Excuses, Excuses

Posted on October 1, 2012 by at Writeindependent.org

money – politics – congress – pledge – honest – candidates – election – corruption – fix – excuses – campaign reform

I have been asking candidates to sign the Pledge for Honest Candidates, which will go a long way to reforming our government so long as you, the voter, will vote for these Honest Candidates.

Candidates for congress can be so disingenuous. They SAY they’re all about campaign reform, but when you put them to task, they drag their feet or they do what the two following candidates have done: kick the can down the road.

Yes, some pledges are bad (see Grover Norquist’s Taxpayer Protection Pledge that has locked congress into a position of never raising any taxes EVER, on any tax bracket, or any company, under any circumstances, even when it would bring our country out of debt). But some are necessary, and it’s time to get money out of politics for REAL, not make false promises.

I can’t trust the following two people because they refuse to sign on the dotted line about campaign finance reform. If they can’t make a simple decision like fixing the “money in politics” problem, even when it is their decision to make, then I can’t vote for them. Can you?

Read below what Jack Orswell (CA 27) and Zoe Lofgren (CA 19) have to say about signing the Pledge for Honest Candidates:

Judy – I agree with the principles of the pledge, but it says I won’t accept more than $100 if elected.  If we cannot change the law in the next year, I won’t have sufficient funds to be re-elected in 2014 to continue the fight.  I agree the goal should be $100 per person and I will fight for it, but the pledge holds me to a different standard than my competition until the law gets passed.

Jack Orswell

My argument against this “logic” is that: if your constituents vote you into office, why do you need more money the second time around than you had the first time? If you are in office and doing a good job, you will get reelected.

Moreover, we need to make this effort to get money out of politics ALL AT ONCE, because that is the way bills get passed when money is not involved: by having a majority in congress passing the bill, bolstered by public support. Of all the factors involved in passing new legislation, that last bit cannot be overstated: the voters need to get NOISY, and it needs to happen NOW! The public must make it so uncomfortable for our representatives to do otherwise, that they will go against their own selfish interests and pass laws based on the people’s wishes.

The next candidate gives me a different excuse that is bolstered by the No Labels group, thank you very much.

Dear Mrs. Frankel:

Thank you for contacting me about the Pledge for Honest Candidates. I appreciate that you took the time to share your thoughts with me, and I apologize for the delay in my response.

I believe that openness and accountability makes our democracy stronger. However, I do not sign pledges from any group as a general policy; the only pledge I take is the oath of office. Please know that I will continue to work with my colleagues in the House of Representatives in a bipartisan manner on legislation to address the concerns of my constituents and Americans across the country.

Again, thanks for being in touch. If I may ever be of any assistance to you or your family, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely

Zoe Lofgren
Member of Congress

What are your thoughts about these excuses? Are you as tired of them as I am? If this is the way your candidates behave before they are elected, imagine how much more difficult they will be once in office, when they don’t need your vote.

Posted in Congress, Money In Politics, Voting, Writeindependent.org | Comments Off

What’s So Hard About Campaign Finance?

Sure, everybody claims to want campaign finance solved. Too much money influences too much in Washington. But when you give Congress an iron-clad way to fix it, they waffle. They decline. And to prove it to you, here’s some of the tactics outlined by some specific candidates who gave me their song-and-dance routine about campaign finance reform:

Posted on October 6, 2012 at Writeindependent.org

voting – congress – district – pledge – honest – candidate – No Labels – Trans Pacific Partnership – NAFTA – GATT

I live in California’s District 33, where only the top two vote getters advance from the Primary to the General election. That means I only have to look at two people: the incumbent Henry Waxman and his challenger Bill Bloomfield.

Bill Bloomfield says he’s an Independent. He says he’ll be tough on campaign reform. But I called his office, and he’s a Republican through and through, so I don’t buy it that he’s an Independent, but more importantly, I don’t trust that he will be tough on campaign financing because of the following emails between myself and someone working in his office:

Hi Judy,

I certainly like the general gist of what I saw in the video and feel it is in line with Bloomfield’s general platform.  However, one of his objectives with No Labels is to remove the idea of “pledges” from Congress (except, as Bill puts it, the pledge of office and pledge of allegiance) as he sees them historically as either ineffective or, more importantly, dangerous.  No Labels is looking to soften the bargaining positions between parties and sees pledges as signed, ridged commitments to a particular position as opposite to its cause.  For more details, please visit www.nolabels.org to see the twelve objectives they’ve outlined to work on repairing Congress.

