Menu



error This forum is not active, and new posts may not be made in it.
PromoteFacebookTwitter!
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
8/21/2015 4:31:30 PM

North and South Korea stand their ground as deadline looms

Reuters

Reuters Videos
South Koreans near North border evacuate


By Ju-min Park and James Pearson

SEOUL (Reuters) - North and South Korea appeared headed toward another clash, as Seoul refused an ultimatum that it halt anti-Pyongyang propaganda broadcasts by Saturday afternoon or face military action, and North Korea said its troops were on a war footing.

South Korean Vice Defense Minister Baek Seung-joo said on Friday it was likely the North would fire at some of the 11 sites where the loudspeakers are set up on the South's side of the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) separating the countries.

Tension escalated on Thursday when North Korea fired four shells into South Korea, according to Seoul, in apparent protest against the broadcasts. The South fired back 29 artillery shells. Pyongyang accused the South of inventing a pretext to fire into the North.

Both sides said there were no casualties or damage in their territory, an indication that the rounds were just warning shots.

"The fact that both sides' shells didn't damage anything means they did not want to spread an armed clash. There is always a chance for war, but that chance is very, very low," said Yang Moo-jin, professor at the University of North Korean Studies in Seoul.

Since the 1950-53 Korean War ended in a truce, not a peace treaty, Pyongyang and Seoul have often exchanged threats, and dozens of soldiers have been killed, yet the two sides have always pulled back from all-out war.

But the renewed hostility is a further blow to South Korean President Park Geun-hye's efforts to improve North-South ties, which have been virtually frozen since the deadly 2010 sinking of a South Korean navy ship, which Seoul blames on Pyongyang.

Park canceled an event on Friday and made a visit to a military command post, dressed in army camouflage.

Both sides traded harsh rhetoric late on Friday.

The North committed "cowardly criminal acts," South Korean Defense Minister Han Min-koo said. "This time, I will make sure to sever the vicious cycle of North Korea's provocations."

The North's official KCNA news agency said its military was not bluffing.

SOUTH SAYS WON'T STOP BROADCASTS

The North's shelling came after it had demanded last weekend that South Korea end the broadcasts or face military action - a relatively rare case of following up on its frequent threats against the South.

Its 48-hour ultimatum, delivered in a letter to the South Korean Defense Ministry, was also uncharacteristically specific, said John Delury, a North Korea expert at Yonsei University in Seoul. The deadline is around 5 p.m. (0800 GMT) on Saturday in Seoul.

South Korea began blasting anti-North propaganda from loudspeakers on the border on Aug. 10, resuming a tactic both sides had stopped in 2004, days after landmines wounded two South Korean soldiers along the DMZ.

North Korea on Monday began its own broadcasts.

Baek told parliament the South's broadcasts would continue unless the North accepted responsibility and apologized for the mines. Pyongyang has denied responsibility.

"There is a high possibility that North Korea will attack loudspeaker facilities," Baek said.

KCNA said North Korean leader Kim Jong Un had declared a "quasi-state of war" in frontline areas.

There were indications the North was preparing to fire short-range missiles, the South's Yonhap news agency said, citing an unnamed government source. The North often fires rockets into the sea during annual U.S.-South Korean military exercises, which are currently under way.

The U.S. military, which bases 28,500 personnel in South Korea, said it was monitoring the situation.

Washington earlier urged Pyongyang to halt "provocative" actions after Thursday's exchange of fire, the first between the two Koreas since October.

Daniel Pinkston of the International Crisis Group think-tank said the large U.S. troop presence in the South for the military exercises could reduce the risk of escalation by pressuring the South to exercise restraint, and as a deterrent to the North.

"This is a bad time to pick a fight with the South while it has all these resources there," he said.

(Reporting by Ju-min Park and James Pearson, with additional reporting by Choonsik Yoo, Hooyeon Kim and Jack Kim; Writing by Tony Munroe; Editing by Dean Yates, Will Waterman and Ian Geoghegan)


"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
8/21/2015 5:01:06 PM

6 dead in Syria after Israeli retaliates for rocket attack

Associated Press

Wochit
Israel Launches Strikes Into Syria After Rocket Attack


DAMASCUS, Syria (AP) — Israeli airstrikes in southern Syria killed six people and wounded seven, Syrian state TV reported Friday, in retaliation for a rocket attack on Israel that Jerusalem blamed on militants backed by Iran.

Four rockets exploded in an open field in northern Galilee on Thursday. There were no injuries but it was the first time since the 1973 Mideast war that rockets from Syrian territory have slammed into Israel. There was no immediate claim of responsibility.

Syrian state TV said an Israeli drone strike Friday targeted a "civilian car" close to a busy market in the village of Kom, killing five. Ahmad Sheikh Abdul-Qader, governor of the southern region of Quneitra, said the attack happened on the road leading to the village of Khan Arnabeh, near Kom, and destroyed the car.

The Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, which tracks the country's war, said the five dead were members of pro-government National Defense Forces. It did not elaborate.

State TV also said an Israeli air raid overnight in Quneitra killed a soldier and wounded seven.

