tagged w/ Accountability
-
Like many Gulf Coast residents, I was highly skeptical when both the media and the Coast Guard told us that the tar balls we were seeing wash up on our shores in the months following the Deepwater Horizon oil disaster were not from BP’s oil geyser at the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico. If they weren’t from the massive leak caused by BP, Halliburton, and TransOcean, then where were these tar balls coming from? While we might not know the clear answer to that question, we do have a new suspect.
According to a lawsuit filed this week by the Waterkeeper Alliance and their Gulf Coast affiliates, there is a smaller oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico off the Louisiana coast that has been flowing nonstop for almost seven and a half years. While nowhere near as large as the oil leak from the Deepwater Horizon disaster – the lawsuit estimates the current leak to be releasing a few hundred gallons of oil per day – the fact that it has been flowing for more than seven years allows plenty of time for hundred of thousands, if not low millions, of gallons of oil to be released into the waters of the Gulf of Mexico.
However, the energy company responsible for the leak – Taylor Energy – says that only about 14 gallons of oil are leaking per day. The Waterkeeper Alliance is basing their analysis on the size and scope of visible oil sheens, similar to how the flow rate was determined for the Deepwater Horizon disaster.
The lawsuit alleges that Taylor Energy is responsible for allowing oil to flow into the Gulf, a direct violation of the Clean Water Act. They are seeking civil penalties in the amount of $37,500 per day that the oil has been leaking, the maximum possible penalty for such violations under the Act.
So how has an oil leak managed to go undetected, or at least unreported, for the better part of a decade? That’s one of the questions the lawsuit is hoping to answer.
From EcoWatch:
Aided by satellite imagery and research conducted by SkyTruth and aerial observation by SouthWings, the Waterkeeper Alliance and its local Waterkeeper organizations learned that the spill, located approximately 11 miles off the coast of Louisiana, started after an undersea landslide in the aftermath of Hurricane Ivan in 2004. An offshore platform and 28 wells were damaged, and since then, Taylor has yet to stop the daily flow of oil from the site. Waterkeeper estimates that hundreds of gallons of oil have leaked from the site each day for the last 7 years.
“The plaintiffs filed suit to stop the spill and lift the veil of secrecy surrounding Taylor Oil’s seven-year long response and recovery operation,” explained Marc Yaggi, executive director of Waterkeeper Alliance. “Neither the government nor Taylor will answer basic questions related to the spill response, citing privacy concerns.” The public deserves to know how this spill happened and why it continues. Coastal communities should understand the risks involved in developing off-shore oil resources and what protections are in place to prevent damage from future spills.
Justin Bloom, the eastern regional director of the Waterkeeper Alliance, points out that none of the recommended reforms from the NOAA assessment of the Deepwater Horizon oil leak have been enacted, allowing for a culture that puts the profits of the oil industry ahead of environmental and human health protections.
In addition to the newly-filed lawsuit, the Waterkeeper Alliance has also released a joint report with SkyTruth and SouthWings (under their joint organization of the Gulf Monitoring Consortium) detailing the failings of our current monitoring and reporting systems for oil disasters. From their new report:
In addition to the lack of reporting, chronic underreporting of oil spills makes it impossible for the public and decision makers to understand the true scope of pollution caused by oil and gas exploration and production. The National Reporting Center’s (NRC) reports lacking estimates of the amount of oil spilled are common. Between October 1, 2010 and September 30, 2011 a total of 2903 oil or refined petroleum (e.g. diesel fuel) spills were reported in the Gulf region. Seventy-seven percent (2221) of those reports did not include an estimate of the quantity of oil spilled. Forty-five percent (1311) identify a suspected responsible party – a strong indicator that those reports were submitted by the actual polluters – and of those, nearly half (620) do not include any spill amount.
More at the linkLike many Gulf Coast residents, I was highly skeptical when both the media and the... more
-
-
There will definitely not be any Dow Chemical branding on the [stadium] wrap before, during or after the Olympic Games," announced a spokeswomen for the London 2012 organizing committee.
The October 18 development marks progress in a global campaign to shame Dow into admitting accountability to victims of the Union Carbide pesticide plant explosion in Bhopal in 1984. Dow merged with UC in 1999, yet has denied liability for the ongoing suffering of tens of thousands.
