Going against the flow. SOMEONE has to speak up! Will it be you? Or me?

Powerful video (watched at 2.5x using Enounce MySpeed)



Yay for the powerful women who refused to stand by silently. Most moving portion begins at about 6:28 . . . but you have to watch the build-up. The whole thing is strong, but if you're in a rush, start at about 4:47.

Yowza!

WWYD Employee With Down Syndrome Insulted By Customers - YouTube

Dear Judge: I know he killed four people, but he suffers from Povertenza . . .

Dear Judge,


I know that Davontaye’s actions caused the deaths of four people. But please don’t give him life in prison. He suffers from Povertenza. You may not know about this condition but Povertenza is an illness that people from impoverished socio-economic backgrounds have.

Due to the inability to access quality education and employment, Davontaye’s development has been stifled. This leads to poor decision making and I would further argue that since his neighborhood sees so much death and destruction, that he may even suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome in addition to Povertenza.

Judge, it is clear that Davontaye can not be held responsible for his actions. He needs rehabilitation, not prison. Prison would only worsen his mental condition. . . .

So begins this excruciating article.

Who would buy such an argument?

Apparently, the judge who sentenced 16-year-old Ethan Couch to 10 years' probation after he drove drunk, killed four people, and left one of his friends paralyzed. After all, said his defenders, he suffers "Affluenza"--the results of his socialization within a family that provided no limits to his behavior through the years due to his family's seemingly unlimited financial resources.

Justice, anyone?

And for more horrors, read the original: Please Excuse Davontaye, He Suffers From Povertenza | Our Legaci

Thanks to Rebecca Meyers for the link.

Multiple stories of interest . . . about banking

The latest edition of Uncommon Wisdom Daily gives us a good idea of how top officials of the U.S. government think about international entanglements . . . and about just how far the United States has gone down the path against which a modified and partially spurious statement attributed to Thomas Jefferson was intended to warn us.

[The modified and/or spurious Jefferson quote:

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered...I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies... The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."

Reality: There is no evidence he actually said these exact words, though there is good evidence he said things very close to what we read in the last two sentences. And once you understand the meaning of the last two sentences, you realize that the first sentence is a restatement of the sentiments.

I should note, too, that not only are banks private corporations, but the Federal Reserve, itself, is a private corporation. Despite whatever small influence the federal government may have upon choosing its leaders, it is a for-profit institution owned by private shareholders.

Be that as it may, let us return to our story. . . .] 

Brad Hoppmann of Uncommon Wisdom Daily says "Reports this week say President Obama will name Stanley Fischer as the next Federal Reserve vice chair."

Who is Stanley Fischer? What's his background?

• He was born in Northern Rhodesia--now Zambia--in 1943.
   
• His family moved to Southern Rhodesia when he was 13.
   
• A short time later, they came to the U.S.
   
• He lived and worked on a kibbutz in Israel for a short time.
   
• He acquired his bachelor's and master's degrees in economics at the London School of Economics (1962-66).
   
• He earned a Ph.D. in economics from MIT (degree granted in 1969), then taught at the University of Chicago from 1969-73, and MIT from 1973-88 and 1990-94. Among his proteges: Ben Bernanke. (Fischer was Bernanke's Ph.D. thesis advisor.)
   
• Fischer acquired U.S. citizenship in 1976.
   
• He served as
   
  • chief economist at the World Bank (1988-1990);
     
  • First Deputy Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF; 1990-2001);
     
  • Vice Chairman of Citigroup, President of Citigroup International, and Head of the Public Sector Client Group at Citigroup (2001-2005);
     
  • Governor of the Bank of Israel (2005-2013).
     
• In order to take on the Bank of Israel role, he was required to become an Israeli citizen . . . which he did--though without renouncing his U.S. citizenship.
  
  [NOTE: One must renounce foreign citizenship when acquiring U.S. citizenship. However, if you are a U.S. citizen and the other country from which you are seeking citizenship does not require you to renounce your U.S. citizenship, you can remain a U.S. citizen while gaining the second (third, fourth, etc.) citizenship. Indeed, this kind of dual citizenship is a fairly common practice. There are many dual-citizenship U.S. citizens. The U.S. federal government is delighted to get whatever tax revenue it can extract from its citizens, wherever they live.]

Hoppmann says top bankers are excited that Fischer could become a governor of the Federal Reserve. Why?

