11 Dec 2013 The U.S. government lobotomized roughly 2,000 mentally ill veterans — and likely hundreds more — during and after World War II, according to a cache of forgotten memos, letters and government reports unearthed by The Wall Street Journal. The Veterans Administration performed the brain-altering operation on former servicemen it diagnosed as depressives, psychotics and schizophrenics, and occasionally on people identified as homosexuals, according to the report. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs says it possesses no records detailing the creation and breadth of its lobotomy program.
Posts Tagged ‘Wall Street Journal’
Posted in government, health, military, tagged Federal government of the United States, Lobotomy, Mental disorder, United States, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Administration, Wall Street Journal, World War II on December 13, 2013 | Leave a Comment »
Mainstream praise is virtually unanimous. It ignores reality. It got short shrift. It reinvents Mandela’s disturbing legacy. It turned a Thatcherite into a saint. A previous article discussed it.
Editorials, commentaries, and feature articles read like bad fiction. Tributes are overwhelming. They reflect coverup and denial.
The true measure of Mandela is hidden from sight. It’s willfully ignored. Illusion replaced it.
Obama issued a disingenuous statement. He called Mandela “a man who took history in his hand, and bent the arc of the moral universe toward justice.”
“We will not likely see the likes of Nelson Mandela again.”
They infest world governments. They run America. They inflict enormous harm. Mandela exceeded the worst of South African apartheid injustice. He deserves condemnation, not praise.
White supremacy remains entrenched. Extreme poverty, unemployment, homelessness, hunger, malnutrition, and lack of basic services for black South Africans are at shockingly high levels. They’re much worse than under apartheid.
Mandela embraced the worst of neoliberal harshness. His successors followed the same model. They still do.
They’re stooges for predatory capitalist injustice. They’re figureheads. They enforce white supremacist dominance. They betray their own people in the process.
Black South Africans are some of the world’s most long-suffering deprived people anywhere. They suffer out of sight and mind.
Mandela could have changed things. He never tried. He didn’t care. He sold out to wealth, power and privileged interests. He did so shamelessly. His life ended unapologetically.
South African conditions today remain deplorable. Neoliberal harshness works this way. Business as usual is policy. Disadvantaged millions are ruthlessly exploited.
Privileged interests alone are served. Doing so reflects financial, economic and political terrorism. It’s commonplace globally. It infects Western societies. It plagues South Africa.
Injustice is deep-seated. It’s nightmarish in South Africa. Mandela’s legacy reflects the worst of all possible worlds short of war, mass slaughter and destruction.
Free market mumbo jumbo inflicts enormous pain and suffering. It empowers corporate interests. It benefits privileged elites. It does so at the expense of deprived millions.
Ordinary people don’t matter. They suffer out of sight and mind. They do so horrifically in South Africa. Major media ignore it. Mandela praise continues.
Former New York Times executive editor Bill Keller headlined “Nelson Mandela, South Africa’s Liberator as Prisoner and President, Dies at 95.”
Mandela was more enslaver than liberator. Not according to Keller. He called him “an international emblem of dignity and forbearance.”
He symbolized injustice. Keller called him “a capable statesman, comfortable with compromise and impatient with the doctrinaire.” He ignored the enormous harm he caused. He turned truth on its head doing so.
Washington Post editors headlined “Nelson Mandela brought the world toward a racial reconciliation.”
They called Gandhi, King and Mandela transformative figures. They “helped create a new ethic through the power of their ideas and the example of their lives,” they said.
Gandhi and King deserve praise. Mandela deserves condemnation. Not according to WaPo editors.
“Mandela,” they said, “dismantl(ed) the strong web of racist ideas, with which certain Western thinkers had sought for more than a century to rationalize the subjugation of others through colonialism, segregation and disenfranchisement.”
Mandela continued the worst of these practices. Black South African suffering deepened on his watch. He did nothing to relieve it.
He’s gone, said WaPo editors. It’s “more important than ever – in a century marked so far by frightening eruptions of terror and religious intolerance – to keep before the world the name and example of Nelson Mandela.”
Doing so requires explaining facts, not fiction. It involves stripping away false illusions. It demands telling it like it is fully, accurately, impartially and dispassionately.
Wall Street Journal editors headlined “Nelson Mandela.” They called him a “would-be Lenin who became Africa’s Vaclav Havel.”
He was no Lenin. He defended capital’s divine right. He did it at the expense of social justice. He’s no candidate for sainthood.
Journal editors perhaps think otherwise. They called him an “all too rare example of a wise revolutionary leader.”
“Age mellowed him…He walked out of jail an African Havel…He opened up (South Africa’s) economy to the world, and a black middle class came to life,” they said.
He sold out to powerful white interests. Apartheid didn’t die. It flourishes. Mandela deepened the scourge of injustice.
No black middle class exists. A select few share wealth, power and privilege. The vast majority of black society is much worse off than under apartheid.
Don’t expect Journal editors to explain. They called the “continent and world fortunate to have” Mandela. Neoliberal ideologues think this way.
Chicago Tribune editors headlined “Nelson Mandela, conscience of the world,” saying:
He “was more than just a symbol. His name was a clarion call for people across the globe in their struggles against oppression.”
“He personified the triumph of nearly unimaginable perseverance over nearly unimaginable tribulation.”
“His top priority was to oversee the creation of a new constitution, guaranteeing equality for all.”
“He also brought together disparate elements of the country, black and white, to address the grinding poverty and homelessness that afflicted his country.”
If one person could be called the conscience of the world, it would be Nelson Mandela.”
“The best way for us to truly honor his life, his suffering, and his memory is to uphold the values he embodied and fight the injustices he forced the world to confront. His inspiration is universal, his legacy timeless.”
Fundamental journalistic ethics require truth, full disclosure, integrity, fairness, impartiality, independence and accountability.
Tribune editors ignore these fundamental principles. So do their mainstream counterparts.
Los Angeles Times editors headlined “South Africa after Mandela.” They called him “one of the towering figures of the 20th century.”
“(H)e was revered around the globe for his vision and courage, and for the enormous personal sacrifices he made to right the wrongs that plagued his country,” they said.
LA Times editors reinvented history like their counterparts. It didn’t surprise.
Boston Globe editors headlined “Nelson Mandela, 1918-2013: A rare vision of magnanimity,” saying:
His “remarkable vision of leadership (helped) overturn South Africa’s vicious apartheid regime.”
He “was a pillar of grace, magnanimity, and restraint in victory.”
“His stable hand helped maintain (South Africa’s) status as a top economic engine on the African continent.”
He “proved that progress was possible.”
Privileged whites during his tenure benefitted hugely. Black society suffered horrifically. It still does. Mandela’s no hero. Don’t expect Globe editors to explain.
Major media editors turn truth on its head. They do it consistently. They do it repeatedly. Countless editorials and commentaries praised Mandela. They proliferate like crab grass. They’re still coming.
Headlines below reflect common sentiment:
“Nelson Mandela: a leader above all others”
“Nelson Mandela’s place in history.”
“Nelson Mandela, rest in peace”
“Nelson Mandela: Farewell to a visionary leader”
“Freedom is Nelson Mandela’s legacy”
“Nelson Mandela, historic icon of peaceful equality”
“Mandela, a moral force for the ages”
“Mandela, the transcendent ‘South African Moses’ “
It’s hard choosing which one is worst. Mandela was more pied piper of Hamelin than Moses. He was no patron saint of impoverished, oppressed and deprived South African blacks.
He sold out to power and privilege. His legacy reflects the worst of neoliberal harshness. Conditions during his tenure exceeded apartheid’s dark side.
They’re worse today. Inequality is institutionalized. So is apartheid. Democracy is more illusion than reality.
Black stooges serve white supremacist interests. Fundamental human and civil rights don’t matter. Corporate interests count most.
Government of, by, and for everyone equitably is nowhere in sight. Don’t expect scoundrel media editors to explain.
Facebook wants to get inside users heads with new capabilities to track and analyse their behaviour across the social network.
Not content with collecting huge troves of data about users’ lives outside of Facebook, executives want new capabilities to track users’ minute interactions with the service itself.
New technology would allow them to start collecting data on details like how long users hover their cursors over elements on the page and whether their newsfeed is visible as they browse the site.
Facebook analytics chief Ken Rudin said the recorded data could be used for various ends – ranging from product development to targeting advertising more precisely.
But with the company among a string of Silicon Valley firms exploited for personal data by the U.S. National Security Agency, any increase in the data it collects is bound to raise users’ concerns.
