April 07-2009:
The American People Need To Know The Truth!
It seems like those classified documents from the past seven years of the George W. Bush administration has finally been released, or is expected to be released soon. Some insiders claim that there are very graphic or grisly portrayals of torture recommended, implemented, and practiced, that may warrant legal retribution for several past officials of the recent past administration.
Releasing this information may also cause some embarrassment for some of our allies, some of whom allowed Renditions on their shores, for the facilitating of interrogative methods, some of which today is categorized as torture.
Do we want this revelation to be made public, after president Barack Obama said repeatedly, that he intends to turn the page, and not get bogged down with the past ills, with this current economic crisis at hand!
However, if or when these documents become public, the American people must be prepared to face some very harsh facts, about our elected leadership in Washington-DC, and whether pursuing this vendetta or judicial end, will solve anything, much less prevent it from happening again.
Derryck.
NYC.
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Friday, April 3, 2009
Fire Those CEO'S Of Failed Banks NOW!
April 03-2009:
Fire Those CEO's Of Failed Banks NOW!
Fire Those CEO's Of Failed Banks NOW!
Because Keeping Them In Place Contradicts Transparency & Ethics!
I have been studying the financial situation that this country (USA) are experiencing currently, and I ask myself the following:
* Why is the Obama administration still allowing those CEO's and other senior banking executives to continue administering those failed and failing banks?
* Why is the Obama administration using as his Treasury Secretary, someone who was responsible for OVERSEEING Regulation of the same financial institutions that have received billions of federal dollars?
* Why hasn't the Obama administration ask the Congress to conduct an enquiry into THE CAUSE, of the financial debacle within the banking and other financial institutions on Wall Street?
* And finally, how could people who are crooked, and gained handsomely in fraudulent acts, be allowed to continue managing our financial institutions, because the White House executive seemingly, does not want the American Commonweal to know the TRUE volume or magnitude if the financial demise of our Banking Institutions?
These questions MUST be addressed NOW, or will be one of the negatives that will be used in a few years against this administration's re-election desire!
Derryck S. Griffith.
Educator-Advocate & Blogger.
Educator-Advocate & Blogger.
Monday, March 30, 2009
General Motors CEO Dismissed!
March 302009:
General Motors-CEO Dismissed!
Mr.Wagner now former CEO of General Motors was dismissed by the Obama administration for failing to deliver as was expected.
It is still not clear if on the presidents orders, he was asked to remove himself from the helm of General Motors.
Now the local media is asking if the administration is injecting itself, in running the business community, and this spells trouble for the Free Market System, that we have been accustomed to, and was using for decades now.
This idiotic and provocative view of those at CNN.com, MSNBC, and elsewhere, by using this scenario of arbitrary injection and control of GM, fail to tell or remind the American people the following.
General Motors is now under the Federal Government's control and supervision, by virtue of receiving taxpayers money, and the State having the majority stake/interest therein.
Therefore, I suggest that you tell Mr. Wolfe of CNN, David Schuster of MSNBC.com, and others to tell the truth, and stop misleading viewers about the REAL facts of this issue!
Derryck.
NYC.
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Press Conference Attendees MUST Never be Pre-selected!
March 29-2009:
Press Conference Attendees MUST Never Be Pre-selected!
I have been following the manner in which president Obama conducts his meet the press face ups. And have seen how he calls on reporters who are already on some list he has on the podium.
Well, if this is the preferred method of holding Press Conferences, then there can be no spontaneous questions, some of which may be very necessary or essential, for viewers not present there, to have asked on their behalf.
And it also subscribes to the view that everyone must at least get a fair chance at asking the Commander In Chief, and our elected representative in The White House, any question he/she feel needs to be asked.
If there is a preference for certain reporter's questions over others, that infers favoritism, and MUST never be allowed to continue.
Therefore, I call upon president Barack H. Obama, and his White House Press Secretary, Chief Whip, and all those responsible for arranging meetings with the press, to CEASE making pre-selected choices for questions, and OPEN the floor for questions from anyone who is qualified to be, there as a reporter in the people's interests.
Derryck.
NYC.
comments@whitehouse.gov
Friday, March 27, 2009
Why Does NATO Need A Missile Defense System?
March 26-2009:
Why Does NATO Need A Missile Defense System?
As I see it, most developed countries in NATO, the US and the UK, have military aircraft that can be launched in seconds to defend large geographic air spaces from incoming missiles. These aircraft have missiles attached to them as part of their defense systems, and can intercept and destroy any missiles incoming, or missile sites if need be.
So why should the US and NATO be contemplating the erection of any 'Radar Defense System' for incoming missiles, in Europe or anywhere around the world?
