Ron Paul – Whistleblowers Are The True Heroes And Patriots In America

MARCH 16, 2017

In today’s backward world, whenever a whistleblower publicly exposes government corruption, politicians respond by condemning the source of the leak rather than investigating any unethical behavior. This doesn’t make any sense in a society that prides itself on being ‘free,’ for none of us are free when we are lorded over by a dangerous government that deceives the public in order to enrich those who manipulate government to their personal advantage.

Ron Paul knows this, and he has long been one of America’s most outspoken voices for truth and integrity in government, now speaking out on behalf of whistleblowers who are increasingly being punished for revealing government’s dark secrets. Regarding this glaring incongruity in American democracy, Ron Paul recently commented on the role whistleblowers play in a free and open society, calling them the true heroes and patriots.

His comments are noted here:

It’s deeply troubling that so many in the news media and in both political parties attack the efforts of whistle-blowers and those who publish their revelations. These individuals risk it all, not for their own wealth and glory, but to inform us of what is being done to us and in our name.
Their releases are both heroic and pro-American.
We are told that the government must be allowed to operate in secret in order to keep us safe, but how much security do we really have if we allow the government to deprive us of our liberty?
What have we learned from whistle-blowers Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning or WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and others? We now know that our government views the Fourth Amendment as a mere suggestion, rather than a constraint on its actions.
Our consumer products have been turned into listening devices that the government can turn on and off at will. Those who ruled East Germany could only fantasize about such technology and its potential for controlling anyone who disagrees with the government.
Revelations last week that our televisions may actually be watching us? Has the CIA been reading George Orwell’s 1984 as an instruction manual?
If we are to be a free society, we must demand the right to know about government malfeasance. We must reject the anti-American notion that the government has the right to know everything about us, but that we have no right to know anything about the government. We cannot entrust our life, liberty and happiness to an unelected shadow government that operates in secret and is accountable to no one.
History teaches of the horrors that result when a people are willing to sacrifice their liberty for the false promises of government-provided security. Totalitarianisms of the left and right have thrived in such an environment.
Whistle-blowers are the truth-seekers, and we must demand the truth. Who does not want to know the truth? Sadly, in an empire of lies, the truth has become treason. ~Ron Paul

In the wake of so many of WikiLeaks revelations about the deepening secrecy and maliciousness of publicly funded government activities, it is crucial to rethink our approach to supporting and protecting whistleblowers. During the Obama presidency, government whistleblowers experienced an unprecedented level of official persecution.

As noted by renowned journalist, John Pilger:

Obama, the constitutional lawyer, prosecuted more whistleblowers than any other president in history, even though the US constitution protects them. He declared Chelsea Manning guilty before the end of a trial that was a travesty. He has refused to pardon Manning who has suffered years of inhumane treatment which the UN says amounts to torture. He has pursued an entirely bogus case against Julian Assange. He promised to close the Guantanamo concentration camp and didn’t. ~John Pilger

It appears we are in danger of maintaining this precedent under President Trump; however, people like Ron Paul are unafraid to speak truth in the empire of lies.

This article (Ron Paul – Whistleblowers are the True Heroes and Patriots in America) was originally created and published by Waking Times and is published here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Isaac Davis and WakingTimes.com. It may be re-posted freely with proper attribution, author bio, and this copyright statement.

(activistpost.com)

TWO NEW BILLS QUIETLY SLIPPING THROUGH CONGRESS THAT WILL GIVE BIG PHARMA UNLIMITED POWER & ZERO ACCOUNTABILITY

LISA BLOOMQUISTMARCH 17, 2017

If you’re hurt by a pharmaceutical, you can sue the company that made the drug, and be compensated for your losses, right? Most people assume that is the way the justice system works, but the reality is that it’s difficult, and in many cases impossible, for victims of pharmaceutical companies (and other big corporations/industries) to gain compensation or justice.There are many aspects of the current U.S. legal system that make getting compensation and justice for injuries caused by pharmaceutical drugs difficult, and there are two bills that are currently going through the U.S. House of Representatives (H.R. 985, the 2017 Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act and H.R. 1215, the Protecting Access to Care Act of 2017) that will make justice for victims of pharmaceuticals nearly impossible.

They Can Hurt You as Long as You Were Warned

Currently, people who are hurt by pharmaceuticals are in a legal catch-22 because victims of pharmaceuticals can’t sue drug companies for hurting them, they can only sue for failure to warn. So, if a pharmaceutical drug gives you cancer, you can’t sue the company that made the drug for the fact that it gave you cancer, you can only sue them for failing to warn you IF the warning label doesn’t contain information about the drug causing cancer. If the warning label says that the drug can cause cancer, you can’t sue, because “you were warned.” Even if you were never given the drug warning label, you “were warned” as far as the justice system is concerned — because the learned intermediary doctrine states that pharmaceutical manufacturers aren’t obligated to inform you, the consumer/patient/victim, they’re only obligated to inform the doctor, the “learned intermediary,” about the potential harm that the drug can cause.

If a pharmaceutical drug causes your cancer, but that isn’t noted on the pharmaceutical warning label, you’re not much better off, because proving that a pharmaceutical caused your cancer is near-impossible for a regular person. The only situation in which a person can sue a pharmaceutical drug company for the harm done by their products is when a drug warning label changes. If a pharmaceutical drug warning label changes, there is enough evidence that the drug did the harm, but people who took the drug prior to the warning label change weren’t properly warned, so there is a short window of opportunity for victims to sue and gain recourse/justice for the harm done to them. The inherently dangerous nature of pharmaceutical drugs, the warning labels that accompany them, and the way our justice system is structured, make it so that the vast majority of those who suffer harm from pharmaceutical drugs are unable to sue the maker of the drug(s) that hurt them.