I suspect it is because he aggressively chopped interest rates in Israel, bought mass amounts of foreign currencies and created new liquidity at every chance. Bankers love all those ideas and would love to see more of them from the Fed.

Yellen, he says, "has reportedly approved the choice and Obama already made the offer to Fischer."

Between his university and central bank experience as well as a senior executive stint at Citibank, Fischer is a classic banking insider. His appointment, if it happens, will further blur national borders at the top echelons of global monetary policy.

Nothing official, of course. But the word is out there--not just from Brad Hoppmann, but on Fischer's Wikipedia page as well.

What's going on? Why all this semi-kinda-almost official, but not quite, discussion?

Hoppmann writes: "The White House could have leaked Fischer’s name to gauge reaction — just like they did with Summers and Yellen earlier this year."

Hmmmmm.

*******

Then there's the slow, rolling, ongoing NSA scandal. I've been reading this for months, how the NSA's tentacles being so ubiquitously ensconced in U.S.-based technology means that U.S.-based technology companies may soon find themselves at a disadvantage in the global market--here this one industry where U.S. companies had traditionally been at the forefront. Their (our) government may be about to do them in.

Well, says Hoppmann, just yesterday we received some more signs that that is exactly what is happening. "[On Thursday,] Cisco (CSCO) chief John Chambers reduced his company’s profit forecast and protested that Cisco does not give any government access to private data.

"Unfortunately," Hoppmann continues, "with all we know now it is hard to believe him."

********

And, finally, from the same newsletter: "JP Morgan Chase is in negotiations to pay Bernard Madoff fraud victims up to $2 billion in restitution."

????!!!! --I thought Madoff was the guilty party! (????)

Apparently he and his firm weren't alone. (!!!???)

Apparently, the Monsanto of the banking industry was also involved?!?

(Apparently, I've not been paying attention. See here, here, and here.)

"The payment," says Hoppmann, "is part of a deal to let the bank avoid pleading guilty to criminal charges in connection with Madoff. Score another win for Jamie Dimon."

. . . And while we're on the subject, maybe I should turn your attention to a couple of paragraphs from the last of the three "here, here, and here" articles referenced two paragraphs above:

JPMorgan is close to paying about $2 billion to settle claims that, as Madoff's main bank for many years, it ignored blatant signs that Madoff was up to no good, the New York Times reports. As part of the deal, JPMorgan will also enter what's known as a deferred prosecution agreement, where everybody will agree that the biggest U.S. bank broke criminal laws and also that prosecutors don't plan to do anything about it, as long as JPMorgan keeps its nose clean. . . .

The NYT makes a big deal out of how this is the first time a big Wall Street bank has entered a deferred prosecution agreement, but just two years ago JPMorgan entered a "non-prosecution agreement" to settle antitrust charges. This settlement sounds awfully similar to a deferred prosecution deal: The bank was not hit with criminal charges as long as it kept to the straight and narrow for the next two years.

JPMorgan seemed in danger of violating that 2011 agreement when it was accused of manipulating electricity markets between 2010 and 2012. The head of its commodities trading division, Blythe Masters, was also accused of making false and misleading statements to federal energy regulators, a charge the bank denied. In the end, no criminal charges were brought against the bank in that case, either -- which was not only a relief for the bank, but also for prosecutors, noted Bloomberg's Jonathan Weil at the time of that settlement this summer.

"An allegation that JPMorgan employees had been untruthful to the energy regulator’s investigators could have forced prosecutors to consider whether JPMorgan had breached the terms of its earlier settlement agreement -- which is serious stuff," Weil wrote. Prosecutors might then have actually had to indict JPMorgan, a prospect that apparently terrifies them.

In all of these cases, the bank has denied criminal wrongdoing. It has said often that its employees "acted in good faith" in the Madoff case. But in two of these three instances, prosecutors at least had enough on the bank to bring these deferred- or non-prosecution agreements, which is apparently the gold standard for criminal actions against a company these days.

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, in a rare moment of candor, admitted earlier this year that some banks are too big to prosecute. The fear is that an indictment could hurt the bank's ability to do business, which could be bad news for the global economy, given how large and interconnected the bank is. Holder later walked back those remarks, followed by Bharara's declaration that criminal prosecutions were always on the table.

So far prosecutors are giving us no reason to believe they have the appetite to back up their words with actions.

Get On the Bus: The Freedom Riders of 1961

Yow!