But I would love to find a way for us to work together as we are obviously working in the same direction.  Bloomfield has just taken a hardline stance against signing any pledges altogether, but certainly isn’t against the well-intentioned nature of yours.  Let me know if you can think of any ways for us to cooperate without signing a pledge and let’s do that.

Regards,

Name removed here

Bloomfield for Congress
office: (310) 513-5033
www.bloomfieldforcongress.com

My reply:

Dear *****,

I like that you want to work together. I think, though, that your stance on not taking pledges is actually oxymoronic. If you pledge not to take a pledge, then you are taking a pledge!

Think about that one.

Now remember, the reason we pick one candidate over another is because of his convictions. If someone decides not to have a specific conviction, then it’s very hard to want to vote for them.

I have decided to blog about this problem. It seems like the candidates are trying very hard to dodge the issue of taking what is effectively “bribes” from lobbyists. If you want another example of a person who is aggressively taking a stance on this issue, visit Rootstrikers. Lawrence Lessig has a pledge for candidates to not take lobbying jobs, ever, after they are in office.

I think I stand correct that most of your constituents don’t want Mr. Bloomberg to take any big money or favors from special interest groups that would tend to sway his decisions in congress.

My biggest concern is something called the Trans Pacific Partnership. If Mr. Bloomberg prevails in the upcoming election, I can guarantee you that I will do everything in my power to persuade Mr. Bloomberg to say “NO” to the TPP. And I will do everything possible to educate our country’s citizens about the TPP, because it’s even worse than NAFTA, GATT, and all the other “free trade” agreements combined.

Judy

Here is another candidate dodging the issue of campaign finance. It’s not likely that there will be any opposition to the Pledge, unless of course the people opposing it want to make themselves look like people who want to take bribes.

Dear Gail,

Please, I urge you to strongly consider this Pledge because we just discovered that Public Access Stations will air our infomercial. I am reaching out to people in every district across the country to have the infomercial walked into the stations, so that we can exercise more influence in Washington than we are currently receiving via “representative government”.

Consider it a way of saving our country from the special interests, SuperPACs and whatever companies or countries are funding them.

Sincerely,
Judy Frankel

On Sep 26, 2012, at 8:51 AM, <ggailparker@cox.net> wrote:

Judy,

I am a candidate in Virginia’s Congressional District 1.  We are currently evaluating whether to sign the pledge.  We rarely receive donations and compliance is not the issue.  (We normally do not sign pledges nor do we respond to “surveys” as they usually seek to “lock down” candidates positions in order that the opposition can attack them.)

I encourage you to continue your efforts and wish you much success.

Sincerely,
Gail for Rail Parker
www.GailParker.us
Independent on the ballot in Virginia for eight consecutive years.

 

Posted in Congress, Money In Politics, Writeindependent.org | Comments Off

Voter Protection

Originally posted at Writeindependent.org on July 24, 2012

Ever feel like you can’t trust our government to count your vote? You’re not alone! Want to do something about it? Visit Election Defense Alliance (EDA). VOLUNTEERS ARE NEEDED!

A democratic election requires that you can:

  1. Mark your ballot in private
  2. Cast your ballot in public
  3. Count the ballots in public

Without ballots counted in public, we do not have democratic elections. It’s crucial to have citizens exercising their prerogative to watch ballot-counting in public.

The following is an example of the steps EDA takes at the Wisconsin polls to help make sure your vote is counted: (your county may vary, and the EDA helps with these variations)

  1. Observe the closing of the polls at 8:00 pm. Request a copy of the poll tape that the poll worker prints out of the tabulator (optical scanner). This is an open record and the Government Accountability Board states that you have a right to request it as long as you are not disrupting their work. An alternative is to photograph the original tape (not a copy) with a cell phone or a disposable digital camera. Members of the public may observe all poll sites and counting locations: Wisconsin Statutes: 7.41 (1, 2, 3, 4, 5). Some polling places lock their doors at 8:00, but this is illegal. If you have a problem, call the Government Accountability Board at (608) 261-2028, or email the Help Desk at GABHelpDesk@wi.gov. They will be at their office until 10 pm on Election Day But you really ought to arrive by 7:45 pm anyway. In fact, to be most efficient, these individuals could simply go to vote near the closing time to combine voting, watching the poll closing and print-out process, and reporting the count.
  2. Also record two more numbers:
    1. The number of signatures on the poll book after the poll worker finishes counting them.
    2. The number on the top of the scanner’s computer screen that shows the TOTAL BALLOT CAST. This number should match the number of signatures and the total ballots cast on the poll tape. Report any differences in these three numbers.