It emerged last month that fears over privacy are prompting many to commit ‘virtual identity suicide’ by deleting their Facebook accounts.
In a separate survey earlier this year more than half of those quitting Facebook cited privacy concerns as their main reason for doing so.
It has long been said of online services like Facebook that users, who enjoy the site’s features for free, are in fact the company’s product rather than its customers.
Facebook is a rich mine of personal information about its more than a billion users, data it leverages commercially to target promotional campaigns precisely to advertisers’ desired audiences.
To this end, the company collects two kinds of data about its users: demographic data, including where users’ live or went to school; and behavioural data, such as users’ online ‘friends’ and ‘likes’.
Mr Rudin told the Wall Street Journal that the new technology, which is still in testing, would would massively expand the collection of that latter kind of data.
FACEBOOK NOW LETS TEENS SHARE POSTS WITH ANYONE
If any parent was ever in two minds about letting their teenager use Facebook, their reservations may be about to increase as Facebook has allowed young people make posts public.
This means anyone on the social network will be able to see the posts, click through to the young user’s profile and see any other publicly shared information.
By adding this option to users aged between 13 and 17 it also means they can let strangers ‘follow’ their public posts.
If a friend then interacts with the post – either by liking or commenting on it – the status appears on that friend’s news feed – making it visible to even more people.
Before the update Facebook prevented under 18s making posts public; the widest audience they could reach was Friends of Friends.
Details recorded may include ‘did your cursor hover over that ad … and was the newsfeed in a viewable area,’ said Mr Rudin, adding that he was not certain when the the capabilities would go live across Facebook.
The social network would not be the first online service to make such a detailed record of users’ interactions with its website.
Digital image marketplace Shutterstock already records literally everything that its users do on the site, including where they place their cursosrs and how long they hover over a picture before buying it.
Shutterstock uses open-source software called Hadoop to analyse the data, the same technology Facebook already uses a modified form of to manage its data.
The Journal reported that Facebook has expanded the hardware in its data analytics warehouse a staggering 4,000 times in four years to a current capacity of 300 petabytes.
That’s equivalent to 300million gigabytes, which is 600,000 times the capacity of a typical 500GB laptop hardrive or equal to the storage space on around 470,000 top-of-the-range 64GB iPhones.
That massive amount of data is distinct from the demographic data stored by Facebook, which has never disclosed how much of the latter it holds.
Posted in enviroment, health, science, tagged Caesium, California, Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, New York, Stanford University, Stony Brook University, Tokyo Electric Power Company, Wall Street Journal on October 3, 2013 | 1 Comment »
Every bluefin tuna tested in the waters off California has shown to be contaminated with radiation that originated in Fukushima. Every single one.
Over a year ago, in May of 2012, the Wall Street Journal reported on a Stanford University study. Daniel Madigan, a marine ecologist who led the study, was quoted as saying, “The tuna packaged it up (the radiation) and brought it across the world’s largest ocean. We were definitely surprised to see it at all and even more surprised to see it in every one we measured.”
Another member of the study group, Marine biologist Nicholas Fisher at Stony Brook University in New York State reported, “We found that absolutely every one of them had comparable concentrations of cesium 134 and cesium 137.”
That was over a year ago. The fish that were tested had relatively little exposure to the radioactive waste being dumped into the ocean following the nuclear melt-through that occurred at the Fukushima Daiichi plant in March of 2011. Since that time, the flow of radioactive contaminants dumping into the ocean has continued unabated. Fish arriving at this juncture have been swimming in contaminants for all of their lives.
Radioactive cesium doesn’t sink to the sea floor, so fish swim through it and ingest it through their gills or by eating organisms that have already ingested it. It is a compound that does occur naturally in nature, however, the levels of cesium found in the tuna in 2012 had levels 3 percent higher than is usual. Measurements for this year haven’t been made available, or at least none that I have been able to find. I went looking for the effects of ingesting cesium. This is what I found:
When contact with radioactive cesium occurs, which is highly unlikely, a person can experience cell damage due to radiation of the cesium particles. Due to this, effects such as nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and bleeding may occur. When the exposure lasts a long time, people may even lose consciousness. Coma or even death may then follow. How serious the effects are depends upon the resistance of individual persons and the duration of exposure and the concentration a person is exposed to.
The half life of cesium 134 is 2.0652 years. For cesium 137, the half life is 30.17 years.
The Fukushima disaster is an ongoing battle with no signs that humans are gaining the upper hand. The only good news to come out of Japan has later been proven to be false and was nothing more than attempts by Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) to mislead the public and lull them into a sense of security while the company searched vainly for ways to contain the accident. This incident makes Three Mile Island and Chernobyl pale in comparison. Those were nuclear meltdowns. A nuclear melt-through poses a much more serious problem and is one that modern technology doesn’t have the tools to address. Two and a half years later and the contaminants are still flowing into the ocean and will continue to for the foreseeable future.
The FDA assures us that our food supply is safe, that the levels of radiation found in fish samples are within safe limits for consumption. But one has to question if this is true and, if it is true now, will it remain true? Is this, like the statements issued from TEPCO, another attempt to quell a public backlash in the face of an unprecedented event that, as yet, has no solution and no end in sight?
As for me, fish is off the menu.
Posted in economics, foreign policy, government, military, tagged Afghanistan, Harvard University, Iraq, Iraq war, Lawrence B. Lindsey, United States, Wall Street Journal, War in Afghanistan (2001–present) on September 23, 2013 | Leave a Comment »
19 Sep 2013 The decade-long American wars in Afghanistan and Iraq would end up costing as much as $6 trillion, the equivalent of $75,000 for every American household, calculates Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government. When President [sic] George Bush’s National Economic Council Director, Lawrence Lindsey, had told the The Wall Street Journal that the war would cost between $100 billion and $200 billion, he found himself under intense fire from his colleagues in the administration which claimed that this was a gross overestimation. Consequently, Lindsey was forced to resign. The Bush administration had claimed at the outset that the Iraq war would be financed via Iraqi oil revenues, but Washington D.C. instead borrowed $2 trillion to finance the two wars, the bulk of it from foreign lenders. [See that? When it comes to financing US wars for oil and opium, the ‘debt ceiling’ matters about as much as a June bug in July.
“City of London demands ad firm stop using spy cams in trash cans” Fox News, August 12, 2013
The story was headlined: “Jerusalem mayor demands investigation of secret ‘smart tracking devices’ in toilets”. The executives of an Israeli company that installed high tech toilets to secretly track the smart-phones of defecators are facing charges of ‘privacy violation’. The company, cleverly named ‘Two Commandments’, ( as in ‘Ye shall make money’ and ‘Ye shall not get caught’), a Tel Aviv-based marketing and private government subcontractor, developed ‘smart pods’ to capture smells, color, expulsive energy and volatile gases. One of the owners, Bibby Dershitz, (a ‘21st century Moses’, according to the Wall Street Journal), claimed the device provided valuable marketing information on consumer habits. According to Bibby’s partner, Laura Klapshitz, “the color, size, texture, density and chemical composition of turds reveals eating and drinking habits and can lead to the development of food products, which are easier to digest, reducing gas and disagreeable lower bowel sounds.”
They marketed the devices as a major breakthrough in health: Israelis would enter public or private bathrooms unaware that their most natural, intimate experiences were being recorded and photographed, because, as Bibby liked to point out, “facial expressions and sphincter tone can reveal serious underlying health issues which will benefit our Israeli pharmaceutical companies in designing new treatments – thus expanding their market”.
The original idea for high tech smart-tracking in public toilets came from Bibby’s time as an intern at the prestigious Israeli research center, Technion, where he was assigned to analyze the blood content in the turds of Palestinian prisoners following what Shin Bet (Israeli secret police) officials laughingly called ‘routine’ interrogation. Israeli scientists maintained that high blood content correlated positively with ‘high quality physical interrogation’ sessions. This could be used to track the performance of ‘interrogators’ for future promotion and bonuses. More importantly, they concluded that high blood content identified prisoners classified as ‘highly resistant (HR)’ to providing ‘reasoned responses’. Israeli scientists maintained that HR prisoners were most likely ‘members of terrorist cells’ and candidates for higher level interrogation protocols. All this critical national security data was derived from turd analysis!
