Merger as Chase Manhattan

Bank In 1955, Chase National Bank and The Manhattan Company merged to create Chase Manhattan Bank. As Chase was a much larger bank, it was first intended that Chase acquire the "Bank of Manhattan", as it was nicknamed, but it transpired that Burr's original charter for the Manhattan Company had not only included the clause allowing it to start a bank with surplus funds, but another requiring unanimous consent of shareholders for the bank to be taken over. The deal was therefore structured as an acquisition by the Bank of the Manhattan Company of Chase National, with John J. McCloy becoming chairman of the merged entity. This avoided the requirement of unanimous consent by shareholders.

Under McCloy's successor, George Champion, the antiquated 1799 state charter was relinquished for a modern one. In 1969, under the leadership of David Rockefeller, the bank became part of a bank holding company, the Chase Manhattan Corporation.

Two famous American families the Burr’s and the Hamilton’s were Wall Street Bankers.

The Latest Supreme Court Ruling, May Protect Corporate Officers From Criminal Prosecution

The US Supreme Court issued a landmark opinion on Thursday that over-turned the way American election campaigns are financed.

The Court has been considering whether to end long-standing limits on corporate and labor union spending in US political campaigns. But the decision has far reaching implications that go beyond campaign financing and include a broad sweeping protection for Corporate officers accused of fraud.

In America, political campaigns are big business, literally - they cost millions of dollars! The 2008 contest between Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain for the White House was the most expensive in US election history, with both candidates raising more than a billion dollars between them, and much of that money was spent on relentless TV ads.

At the heart of the question the Supreme Court considered, should corporations be treated as persons under the US constitution and allowed to spend huge amounts of cash on political campaigns at state, and Federal Congressional and Presidential levels? Their decision, which granted citizenship to corporations, now requires that each of the Constitutional Amendments must be applied to the corporate existence. A potentially devastating blow to prosecutors and the Justice Department

Those in favor argued before the bench that not to include corporations would be a violation of the First Amendment which guarantees free speech. But that free speech has always been a right of the individual, not the corporation which derives its existence through state law!

Those against claimed it would be devastating for American democracy with a flood of corporate sponsored TV ads with big business way outspending individuals.

This intentional error of the Supreme Court will have a lasting impact on the US Constitution and for all Americans. Corporations prior to this ruling enjoyed NO other rights under the Federal Constitution, they had no right of privacy which Americans are entitled to under the Fourth Amendment, and they had no protection against Self incrimination which Americans enjoy under the Fifth Amendment.

Yet the Supreme Court has now leveled the playing field, this error has the propensity to undermine centuries of precedents, it will further cripple criminal cases against corporate officers, because if as the Supreme Court has now determined, “A corporation has the rights of a natural person” then all the rights of citizenship must now be provided to corporations and will effectively shield their officers who commit fraud, and perhaps, as the current investigation is being played out in the Congressional hearings, this was the Supreme Court’s real intent.

The Supreme Court ends Democracy in Favor Of Capitalists Rule

It has been said that the end of our republic would come about through the courts! Today that proverb has come home to nest.

The US supreme court as expected has ended limits on corporate spending for US political campaigns, which will effect this year's congressional races and the 2012 presidential contest. This ruling marks the beginning of the end for our Republic.

The 5-4 ruling on Thursday was a defeat for the law's supporters who said that ending the limits would unleash a flood of corporate money into the political system to promote or defeat candidates. A further argument which seemed to also fail was that the First Amendment guaranteeing free speech did not guarantee that right to corporations.

The ruling by the Bush appointments, and conservative majority transformed the political landscape and the rules on how money can be spent in future presidential and congressional elections, which have already broken new spending records with each political cycle.

The justices on Thursday overturned supreme court precedents from 2003 and 1990 that upheld federal and state limits on independent expenditures by corporate treasuries to support or oppose candidates. The ultra conservative court has continually since the Bust appointments were first seated over turned precedents that were based on good and sound law.

Writing for the majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy said the limits violated constitutional free-speech rights. "We find no basis for the proposition that, in the context of political speech, the government may impose restrictions on certain disfavored speakers," he wrote.

How the court determined that a Corporation was a natural person and had the rights of individuals is still an enigma. It is a stunning defeat for literacy.

A corporation is not a natural person it is a creation of law, and as such DOES not possess the rights garnered by the US Constitution, for example: Both the fifth and the fourth Amendment have been found not to apply to corporations: A recent 1st Circuit Court of Appeals case has a nice summary of the various decisions and doctrines preventing corporate entities from asserting 5th amendment privileges against self-incrimination. The case, Amato v. US, involved a subpoena to produce corporate records for a corporation whose sole shareholder, officer and employee was the target of a criminal investigation. The plaintiff in the case (who was the sole shareholder) attempted to quash a subpoena for corporate records by asserting 5th amendment privileges. The Appeals Court ultimately upheld the subpoena holding that corporations may not assert 5th amendment privileges to avoid producing documents.