If you are at a location that hand-counts ballots, watch the hand counting process and record the totals for that process in the same manner above (1).

  1. Report the vote totals to the person who is heading up this operation for your county. Bring that person’s name and phone number with you and call in your totals as soon as you leave the polling site.
  2. Have a person, or preferably two people, present at County Election Headquarters to watch and record the vote totals counted on the computers that are adding up the totals being reported in from the “wards.”
  3. That person (or an assistant) should also receive the calls from your team-members at the individual polling sites (wards). Add up the numbers that are called in. Have the other person from your team witness or double-check the totaling process. Compare these called-in totals with the County election totals (4). Also compare with the totals that are later posted on the County Clerk’s website, and/or the Government Accountability Board’s website, as well as those reported in the newspaper on November 7th.
  4. Report whatever comparisons you have as soon as you get them to the person heading up this operation for the State.

To reiterate, citizens observe the closing of their own poll and report the vote totals. One person receives these citizen observed totals and adds them up. One other person observes at election headquarters to get the machine counted vote totals and compares them to the citizen observed totals. Report these comparisons to the person leading this action in Wisconsin.

You are playing a very valuable role in ensuring the accuracy of the reported vote totals. Thank you very much! To see a video on this issue, watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywEcU1j2AWg&feature=plcp

 

Posted in Voting, Writeindependent.org | Comments Off

Protest Voting

Originally posted at Writeindependent.org on October 7, 2012

protest – vote – lesser of two evils – why vote – ballot – tampering – voter apathy – independent – swing state – toss up – state – suppression – stand up

Are you tired of voting for the lesser of two evils? Do you feel, like the rest of America, that we have only two choices, that both of them are backed by the same monopolies? Were you thinking about NOT VOTING? If you are worried that your vote isn’t being counted properly, finish reading this page.

It’s time to change all that.

Instead of voting for the lesser of two evils or Not Voting, state your displeasure with our government by casting a Protest Vote.

There are several ways to cast a protest vote:

  1. Vote for the candidate whom you would most like to see win
  2. Vote for the candidate who has signed the Pledge for Honest Candidates, who will help remove the influence of money on our political system
  3. Write in a vote for someone who wants to win, but who isn’t on the ballot.

This year, make it known that you do not like the direction our politicians have taken us.

Posted in Voting, Writeindependent.org | Comments Off

My Bread is Safe!

Ever since I discovered that wheat is often sprayed with Roundup to speed up the harvesting process, I’ve been worried about my bread. Is it made with wheat that’s been sprayed with Roundup or glyphosate, the main chemical that farmers use to kill weeds?[i]

You might be asking yourself: why would they spray wheat with Roundup? Isn’t wheat safe from being sprayed because there is no “Roundup-Ready” GMO-tainted wheat anymore? Well, no. It’s true that GMO wheat has been banned in the US.[ii] But Monsanto found a way to give farmers a reason to spray wheat with Roundup even though there’s absolutely no need to do it. They’ve convinced wheat farmers that Roundup will desiccate (dry) their crop quicker, thus getting it ready for harvest sooner, and of course ready for sale sooner.

And you can’t wash the Roundup off.

If you don’t believe me that Monsanto sells Roundup to farmers for this purpose, read Monsanto’s own marketing literature: http://bit.ly/1tcn2of

So if farmers spray their wheat, and that goes to the granary and gets ground up as flour, the Roundup comes with it!

Who’s eating the Roundup-tainted flour? Who the hell knows! Maybe McDonalds is making their buns with it.

So naturally, I was worried that I’m eating Roundup-tainted bread. I called the company who makes my favorite bread. I buy Sweet Dark Prairie Bread at Sprouts. It’s made by Healthbreads Inc., dba Oasis Breads, located at 155 Mata Way #112, San Marcos, CA 92069. I called 760-747-7390 and a woman answered the phone. When I asked if they bought wheat from a supplier whose farmers spray their fields with Roundup, she asked me to wait on the line for a moment.