The Israeli military did not comment on the reported casualties but said it carried out a raid Friday morning on "part of the terror cell responsible for the rocket fire at northern Israel."

Israel said it had credible information that Iran, a key backer of Syrian President Bashar Assad, was behind Thursday's rocket attack. The foreign ministry said in a statement that a commander who heads the Palestinian division of Iran's elite Quds Force, identified as Saeed Izaadhi, orchestrated the attack that was carried out by the Islamic Jihad group.

"The military struck the cell that carried out the shooting and the Syrian forces that allowed it. We have no intention of escalating events," Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said.

But he added: "Those countries that are quick to embrace Iran should know that it was an Iranian commander who endorsed and directed the cell that fired at Israel."

In Gaza, the Islamic Jihad group denied involvement in the attack.

Syrian TV, meanwhile, said the air raids aimed to "boost the morale of terrorist organizations," claiming that Israel is backing militants in the area.

Israel and Syria are bitter enemies. Israel has avoided taking sides in the Syrian civil war, which pits Assad's government against an array of militants, including the brutal Islamic State group.

___

Deitch reported from in Jerusalem. Associated Press writer Bassem Mroue in Beirut contributed to this report.







Israeli forces carry out airstrikes in southern Syria after militants in Syria fired rockets into Israel.
Several casualties reported


"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
8/21/2015 5:36:41 PM
Bizarro Earth

Corporate crime, psychopaths and the plunder of planet Earth

Image

Unfortunately for the world of normal people, living in a world run by psychopaths may feel like we've entered the Twilight Zone, but it is indeed, our Reality.

"Slavery is the legal fiction that a person is property. Corporate personhood is the legal fiction that property is a person."
— Anonymous

In 2010 the pro-corporate Roberts' 5/4 Supreme Court decided, in the Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission ruling that favored right-wing multimillionaire businessmen and amoral multinational corporations by making it easier for them to steal US elections by allowing unlimited, anonymous monetary contributions to political campaigns, political action groups and politicians.

This ruling, called by many fair-minded observers to be the worst Supreme Court decision of the past century, has emboldened the already powerful and corruptible corporations (that already have dominion over the economy) to now also be able to thoroughly bribe any number of favored pro-corporate politicians to do their will but also to more effectively brain-wash voters through multi-million dollar ad campaigns (that can't be effectively countered by small contributions from average voters).

The US Supreme Court has thus made legal the absurd notion that inanimate paper corporations like PolyMet and Glencore should have the same privileges (but not the same responsibilities) as living humans. Both of those out-or-state companies are potential despoilers of northern Minnesota's irreplaceable wetlands, rivers, aquifers and aboriginal land and water rights.

After the ruling came down, there was only a brief bit of outrage from the so-called national and state leadership of our essentially "one-party system" (one-party, that is, when it comes to the Republican and Democratic Party's corporate and militarist agendas).

What should be the punishment for corporate entities that plunder and pillage?

But if corporate America has new privileges, shouldn't it be honoring the responsibilities of personhood as well?

Any thinking person would agree that if any entity enjoys the privileges of a human, it should also bear the same responsibilities as humans. Thus it should incur the same punishments as individuals do when it hurts people, commit crimes, poisons the water, fouls the air or rapes the land?

One of the rare victories against corporate giants occurred at Shapleigh, Maine, when that town managed to protect their water rights from the insatiable water-extracting corporate giant Nestle. (See video and more information on this episode at:http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/40335).


Nestle, one of many multinational corporate exploiters around the world, has no allegiance to any state or municipality or any location where it tries to extract water or minerals that never were theirs to begin with. But when the minerals are gone and the water has been used up or polluted, Nestle, PolyMet, Glencore, et al will be long gone, which has always been the case of giant resource-extractors and polluters like Exxon/Mobil, Shell, Chevron, British Petroleum, Halliburton, Deep Water Horizon, Coca-Cola, Perrier or whatever other corporate intruder that covets the people's resources.

And who benefits? Why, of course, the major benefactors will be faceless, out-or-state investors, corporate shareholders and CEOs living and doing business at some luxurious corporate headquarters, none of whom will have to live with the poisoned environment that they will be leaving behind.

Move to amend: Overturning Citizens United

Shapleigh, Maine's small victory against injustice should inspire the rest of us to do what must be done if America's fragile democracy is ever to thrive again. The outrageous Citizens United decision must be overturned with a constitutional amendment. (See www.movetoamend.org for more.) The future of the nation, our children, the planet, our drinking water, natural habitat and aboriginal rights are all at stake.

Exploitive corporations don't really seem to care. They are mainly interested in next quarter's profits, the outlook for future share prices and who or what might be their next victim They have lots of laws on their side and a surplus of legislators and corporate lawyers to defend their unethical activities.

It should be emphasized that the allegiance of big corporations is to its fellow co-investors, its private or mutual fund shareholders, and its executives and management teams. Their responsibilities are not to the people whose lives and health depend on the usability or sustainability of the land, water, air and food supplies that they will be inevitably depleting or poisoning.

Corporate shareholders and executives from the trans-national corporations that make up Big Pharma, Big Food, Big Agribusiness, Big Oil, Big Finance, etc are selfishly motivated by profits and not the common good, and therefore they are not really concerned about the struggling, degraded communities that are left behind to fend for themselves.