Victims of Generic Pharmaceuticals Can’t Sue

On top of that, victims of generic pharmaceuticals are completely unable to sue the manufacturer of the pharmaceutical drug that hurt them. This is an absurd situation that is an extreme miscarriage of justice. You can read more about the inability of victims to sue makers of generic pharmaceuticals in the New York Times article “In 5-4 Ruling, Justices Say Generic Makers Are Not Liable for Design of Drugs” and the posts on HormonesMatter.com, “SCOTUS Decision on Medication Safety: No Product Liability” and “Hurt by a Generic Drug? Victims have no Recourse unless the FDA Changes Rules.” Basically, if you are hurt by a generic drug, you have no recourse because cannot sue a generic drug manufacturer. The FDA has the power to change this situation, but they have failed to do so over the 3+ years that they have been deliberating how they might address it.

A poignant example of how this horrible rule can keep people from gaining justice is the tragic death of Chris Dannelly. Chris Dannelly was killed by generic Levaquin — levofloxacin — and neither his widow nor his children can sue the maker of the generic levofloxacin that killed him. Here is a newscast about Chris Dannelly’s death from levofloxacin:

Justice for the Rich

Justice is supposed to be blind, but your chances of getting compensated for your losses are significantly higher if you are wealthy. It is difficult to get a lawyer to take your medical harm case if the damages that you may be compensated for are less than a million dollars. According to theProPublica article “Patient Harm: When An Attorney Won’t Take Your Case”:

But lawyers may have to invest $50,000 or more to pursue a case, and they usually only get paid if they win or settle. The payout is determined largely by economic damages – lost earnings, medical bills and future costs caused by the injury. Those who don’t earn big paychecks – including children, the elderly and stay-at-home-moms – are the least likely to find an attorney, studies show.

If you can’t show that you suffered from millions of dollars in lost wages, and other damages, lawyers won’t take your case because it doesn’t make economic sense for them to do so. And, if you can’t find a lawyer to take your case, you cannot get justice.

In order to increase the potential payout of a lawsuit, to make it worth the upfront investment of a lawyers’ time, money, and effort, plaintiffs are lumped together in class-action lawsuits. Class-action lawsuits aren’t ideal, but they’re the only form of justice that most victims of pharmaceutical companies have, and, frankly, they’re better than nothing. Class-action lawsuits are often the only way that victims of pharmaceutical drugs can gain justice, and class-action lawsuits are currently under attack by the U.S. Congress.

H.R. 985 – Making Justice Even More Difficult for Victims

H.R. 985, the 2017 Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act, aims to put more obstacles in the way of plaintiffs/victims who seek justice. This justice-reform bill is a gift to the pharmaceutical industry, and other big corporations that hurt citizens (like big banks, big agriculture, big chemical, big oil etc.) from Congress men and women who receive millions of dollars in donations from those industries.

One of the most potentially damaging aspects of H.R. 985 is a provision that states that each plaintiff in a class-action lawsuit must “affirmatively demonstrate” that they “suffered the same type and scope of injury as the named class representative.” This means that all plaintiffs in a class-action lawsuit must have exactly the same injury. This provision will keep a large number of pharmaceutical class-action lawsuits from moving forward, and will rob the people who could otherwise be involved in a class-action lawsuit of justice.

Here is an example of how this provision in H.R. 985 could hurt people: The warning labels for fluoroquinolone antibiotics, including Cipro, Levaquin, and Avelox, have recently been updated to note that permanent peripheral neuropathy is a potential effect of those drugs. This opened the door to lawsuits, and many law firms are taking cases for those suffering from peripheral neuropathy caused by fluoroquinolones. Peripheral neuropathy is a broad diagnosis though, and it presents in many different ways. Some people with peripheral neuropathy may have pain that is debilitating, while others may have twitching muscles, others may experience numbness, others may have reduced balance or coordination, and others may have autonomic nervous system dysfunction that causes loss of digestive motility. H.R. 985 could make it so that those plaintiffs cannot join together in a class-action lawsuit because their symptoms present differently, and, as noted above, without the possibility of a class-action lawsuit, there is no possibility for justice for many victims of pharmaceutical industry crimes.

In “House Judiciary Committee Passes H.R. 985: Fairness in Class Action Litigation” the following example is given to illustrate how this provision could hurt those trying to sue a bank: “So if your bank steals a $5 overdraft fee, and $10 from your neighbor, a class action could be dismissed because your injuries were different. Even if you file a lawsuit and get your $5 back, your friend would not.”

This provision of H.B. 985 would keep cases like that of the people of Hinkley, California versus Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), that was featured in the movieErin Brockovich, from moving forward. The people of Hinkley “suffered cancers, mis carriages and digestive and skin disorders as a result of the company (PG&E) dumping contaminated waste into ponds that seeped into the town’s drinking water.” If they weren’t allowed to join together in a class-action lawsuit because they didn’t have the “same type and scope of injury as the named class representative,” they wouldn’t be able to gain justice.

When people are exposed to endocrine disrupting chemicals (whether those be industrial pollutants, pharmaceuticals, pesticides, herbicides, etc.), the health maladies that result vary from person to person. Some people may suffer from infertility, while others get cancer, and others develop an autoimmune disease. (For more information about the health effects of endocrine disrupting chemicals, read Our Stolen Future: Are We Threatening Our Fertility, Intelligence, and Survival?–A Scientific Detective Story by Theo Colborn, Dianne Dumanoski, and John Peterson Myers.) The people in the industries producing endocrine-disrupting pollutants know this, and they lobby accordingly — hence this provision in H.B. 985.

If H.B. 985 passes into law with the provision that all plaintiffs must “affirmatively demonstrate” that they “suffered the same type and scope of injury as the named class representative,” bulldog lawyers hired by big pharma, big ag, big chemical, big oil, and other profit-at-all-cost motivated corporations, will tear apart all attempts of plaintiffs/citizens/victims to join together to fight for justice.

Plaintiff Lawyers Won’t Take Cases if They Can’t Get Paid

Another way that H.B. 985 will keep victims of corporate crimes from gaining justice is by limiting the amount of money attorneys can receive as compensation for representing class-action plaintiffs. This will interfere with the attorney/client contract and it will disincentivize attorneys from taking cases of those who have been victimized by big corporations.