From this stint at ‘Technion’, Bibby concluded that, ‘Turds talk!’ With this entrepreneurial insight, Bibby asked his partner, Laura Klapshitz, to prepare a prospectus to secure the backing of wealthy venture capitalists. Bibby and Laura’s success in raising funds focused initially on the impact on ‘consumer goods’ market. Rigorous analysis of foods and drinks, kosher and otherwise, provided invaluable “data in the well”, to use Laura’s euphemism for turds in the toilet. Ms. Klapshitz explained that the “visual dimension thing, especially through facial expressions, and the tight sphincter thing, can help us to break into the trendy, upscale health food market”. Laura also introduced innovative toilet accessories and upgrades, like ‘the gauge to accurately measure sphincter tone’. She and Bibby used the gauge to provides data measuring the ‘constipation index, to identify and address a common problem among “our highly stressed sedentary techno-warriors and high BMI index(overweight) settlement rabbis.”
Bibby described the initial heady days of the new ‘start-up’: “As soon as our campaign to install smart tracking in public toilets took off, the market-savvy investors and wealthy ‘insider’ financiers from the Diaspora jumped on board!” Their success, he philosophically declared to Laura, confirmed one of Freud’s most profound insights: that ‘money is crap and crap is money’.
Laura and Bibby met with a team of young Harvard law graduates and newly-minted Wharton MBAs to patent the ‘Crap Watch’ (as it came to be known to the insiders) and to discuss ‘new markets’.
This team of the best and brightest from the Ivy Leagues jokingly dubbed themselves as ‘the toilet tribe’, (TT). They developed a new marketing strategy based on moving to upscale private corporate toilets and government bathrooms and formed a joint venture with major Israeli business groups and security agencies. The ‘TT’ also decided to upgrade their promotional material and consider a public stock offering.
They agreed to eventually consider mergers and acquisitions -especially in what they called ‘turd-centered appliances’ designed to enhance ‘data collection’.
After winning the prestigious Forbes Award as ‘Entrepreneur of the Year’, Bibby and Laura signed off on a million-dollar book contract for a manuscript entitled, ‘Defecation: The Eye in your Toilet’.
Bibby and Laura were no longer just running a ‘mom and pop’ business: They borrowed big and re-invested their profits like ‘true entrepreneurs’, hiring salespeople, public relations specialists, market researchers and ‘special’ field technicians (a euphemism for agents adept at discreetly penetrating high-security facilities and planting smart pods in toilets under delicate circumstances).
Despite the major expansion of their workforce, Bibby and Laura were still personally responsible for negotiating with high-end clients. They secured lucrative contracts with Israel’s leading multi-nationals by convincing the CEOs that ‘smart’ turd-analysis could identify employees who were consuming well beyond their income level – important clues to rooting out potential trouble-makers, embezzlers, corporate spies and rogue speculators. In addition analysis of turd composition (color, texture, smell) would reveal if lower level employees had potentially expensive, undeclared health problems or drug habits – both grounds for their immediate dismissal without severance pay. As an added bonus, Bibby promised to provide ‘smart insurance’ to top CEOs: a security device, which would detect any smart-pod secretly placed in their own toilets.
Klapshitz insisted on the competitive advantages that toilet espionage offered to corporate clients: “Toilets are frequently used as discreet meeting places”. She argued persuasively that, “Behind the closed doors, strategic decisions are discussed which we record with our high-quality monitoring while removing any irrelevant, unseemly noises, such as flatulence”. “She means farting”, Bibby ejaculated. ‘Look. We provide the intimate data”, Bibby argued to potential clients,“ Call it blackmail, if you like. But it can increase your competitive advantage in any contract negotiation”.
Laura, striking a moralistic posture, pointed out that, “Our recordings may reveal ‘perversions’, unethical corporate activity during business hours, such as masturbation among the highly stressed executives or government officials grabbing female or male employees inside the water closet. This gives you powerful leverage in closing deals”.
As part of a major expansion program, a joint venture was worked out with the Mossad. Two Commandments went global! The new target market included the Arab countries, North America and the European Union.
Entry-level field technicians with Middle Eastern (Sephardic) backgrounds were hired especially for their ‘Arab looks’ for missions to plant the toilet-pods in Muslim countries – considered a ‘smelly assignment’ by Bibby, a Zionist-Neo-Con, who claimed that, “Arabs rarely flush”.
Laura, the Zionist-Liberal, corrected Bibby’s bigotry by pointing out that it wasn’t the Arabs’ poor hygiene, but their “frequent water shortages because the US and Israel had bombed their water systems and the West blocked sale of replacement parts”. She added that “Our target population, especially the elite in Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt, use ultra-modern perfumed, air-conditioned toilets, especially designed with soothing musical flushing systems – better than anything here. Bibby, it’s wrong to label all Arabs as ‘non-flushers’. Do you really want our Sephardic technicians to complain that we are giving them the dirtiest and most dangerous assignments because they look like Arabs? ”.
The joint venture with Mossad took “Two Commandments” into the US market, where AIPAC and its cohorts among the ‘52 Presidents of the Major American Jewish Organizations’ brokered a long-term, large-scale, multi-million dollar contract to ‘toilet-watch’ members of Congress, White House officials, generals, oil company executives and anyone else involved in Middle East policy affecting Israel.
As Bibby later wrote in his ‘memoirs’, Defecation: The Eye in Your Toilet: “The AIPAC and Co. sent the toughest negotiators we had ever encountered. First, they tried the ‘tribal gambit,’ telling us that, “If it’s for Israel you should do it for free”. So I told them: “First, you should give up your $100 million dollar annual lobbying budgets.” Then they bargained for a discount rate claiming that AIPAC was a ‘non-profit’. “Yeah.”, I said, “You’re not counting the annual $ 3 billion-plus that Israel milks from the US Treasury and the big kickback to you and the Defamation League”. Finally, they resorted to the cheap charge that we were ‘profiteering at the expense of Israel’s security’, accusing us, Sabras, of verging on anti-Semitism for not confronting Israel’s ‘existential threat’. Such Chutzpah!”
“I laughed in their face! Both Laura and I served in the military, we are still in the Reserves and who are these guys really working for? Wall Street bankers! These guys were stink-tank policy wonks drawing six figure salaries to con the goys. And most of them weren’t even married to Jews. I started for the door saying, “No Deal! You AIPAC bums screwed up the Rosen Weismann spy case; you let Pollard get caught with bags of documents; ‘Lobo’ Wolfowitz temporarily lost his security clearance and Marty Indyk too! What amateurs! If you want a professional job you have to pay. Pick up the phone and call any of your billionaire philanthropists. Tell’um to cough up 20 million for Israel!”
“After some shouting and even shoving, Laura and I walked out the door. They called us back and signed the contract.”
“They got their money’s worth. The Congressional toilets were hooked up and in the first week we picked up one constipated senior Senator who uttered prophetic anti-Semitic slurs while he struggled: “The Jews won’t let me have a moment’s peace. They follow me into the bathroom to bugger me (!!) about upping the annual payola, tightening the sanctions on Iran and not cutting aid to the Egyptian military … They make me feel (“grunt and grunt”) like I am just working for Israel.” This guy was marked as a “fence-sitter on Israel”.
“The State Department, Pentagon and Treasury toilets were all brought ‘on-line’ by our teams of dual citizen agents and terror ‘experts’, strategically placed by AIPAC inside the institutions. We monitored members of Congress who had ‘plumbing problems’ (urinary frequency) and couldn’t sit through long-winded appropriation sessions. They could be relied on to close the debate and call for a vote to fund wars against Israel’s enemies – just so they could rush off to the nearest ‘facilities’.”
“Our ‘smart-pods’ tracked a top White House staffer with financial problems who we caught trying to arrange a loan on his cell-phone while ‘sitting in the stall’. AIPAC , used their financial contacts to cultivate this White House asset. They got ‘the inside dope’ on the White House’s Palestine peace proposals in exchange for a low-interest loan. Prime Minister Bibi ‘the Whale’ used that information to pre-empt Vice President Biden’s visit when he announced the construction of three thousand new settlement units”.
“This ‘toilet talk’ had become a goldmine: We went from continent to continent, deal to deal. We paid for new settlements in the West Bank, (Laura objected ‘a little’). The press crowed that our “Jewish genius had turned shit to gold”. The only objection came from some self-righteous Haredi draft-dodging loser who condemned us for worshiping ‘Mammon instead of the Y- guy’.”