"Trust us, we're the experts"; "Toxic sludge is good for you"; "We'll clean up after ourselves" — and other corporate lies

Conscienceless mega-corporations that swoop down on naïve and unsuspecting people and local governmental bodies, usually ask them to "trust us, we're the experts" and that — at some time in the uncertain future - they will un-poison the usually permanently-toxified environment that they secretly intend to leave behind. Under-employed or laid off workers, understandably desperate for jobs, jobs, jobs, are easily fooled into believing the well-crafted disinformation - until it is too late and the mess is no longer the corporation's problem. It's an old con.

Promises made during the courtship phase are likely to be broken with impunity when these foreign corporations pull out, merge with other entities or file for bankruptcy. Silver-tongued CEOs and their shyster lawyers are very good at getting us rubes up north all starry-eyed over a relatively small number of temporary jobs while (that will last until the inevitable bust) discounting the huge risks of permanent dead zones that will be created from the poisonous chemicals.

The crimes of WalMart, Coca-Cola and Union Carbide/Dow Chemical and Henry Kissinger

A good example of the many tax-avoiding mega-corporations is WalMart. Most of its profits go to a handful of Walton family multi-billionaires in Arkansas. WalMart successfully - and legally - avoids paying for healthcare insurance and other benefits for most of their exploited, underpaid, part-time employees, who are also victims of the corporation's notorious union-busting policies that conservative politicians are always pushing for (ask any Wisconsinite about the success that Scott Walker and his paymasters, the Koch Brothers have had in destroying Wisconsin's unions)..

US taxpayers are left holding the bag while WalMart legally avoids what should be their corporate responsibility: to be fair to their employees and the region in which they are doing business. WalMart's (and McDonald's, and every other fast food chain) notorious below-subsistence level wages forces many of their workers to work a second or third job and also seek welfare benefits from the local government entity - a cunning cost-shifting tactic that places unfair economic burdens on tax-payers.

Another example is Coca-Cola. Coke depends on water that it extracts from any and every publically-owned water source from which the corporation can extract it, including, as a particularly egregious example, the aquifers that are situated beneath thirsty, struggling, impoverished, starving (and then suicidal) Indian farmers who are losing their farms in newly drought-stricken India.

Millions of gallons of water from aquifers that have traditionally been used for farmland irrigation are being depleted by Coca-Cola in order to meet the artificial demand that has been created for the sweet, sugary (or chemically sweetened), caffeinated (and therefore addictive), nutritionally useless, obesity-inducing and diabetes-producing soft drink that contains a few pennies worth of ingredients and then is sold to poor people everywhere for as much as the market will bear.

Coke's predation of poor people in India and elsewhere brings to mind another bunch of corporate criminals who have never been brought to justice. The infamous 1984 Union Carbide cyanide catastrophe in Bhopal, India that killed 25,000 slum-dwellers left 100,000 permanently poisoned - and often blinded - impoverished, sometimes homeless victims whose lives were ruined, with uncounted thousands of others living on poisoned soil, drinking poisoned water and breathing poisoned air.

Every Bhopal victim that was exposed to the Union Carbide cyanide plant environs is chronically ill, with women - 30 years later - still delivering malformed babies and dead fetuses because of the pesticide residues that cannot be detoxified. Union Carbide, the American corporation responsible for the disaster, has consistently shirked, as criminal entities typically do, its moral responsibilities to their suffering victims. Carbide eventually sold itself to the equally infamous Dow Chemical, the company that brought us Agent Orange, napalm, immune-destroying silicone breast implants, polyvinyl chloride, and plutonium contamination from the Rocky Flats, Colorado plant that manufactured the plutonium triggers for hydrogen bombs.

Carbide's corporate executives have been indicted for their crimes and have been repeatedly subpoenaed to appear in Indian courts. But the US has not honored the extradition treaties it has with India. These amoral executives have refused to appear and are therefore in contempt of court. There are warrants out for their arrests in India, just as there are warrants out for the arrest of Citizen Henry Kissinger for his part in the international war crimes and crimes against humanity that he was a part of in Chile, East Timor, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, etc. All of these accused criminals remain at large, and America's Big Business-friendly, corporate-controlled nation has been proudly harboring them.

The common denominator linking human and corporate criminals

There are a number of common denominators that link human criminals and the multinational corporations that populate the Fortune 500 and the Dow-Jones 30 Industrial Average lists (like WalMart, McDonald's, Coca-Cola, Boeing, Dow Chemical, Chevron, Exxon/Mobil, du Pont, British Petroleum, Halliburton Monsanto, Merck, Pfizer, Proctor and Gamble, Nestle, Perrier, Nike, Goldman Sachs, J P Morgan Chase, etc, etc). For one, the corporations, are just as afraid of facing the music as were Bernie Madoff, Ken Lay, Kissinger, Mr Ponzi, and the other multibillionaires of their ilk (that are rich enough to employ rafts of cunning defense lawyers). Be certain that they will use any means necessary to evade or delay justice. Similarly, none of them can be expected to show any genuine remorse for the human suffering that their actions have caused.