In “Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act of 2017: The Corporate Sweetheart Deal,” it is noted that:

Under this bill it is doubtful you would be able to find a lawyer to represent you unless you could afford to pay them hourly. Lawyers know that people who have been badly hurt often cannot afford to pay hefty hourly legal bills. Thus, lawyers often enter into a contingency contract with clients. The lawyer promises to work hard on the client’s behalf, and if the lawyer wins the case, the client pays them a portion of what was collected. This bill makes it nearly impossible for lawyers to make that agreement with their clients. This is a move by the federal government to directly interfere with and restrict negotiated contracts.

Victims of corporate crimes typically don’t have the money to pay attorneys upfront. The victim/plaintiff attorneys are paid out of the final settlement or award. If the amount that attorneys could possibly recoup is limited by Congress, this provides a serious disincentive for attorneys to take cases and to invest the time/money/effort into pursuing justice for victims.

H.R. 1215 Hurts Victims of Big Pharma

Another horrible bill that is going through the U.S. Congress is HR 1215 “Protecting Access to Care Act of 2017.” H.R. 1215 eliminates the rights of people harmed by medical professionals. It rigs the system, making it nearly impossible for injured victims to pursue lawsuits by imposing harsh time limits on lawsuits, denying the right to a trial by jury, limiting certain damages to $250,000 (even in states where such limits are unconstitutional), and protecting those who prescribe dangerous drugs and who hurt people with dangerous medical devices.

Corrupt Politicians Represent Big Business

H.R. 985 and H.R. 1215 are gifts to big corporations — big pharma, big ag, big chemical, big oil, and big banks — that prevent citizens who have been hurt by these corporations from gaining justice. The man who introduced H.R. 985, and who is ushering H.R. 1215 through the House Judiciary Committee, is Bob Goodlatte, a Republican from Virginia. During his time in Congress,Representative Goodlatte has received more that $2.1 million from agribusiness, almost $1.5 million from the finance, insurance, and real estate sector, more than $670,000 from the health sector (which includes pharmaceutical companies), and $1.3 million from miscellaneous business interests. Those industries have invested a lot of money in Goodlatte, and that investment is now paying off as he is now the chair of the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee, and has introduced a bill that will drastically limit the liability of large corporations. These corporations will be able to steal from and poison the American people, without consequence, if H.R. 985 and H.R. 1215 pass into law as they currently stand.

The Myth of the Frivolous Lawsuit

People like Representative Goodlatte claim that congressionally mandated judicial reform is necessary because there are too many frivolous lawsuits. This is a myth that has been repeated so many times that many, maybe even most, people think that it’s true. Of course, there are cases where an unscrupulous attorney or greedy plaintiff succeeds in getting a large payoff, but that situation is unusual, and it is far more common for legitimately injured people to be unable to gain justice (for the reasons described above) than it is for a frivolous lawsuit to move forward and win in court.

This skit from Adam Ruins Everything, though it is meant to be humorous, excellently explains how the myth of the frivolous lawsuit was started, perpetrated, and promoted by large corporations:

The case described in the video, that of Liebeck vs. McDonald’s, wasn’t frivolous, and neither are most lawsuits that individual citizens bring against large corporations.

Whenever someone tries to justify taking away your rights to a fair trial and your opportunities for recourse against a corporation that hurt you by claiming that “frivolous lawsuits” should be limited, be suspicious, question thoroughly, and understand that those people are trying to take away your rights to hold corporations that hurt people responsible for their crimes. When you hear the term “justice reform,” know that it is code for “politicians trying to take away your right to sue and chance of getting justice if a big corporation hurts you.” Fight not only for justice, but also for an honest and righteous conversation about the issues. The truth is that it is exceedingly difficult for legitimate victims to get justice and/or compensation for their losses. The truth is that the rights of citizens are being eroded and the rights of corporations are being elevated.

Welcome to the Corporatocracy

Through “judicial reform” bills like H.R. 985 and H.R. 1215, the U.S. Congress is working with big corporations of all sorts to rob citizens of their ability to gain justice. These “Representatives” are not representatives of the people, they are representatives of the corporations that hurt the people. These corporations are, after all, who pay the politicians.

Though corporate interests are quickly supplanting individual rights, there are still some checks and balances left in the system. Democratically elected officials still can be held accountable by the people who elected them. I encourage everyone who wants to be able to hold corporate criminals responsible for hurting and murdering people to email, call, tweet, or otherwise reach out to every member of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee, and tell them to oppose both H.R. 985 and H.R. 1215. The coroporatocracy has the upper-hand right now, but maybe democracy isn’t entirely dead. Please take a few moments to reach out to the U.S. House Judiciary Committee – thank you.

(collective-evolution.com)