But as the court today “incorrectly” noted: the same entity that does not possess constitutional rights now possesses the constitutional right of free speech?

Dissenting views

The court's conservative majority, with the addition of Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, both Bush appointees, previously voted to limit or strike down parts of the law designed to regulate the role of money in politics and prevent corruption.

The court's four liberals, including its newest member, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who was appointed by Obama, dissented.

In his sharply worded dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens said: "The court's ruling threatens to undermine the integrity of elected institutions across the nation."

The case began when a conservative group, Citizens United, made a 90-minute film called “Hillary: The Movie” that was very critical of Hillary Clinton, now-secretary of state, as she sought the Democratic presidential nomination.

Film controversy

Citizens United wanted to air advertisements for the film and distribute it through video-on-demand services on local cable systems during the 2008 Democratic primary campaign.

But federal courts said the film looked and sounded like a long campaign
advert, and therefore should be regulated like one.

Hillary: The Movie was advertised on the internet, sold on DVD and shown in a few theaters.

Campaign regulations do not apply to DVDs, theaters or the internet.

The court first heard arguments in March, then asked for another round of arguments about whether corporations and unions should be treated differently from individuals when it comes to campaign spending.

After a special argument session in September, the conservative justices gave every indication that they were going to take the steps they did on Thursday.

Was the decision correct? The right of Free speech applies to individuals, not corporations, and it stems from the first amendment to the US Constitution:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

In an intelligent reading of the language of the First Amendment it is clear that it was meant strictly for individuals, “people” are individuals, not corporations” to interpret it otherwise as the Supreme Court has now done is to nullify the very existence of our republic. We will from this day forward no longer be a democracy; instead we are now to be ruled by “corporate control” through its vast economic resources, over our government. In short welcome to Fascist America.

It’s time to rethink a Supreme Court

That the makeup of the Supreme Court can be controlled, and with it decisions rendered is not an issue, it’s a fact. Lincoln and Grant were two of the early presidents who learned how to stack the court with political appointments, lawyers who would hold in favor policies that were important to the administration, yet which were candidly unconstitutional.

The most inglorious example was the Legal Tender cases of Knox V lee 79 U.S. 457 (1870) and Hepburn v. Griswold, 75 U.S. 603 (1870)

Lincoln took office during one of the most tumultuous times in America’s history, the Treasury was out of money, the South was in the midst of succession and refused to pay its share of taxes, a war was inevitable, but how to finance that war?

Lincoln appointed Salmon Portland Chase as the Secretary of the Treasury and gave him a mandate; find a way to finance the war!

Chase was the architect of the United States Note, a forerunner to the Federal Reserve Note, but different. Chase made the US Notes a Legal Tender for the first time in US History, prior to this our legal tender was either Gold coin or Silver coin and the paper was a representative of value.

The new US Notes circulated as a debt of the United States, the government bought the horses and armaments using these notes, and all understood that at some point in time they would be redeemed in specie.

Lincoln was no fool, he was an astute lawyer who understood the US Constitution, and he knew that this law would be challenged.

Lincoln appointed Salmon Portland Chase first as his secretary of the treasury from 1861, to 1864 then elevated him to the Supreme Court as its chief justice in 1864, his intent was for Chase who had been the architect of the Legal Tender currency to uphold its constitutionality.

When the first case came before the Supreme Court in 1870 Hepburn v. Griswold, Chase writing for the court unconditionally stated that although during times of war the nation might do things not otherwise allowed or permitted, the US Government had no authority to make paper a legal tender.

This decision was adverse to the railroads which were heavily in debt, and this decision which would require their bond payments to be made in specie would drive them into bankruptcy.

In 1870 after the Chase ruling Ulysses S. Grant then the US President nominated two lawyers for the railroad interests to the Court, Joseph P. Bradley, and William Strong, changing the makeup and control of the Court

Directly after their seating, a second case was brought before them also engendering the very same issue the question of a paper currency as a Legal Tender, Knox V lee

The makeup of the court now changed favoring a paper currency, Bradley and Strong reversed the Chase holding.

What this lesson and the lesson of today where the Court has ruled 5 to 4 against the Constitution, have brought to our attention, the validity of the Supreme Court itself.

The Supreme Court has been so stacked against the interests of preserving the republic, that rulings are instrumental in reducing our rights and in fact calculated to over through the US Constitution, Our rights are continually being eroded by this august body!

Medical Malpractice

An interesting side show

Hospital executives are now the latest group to flaunt their wealth in the face of the unemployed,

Wall Street isn’t the only ones taking down big bonuses. Hospital presidents and CEOs are also collecting fat bonuses and incentive payments, even as our health-care systems cry poverty, claiming they struggle to break even against government cutbacks, tightwad insurers and skyrocketing costs.