In 2010, Dow signed a 10-year deal with the International Olympic Committee (IOC) as "Worldwide Olympic Partner." IOC rules forbid advertising on game venues, but Dow is paying for the $11 million fabric wrap encircling the stadium, and had planned to emblazon its logo on five "test panels" in preparation for the games.
As GroundTruth reported in October, victims of the Bhopal disaster, including the International Campaign for Justice in Bhopal, have been working with Members of Parliament in Britain to remove Dow as sponsor of games. Pulling the logo signals that public outrage and political pressure is having an impact.
Some in India's government, the Sports Ministry, and the Indian Olympics Association (IOA) have joined in the campaign. IOA acting president VK Malhotra told The Times of India that removal of Dow's logo is not enough: "Our demand is that Dow should be removed as a sponsor and we have expressed strong reservation with the Olympics. We are sending our communication to Dow as well as IOC on this regard."
More at the linkThere will definitely not be any Dow Chemical branding on the [stadium] wrap before,... more
-
-
Erekat tells diplomats world must hold Israel to account
Published today (updated) 03/12/2011 16:01
Senior PLO official Saeb Erekat on Saturday urged the international community
to hold the Israeli government to account in meetings with foreign diplomats.
(MaanImages/Rami Swidan, File)JERICHO (Ma'an) -- Senior PLO official Saeb Erekat on Saturday urged the international community to hold the Israeli government to account and stop treating Israel as above the law.
Erekat’s remarks came during separate meetings with the US consul general in Jerusalem Daniel Rubinstein, the French consul general Frédéric Desagneaux, and representative of Japan to the Palestinian Authority Naofumi Hashimoto, a press statement said.
Erekat said Israel's closure of civil society organizations in East Jerusalem, its continuation of settlement activities and the ongoing blockade on the Gaza Strip reflect an ongoing trend of thwarting the peace process and all attempts to resume negotiations.
The measures are also part of Israel's efforts to eliminate the two-state solution, he added.
The Fatah official urged UN member countries to vote in favor of Palestine's membership at the international body.
"Voting pro Palestine will support peace and the two-state solution. It is the shortest way to achieve comprehensive, sustainable, and just peace in the Middle East," he said.Erekat tells diplomats world must hold Israel to account
Published today (updated)... more
-
-
In Canada and the United Kingdom, Indigenous activists and their supporters targeted Shell today for violating agreements made with Indigenous communities in Canada. In Durban, site of the ongoing UN climate talks, activists from Canada joined activists from Africa to denounce Shell and their repeated violations of human rights and environmental regulations. Appearing outside a Shell refinery, a number of Indigenous activists joined with youth from Canada and Africa to support the community of Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN), who recently announced their lawsuit against Shell.
“Shell has left a trail of broken promises and ravaged eco-systems. They have been pushing their dirty fossil fuels plans on every country they can bully. It’s time to stand up and say get the Shell out of there, we don’t want your broken promises anymore,” declared Eriel Deranger, a community member of ACFN and director of Sierra Club Prairies.
“We’re drawing the line, and taking a strong stand against Shell. ACFN wants no further developments until Shell is brought to justice and our broader concerns about the cumulative impacts in the region are addressed,” stated Allan Adam, Chief of ACFN.
“The destructive tar sands operations by Shell and other big oil companies are destroying the land and violating our people’s rights to hunt, trap and fish. Canada is a willing partner in these crimes and other human rights abuses caused by fossil fuels and climate change,” noted Daniel T’seleie, an Indigenous youth from northern Canada, and a member of the Canadian Youth Delegation.
“Shell has a history of devastation across the African continent that we are well aware of. Our peoples and our environments have been turned into a colony for companies like Shell, who profit from our suffering. Knowing full well the extent of brutality that Shell has delivered to my fellow Nigerians, we stand in solidarity with our brothers and sisters in Canada standing up to say ‘get the Shell out of here’,” emphasized Nnimmo Bassey, director of Environmental Rights Action (Nigeria) and winner of the Alternative Nobel Prize.
“Ironically, Durban, the site of this year’s international climate talks, has struggled against the aging Shell refinery that is the symbol of climate change and environmental injustice. Shell has been responsible for crimes against local citizens, where refinery accidents are common and where rusting pipelines have leaked more than 1 million litres of petrol. We strictly oppose plans to bring Tar Sands oil to South Africa, and agree that Shell must be held accountable for its violations against communities,” claimed Bobby Peek, director of Groundwork in Durban.