Luis Miguel 1162 61587 Lima	RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES? 3/19/2017 5:35:52 PM
	Trump’s First War? ‘All Options Are On The Table’ As The U.S. And North Korea Prepare For The Second Korean War By Michael Snyder, on March 17th, 2017 This may be the closest that we have been to war with North Korea since the original Korean War ended in 1953. The North Koreans are feverishly working to develop intercontinental ballistic missiles that could strike the U.S. mainland, and meanwhile Donald Trump has not moved from his position that North Korea will simply not be allowed to have ICBMs. If North Korea does not blink, it means that we are literally counting down the days until we go to war. Unfortunately, North Korean leaders appear to literally be insane and they have shown absolutely no signs of backing off. In 2016, North Korea tested two nuclear bombs and test-fired 24 missiles, and so far this year they have test-fired five ballistic missiles into the Sea of Japan. During a joint press conference with the South Korean Foreign Minister on Friday, U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson boldly declared that “all options are on the table” when it comes to North Korea… US military action against North Korea is an “option on the table,” Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has stated, adding that Washington’s “strategic patience” with the isolated country has ended. “Let me be very clear. The policy of strategic patience has ended. We are exploring a new range of diplomatic, security and economic measures. All options are on the table,” Tillerson told reporters during a joint news conference with South Korean Foreign Minister Yun Byung-se on Friday. In addition, Tillerson specifically declined to rule out a preemptive strike against the regime. Needless to say, the ultra-paranoid leadership in Pyongyang was totally freaked out by what Tillerson had to say. The following comes from the Washington Post… Soon after Tillerson’s remarks, in a sign of mounting tensions, the North Korean Embassy held an extraordinary news conference in Beijing to blame the potential for nuclear war on the United States while vowing that its homegrown nuclear testing program will continue in self-defense. North Korea has amassed a sizable nuclear stockpile and appears at the brink of being able to strike the U.S. mainland and American allies in Asia. What has brought this crisis to a breaking point is the fact that North Korea has continued to work on developing an ICBM that could deliver a nuclear payload to the United States. Donald Trump has promised to stop North Korea from doing that before it ever happens… Just before he took office in January, Trump tweeted: “It won’t happen!” when Kim said North Korea was close to testing an ICBM. I believe that Trump means what he says. So now Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un are locked in a very dangerous game of chicken. Both of them are known to be extremely strong-willed, tempermental, and unwilling to back down when threatened. But if neither of them is willing to back down now, it could potentially spark a major war… Making matters worse, this year we have Kim Jong Un on one side: A young, relatively inexperienced and unpredictable leader prone to aggression who could be facing internal turmoil (one explanation for killing his brother). On the other, we now have President Trump. In such a high-stakes standoff, if we’re not careful, these two leaders could prove to be a volatile — and deadly — mix. In short, what we have now is a regional tinderbox ready to be lit by a small spark that could lead to an exchange of fire and subsequently another war. And actually the truth is that the conflict has already started. It is widely known that the U.S. has already been conducting cyberattacks against North Korea’s nuclear program, but if those cyberattacks end up not being enough the Trump administration will order a preemptive military strike. In recent days, the U.S. military has deployed a 100,000-ton Nimitz-class aircraft carrier to the region. The USS Carl Vinson is carrying more than 40 F-18s, and it is being escorted by a number of very powerful destroyers and cruisers. And it is also being reported that SEAL Team 6 is being deployed to South Korea in order “to practice incapacitating North Korean leadership in the case of conflict”. The following comes from Zero Hedge… On March 1, the WSJ reported that the options contemplated by the White House in response to recent North Korean acts, include “the possibility of both military force and regime change to counter the country’s nuclear-weapons threat.” The review came es amid recent events have strained regional stability including last month’s launch by North Korea of a ballistic missile into the Sea of Japan, and the assassination of the estranged half brother of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in Malaysia. And, according to a report in Yonhap, said “regime change” may come far sooner than expected: the South Korean website writes that U.S. special operations forces, including the unit that killed Osama Bin Laden, will take part in joint military drills in South Korea “to practice incapacitating North Korean leadership in the case of conflict”, a military official said Monday. The U.S. Navy’s Special Warfare Development Group, better known as the SEAL Team 6, will arrive in South Korea for joint military drills and take part in an exercise simulating a precision North Korean incurion and “the removal of North Korean leader Kim Jong-un”, according to the Ministry of National Defense Monday. But regime change in North Korea would not be easy, and unless the U.S. was willing to use nuclear weapons in a first strike the North Koreans would almost certainly be able to strike back very hard. North Korea has the fourth largest army in the entire world, and it is being reported that North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has personally ordered his entire military to go into “combat mode” in anticipation of a conflict with the United States… It’s been at least 24 hours since any further sabers were rattled between China, US, South Korea, and North Korea (oh and Japan), but it according to DailyNK.com, Kim Jong Un has ordered the entire North Korean army into “combat mode” to tighten security and consolidate sentiment in response to military drills conducted by South Korea and the US, which began in early March. A source in South Pyongan Province told Daily NK that following the order from Kim Jong Un, every last soldier– even if away on business, on leave, off-base for training, or even those with a recent death in the family–were ordered back to their units. The authorities have ordered the military police in each region to summon all soldiers back to their bases. North Korea has overwhelming military superiority over South Korea, and unless the U.S. was willing to use nukes, any U.S. strike would almost certainly provoke a North Korean invasion of South Korea. The following description of what that might look like comes from the Daily Mail… North Korea, most rogue of rogue nations, has struck. The nuclear explosion, similar in size to that which levelled Hiroshima, signalled the start of a blitzkrieg-style ground invasion intended to swiftly overwhelm its richer, more advanced neighbour. A second atomic warhead, inbound on a crude Rodong rocket, has been successfully intercepted by America’s THAAD (Terminal High-Altitude Area Defence) anti-ballistic missile system. But Seoul’s torment is only beginning as hundreds of North Korean heavy guns rain down shells on the capital, many containing Sarin nerve gas. The city, bunched up against the North-South border, is hopelessly vulnerable to a mass sneak attack of the kind now taking place, as hundreds of thousands of North Korean troops, and thousands of tanks, pour out of innumerable underground bunkers built within miles of the Demilitarized Zone between the two countries. Unless the U.S. is willing to nuke North Korea into oblivion (and this would almost certainly not happen), the scenario detailed above is very likely to actually happen someday. And once North Korea invades, the United States will be forced to come to South Korea’s aid and the Second Korean War will have begun. We are moving into a time when war will become much more common, and at some point World War III will erupt. If we do go to war with North Korea, Trump will get the blame, but the truth is that Barack Obama, George W. Bush and Bill Clinton also deserve much of the blame for allowing things to get to this point. It is absolutely unthinkable that we would allow the North Koreans to develop ICBMs that could deliver nuclear payloads to U.S. cities. But it is almost as unthinkable for us to go to war with North Korea. Both possibilities are absolutely horrific, and so let us hope that cooler heads will prevail and that Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un will be able to work things out. (End of American Dream)
	"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
	+1