When she came back, she said “We’re absolutely, positively certain that it is not sprayed. We are working on getting a certificate that says that.” In other words, they know their source and the source is not spraying their fields. Whether or not the source is organic, she did not say. But my guess is that they are working on getting an organic certification, or they’re clearing the entire supply chain of all the ingredients that go into the making of this bread, so that they can verify that the bread itself is organic.

I wish you could have heard the woman who answered the phone. She was emphatic when she said that there’s absolutely no chance the wheat was sprayed! Good for them!

BTW, GMO tainted wheat was found in Montana[iii] in September 2014 and Oregon[iv] in April, 2013.[v] Watch the USDA try to assure foreign trading partners that GMO-tainted wheat found in the USA hasn’t entered our wheat export supply chain: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-h2ld6oHwmk

Sources:

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/2013/05/ge_wheat_detection.shtml

[i] http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/faq7206?opendocument

[ii] http://eatlocalgrown.com/article/11547-illegal-monsanto-gmo-wheat-threatens-u-s-exports.html

[iii] http://naturallysavvy.com/live/illegal-gmo-wheat-found-growing-in-montana

[iv] http://naturallysavvy.com/eat/illegal-gmo-wheat-growing-in-oregon-threatens-us-wheat-exports

[v] http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/30/us-wheat-asia-idUSBRE94T0JA20130530

 

Posted in Agriculture, Writeindependent.org | Comments Off

Holder Takes Credit for Lower Prison Population

Decrease sentencing for non-violent drug offenders, decrease costs. It’s a band-aid win for the federal government who wants to seem tough on crime but easy on the wallet. For one thing, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder’s March 13, 2014 appearance in front of the U.S. Sentencing Commission to push the change to the sentencing guidelines will only apply to federal penitentiaries. There are 213,901 inmates in federal correctional facilities as of Oct. 16th, 2014. There are ten times that many prisoners (2 million) in state-run facilities.

Our prison industrial complex is a disgrace. “Although the United States comprises just five percent of the world’s population, we incarcerate almost a quarter of the world’s prisoners,” Holder said to the U.S. Sentencing Commission.

Dr. Cornel West and author Michelle Alexander call mass incarceration The New Jim Crow in their book by the same name.

An anonymous comment made in response to Caitlin Seandel’s blog post called “Prison Labor” Three Strikes and You’re Hired, explains the problem of sentencing:

“Incarceration is a function of 4 things (number of arrests, number of convictions, sentence length, recidivism). The current trend is to arrest many, convict some, extraordinary long sentencing with option of parole. The generous offer of parole is negated by high recidivism. The police is (sic) responsible for first introduction to criminal justice system, but also the main amplifier of recidivism. Recidivism always begins with the 2nd arrest. Public prosecutors overcharge, causing construction of inappropriately high bond as misdemeanors become felonies in this unethical practice. The trumped up charges leads to a necessity to plea guilty to lesser charges but waiving the right to trial and a jury. Since so few convicts go through a jury it gives free hands for public prosecutors and judges to ‘do as they please’ without supervision and the involvement of the public eye. The jury would be the ultimate supervision and the moderator of the public prosecutor and the judge. Due to prosecutions overcharging and plea deals this part of the oversight disappears. I would say shame on you all. What can be done? Defense lawyers should lower their fees to help more people get saved from being wrecked by the current system. People selected for jury should attend without hesitation, to make the system work once again. There should be statistical oversight of plea deals vs jury trials percentage. A 50-50 proportion would serve better than a 90-10 (plea vs jury) in terms of keeping the DA and judge under public supervision oversight and moderation. In a system that has got out of control, the citizens appointed to jury duty and the defense lawyers will be the only parties that can actively claim it by back by lawfully allowed means.”

Sources: http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-prison-industry-in-the-united-states-big-business-or-a-new-form-of-slavery/8289

http://ellabakercenter.org/blog/2013/06/prison-labor-is-the-new-slave-labor

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/14/us/politics/holder-endorses-proposal-to-reduce-drug-sentences.html

 

Posted in Money In Politics, Writeindependent.org | Comments Off

Healthcare

Originally posted at Writeindependent.org on June 30, 2012

Obamacare – Affordable Care Act – ACA – Justice Roberts decision – ACA constitutional

I used to own and operate a physical therapy practice from 1989 to 1996, so I know more than most people about the insurance industry. I never understood the media’s argument against health care. When Justice Roberts put in the final decision, the stock market rallied in the health sector. People who once played Russian roulette with their lives will now be able to get health insurance. People who are dying won’t leave their loved ones holding huge debts that could wipe them out. And most importantly, there is no such thing as “death panels.” I can assure you that.