“At the pinnacle of our success, the curse of that Haredi loud-mouth came back to haunt us! No it wasn’t an Arab terrorist, they were all under toilet surveillance; nor was it a competing intelligence service like the US Homeland Security, the Mossad had their own people in there. We were brought down by one of our own: The rat was a graduate of Hebrew University, Joshua Ben Ezra. We had hired him as a field technician, assigned (on account of his ‘Arab’ looks) to bug and monitor the toilets and turds of the Palestinian Authority: A dangerous and smelly assignment to which he felt he was over-qualified. This Ben Ezra, got some ‘chip on his shoulder’ because he looked Arab, forgetting, that was the reason we hired him in the first place. Then rumors began to circulate among our other employees that his ‘blood was tainted’ or that he was ‘using the race card to promote his career’… Joshua, from the start, was very good at what he did: He discovered ‘President’ Mahmoud ‘the Bagman’ Abbas’ secret overseas bank account worth $400 million while monitoring a long cell-phone call to his London bankers from a ‘session on the throne’ (Constipation- Conspiracy- Confidentiality) which only yielded a puny turd. Then he monitored a secret tryst between a devout Hamas leader and a rival’s daughter ‘over the toilet seat’. This helped the Mossad to set-off a mini-civil war in Gaza. Joshua was that good!”
“There was no doubt that Ben Ezra would ‘go places’. But he was too impatient. He felt his professional and personal ambitions were blocked by his ‘skin problem’. He secretly tried skin products, lightened and straightened his hair, waxed off his hairy arms, legs, chest and the rest… Josh was hoping to score some upscale Ashkenazi or make it with our leggy blond Long Island ‘college intern on the aliya’ junket. We know this because we bug our own employees’ toilets.”
“In the aftermath of our debacle, we investigated what led Ben Ezra to turn traitor, or what Laura called, a ‘whistle blower’. The historic turning point took place on the edge of the bath tub. His puny ‘performance’ with his tall Long Island lovely was a fiasco: He was too short, she giggled instead of moaning. He drooped and she dressed, walked out and described the whole encounter to the secretarial staff during a coffee break.”
“The fact is that Ben Ezra was and is a computer genius, whatever his other shortcomings. He had access to our files all around the world and he mined our findings, reports and evaluations, including industrial spying, speculation and blackmail. He secretly exposed our joint venture with the Mossad in Arab countries, including the assassinations, infiltration, bribes and converted spies (with their names, dates and bank account numbers). He released information on our collaboration with ‘the Lobby’ where we secured confidential White House documents, how we ‘arm-twisted’ Congressional ‘vacillators on Israel’ and demolished the ‘anti-Semitic’ critics of Israel.”
Nobody knew who he was. Ben Ezra escalated. At first, as a loyal Zionist, he would only leak documents to the Israeli press but the Israeli papers ‘self-censored’ and refused to print. Long Island leggy had done a lot of damage: He was ridiculed at work, Bibby and Laura snubbed him and the secretaries snickered. Joshua then sent a stream of documents to independent journalists, major newspapers and web sites the world over. The NY Times, Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post, the major TV networks and NPR all contacted the Israeli embassy in Washington and refused to follow-up on any of the documents. The BBC, quoted an anonymous Israeli official, who claimed that the ‘so-called whistleblower was an anti-Semitic neo-Nazi holocaust denier with a conspiracy complex’. Al Jazeera quoted a Gulf State expert who claimed the allegations especially the reports on Gulf state collaboration with Mossad were part of an ‘Al Qaeda disinformation campaign’.”
Ben Ezra then contacted Rachel (“Ray”) Klapshitz, the ‘black-sheep’ daughter of the Two Commandments founder, who had renounced her Israeli citizenship and become an investigative journalist for the Gatekeeper. Ray’s stories exposing the turd spy operations busted through the media blackout. The mass circulation ‘yellow press’ couldn’t resist: ‘Fellatio for Israel in Pentagon Toilets’, headlined the Daily Sun. ‘400 Million Bucks for Abbas, Turds for the Pals’, wrote an Israeli scandal sheet. The Washington Post discreetly jumped with its article entitled, ‘Presidential Toilets as a Site of alleged Israeli Spying. Is Israel endangering its ‘special relationship?’
Prime Minister Bibi, the Whale, was hysterical. Jowls twitching, he called in the heads of Mossad, Shin Bet’s Special Operations Unit (Yamas) and the National Security Council: “Find the Turd Spy at all costs and shut him up forever!” he bellowed. “Even, I mean, especially, if he’s a Jew, a self-hating traitor!”
The Mossad had already checked the toilets of all its spies and employees, including the mobile assassins, whores and bankers. It was realized much later that because of his computer skills and his innocuous reputation, Bibby and Laura recommended that Joshua Ben Ezra be made a member of the special investigating unit. He worked 18 hour days; 9 hours for the Jewish State and 9 hours for Truth, Democracy, Freedom and Justice for the Sephardi. Even more incriminating documents were published including the covert consultations between top Pentagon Zionists and Israeli Foreign Policy officials when they concocted the ‘data’ about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction in the lead up to the US invasion, proof that Treasury Zionists had written the entire policy for new sanctions on Iran in consultation with Tel Aviv and shocking information about the Mossad’s ‘prior knowledge of the 9-11 attack and its monitoring of the perpetrators in the air and on the ground’.
Ben Ezra had deeply penetrated the highly vaunted Mossad counter-espionage apparatus. Prime Minister Bibi ‘the Whale’ called for a much smaller super-elite Mossad team to investigate the investigators and Joshua was picked to be among the ‘final five’.
Meanwhile ‘Two Commandments’ became ‘No Commandments’: The company went ‘belly-up’. Investment capital evaporated. Bibby and Laura were under investigation. Share prices dropped from 500 shekals to near zero. Investors jammed the lines and traders refused to answer their phone. The Harvard ‘Toilet Tribe’ returned to Cambridge to scrounge for post docs. The ‘victims’ filed law suits. The clients claimed innocence and paid fines ‘without admitting guilt’. Forbes withdrew its entrepreneurial award. Bibby and Laura signed up for an extended cruise on the Nile. The whistleblower, Ben Ezra, hidden in broad sight on the elite Mossad ‘Special Commission’ quietly worked away. While he drew a double-salary as chair of the investigation, he planted amorous e-mails between Prime Minister Bibi ‘the Whale’ and Long Island Long Legs – special references to his ‘oversize gut and undersize ‘member’. ‘Yamas’ was exposed to have been spying on Mossad agents within Hamas, resulting in a shoot-out, which wounded an IDF soldier from Brooklyn…
‘Two Commandments’ filed for bankruptcy. The ‘Holocaust Foundation’, a major investor, lost millions and denounced it as a Ponzi scam claiming that Bibby and Laura were “worse than Madoff”. To escape threats and charges of “blood libel”, and Defamation League charges of “soiling the pristine reputation of Israel, the Only Democratic Country in the Middle East governed by the Only Moral People”, Bibby Dershitz and Laura Klapshitz left for their cruise, leaving no forwarding address. They made sure to check the ship’s toilets and ignore the turds.
Rachel’s reportage, based on Ben Ezra’s leaked documents, led to fame and harassment: She won the Colombia University Annual Investigative Journalism Award and the furious condemnation of the World Zionist Council. Meanwhile Joshua quietly packed his toothbrush and computer files and bought a one way ticket to Teheran, avoiding security checks by flashing his official passport as a member of the Whale’s Elite Super Special Counter Espionage Commission.
Furious, Israel demanded that Iran extradite the traitor, Ben Ezra. AIPAC threatened to round up a unanimous Congressional vote of support for whatever Israel demanded. The Iranians calmly pointed out that since Joshua’s grandfather was born in Iran, Ben Ezra could claim citizenship and Iranian citizens could not be extradited abroad; it was against their Constitution.
Posted in foreign policy, government, military, tagged Ban Ki-moon, Barack Obama, Chemical Corps, John Kerry, Secretary-General of the United Nations, Syria, United Nations, Wall Street Journal on August 28, 2013 | 1 Comment »
WASHINGTON – After initially insisting that Syria give United Nations investigators unimpeded access to the site of an alleged nerve gas attack, the administration of President Barack Obama reversed its position on Sunday and tried unsuccessfully to get the U.N. to call off its investigation.
The administration’s reversal, which came within hours of the deal reached between Syria and the U.N., was reported by the Wall Street Journal Monday and effectively confirmed by a State Department spokesperson later that day.
In his press appearance Monday, Secretary of State John Kerry, who intervened with U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon to call off the investigation, dismissed the U.N. investigation as coming too late to obtain valid evidence on the attack that Syrian opposition sources claimed killed as many 1,300 people.