There are checklist diagnoses for various supposed personality disorders in the billing bible and diagnostic manual for psychiatrists (the Diagnostic and Statistical Manuel [DSM] which, by the way, contains no statistics). One of the 374 disorders that are listed in the 4th edition of the DSM is antisocial personality disorder (code number 301.7), which identifies pathological liars, chronic cheaters, abusers, thieves and killers whose cunning and lack of morals, ethics or consciences commonly enable them to avoid being caught or punished for their crimes and misdeeds.

These "sociopaths" (aka psychopaths) typically refuse to accept blame or responsibility for their actions and typically run away to avoid prosecution (as per the recent Whitey Bolger case). In the case of sociopathic mega-corporations that are occasionally successfully sued in court, business-friendly judges will often impose a "gag rule" for the successful human plaintiff and a slap on the wrist and a plea bargain for the guilty "non-human" corporation. On top of that, corporate-friendly judges often allow the corporation to officially deny any wrong-doing as it accepts the penalty!

Those corporate entities have always met the definition of antisocial personality disorder. They are famously incapable of showing genuine remorse if or when they are caught and/or convicted for their crimes. (Learn more about corporate sociopathy athttp://www.thecorporation.com/, especially by watching the 2003 Canadian documentary titled The Corporation athttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHrhqtY2khc.)

Below are seven diagnostic criteria that are used to diagnose antisocial (aka, sociopathic or psychopathic) personality disorder in humans (in the DSM, it only takes three of the seven to make the diagnosis):

1) callous disregard for the feelings of other people

2) incapacity to maintain human relationships

3) reckless disregard for the safety of others

4) aggressiveness

5) deceitfulness (repeated lying and conning others for profit)

6) incapacity to experience guilt and

7) failure to conform to social norms and respect for the law.

Other common traits manifested by sociopaths include:

Lack of conscience

Lack of remorse for evils done to others

Indifference to the suffering of its victims

Rationalizes (makes excuses for) having hurt, mistreated or stolen from others

Willingness to exploit, seduce or manipulate others

No sign of delusional or irrational thinking

Cunning, clever

Usually above average intelligence

Always looking for ways to make money or achieve fame or notoriety

Willing to cause or contribute to the financial ruin of others

Untrustworthy

Cannot be trusted to adhere to conventional standards of morality.

Sociopaths do not have delusional thinking and are not considered mentally ill. Sociopaths are, for all intents and purposes, totally sane but are also incurable of their personality disorder. These individuals make up at least 4% of the US population, although certain professions tend to attract larger percentages of them (read The Sociopath Next Door: The Ruthless Versus the Rest of Us, by Martha Stout, PhD - buy it at: https://www.google.com/#q=The+Sociopath+next+door).

Actually the exact number of sociopaths - humans or their corporate counterparts - is not precisely known, but, lacking empathy or a conscience, neither truly feels guilty about their frequent misdeeds. Believing that there is nothing wrong with them, human sociopaths rarely ask for help (and corporations are no different) especially when the law (and the markets, in the case of corporate sociopaths) is on their side. And therefore they never truly try to change.

If and when human sociopaths are court-ordered to submit to evaluation and "treatment", they may acquiesce but only pretend to change until the pressure is off and their unethical or criminal activities look doable again. Academic psychologists tell us that attempts to rehabilitate full-fledged sociopaths are useless, but nonetheless, the often charming, charismatic, silver-tongued sociopath is often able to fool the treatment team into thinking progress is being made.

Likewise, sociopathic corporations don't have much trouble seducing regulatory agencies, local governmental entities, the public and desperate underemployed workers by promising jobs and a secret un-tested plan to prevent environmental catastrophes. Only when it's too late and the corporation has skipped the country with the loot will all the painful realities be revealed.

What should be the punishment for sociopathic corporations who poison the environment?

Experienced psychologists tell us that sociopathic individuals that have committed crimes have to be locked away to protect society from them.

So a number of questions need to be asked. Given the fact that human sociopaths need to be avoided, marginalized or locked up, we need to ask what needs to be done with the corporate entities that meet the criteria above. What needs to be done with corporations that have a history of false advertising, deceiving the public, lying, cheating, poisoning the water, fouling the air, raping the land or otherwise acting unethically?

Given the anti-constitutional 2010 Citizen's United ruling granting personhood to corporations for political bribery purposes, shouldn't sociopathic corporations be dealt with just like their human counterparts when they act criminally? Shouldn't long prison sentences be given to the CEOs, Boards of Directors and management teams? Shouldn't there be confiscation of property or even capital punishment in the case of egregious cases involving mass deaths as in the cases of Union Carbide, Coca-Cola and Merck (over the Vioxx and Gardisil deaths and disabilities)?

I hasten to add that I am against capital punishment for humans, but any person with a conscience and more than a double digit IQ knows that corporations are not really human. Corporations don't bleed and don't cry out in pain during the execution process, although their executives may plead for mercy while shedding insincere crocodile tears. Capital punishment for corporations, contrary to the data on capital punishment for humans, would prevent a lot of future sociopathic behaviors.

