Category Archives: Corporate Takeover

Corporations vs. Entrepreneurship

Entre_Feature

The corporate culture would have you believe that it is the foremost structure of the economy. That the entrepreneur is a nuisance and is tilting at windmills. Since competition is a dirty word, the innovative venture poses no threat, but might qualify as an acquisition. Only if the business model is such that duplicating the endeavor is too time consuming or difficult will the corporatist take interest. Yet, in the end, the design of the corporate organization is more about brute force than creative invention. So why is it so difficult for the enterpriser to get their project off the ground? And what is the compelling motivation to start your own business?

An independent businessperson is a much different breed from the corporate ladder climber. Consider the 7 Reasons to Ditch the Corporate World for a Career at a Startup.

  1. Getting recognition
  2. Having more responsibility
  3. Bonding with coworkers
  4. Learning from true innovators
  5. Embracing new opportunities
  6. Putting your strengths to work
  7. Working toward the money

If you have never been part of a small business and your only experience is with a corporatist organization, some of the above aspects may seem foreign if not outright dangerous. In order to help define the difference between the two mindsets, Jun Loayza founder of Future Delivery provides the following assessment in Corporate World vs Entrepreneurial Life.

“The corporate world is calling with nice cars, fancy lunches, and guaranteed paychecks — if you’re willing to put your dream company on hold and sit in a low-walled prison five days a week.  If you’re torn between stable income and the wish fulfillment of a bold new venture, listen up to someone who’s had the pleasure and pain of living in both worlds.”

Work/Life balance vs Lifestyle

Steady Income vs No Money

Good Enough vs Better than All the Rest

These headings compare the vast differences in thinking, temperament, objectives and goals. Start-up attempts usually begin with an idea for a product or service that is not currently available. Formulating a business plan and identifying a method to monetize a return is often overlooked, when the visionary is engaged with the excitement that a successful rollout could generate.

A small business owner of a more established sector operation is more concerned with surviving competition, maintaining margins, expanding market share and gaining access to capital for growth and expenses. This difference from the dreamer turned practical, separates the emphasis both apply.

So the similarities between the merchant and the innovative entrepreneur are far more in common than the style used by Corporate America Is Killing Your Start-up Dreams. The Inc. publication presents aspects of the corporate culture and how it works.

Note the vast difference in the business model employed by corporations from the entrepreneur. While they preach company loyalty, corporatists actually exercise a pattern of expediency.

Corporate America Creates a False Sense of Security

The corporate climb is slow and at each rung you’re reminded that there is so much still to do before reaching the next level

Knowledge is power

Mitigating risk is key

You only live once

Corporatism 101 presents background on the difference between corporatism and corporations. However, the blunt distinction in both prove to be light years different from an economy driven by  creative and pioneering projects that advance, grow and create actual new wealth.

Corporate mores seldom exhibit a passion to improve the economic well being of consumers, but frequently tap the consumerism of the customer to keep the engine of materialism as the life blood of business.

Add to this aspect the financial sector of the corporate economy and the lack of any real competition is vividly demonstrated. There is little room for start-up financial ventures, when the source of capital access is mainly reserved to the largest of corporate companies.

It is because of this reason that most plans fail. Money is a necessary ingredient to float a start-up. Finding an angel financier to raise the needed venture capital is usually reserved to seasoned business people.

Nonetheless, for those brave souls who strike out on their own, the risks are substantial. What happens if your flop? Going back to a previous life may not be an option.

Why Corporations Won’t Hire An Entrepreneur defines the issue well.

“Corporations have become factories of mental models created over decades of controlling how and what people think through the influence of power and money. The attitudes have created cultures of “we are in control and we pay you to follow the rules we make“.

These mental models were designed to build organizations where compliance and productivity of human labor determined profitability.  Subsequently organizations were built around a hierarchy of control similar to the military where the strategy was to beat the enemy.  This mental model is dependent on compliance.  Compliance through control of resources via influence of power and money has proven to be limiting and costly.”

Basically, the dilemma is that forced compliance works better than free association in the trenches of economic dominance. The essential notion of a free market is an illusion. In the real world of goods and services the big box store, energy supplier, food processor and financial services are the realm of protective trade secrets.

While it might be easy to analyze how a large retailer operates, it may not be as transparent on how that business maintains its dominance over their own market share. The entrepreneur is constantly fighting to get into the game. Carving out a small niche that flies under the corporate radar screen is the best chance to refine and expand a start-up.

Forget about transferring the entrepreneurship mindset into the corporate structure. Both planets orbit in different universes. With the systemic decline in a viable economy, the unemployment stats and the underemployment part time jobs that emerge from the corporatist companies allow for little future for our society or individual security.

America was built by daring entrepreneurs long before the corporate system.


SARTRE is the pen name of James Hall, a reformed, former political operative. This pundit’s formal instruction in History, Philosophy and Political Science served as training for activism, on the staff of several politicians and in many campaigns. A believer in authentic Public Service, independent business interests were pursued in the private sector. As a small business owner and entrepreneur, several successful ventures expanded opportunities for customers and employees. Speculation in markets, and international business investments, allowed for extensive travel and a world view for commerce. He is retired and lives with his wife in a rural community. “Populism” best describes the approach to SARTRE’s perspective on Politics. Realities, suggest that American Values can be restored with an appreciation of “Pragmatic Anarchism.” Reforms will require an Existential approach. “Ideas Move the World,” and SARTRE’S intent is to stir the conscience of those who desire to bring back a common sense, moral and traditional value culture for America. Not seeking fame nor fortune, SARTRE’s only goal is to ask the questions that few will dare … Having refused the invites of an academic career because of the hypocrisy of elite’s, the search for TRUTH is the challenge that is made to all readers. It starts within yourself and is achieved only with your sincere desire to face Reality. So who is SARTRE? He is really an ordinary man just like you, who invites you to join in on this journey. Visit his website at http://batr.org.

Leaked TPP Trade Bill Healthcare Annex

wikileaks-tpp-healthcare-annex.si

Proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade legislation and its companion Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP)  are anti-consumer stealth corporate coup d’etat freedom and ecosystem-destroying measures – nightmarish by any standard.

They let corporate predators establish unrestricted supranational global trade rules overriding national sovereignty and domestic laws.

They serve investor rights at the expense of public ones. They permit anything goes for profit. They create a world more unfit to live in than already.

On June 10, WikiLeaks published the draft TPP Healthcare Annex (so-called Annex on Transparency and Procedural Fairness for Pharmaceutical Products and Medical Devices).

It establishes pharmaceutical and medical device procurement and reimbursement rules government healthcare authorities must follow.

Vague language creates opportunities for drug and medical device companies to challenge Medicare and healthcare program procedures of the 12 TPP-bloc countries.

Consumer friendly policy reforms would be constrained – including the ability of governments to contain rising prices making them unaffordable for millions.

Big Pharma wants profits protected over public health, said WikiLeaks. It wants them maximized.

An earlier Healthcare Annex was released in 2011. Some harmful provisions were removed in the latest version. Global Trade Watch (GTW) says serious questions remain unanswered – vital for people to know, including:

“What guarantees are there that the TPP’s requirements would not override existing procedures for Medicare?”

The US Trade Representative’s Office (USTR) claims Medicare fully complies with TPP provisions.

“Yet (their) ambiguous language…leaves our domestic healthcare policies vulnerable to attack by drug and (medical) device manufacturers,” said GTW.

Could companies use Healthcare Annex provisions to cover expensive products “without a corresponding benefit to public health,” GTW asked?

Medicare reimburses for “reasonable and necessary” products and treatment. TPP “recognize(s) the value (of drugs and medical devices through the) operation of competitive markets (or their) objectively demonstrated therapeutic significance” – regardless of effectiveness or affordability.

Medicare permits limited reimbursement appeals only. Companies might argue TPP rules permit unrestricted reviews.

“Would the TPP constrain pharmaceutical reform efforts in the US,” asked GTW? Healthcare Annex provisions apply to future coverage determinations as well as current ones.

Healthcare reform advocates want soaring drug prices curtailed by establishing a “national formulary” enabling the government to get substantial discounts passed on to consumers. TPP won’t allow it.

“Could the inclusion of this Annex in the TPP bolster the case of a pharmaceutical company that is suing the United States,” asked GTW?

Investor-State Dispute Settlement procedures have been included in US trade agreements since the 1990s. Foreign companies may challenge government policies – claiming they potentially curtail future profits. In return, they demand “unlimited sums in taxpayer compensation.”

GTW asked if the Healthcare Annex boosts their case – at the expense of the public interest. Companies could claim government policies compromised their profit expectations and demand compensating reimbursement at taxpayers’ expense.

Much about TPP remains secret – vital information people have a right to know. If enacted, Washington wants it extended to all Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) members – about 40% of the world’s population.

Attorney Judit Rius Sanjuan for Doctors Without Borders says TPP “will increase the cost of medicines worldwide, starting with the 12 countries that are negotiating” TPP.

Hugely profitable drug companies want unconstrained rights to charge whatever the market will bear. They claim high prices are needed to compensate for billions of dollars spent for research – without acknowledging how much governments in America and elsewhere pay for, passing on scientific research information to drug companies cost-free.

GTW director Lori Wallach calls the Healthcare Annex leak “the latest example of why fast-tracking the TPP would undermine the health of Americans and the other countries and cost our government more, all to the benefit of pharma’s profits.”


Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at [email protected]. His new book is titled “How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion and Class War”. www.claritypress.com/Lendman.html Visit his blog site at www.sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Another Round Of Fake Environmental Concern

cop21 paris 2015

(The Real Agenda) Transnational oil corporations are just one group of many that bear responsibility for the destruction of the environment, yet, they love to appear as if they are concerned about the health of the planet.

Big Oil has been behind fake environmental movements for the past half a century, financing NGOs and philanthropic organizations that present themselves as defenders of the environment but that are nothing less than corporate creations whose role is to keep people distracted while they go about destroying the future of billions of people.

While many oil companies claim to have a firm corporate social responsibility plan which supposedly includes avoiding environmental pollution, they always manage to dump chemicals into landfills and to use dangerous substances in the products they manufacture.

As the next round of environmental discussions on so-called Climate Change is set to take place in Paris this year, oil companies are already asking to be let into the conversations so they can speak directly with representatives of the United Nations and national governments.

The fake environmental movement and the UN could not have a better partner than Big Oil in their attempt to establish a legally binding universal agreement at the end of the United Nations Climate Change Conference next November in Le Bourget, France.  Both Big Oil and the UN have worked hand in hand to make people surrender their rights to property and individual liberty because “climate doomsday” is around the corner.