But I was never completely happy with Obamacare. Let’s re-write the Affordable Care Act to be what it was intended to be: affordable health insurance that covers pre-existing conditions, yes, but also offers a public option. Let people have a choice to purchase the plan, even if they are self-employed.

It’s easy to write an ACA that makes sense: just take Medicare and add maternity and child health. There was no need to start from scratch.

There’s only one thing I don’t like about being taxed for insurance: the whole thing should not be privatized. Insurance companies have shown us time and again that they can not be trusted with huge sums of profits. Most of it goes toward the top executives’ salaries and not toward what they should provide: healthcare. Case in point: United Healthcare’s Stephen J. Hemsley makes 48.8 million per year. You can’t tell me that he makes money like that by making the company profitable without also realizing that his efforts and money isn’t going toward improving his subscriber’s healthcare. I know; my daughter and I have experienced being on the United Healthcare plans, and it was no picnic trying to get services.

We shouldn’t have health insurance companies at all because they operate in a perpetual state of conflict of interest. They are supposed to “make money” and “be profitable” and yet they are supposed to “provide funding” for “healthcare”… Doesn’t anyone else see how those two ideals conflict? Medicine should be socialized, end of story. Thirty-two of the thirty-three developed nations have universal health care, with the United States being the lone exception [1].

Norway 1912 Single Payer
New Zealand 1938 Two Tier
Japan 1938 Single Payer
Germany 1941 Insurance Mandate
Belgium 1945 Insurance Mandate
United Kingdom 1948 Single Payer
Kuwait 1950 Single Payer
Sweden 1955 Single Payer
Bahrain 1957 Single Payer
Brunei 1958 Single Payer
Canada 1966 Single Payer
Netherlands 1966 Two-Tier
Austria 1967 Insurance Mandate
United Arab Emirates 1971 Single Payer
Finland 1972 Single Payer
Slovenia 1972 Single Payer
Denmark 1973 Two-Tier
Luxembourg 1973 Insurance Mandate
France 1974 Two-Tier
Australia 1975 Two Tier
Ireland 1977 Two-Tier
Italy 1978 Single Payer
Portugal 1979 Single Payer
Cyprus 1980 Single Payer
Greece 1983 Insurance Mandate
Spain 1986 Single Payer
South Korea 1988 Insurance Mandate
Iceland 1990 Single Payer
Hong Kong 1993 Two-Tier
Singapore 1993 Two-Tier
Switzerland 1994 Insurance Mandate
Israel 1995 Two-Tier

And there is one more problem with Universal Health Care: if we don’t get our environmental house in order, with (for example) autism and cancer rates soaring, we’ll be broke even if our government administers the plan flawlessly. It takes both: to improve the health of our planet as we improve the government that supposedly “supports” our health.

http://truecostblog.com/2009/08/09/countries-with-universal-healthcare-by-date/

Posted in Congress, Ecology, Economy, Everyday life, Writeindependent.org | Comments Off

Will I Lose My Home?

Please don’t make me regret signing up for Medi-Cal! I just found out today that it is possible for the government to lay an estate claim on my house to pay for outstanding medical bills when I die. I remember seeing something about this when I filled out the forms for Medi-Cal so that I could qualify as a provider of (and my daughter could receive) In Home Supportive Services.

But could they really take my home away from Jillian when I die? Please tell me it isn’t so!

There are ten states where language in their sign-up documentation effectively allows those states to use “estate recovery” to steal Medicaid and Medi-Cal recipients’ equity in their homes in order to cover medical expenses.

In California, SB 1124 passed unanimously in the Senate to overturn the wording in the Medi-Cal sign-up paperwork (or online registration, like the kind I used) so that low-income families don’t have to worry about this. Unfortunately, Governor Jerry Brown VETOED the bill! If you don’t believe me, read Jerry Brown’s signature on this veto note: gov.ca.gov/docs/SB_1124_Veto_Message.pdf

For more information on how California uses “estate recovery” to take away people’s home, read: http://bit.ly/ZAtAzB

Sources: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/09/12/1329202/-California-Governor-Brown-Still-Wants-to-Steal-My-Home#

Posted in Economy, Everyday life, Writeindependent.org | Comments Off

The Game

Recovered from Writeindependent.org, originally posted on July 13, 2012

We are taught about this game from the time we enter preschool: that you have to learn certain subjects (math and English are presumably the most important), that you have to be ahead of your peers (presumably to have the best chances to enter college), that you will want to earn a lot of money (presumably so that you are attractive to the girls if you’re male, and so that you can be independent if you’re female) and that money is the source of all things: happiness, security, material things that we are sold on TV.