What should be done

Corporations that plunder, pollute or poison Mother Earth or ruthlessly execute hostile mergers and acquisitions of weaker companies meet some of the above definitions for rape. Most of us would agree that our society should punish corporate rapists as severely as it punishes the human kind.

What about the known lethal poisons that thousands of unregulated chemical corporations knowingly discharge into the water, air, soil of Mother Earth? Shouldn't their acts of desecration be regarded as rape, assault and battery, reckless endangerment or premeditated ecocide?

Their poisonous actions that threaten the survival of portions of the planet have already caused a multitude of die-offs of thousands of species of animals in the increasing numbers of dead and dying zones in aquifers, wetlands, rivers, lakes, rivers and oceans all around the planet. What about the dead zones in human brains from neurotoxic pharmaceuticals (like the mercury and aluminum in childhood vaccines), drugs that were allowed on the market before being tested for either short- or long-term safety?

What about the extractive mining companies that, with their poisonous explosives, blow the tops off mountains in Appalachia or the Philippines (and were planned by GTac for the Penokee Mountain range of northern Wisconsin) in order to extract and export the non-renewable mineral resources beneath? Does it make any sense to believe the foreign mining officials and their cunning lobbyists who claim innocence when living things downwind and downstream are sickened or die off? Who should be responsible for the toxins that contaminate the previously pristine streams and aquifers that once provided safe drinking water and a healthy natural environment for fish, wildlife, wild rice and humans (especially the aboriginal First Nation brothers and sisters that had their lands and livelihoods stolen from them a century or more ago)?

Zero tolerance for corporate predators; stop them before they do it again!

How many strikes should any out-of-state extractive industries be allowed before they are called out for the predators that they are and thrown out? Shouldn't corporate intruders be stopped before they despoil even one more aquifer, one more stream, one more lake, one more mountain or our only planet? Shouldn't politically-connected corporate exploiters be banned, arrested, tried and punished just like human predators that relentlessly stalk their sexual prey? And shouldn't there be generous monetary restitution to the victims of past corporate criminality?

Shouldn't industrial thieves, liars, rapists and killers be treated the same as human thieves, liars, rapists and killers, especially since they received the privileges of personhood in 2010? Shouldn't we be suspicious of untrustworthy corporations that have lied to us - even once - even after spending hundreds of millions of dollars on multicolored Power Point presentations, feel-good commercials, "green-washed" billboards or highly-paid lobbyists that are on the make bribing politicians and paying off the media so they will not oppose or expose their agendas?

What about those despised sociopathic executives that are addicted to their wealth, profits, prestige, corporate jets, vacation homes and quarterly bonuses?

We regularly intervene for society's human addicts who need help overcoming their gambling or drug addictions and are thus a danger to themselves or others. Shouldn't there be interventions planned for these power addicts before they do any more damage to us, the planet or our (or their) progeny?

The answer, in a fair society, should be yes to all these questions, no matter how often the smiley-faced, well-dressed corporate spokespersons - in their most cunning damage-control mode - try to convince us that their companies are "responsible citizens". We star-struck celebrity-worshippers of high profile corporations and well-coiffed CEOs seem to sucker for that line again and again. But the stakes are higher this time. The survival of the planet and its creatures is at stake.

Should multinational corporations be judged guilty until proven innocent?

One wonders what should be the best approach for dealing with cold-blooded, non-human corporate entities. Rather than applying the standard American constitutional guarantee for human citizens (to be judged innocent until proven guilty), shouldn't we be judging dangerous non-human entities as guilty until proven innocent?

I like that notion. I have often advised my psychologically traumatized patients (falsely diagnosed, by the way, of having mental illnesses of unknown etiology) who were victims of physical, sexual, emotional or spiritual abuse in childhood to not give respect and forgiveness to their abusers unless they have truly earned it, have sincerely and contritely asked to be forgiven and therefore deserve to be respected, forgiven or obeyed.

Psychologically speaking, not obeying - and also not respecting - one's victimizers (even if they were parent-figures) should be the norm in interpersonal relationships. Psychologically speaking, the existence of significant parental neglect or abuse in a family should be one of the exceptions to the 4th commandment rule (that commands children to honor their father and their mother). Likewise, we should only do business with companies that have earned and truly deserve our trust and respect.

Being suspicious of sociopathic entities is an important strategy to follow if one is to protect oneself from being cheated, used or abused. Staying out of a sociopath's grasp is the proper thing to do, even if the person or corporation appears on the surface to be charming or honorable, for both traits can be easily faked. Staying clear of vipers, hungry alligators, hungry grizzly bears or anybody or anything that one suspects has no conscience makes good sense, since conscienceless entities are also likely to be liars and thieves and are thus fully capable of rape, pillage and even murder if they can get away with it.

Staying away from (including advocating the boycotting of) corporations that have behaved unethically in the past is a simple thing that a person can do to combat corporate criminals, but in our largely brainwashed, advertised-into-submission culture, only small minorities of people recognize - until it is too late - that they are being chumped.

Has the corporate coup d'etat been completed?