While hospitals have been laying off personnel in nursing, and warning of further layoffs and slashed patient services, many hospitals shower their top execs and department heads with bonuses and perks. They include housing allowances, chauffeurs, first-class air travel, tuition for their children and country-club memberships.

Under new IRS rules, effective 2008, the extras are now required to be disclosed for the first time.

The filings for the city’s biggest and most prestigious private, tax-exempt hospitals show at least a dozen CEOs got compensation of $1 million and up. Some also cash in early on million-dollar pre-retirement payouts while on the job.

Dr. Herbert Pardes, who runs the New York-Presbyterian Hospital and its health-care system -- the city's largest private hospital network, received a $1 million bonus in 2008 on top of his $1.67 million salary.

The hospital has a "pay for performance" philosophy but says even though Pardes met his goals, his bonus was smaller than 2007's to "reflect the current external environment."

Pardes' compensation totaled $9.8 million in 2008 because he vested in a retirement plan that will pay $6.8 million when he leaves in 2011. He also received a $93,500 housing allowance and the use of a car and driver.

The $4.2 million 2008 compensation for Steven Safyer, CEO of Montefiore Medical Center in The Bronx, another major teaching hospital, included a $1.2 million salary, a $452,789 bonus, a $6,000 college scholarship for his child and $2.1 million in pre-retirement cash.

A $1.2 million bonus went to Miguel Fuentes Jr., CEO of the 958-bed Bronx-Lebanon Hospital. His $4.8 million package included $878,024 in salary and an $858,000 pre-retirement payout. He's also set to get $1.8 million in retirement cash next year.

Execs cleaned up even at struggling hospitals. Despite years of losses, 513-bed Lenox Hill Hospital on the Upper East Side gave CEO Gladys George an early-retirement payment of $752,469 on top of her relatively modest $522,206 salary. Her salary still dwarfs that of Alvin Aviles, who makes $291,000 as CEO of the city's $6.3 billion Health and Hospitals Corp., the nation's largest public system with 39,000 employees at 11 hospitals, four nursing homes and many treatment centers.

Perhaps this is the reason our health care system is so over priced, and so ineffective
perhaps if there were less greed, and more concern for patients mal practice litigation might be less troublesome.

A few years back Harvard researchers found that 1% of a representative sample of patients treated in New York state hospitals in 1984 were injured, and one-quarter of those died, because of medical negligence. Nationwide, that would have translated into 234,000 injuries and 80,000 deaths in 1988 from negligence in American hospitals.

Most of this involves physicians. There is no clear evidence that there has been significant improvement since then.

A similar study conducted in California in 1974 found that 0.8% of hospital patients had either been injured by negligence in the hospital or had been hospitalized because of negligent care. Extrapolation of those findings would have yielded an estimate of 249,000 injuries and deaths from negligent medical practice in 1988.

In 1976 the HEW Malpractice Commission estimated similarly that one-half of 1% of all patients entering hospitals are injured there due to negligence. That estimate would have indicated 156,000 injuries and deaths resulting from doctor negligence in 1988.

Expanding these estimates to include general medical practice outside of a hospital, the potential abuse by physicians is even greater. An in-depth interview with 53 family physicians revealed that 47% of the doctors recalled a case in which the patient died due to physician error. Only four of the total reported errors led to malpractice suits, and none of these errors resulted in an action by a peer review organization.

Medical students at SUNY-Buffalo were asked to recall incidents during their clinical training that raised ethical concerns. More than 200 students responded (40% of total sample); the majority of instances they reported (60%) did not in the researchers’ opinions threaten the patient’s life, health or welfare. This, however, implies that potentially 40% did.

It is not unreasonable to estimate that at least 1 percent of doctors in this country deserve some serious disciplinary action each year. This would amount to 7,703 physicians being disciplined each year, a number that, unfortunately far exceeds the actual number of physicians disciplined.

Two studies surveyed residents to determine the incidence of substance use. Recent alcohol use was extremely high in both groups (87% within the last year for emergency medicine residents; 74% within the past 30 days for surgery residents).Additional findings proved extremely disturbing; although the emergency medicine program directors accurately determined the incidence of alcohol use amongst residents, they dramatically underestimated the percent who were actually impaired by the substance as indicated by diagnostic tests (1% estimate impaired vs. 13% diagnosed.)

This does not bode well for creating a medical system that prevents mishaps before they occur. And although the surgery residents reported negligible recent cocaine use, when employed, the drug was typically obtained from the hospital supply, indicating a greater ease of access than for the general population.

In order that Doctors and hospital staff can continue their addictive habits. It does appear that the higher salaries are necessary. Perhaps also, if we reduce those perks, and salaries, the addictions may subside, and we may have cheaper and more affective health care, perhaps not!

Why the surge in Afghanistan? Part 5 of 6

The Project for a New American Century.