Luis Miguel 1162 61587 Lima	RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES? 3/19/2017 5:50:13 PM
	Ron Paul – Whistleblowers Are The True Heroes And Patriots In America MARCH 16, 2017 By Isaac Davis In today’s backward world, whenever a whistleblower publicly exposes government corruption, politicians respond by condemning the source of the leak rather than investigating any unethical behavior. This doesn’t make any sense in a society that prides itself on being ‘free,’ for none of us are free when we are lorded over by a dangerous government that deceives the public in order to enrich those who manipulate government to their personal advantage. Ron Paul knows this, and he has long been one of America’s most outspoken voices for truth and integrity in government, now speaking out on behalf of whistleblowers who are increasingly being punished for revealing government’s dark secrets. Regarding this glaring incongruity in American democracy, Ron Paul recently commented on the role whistleblowers play in a free and open society, calling them the true heroes and patriots. His comments are noted here: It’s deeply troubling that so many in the news media and in both political parties attack the efforts of whistle-blowers and those who publish their revelations. These individuals risk it all, not for their own wealth and glory, but to inform us of what is being done to us and in our name. Their releases are both heroic and pro-American. We are told that the government must be allowed to operate in secret in order to keep us safe, but how much security do we really have if we allow the government to deprive us of our liberty? What have we learned from whistle-blowers Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning or WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and others? We now know that our government views the Fourth Amendment as a mere suggestion, rather than a constraint on its actions. Our consumer products have been turned into listening devices that the government can turn on and off at will. Those who ruled East Germany could only fantasize about such technology and its potential for controlling anyone who disagrees with the government. Revelations last week that our televisions may actually be watching us? Has the CIA been reading George Orwell’s 1984 as an instruction manual? If we are to be a free society, we must demand the right to know about government malfeasance. We must reject the anti-American notion that the government has the right to know everything about us, but that we have no right to know anything about the government. We cannot entrust our life, liberty and happiness to an unelected shadow government that operates in secret and is accountable to no one. History teaches of the horrors that result when a people are willing to sacrifice their liberty for the false promises of government-provided security. Totalitarianisms of the left and right have thrived in such an environment. Whistle-blowers are the truth-seekers, and we must demand the truth. Who does not want to know the truth? Sadly, in an empire of lies, the truth has become treason. ~Ron Paul In the wake of so many of WikiLeaks revelations about the deepening secrecy and maliciousness of publicly funded government activities, it is crucial to rethink our approach to supporting and protecting whistleblowers. During the Obama presidency, government whistleblowers experienced an unprecedented level of official persecution. As noted by renowned journalist, John Pilger: Obama, the constitutional lawyer, prosecuted more whistleblowers than any other president in history, even though the US constitution protects them. He declared Chelsea Manning guilty before the end of a trial that was a travesty. He has refused to pardon Manning who has suffered years of inhumane treatment which the UN says amounts to torture. He has pursued an entirely bogus case against Julian Assange. He promised to close the Guantanamo concentration camp and didn’t. ~John Pilger It appears we are in danger of maintaining this precedent under President Trump; however, people like Ron Paul are unafraid to speak truth in the empire of lies. This article (Ron Paul – Whistleblowers are the True Heroes and Patriots in America) was originally created and published by Waking Times and is published here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Isaac Davis and WakingTimes.com. It may be re-posted freely with proper attribution, author bio, and this copyright statement. (activistpost.com)
	"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
	+1