This to my mind is an act of aggression, in terms of extending one's military power, and aggressive abilities anywhere around the globe. Regardless of how it will be perceived by other nations that feel threatened.
If we should continue along this path, then we are giving those developing countries like Iran, Syria, Israel, North Korea, and others, the right to contemplate sophisticated systems to combat any threat or perceived threat to their territories or allies.
I strongly advocate for the neutralizing of any such treaty, or intent to negotiate any such treaty between any nation or region.
Especially the USA. Because to continue along this line will inevitably result in the quest for more defense systems, or aggressive systems by all those nations that feel vulnerable to the big powers today!
Derryck S. Griffith.
Educator-Advocate & Blogger.
NYC.
E-mail: comments@whitehouse.gov
Why Does NATO Need A Missile Defense System?
As I see it, most developed countries in NATO, the US and the UK, have military aircraft that can be launched in seconds to defend large geographic air spaces from incoming missiles. These aircraft have missiles attached to them as part of their defense systems, and can intercept and destroy any missiles incoming, or missile sites if need be.
So why should the US and NATO be contemplating the erection of any 'Radar Defense System' for incoming missiles, in Europe or anywhere around the world?
This to my mind is an act of aggression, in terms of extending one's military power, and aggressive abilities anywhere around the globe. Regardless of how it will be perceived by other nations that feel threatened.
If we should continue along this path, then we are giving those developing countries like Iran, Syria, Israel, North Korea, and others, the right to contemplate sophisticated systems to combat any threat or perceived threat to their territories or allies.
I strongly advocate for the neutralizing of any such treaty, or intent to negotiate any such treaty between any nation or region.
Especially the USA. Because to continue along this line will inevitably result in the quest for more defense systems, or aggressive systems by all those nations that feel vulnerable to the big powers today!
Derryck S. Griffith.
Educator-Advocate & Blogger.
NYC.
E-mail: comments@whitehouse.gov
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Why did president Obama apologize for making fun of his own inability to Boll well?
Why did president Obama apologize for making fun of his own inability to Boll well?
If those who are so petty and self-centered feel that he was refering to people
with disabilities, when he said that he needs to attend a Special Olympics
program.
Then let them!
Isn't the president allowed to make fun of his own short comings?
It is time Americans, and the local media STOP assuming what is not intended,
everytime some person says something that they feel is offensive!
Derryck.
NYC.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Could The Obama Administration Recoup The 120 Million A.I.G. Payout?
March 17-2009:
Could The Obama Administration Recoup The 120 Million Dividend Payout From AIG?
I don't think that the Obama administration has a valid legal case with AIG, in terms of recouping the 120 million dollar dividends.
Because that was a 'contract of service' that these recipients had with AIG. And asking the recipients to give back or not receive these dividends will be a violation of that contract.
As I see it, if that aspect of the contract was there before the State became the majority stake holder of AIG, then those dividends will have to be re-negotiated, or declared null and void. Because
(I presume), that there would have been the expectation of the Obama administration, that AIG, as recipients of the Public's Money, would not use same to indulge in any monetary transactions that would imply, that they were irresponsible managers of the Public Money or Public trust.
Finally, the recipients of the dividends (if they haven't received it as yet), can refuse to do so, or accept half or part of that payout voluntarily. But it up to them to decide.
Incidentally, stock brokers income are also called dividends. This is just like working from 8.00 am to 4.00 pm on a daily basis. But instead, are paid for their skill at bringing in revenue for their client's investments!
Any action to recoup any dividend payouts might entail a lengthy legal battle with (AIG or the State) vs AIG's clients.
Derryck.
NYC
Could The Obama Administration Recoup The 120 Million Dividend Payout From AIG?
I don't think that the Obama administration has a valid legal case with AIG, in terms of recouping the 120 million dollar dividends.
Because that was a 'contract of service' that these recipients had with AIG. And asking the recipients to give back or not receive these dividends will be a violation of that contract.
As I see it, if that aspect of the contract was there before the State became the majority stake holder of AIG, then those dividends will have to be re-negotiated, or declared null and void. Because
(I presume), that there would have been the expectation of the Obama administration, that AIG, as recipients of the Public's Money, would not use same to indulge in any monetary transactions that would imply, that they were irresponsible managers of the Public Money or Public trust.
Finally, the recipients of the dividends (if they haven't received it as yet), can refuse to do so, or accept half or part of that payout voluntarily. But it up to them to decide.
Incidentally, stock brokers income are also called dividends. This is just like working from 8.00 am to 4.00 pm on a daily basis. But instead, are paid for their skill at bringing in revenue for their client's investments!
Any action to recoup any dividend payouts might entail a lengthy legal battle with (AIG or the State) vs AIG's clients.
Derryck.
NYC
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