Then to “win” this game, the best and the brightest (because the dullards dropped out at some point and realized it was a pointless game anyway, and maybe they really were the smartest ones anyway…) went on to Harvard, or Yale, or what have you. And they became the “leaders” in every way, because their money bought influence, and with this influence, they changed the rules of the game itself, so that they could get more money and more influence.

Do you see where I’m going here? The same people who supposedly “won” the game of life that they were taught since preschool was the game are the ones who are actually destroying the fabric of our society. First, they created weapons to assure their dominance, they funded this weaponry and the soldiers to blow things up and made sure that the taxes paid for it all, then they undermined our economic system by deregulating it and making it complicated and untraceable and impossible to fix. These “brilliant” minds of finance and war built themselves the ultimate paradox: a place unfit for life as we know it.

So how do we unravel this thing? I actually think human beings are quite resilient. I think that the minds who “won” this game of how to become fabulously wealthy can turn around and become the creative geniuses who get us out of this mess.

And if they don’t do it, we dullards will. Because we will be the creative genii.

Who are these genii (plural for genius)?

They:

  1. Question authority
  2. Use critical thinking
  3. Live “outside the box” in non-traditional paradigms
  4. Lead with their passion
  5. When people say “it can’t be done” they don’t listen and they do it anyway
  6. Find monopoly incredibly boring
  7. Don’t watch much TV
  8. Exercise their artistry, whatever that may be
  9. Live deeply, finding resonant ideas and synchronicities and listening to them
  10. Are considerate of others because they know we are all in this together
  11. Make a conscious effort to tread softly on the planet that is the source of all life.

Show me a “leader” of industry, a traditional wealthy individual, and I can almost guarantee they don’t do the most important of these. We know for a fact that their course is unsustainable. So how smart was this paradigm we foisted upon our children, or our parents foisted upon us? And should we continue to be complicit in this system, or find a better way?

 

Posted in Economy, Everyday life, Military, Writeindependent.org | Comments Off

Mainstream Media Drops the Ball

Mainstream media still refuses to report on the Trans Pacific Partnership (aka TPP) and the TransAtlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (aka TTIP), supposedly “free trade” agreements that are Trojan horses for corporations to gain unprecedented rights. Briefly, these trade agreements allow corporations to sue governments if their laws stand in the way of their profits. For example, if a government passes a law to ban GMOs, Monsanto can sue that government for lost revenues.

What court would ever find in favor of Monsanto in such a case? Well, the lawyers who are crafting the TPP and TTIP agreements thought about that. They’ve set up a kangaroo court of three attorneys who decide the outcome of such lawsuits. They call it a tribunal, and this tribunal answers to no one. Lucky for Monsanto, the attorneys are handpicked by –you guessed it—the same attorneys who helped craft these agreements.

In case you still can’t believe it, under NAFTA several huge companies have sued countries who have signed that agreement, also reviewed by a similar kangaroo court. Here are some cases where corporations have sued governments and the damages sought (in American dollars):

Company Country being sued Damages sought (in millions of dollars)
Ethyl Canada $250
Metaclad Mexico $90
SD Myers Canada $20
Loewen State of Mississippi $725
Sunbelt Canada $220
Pope & Talbot Canada $507

But will you find out about this through the mainstream media? Suspiciously, they are mum about these lawsuits.

Many activists in the countries involved in these deals have already been protesting. Twenty-two countries across Europe are planning public rallies in over 1,000 locations. But, will you hear about them from “Fox ‘News,’ CNN, New York Times, London Times, ABC? Of course not. Did you hear about the massive protests against it? Of course not. You only hear what the interest groups permit you to hear,” says Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy for the Reagan administration and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. “If these faux ‘trade agreements’ go through, Europe and Asia will also be ruled by American corporations.”

Sources: http://www.citizen.org/documents/Fancy1.pdf

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/10/12/382010/the-us-lie-machine/

Posted in Economy, Writeindependent.org | Comments Off