Jan (aka) Jaz 7946 11687 Denver	RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES? 3/19/2017 6:02:32 PM
	This is going to be an interesting development for those who believe they need a 'corporate pill' to heal their body vs Nature Made Healing (clean water, food, herbs, ... Earth) Jan aka Jaz Quote: TWO NEW BILLS QUIETLY SLIPPING THROUGH CONGRESS THAT WILL GIVE BIG PHARMA UNLIMITED POWER & ZERO ACCOUNTABILITY LISA BLOOMQUISTMARCH 17, 2017 If you’re hurt by a pharmaceutical, you can sue the company that made the drug, and be compensated for your losses, right? Most people assume that is the way the justice system works, but the reality is that it’s difficult, and in many cases impossible, for victims of pharmaceutical companies (and other big corporations/industries) to gain compensation or justice.There are many aspects of the current U.S. legal system that make getting compensation and justice for injuries caused by pharmaceutical drugs difficult, and there are two bills that are currently going through the U.S. House of Representatives (H.R. 985, the 2017 Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act and H.R. 1215, the Protecting Access to Care Act of 2017) that will make justice for victims of pharmaceuticals nearly impossible. They Can Hurt You as Long as You Were Warned Currently, people who are hurt by pharmaceuticals are in a legal catch-22 because victims of pharmaceuticals can’t sue drug companies for hurting them, they can only sue for failure to warn. So, if a pharmaceutical drug gives you cancer, you can’t sue the company that made the drug for the fact that it gave you cancer, you can only sue them for failing to warn you IF the warning label doesn’t contain information about the drug causing cancer. If the warning label says that the drug can cause cancer, you can’t sue, because “you were warned.” Even if you were never given the drug warning label, you “were warned” as far as the justice system is concerned — because the learned intermediary doctrine states that pharmaceutical manufacturers aren’t obligated to inform you, the consumer/patient/victim, they’re only obligated to inform the doctor, the “learned intermediary,” about the potential harm that the drug can cause. If a pharmaceutical drug causes your cancer, but that isn’t noted on the pharmaceutical warning label, you’re not much better off, because proving that a pharmaceutical caused your cancer is near-impossible for a regular person. The only situation in which a person can sue a pharmaceutical drug company for the harm done by their products is when a drug warning label changes. If a pharmaceutical drug warning label changes, there is enough evidence that the drug did the harm, but people who took the drug prior to the warning label change weren’t properly warned, so there is a short window of opportunity for victims to sue and gain recourse/justice for the harm done to them. The inherently dangerous nature of pharmaceutical drugs, the warning labels that accompany them, and the way our justice system is structured, make it so that the vast majority of those who suffer harm from pharmaceutical drugs are unable to sue the maker of the drug(s) that hurt them. Victims of Generic Pharmaceuticals Can’t Sue On top of that, victims of generic pharmaceuticals are completely unable to sue the manufacturer of the pharmaceutical drug that hurt them. This is an absurd situation that is an extreme miscarriage of justice. You can read more about the inability of victims to sue makers of generic pharmaceuticals in the New York Times article “In 5-4 Ruling, Justices Say Generic Makers Are Not Liable for Design of Drugs” and the posts on HormonesMatter.com, “SCOTUS Decision on Medication Safety: No Product Liability” and “Hurt by a Generic Drug? Victims have no Recourse unless the FDA Changes Rules.” Basically, if you are hurt by a generic drug, you have no recourse because cannot sue a generic drug manufacturer. The FDA has the power to change this situation, but they have failed to do so over the 3+ years that they have been deliberating how they might address it. A poignant example of how this horrible rule can keep people from gaining justice is the tragic death of Chris Dannelly. Chris Dannelly was killed by generic Levaquin — levofloxacin — and neither his widow nor his children can sue the maker of the generic levofloxacin that killed him. Here is a newscast about Chris Dannelly’s death from levofloxacin: Justice for the Rich Justice is supposed to be blind, but your chances of getting compensated for your losses are significantly higher if you are wealthy. It is difficult to get a lawyer to take your medical harm case if the damages that you may be compensated for are less than a million dollars. According to theProPublica article “Patient Harm: When An Attorney Won’t Take Your Case”: But lawyers may have to invest $50,000 or more to pursue a case, and they usually only get paid if they win or settle. The payout is determined largely by economic damages – lost earnings, medical bills and future costs caused by the injury. Those who don’t earn big paychecks – including children, the elderly and stay-at-home-moms – are the least likely to find an attorney, studies show. If you can’t show that you suffered from millions of dollars in lost wages, and other damages, lawyers won’t take your case because it doesn’t make economic sense for them to do so. And, if you can’t find a lawyer to take your case, you cannot get justice. In order to increase the potential payout of a lawsuit, to make it worth the upfront investment of a lawyers’ time, money, and effort, plaintiffs are lumped together in class-action lawsuits. Class-action lawsuits aren’t ideal, but they’re the only form of justice that most victims of pharmaceutical companies have, and, frankly, they’re better than nothing. Class-action lawsuits are often the only way that victims of pharmaceutical drugs can gain justice, and class-action lawsuits are currently under attack by the U.S. Congress. H.R. 985 – Making Justice Even More Difficult for Victims H.R. 985, the 2017 Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act, aims to put more obstacles in the way of plaintiffs/victims who seek justice. This justice-reform bill is a gift to the pharmaceutical industry, and other big corporations that hurt citizens (like big banks, big agriculture, big chemical, big oil etc.) from Congress men and women who receive millions of dollars in donations from those industries. One of the most potentially damaging aspects of H.R. 985 is a provision that states that each plaintiff in a class-action lawsuit must “affirmatively demonstrate” that they “suffered the same type and scope of injury as the named class representative.” This means that all plaintiffs in a class-action lawsuit must have exactly the same injury. This provision will keep a large number of pharmaceutical class-action lawsuits from moving forward, and will rob the people who could otherwise be involved in a class-action lawsuit of justice. Here is an example of how this provision in H.R. 985 could hurt people: The warning labels for fluoroquinolone antibiotics, including Cipro, Levaquin, and Avelox, have recently been updated to note that permanent peripheral neuropathy is a potential effect of those drugs. This opened the door to lawsuits, and many law firms are taking cases for those suffering from peripheral neuropathy caused by fluoroquinolones. Peripheral neuropathy is a broad diagnosis though, and it presents in many different ways. Some people with peripheral neuropathy may have pain that is debilitating, while others may have twitching muscles, others may experience numbness, others may have reduced balance or coordination, and others may have autonomic nervous system dysfunction that causes loss of digestive motility. H.R. 985 could make it so that those plaintiffs cannot join together in a class-action lawsuit because their symptoms present differently, and, as noted above, without the possibility of a class-action lawsuit, there is no possibility for justice for many victims of pharmaceutical industry crimes. In “House Judiciary Committee Passes H.R. 985: Fairness in Class Action Litigation” the following example is given to illustrate how this provision could hurt those trying to sue a bank: “So if your bank steals a $5 overdraft fee, and $10 from your neighbor, a class action could be dismissed because your injuries were different. Even if you file a lawsuit and get your $5 back, your friend would not.” This provision of H.B. 985 would keep cases like that of the people of Hinkley, California versus Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), that was featured in the movieErin Brockovich, from moving forward. The people of Hinkley “suffered cancers, mis carriages and digestive and skin disorders as a result of the company (PG&E) dumping contaminated waste into ponds that seeped into the town’s drinking water.” If they weren’t allowed to join together in a class-action lawsuit because they didn’t have the “same type and scope of injury as the named class representative,” they wouldn’t be able to gain justice. When people are exposed to endocrine disrupting chemicals (whether those be industrial pollutants, pharmaceuticals, pesticides, herbicides, etc.), the health maladies that result vary from person to person. Some people may suffer from infertility, while others get cancer, and others develop an autoimmune disease. (For more information about the health effects of endocrine disrupting chemicals, read Our Stolen Future: Are We Threatening Our Fertility, Intelligence, and Survival?–A Scientific Detective Story by Theo Colborn, Dianne Dumanoski, and John Peterson Myers.) The people in the industries producing endocrine-disrupting pollutants know this, and they lobby accordingly — hence this provision in H.B. 985. If H.B. 985 passes into law with the provision that all plaintiffs must “affirmatively demonstrate” that they “suffered the same type and scope of injury as the named class representative,” bulldog lawyers hired by big pharma, big ag, big chemical, big oil, and other profit-at-all-cost motivated corporations, will tear apart all attempts of plaintiffs/citizens/victims to join together to fight for justice. Plaintiff Lawyers Won’t Take Cases if They Can’t Get Paid Another way that H.B. 985 will keep victims of corporate crimes from gaining justice is by limiting the amount of money attorneys can receive as compensation for representing class-action plaintiffs. This will interfere with the attorney/client contract and it will disincentivize attorneys from taking cases of those who have been victimized by big corporations. In “Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act of 2017: The Corporate Sweetheart Deal,” it is noted that: Under this bill it is doubtful you would be able to find a lawyer to represent you unless you could afford to pay them hourly. Lawyers know that people who have been badly hurt often cannot afford to pay hefty hourly legal bills. Thus, lawyers often enter into a contingency contract with clients. The lawyer promises to work hard on the client’s behalf, and if the lawyer wins the case, the client pays them a portion of what was collected. This bill makes it nearly impossible for lawyers to make that agreement with their clients. This is a move by the federal government to directly interfere with and restrict negotiated contracts. Victims of corporate crimes typically don’t have the money to pay attorneys upfront. The victim/plaintiff attorneys are paid out of the final settlement or award. If the amount that attorneys could possibly recoup is limited by Congress, this provides a serious disincentive for attorneys to take cases and to invest the time/money/effort into pursuing justice for victims. H.R. 1215 Hurts Victims of Big Pharma Another horrible bill that is going through the U.S. Congress is HR 1215 “Protecting Access to Care Act of 2017.” H.R. 1215 eliminates the rights of people harmed by medical professionals. It rigs the system, making it nearly impossible for injured victims to pursue lawsuits by imposing harsh time limits on lawsuits, denying the right to a trial by jury, limiting certain damages to $250,000 (even in states where such limits are unconstitutional), and protecting those who prescribe dangerous drugs and who hurt people with dangerous medical devices. Corrupt Politicians Represent Big Business H.R. 985 and H.R. 1215 are gifts to big corporations — big pharma, big ag, big chemical, big oil, and big banks — that prevent citizens who have been hurt by these corporations from gaining justice. The man who introduced H.R. 985, and who is ushering H.R. 1215 through the House Judiciary Committee, is Bob Goodlatte, a Republican from Virginia. During his time in Congress,Representative Goodlatte has received more that $2.1 million from agribusiness, almost $1.5 million from the finance, insurance, and real estate sector, more than $670,000 from the health sector (which includes pharmaceutical companies), and $1.3 million from miscellaneous business interests. Those industries have invested a lot of money in Goodlatte, and that investment is now paying off as he is now the chair of the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee, and has introduced a bill that will drastically limit the liability of large corporations. These corporations will be able to steal from and poison the American people, without consequence, if H.R. 985 and H.R. 1215 pass into law as they currently stand. The Myth of the Frivolous Lawsuit People like Representative Goodlatte claim that congressionally mandated judicial reform is necessary because there are too many frivolous lawsuits. This is a myth that has been repeated so many times that many, maybe even most, people think that it’s true. Of course, there are cases where an unscrupulous attorney or greedy plaintiff succeeds in getting a large payoff, but that situation is unusual, and it is far more common for legitimately injured people to be unable to gain justice (for the reasons described above) than it is for a frivolous lawsuit to move forward and win in court. This skit from Adam Ruins Everything, though it is meant to be humorous, excellently explains how the myth of the frivolous lawsuit was started, perpetrated, and promoted by large corporations: The case described in the video, that of Liebeck vs. McDonald’s, wasn’t frivolous, and neither are most lawsuits that individual citizens bring against large corporations. Whenever someone tries to justify taking away your rights to a fair trial and your opportunities for recourse against a corporation that hurt you by claiming that “frivolous lawsuits” should be limited, be suspicious, question thoroughly, and understand that those people are trying to take away your rights to hold corporations that hurt people responsible for their crimes. When you hear the term “justice reform,” know that it is code for “politicians trying to take away your right to sue and chance of getting justice if a big corporation hurts you.” Fight not only for justice, but also for an honest and righteous conversation about the issues. The truth is that it is exceedingly difficult for legitimate victims to get justice and/or compensation for their losses. The truth is that the rights of citizens are being eroded and the rights of corporations are being elevated. Welcome to the Corporatocracy Through “judicial reform” bills like H.R. 985 and H.R. 1215, the U.S. Congress is working with big corporations of all sorts to rob citizens of their ability to gain justice. These “Representatives” are not representatives of the people, they are representatives of the corporations that hurt the people. These corporations are, after all, who pay the politicians. Though corporate interests are quickly supplanting individual rights, there are still some checks and balances left in the system. Democratically elected officials still can be held accountable by the people who elected them. I encourage everyone who wants to be able to hold corporate criminals responsible for hurting and murdering people to email, call, tweet, or otherwise reach out to every member of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee, and tell them to oppose both H.R. 985 and H.R. 1215. The coroporatocracy has the upper-hand right now, but maybe democracy isn’t entirely dead. Please take a few moments to reach out to the U.S. House Judiciary Committee – thank you. (collective-evolution.com)
	$$$ $$$ Jan's Personal Invitation to SFI $$$ Eager Zebra Games $$$ $$$ #SEO_links_available! $$$ #JazNiche $$$
	+0