More at the linkIn Canada and the United Kingdom, Indigenous activists and their supporters targeted... more
-
-
The battle between some of the world's most powerful energy companies and an Alaska village that's losing ground to climate change heads to federal appeals court on Monday.
Nine Kivalina residents, having survived the recent mega-storm that walloped western Alaska, will be at the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco to watch their lawyers argue that ExxonMobil Corp., BP, ConocoPhillips and other corporate Goliaths owe the village at least $95 million in damages.
A key Kivalina argument charges that the energy companies are engaged in a conspiracy to cover up the link between their emissions and the earth's warming temperatures. A similar argument proved pivotal decades ago in helping smokers prevail in court against tobacco giants.
The Northwest Alaska village lost the first round of its lawsuit in 2009, when a U.S. District Court dismissed it, saying climate-change pollution needs to be regulated by Congress and the administration, not courts. The village lacked standing, the court said, because it could not show the companies' emissions caused the erosion threatening the village.
But Kivalina is optimistic this time around.
"What we have going for us is the science is changing by the day," and the causal connection between greenhouse-gas emissions and the climate is clarifying, said Heather Kendall-Miller, an attorney for Kivalina and head of the Alaska office of the Native American Rights Fund.
snip
Finding a new home
The quarter-mile-long rock revetment, installed in 2009 by the Army Corps, will buy the village an estimated 10 to 15 years before it must move.
But in 2019, what then?
.
The village is trying to find a new site where it can rebuild, out of harm's way. But when it does, how will it pay to build a school, homes and other facilities, and to scrape roads and an airstrip on the tundra?
That's where the lawsuit comes in. Moving could cost between $95 million and $400 million, according to figures from the Army Corps of Engineers and the General Accountability Office. That's at least $350,000 to $1.4 million for each village resident.
The city and tribe hope their lawsuit -- Kivalina v. ExxonMobil -- forces about 20 of the world's largest oil, power and coal companies to cough up the cash.
The village has prevailed against industry before. In 2008, with legal help from the San Francisco-based Center on Race, Poverty and the Environment, Kivalina forced mining giant Teck-Cominco to settle a lawsuit and spend $120 million on a pipeline to protect drinking water.
More at the linkThe battle between some of the world's most powerful energy companies and an... more
-
-
"We're going to show [Chevron] that they can't come here and create
whatever environmental mess they want."
Those were the words of Carlos Minc, Rio de Janeiro state's environment secretary, in response to Chevron's oil spill off the Atlantic coast of Brazil. Judging from his statements to the press, Minc has grown increasingly frustrated with Chevron's actions following the spill.
Anyone familiar with the ongoing battle to bring Chevron to justice in Ecuador knows that the company will do everything it can to protect its profits even at the expense of the planet and human health. Brazilian officials are determined to make Chevron pay for the impacts of its reckless business operations. Send key environmental officials in Brazil a message now to let them know you've got their back.
It isn't just Chevron's response to the spill that has been criticized. Before and after the spill occurred, Chevron showed shockingly little concern about the risks involved. The company reportedly drilled deeper than it was licensed to, and had to borrow sonar equipment to even locate where the leak was occurring. Chevron was completely unprepared for an oil spill – or perhaps I should say, completely unconcerned. Production and profits are all that really matter to Chevron.
No wonder Carlos Minc has also been quoted saying: "We believe the accident could've been avoided. There was an environmental crime. [Chevron] hid information and their emergency team took almost 10 days to start acting."
Brazil's National Petroleum Agency says more than 110,000 gallons of oil have spilled into the Atlantic Ocean. Write to Carlos Minc and other key Brazilian environmental officials now and urge them to hold Chevron accountable for every last drop.
For a cleaner future,
Mitch Anderson
Corporate Campaigns Director
P.S. AlterNet recently named Chevron the #1 "Most Toxic Energy Company," a label the company richly deserves. Even while it refuses to pay to clean up its messes in Ecuador and around the world, Chevron is spending huge sums of money to influence public policy in a preemptive bid to never be held accountable for the damage it does to the planet. Share this story to help expose Chevron and other energy companies that are polluting our political process.