In early 1997 a very controversial group established itself in Washington DC, its purported goal was to promote “American Global Leadership” this organization was a neoconservative political think tank that followed the philosophy of a very dangerous thinker, Leo Strauss. The group is an initiative of the New Citizenship Project, funded by the Sarah Scaife Foundation, the John M. Olin Foundation and the Bradley Foundation.

The chairman was and is William Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard (Financed by Rupert Murdock FOX TV and recent owner of the Wall Street Journal) Kristol is a regular contributor to the Fox News Channel. The Executive Director and chief operating officer has been Gary J. Schmitt.

In 1998, The Project for the New American Century (PNAC), developed a strategy for a series of pre-emptive wars. Those wars involved the oil rich nations of Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia.

William Kristol, and both HW and W Bush are followers of the philosophy of Leo Strauss, 1899-1973 Strauss was a philosopher and the originator of thought relating to neo-conservatism in the United States.

Strauss’s ideas governed several republican administrations from Reagan on, particularly its foreign policy and the Bush so-called "war on terror." Yet, beyond academic circles, most people know little about the man. Its time that we did!

As far as his politics, it came out of his experience in Nazi Germany. He saw the world, basically, as made up of groups that are pitted against each other in mutual hatred and animosity. You either destroy your enemy or you’re destroyed by your enemy. He believed that political society has to be organized in a way that makes the enemy very paramount, always somehow in view. Only the prevalence of the enemy will keep people united, will keep them together, will keep them strong. According to Strauss, if you don’t have any enemies then you better follow the advice of Macchiavelli and invent some. If we paid any attention to the Bush administration we witnessed Strauss philosophy in motion.

Strauss’ thought patterns were rather dark, his solutions are that the only way you can inspire hedonistic and slothful people to fight and die for their nation is to unite the nation with god, and with justice and with the absolute. So that nationalism and religion had to be united. The closer that you allied them the more likely you were going to get the military strength and people willing to die and sacrifice themselves for their country.

We found, for example, in the Bush administration, the Neo-Conservatives who were very much influenced by Strauss. People like Paul Wolfowitz, Abraham Schulsky, William Kristol, all of these were very prominent figures within the Bush administration. We saw the language of Strauss in the speeches of George W. Bush. When Bush said something like “The Hand of God is guiding the affairs of this nation.” This is really a Straussian alliance of religion and politics that was reflected in those speeches. Or for further example, when Bush portrayed the struggle between America and her enemies as a struggle between good and evil, between civilization and terrorism, democracy and tyranny, freedom and oppression. Following Strauss the concept of the enemy is paramount.

Politics is a deadly game. At the same time, the alliance of religion with it makes it even more deadly.

It’s not just Islam that’s disastrous for politics. Christianity has been just as deadly. When Bush talked about the enemy, for example, it’s true that America has enemies. But if you become too paranoid about the enemies, you exaggerate the enemy. As we saw with the Bush administration, there was so much fear in that administration. We heard them say, “Well, let’s kill our enemies before they do anything to us.” As if to say, “Let’s kill them before they even become our enemies.” “let’s get them over there so we don’t have to fight them here”

Strauss’s view of the management of society was as an elitist, and of course he was anti-democratic. He cultivated an elite mentality that was unscrupulous, duplicitous, and one that doesn’t care about ordinary people.

But Strauss had some very true things to say about Democracy. That democracy opens itself up to tyranny; it opens itself up to the rise of demagogues.

Strauss knew that it was in the context of a democratic regime in Weimar that Hitler emerged supreme. Strauss had a fear, and a rightful fear, of democracy and the fact democracy is vulnerable to this rise of demagoguery. His solution was to create, in his own words, an aristocracy in the midst of mass society. To have an elite of supposedly wise individuals who know the truth, who know what people need, who know what kind of noble lies and pious frauds they need. To rule behind the scenes.

In 1998, members of the PNAC, including Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz, wrote to President Bill Clinton urging him to remove Saddam Hussein from power. The letter argued that Saddam would pose a threat to the United States, its Middle East allies and oil resources in the region. The letter also stated "American policy cannot continue to be crippled by a misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council." The letter argues that an Iraq war would be justified by Hussein's defiance of UN "containment" policy and his persistent threat to US interests.

The 2000 Rebuilding America's Defenses report recommends improved planning, the report states:

"while the unresolved conflict in Iraq provides the immediate justification [for US military presence], the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein" and "Over the long term, Iran may well prove as large a threat to U.S. interests in the Gulf as Iraq has. And even should U.S.-Iranian relations improve retaining forward-based forces in the region would still be an essential element in U.S. security strategy given the longstanding American interests in the region".

The interest discussed here is OIL.

The PNAC has been the subject of considerable criticism and controversy, both among members of the left and right. Critics dispute the premise that American "world leadership" is desirable for the world or even for the United States itself.

The PNAC's harshest critics claim it represents a disturbing step towards total world subjugation by America, motivated by an imperial and globalist agenda of global US military expansionism and dominance.