As I am looking for the best photos to go in my revision of Dr. Daniel Boorstin's The Landmark History of the American People, I came across an article that riveted me: Get On the Bus: The Freedom Riders of 1961 from NPR. Truly astonishing the things various brave people have done for the sake of justice.

I put myself, in my mind's eye, on that bus as it entered Anniston, Alabama, on Sunday, May 14, 1961:

Hank Thomas did not recall seeing anyone on the streets. He did remember the strange feeling that he and the other Riders experienced as the bus eased into the station parking lot just after 1:00 P.M.

The station was locked shut, and there was silence — and then suddenly, as if out of nowhere, a screaming mob led by Anniston Klan leader William Chappell rushed the bus. Thomas thought he heard Jones encourage the attackers with a sly greeting. "Well, boys, here they are," the driver reportedly said with a smirk. "I brought you some niggers and nigger-lovers." But it all happened so fast that no one was quite sure who was saying what to whom.

As the crowd of about fifty surrounded the bus, an eighteen-year-old Klansman and ex-convict named Roger Couch stretched out on the pavement in front of the bus to block any attempt to leave, while the rest — carrying metal pipes, clubs, and chains — milled around menacingly, some screaming, "Dirty Communists" and "Sieg heil!"

There was no sign of any police, even though Herman Glass, the manager of the Anniston Greyhound station, had warned local officials earlier in the day that a potentially violent mob had gathered around the station. After the driver opened the door, [two plain-clothes Alabama State Troopers (whose identities were unknown to the Freedom Riders] hurried to the front to prevent anyone from entering. Leaning on the door lever, the two unarmed investigators managed to close the door and seal the bus, but they could not stop several of the most frenzied attackers from smashing windows, denting the sides of the bus, and slashing tires.

"One man stood on the steps, yelling, and calling us cowards," [one of the Riders] noticed, but her attention soon turned to a second man who "walked by the side of the bus, slipped a pistol from his pocket and stared at me for some minutes." When she heard a loud noise and shattering glass, she yelled, "Duck, down everyone," thinking that a bullet had hit one of the windows. The projectile turned out to be a rock, but another assailant soon cracked the window above her seat with a fist full of brass knuckles. Joe Perkins's window later suffered a similar fate, as the siege continued for almost twenty minutes.

By the time the Anniston police arrived on the scene, the bus looked like it had been in a serious collision. Swaggering through the crowd with billy clubs in hand, the police officers examined the broken windows and slashed tires but showed no interest in arresting anyone. After a few minutes of friendly banter with members of the crowd, the officers suddenly cleared a path and motioned for the bus to exit the parking lot.

A police car escorted the battered Greyhound to the city limits but then turned back, once again leaving the bus to the mercy of the mob. A long line of cars and pickup trucks, plus one car carrying a news reporter and a photographer, had followed the police escort from the station and was ready to resume the assault.

Once the entourage reached an isolated stretch of Highway 202 east of Bynum, two of the cars (one of which was driven by Roger Couch's older brother Jerome) raced around the front of the bus and then slowed to a crawl, forcing the bus driver to slow down. Trailing behind were thirty or forty cars and trucks jammed with shrieking whites. Many, like Chappell and the Couches, were Klansmen, though none wore hoods or robes. Some, having just come from church, were dressed in their Sunday best — coats and ties and polished shoes — and a few even had children with them.

The whole scene was darkly surreal and became even more so when a pair of flat tires forced the bus driver to pull over to the side of the road in front of the Forsyth and Son grocery store six miles southwest of town, only a few hundred yards from the Anniston Army Depot. Flinging open the door, the driver, with Robinson trailing close behind, ran into the grocery store and began calling local garages in what turned out to be a futile effort to find replacement tires for the bus.

In the meantime, the passengers were left vulnerable to a swarm of onrushing vigilantes. Cowling[, one of the Alabama State Highway Patrolmen,] had just enough time to retrieve his revolver from the baggage compartment before the mob surrounded the bus. The first to reach the Greyhound was a teenage boy who smashed a crowbar through one of the side windows. While one group of men and boys rocked the bus in a vain attempt to turn the vehicle on its side, a second tried to enter through the front door.

With gun in hand, Cowling stood in the doorway to block the intruders, but he soon retreated, locking the door behind him. For the next twenty minutes Chappell and other Klansmen pounded on the bus demanding that the Freedom Riders come out to take what was coming to them, but they stayed in their seats, even after the arrival of two highway patrolmen. When neither patrolman made any effort to disperse the crowd, Cowling, Sims [the other Highway Patrolman onboard], and the Riders decided to stay put.