The sudden reversal and overt hostility toward the U.N. investigation, which coincides with indications that the administration is planning a major military strike against Syria in the coming days, suggests that the administration sees the U.N. as hindering its plans for an attack.
Kerry asserted Monday that he had warned Syrian Foreign Minister Moallem last Thursday that Syria had to give the U.N. team immediate access to the site and stop the shelling there, which he said was “systematically destroying evidence”. He called the Syria-U.N. deal to allow investigators unrestricted access “too late to be credible”.
After the deal was announced on Sunday, however, Kerry pushed Ban in a phone call to call off the investigation completely.
The Wall Street Journal reported the pressure on Ban without mentioning Kerry by name. It said unnamed “U.S. officials” had told the secretary-general that it was “no longer safe for the inspectors to remain in Syria and that their mission was pointless.”
But Ban, who has generally been regarded as a pliable instrument of U.S. policy, refused to withdraw the U.N. team and instead “stood firm on principle”, the Journal reported. He was said to have ordered the U.N. inspectors to “continue their work”.
The Journal said “U.S. officials” also told the secretary-general that the United States “didn’t think the inspectors would be able to collect viable evidence due to the passage of time and damage from subsequent shelling.”
The State Department spokesperson, Marie Harf, confirmed to reporters that Kerry had spoken with Ban over the weekend. She also confirmed the gist of the U.S. position on the investigation. “We believe that it’s been too long and there’s been too much destruction of the area for the investigation to be credible,” she said.
That claim echoed a statement by an unnamed “senior official” to the Washington Post Sunday that the evidence had been “significantly corrupted” by the regime’s shelling of the area.
“[W]e don’t at this point have confidence that the U.N. can conduct a credible inquiry into what happened,” said Harf, “We are concerned that the Syrian regime will use this as a delay tactic to continue shelling and destroying evidence in the area.”
Harf did not explain, however, how the Syrian agreement to a ceasefire and unimpeded access to the area of the alleged chemical weapons attack could represent a continuation in “shelling and destroying evidence”.
Despite the U.S. effort to portray the Syrian government policy as one of “delay”, the formal request from the United Nations for access to the site did not go to the Syrian government until Angela Kane, U.N. High Representative for Disarmament Affairs, arrived in Damascus on Saturday, as Ban’s spokesman, Farhan Haq, conceded in a briefing in New York Tuesday.
Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Muallem said in a press conference Tuesday that Syria had not been asked by the United Nations for access to the East Ghouta area until Kane presented it on Saturday. Syria agreed to provide access and to a ceasefire the following day.
Haq sharply disagreed with the argument made by Kerry and the State Department that it was too late to obtain evidence of the nature of the Aug. 21 incident.
“Sarin can be detected for up to months after its use,” he said.
Specialists on chemical weapons also suggested in interviews with IPS that the U.N. investigating team, under a highly regarded Swedish specialist Ake Sellstom and including several experts borrowed from the Organisation for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons, should be able to either confirm or disprove the charge of an attack with nerve or another chemical weapon within a matter of days.
Ralph Trapp, a consultant on proliferation of chemical and biological weapons, said he was “reasonably confident” that the U.N. team could clarify what had happened.
“They can definitely answer the question [of] whether there was a chemical attack, and they can tell which chemical was used,” he said, by collecting samples from blood, urine and hair of victims. There was even “some chance” of finding chemical residue from ammunition pieces or craters where they landed.
Trapp said it would take “several days” to complete an analysis.
Steve Johnson, who runs a programme in chemical, biological and radiological weapons forensics at Cranfield University in the United Kingdom, said that by the end of the week the U.N. might be able to answer whether “people died of a nerve agent.”
Johnson said the team, if pushed, could produce “some kind of view” on that issue within 24 to 48 hours.
Dan Kastesza, a 20-year veteran of the U.S. Army Chemical Corps and a former adviser to the White House on chemical and biological weapons proliferation, told IPS the team will not be looking for traces of the nerve gas sarin in blood samples but rather chemicals produced when sarin degrades.
But Kastesza said that once samples arrive at laboratories, specialists could make a determination “in a day or two” about whether a nerve agent or other chemical weapons had been used.
The real reason for the Obama administration’s hostility toward the U.N. investigation appears to be the fear that the Syrian government’s decision to allow the team access to the area indicates that it knows that U.N. investigators will not find evidence of a nerve gas attack.
The administration’s effort to discredit the investigation recalls the George W. Bush administration’s rejection of the position of U.N. inspectors in 2002 and 2003 after they found no evidence of any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and the administration’s refusal to give inspectors more time to fully rule out the existence of an active Iraqi WMD programme.
In both cases, the administration had made up its mind to go to war and wanted no information that could contradict that policy to arise.
Posted in foreign policy, government, military, tagged Bunker buster, Fordow, Iran, Isotope separation, Israel, Massive Ordnance Penetrator, pentagon, Wall Street Journal on May 6, 2013 | Leave a Comment »
Under the title Pentagon bulks up ‘bunker buster’ bomb to combat Iran: U.S. Upgrades Weapon to Penetrate Key Nuclear Site; Push to Persuade Israelis, The Wall Street Journal reports that the US military is planning to use its “biggest” conventional bunker buster bombs against Iran:
The Pentagon has redesigned its biggest “bunker buster” bomb with more advanced features intended to enable it to destroy Iran’s most heavily fortified and defended nuclear site.
The newest version of what is the Pentagon’s largest conventional bomb, the 30,000-pound Massive Ordnance Penetrator, or MOP, has adjusted fuses to maximize its burrowing power, upgraded guidance systems to improve its precision and high-tech equipment intended to allow it to evade Iranian air defenses in order to reach and destroy the Fordow nuclear enrichment complex, which is buried under a mountain near the Iranian city of Qom. […]
The improvements are meant to address U.S. and Israeli concerns that Fordow couldn’t be destroyed from the air. […] Fordow has long been thought to be a target that would be difficult if not impossible for the U.S. to destroy with conventional weapons. (WSJ, May 3, 2013)
The official explanation for the possible use of the MOP bomb is that Israel does not have the military capabilities within its own weapons arsenal to permanently disable Iran’s nuclear facilities:
“U.S. officials see development of the weapon as critical to convincing Israel that the U.S. has the ability to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear bomb if diplomacy fails, and also that Israel’s military can’t do that on its own.” (op cit)
Posted in economics, government, history, law, media, taxes, tagged Joseph Stiglitz, Laurence Kotlikoff, Michel Chossudovsky, New York Times, Nouriel Roubini, ponzi scheme, Spain, Wall Street Journal on April 13, 2013 | 1 Comment »
Bill Gross, Nouriel Roubini, Laurence Kotlikoff, Steve Keen, Michel Chossudovsky, the Wall Street Journal and many others say that our entire economy is a Ponzi scheme.
Former Reagan budget director David Stockton just agreed:
So did a top Russian con artist and mathematician.
Even the New York Times‘ business page asked, “Was [the] whole economy a Ponzi scheme?“
In fact – as we’ve noted for 4 years (and here and here) – the banking system is entirely insolvent. And so are most countries. The whole notion of one country bailing out another country is a farce at this point. The whole system is insolvent.
Europe’s plan to lend money to Spain to heal some of its banks may not work because the government and the country’s lenders will in effect be propping each other up, Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz said.
“The system … is the Spanish government bails out Spanish banks, and Spanish banks bail out the Spanish government,” Stiglitz said in an interview.
“It’s voodoo economics,” Stiglitz said in an interview on Friday, before the weekend deal to help Spain and its banks was sealed. “It is not going to work and it’s not working.”
[The same is true of every other nation.]
Credit Suisse’s William Porter writes:
“Portugal cannot rescue Greece, Spain cannot rescue Portugal, Italy cannot rescue Spain (as is surely about to become all too abundantly clear), France cannot rescue Italy, but Germany can rescue France.” Or, the credit of the EFSF/ESM, if called upon to provide funds in large size, either calls upon the credit of Germany, or fails; i.e, it seems to us that it probably cannot fund to the extent needed to save the credit of one (and probably imminently two) countries that had hitherto been considered “too big so save” without joint and several guarantees.***
As Nouriel Roubini wrote in February:
[For] problems of that magnitude, there simply are not enough resources – governmental or super-sovereign – to go around.
As Roubini wrote in February:
“We have decided to socialize the private losses of the banking system.
Roubini believes that further attempts at intervention have only increased the magnitude of the problems with sovereign debt. He says, “Now you have a bunch of super sovereigns – the IMF, the EU, the eurozone – bailing out these sovereigns.”