Supporters of the project believe that the PNAC's goals are not fundamentally different from past conservative foreign policy assessments. American conservatives have traditionally favored a militarily strong United States, and advocated the country take “aggressive” (preemptive) positions when its interests are threatened.

A line frequently quoted by critics from Rebuilding America's Defenses famously refers to the possibility of a "catastrophic and catalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor" (page 51). This quote appears in Chapter V, entitled "Creating Tomorrow's Dominant Force", which discusses the perceived need for the Department of Defense to "move more aggressively to experiment with new technologies and operational concepts” (page 50). The full quote is as follows:

"Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor ."

This quote can be considered, if only circumstantial evidence, supporting other direct evidence, that the US government was complicit in the 9/11 terrorist attacks as a precursor to an invasion of Iraq. The World trade Center being the “new Pearl Harbor”, which would justify war on Iraq.

The invasion of Iraq, the "bullying" of the international community into supporting the 2003 war, and the fact that the war went ahead despite much international criticism, stem from the positions of prominent conservatives in the Bush administration. The invasion of Iraq was a foregone conclusion, as the 1998 letter evidences Rumsfeld's, Wolfowitz's and Perle's opinions, this was five years prior to the Iraq invasion. Other signatories of the letter include John Bolton and Zalmay Khalilzad, the former United States ' ambassadors to the United Nations and Iraq , respectively.

Rory Bremner, citing the letter, said:
"that's what they want — regime change — and nothing, not Blair, not the UN, not Hans Blix, not France, Germany, Russia, China, not the threat of terrorism, or Arab reservations, or lack of evidence or the Peace March, not even our own brave Jack Straw is going to stand in their way."

George Monbiot, citing the letter, said:
"To pretend that this battle begins and ends in Iraq requires a willful denial of the context in which it occurs. That context is a blunt attempt by the superpower to reshape the world to suit itself."

After the 2000 election of George W. Bush, many of the PNAC's members were appointed to key positions within the new President's administration:
Elliott Abrams, National Security Council, Representative for Middle Eastern Affairs
Richard Armitage, Department of State, Deputy Secretary of State
John R. Bolton, Department of State, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations
Richard Cheney, Vice President
Seth Cropsey, Voice of America, Director of the International Broadcasting Bureau
Paula Dobriansky, Department of State, Undersecretary of State for Global Affairs
Francis Fukuyama, President's Council on Bioethics, Counsel Member
Bruce Jackson, U.S. Committee on NATO, President
Zalmay Khalilzad, U.S. Embassy Baghdad , Iraq, U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, previously served as Ambassador to Afghanistan still under W Bush
I. Lewis Libby, Chief of Staff for the Vice President
Peter W. Rodman, Department of Defense, Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security
Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
Randy Scheunemann, U.S. Committee on NATO, Project on Transitional Democracies, International Republican Institute, Member
Paul Wolfowitz, President, World Bank
Dov S. Zakheim, Controller, Department of Defense
Robert B. Zoellick, Department of State, Deputy Secretary of State

With so many of the PNAC members in office and the philosophy of Leo Strauss being so closely followed, war in the Middle East was inevitable.

The Banks and their New SCAM - an industry laden with crooks!

With Foreclosures topping 5 million and another 7 million in the wings, the banks now have a new SCAM. They foreclosed on our homes, taking the home at the bottom of the market. Collected the insurance on the difference between the Note (They didn’t Own) and the market value they created by the volume, velocity and volatility of their foreclosures. Initially dumping the home cheap to bring down the market even further, in order to acquire the properties at an even lower price, they now are holding several million homes off the market, to force the value of these properties back up in order to make an additional windfall.

Real Estate Brokers across America have stopped submitting offers to Banks relating to their REO’s because they have found that the banks are playing games with the potential buyers, the Banks have no interest in selling their foreclosed properties until the market returns, and they (the Banks) are the ones who can make it return.

Meanwhile the Banks have been made whole, and in some cases have not only collected the insurance, but sued the former homeowner for a deficiency, that difference between what the home was foreclosed for and the mortgaged amount.

We are in an inflationary market, and the Banks realize that they were the cause of the market collapse, by placing a volume of homes on the market they caused the value of the homes to fall, now by restricting the homes they place on the market the values are expected to rise, it’s the old game of supply and demand, a lot of money chasing a few homes will cause the value of the homes to rise, by releasing a few thousand homes at a time, the market will stabilize in the banks favor.

Initially, the Banks, because of this SCAM and their insatiable greed blocked the borrowers attempt to sell their home instead of it being foreclosed. They accomplished this by the shear volume of the foreclosure frenzy. Now the Banks are primed to reap the windfall of a market they created at the peril of the borrower.

There is a lot of money that has been created over the past 8 years. The market has inflated for almost every other commodity but Real Estate, now we can expect to see this market inflate again.