Unfortunately for them, more people are now aware of the hoax that anthropogenic global warming and climate change really are, which is why the UN and large international corporations are now partnering to secretely approve a resolution that would mandate the end of civilization as we know it.

As we have reported ad nauseum before, Big Oil and other industries are strong supporters of the carbon credits scheme, the system that codifies pollution worldwide, as it promotes planetary contamination in exchange for fees that only the largest companies will be able to afford.

In a recent statement sent by six major European oil companies to Christiana Figueres, the Executive Secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, they claim that “climate change is a critical challenge to our world”, which is why they want full access to the climate negotiations that will take place in Paris.

BP Group, BP, Eni, Royal Dutch Shell, Total Satoil are trying to get a place at the conversations in Paris later this year, where the UN intends to approve mechanisms to replace the Kyoto Protocol.

According to UN officials, the main goal of the meeting is to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, which the UN and other environmental organizations claim to be the cause of global warming. The same discussion is taking place at the governmental level.

The major economies of the world are presenting their commitments to reduce emissions. And companies involved in fossil fuels are in the crosshairs of an economic model that  leads to the total decarbonisation of the world’s economy, as recognized last week by Figueres.

In this situation, the six European oil giants have sent the letter to the UN in an attempt not to be left out of the agreements. The companies say they want to “open a direct dialogue with the UN and national governments”.

The formula they propose is the same that exists now, except it would be a mandatory one if approved. They want to put a price tag on carbon emissions and the official establishment of carbon markets for buying and selling carbon allowances, a fraudulent scheme which now moves about $34 billion annually. A large chunk of this money is paid to people like Al Gore, who owns his own carbon trade company.

These six major companies believe that carbon pricing can “discourage high emissions” of CO2 and “reduce uncertainty which will help stimulate investment in low carbon technologies.” For that, the oil companies ask for “transparent, stable and ambitious regulatory frameworks” which they will undoubtedly seek to influence and control.

“We recognize that the current trend in emissions of greenhouse gases is higher than what is necessary to limit temperature increase to less than two degrees above pre-industrial levels”, stated in their letter the leaders of the six major oil companies.

“The challenge now is how to meet increased demand for energy with less CO2″, they added. “We are ready to play our part”, say these companies.

The flawed science referred to by the six oil companies in their letter is the same provided by the UN in multiple documents. This so-called science purports that desirable planetary temperature should be just above pre-industrial levels, which according to the UN can only be reached by completely decarbonizing human activity. In truth, despite the continuous increase in CO2 emissions for the past decade or so, there has been no measurable increase in global temperatures.

Even mainstream media have been obligated to report on the fact that data that shows a relation between increases in CO2 emissions and global warming have been manipulated to fit the politics of global warming and climate change so that European and American corporations, through their UN partners, have an excuse to push for limits to development in third world nations.


Luis R. Miranda is an award-winning journalist and the founder and editor-in-chief at The Real Agenda. His career spans over 18 years and almost every form of news media. His articles include subjects such as environmentalism, Agenda 21, climate change, geopolitics, globalisation, health, vaccines, food safety, corporate control of governments, immigration and banking cartels, among others. Luis has worked as a news reporter, on-air personality for Live and Live-to-tape news programs. He has also worked as a script writer, producer and co-producer on broadcast news. Read more about Luis.

Once Again, The World Marches

march-against-monsanto-home

They marched in Australia. They marched in Africa. They marched in Canada. They marched in Dublin and London and all across Europe.

Here in the U.S., we marched in Portland, Maine and Seattle, Wash., and in between, in cities large and small, coast to coast.

On May 23, 2015, the world marched against Monsanto.

Monsanto isn’t alone in its greed-driven quest to sell toxic chemicals, to monopolize the world’s seed supply, to put small farmers out of business, to keep consumers in the dark about the pesticide-laden GMOs in our food. Dow, Dupont, Syngenta, Bayer. They are all destroying our soil and our food—which will ultimately lead to the destruction of the very ecosystem that sustains us.

But Monsanto has become the face of everything that’s wrong with our food and farming system today. And for that matter, everything that’s wrong with our Democracy.

So we marched. In great numbers. All over the globe.

And we’ll do it again next year. And every year after, as long as it takes. Until we rebuild our soil, our farms, our forests, our food system, and our health.

A sampling of photos and articles from the 2015 global March against Monsanto

Image credit: www.march-against-monsanto.com

Congressional Sellout On TPP Fast Track

tpp

There is a simple reason why the Congress is held is such ill repute. Leadership in both parties are total agents for the Plutocrats that have systematically destroyed our economy with their globalist corporatist model that results in national impoverishment. The only startling pattern to this bipartisan betrayal is that the public continues to accept their excruciating fraud with only a whimper of discontent. BATR has covered the TPP Fast Track issue intensively. The most consistent observation is that the public, in this sinking economy, has ignored the impact that will accelerate, as the leaks from this secretive agreement become known.

Debating the facts or the “so called” merits of free trade is like talking to a deaf mute that is blind. Sign language will not work, nor will beating a drum communicate the war message that the globalist plot to fatally cripple our domestic economy is the real goal of all the internationalist trade agreements.

Corporatism has no national loyalty. Authentic conservative economic nationalism has been sold out by the political class, who are funded by monopolistic transnational’s dedicated to a New World Order of centralized control and rationed resources for the general public.

Naïve Conservative, newborn Tea Party members and wishful Republican enthusiasts expressed rejoice with the GOP gaining a Senate majority in the 2014 election. Yet it was unequivocally ordained that the new majority in the Senate would maintain the same destructive leadership treachery under Harry Reid. The Mitch McConnell leadership era only differs in style when it comes to pushing the same globalist agenda.

The Washington Post reports that Obama wins trade victory in the Senate.

“A coalition of 48 Senate Republicans and 14 Democrats voted for Trade Promotion Authority late Friday, sending the legislation to a difficult fight in the House, where it faces more entrenched opposition from Democrats.”

Without McConnell’s complicity, many Democrats would have had to cast their support for fast track since many of the no votes allowed for cover from their true sentiments. However, the overwhelming Republican acceptance illustrates just how futile it is to place trust in the Senate.

A Senate of Subversion details the customary duplicity that applies to both parties. Nonetheless, the immediate circumstance at hand asks, Could Conservatives Push TPA Over the Finish Line?

According to Roll Call, Republican phony conservatives show their true colors.

“While many on the right are still hedging their position on the TPA, there appears to be some conservative support for the trade process legislation. And with congressional Democrats increasingly taking a firmer line against the TPA, which would give expedited consideration to the Trans-Pacific Partnership under negotiation with 11 other countries, conservatives could be the key to getting the TPA over the finish line.”

Add the ridiculous admission of Orrin Hatch on Trade Bill:  ‘I DON’T KNOW FULLY WHAT’S IN TPP MYSELF’ Ironically, Hatch also admits he doesn’t know what is in the TPP deal, while at the same time he objects to the push for more transparency prior to any crucial votes”, and you have a classic example that Senators simply vote for their corporatist masters.

The next report from Breitbart demonstrates just how futile it is to place faith in a Republican Senate. Only Two Republicans Admit They Actually Read Secret Obama Trade Deal —Both Unsupportive, separates the lone responsible Senators from the rest of the pack.

“Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) has on numerous occasions publicly stated he has read the TPP—which is locked away in a secret room in the Capitol, access to which only lawmakers and certain staffers with high-level clearance are provided—and a spokeswoman for Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT)  on Thursday told Breitbart News that the Senator has read it as well. Despite asking press staff for every U.S. Senate Republican office throughout the day Thursday if their office’s senator has visited the secret room to read the deal—specifically the controversial “living agreement” contained within it—only Sessions and Lee would confirm they visited the room to read it.”

Now if you want a detailed history lesson on Fast Track, no better analysis is provided than, The TPP and the TTIP: How Congressional Republicans Lie to Approve Obama’s Trade Deals.

“The crucial vote in the U.S. Senate was on 14 May 2015, when the issue was whether to grant these deals “Fast Track Trade Promotion Authority,” which is what Presidents since Nixon’s time have used in order to get Congress to cede to the Executive, the U.S. President, virtually 100% of Congress’s Constitutionally mandated role in treaty drafting and approval — making it effectively an entirely Presidential matter. This “Fast Track” was invented by the Republican President Nixon in 1974, in order to bring about an Executive dictatorship in the passage-into-law of international-trade treaties that would otherwise stand no real chance of becoming law, because too many members of Congress would lose their seats if they voted directly for such horrendous treaties. So, instead, there is now instead, for these super-terrible international-trade deals, “Fast Track,” as constituting the crucial vote. This trick enables a member of Congress to say that he or she had voted for “Fast Track” instead of for the trade-deal itself. (He then has actually voted to eliminate the Constitution’s requirement that any treaty needs two-thirds of the U.S. Senators to vote for it in order for the treaty to become law; that two-thirds is reduced by “Fast Track” to a standard 50%. Though in the U.S. Constitution international treaties were handled as requiring especially high caution in order for them to be able to become law, Nixon created this way around the Constitutional requirement, this “Fast Track” trick that should be thrown out by the U.S. Supreme Court.) The presumption here, in shunting these important things off into a procedural trick, is that voters are stupid enough to be easily fooled, and this is it: “Fast Track.”

When Boehner Praises Trade Bill Passage, the complicity of the Speaker of the House  registers for all to see.

“Trade helps create good-paying American jobs, so it’s good news that the Senate has put us one step closer to eliminating trade barriers. These reforms have the support of farmers, manufacturers, small business owners, and Americans from all walks of life, and it’s not hard to figure out why,” Boehner says in a statement.

Drawing reasonable conclusions Devvy Kidd offers up a perceptive viewpoint in Boehner and McConnell Working to Kill off America as we know it: TPP.

What can you do?

  1. STOP voting for incumbents who are are not constitutional bull dogs. STOP voting the same incumbents back into office every two years (House) and six years (Senate) even though the Seventeenth Amendment was NOT ratified by enough states, few in America care. My Seventeenth Amendment lawsuit is in the Third District Court of Appeals in Austin, Texas; the next brief is due July 3rd. I will keep you posted. Are conservatives happy they voted back in all the same incumbents last November who continue to stab us in the back?
  2. Last month the trade deficit was $40 BILLION dollars. That’s America’s wealth being sucked out of this country. Buy Made in USA (ahuge listing of companies) so American companies can expand and hire Americans. Ask where you shop. Let them know you will order on line, but we support American workers first. We CAN create a huge job boom. That means fruits and vegetables, too. See:One Million Jobs Project – take five minutes to read and watch:

Folks if you want to see the future, rely on Pat Buchanan: If Republicans Pass Trade Deal, They’ll Never Win The Presidency, because the economic record is perfectly clear. Challenging Republican leadership usually goes unreported.