The concept of corporate power and privilege has massively benefited Big Businesses at the expense of the "consuming" public, but the reality is that it has been going on for generations. Multinational corporations and multibillionaires are increasingly in control of the White House, the US Congress and the court system, especially since Citizens United. Both political parties have been seduced by corporate campaign "contributions"/bribes.

And now, sadly, it appears that the judicial branch of the federal government is being bought off - and it appears that they are staying bought. It is not just the politicians that are controlled by corporate money anymore.

Actually, the mythical "unbiased", "non-politicized" US Supreme Court has always been heavily influenced by corporate power and money. Throughout US history, it has always been wealthy corporations, wealthy businessmen, wealthy politicians, wealthy judges and wealthy attorneys that have been installed in federal judgeships by equally wealthy presidents - many of whom have been members of the same bipartisan "old boy's clubs" such as Yale University's elite, secretive Skull and Bones. America's courts have always had judges that were in bed with capitalist, racist and union-busting elites that have never held the common good as a priority.

Say hello to friendly American fascism

The Italian dictator Benito Mussolini is said to have proclaimed that "fascism should rightly be called corporatism as it is a merger of state and corporate power:" He should know, he invented the term and the concept. Italy's right-wing, anti-worker, union-busting corporations loved and supported him as much as most 1930s German corporations loved and supported Hitler and that fascist dictator's anti-communist, anti-socialist, anti-union agendas.

Fascism is a right-wing, nationalistic, authoritarian political ideology that rules with military discipline and police state power, backed up by a secretive national security apparatus, aggressive propaganda, control of the media and suppression of trade unions. Therefore Big Businesses, notably the weapons industries and other war-related or police state industries thrive in fascist nations that suppress workers and keeps workers' wages low.

Fascist nations commonly violate the human rights of their own citizens as well as the rights of the nations that they invade and occupy). Fascist leaders try to unify the people by creating enemies, scapegoating them and then, usually via false flag operations, going to war against them. Dissent is not tolerated in fascist nations and often elections are fraudulent. Oftentimes there is some sort of a merger of church and state and the fostering of anti-intellectual/anti-scientific attitudes, thus appealing to the ignorant or uneducated. And there is always an obsession with law and order.

Who can deny that there has been a slow, rolling corporate, quasi-fascist coup d'etat that has gradually been overturning America's one person/one vote democracy? America has all the marks of a plutocracy (rule by the wealthy privileged class) that prefers fascist rule and favors corporatism.

Who can deny that wealthy corporations and their plutocratic billionaires have inordinate control over the economy, foreign and domestic policy and both major political parties? And now these inhuman entities have their privatizing eyes on our water, our land, our breathable air, our Social Security, our Medicare and even our food (as Bob Dylan sang in Union Sundown, "I can see the day comin' when even your home garden is gonna be against the law".).

Elections will continue, although the choice of candidates, the so-called "debates" (that exclude minor party candidates) and the value of small monetary donations will be increasingly meaningless. There will be fewer viable anti-establishment candidates like Paul Wellstone (or a Green Party candidate like Jill Stein or a Democratic Socialist Party candidate like Bernie Sanders) for whom to cast votes. The American dream (that "you have to be asleep to believe in", as George Carlin put it) appears to have vanished. And we sheep were asleep at the wheel when it disappeared and became a nightmare for the under-privileged.

Corporate rights vs. corporate responsibilities

It is the greedy, conscienceless, under-regulated multinationals (and NOT "man") that are poisoning the planet's ecosystems. It has been nonhuman corporations that have been causing the economic and environmental crises - including global climate changes and wars. And, because they rarely get indicted, much less punished, for their crimes corporations are continuing to get away with planetary rape, pillage and murder - and they don't seem to care. Their motto seems to be: "grab everything you can steal by any means necessary; enrich and privilege your CEOs, your boards of directors, your shareholders, spokespersons, lawyers, lobbyists, legislators, judges, and military and law enforcement officials so they are on your side; don't get caught; hunker down in your gated communities with your chauffeurs and your bodyguards while the revolutionary riots are raging outside; and let the devil take the hindmost."

Wrist slaps seem to be the norm for corporate sociopaths and the superrich if and when they are "brought to justice" for their crimes. If there are any consequences for reckless or destructive business practices at all, the corporation usually gets assessed a relatively small and very affordable fine. For large corporations, punitive fines for criminality are just a part of doing business. (The $2.2 billion fine against Johnson & Johnson's subsidiary Janssen Pharmaceuticals for illegally marketing the antipsychotic drug Risperdal didn't much affect its share price nor did it seem to stir up its shareholders.)

Sometimes though, a corporation about to be brought to justice will threaten to move its headquarters or its operations to another state or nation, leaving their smelly and toxic messes to be cleaned up by somebody else, just as one would expect of a conscienceless sociopath.

The brazen action of the Roberts' court in Citizens United might be one of the final nails in the coffin of America's mortally wounded democracy. Given the fact that the myth of corporate personhood is now the law, it is past time that the 99% and its representatives in Congress insist that the 1% be punished at least as severely as are human criminals. The 99% needs to exercise its duty to preserve and defend the constitution (and the planet) from all enemies, foreign or domestic, human or corporate, even if the corporate criminals are hiding behind boardroom walls during the day or living the celebrity high life at night.