Eventually, however, two members of the mob, Roger Couch and Cecil "Goober" Lewallyn, decided that they had waited long enough. After returning to his car, which was parked a few yards behind the disabled Greyhound, Lewallyn suddenly ran toward the bus and tossed a flaming bundle of rags through a broken window. Within seconds the bundle exploded, sending dark gray smoke throughout the bus. . . .

The story continues. Not only about the Greyhound bus in Anniston, but about the fate of the Riders on a Trailways bus that wound up in Birmingham. (Horrifying.)

But I began this post with a comment about brave people seeking justice.

How's this for a 12-year-old girl in Anniston as she reached out with basic human kindness to the victims of the bus bombing? I haven't quoted the discussion of the choking smoke that filled the bus as the menacing mob seethed outside.

When one of the bus's gas tanks exploded, the people on board finally tumbled out.

I'm skipping more of the story, more gory details. But then there was this:

One little girl, twelve-year-old Janie Miller, supplied the choking victims with water, filling and refilling a five-gallon bucket while braving the insults and taunts of Klansmen. Later ostracized and threatened for this act of kindness, she and her family found it impossible to remain in Anniston in the aftermath of the bus bombing.

I am humbled. Would I exhibit that kind of bravery?

I urge you to read the rest of the article for yourself. Very powerful.

Legalized rape in America's airports

This post is NOT for children's consumption. But I expect you're not a child. And "someone" needs to wake up.

Mike Adams of NaturalNews.com brought this issue to my attention with his article FBI's new definition of rape ensnares TSA agents as serial rapists.

"[I]n October," he writes, "the FBI's UCR subcommittee Advisory Policy Board voted to recommend the definition [of rape] be expanded. The new definition . . . . which looks set to be "officially" adopted by the FBI in 2012, is as follows:

"Rape" is: ...penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim."

If we use that definition, Adams says, the TSA is in trouble.

"Oh, come on!" I thought. "The TSA isn't examining people's anuses or sexual organs!"

But I followed the links in his article and I was shocked.

Here's the story of a woman who was sexually assaulted by a female TSA agent . . . and is now being sued (or, at least, threatened with a lawsuit) by the agent for having caused the agent emotional distress by making a scene during and immediately after the assault!

"Yeah, yeah. 'Assault.' Right," I can hear you say to yourself. "It's not that the victim was assaulted. The only reason she claimed sexual assault is because she was engaging in political theater."

Right?

That's what I thought when I read Adams' article. But then when I read the details, I started to get a different picture. I mean, how would you describe the following alleged behavior on the part of the TSA agent?

[T]he woman, FOUR TIMES, stuck the side of her gloved hand INTO my vagina, through my pants. Between my labia. She really got up there. Four times. Back right and left, and front right and left. In my vagina. Between my labia. I was shocked — utterly unprepared for how she got the side of her hand up there. It was government-sanctioned sexual assault.

Still not wanting to over-react, I thought, "Well . . . that's definitely not right. But there's going to be that occasional agent who gets out of line."

But . . . wait a second. Why do I find another person alleging virtually identical behavior on the part of another female TSA agent?

Two such cases? And both women who complain are very explicit about what the agent did in each case, and their descriptions are very similar: Former Miss USA winner: TSA agent ‘touched my vagina’.

More specifically, says Susie Castillo,

This woman, she touched my vagina four times because she went up my leg, up both legs, from behind and then turned around and did it in the front.

Is there "something to this" story?

An attorney commenting on the first case writes,

Amy’s public assault is not unusual. Stories of gratuitous and inappropriate touching by TSA employees are legion. The stories range from inhuman indifference to deliberate humiliation. Many of those stories emphasize that showing any resistance — whether by opting out of scanners, or voicing objections to groping — will result in immediate retaliation, and possible official investigation, by TSA employees. The TSA has reached the point that its sense of entitlement is nearly impervious to satire. Yet our government assures us that our concerns are meritless.

There was outrage when these searches were put into place. Where is the outrage today? "Where are womens' organizations in taking a stand against serial rapists working at the airport?" asks Adams.