More at the link"We're going to show [Chevron] that they can't come here and create... more
-
-
A group of protesters seemingly affiliated with the "Occupy" movement interrupted President Obama's speech in Manchester, New Hampshire on Tuesday, engaging in a call-and-response protest for about 20 seconds before being drowned out by Mr. Obama's supporters.
"Mic check!" yelled a voice from the crowd as Mr. Obama was giving a speech calling on Congress to pass and extend a payroll tax cut. Other protesters repeated "mic check," in the style of the Occupy protests, as Mr. Obama halted his speech and looked out into the crowd.
"Mr. President, over 4,000 peaceful protesters," the lead protester began, his words then repeated by the other protesters. They then made reference to those protesters being arrested, though their words became difficult to hear.
At this point those in the crowd began booing and chanting "Fired up, ready to go," prompting Mr. Obama to say, "no, no, no, it's ok. It's ok."
"All right, OK guys," he continued, trying to calm the crowd as supporters started chanting "Obama" over the protesters.
"I'm going to be talking about a whole range of things today, and I appreciate you guys making your point, let me go ahead and make mine," he said. "All right? And I'll listen to you, you listen to me." The comment prompted applause from the audience.
He went on to reference the movement twice more in his remarks.
"A lot of the folks who've been down in New York and all across the country in the 'Occupy' movement, there is a profound sense of frustration, there's a profound sense of frustration about the fact that the essence of the American dream, which is that if you work hard, if you stick to it that you can make it, feels like that's slipping away," said the president. "And that's not the way things are supposed to be, not here, not in America. This is a place where your hard work and your responsibility's supposed to pay off, it's supposed to be a big, compassionate country where everybody who works hard should have a chance to get ahead, not just the person who owns the factory, but then men and women who work on the factory floor."
The protesters handed out their full message on paper to the assembled press.
"Mr. President, over 4000 peaceful protesters have been arrested while bankers continue to destroy the American economy," it said. "You must stop the assault on our 1st Amendment rights. Your silence sends a message that police brutality is acceptable. Banks got bailed out. We got sold out."
*You may have to go to the link to watch the video.A group of protesters seemingly affiliated with the "Occupy" movement... more
-
-
Permanent Peoples' Tribunal accuses biotech giants Monsanto, Dow, Bayer, Syngenta, DuPont and BASF of promoting dangerous pesticides including endosulfan, paraquat and neonicotinoids
The world's major agrochemical companies, Monsanto, Dow, Bayer, Syngenta, DuPont and BASF, will face a public tribunal in early December accused of systematic human rights violations.
They are accused of violating more than 20 instruments of international human rights law through promoting reliance on the sale and use of dangerous and unsafe pesticides including endosulfan, paraquat and neonicotinoids.
The Permanent Peoples' Tribunal (PPT), an international opinion tribunal created in 1979, will hear expert testimony from scientists, medical doctors and lawyers to prove the charges. Victims who have been injured by these products - from farmers, farmworkers, mothers and consumers from around the world - will also testify to the causes and nature of their injuries.
The cases will be heard over a four-day trial in Bangalore, India beginning December 3. While the Tribunal has no legal weight, and cannot force sanctions on companies, it aims to expose and raise awareness of large-scale human rights violations.
Pesticides Action Network (PAN) International, a global network comprised of 600 organisations in 90 countries, has spent years collecting information to bring about the indictments and is seeking justice for more than 25 specific cases - such as Silvino Talavera, an 11-year-old from Paraguay who died days after breathing in a cloud of Monsanto's RoundUp herbicide sprayed by a crop duster. The trial will also hear evidence of the link between pesticide use and a decline in bees.
The corporations, known as the 'Big 6' control 74 per cent of the global pesticide market, as well as dominating the global seed market.
Bayer reject the allegations saying they are a 'wholesale distortion of the role of pesticides in our society.' Monsanto, Syngenta and Dow, after being contacted by the Ecologist, were unavailable for comment.
Pesticide poisonings
An estimated 355,000 people are believed to die each year from unintentional toxic chemical poisoning, according the World Health Organization, many of these from use or exposure to pesticides and other agrochemicals. Nick Mole from PAN UK said the trial would give a voice to the otherwise voiceless victims of pesticides.
‘The pesticide industry is massive and incredibly powerful. It is difficult to prove corporate manslaughter even when these products are killing hundreds of people a year,' he said. ‘We've spoken to people who have been abused and we are allowing them to give voice to their individual stories. We will be presenting the outcome of the Tribunal to the corporations and will be inviting their response,' he said.