“How does [House Budget Chairman] Paul Ryan explain the fact that we’ve had $11 trillion in trade deficits since the NAFTA decade?” Buchanan posed. [T]ake a look at our country: why is China suddenly all these gleaming new cities and factories and plants to build the silk road, while the United States of America is indebted $2.5 trillion to China and Japan?”

Facing up to this consequence of the most destructive trade treaties of the last several decades is something the Republicans have avoided. Purging the Buchanan wing from the GOP has produced a total breakdown in even the appearance that there is a difference in the parties. The political class are dedicated internationalists and are bent upon the destruction of an independent domestic economy where Middle America can exist.

What good is it to have a majority in both legislatures in Congress if your party power brokers continue to betray genuine conservatives? The Radical Reactionary essay, The Irrelevance of the Republican Party is a must read resource that traces the saga and argues that the GOP cannot be reformed.

Mitch McConnell and John Boehner have failed miserably in their leadership roles. Paleo-conservatism is the only alternative to internationalist neo-Cons. Embrace populism and reject the GOP elitism.


SARTRE is the pen name of James Hall, a reformed, former political operative. This pundit’s formal instruction in History, Philosophy and Political Science served as training for activism, on the staff of several politicians and in many campaigns. A believer in authentic Public Service, independent business interests were pursued in the private sector. As a small business owner and entrepreneur, several successful ventures expanded opportunities for customers and employees. Speculation in markets, and international business investments, allowed for extensive travel and a world view for commerce. He is retired and lives with his wife in a rural community. “Populism” best describes the approach to SARTRE’s perspective on Politics. Realities, suggest that American Values can be restored with an appreciation of “Pragmatic Anarchism.” Reforms will require an Existential approach. “Ideas Move the World,” and SARTRE’S intent is to stir the conscience of those who desire to bring back a common sense, moral and traditional value culture for America. Not seeking fame nor fortune, SARTRE’s only goal is to ask the questions that few will dare … Having refused the invites of an academic career because of the hypocrisy of elite’s, the search for TRUTH is the challenge that is made to all readers. It starts within yourself and is achieved only with your sincere desire to face Reality. So who is SARTRE? He is really an ordinary man just like you, who invites you to join in on this journey. Visit his website at http://batr.org.

Jeff Nielson: The Complete Criminalization Of Our System (VIDEO)

cashless society

[If you really study the patterns] you can actually see when they turn on and off the algorithm program used to manipulate the gold and silver markets.  – Jeff Nielson, Shadow of Truth

Rule of Law has been completely abandoned by the Government and business elite.  What remains is a citizenry in this country that has been largely dumbed-down and taught to ignore or deny the reality unfolding right before its eyes.

What’s left is an elitist club of political and corporate “leaders” who are using every possible means to keep our system from collapsing, enabling them to steal or confiscate every last crumb of middle class wealth.  If you don’t have enough spare cash to own your own Washington, DC politician, you are middle class – you are not part of “The Club.”

The Shadow of Truth hosted a fascinating conversation (at least we found it fascinating) with Jeff Nielson, of Bullion Bulls Canada.

The lies are getting bigger and bigger to the point at which they are now ludicrous or even perverse.

The conversation ranged from the proposals by criminal Keynesian “economists” to abolish cash currency to Jeff’s “One Bank” concept.

With 46% of all transactions by volume in the U.S. conducted using cash – 23% by value – converting to an electronic digital currency system would turn our lives upside down. But more insidiously, it would give the Government a lot more control over your life, not to mention the fact that it would make it very easy for the Government to impose a bail-in of the banking system when that inevitability occurs.

Unfortunately, the majority of the zombie-like Americans will likely just shrug it off when the move is made to abolish cash, just like our citizens shrugged off the Patriot Act and ignored the imposition of the NSA into our lives.

Jeff’s “One Bank” concept is based on the fact that a cabal of utlra-wealthy bankers, businessmen and media moguls largely control the western financial and political systems.  Jeff explains the idea and how it functions. In my mind, it all starts at the top with the Bank for International Settlements – the BIS.

The discussion includes whether or not the Government will eventually make gold and silver illegal and try to confiscate the public’s bullion.  Jeff sees it as an inevitability and necessary to support a fully electronic currency system.

Without question Jeff is highly intelligent, well thought out and articulate. Whether or not you agree with some or all of his ideas, we can assure you that you will find this discussion to be thought-provoking.

We begin our conversation with Jeff Nielson of Bullion Bulls Canada discussing the cashless society the criminal banking cabal is attempting to foist upon the world. Will they be successful?

What I can’t understand is why these criminals would want to give up the drug money laundering operation. The international drug trade accounts for 8% of total global trade. Think about that for a minute. The profits from laundering that volume of cash has to be enormous. What about the 46% of transactions, by volume, in United States that are still conducted using cash? 23% of the value of all transactions in U.S. is conducted using cash. It would make sense that with this sheer volume of hard currency floating around that if the criminal banking cabal forces us into a digital nightmare the black and gray markets would absolutely explode. The statistics that were just pointed out would support this thought. The people that are conducting their lives using hard currency are not going to simply stop doing that. These are for legitimate transactions. These percentages do not, to my knowledge, take into account the illegal drug trade that was just pointed out the criminal banking cabal is making huge profits.


Rory Hall has been a daily contributor at SGTReport.com. for more than two years. He has written several original articles and interviewed some of the top precious metals professionals in the industry, as well as top preparedness specialists in the world. His YouTube Channel, The Daily Coin, was launched in February 2014 and his website TheDailyCoin.org was launched April 25, 2014. QUOTE: “As a student of monetary, financial and economic history for the past five years it has taught me to watch the markets with an open mind and a hand on my wallet.”

Don’t forget to follow The Daily Coin on Twitter and like us on Facebook

Senate Defeats Anti-Consumer Trade Bill Fast Track Authority

 fast_track_derailed

Score one for the good guys. A previous article explained so-called “trade promotion authority (TPA)” lets Obama and his trade representative, complicit with corporate predators, ram through Congress, with minimal debate, no amendments or public discussion outrageous legislation global justice advocates call NAFTA on steroids.

Proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) are stealth corporate coup d’etat measures – freedom and ecosystem-destroying nightmares.

Corporate giants wrote both measures – to establish unrestricted supranational global trade rules overriding national sovereignty, domestic laws and personal freedoms, serving their interests at the expense of humanity.

They permit anything goes for profit. Investor rights alone matter. Public ones be damned.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) called fast track’s defeat “a significant (consumer) victory.”

Hundreds of independent organizations opposed it. EFF said its “members alone sent tens of thousands of emails, phone calls, and tweets to lawmakers to come out against this legislation.”

Fast track supporters needed 60 Senate votes to debate granting Obama what he sought. He fell eight short.

One Democrat alone backed him – Delaware’s Tom Carper. Party leadership opposed him. Fast track authority was defeated by a 52 – 45 majority.

In Tuesday Senate floor remarks, Carper willfully and outrageously lied claiming TPP is “fair to workers and middle class families.” If enacted, it’s a dagger in the heart of fairness, fundamental freedoms and eco-sanity.

“Today is not the end of the fast track fight,” said EFF. TPP and TTIP supporters won’t quit.

Obama continues going all-out to enact what belongs in the dustbin of hellish proposed congressional legislation.

White House press secretary Josh Earnest downplayed Tuesday’s defeat saying “(i)t is not unprecedented for the US Senate to encounter procedural snafus. We’re going to continue to work through these challenges.”

EFF was upbeat saying “we can come away from (Tuesday’s victory) empowered and energized because it’s a clear sign that we’re succeeding at convincing Congress to come out against these (hellish anti-consumer) international corporate deals.”

Let’s hope EFF is right. Consumer victories are hard to come by. Sustained momentum is vital to prevent triumphs later becoming tragedies.

Global Trade Watch’s Lori Wallach issued a statement saying in part:

“The Fast Track train went off the rails today. The US Senate vote was supposed to generate momentum for Fast Track in the US House of Representatives, where it’s in deep trouble, with almost every House Democrat and a significant bloc of GOP lawmakers opposing it.”

“The only reason to upend the required procedures for a ‘revenue bill’ and bring up Fast Track in the Senate first was to get a huge victory to build momentum in the House.”

“But that strategy backfired and Democrats in the House remain committed to standing up for their beliefs that the trade package would do a lot more harm than good.”

“Fast Track for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is an especially bad idea. After six years of negotiations, the text is almost complete.”

“Yet under the Hatch-Wyden-Ryan Fast Track bill, the pact would remain secret from the public until 30 days after its text is locked.”

“That the text would be made public 60 days before the formal signing ceremony is irrelevant, because it would be too late to fight for needed changes.”

“The rhetoric being used to sell the trade package is really far off from the reality of what is in it. It is like being in the twilight zone.”

TPP and TTIP are corporate predator wish lists at the expense of fundamental consumer rights and environmental sanity.

Not according to New York Times editors. They support fast track enabling enactment of outrageous trade bills demanding rejection.

In a Tuesday editorial, they lied claiming TPP “could help reduce environmental destruction and improve the lives of workers…”

In 1993, Times editors supported NAFTA saying:

“The laboriously constructed agreement to phase out trade barriers among the US, Mexico and Canada, which this page has strongly supported, is likely to have a positive, though small, impact on US living standards and provide a modest boost to the Mexican economy.”

“Some American jobs would be lost to cheaper Mexican labor, other jobs would be gained because American exports would increase as Mexico’s high tariffs gradually disappeared.”

“Economics aside, Nafta’s defeat would suggest that the US had abandoned its historical commitment to free trade and would thus discourage other Latin and South American countries that have moved toward more market-oriented economies in the expectation of freer world trade.”
 
Fact: America’s trade deficit with Mexico cost around 700,000 US jobs through 2010 alone.

Fact: Official government data show well over five million US manufacturing jobs lost – plus millions more offshored to cheap labor markets, many more at risk.

It bears repeating. US trade bills are one-way – everything for corporate predators at the expense of fundamental consumer rights and eco-sanity.


Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at [email protected]. His new book is titled “How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion and Class War”. www.claritypress.com/Lendman.html Visit his blog site at www.sjlendman.blogspot.com.