Why the surge in Afghanistan ? Part 4

Iran and the Caspian Sea

Iran appears to be a trouble spot and an enemy of the United States and Israel , this because they border the Caspian Sea . The Caspian, with its rich oil reserves has the eye of the US and coupled with our military muscle we have already claimed the region. The US is aligned with Pakistan . Iran has aligned itself with China India and Russia .

The Caspian Sea is the largest enclosed body of water, by area, on Earth, variously classed as the world's largest lake or a full-fledged sea. The sea has a surface area of 371,000 square kilometers (143,244 sq mi) and a volume of 78,200 cubic kilometers (18,761 cu mi). It is in an endorheic basin (it has no outflows) and is bounded by northern Iran , southern Russia , western Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan , and eastern Azerbaijan . It has a maximum depth of about 1,025 meters (3,363 ft).

The Caspian area is rich in energy resources. Wells were developed in the region as early as the 10th century. By the 1500s Europeans were aware of the rich oil and gas deposits.

English traders Thomas Bannister and Jeffrey Duckett described the area around Baku as “a strange thing to behold, for there issueth out of the ground a marvelous quantity of oil, which serveth all the country to burn in their houses. This oil is black and is called nefte. There is also by the town of Baku , another kind of oil which is white and very precious (i.e., petroleum)."

The world’s first offshore wells and machine-drilled wells were made in Bibi-Heybat Bay , near Baku , Azerbaijan . In 1873 exploration and development of oil began in some of the largest fields, known to exist at that time, in the world. They were developed on the Absheron peninsula near the villages of Balakhanli, Sabunchi, Ramana and Bibi Heybat. Total recoverable reserves at that time numberd more than 500 million tons. By 1900 Baku had more than 3,000 oil wells, 2,000 of which were producing at industrial levels. By the end of the 19th century Baku 's fame as the "Black Gold Capital" was spreading throughout the world, causing many skilled workers and specialists to flock to the city.

By the turn of the 20th century, Baku was the global center for the international oil industry. In 1920, when the Bolsheviks captured Azerbaijan , all private property - including oil wells and factories - were confiscated. After that, the republic's entire oil industry was directed towards the purposes of the Soviet Union . By 1941 Azerbaijan was producing a record 23.5 million tons of oil, and the Baku region supplied nearly 72% of all oil extracted in the entire USSR . In 1994 the "Contract of the Century" was signed, signaling the start of major international development of the Baku oil fields. The Baku–Tbilisi–Ceyhan pipeline, a major pipeline allowing Azerbaijan oil to flow straight to the Turkish Mediterranean port of Ceyhan , opened in 2006.

The oil in the Caspian basin is estimated to be worth over US $12 trillion. The sudden collapse of the USSR and subsequent opening of the region has led to an intense investment and development scramble by international oil companies. In 1998 Dick Cheney commented that "I can't think of a time when we've had a region emerge as suddenly to become as strategically significant as the Caspian."

Enter Iran

On August 8, 2008 Iran announced that they were in talks with India ’s Oil and Natural Gas Commission (ONGC) and China ’s offshore oil corporation for the development of oil reserves in the South Caspian Sea region.

The report quoted the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC) deputy director Hojatollah Ghanimifard as saying that NIOC has been discussing the issue with India ’s ONGC Videsh, the overseas arm of the ONGC, and China ’s state-run China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC).

NIOC is reviewing proposals to make the terms of the current contracts more attractive to international oil companies by offering them production-sharing contracts for the first time, the report said.

Under such contracts the developer is entitled to a share of production, which allows them to recoup their investment costs and make improved profits.

The Brazilian state-run oil company Petrobras is currently drilling three wells in the Caspian Sea.

Iran angered the US because it jumped right in the face of the American oil companies, who have also begun to build their pipe line across Afghanistan , to draw oil from the Caspian Sea across Afghanistan to Pakistan .

If Iran is allowed to continue with its plans, it will be the largest competitor of the US as at least half of the oil reserves are along the Iranian portion of the Caspian.

The US Invaded Afghanistan over the Oil Pipe Line, we invaded Iraq , over its oil reserves, and there was a plan in place to invade Iran.

Predictions for 2010

Reality Check!

Expect a short recovery to begin sometime in early to mid 2010, and live briefly before the US will slip into a broader deeper and longer “depression”.

So far this “depression” has followed the trend established from 1929 to 1932. America will emerge briefly from this depression as it did then, and fall into a deeper and longer lasting one.

Real Estate values will fall further, more homes will be foreclosed, and more banks will fail! The FED will pump more money into the banks to save them, which will acerbate an already unfathomable problem.

With increased job losses, a bleaker stock and real estate market, and surging inflation, the dollar will be replaced as a reserve currency, and inflation will drive up the markets of Brazil, China and India at 3 to 5 times that of America.

The price of goods and services here will rise with the inflation the FED has and will further create. Additional increases in utility costs will break many consumer households and create more real estate defaults, oil prices, will be between 70 and 110 dollars a barrel and may go much higher.