It is hoped that the verdict, to be delivered on December 6, will lead to greater discussions at UN institutions on holding agrochemical corporations accountable for crimes relating to the impact of their products.
More at the linkPermanent Peoples' Tribunal accuses biotech giants Monsanto, Dow, Bayer,... more
-
-
The global challenge of climate change poses a perfect moral storm — by failing to take action to rein in carbon emissions, the current generation is spreading the costs of its behavior far into the future. Why should people in the future pay to clean up our mess?
by stephen gardiner
Sometimes the best way to make progress on a problem is to get clearer on what that problem is. Arguably, the biggest issue facing humanity at the moment is the looming global environmental crisis. Here, the problem is not that we are unaware that trouble is coming. After all, the basic science is both well known and continually being reiterated in major national and international reports. Rather, the core problem is that thus far effective action seems beyond us. We seem at best paralyzed, and at worst indifferent. Put starkly, there seems little place within our grand institutions and busy lives for what may turn out to be the defining issue of our generation.
Why? In my view, at the heart of the matter is the fact that humanity is in the grip of a profound ethical challenge that our current institutions and theories are ill-equipped to meet.
Sebastian Junger’s book The Perfect Storm tells the story of a fishing boat caught at sea during the rare convergence of three independently powerful storms. Similarly, the global crisis of climate change brings together three major challenges to ethical action — and in a mutually reinforcing way. It is genuinely global, profoundly intergenerational, and occurs in a setting where we lack robust theory and institutions to guide us. Neglect of this perfect moral storm leads us to underestimate the climate problem and fail to appreciate the wider implications in predictable ways.
Conventional wisdom identifies climate change as primarily a global problem. Wherever they originate, emissions of the main greenhouse gas (carbon dioxide) quickly become mixed in the atmosphere, affecting climate Those least responsible for past emissions are likely to suffer the most serious impacts.everywhere. According to the standard analysis, this makes climate change a traditional “tragedy of the commons,” played out between nation states that represent the interests of their citizens in perpetuity. In Garrett Hardin’s tragedy, each herdsman prefers the collective outcome where none over-consume — so that the commons is not overburdened. Nevertheless, when acting individually each prefers to over-consume himself, no matter what the others do — with ruinous results for all.
In climate change, we are often told, states reason in the same way. Each prefers the collective outcome where none over-consume with carbon emissions — so that dangerous climate change is avoided. Yet, when acting individually, each prefers to over-consume, no matter what the others do — so overconsumption is rife. In both cases, then, we are led to an outcome that no one wants, and which is severe enough to seem tragic.
Unfortunately, this traditional model is at best dangerously incomplete. To begin with, it ignores one central spatial aspect of the climate problem. Those least responsible for past emissions are likely to suffer the most serious impacts (at least in the short- to medium-term). This is partly because the poorer nations are disproportionately located in more climate-sensitive regions, but it is also because, being poor, they lack the resources available to the rich to address negative impacts. Since it ignores this basic problem of fairness, the traditional model underestimates the nature of the relevant “tragedy.”
Even more importantly, the traditional model obscures the temporal aspect of the perfect moral storm. Once emitted, a substantial proportion of climate emissions typically remain in the atmosphere for hundreds of years, and some persist for tens — even hundreds — of thousands. This means that the current generation takes benefits now, but spreads the costs of its behavior far into the future.
Worse, many of these benefits are comparatively modest (e.g., those of bigger and more powerful vehicles), and many of the projected costs are severe, even catastrophic (e.g., severe flooding and famine). Worse still, the problem is iterated: The same temptation to take modest benefits now even Most victims of climate change cannot hold us to account, being very poor, not yet born, or nonhuman.in the face of severe costs to the future is repeated for subsequent generations as they come to hold the reins of power. Hence, there are cumulative impacts further in the future. Worst of all, such impacts may eventually provoke the equivalent of an intergenerational arms race. Perhaps some future generations will face such appalling environmental conditions that they are entitled to emit more in self-defense, even foreseeing that this behavior makes matters even worse for their successors. And so it goes on.