Essentially, the super-sovereigns underwrite sovereign debt – increasing the scale and concentrating the problems.
Roubini characterizes super-sovereign intervention as merely kicking the can down the road.
But, despite the paper shuffling of debt at the national level – and at the level of supranational entities – reality ultimately intervenes: “So at some point you need restructuring. At some point you need the creditors of the banks to take a hit – otherwise you put all this debt on the balance sheet of government. And then you break the back of government – and then government is insolvent.”
The Global Mail notes:
Half the world, including almost all the developed world, now is reproducing at below replacement level. A generation from now, according to United Nations Population Division projections, less than a quarter of the world’s women – most of them in Africa and south Asia – will be reproducing at above replacement rate. And those UN forecasts are probably on the high side, for reasons we’ll come to later.
And as the birth rate has plunged in developed nations, and the native-born population has begun to shrink and rapidly age, governments and business have sought to make up the numbers by importing people to prop up their economies. It’s all they know how to do, for our economic system is, at its base, a giant Ponzi scheme, dependent on ever more people producing and consuming ever more stuff.
But what happens if that all stops? What happens when you get an ageing, shrinking population that consumes less?
“The answer to that question is that we don’t know because it’s never happened before,” says Peter McDonald, professor of demography and director of the Australian Demographic and Social Research Institute at the Australian National University.
“We’re certainly operating a Ponzi scheme in Australia,” says Dr Bob Birrell, an economist and migration expert from Monash University.
“Our growth is predicated on extra numbers… [and] more of our activity is going into city building and people servicing, which do not directly produce many goods that can be traded in overseas markets.
Half the world is facing the problem of low fertility, and Australia, with its massive program of importing people, is providing an extreme example of one approach to the conundrum.
In a nutshell, the problem is this: lower fertility rates mean older, less innovative and productive workforces. More importantly to the Ponzi economic order, older, stable or declining populations consume less. So growth requires either importing people, or exporting stuff, or a combination of the two. Orthodox economics simply can’t cope otherwise.
Europe as a whole has been reproducing at well below replacement rate for close to 40 years. The last period for which UN data showed Europe’s total fertility rate above the replacement rate was 1970-75.
Europe’s contemporary demographics give new meaning to the descriptor ‘the old world’. The continent’s average person is over 40 now. By 2050, if things continue on trend, the average European will be 45.7. If one takes the UN’s “low variant” projection, he/she will be over 50 years of age.
And the low variant now looks closer to the mark. Fertility rates had actually rebounded a little over recent years, the result of a bit of “catch-up” after a shift over several previous decades in which women delayed child-bearing. But the European recession has set fertility rates plunging again.
The recession’s effects will likely linger for decades, in lower rates of earnings and savings, and also in reduced fertility.
Last year, Forbes magazine, that most reliable voice of the economic orthodoxy, laid the blame for Europe’s economic decline squarely on its citizens’ failure to reproduce in adequate numbers, in an article headlined What’s Really Behind Europe’s Decline? It’s The Birth Rates, Stupid.
The Forbes piece was unequivocal: the biggest threat to the European Union was its low fertility rate.
The piece ended with a dire warning that unless Club Med managed to induce people to have more babies, catastrophic economic consequences would flow for all of Europe and maybe the world.
As Thomas Sobotka, one of the authors of a 2011 study on population trends by the Vienna Institute of Demography, told the Guardian newspaper, massive cuts in social spending would only exacerbate the problem.
“This may prolong the fertility impact of the recent recession well beyond its end. It could lead to a double-dip fertility decline,” he said.
But when it comes to fertility declines, Asia takes the cake.
Japan, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, Macau, Hong Kong, and most importantly China currently all have fertility rates lower than those of Europe.
China’s and Korea’s are about to start falling, if they haven’t already.
“I’m pretty pessimistic about the east-Asian situation,” says McDonald. “I think those countries find it very difficult move in the right direction of supporting work and family, in particular, reducing work hours.
“We are now talking about some 30 per cent of Japanese women not getting married.”
“I saw a couple of people from the Japanese government give a paper recently, essentially accepting this as an inevitability – a low birth rate forever,” he says.
It’s the same all over Asia.
Hong Kong has a birth rate of 1.09, which is on track to see its population almost halve in a generation. Taiwan is at 1.10; China, 1.55; Thailand, 1.66; Vietnam, 1.89. Even Indonesia’s fertility is just above replacement rate, at 2.23, and is falling fast. Malaysia and the Philippines are still growing pretty quickly, as are the south-Asian countries, which may give them a competitive edge for a few decades – and a growing export industry of people. But it is not projected to last more than a few decades.
Let’s return to America. The United States also is reproducing at below replacement rate, and its birthrate has declined sharply in recent years.
The US birth rate not only fell to its lowest level ever in 2011, but the greatest decline was among immigrant women.
In the longer term, the world will have to adjust its economic system to cope with the novel concept of less. Fewer people, less consumption, lowered need for resources, energy, housing, roads, you name it.
The above is admittedly depressing. But the reality is that there’s hope.
And as we’ve previously noted about energy:
The current paradigm is that energy is produced expensively by governments or large corporations through gigantic projects using enormous amounts of money, materials and manpower. Because energy can only be produced by the big boys, we the people must bow our heads to the powers-that-be. We must pay a lot of our hard-earned money to buy electricity from them, and we can’t question the methods or results of their energy production.
Our life will become much better when we begin to understand that energy is all around us – as an ocean of electromagnetic forces and as a byproduct of other processes in the form of heat, pressure, etc. – and all we need do is learn how to harvest it.
Big Pharma Criminality no Longer a Conspiracy Theory: Bribery, Fraud, Price Fixing now a matter of public record
Posted in death, economics, government, health, law, media, tagged big pharma, Drew Pinsky, Food and Drug Administration, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Merck & Co, United States, Wall Street Journal on March 29, 2013 | 2 Comments »
Those of us who have long been describing the pharmaceutical industry as a “criminal racket” over the last few years have been wholly vindicated by recent news. Drug and vaccine manufacturer Merck was caught red-handed by two of its own scientists faking vaccine efficacy data by spiking blood samples with animal antibodies. GlaxoSmithKline has just been fined a whopping $3 billion for bribing doctors, lying to the FDA, hiding clinical trial data and fraudulent marketing. Pfizer, meanwhile has been sued by the nation’s pharmacy retailers for what is alleged as an “overarching anticompetitive scheme” to keep generic cholesterol drugs off the market and thereby boost its own profits.
The picture that’s emerging is one of a criminal drug industry that has turned to mafia tactics in the absence of any real science that would prove their products to be safe or effective. The emergence of this extraordinary evidence of bribery, scientific fraud, lying to regulators and monopolistic practices that harm consumers is also making all those doctors and “skeptics” who defended Big Pharma and vaccines eat their words.
To defend Big Pharma today is to defend a cabal of criminal corporations that have proven they will do anything — absolutely anything – to keep their profits rolling in. It makes no difference who they have to bribe, what studies they have to falsify, or who has to be threatened into silence. They will stop at nothing to expand their profit base, even if it means harming (or killing) countless innocents.
Let’s take a look at recent revelations:
GlaxoSmithKline pleads guilty to bribery, fraud and other crimes
It what is now the largest criminal fraud settlement ever to come out of the pharmaceutical industry, GlaxoSmithKline has pleaded guilty and agreed to pay $1 billion in criminal fines and $2 billion in civil fines following a nine-year federal investigation into its activities.
According to U.S. federal investigators, GlaxoSmithKline (http://www.naturalnews.com/036416_GlaxoSmithKline_fraud_criminal_char…):
• Routinely bribed doctors with luxury vacations and paid speaking gigs
• Fabricated drug safety data and lied to the FDA
• Defrauded Medicare and Medicaid out of billions
• Deceived regulators about the effectiveness of its drugs
• Relied on its deceptive practices to earn billions of dollars selling potentially dangerous drugs to unsuspecting consumers and medical patients
And this is just the part they got caught doing. GSK doesn’t even deny any of this. The company simply paid the $3 billion fine, apologized to its customers, and continued conducting business as usual.
By the way, in addition to bribing physicians, GSK has plenty of money to spread around bribing celebrities and others who pimps its products. The company reportedly paid $275,000 to the celebrity doctor known as “Dr. Drew,” who promoted Glaxo’s mind-altering antidepressant drug Wellbutrin.