We must identify and courageously name America's domestic enemies even if they are corporations or members of the executive, legislative or judicial branches of our federal and state governments. Naming the evil-doers (and naming the evil that they do) must be done in order to effectively confront them.

Simultaneously, we need to demand that our basic human right to have access to healthy, uncontaminated water, food, soil and air (and access to affordable education, health care and dental care as well), be safe-guarded from the greedy exploiters and predators in the plutocratic classes who extract the wealth and resources wherever and from whomever they can. The fate of our children, grandchildren and planet Earth depends on those safe-guards.

Among the first of the many steps that must be taken if we are to reverse the multinational corporate takeover/privatization of the planet is to demand that our local, state and federal legislators reverse the Citizens United ruling and correct the damage done. (Seewww.movetoamend.org andhttp://www.alecexposed.org/wiki/ALEC_Exposed for more information.)

Dr. Kohls is involved in peace, nonviolence and justice issues and therefore writes about fascism, corporatism, militarism, racism, imperialism, totalitarianism, economic oppression, anti-environmentalism and other violent, unsustainable, anti-democratic movements. Most of his Duty to Warn columns have been archived athttp://duluthreader.com/articles/categories/200_Duty_to_Warn.

Comment: Until the world of relatively normal people learn to understand the depths of depravity, corporate-run or otherwise, that psychopaths manifest on a daily basis, and until the world of relatively normal people learn to recognize the very structures of power of that enable psychopaths to do what they do - and find constructive ways to offset it - there is little chance for humanity to thrive as a whole.

See: Political Ponerology (A Science on the Nature of Evil Adjusted for Political Purposes)


(sott.net)

"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
8/21/2015 6:06:13 PM

Clinton facing fresh worries in Congress over emails

Associated Press

In this Aug. 18, 2015, photo, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton speaks with people at a town hall meeting in North Las Vegas, Nev. Clinton's campaign is facing fresh worries among congressional Democrats about her use of a private email account while serving as secretary of state. Poll results suggest the inquiry may be taking a toll on her presidential campaign. (AP Photo/John Locher)


WASHINGTON (AP) — Hillary Rodham Clinton is facing fresh worries among congressional Democrats about her use of a private email account while serving as secretary of state, as new polls signal that the inquiry is taking a toll on her presidential campaign.

The Democratic front-runner's campaign has taken steps to defend her against allegations she may have put classified information at risk by using a private email account and server, arguing she never sent or received material considered classified at the time.

But Democratic lawmakers said Clinton's campaign has not adequately explained the complicated nature of the email review and panned some of her attempts to use humor to talk about the probe. Clinton joked at a Democratic dinner in Iowa last week that she liked the social media platform Snapchat because the messages disappear by themselves. And she shrugged off questions about her server being wiped clean, asking facetiously in Nevada, "Like a cloth or something?"

"I don't think the campaign has handled it very well," Florida Sen. Bill Nelson told The Associated Press on Thursday. "I think the advice to her of making a joke out of it — I think that was not good advice."


Nelson said if Clinton had received information that should have been labeled classified or top secret, the person sending the email would bear the responsibility of making that clear on the email. "If she is receiving something on a private email account and it has no designation, then how would she know that it is classified?" he asked.

In Republican-leaning Kentucky, Democratic Rep. John Yarmuth warned in an interview with WHAS-TV in Louisville: "I still think there is a chance that this could upend her campaign."

"I just never feel like I have a grasp of what the facts are," Yarmuth said Wednesday. "Clearly she has handled it poorly from the first day. And there's the appearance of dishonesty, if it's not dishonest."

The new concerns follow Clinton's decision to turn over her server to federal investigators who are trying to determine if the data on it was secure.

Clinton holds a wide but narrowing lead in the Democratic field against Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, who has picked up ground on her in New Hampshire and Iowa. Former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley has pitched himself as a fresh face and has tried to gain traction.

While Clinton holds significant advantages in money and support among Democrats, polls released Thursday by Quinnipiac University in Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania — three general election battleground states — found that only about one-third of respondents thought she was honest and trustworthy.

That has prompted Clinton's campaign to defend her on cable television and distribute fact sheets to supporters about the inquiry.

On Friday, the campaign publicized a video of Clinton press secretary Brian Fallon sitting behind a laptop and reading off and then correcting what he called inaccurate tweets about the emails.

"Look, we fully expect that Republicans are going to continue to want to talk about Hillary Clinton's emails," Fallon says at the end of the video. "And the reason for that is because they can't talk about their plan to grow the economy on behalf of the middle class."

Clinton's allies predict congressional Republicans will overplay their hand when Clinton testifies in October before a GOP-led panel investigating the 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya.

"I've been around this block many times with supposed Clinton scandals. It just won't work," said David Brock, a Clinton loyalist and the founder of Democratic super PAC American Bridge.

Clinton told reporters in Nevada that they were the only ones bringing up the subject. Yet others are hearing about it.

Marc Lasry, a New York financier and top fundraiser for Clinton, said donors are asking him questions about the situation — which he said he sees as "a non-issue."