Reduced taxes will cause states to increase the valuations of property even as it sinks to new lows in value. Consumers tired of fighting to save their homes will simply walk away. American consumers are likely to revolt and challenge government over its fallings and never ending support for the banks.

Angry over their plight and the enlargement of tent cities, and the legions of new homeless, consumers will see through the façade of Washington, its control from Wall Street, and revolution will be common talk in private circles.

The printing presses controlled by the FED have already set the dollars collapse in motion. It will continue to expand the money supply in an increased effort to save the banking system. The EURO and YEN and every foreign currency has already moved up in value against the Dollar causing its devaluation while the costs of all foreign goods are rising.

Expect to see panic selling in dollars and dollar assets as investors move away from buying anything that has anything to do with America. Sovereign Wealth Funds, now considering US assets risky, and which currently comprise approximately 3 trillion dollars have already begun to move away from the Dollar and dollar assets Mergers are set to rise, and outsourcing of American jobs will continue.

Central Banks have been purchasing and will continue to purchase Gold for reserves against inflation.

Why the surge in Afghanistan ? Part 3

Developing Afghanistan ’s infrastructure

(It’s about oil!)

Although the US infrastructure, our bridges, roads and dams, are old and in need, not only of repair but, a complete makeover, the Government has failed to establish a fund or to set any priority for these crumbling bridges and dams, or to rebuild “Katrina” ravaged New Orleans, Louisiana, an estimated price tag for New Orleans is about 100 billion dollars.

However, Afghanistan is a different story. With the fall of the Taliban and Osama Bin Alden’s death, which was known to have occurred on December 16, 2001, the United States began to develop Afghanistan ’s infrastructure in preparation for the Oil Pipe Line and an influx of American support personnel.

The American taxpayers have already invested much more than the cost to rebuild our own infrastructure in this one country, Afghanistan .

Roads, Bridges, railway systems and airports have been built or enlarged with American taxpayer assistance, including such projects as:
1. A new bridge to Tajikistan was completed in 2007.
2. Kabul-Kandahar Highway
3. Kabul-Jalalabad-Torkham Highway
4. Kabul-Gardez Highway
5. Kabul-Mazar Highway
6. Kandahar-Boldak Highway
7. Kandahar-Herat Highway
8. Herat-Islam Qala Highway
9. Herat-Mazar Highway

A road bridge linking Tajikistan and Afghanistan , which cost $37 million, was inaugurated in 2007. The bridge, nearly 700 metres long and 11 metres across, straddles the Panj river which forms a natural border between the two countries, between the ports of Nizhny Panj on the Tajik side and Shir Khan Bandar in Afghanistan. Delaram-Zaranj highway was constructed with Indian assistance and was completed in January 2009.

An upgrade of a10 kilometer long rail line which extends from Serhetabat in Turkmenistan to the town of Towraghondi in Afghanistan began in 2007.

A second 1,520 mm (4 ft 11+5⁄6 in) gauge line, extends for around 15 kilometers from Termez in Uzbekistan to Kheyrabad Port , crossing the Amu Darya on the road-rail Friendship Bridge . This line is currently being extended to Mazar-i-Sharif.

The nearest railhead in Iran is a 1,435 mm (4 ft 8+1⁄2 in) standard gauge line which terminates at Mashhad .

This line is currently being extended 202 kilometers east to Herat . The Khaf, Iran-Herat railway project began in 2006 and was completed in the last months of 2008.

Pakistan border

Two broad gauge 1,676 mm (5 ft 6 in) lines from Pakistan terminate on the border at Chaman and the Khyber Pass. Various proposals exist to extend these lines on to Kandahar and Kabul respectively. Work is expected to begin in January 2010.

Other borders

There are currently no rail links to China or Tajikistan , though a connection to the latter was proposed in 2008, and is expected to begin around the middle of 2010.

Work progress in 2007

Construction in Iran has brought that system's lines close to the Afghan border at Khaf. Proposed extensions using 4 ft 8+1⁄2 in (1,435 mm) gauge would serve: Ghurian, Herat (933m), Meymaneh (877m), Sheberghan (250m), Hariatan - break of gauge link with Uzbekistan , Shir Khan Bandar (329m)

2008
Opened up Afghan trade route to Iran

2009
Proposed extension from Hairatan on the Uzbek border to Mazar-i-Sharif using a Soviet-built bridge over the Amudarya River .

Five year railway building project.

Pipelines

Not forgetting the real purpose of the war! There are petroleum pipelines from Bagram into Uzbekistan and Shindand into Turkmenistan . These pipelines have been is disrepair and disuse for years. There are 180 kilometers of natural gas pipelines. The $3 billion Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline proposal for a natural gas pipeline across Afghanistan into Pakistan is moving forward.

Ports and harbors are being upgraded

The chief inland waterway of land-locked Afghanistan is the Amu Darya River which forms part of Afghanistan 's northern border. The river handles barge traffic up to about 500 metric tons. The main river ports are located at Kheyrabad and Shair Khan .