As the Wall Street Journal reports:
In June 1999, popular radio personality Dr. Drew Pinsky used the airwaves to extol the virtues of GlaxoSmithKline PLC’s antidepressant Wellbutrin, telling listeners he prescribes it and other medications to depressed patients because it “may enhance or at least not suppress sexual arousal” as much as other antidepressants do. But one thing listeners didn’t know was that, two months before the program aired, Dr. Pinsky — who gained fame as “Dr. Drew” during years co-hosting a popular radio sex-advice show “Loveline” — received the second of two payments from Glaxo totaling $275,000 for “services for Wellbutrin.”
Merck falsified vaccine data, spiked blood samples and more, say former employees
According to former Merck virologists Stephen Krahling and Joan Wlochowski, the company: (http://www.naturalnews.com/036328_Merck_mumps_vaccine_False_Claims_Ac…)
• “Falsified test data to fabricate a vaccine efficacy rate of 95 percent or higher.”
• Spiked the blood test with animal antibodies in order to artificially inflate the appearance of immune system antibodies.
• Pressured the two virologists to “participate in the fraud and subsequent cover-up.”
• Used the falsified trial results to swindle the U.S. government out of “hundreds of millions of dollars for a vaccine that does not provide adequate immunization.”
• Intimidated the scientists, threatening them with going to jail unless they stayed silent.
This is all documented in a 2010 False Claims Act which NaturalNews has acquired and posted here:
Millions of children put at risk by Merck
In that document the two virologists say they, “witnessed firsthand the improper testing and data falsification in which Merck engaged to artificially inflate the vaccine’s efficacy findings.”
They also claim that because of the faked vaccine results, “the United States has over the last decade paid Merck hundreds of millions of dollars for a vaccine that does not provide adequate immunization… The United States is by far the largest financial victim of Merck’s fraud.”
They go on to point out that children are the real victims, however:
“But the ultimate victims here are the millions of children who every year are being injected with a mumps vaccine that is not providing them with an adequate level of protection. …The failure in Merck’s vaccine has allowed this disease to linger with significant outbreaks continuing to occur.”
Merck’s mumps viral strain is 45 years old!
According to the complaint, Merck has been using the same mumps strain — weakened from generations of being “passaged” — for the last 45 years! The complaint reads:
“For more than thirty years, Merck has had an exclusive license from the FDA to manufacture and sell a mumps vaccine in the U.S. The FDA first approved the vaccine in 1967. It was developed by Dr. Maurice Hilleman, at Merck’s West Point research facility, from the mumps virus that infected his five year-old daughter Jeryl Lynn. Merck continues to use this ‘Jeryl Lynn’ strain of the virus for its vaccine today.”
A complete medical farce
This information appears to show Merck’s mumps vaccine to be a complete medical farce. Those who blindly backed Merck’s vaccines — the science bloggers, “skeptics,” doctors, CDC and even the FDA — have been shown to be utter fools who have now destroyed their reputations by siding with an industry now known to be dominated by scientific fraud and unbounded criminality.
That’s the really hilarious part in all this: After decades of doctors, scientists and government authorities blindly and brainlessly repeating the mantra of “95% effectiveness,” it all turns out to be total quackery hogwash. Utterly fabricated. Quackety-quack quack. And all those hundreds of millions of Americans who lined up to be injected with MMR vaccines were all repeatedly and utterly conned into potentially harming themselves while receiving no medical benefit.
Intelligent, informed NaturalNews readers, home school parents, and “awakened” people who said “No!” to vaccines are now emerging as the victors in all this. By refusing to be injected with Merck’s vaccines, they avoided being assaulted with a fraudulent cocktail of adjuvant chemicals and all-but-useless mumps strains over four decades old. They protected their time, money and health. Those who refuse to be physically violated by vaccines are, once again, turning out to be the smartest people in society. No wonder they also tend to be healthier than the clueless fools who line up to get vaccinated every year.
Merck fraudulently misrepresented the efficacy of its vaccine and contributed to the spread of infectious disease, says lawsuit
The faked vaccine efficacy numbers aren’t the only troubles Merck is now facing. Shortly after the above False Claims Act was made public, Chatom Primary Care filed suit against Merck. That document is available from NaturalNews at:
It alleges that:
• [Merck engaged in] …a decade-long scheme to falsify and misrepresent the true efficacy of its vaccine.
• Merck fraudulently represented and continues to falsely represent in its labeling and elsewhere that its Mumps Vaccine has an efficacy rate of 95 percent of higher.
• Merck knows and has taken affirmative steps to conceal — by using improper testing techniques and falsifying test data — that its Mumps Vaccine is, and has been since at least 1999, far less than 95 percent effective.
• Merck designed a testing methodology that evaluated its vaccine against a less virulent strain of the mumps virus. After the results failed to yield Merck’s desired efficacy, Merck abandoned the methodology and concealed the study’s findings.
• Merck also engaged in “incorporating the use of animal antibodies to artificially inflate the results… destroying evidence of the falsified data and then lying to an FDA investigator… threatened a virologist in Merck’s vaccine division with jail if he reported the fraud to the FDA.”
• “Merck designed a testing methodology that evaluated its vaccine against a less virulent strain of the mumps virus. After the results failed to yield Merck’s desired efficacy, Merck abandoned the methodology and concealed the study’s findings. [Then] Merck designed even more scientifically flawed methodology, this time incorporating the use of animal antibodies to artificially inflate the results, but it too failed to achieve Merck’s fabricated efficacy rate. Confronted with two failed methodologies, Merck then falsified the test data to guarantee the results it desired. Having achieved the desired, albeit falsified, efficacy threshold, Merck submitted these fraudulent results to the FDA and European Medicines Agency.”
• “Merck took steps to cover up the tracks of its fraudulent testing by destroying evidence of the falsified data and then lying to an FDA investigator… Merck also attempted to buy the silence and cooperation of its staff by offering them financial incentives to follow the direction of Merck personnel overseeing the fraudulent testing process. Merck also threatened… Stephen Krahling, a virologist in Merck’s vaccine division from 1999 to 2001, with jail if he reported fraud to the FDA.”
• “Merck continued to conceal what it knew about the diminished efficacy of its Mumps Vaccine even after significant mumps outbreaks in 2006 and 2009.”
Obama administration has zero interest in actual justice
Another interesting note in all this is that under President Obama, the U.S. Dept. of Justice showed no interest whatsoever in investigating Merck over the False Claims Act filed by two of its former virologists. Despite the convincing evidence of fraud described in detail by insider whistleblowers, the Obama Department of Justice, led by gun-running Attorney General Eric Holder who is already facing serious questions over Operation Fast and Furious, simply chose to ignore the False Claims Act complaint.
When evidence of criminal fraud was brought before the U.S. Department of Justice, in other words, the DoJ looked the other way with a wink and a nod to the medical crimes taking place right under their noses. Who cares if tens of millions of children are being injected year after year with a fraudulent mumps vaccine? There’s money to be made, after all, and exploiting the bodies of little children for profit is just business as usual in a fascist nation dominated by corporate interests.
Pfizer sued by retailers over anticompetitive scheme
Adding to all this, Pfizer has now been sued by five U.S. retailers (pharmacies) who accuse the company of monopolistic market practices. According to the lawsuit, Pfizer conspired to prevent generic versions of its blockbuster cholesterol drug Lipitor from entering the market. This was done to protect billions in profits while making sure patients did not have access to more affordable cholesterol drugs. Pfizer sells nearly $10 billion worth of Lipitor each year.
According to the Reuters report on this lawsuit, Pfizer is being accused of (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/05/us-pfizer-walgreen-lipitor-…):
• Obtaining a fraudulent patent
• Engaging in sham litigation
• Entering a price-fixing agreement to delay cheaper generics
• Entering arrangements with pharmacy benefit managers to force retailers to buy more Lipitor (chemical name is atorvastatin calcium)
No arrests or prosecution of Big Pharma executives
One of the most astonishing realizations in all this is that given all the criminal fraud, bribery, misrepresentation, lying to the FDA, price fixing and other crimes that are going on in the pharmaceutical industry, you’d think somebody somewhere might be arrested and charged with a crime, right?
To date, not a single pharmaceutical CEO, marketing employee or drug rep has been charged with anything related to all this fraud. In America, drug company employees are “above the law” just like top mafia bosses of a bygone era.
How insane is this, exactly? Consider this:
Imagine if YOU, an individual, went around town bribing doctors, falsifying data, selling a fraudulent product to the government, lying to regulators, engaging in anti-trade price-fixing and threatening your employees into silence. What would happen to you?