Here at NaturalNews, we believe rape is wrong, and unlike NOW and Feminist.org, we don't make exceptions for federal employees committing those acts of rape. We think rape is ALWAYS wrong, whether you're at an airport, a restaurant, a dental chair or a late-night party where you had a little too much to drink or your sex offender creep boyfriend dropped a little Rohypnol in your cup.

It is stunning to find that we, an alternative news organization, actually possess a stronger sense of opposing rape than these feminist groups. And it makes you wonder: If they believe rape is acceptable when committed by federal employees at the airport, under what other conditions would they also support the serial raping of women?

For more on this general subject, I encourage you to read the rest of Mike's article on the subject and/or We’re Going To Molest You. And Then We’re Going To Make You Pay for It. The latter briefly tells the story of the first woman whose story I have quoted, above. But then another one about a woman who is being billed by the hospital where a police-forced body cavity search upon her person turned up no evidence of any criminal wrongdoing on her part. But the police had "credible suspicion," they claim (based on the hearsay of one person), so they were going to make sure they "did their duty" upon her. But they had no intention, apparently, of paying for their supposed law-enforcement action. . . . So now this woman is to be twice--no, three times--the victim? First, the victim of a malicious false witness; then the victim of a forced body cavity search; and, finally, forced to pay for the procedure done upon her?

And this is justice? . . . Or is it that the United States is turning into a police state?

Homeowners foreclose on bank that wrongfully foreclosed on them

Their attorney called it "sweet justice." I think I would agree. (Where I would tend to disagree: The bank's foreclosure caused a whole lot more pain to the wrongfully foreclosed homeowners than did the homeowners' [legally correct] foreclosure upon the bank.)

Warren and Maureen Nyerges bought a home with cash, but a year later, Bank of America tried to foreclose on them. The Nyerges had to take the bank to court to get them to stop the foreclosure, and in December 2010, the judge agreed: the bank had wrongfully tried to foreclose on the Nyerges' home. He ordered the bank to pay the couple $2,500 to cover their attorney's fees.

Months later, however, the bank had still not paid, despite repeated requests from the Nyerges. So, eventually, the Nyerges hired a lawyer who pursued a levy, and on Friday, June 3, the lawyer, Todd Allen, went to the local Bank of America branch with the sheriff, the media and a moving truck.

"I'm either leaving the building with a whole bunch of furniture, or a check or cash or something," said Allen.



Hat tip to Mike Adams and Neev M. Arnell of Natural News and Eyder Peralta of NPR News.

Most complete report is at Naples (FL) News.

Moral/Ethical Language

It has struck me in the past. I decided to remark upon it today. I get the sense our culture uses far less moral or ethical language than we find in the Bible . . . or, to be exact, Isaiah chapter 1.

I was reading Isaiah 1 this morning and look what I saw:

• iniquity--v. 13


• your hands are full of blood--v. 15


• the evil of your deeds--v. 16


• evil--v. 16


• good--v. 17


• justice--v. 17


• oppression--v. 17


• justice--v. 17


• plead the cause [of an oppressed class of people]--v. 17


• sins--v. 18


• obedien[ce]--v. 19


• rebel[lion]--v. 20


• faithful[ness]--v. 21


• whore[dom]--v. 21


• justice--v. 21


• righteousness--v. 21


• murder--v. 21


• rebel[liousness]--v. 22


• thieve[ry]--v. 22


• bribe[ry]--v. 22


• [lack of] justice--v. 22


• righteousness--v. 26


• faithful[ness]--v. 26


• justice--v. 27


• righteousness--v. 27


• be ashamed--v. 29


• blush--v. 29

Somehow, I find this kind of language bracing. It calls me to "take a stand," "speak out," act out . . . for justice, righteousness, good. . . .

Two Judges

My best friend from high school (yipes! that was 33½ years ago that we graduated!) sent me a poem a couple of days ago. I asked him if I could copy it here. He said yes.

The Judge

A story is told
Of old...
Two women brought one child
Before the judge
Each claiming the child.
"Cut the child in two!"
Declared the judge.
The real mother relinquished
And the child was saved.

A story is told
Of not so old
A woman brought her unborn
Before the judge
Disclaiming the child.
"Cut the child in two!"
Declared the judge.
And the child was cut in two.

--Mike Tanner, friend, faithful husband and father of four

PS. God help us.

I am hoping the references are obvious.

If not, check out 1 Kings 3:16-28 for Judge 1 and Roe v. Wade for Judge 2.