The third storm exacerbates the situation. Climate change brings together many areas in which our best theories are far from robust, such as intergenerational ethics, global justice, scientific uncertainty, and humanity’s relationship to nature. The problem here is not that we do not have any guidance at all. For example, the idea that imposing catastrophe on the future for the sake of our own modest benefits is not a defensible way to behave is a relatively secure basic ethical intuition. Rather, the problem is that it is difficult to move beyond those basic intuitions to deal with the details, and we are too easily distracted by counterarguments, especially from theories that have merits in other contexts, but fail to take the future seriously enough.
For example, some influential economists claim the current generation is justified in moving slowly on climate change because future people will be richer due to economic growth, and so should pay more. But are we entitled to assume that the future will be richer even in a climate catastrophe? And even if they are, why should they pay to clean up our mess?
More at the link
___________________
The decisions we all make now have an effect on future generations. To leave this world this way for future generations is a moral crime.The environmental debt we leave our children is even more heinous a crime than the economic debt we leave them. I will never understand the mindset of the quick fix.
http://cugh.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/climate-change.jpgThe global challenge of climate change poses a perfect moral storm — by failing... more
-
-
"How many people think it’s important to risk arrest, attendees at the bank accountability panel were asked. Everyone raised their hands.""How many people think it’s important to risk arrest, attendees at the bank... more
-
-
Cabal
-
added this
-
4 months ago
- |
-
-
" A massive explosion rocked the Norwegian capital, Oslo"
"The target appeared to have been the Ministry of Petroleum and Energy"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/norways-capital-shaken-by-bomb-blast/2011/07/22/gIQABA6dTI_story.html?hpid=z1
The W. Post references foreign terrorist activities, but the Ministry of Defense or the Prime Minister's office would be more appropriate targets for such terrorists. Since there are violent student conflicts also occurring in Norway just now, it's more likely that Norwegian citizens of the world are taking the battle that Big Oil has been waging against the world, to their own doorstep. An all out accountability assault against Big Oil everywhere, and from every direction, could possibly begin a process of Big Oil becoming a little more socially responsible. When the highest heads of Big Oil feel sufficiently endangered by repercussion of their own actions, and their stolen wealth can't protect them, they may begin to reexamine their own footprints upon the world." A massive explosion rocked the Norwegian capital, Oslo"
"The target... more
-
-
In tonight's new episode of "4th and Forever," Jeremiah Hollowell learns he must switch positions from running back to defensive end. Meanwhile, he is struggling to juggle football, school, and supporting his son.
Like many of his teammates, Jeremiah wants to attract the attention of scouts and is worried about how this change might affect his opportunities down the line. Will he choose to embrace his new role?
In a team setting, is it better to focus on the success of the group or your own? How do you decide?
Tune in Thursday at 9/8c to see whether the Jackrabbits can rise above the competition on an all-new episode of "4th and Forever" on Current TV. For more information, visit http://current.com/4thandforever.In tonight's new episode of "4th and Forever," Jeremiah Hollowell... more
-
-
This is a teaser for an article that I posted on my Blog MINNESOTA JUDICIAL REFORM
AND ACCOUNTABILITY [ http://bit.ly/jPM1H8 ]. It includes Proposed Legislation that I have sent to my Minnesota US 6th District Representative, Michele Bachmann. In my humble opinion, this should be the single most important issue of the 2012 Elections.
Upon reading my article and proposed legislation, I believe you will reach the same conclusion that I have: Sovereign Immunity is a fraud. It was not provided for in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. It results from a deliberate and fraudulent Judicial Interpretation to the 11th Amendment. Sovereign Immunity is what prevents WE THE PEOPLE from suing and holding accountable our Elected Officials, Judges, Government and Government Agencies and Government Bureaucrats. For we rank and file citizens, the political party that you belong to should not be a consideration in supporting this proposed legislation. After reading my article, I believe you will be as angry and motivated for this proposed reform as I am.
If Upon reading this, you find yourself in agreement with my assessment and proposed Legislation Please contact Representative Michele Bachmann [ http://bachmann.house.gov ] at the following voice and fax numbers.