The Big Business Of Cancer: 100 BILLION Dollars Was Spent On Cancer Drugs Last Year Alone

cancer profits

If you are an American, there is a 1 in 3 chance that you will get cancer during your lifetime.  If you are a man, the odds are closer to 1 in 2.  And almost everyone in America either knows someone who currently has cancer or who has already died from cancer.  But it wasn’t always this way.  Back in the 1940s, only one out of every sixteen Americans would develop cancer.  Something has happened that has caused the cancer rate in this nation to absolutely explode, and it is being projected that cancer will soon surpass heart disease and become the leading cause of death in the United States.  Overall, the World Health Organization says that approximately 14 million new cases of cancer are diagnosed around the globe each year, and the number of new cases is expected to increase by about 70 percent over the next 2 decades.  There are very few words in the English language that cause more fear than the word “cancer”, but despite billions spent on research and all of the technological progress we have made over the years this plague just continues to spiral wildly out of control.  Why is that?

In America today, more money is spent to treat cancer than to treat any other disease by far.  In fact, according to NBC News, 100 BILLION dollars was spent on cancer drugs just last year alone…

As drug prices continue to fall under ever-increasing scrutiny, spending on cancer medicines has hit a new milestone: $100 billion in 2014.

That’s up more than 10 percent from 2013, and up from $75 billion five years earlier, according to a report published Tuesday from the IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics.

100 million dollars would be an astounding amount of money to spend on these drugs.  But 100 billion dollars is 1,000 times as much money as 100 million dollars.  And the IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics is projecting that the amount of money spent on cancer drugs will continue to grow at a rate of 6 to 8 percent a year.

Needless to say, there are a lot of people out there that are becoming exceedingly wealthy treating this disease.

And the cost of some these drugs is absolutely absurd.  According to NBC News, two of the latest cancer drugs to be developed “are priced at $12,500 a month“…

Forty-five new drugs for cancer hit the market between 2010 and 2014, including 10 last year alone, IMS said. Two of those are so-called immunotherapies, a hot new class that harnesses the immune system to fight cancer. They are Opdivo from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Keytruda from Merck. Both are priced at $12,500 a month.

Yes, I understand that drug companies are in business to make a profit.

But how can anyone possibly justify charging cancer patients that much for their medicine?

If you are diagnosed with cancer in America today and you choose to trust the medical system with your treatment, you can say goodbye to your financial future.  Even if you have health insurance, you will probably end up flat broke one way or the other.  Either you will survive and be flat broke, or you will die flat broke.

And despite all of our ultra-expensive treatments, the survival rate for cancer is still not very good.  At this point, the five year survival rate for those diagnosed with cancer is just 65 percent.  That means that 35 percent of those diagnosed with cancer are going to end up dead within five years, and for certain forms of cancer that percentage is much, much higher.

Sadly, as I mentioned at the top of this article, the percentage of the population getting cancer just continues to go up

We have lost the war on cancer. At the beginning of the last century, one person in twenty would get cancer. In the 1940s it was one out of every sixteen people. In the 1970s it was one person out of ten. Today one person out of three gets cancer in the course of their life.

We live in a society that is highly toxic, and it is getting worse with each passing day.

And once you do develop cancer, doctors are not allowed to prescribe any “alternative treatments” for you.  They are only permitted to offer you the treatments that the system tells them that they must offer.

One of these is chemotherapy.  It is an absolutely nightmarish treatment that often kills the patient before it kills the cancer.  The following is how one woman described her experience with chemo

This highly toxic fluid was being injected into my veins. The nurse administering it was wearing protective gloves because it would burn her skin if just a tiny drip came into contact with it. I couldn’t help asking myself “If such precautions are needed to be taken on the outside, what is it doing to me on the inside?” From 7 pm that evening, I vomited solidly for two and a half days. During my treatment, I lost my hair by the handful, I lost my appetite, my skin colour, my zest for life. I was death on legs.

Many patients go through round after hellish round, hoping that it will do something about their cancer.  Have you ever known someone who has gone through this ordeal?  It can be absolutely heartbreaking.

But in the end, there is a tremendous amount of doubt regarding whether chemo does much good at all.  Just consider the words of Dr. Ralph Moss, the author of a book entitled “The Cancer Industry“…

In the end, there is no proof that chemotherapy actually extends life in the vast majority of cases, and this is the great lie about chemotherapy, that somehow there is a correlation between shrinking a tumour and extending the life of a patient.

So why do oncologists push chemo so hard?

Well, it is because they make a tremendous amount of money doing it

According to the research of Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner of Freakonomics fame, “Oncologists are some of the highest paid doctors, their average income is increasing faster than any other specialist  in the medical field, and more than half their income comes from selling and administering chemotherapy.”

Yes you read that right.  Oncologists make a huge profit, as much as two-thirds of their income in some cases, from chemotherapy drugs.

Their business model is very different from other doctors because you can’t buy chemotherapy drugs at your local pharmacy.

Oncologists buy these drugs direct at wholesale prices, then they mark them up and bill the insurance companies. This legal profiting on drugs by doctors is unique to the cancer treatment world. They’re making money off the drugs that they insist you take to save your life. That’s a HUGE conflict of interest. They’re selling you the drugs, and charging you for the privilege of putting them in your body. No other doctor can do that.

Our system is deeply corrupt and deeply broken.

But nothing is going to change any time soon because hundreds of billions of dollars are being made.

So what do you think?  Do you have an experience with the cancer industry that you would like to share?  Please feel free to add to the discussion by posting a comment below…


Michael T. Snyder is a graduate of the McIntire School of Commerce at the University of Virginia and has a law degree and an LLM from the University of Florida Law School. He is an attorney that has worked for some of the largest and most prominent law firms in Washington D.C. and who now spends his time researching and writing and trying to wake the American people up. You can follow his work on The Economic Collapse blog, End of the American Dream and The Truth Wins. His new novel entitled “The Beginning Of The End” is now available on Amazon.com.

Google Seeks Stronger Control Of Digital Media Market

google

Google and eight European newspapers announced Tuesday the creation of a fund of 150 million euros to support digital journalism.

On paper, the initiative seems benign, but in reality, Google’s intention revolves around consolidating its grip on internet news media in a way that it can control even further what is shown on people’s news searches.

It is called the Digital News initiative and, according to Google, it will be operational in the coming months.

The intention of the fund, Google and its partners say, is to encourage “quality journalism through technology and innovation” and to fund “projects that show new ways of thinking in the practice of digital journalism.”

In practice, Google intends to do two things. First, become the global manager of news distribution, where all online journalistic content must go through its filters to be “adequately” filtered. Second, Google intends to limit and eventually block alternative media content from reaching news consumers.

The DNI brings now includes mass media such as El País of Spain, Les Echos in France, Germany’s FAZ, The Financial Times and The Guardian in Britain. It has also added Dutch Media NRC, La Stampa in Italy and Die Zeit in Germany. According to Google’s statement, the initiative has the support of organizations such as the European Journalism Centre, Global Editors Network and International News Media Association.

This future mechanism, which will join with other European publishers, will be articulated around three axes: product development, innovation support; training and research.

The first of the three axes has to do with how news are produced and it won’t be surprising if much of the content generated under this phase is either official propaganda fed to the media or to Google by government sources and/or computer generated information. Both practices are existing manipulation tools used by major media outlets.

Google and the publishers will create what has been called a task force with the purpose of “increasing revenue, traffic and the degree of commitment” of online readers. Careful attention needs to be given to the “traffic” aspect of this proposal. Right now, Google and Facebook have the ability to manage any news feed it wants, propping some news while restricting others.

In order to support innovation, Google will also “make available 150 million euros for projects bearers of new ideas in the practice of digital journalism” for a period of three years. As it occurs with other industries, the news business is already subject to financial manipulation, where large conglomerates haul out large amounts of cash to attract fresh ideas, but later these ideas become property of the financiers, who use them to fulfill their personal or corporate goals.

Google also plans to provide journalists with research sources that will be based throughout Europe, in the form of “online tools” to do their professional work.

“Google has always wanted to be a friend and collaborator of the media,” said Carlo D’Asaro Biondo, manager of strategic partnerships in Europe for Google, in The Financial Times conference on digital media held on Tuesday in London. “We want to take our part in the joint struggle to find more sustainable models for journalism,” he said.

Not so benign changes

The president of strategic partnerships for Google in Europe, Carlo D’Asaro Biondo said that the company considers changing its Google News service “for the benefit of digital media”, which have Google of abusing its dominance and of preventing their growth.

That is precise what will continue to happen as Google consolidates its power over internet news content. Google will promote “news” produced by large media conglomerates that work at the service of international corporations while limiting or eliminating content generated by alternative news outlets.

Google already implements censorship practices when the company, in any of its services, blocks audio, video or text due to unproven allegations of “alleged” copyright violations. In the meantime, Google plans to provide more visibility to news stories that the company deems as produced by “strong brands” or whose “expertise” in certain areas provides relevance to the news content while leaving independent news research out of sight.

“Digital News Initiative” comes after years of public disagreements between Google and European media and governments with whom it has had confrontations because of its questionable practices. Most of the confrontations have taken place in countries like France, Germany and Spain, where Google News was shut down after the Commission European accused the company of committing abuses related to search dominance.


Luis R. Miranda is an award-winning journalist and the founder and editor-in-chief at The Real Agenda. His career spans over 18 years and almost every form of news media. His articles include subjects such as environmentalism, Agenda 21, climate change, geopolitics, globalisation, health, vaccines, food safety, corporate control of governments, immigration and banking cartels, among others. Luis has worked as a news reporter, on-air personality for Live and Live-to-tape news programs. He has also worked as a script writer, producer and co-producer on broadcast news. Read more about Luis.

Congress Introduces Fast Track Legislation To Help Enact Anti-Consumer Trade Bills

free trade agreements

Congressional passage of so-called “trade promotion authority” (TPA) will let Obama expedite the legislative process for pending Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) bills.

The Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015 (TPA 2015) lets Obama and his trade representative, complicit with corporate predators, rush through Congress, with minimal hearings and no amendments, legislation global justice advocates call NAFTA on steroids.

TPP and TTIP are trade bills from hell. They’re stealth corporate coup d’etats.

They’re giveaways to banksters and other corporate predators. They’re freedom and ecosystem-destroying nightmares.

They’re secretive, multi-national trade deals giving monied interests more power than ever at the expense of personal freedom for consumers and environmental sanity.

They’re ripoffs on the grandest scale. They’ll establish unrestricted supranational global trade rules.

Corporate giants wrote them. Their demands will override domestic laws.

They’ll trample on national sovereignty, privacy and personal freedoms.

They’ll permit unrestricted trade in goods, services, rules of origin, trade remedies, sanitary and phytosanitary measures, technical barriers, government procurement and competition policies, and intellectual property (IP).

IP includes copyrights, trademarks, patents, and related considerations.

One-sided pro-business structuring harms popular rights. At stake is a free and open Internet, its global infrastructure, and worldwide innovation under level playing field rules.