Luis Miguel 1162 61587 Lima	RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES? 3/19/2017 6:03:20 PM
	Jeff Sessions Goes Full Reefer Madness March 17, 2017 at 1:54 pm Written by Carey Wedler (ANTIMEDIA) Attorney General Jeff Sessions is terribly confused and wildly uninformed. That, or he’s a liar. Trump’s pick to head the Department of Justice has long opposed cannabis and enthusiastically supported the war on drugs. Though he reportedly recently assured congressional lawmakers he would not be instituting a crackdown on weed in states where it’s legal, his rhetoric against the increasingly accepted plant is concerning. Sessions attracted headlines last week when he claimed “there is more violence” surrounding marijuana use than many people imagine. Of course, this is demonstrably false according to crime statistics from states where it is legal. As the Denver Post has noted, “there is one thing that legalization supporters, opponents and neutrals within Colorado agree on: It’s unlikely marijuana has much to do with Denver’s recent uptick in crime.” As one meme quipped, the violence Sessions should have been referring to is caused by the war on drugs, which is now widely known to cause widespread, institutional violence. Nevertheless, Sessions remains steadfast in his opposition to weed. In another false statement, Sessions claimed this week that marijuana is almost as dangerous as heroin. Speaking to law enforcement agents at the federal, state, and local level on Wednesday, Sessions boldly asserted: “…I am astonished to hear people suggest that we can solve our heroin crisis by legalizing marijuana – so people can trade one life-wrecking dependency for another that’s only slightly less awful. Our nation needs to say clearly once again that using drugs will destroy your life.” First, let’s examine the claim that legalizing cannabis will not help the heroin — and by extension, the opiate painkiller — crisis. One recent study indicated that in states that allow access to cannabis, overdoses from opiate drugs drop. That 2014 study concluded such deaths had decreased by as much as 25% in states with medical marijuana programs. Further, according to some reports — and in an apparent nightmare scenario for Sessions — some opiate addicts are switching to cannabis rather than continuing to use the deadly drug. “They felt a lot better when their pain was being controlled by cannabis rather [than] opioids because opioids have a lot of side effects,” said Dan Clauw, a researcher investigating this trend. It is unclear what exactly Sessions considers so “awful” about cannabis. In various forms, it is increasingly proving to help treat epilepsy, Crohn’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, multiple sclerosis,anxiety, pain, and the side effects of chemotherapy, to name a few indications. As the government-run National Cancer Institute has acknowledged, preliminary research shows cannabis may help inhibit the growth of tumor cells by causing cell death. Heroin and opiates do none of these things, except treat pain — a benefit clearly outweighed by the extreme risk of addiction and death these drugs pose (in contrast, even former Attorney General Loretta Lynch has admitted marijuana is not a gateway drug). From 1999 to 2015, 183,000 people in the United States died just from prescription opioids, and many painkiller addicts graduate to heroin out of desperation. In contrast, research supports the medical potential of cannabis. This is particularly impressive considering the weed the government provides for academic research hardly even resembles healthy cannabis and is often covered in mold. Imagine what researchers might discover if they were studying cannabis similar to what individual users are actually consuming. Nevertheless, Sessions correctly asserts preventative measures are vital to tackling drug abuse. But his other solutions, namely, criminal enforcement, are less viable. Even police officers are increasingly skeptical of the government’s ongoing war on marijuana. While many officers recognize the serious threat of heroin and painkillers, a recent survey of law enforcement showed marijuana is a top concern for fewer than 5% of those questioned. Sessions is not only out of touch with research regarding cannabis, but also the priorities of the law enforcement agents he presides over. Though he claims he will not aggressively pursue the plant, at least one U.S. attorney has already tried. Earlier this month, U.S. Attorney Daniel Bogden issued a warning to the organizers of High Times’Cannabis Cup in Las Vegas, asserting they had incorrectly interpreted an Obama-era memorandum commanding the Department of Justice to respect state’s rights on marijuana. Though it’s doubtful Sessions had anything to do with this specific action, it’s possible his stance is already permeating the culture of the Department of Justice. Whether Sessions is simply grossly uninformed about cannabis or is actually misrepresenting it to bolster his drug warrior approach, one thing is clear: his focus on “enforcement” ensures the failed policy will be in full swing for some time to come. Creative Commons / Anti-Media / Report a typo
	"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
	+1