Washington D.C. Office
103 Cannon House Office Building Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-2331 Fax: (202) 225-6475
Woodbury Office
6043 Hudson Rd, Suite 330 Woodbury, MN 55125
Phone: 651-731-5400 Fax: 651-731-6650
St. Cloud/Waite Park Office
110 2nd Street S, Suite 232 Waite Park, MN 56387
Phone: 320-253-5931 Fax: 320-240-6905
LEGAL EVIL? In their own words - Revised and Updated to include Proposed Legislation Language sent to my MN US Representative, Michele Bachmann [ http://bit.ly/jPM1H8 ]
With the US Judiciary's reputation for integrity and honesty firmly embedded in the minds of WE THE PEOPLE, what standing does any single Citizen have to challenge their reputations? To overcome this handicap, I will use the American Legal System’s own words to expose the true nature of their integrity and character.
Let us begin with the words of former FBI director J Edgar Hoover:
"The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists.''
Next, I am going to use the words of Judges themselves. Judges allege that they reach conclusions by citing existing case law aka previous rulings of judges.
In my research on immunity for Judges and States, I was astonished and dismayed to learn the liberties the Judges had taken, and leaps of logic they had used, to interpret and write case law and rules in their favor.
The first cases I will cite are:
Wiggins v Hess (1976, CA8 Mo) 531 F2d 920
"Judicial immunity applies even when judge acts maliciously and corruptly; judge loses his immunity from liability for damages in violation of 42 USCS &1983 ONLY if he acts in clear absence of jurisdiction."
and:
Holloway v Walker (1985, CA5 Tex) 765 F2d 517
"Judges absolute immunity from suit under 42 USCS & 1983 for actions take under jurisdiction is not avoided by allegation that the acts are performed pursuant to bribe or conspiracy."......
To read the rest of the story and the proposed reform bill for free please click here:
Minnesota Judicial Reform and Accountability [ http://bit.ly/jPM1H8 ]
Those were my thoughts. - http://bit.ly/jhs2ih
In Liberty, - http://bit.ly/kKJYal
Don Mashak - http://bit.ly/ksfyOn
The Cynical Patriot - http://bit.ly/kJb2OS
http://twitter.com/dmashak
DON MASHAK'S CHALLENGE TO ALL USA POLITICAL PARTIES! - http://bit.ly/tTDML
Don Mashak | Facebook - http://on.fb.me/aZL3SG
Don Mashak - Quora - http://www.quora.com/Don-Mashak
Don Mashak - Examiner.com - http://exm.nr/hEleFU
Don Mashak (dmashak) - Digg - http://digg.com/dmashak
Don Mashak's Minnesota 10th Judicial District Free Press - http://bit.ly/XYVN4This is a teaser for an article that I posted on my Blog MINNESOTA JUDICIAL REFORM... more
-
-
The Project On Government Oversight is celebrating 30 years of exposing corruption and exploring solutions. Comedian and social commentator Lewis Black gives POGO's staff props calling them, "The most ass-kicking, name-taking bunch of goody-two-shoes good government types in America."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ln8QexETcVwThe Project On Government Oversight is celebrating 30 years of exposing corruption and... more
-
-
"Today, the event culminates in real action -- thousands of those activists are now taking to the streets to confront Congress and the White House on climate inaction. They're also stopping at the US Chamber of Commerce -- the nation's biggest anti-climate lobbying force -- and BP headquarters to call out the oil giant for filing a multibillion dollar tax refund on its spill cleanup expenses. Check out some amazing pics from the front lines of the march:
Amazing photos of the event are streaming in from activists using Twitpic, and these are just a few. Follow the #powershift on Twitter for more.""Today, the event culminates in real action -- thousands of those activists are... more
-
-
The following is an excerpt from an article I wrote on one of my blogs:
"The following Elements of Natural Law are fundamental to the Citizens of the USA understanding the problems our Country (the USA) faces. And it may also be helpful in allowing the rank and file Citizens of other Countries in understanding the problems in theirs.
The fundamental understanding our US Founding Fathers had in drafting our constitution, is People under Natural Law have free will, and are not virtuous by nature. Therefore, governments must be constructed in anticipation of the nature of man. Acting on this knowledge, our Founding Fathers built into our Government and Constitution, various checks and balances.
Amongst these checks and balances were transparency and accountability. All of our problems today emanate from the slow, persistent rolling back of the checks and balances, transparency and accountability our Founding Fathers built into our Government and Constitution.".....
To read the rest of the article for free Click here:
Minnesota 10th Judicial District Free Press News
http://donmashaksmn10judicialdistrictfreepre.blogspot.com/
Those were my thoughts.