Power brokers want secretive provisions established with no public knowledge of their destructive harm.

TPP and TTIP rewrite global IP enforcement rules. They include numerous other anti-populist provisions.

They override national sovereignty. They prioritize investor rights over public ones.

Obama lied saying:

“The bill put forward today would help us write (trade) rules in a way that avoids the mistakes from our past, seizes opportunities for our future, and stays true to our values.”

“It would level the playing field, give our workers a fair shot, and for the first time, include strong fully enforceable protections for workers’ rights, the environment, and a free and open internet.”

Fact: Trade rules Obama advocates are polar opposite what he claims. They’ll benefit monied interests at the expense of all others.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) calls fast track legislation a way to “legitimize White House secrecy and clear the way for (anti-consumer) trade deals.”

They impose restrictive digital regulations. They create a new Chief Transparency Officer – a likely corporate official with authority to:

“consult with Congress on transparency policy, coordinate transparency in trade negotiations, engage and assist the public, and advise the United States Trade Representative on transparency policy.”

Given existing strict confidentiality rules (and greater than ever corporate empowerment on trade), nothing meaningful will be done to improve transparency.

As things now stand, fast track text language will be made public 60 days before signed if passed.

According to EFF, it doesn’t matter. “(T)he text is already locked down from any further amendments.”

Fast track “t(ies) the hands of Congress so that it is unable to give meaningful input into the agreement during its drafting, or to thoroughly review the agreement once it is completed.”

It can only vote up or down with no changes. Most troubling is what’s excluded from negotiating objectives.

Nothing requires “balance in copyright, such as the fair use right,” says EFF.

“(I)f a country’s adoption of a fair use style right causes loss to a foreign investor, it could even be challenged as a breach of the agreement…”

“(W)e do not see anything in this bill that would truly remedy the secretive, undemocratic process of trade agreements,” EFF stresses.

Fast track will likely be voted on next week. Passage “would legitimize the White House’s corporate-captured, backroom (secretive, anti-consumer) trade negotiations.”

Lori Wallach heads Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch (GTW). Fast track authority “delegate(s) away Congress’ constitutional authority and (grants) blank-check (presidential) power,” she explains.

Fast track “would make it easier for corporations to offshore American jobs, would undermine our wages by forcing Americans to compete with Vietnamese workers making less than 60 cents an hour and would expose our consumer and environmental safeguards to attack by foreign corporations in extra-judicial tribunals” – run by corporate predators.

Congress is being asked to yield its constitutional trade authority to diktat presidential power.

Congress permitted fast track for only 5 of the past 21 years – 2002-2007.

It remains to be seen if it’ll authorize what demands rejection – what hugely benefits America’s 1% at the expense of all others.


Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at [email protected]. His new book is titled “How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion and Class War”. www.claritypress.com/Lendman.html Visit his blog site at www.sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Corporate Farms Control Of Water

farm drought

Water and air are the most important resources on the planet. Breathing clean air seems to be accepted as a noble goal and the cost attributed to its improvement is usually universally accepted. However, the same cannot be said about access to fresh water as big business interests often argues. Many corporate interests contend that private ownership of public water out- weighs the rights of actual property owners. Corporate agriculture is quite different from traditional family farming. Yet, the factory farms that have taken over agribusiness demonstrate little regard for preserving a viable water supply.

Tilling the back forty is no longer the face of farming. Adding concern to an already parched situation is the California delta’s water mysteriously missing amid drought, news has come to light.

“Delta farmers don’t deny using as much water as they need. But they say they’re not stealing it because their history of living at the water’s edge gives them that right. Still, they have been asked to report how much water they’re pumping and to prove their legal rights to it.

At issue is California’s century-old water rights system that has been based on self-reporting and little oversight, historically giving senior water rights holders the ability to use as much water as they need, even in drought. Gov. Jerry Brown has said that if drought continues this system built into California’s legal framework will probably need to be examined.”

So what is all this water extraction being used for? Manuel Ramirez from K&M Press is an exporter in the Imperial Valley is quoted by the BBC in the account, California drought: Why farmers are ‘exporting water’ to China.

“The last few years there has been an increase in exports to China. We started five years back and the demand for alfalfa hay has increased,” he says.

“It’s cost effective. We have abundance of water here which allows us to grow hay for the foreign market.”

Japan, Korea and the United Arab Emirates all buy Californian hay. The price is now so high that many local dairy farmers and cattle ranchers can’t afford the cost when the rains fail and their usual supplies are insufficient.”

California Food Facts – Production & Crops lists the state’s leading export crop as almonds. Widely described in Mother Jones is the amount of water needed to produce a list of crops. A single almond requires 1.1 gallons of water. The lunacy of exporting a product that consumes such a high water usage is typical of an environment that has ignored the wasteful use of water resources for decades.

Even more alarming is contained in the CBS news report, Farmers May Sell Water Meant For Growing Crops During California’s Drought.

“Instead of growing crops, some California farmers will sell their water to other farms during the fourth year of the state’s drought.

Not all farmers will use their allocated amount of water this year, and several irrigation districts will allow farmers to sell their extra water.”

The practice of selling water may seem on the surface a free market transaction. Nonetheless, the dubious corporatist claim on a vanishing water supply defies rational policy. Now that California Governor Jerry Brown Orders Statewide Water Restrictions, and issued a decree, “The order calls on local water agencies to implement tiered water pricing that charges higher rates as more water is used and requires agricultural users to report more water use information to state regulators”, fails to rein in big agriculture.

Of course as with setting an enlightened public policy, especially when addressing an emergency, not all the blame should be placed on farming. Notwithstanding, their abuses, the underlying failure in allowing exporting crops that use up our domestic water reserves is the key failure in the Governor Brown executive order.

The National Geographic quotes from a Governor Brown statement:

“Some have questioned the production of so much food for export during a water shortage. Even as many farmers struggle to meet their crops’ demand for water in drought-stricken California, every year they also send billions of virtual gallons to other countries—in the form of the food and animal feed grown with that water.

The United States exports about 82 trillion gallons of water a year–more than twice as much virtual water as any other country. That’s largely because American farms are a big supplier of the global food chain.”

California is currently getting media attention. But when compared to global conditions, Water Usage & Privatization, makes some astounding warnings.

“About 90 percent of the world’s freshwater stocks currently remain under public control, but privatization is becoming more common as revenue-strapped governments increasingly cannot afford to maintain and repair crumbling municipal water purification and delivery systems often built decades ago. Historically, however, in places where privatization has been established, it has proven to be another cause of—rather than a solution to—chronic water shortage problems. That is, because corporations are (by their nature) more concerned with making money than serving people’s and communities’ best interests, water privatization has led to corruption, lack of corporate accountability, loss of local agency, weakened water quality standards, and steep rate hikes that eliminate poor people’s access to water.”

Government oppression is always a prime concern with public policy. Still, the greed of corporatist farming plays a destructive role when water usage is misused with flagrant disregard for the public welfare. As long as state and local office holders ignore balance and prudent measures to curb flushing freshwater down a wasteful hole, the prospects of a prosperous civilized society will be brought into question.

However long weather conditions remain that diminishes replenishment in ground water, the need to act now becomes more important. As expected corporatist interests will fight every inch to keep control of every drop. The globalists warming cultists will spin their fear agenda, but will do little to confront the destructive practices of the “Free Trade” sellout. The proper role of lawful government is absent. Heed this example of the special interests control of our future, through    their influence of bad public policy.


SARTRE is the pen name of James Hall, a reformed, former political operative. This pundit’s formal instruction in History, Philosophy and Political Science served as training for activism, on the staff of several politicians and in many campaigns. A believer in authentic Public Service, independent business interests were pursued in the private sector. As a small business owner and entrepreneur, several successful ventures expanded opportunities for customers and employees. Speculation in markets, and international business investments, allowed for extensive travel and a world view for commerce. He is retired and lives with his wife in a rural community. “Populism” best describes the approach to SARTRE’s perspective on Politics. Realities, suggest that American Values can be restored with an appreciation of “Pragmatic Anarchism.” Reforms will require an Existential approach. “Ideas Move the World,” and SARTRE’S intent is to stir the conscience of those who desire to bring back a common sense, moral and traditional value culture for America. Not seeking fame nor fortune, SARTRE’s only goal is to ask the questions that few will dare … Having refused the invites of an academic career because of the hypocrisy of elite’s, the search for TRUTH is the challenge that is made to all readers. It starts within yourself and is achieved only with your sincere desire to face Reality. So who is SARTRE? He is really an ordinary man just like you, who invites you to join in on this journey. Visit his website at http://batr.org.

The TPP Paves The Way For World Government (VIDEO)

tpp

A coalition of major business groups is urging Stephen Harper to take a “leadership role” in completing the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Dan Dicks of Press For Truth breaks down the latest news on the TPP front.


Dan Dicks

Corporatism 101

corporatocracy1

Regular readers of this Corporatocracy series should have a firm grasp on the concept of Corporatism. However, the uninitiated might presume that a corporation is merely a vehicle for protecting the owners of the enterprise from the liability risks of conducting business. Much attention has been devoted to the economic conditions and aspects when examining the corporate structure. But modest effort is found in business journals that discuss the social consequences of consolidating the entire hierarchy of political favoritism, access to capital and protection from competition that is at the heart of the corporatist model.

Corporatism as Theory and Practice by Joseph R. Stromberg offers a historic perspective.

“Corporatism and corporations are not yet the same subject. The key word is “yet.” If there is a relationship, it is historical. Very briefly, corporations — legally privileged from birth, pampered by courts, subsidized by Congress, with a social “in” with the most important state personnel — were likely, as ideal engines for accumulating capital, to produce unbalanced economic outcomes, mass discontent, and political unrest. Combine those engines with inherited dysfunctional institutions such as fractional-reserve banking, eminent domain, primitive military accumulation (e.g., the Indian wars), governmental distribution of resources, a venal party system, and a mighty executive, and you have a recipe for crisis. American elites recognized the danger fairly early. By trial and error they put together “corporate syndicalism” (Williams), “political capitalism” (Kolko), corporatism (varii), or “interest-group liberalism” (Lowi). It remained to be seen who (business or state?) would dominate the partnership. Hoover himself reflected in 1922 on the danger of “a syndicalist nation on a gigantic scale.”

Out of such a context the 21th century version of corporatism maintains little effort to satisfy mass discontent of the populace, because the will to achieve an independent livelihood has been stamped out so wholly by the merged state/corporate system. Viewing this alliance as a partnership vying for dominance is a false outlook. In this new millennium, the globalist economy is under total control by a financial dictate that makes laws, writes regulations, enforces compliance, bankrupts companies not in the club, subsidizes crony ventures, and imposes access to capital as a reward for playing ball.