"What I hear from people is, 'Hey, can you explain this to me?'" Lasry said in an interview Friday. "I tell people that it was perfectly fine for her to have a personal server. They say, 'Oh, that's what I thought.' And the next question is, 'Why is this such a big deal?' And I tell them that this is only an issue because Republicans and the media have made it into an issue."

Watching from the sidelines is Vice President Joe Biden, who is considering entering the Democratic primaries. Biden has struggled in two previous presidential bids, but his entry could offer Democrats another alternative.

While those in the Democratic field have largely steered clear of the email review, O'Malley said Wednesday in Las Vegas that Clinton's email practices had become a "huge distraction" from what Democrats should be talking about and said it showed the need for more televised debates.

"Until we do, our party's label is going to be the latest news du jour about emails and email servers and what Secretary Clinton knew and when she knew it," O'Malley said.

Republicans say they aren't surprised that Democrats are growing nervous about continued focus on the situation.

"Clinton's growing email scandal is a huge potential problem for Democrats because, at some point, this is going to become a drag on the whole ticket if she happens to be the nominee," Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus said on Friday.

___

Follow Ken Thomas and Julie Bykowicz on Twitter: https://twitter.com/KThomasDC and https://twitter.com/bykowicz

"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+0
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
8/21/2015 11:13:03 PM

Drenched in red: Wall Street plunges in worst weekly retreat since 2011

Yahoo Finance



U.S. markets tumbled more than 5% this week as worries mounted over the state of the global economy.

The S&P 500 plummeted 64.8 points, or 3.2%, on Friday, capping a painful week that saw the broad-market barometer shed 5.8%. Meanwhile, the Dow Jones Industrial average dropped 530.9 points, or 3.1% on the day. It was the steepest drop since August 2011 for the blue-chip average. Meanwhile, the Nasdaq Composite dropped 171.5 points, or 3.5%. All three major benchmarks are now in the red for 2015, and the Dow narrowly entered correction territory.

The selloff wiped out some $1.3 trillion in U.S. market value since Tuesday morning, according to a calculation by Yahoo Finance using the Dow Jones U.S. Total Market Index. In a sign of the concern on the Street, the CBOE's VIX, which is sometimes called Wall Street's fear gauge, spiked more than 100% for the week.

'Relentless'

"Investors have been provided with a relentless string of global data points that speak to a massive transition to 'risk-off,'" said Peter Kenny, chief market strategist at Clearpool Group.

Echoing Kenny, Gustavo Reis, an economist at Bank of America Merrill Lynch, wrote in a note to clients that emerging market "growth concerns and softer activity news in (developed markets) appear to have switched a full on global growth scare in the marketplace." He bluntly added, "We believe the global outlook has deteriorated."

U.S. traders were greeted Friday with a round of data indicating China's vast factory sector may have contracted at the swiftest pace in six-and-a-half years in August. This comes as the government there has taken unprecedented steps to prop up the world's second biggest economy. Indeed, last week, the People's Bank of China sharply depreciated the yuan, a move some observers said was aimed at boosting exports.

The yuan devaluation also ignited concerns that a new currency war could be afoot, in which several emerging-market countries could move to cut the value of their currencies to protect their own export markets. Those worries were amplified this week after Vietnam devalued the dong by 1%, and Kazakhstan's tenge crashed.

This could put the U.S. economy in a tough bind as the greenback has already surged more than 16% against a basket of global currencies over the past 12 months. The Federal Reserve is also seen hiking interest rates this year, which would likely put even greater pressure on the U.S. dollar.

In fact, Kenny noted that the selloff was exacerbated by "growing concerns of a misstep by the Federal Reserve in terms of normalization timeline."

Race to safety

Given the economic nature of the concerns, cyclical shares took the heaviest losses on the week, while defensive holdings were spared the worst of the selling. The energy, technology, and financial sectors fell by the widest margins, while the utilities, telecommunication and health-care sectors fell the least.

Among the many decliners was Apple (AAPL), the world's biggest publicly-traded company by market capitalization, which tumbled into bear-market territory on Friday.

Many commodities were also pummeled. The benchmark U.S. crude oil contract dropped more than 5% for the week, briefly dipping under $40 a barrel for the first time since 2009. Crude is off by almost 25% for the year.

Traders, meanwhile, raced into safe-haven assets. The yield on the benchmark U.S. 10-year Treasury bond fell 0.034 percentage point on Friday to 2.05%. Bond yields move in the opposite direction of prices, so when traders bid-up the asset, the yield falls. Gold jumped 4.2% to cap the week at $1,159 a troy ounce.

Looking ahead

Attention could shift back to the U.S. next week, as investors will receive a slew of key economic data. Among the reports on tap are a revised look at second-quarter gross domestic product, a closely-watched snapshot of home prices, and a gauge of consumer income and spending.

The Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City also hosts its annual economic symposium in Jackson Hole, Wyoming. Fed chief Janet Yellen won't be in attendance, but her No. 2, Stanley Fischer, will be delivering an address on inflation. While the job market has picked up steam in recent months, most gauges of inflation remain stubbornly below the central bank's targets.



Concerns over the Chinese economy and resignation of Greece's PM cause markets to suffer further.
Investors gripped by unease



"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1