You’d probably wind up rotting in prison, the subject of an FBI investigation and a DoJ prosecution.
So why is it okay for a multi-billion-dollar corporation to carry out these same crimes and get away with it? Why are the CEOs of top drug companies given a free pass to commit felony crimes and endless fraud?
I’ll tell you why, and you’re not gonna like the answer: Because America has become a nation run by crooks for the benefit of crooks. It’s one big country club, and as comedian George Carlin used to say, “YOU ain’t in it!”
If Big Pharma would falsify data on vaccines, what else would the industry do?
I hope you’re getting the bigger picture in all this, friends. If these drug companies routinely bribe doctors, falsify data, defraud the government and commit felony crimes without remorse, what else would they be willing to do for profit?
• Falsify efficacy data on other prescription drugs?
• Exploit children for deadly vaccine trials?
• Invent fictitious diseases to sell more drugs?
• Unleash bioweapons to cause a profitable pandemic?
• Conspire with the CDC to spread fear to promote vaccinations?
• Silence whistleblowers who try to go public with the truth?
• Give people cancer via stealth viruses in vaccines?
• Destroy the careers of medical scientists who question Big Pharma?
• Force a medical monopoly on the entire U.S. population via socialist health care legislation?
But of course they would. In fact, the industry is doing all those things right now. And if you don’t believe me, just remember that five years ago, no one believed me when I said drug companies were engaged in criminal conspiracies to defraud the nation — something that has now been proven over a nine-year investigation.
Media scoundrels stopped short of truth and full disclosure. The Wall Street Journal headlined “An Internet Activist Commits Suicide.”
New York’s medical examiner announced death by “hang(ing) himself in his Brooklyn apartment.”
Lingering suspicions remain. Why would someone with so much to give end it all this way? He was one of the Internet generation’s best and brightest.
He advocated online freedom. Selflessly he sought a better open world. Information should be freely available, he believed. A legion of followers supported him globally.
Alive he symbolized a vital struggle to pursue. Death may elevate him to martyr status but removes a key figure important to keep alive.
‘Twinkie-maker Hostess continues to screw over its workers. The company is in the process of complete liquidation and 18,000 unionized workers are set to lose their jobs. More troubling – they could lose their pensions.
According to a report by the Wall Street Journal , Hostess’ CEO, Gregory Rayburn, essentially admitted that his company stole employee pension money and put it toward CEO and senior executive pay (aka “operations”). While this isn’t technically illegal, it’s another sleazy theft by Hostess executives – who’ve paid themselves handsomely while running their company into the ground. Just last month, a judge agreed to let Hostess executives suck another $1.8 million out of the bankrupt company to pay bonuses to CEOs.
If there’s no way to recover the money for the Hostess pension plans for workers, then we the taxpayers – through the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. – will have to foot the bill to make sure workers get the retirement money they paid in.’
Posted in economics, government, military, technology, tagged Business Executives for National Security, Cyberwarfare, Leon Panetta, NBC, New York City, Susan Collins, United States, Wall Street Journal on October 23, 2012 | 3 Comments »
“Tom Dispatch” – - First the financial system collapses and it’s impossible to access one’s money. Then the power and water systems stop functioning. Within days, society has begun to break down. In the cities, mothers and fathers roam the streets, foraging for food. The country finds itself fractured and fragmented — hardly recognizable.
It may sound like a scene from a zombie apocalypse movie or the first episode of NBC’s popular new show “Revolution,” but it could be your life — a nationwide cyber-version of Ground Zero.
Think of it as 9/11/2015. It’s Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta’s vision of the future — and if he’s right (or maybe even if he isn’t), you better wonder what the future holds for erstwhile American civil liberties, privacy, and constitutional protections.
Last week, Panetta addressed the Business Executives for National Security, an organization devoted to creating a robust public-private partnership in matters of national security. Standing inside the Intrepid, New York’s retired aircraft-carrier-cum-military-museum, he offered a hair-raising warning about an imminent and devastating cyber strike at the sinews of American life and wellbeing.
Yes, he did use that old alarm bell of a “cyber Pearl Harbor,” but for anyone interested in American civil liberties and rights, his truly chilling image was far more immediate. “A cyber attack perpetrated by nation states or violent extremist groups,” he predicted, “could be as destructive as the terrorist attack of 9/11.”
Panetta is not the first Obama official to warn that the nation could be facing a cyber catastrophe, but he is the highest-ranking to resort to 9/11 imagery in doing so. Going out on a limb that previous cyber doomsayers had avoided, he mentioned September 11th four times in his speech, referring to our current vulnerabilities in cyber space as “a pre-9/11 moment.”
Since the beginning of the Obama presidency, warnings of cyber menaces from foreign enemies and others have flooded the news. Politicians have chimed in, as have the experts — from respected security professionals like President George Bush’s chief counterterrorism advisor Richard Clarke to security policymakers on the Hill like Senators Joe Lieberman and Susan Collins. Even our no-drama president has weighed in remarkably dramatically on the severity of the threat. “Taking down vital banking systems could trigger a financial crisis,” he wrote in the Wall Street Journal. “The lack of clean water or functioning hospitals could spark a public health emergency. And as we’ve seen in past blackouts, the loss of electricity can bring businesses, cities, and entire regions to a standstill.”
Panetta’s invocation of 9/11 was, however, clearly meant to raise the stakes, to sound a wake up call to the business community, Congress, and the nation’s citizens. The predictions are indeed frightening. According to the best experts, the consequences of a massive, successful cyber attack on crucial U.S. systems could be devastating to life as we know it.
It’s no longer just a matter of intellectual property theft, but of upending the life we lead. Imagine this: instead of terrorists launching planes at two symbolic buildings in the world’s financial center, cyber criminals, terrorists, or foreign states could launch viruses into major financial networks via the Internet, or target the nation’s power grids, robbing citizens of electricity (and thus heat in the middle of winter), or disrupt the systems that run public transportation, or contaminate our water supply.
Any or all of these potential attacks, according to leading cyber experts, are possible. Though they would be complex and difficult operations, demanding technical savvy, they are nonetheless within the realm of present possibility. Without protections, American citizens could be killed outright (say on a plane or a train) or left, as the president warned, without food, fuel, water and the mechanisms for transacting daily business.
For those of us who have lived inside the national security conversation for more than a decade now, such early warnings of dire consequences might sound tediously familiar, just another example of the (George W.) Bush who cried wolf. After all, in the wake of the actual 9/11 attacks, governmental overreach became commonplace, based on fear-filled scenarios of future doom. Continual hysteria over a domestic terror threat and (largely nonexistent) al-Qaeda “sleeper cells” bent on chaos led to the curtailing of the civil liberties of large segments of the American Muslim population and, more generally, far greater surveillance of Americans. That experience should indeed make us suspicious of doomsday predictions and distrustful of claims that extraordinary measures are necessary to protect “national security.”
For the moment, though, let’s pretend that we haven’t been through a decade in which national security needs were used and sometimes overblown to trump constitutional protections. Instead, let’s take the recent cyber claims at face value and assume that Richard Clarke, who prior to 9/11 warned continuously of an impending attack by al-Qaeda, is correct again.
And while we’re not dismissing these apocalyptic warnings, let’s give a little before-the-fact thought not just to the protection of the nation’s resources, information systems, and infrastructure, but to what’s likely to happen to rights, liberties, and the rule of law once we’re swept away by cyber fears. If you imagined that good old fashioned rights and liberties were made obsolete by the Bush administration’s Global War on Terror, any thought experiment you perform on what a response to cyber war might entail is far worse.
Remember former White House Council Alberto Gonzales telling us that, when it came to the interrogation of suspected terrorists, the protections of the U.S. Constitution were “quaint and obsolete”? Remember the argument, articulated by many, that torture, Guantanamo, and warrantless wiretapping were all necessary to prevent another 9/11, whatever they did to our liberties and laws?
Now, fast forward to the new cyber era, which, we are already being told, is at least akin to the threat of 9/11 (and possibly far worse). And keep in mind that, if the fears rise high enough, many of the sorts of moves against rights and constitutional restraints that came into play only after 9/11 might not need an actual cyber disaster. Just the fear of one might do the trick.
Not surprisingly, the language of cyber defense, as articulated by Panetta and others, borrows from the recent lexicon of counterterrorism. In Panetta’s words, “Just as [the Pentagon] developed the world’s finest counterterrorism force over the past decade, we need to build and maintain the finest cyber operators.”