This is not Capitalism, it is demented Corporatocracy.

Don Quijones writes in Crunch Time for the Global Corporatocracy about the closed door negotiations for the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), the US-EU trade deal (TIPP) and TISA.

“The hyper-secret Trade in Services Act (TiSA), which seeks to bind together the U.S., the EU and 22 other Western-aligned nations under a new system of laws and regulations covering telecoms, water, gas, electricity, transport, financial and legal services, software design, electronic data, tourism, healthcare and a whole lot more, is infinitely worse. The treaty’s text is designed to be almost impossible to repeal, and is to be “considered confidential” for at least five years after being signed.”

Basically, the nature of all these destructive trade agreements is reducible to “The fact that we now live in a world dominated by highly undemocratic and unaccountable supranational organizations (the IMF, World Bank, WTO, EU…) is no mere accident.”

Corporatism 101 is not taught in school or even debated in the mass media. It falls to online publications like Naked Capitalism to feature another persuasive argument by Mr. Quijones, which concludes.

“The rise of investor-state dispute settlements and the broad application of arbitration procedures are the ultimate victory in the global corporatocracy’s decades-long coup d’état. If allowed to take universal effect, the system will impose above you, me, and our governments a rigid framework of international corporate law designed to exclusively protect the interests of corporations, relieving them of all financial risk and social and environmental responsibility. From then on, every investment they make will effectively be backstopped by our governments (and by extension, you and me); it will be too-big-to-fail writ on an unimaginable scale.”

It seems that all the attention provided in business news is diverted away from the totality of integration under the auspices of a pseudo and hostile legal framework that only deepen the aggregate control over the social, political, economic and global functions, is silent by design.

So when Suarez-Villa, Luis, publishes in Globalization and Technocapitalism: the political economy of corporate power and technological domination, page 203, we all should take notice.

“It should not surprise, therefore, that a major objective of the fast neo-imperialism is to establish corporatocratic governance whenever and wherever campaigns of conquest happen to be carried out. Fast militarism thereby comes into the scene, whenever aggression is executive. Military conquest for its own sake is pointless, and the fast neo-imperialism has no real reason for being, unless the imposition of corporatocracy is part of the end game of conquest.”

The re-establishment of a neo-feudalism is not a function of privatization, when market forces are unleashed from the choke hold that keeps real competition at bay. Allowing businesses to vie for consumer favor is healthy under a free market economy. Today, there are few examples where the corporatocracy allows for free trading in goods and services.

This is the important lesson that techno corporatism refuses to accept. As the bondage economy expands, the serfs become expendable. Since the consumer economy is shifting into a financial speculation arena, the elites see little reason for continued subsistence of the bottom feeders, since they are not needed to till their estates.

Knowing this object lesson is the actual answer to the Corporatism 101 studies.

Maybe Bruce E. Levine PhD should be teaching class. Get Up, Stand Up: Uniting Populists, Energizing the Defeated, and Battling the Corporate Elite, argues that “individuals must recover self-respect, and a people must regain collective confidence that they can succeed at eliminating top-down controls. Get Up, Stand Up describes how we can recover dignity, confidence, and the energy to do battle.”

It all starts with a required understanding that the Corporatocracy economy is inherently destructive to individual liberty. If people are unable to learn this fact, life on earth will sink into oblivion.


SARTRE is the pen name of James Hall, a reformed, former political operative. This pundit’s formal instruction in History, Philosophy and Political Science served as training for activism, on the staff of several politicians and in many campaigns. A believer in authentic Public Service, independent business interests were pursued in the private sector. As a small business owner and entrepreneur, several successful ventures expanded opportunities for customers and employees. Speculation in markets, and international business investments, allowed for extensive travel and a world view for commerce. He is retired and lives with his wife in a rural community. “Populism” best describes the approach to SARTRE’s perspective on Politics. Realities, suggest that American Values can be restored with an appreciation of “Pragmatic Anarchism.” Reforms will require an Existential approach. “Ideas Move the World,” and SARTRE’S intent is to stir the conscience of those who desire to bring back a common sense, moral and traditional value culture for America. Not seeking fame nor fortune, SARTRE’s only goal is to ask the questions that few will dare … Having refused the invites of an academic career because of the hypocrisy of elite’s, the search for TRUTH is the challenge that is made to all readers. It starts within yourself and is achieved only with your sincere desire to face Reality. So who is SARTRE? He is really an ordinary man just like you, who invites you to join in on this journey. Visit his website at http://batr.org.

Destructive Centralization And The GE Corporatist Culture

one_nation_under_ceo

Entrepreneurs’ versus the corporatists’ mode of business culture are separated by a vastly different view of enterprise. The former deems his work as innovative, creative and beneficial to customers. The later see the corporate organization as an institution end of itself. Competition makes the business pioneer sharp and driven, while any competitor is targeted for demise within the corporative culture. Buyouts of ventures that show promise may be a payoff reward for the struggling enterpriser, but the corporatist CEO sees the absorption of new technology as a twofold gain. Acquiring the means to create or advance market share and stamping out any future competitive threats.

This corporatist culture actually has merged with the definitive enforcement partner; namely, the state. The morphing of anti-trust safeguards into a system of crony alliance protection is the current standard for the globalist economy. The implication is that a company needs to pay to play and become “Free Trade” proponents to even remain in business.

Thomas E. Woods Jr. cites a prime example of the contemporary corporate-government fascism that controls the global economy, with the example of Government Electric. In The Cultural Costs of Corporatism: How Government-Business Collusion Denigrates the Entrepreneur and Rewards the Sycophant, the formula is set.

The best case study in political entrepreneurship may be General Electric. CEO Jeffrey Immelt pretty clearly laid out his approach in a letter to stockholders in the depths of the 2008–9 recession, and just days after the inauguration of Barack Obama, who promised to “remake America.”

Immelt wrote:

“The global economy, and capitalism, will be “reset” in several ways. The interaction between government and business will change forever. In a reset economy, the government will be a regulator; and also an industry policy champion, a financier, and a key partner. . . . Successful companies won’t just “hunker down”; they will seek out the new opportunities in a reset world.”

Later in the letter, Immelt stated more directly that GE saw the government as its best potential customer:

“GE’s broad technical portfolio positions us as a natural partner as the role of government increases in the current crisis. Over the past decade, we have positioned GE to lead in the “big themes.” These include emerging market growth, clean energy, and sustainable healthcare. . . .

Governments will invest to stimulate their economies, solve societal problems, and create jobs. GE’s broad portfolio and expertise position us as a natural partner. Tackling important problems together will require teamwork and respect between business, government, and society. We know how to do this and intend to play an important part in solving these essential challenges.”

If success is measured by the amount of retained money or return on assets and especially how little taxes are paid, the GE mold is frightening. Corporatism: The Real World of Corporate Favoritism reports.

“General Electric’s annual SEC 10-K filing for 2011 (filed February 24, 2012) reveals that the company paid at most 2.3% of its $81.2 billion in U.S. pretax profits in federal income taxes over the last 10 years.

Indeed, General Electric, the nation’s largest corporation, paid no federal corporate taxes in the United States in 2010, according to a report in The New York Times.”

The book, Rescuing Capitalism from Corporatism by John David Rose documents the long record of GE’s criminal price fixing going back to 1911 anti-trust violations. By any reasonable criteria, over a century of predatory pricing and monopolist market domination is a definite cultural deficiency.

Corp Watch contributor Charlie Cray lists a series of General Electric transgression topics and examples. Some of the more relevant items are:

Enronomics

Defense Contracting Fraud

Violations of Securities Laws

Tax issues

History of GE Labor Relations

Environment and product safety

Anti-competitive and consumer protection

Unlawful Debt Collection Practices

It would be difficult to explain away such a pattern of conduct as merely the side effects of becoming a prevailing behemoth. More to the point, the mentality that allows and encourages such behavior is a fundamental component that invigorates transgressions against ethical business practices. The net effects upon society, encourages the corporatist mindset to consolidate their state sponsor cronyism.

It seems unnecessary to dispute the negative consequences of “too big to fail” after the 2008 collapse. However, the concept of The Economic System of Corporatism offers this assessment.

“Coupled with the anti-market sentiments of the medieval culture there was the notion that the rulers of the state had a vital role in promoting social justice. Thus corporatism was formulated as a system that emphasized the positive role of the state in guaranteeing social justice and suppressing the moral and social chaos of the population pursuing their own individual self-interests. And above all else, as a political economic philosophy corporatism was flexible. It could tolerate private enterprise within limits and justify major projects of the state. Corporatism has sometimes been labeled as a Third Way or a mixed economy, a synthesis of capitalism and socialism, but it is in fact a separate, distinctive political economic system.”

Yes, once again, let’s called this synthesis by its true name; fascism. Just how well has the government achieved this utopian and fantasy notion that government is in the business of dispensing social justice?

At the heart of the corporatist mindset is control of markets and elimination of competitors. Government survives on deceiving the public and transnational corporations thrive on working their partnership relations with official authorities.

GE may be one of the most obvious offenders; nonetheless, the formulation of politics picking winners and losers based upon bribes and favoritism is a dreadful system. Preference for an actual free market based upon a decentralized merchant economy is the only alternative to globalism, which is enslaving the world.

The corporatist culture fuels the despotism, which society is so willing to accept. Voting how to spend your money is one of the few options a consumer has. Business collaborators with government crooks feed the abuses that GE perfects so well. This confederation in crime naturally harms ordinary citizens.


SARTRE is the pen name of James Hall, a reformed, former political operative. This pundit’s formal instruction in History, Philosophy and Political Science served as training for activism, on the staff of several politicians and in many campaigns. A believer in authentic Public Service, independent business interests were pursued in the private sector. As a small business owner and entrepreneur, several successful ventures expanded opportunities for customers and employees. Speculation in markets, and international business investments, allowed for extensive travel and a world view for commerce. He is retired and lives with his wife in a rural community. “Populism” best describes the approach to SARTRE’s perspective on Politics. Realities, suggest that American Values can be restored with an appreciation of “Pragmatic Anarchism.” Reforms will require an Existential approach. “Ideas Move the World,” and SARTRE’S intent is to stir the conscience of those who desire to bring back a common sense, moral and traditional value culture for America. Not seeking fame nor fortune, SARTRE’s only goal is to ask the questions that few will dare … Having refused the invites of an academic career because of the hypocrisy of elite’s, the search for TRUTH is the challenge that is made to all readers. It starts within yourself and is achieved only with your sincere desire to face Reality. So who is SARTRE? He is really an ordinary man just like you, who invites you to join in on this journey. Visit his website at http://batr.org.