Luis Miguel 1162 61587 Lima	RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES? 3/19/2017 11:38:20 PM
	Official Resigns After U.N. Accidentally Tells the Truth About Israel March 18, 2017 at 2:01 pm Written by Darius Shahtahmasebi (ANTIMEDIA) A U.N. report published this week accused Israel of imposing an “apartheid regime” of racial discrimination on the Palestinian people. Shortly after its release, the official who approved its publication resigned amid pressure to pull it, and the report has since been withdrawn. The report, written by the U.N. Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA), concluded that “Israel [has] established an apartheid regime that dominates the Palestinian people as a whole” — a charge Israel vehemently denies. Israel’s Foreign Ministry spokesman likened the report to Der Sturmer, a Nazi propaganda publication that was strongly anti-Semitic. It is a unique and beneficial position to be in wherein every legitimate criticism of one’s policies is deemed to be racially or politically motivated. In that sense, Israel wants to be ultimately free of criticism, even when the nation commits serious violations of international law. Unsurprisingly, the U.S. has staunchly come to Israel’s defense. “The United Nations secretariat was right to distance itself from this report, but it must go further and withdraw the report altogether,” the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, said in a statement, asreported by the Independent. The ESCWA comprises 18 Arab states in Western Asia and has a view of supporting economic and social development in member states, according to its website. The report was prepared at the request of its member states and notes it reflects the views of the authors only. It was also published without any prior consultation with the U.N. secretariat. Is the report entirely without merit, as the U.S. and Israel would have us believe? According to the report’s abstract, which Anti-Media cited before the publication was pulled: “A history of war, annexation and expulsions, as well as a series of practices, has left the Palestinian people fragmented into four distinct population groups, three of them (citizens of Israel, residents of East Jerusalem and the populace under occupation in the West Bank and Gaza) living under direct Israeli rule and the remainder, refugees and involuntary exiles, living beyond. This fragmentation, coupled with the application of discrete bodies of law to those groups, lie at the heart of the apartheid regime. They serve to enfeeble opposition to it and to veil its very existence. This report concludes, on the basis of overwhelming evidence, that Israel is guilty of the crime of apartheid, and urges swift action to oppose and end it.” South Africa, a country whose infamous history of an apartheid regime shows its people are adept enough to recognize apartheid when they see it, has been a staunch backer of the Palestinian movement for years. South Africa’s International Relations Minister, Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, once famously stated “the Palestinian struggle is our struggle.” The U.N. report was authored by Richard Falk, a former U.N. human rights investigator for the Palestinian territories, and Virginia Tilley, a professor of political science at Southern Illinois University. After its publication, U.N. Under-Secretary General and ESCWA Executive Secretary Rima Khalaf resigned amid pressure from Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to withdraw it, Reuters reports. She stood by the report, adding, “It was expected that Israel and its allies would put enormous pressure on the United Nations secretary-general to renounce the report.” The report is no longer visible on UNESCWA’s website, but can be found in the Internet archive. Creative Commons / Anti-Media / Report a typo
	"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
	+1

Menu

Forums

Trump’s First War? ‘All Options Are On The Table’ As The U.S. And North Korea Prepare For The Second Korean War