Airports are being upgraded

There are 47 airports. Approximately 10 of these have paved runways. Of those, 3 have runways over 3000 meters, 4 have runways between 2500 and 3000 meters, 2 have runways between 1500 and 2500 meters, and 1 has a runway under 1000 meters. 37 have unpaved runways. Of those, 1 has a runway over 3000 meters, 7 have runways between 2500 and 3000 meters, 14 have runways between 1500 and 2500 meters, 4 have runways between 1000 and 1500 meters, and 11 have runways under 1000 meters.

Kabul International Airport (3500 m runway) is the nation's largest airport and the primary hub for international civilian flights.

Kandahar International Airport (3200 m runway) is a dual-use airport serving southern Afghanistan .

Mazari Sharif Airport (3100 m runway) is a dual-use airport serving the northern and central portions of the country.

Herat Airport (2600 m runway) is the primary civil airport for the western portion of the country.

Jalalabad Airport (1800 m runway)

Bagram Air Base is used by the US military and allied forces. It has heavy traffic, especially helicopters. It can also handle larger airliners such as Boeing 747s, C-5 Galaxy and C-17 Globemaster III military cargo planes. KBR and some other companies fly into and out of Bagram on a regular basis.

Afghanistan government priorities include upgrading of Kabul Airport to international airport meeting ICAO standards and upgrading Herat , Mazari Sharif and Jalalabad airports to international standards.

Heliports

We have developed at least five heliports.

In our incessant need for oil, we have placed our own population in harms way as bridges in need of repair or replacement continue to collapse at an alarming rate, examples follow:

On December15,1967 at approximately 5 p.m., the U.S. Highway 35 bridge connecting Point Pleasant , West Virginia and Kanauga , Ohio suddenly collapsed into the Ohio River . At the time of failure, thirty- seven vehicles were crossing the bridge span, and thirty-one of those automobiles fell with the bridge. Forty- six individuals perished with the buckling of the bridge and nine were seriously injured. Along with the numerous fatalities and injuries, a major transportation route connecting West Virginia and Ohio was destroyed, disrupting the lives of many and striking fear across the nation.

Shortly after the collapse of the highway 35 bridge, President Lyndon B. Johnson ordered a nation-wide probe to determine the safety of the nation's bridges.

In 1967 there were 1,800 bridges in the United States which were 40 years old including 1,100 highway bridges designed for Model-T traffic. Many federal officials feared that other structures, built around the some time to handle Model-T traffic, could face the same fate as the Silver Bridge . To date we have found no remedial work on any of these bridges, however sadly many have since this report collapsed with fatalities.

A list of the bridges and their collapse date follows, note some were in the later part of the 19th century, but most were in the 20th century, and many were after the Silver Bridge Collapse and the subsequent Federal report.

May 5, 1875; Portage Bridge
December 29, 1876; Ashtabula River Railroad Disaster
March 14, 1887; Bussey bridge
August 7, 1904; Eden Train Wreck
December 22, 1935; Appomatox River Drawbridge
January 27, 1938; Upper Steel Arch Bridge (also known as Honeymoon Bridge and Falls View Bridge )
November 7, 1940; Tacoma Narrows Bridge (Galloping Gertie)
July 28, 1942; Chesapeake City Bridge
December 15, 1967; Silver Bridge

Following is a list of Bridges that collapsed after the Federal Bridge Condition Report

November 7, 1972; Sidney Lanier Bridge
May 9, 1980; Sunshine Skyway Bridge
July 17, 1981; Hyatt Regency walkway collapse
January 13, 1982; 14th Street Bridge
June 28, 1983; Cline Avenue over the Indiana Harbor and Ship Canal and surrounding heavy industry Mianus River Bridge
April 1, 1989; Schoharie Creek Bridge collapse Thruway Bridge Tennessee Hatchie River Bridge October 17, 1989; Cypress Street Viaduct
October 17, 1989; San Francisco – Oakland Bay Bridge
May 28, 1993; Claiborne Avenue Bridge
September 22, 1993; CSXT Big Bayou Canot rail bridge
December 13, 2000; Hoan Bridge
September 15, 2001; Queen Isabella Causeway
May 26, 2002; I-40 bridge disaster
March 26, 2003; Interstate 95 Howard Avenue Overpass
July 21, 2003; Kinzua Bridge
April 29, 2007; MacArthur Maze
August 1, 2007; Minneapolis I-35W bridge over the Mississippi River
August 15, 2007; Harp Road bridge
February 2004; Igor I. Sikorsky Memorial Bridge replacement project
June 12, 2008; The Cedar Rapids and Iowa City Railway (CRANDIC) bridge
October 27, 2009; San Francisco – Oakland Bay Bridge

Which US Bridge will fall next?

We have money for nation building, and wars of choice, what about our own nation, are we expendable?