 

City Of London’s Ownership Of American Colonies

City-Of-London

The misplaced reverence to the ill formulated U.S Constitution and hidden subjugation back to the City of London is one aspect of history that is not taught in government schools or discussed in institutes of higher education. This subject is probably new to most observers of the legacy from the Founding Father’s biggest mistake. Regular readers of BREAKING ALL THE RULES are familiar with the arguments made in the essays, In the beginning: Let there be the Articles of Confederation and Articles of Confederation was Preferable. Now the case for the betrayal of the purpose of the American Revolution needs to be explored.

Cited on the US Constitution Gave Legal Ownership and Control of the United States to London site is an assessment by Michael Edward.

“Neither the American people nor the Queen of Britain own America. The Crown Temple owns America through the deception of those who have worn their allegiance by oath to the Middle Templar Bar. The Crown Bankers and their Middle Templar Attorneys rule America through unlawful contracts, unlawful taxes, and, contract documents of false equity through debt deceit, all strictly enforced by their completely unlawful, but ‘legal,’ Orders, Rules and Codes of the Crown Temple Courts Our so-called ‘judiciary’ in America. This is because the Crown Temple holds the land titles and estate deeds to all of North America.”

An examination of The Templars of the Crown provides elaboration on this appraisal. For an even more in-depth analysis, review the material that probes AMERICAN LAND OWNERSHIP, A TRUE OXYMORON, which deals with the work of James Montgomery.

“Many of you are aware that the laws of this nation and it’s states, were made to be in compliance and submission to the laws of England, only modified by state and federal law. You will see in this last Chapter state statutes from just a few of the original colonies, that this is the case. Are these what are called ancient statutes? Yes. However, since the king’s Corporation is alive and well as are his heirs, so is his Trust and the law used to create and govern it. The law that governs his Trust can only be amended, no law could be enacted contrary to the king’s will and cestui que trust, the main corporate sole where office is always found, the Crown. The king’s practice of granting lands in this country to those loyal to him continues, along with their land grants being protected by state ancient statutes which are still on the books. We are governed by the king’s nobles just as in times of old England, self proclaimed nobles, and corporate trusts. They rule this country and the world. The huge corporations have been granted power and liberty not known by the common man. The nobles, real and the created, occupy their possessions as fiduciaries and trustees of the king’s grants; only if they remain loyal to the system, their privilege and life style are their reward.”

Invest the time in discovering all the historic accounts, legal rulings and linkages that go back to the Crown, AKA, the City of London.

If you are unfamiliar with The (British) Crown Empire and the City of London Corporation take a quick refresher course on the actual nature of the financial foundation and codified sanction that purports to be lawful. Jurisprudence may be legal by the definition and formulations of the judicious barrister class, but it certainly is not founded on the basic principles of natural law.

Julian Websdale concludes: “The whole Earth is governed by The Crown, through Crown Colonies which belong to The City – The Crown Empire. It governs Africa and still governs China and India. The colonies of the Earth are really just Crown Colonies – The United States of America are states of The Crown.”

Now this interpretation may seem bizarre to most and the plot thickens in the The construe Powers – Behind the Global Empire piecing together a long account of legalized equity mandates.

“The signed treaties and charters between Britain and the United States reveals that King James the 1st was not only famous for translating the Bible, but for signing the first charter of Virginia in 1606. That charter granted America’s British forefathers a license to settle and colonize America and guaranteed future kings and queens of England to have sovereign authority over citizens and colonized land in America. The treaty of 1783 identifies the king of England as the prince of the United States. King George the 3rd gave up most of his claims over American colonies, but he kept his right to continue receiving payment for his business venture of colonizing America.”

The next element to consider has The Top of the Pyramid: The Rothschilds, the British Crown and the Vatican Rule the World. Read this account and trace back the historic lineage of  some of the Englishmen who founded America.

“To have the Declaration of Independence recognized internationally, Middle Templar King George III agreed in the Treaty of Paris of 1783 to establish the legal Crown entity of the incorporated United States, referred to internally as the Crown Temple States (Colonies). States spelled with a capital letter ‘S,’ denotes a legal entity of the Crown.

At least five Templar Bar Attorneys under solemn oath to the Crown, signed the American Declaration of Independence. This means that both parties were agents of the Crown.”

As time proceeds, the sell out of the “shot heard around the world” revolution deepens. Two Constitutions in the United States. 1st was illegally suspended in favor of a Vatican “Crown” corporation in 1871. This approving assessment of the Federal Constitution views a Shadow Government in place since 1871.

“Since 1871 the United States president and the United States Congress has been playing politics under a different set of rules and policies.  The American people do not know that there are two Constitutions in the United States.  The first penned by the leaders of the newly independent states of the United States in 1776.  On July 4, 1776, the people claimed their independence from the Crown (temporal authority of the Roman Catholic Pope) and Democracy was born.  And for 95 years the United States people were free and independent.  That freedom ended in 1871 when the original “Constitution for the United States for America” was changed to the “THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA”.

The Congress realized that the country was in dire financial straits, so they made a financial deal with the devil –  the Crown (a.k.a. City of London Corporation – est. by the Catholic Church on Jan 1, 1855) thereby incurring a DEBT to the Pope.  The conniving Pope and his bankers were not about to lend the floundering nation any money without some serious stipulations. So, they devised a way of taking back control of the United States and thus, the Act of 1871 was passed.  With no constitutional authority to do so, Congress created a separate form of government for the District of Columbia.

With the passage of  “the Act of 1871” a city state (a state within a state) called the District of Columbia located on 10 sq miles of land in the heart of Washington was formed with its own flag and its own independent constitution – the United States’ secret second constitution.”

Lastly, Three Corporations run the world: City of London, Washington DC and Vatican City list the City of London houses as including:

Rothschild controlled ‘Bank of England’

Lloyds of London

The London Stock Exchange

All British Banks

The Branch offices of 384 Foreign Banks

70 USA Banks

Fleet Streets Newspaper and Publishing Monopolies

Headquarters for Worldwide Freemasonry

Headquarters for the worldwide money cartel known as ’THE CROWN’.

Conclusion: “City of London directly and indirectly controls all mayors, councils, regional councils, multi-national and trans-national banks, corporations, judicial systems (through Old Bailey, Temple Bar and the Royal Courts of Justice in London), the IMF, World Bank, Vatican Bank (through N. M. Rothschild & Sons London Italian subsidiary Torlonia), European Central Bank, United States Federal Reserve (which is privately owned and secretly controlled by eight British-controlled shareholding banks), the Bank for International Settlements in Switzerland (which is also British-controlled and oversees all of the Reserve Banks around the world including our own) and the European Union and the United Nations Organization.”

This introduction to the actual influence and pompous legal authority that underpins the financial hierarchy is based upon a historic explanation that is foreign to most Americans. The implications are staggering and for this reason alone, most are not willing to do their own research. Do not get caught up in the uncanny departure from the usual rendering of reality. Remember that the City of London’s coat-of-arms reads in Latin – Domine Dirige Nos – which translates, Lord, direct us. The true question, asks just which deity do the soldiers of the Crown adore?


SARTRE is the pen name of James Hall, a reformed, former political operative. This pundit’s formal instruction in History, Philosophy and Political Science served as training for activism, on the staff of several politicians and in many campaigns. A believer in authentic Public Service, independent business interests were pursued in the private sector. As a small business owner and entrepreneur, several successful ventures expanded opportunities for customers and employees. Speculation in markets, and international business investments, allowed for extensive travel and a world view for commerce. He is retired and lives with his wife in a rural community. “Populism” best describes the approach to SARTRE’s perspective on Politics. Realities, suggest that American Values can be restored with an appreciation of “Pragmatic Anarchism.” Reforms will require an Existential approach. “Ideas Move the World,” and SARTRE’S intent is to stir the conscience of those who desire to bring back a common sense, moral and traditional value culture for America. Not seeking fame nor fortune, SARTRE’s only goal is to ask the questions that few will dare … Having refused the invites of an academic career because of the hypocrisy of elite’s, the search for TRUTH is the challenge that is made to all readers. It starts within yourself and is achieved only with your sincere desire to face Reality. So who is SARTRE? He is really an ordinary man just like you, who invites you to join in on this journey. Visit his website at http://batr.org.

The Top 10 Tricks Used By Corporate Junk Science

corporate-logos-reseach

Corporate junk science is an all-pervading presence in our society. It’s everywhere. The scientific journals of the entire world, offline and online, have been flooded with so much fake science that it has, sad to say, become practically impossible for the average person to wade through all of it and sort out the wheat from the chaff. However, the fake science I am referring to here is not unintentional or sloppy work, which is more of a minor problem in the scheme of things (since it will eventually be corrected with due diligence), but rather the deliberately fraudulent “scientific studies” which are put out by major corporations with a definite agenda in mind – usually establishing a fake scientific basis of “safety” for their products, whether they be vaccines, mobile phones, GMOs, tobacco, fluoride, soda or soft drinks, etc. It’s nothing more than corporate junk science, and many people, including doctors, scientists and academics, have been taken in hook, line and sinker by it.

It’s time to shine the light on this ugly phenomenon. Science is meant to be about the pursuit of truth and understanding how our world works. It is truly sickening to see the extent to which it has been hijacked to serve corporate interests – to make a tiny, tiny 0.0001% rich at the expense of harming and killing the rest of mankind.

A recent study published on JAMA entitled “Research Misconduct Identified by the US Food and Drug Administration” found some very disturbing things in its sample of 57 studies that it analyzed:

“Fifty-seven published clinical trials were identified for which an FDA inspection of a trial site had found significant evidence of 1 or more of the following problems: falsification or submission of false information, 22 trials (39%); problems with adverse events reporting, 14 trials (25%); protocol violations, 42 trials (74%); inadequate or inaccurate recordkeeping, 35 trials (61%); failure to protect the safety of patients and/or issues with oversight or informed consent, 30 trials (53%); and violations not otherwise categorized, 20 trials (35%).”

Take a look at this first finding. It states that 39% which is around 2/5 of studies committed data falsification! How can we possibly trust medical science when the fraud is so blatant and widespread? And it’s not as though the authors of these studies come out and admit it. The study also found that:

“Only 3 of the 78 publications (4%) that resulted from trials in which the FDA found significant violations mentioned the objectionable conditions or practices found during the inspection. No corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, or other comments acknowledging the key issues identified by the inspection were subsequently published.”

Another study at PLOS ONE entitled “How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data” concluded that:

“It is likely that, if on average 2% of scientists admit to have falsified research at least once and up to 34% admit other questionable research practices, the actual frequencies of misconduct could be higher than this.”

In light of all of this, if we want the truth, we need to look at the whole structure of how “science” works in the real world. We need to get wise to the methods that are used by unscrupulous groups to further their agenda. With that in mind, here is a list of the top 10 tricks used by the corporatocracy to pull the wool over your eyes by manipulating science and substituting their fake corporate junk science instead (thanks to Webster Kehr of CancerTutor.com for compiling his instructive list, from which the below points are derived).

1. Substituting Synthetic for Natural Versions of a Nutrient

Those who know a little about nutrition probably realize by now that there is a vast difference between a nutrient found in a food or plant, and its synthetic counterpart artificially made in a lab. All vitamin C is not created equal; some versions are more equal than others. The same goes for other vitamins. It also applies to minerals, since some are derived from plant or animal matter (“organic”) whereas others are derived from rock (“inorganic”). The body can’t assimilate inorganic minerals, so all those so-called “natural” supplements full of rock and fossil-derived calcium are useless, and are actually harming your body by causing calcification.

When the corporatocracy wants a result skewed against an unpatentable natural solution and in favor of one of their patentable products, they simply use the synthetic (and less potent) version of that nutrient in the study and “find” that it is ineffective. Corporate junk science at its best!

2. Isolating Nutrients to Remove their Power of Synergy

Here’s another trick used by corporate junk science. If it’s trying to “scientifically prove” that a natural substance is ineffective, rather than testing the whole substance, it will isolate certain nutrients from it, declare them the only ones with any health benefit, then find them ineffective. This is like taking a clove of garlic, declaring that allicin is the only thing in it that could possibly do any good for human health, and then disregarding the whole plant when allicin doesn’t do everything you expected. The same goes for when corporate junk science, intentionally or not, tests the wrong nutrient and declares itself finished with testing.

Nature doesn’t work like this. Plants are complex organisms. Some are composed of hundreds of different phytonutrients which work together synergistically to produce wellness in the human body. Real science would test the whole plant open-mindedly in a variety of ways to try to discover and unlock the secret to its healing potential.

3. Contaminating the Tests

Webster Kehr mentions a case involving laetrile or amygdalin (colloquially called vitamin B17). He writes that the “NIH contaminated an already bogus pill being used in a study. Natural laetrile cannot and has never given a patient the symptoms of cyanide poisoning. It simply is impossible. The NIH refused to allow an alternative laetrile vendor to supply natural laetrile for the study – so they could create a custom pill for the study. In creating their custom bogus laetrile pill, it was not enough for them to not have any natural laetrile in the pill. A worthless pill would not have given any patient the symptoms of cyanide poisoning. They also had to lace the pill with inorganic cyanide so that the patients would have the symptoms of cyanide poisoning.”

As explained in my article “Natural Cancer Cure Laetrile (Amygdalin, Vitamin B17) Works Better than Chemotherapy“, the cyanide contained in apricot kernels, apple seeds, etc. is a selective cancer cell killer. It leaves healthy cells alone, because they can disable the cyanide.

4. Altering the Treatment Plan

If corporate junk science can’t prove a natural substance itself is ineffective, then it uses the trick of altering the treatment plan, so that people are getting the correct amount of that substance. This could be as simple as making the dosage too low or too high, or combining the substance with other foods or drink which disable its healing effects, or heating it, etc. Just like Big Pharma drugs, natural cures require a patent to follow a correct dosage and treatment plan for them to be successful in healing disease.

5. Getting Tricky with Statistics

Mark Twain once said that there are “lies, damn lies and statistics”. Corporate junk science often plays around with the numbers to emphasize one thing and hide another thing. Big Biotech often does this with their GMO studies, for instance, never allowing a study to exceed 90 days (after which the deleterious effects of GMOs begin to emerge).

6. The False Worship of Double Blind Studies

Are double blind studies always the gold standard? As Kehr points out, “in many cases, a double blind study makes no sense in the world. For example, how could you do a double blind study comparing a person who refuses all orthodox cancer treatments with someone who goes through chemotherapy? It is a stupid concept, because after one day a person would know which group they were in … How can you compare chemotherapy to Vitamin C in a double blind study? The chemotherapy group would have intense pain, sickness, their hair will fall out, and so on. The Vitamin C group would have no added pain, no sickness (except perhaps diarrhea), and their hair will not fall out, etc.”

7. Selecting Patients Favorable to the Agenda

The selection protocol in determining which patients to choose for a study is important, because by carefully selecting the patients in a study, you can to a large extent control the outcome of the study. Kehr gives examples of how the Mayo Clinic choose a narrow range of cancers as opposed to Pauling and Cameron when testing the efficacy of vitamin C as a natural cancer treatment.

8. Bribing the Peer-Review Group

In my article “The Massive Flaw with the Scientific Hierarchy of Evidence“, I highlighted how a distinguished 20-year medical journal editor became so appalled with the flagrant corruption of corporate junk science, she declared that it was no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published. The peer review process has itself become too corrupted.

This is from Webster Kehr:

“In June [2002], the New England Journal of Medicine, one of the most respected medical journals, made a startling announcement. The editors declared that they were dropping their policy stipulating that authors of review articles of medical studies could not have financial ties to drug companies whose medicines were being analyzed.

The reason? The journal could no longer find enough independent experts. Drug company gifts and “consulting fees” are so pervasive that in any given field, you cannot find an expert who has not been paid off in some way by the industry. So the journal settled for a new standard: Their reviewers can have received no more than $10,000 [per year] from companies whose work they judge. Isn’t that comforting?

9. Controlling the Publicization of the Results

Most scientists are given contracts by the corporatocracy which contain a clause forbidding them to publicize results that the funders don’t like. This means that Big Pharma, Bir Agra, Big Biotech or whoever it is has the legal right to suppress the results of any study they don’t like – including being able to stop scientists from submitting such studies to a journal.

10. Controlling the Funding and Hiding the Funders

Science is, to some extent, by the admissions of one of its branches quantum physics, based on the state of the observer. So, it is unsurprising that it can be manipulated by placing the people who have your point of view in control. An outcome is more likely to be generated when you have people expecting (or subconsciously intending) that result. On top of this, results can be bought and the true finance behind that bribery can be hidden through front groups, think tanks, shell corporations, fake grassroots (astroturf) organizations and many other means.

The 10 tricks do, of course, exist in addition to the massive category of data falsification, where corporations omit and distort results at will through all sorts of chicanery (e.g. not reporting patients who suffer side effects and instead labeling them as “non-compliant”).

Corporate junk science is like a cancer parasiting off the host and destroying humanity’s attempt for knowledge and objectivity. The time has come to expose it fully and restore truth.

Sources:

http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleID=2109855

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0005738

http://www.cancertutor.com/bogusscience/


Makia Freeman is the editor of The Freedom Articles and senior researcher at ToolsForFreedom.com, writing on many aspects of the global conspiracy, from vaccines to Zionism to false flag operations and more, and also including info on natural health, sovereignty and higher consciousness.

Net Neutrality: Preferential Regulation And Legislation To Protect Monopolies (VIDEO)

There is nothing neutral about net neutrality. In fact, new regulations only intend to fruther erode the free circulation of information and to give preferential treatment to those who have the means to pay for it. (Image: www.nbcnews.com)

There is nothing neutral about net neutrality. In fact, new regulations only intend to fruther erode the free circulation of information and to give preferential treatment to those who have the means to pay for it. (Image: www.nbcnews.com)

The implementation of Internet neutrality is nothing more than the culmination of a process in which the largest ISPs launch their last assault on the communications market to consolidate their growing monopoly.

Powerful ISPs are supported by big government, whose so-called deregulation plans – which in reality are heavy regulatory scams governed by rules written by the industry and not by legislators – intend to kidnap and eliminate user choice.

The ongoing process that seeks to consolidate control over communications infrastructure is a clear example of modern Fascism.

Net neutrality ultimately means that government entities will be able to exercise total control over the way in which ISPs function and that these entities will have unlimited access to metadata as well as all information that runs through ISP networks.

Giving any government control over global communications is equal to concentrating military power solely in its hands.

In fact, what the alleged government regulators are doing is using the bureaucratic structure to facilitate the concentration of power over the Internet, which is the only significant tool available to  people to counteract the corruption that results in monopolistic practices sought by large corporations.

Adopting net neutrality far and wide would effectively be like concentrating all military might in the hands of one single entity such as the United Nations, for example. In that case, the U.N. would be the only organization with the power to force nations to do what it wants them to do.

In the same fashion, Internet neutrality would allow the two-headed monster composed by large communication companies and government to have their way with everyone else.

See the video below for an in-depth explanation about the past, present and future of the Internet, should net neutrality take over national and international communications infrastructure.

As explained by Stefan Molyneux in the video above, the imposition of net neutrality will end up as all other cases of government intervention. When the government attempts to control big businesses and / or the marketplace, the result is exactly the opposite: Big businesses end up controlling government, which is in itself the definition of Fascism.

When corporate-written, government-enforced regulations dictate the way the world functions, the result is Fascism.

It is the government of the corporations, for the corporations and by the corporations.

This reality is already true in many aspects of our lives. Corporations are largely in control of food supply, water supply, transportation, basic services, the military, communications technology, health and insurance, among others.

In all of these cases, governments have, under the excuse of ‘de-regulation’, worked hand-in-hand with industry to eliminate competition, thus strengthening their monopolies.

After monopoly triumphs over competitive national markets in developed nations, the same model is exported to other regions of the planet in the form of Free Trade Agreements (FTA), whose only goal is to eliminate national barriers so that global corporations are able to flood local markets with heavily subsidized, cheaper, lower quality products.

In the case of Internet services, it would result in strongly surveilled access to Internet content, poorer and more limited access due to decaying infrastructure that will run on the “slow lanes” of the web. In the near future, it will also mean open censorship of content due to lack of capacity by users and some content producers to pay for acess to “fast lanes” or because regulators decide that some content is not adequate.

Is net neutrality good or bad for you? You decide. Just remember that, in Molyneux’s words, the world is full of people with very low morality, those with deep pockets and empty hearts. Remember that those people are the ones who are now in control of corporations which in turn are in control of government and that they are the ones behind the push for Net Neutrality.


Luis R. Miranda is an award-winning journalist and the founder and editor-in-chief at The Real Agenda. His career spans over 18 years and almost every form of news media. His articles include subjects such as environmentalism, Agenda 21, climate change, geopolitics, globalisation, health, vaccines, food safety, corporate control of governments, immigration and banking cartels, among others. Luis has worked as a news reporter, on-air personality for Live and Live-to-tape news programs. He has also worked as a script writer, producer and co-producer on broadcast news. Read more about Luis.