Don Mashak
The Cynical Patriot
http://twitter.com/dmashakThe following is an excerpt from an article I wrote on one of my blogs:
"The... more
-
-
"On Saturday, January 29, 2011 more than 50 members of TEA Party Groups from across the State met at the Brooklyn Park MN Library to participate in a Nominal Group Process Meeting. Through this 5.5 hour process, the group set its goals for the immediate future in Minnesota.
With Regard to the Top Issues that Minnesota North Star TEA Party Patriots will help Local groups are:
1) Judicial Reform and Accountability
2) Voter ID
3) Reducing Government Size.
Other Issues in the top 10 included......"
Continue reading on Examiner.com: Results of North Star TEA Party Patriots Coalition Nominal Group Process - Minneapolis Independent | Examiner.com
http://www.examiner.com/independent-in-minneapolis/results-of-north-star-tea-party-patriots-coalition-nominal-group-process#ixzz1CfnPhwf8
Those were my thoughts.
Don Mashak
The Cynical Patriot
http://twitter.com/dmashak"On Saturday, January 29, 2011 more than 50 members of TEA Party Groups from... more
-
-
When Michelle Obama first announced her Let's Move program to end childhood obesity "within a generation" last year, I tried to remain open-minded. Like many others, I was happy to have the first lady bring attention to this important problem. And there's no doubt that her leadership has helped, for example, to get Congress to make improvements to school meals. But I remained concerned that the White House was reluctant to take on the food industry in any meaningful way. It seems that things are worse than I thought.
Last week, Walmart executives announced what Michelle Obama hailed as a new "nutrition charter," a number of promises to sell healthier food. While the media reported the news with much fanfare -- serving up the positive spin that Walmart hoped the first lady would help provide -- there was little critique to be found.
I am less interested in the specifics of the proposal than I am in the fact that the White House endorsed it. This secretly brokered deal raises numerous troubling questions about the respective roles of industry and government as it relates to setting food and nutrition policy for the nation. For starters:
1) What was the first lady's staff doing in secret talks with Walmart for over a year? How did such an approach even get started? Here's an alternative scenario: Congress holds hearings (you know, in public) on how the entire food industry should be changing its ways with enforceable, meaningful laws that apply to everyone, not just Walmart.
2) Why not wait until Walmart has actually accomplished something to give them credit? Any company can promise something. And we have plenty of examples of other food companies making promises that weren't kept. (Shameless plug: My book is chock-full of them; can someone please send a copy to Mrs. Obama? No really, please.)
Does anyone remember how McDonald's promised to stop using trans fats, but oops, didn't? Or how about the time Ruby Tuesday's promised to list nutrition facts on its menus until they decided that wasn't working out so well. And then there's the soda industry, which has made so many broken promises, it's hard to keep up. The biggest one was in 2006 when Bill Clinton announced a deal (also secretly brokered) in which soda companies promised to change the beverages they sold in schools. While industry claims mission accomplished, recent research suggests otherwise. But all that was before Michelle Obama's time, I guess.
3) What has the White House traded in exchange for Walmart's pledges? In most negotiations, each party gives up something to gain something. While the White House may not admit it, Walmart does reap valuable rewards besides just good PR. As I also describe in my book, the goal here is for companies to avoid actual government regulation by claiming that voluntary self-regulation is the way to go. This is obviously what Walmart intends with its pledge to develop "strong criteria for a simple front-of-package" label despite the fact that the Food and Drug Administration has announced its intention to address this issue. But who needs scientific government agencies telling food companies what belongs on food packages when the first lady has that covered in her secret meetings?
4) Why would the White House endorse a plan with a five-year timetable? How will it be monitored? And how will Walmart be held accountable? Is there some sort of contract between and White House and Walmart? If these were legal negotiations, both parties would sign a legally binding written agreement. So what happens in five years? Will Walmart host another press conference with the first lady to announce how well they did with their list of promises? Don't count on it. If history is any guide, no one will even remember Thursday's PR stunt. Sure, it's possible that some progress will be made by 2016, fewer salt grams here, a little less sugar there. But that will hardly make a dent in the public health crisis that faces our nation.
cont.When Michelle Obama first announced her Let's Move program to end childhood... more
-
-
This is an except from an article I wrote on Examiner.com:
Announcing the Reorganization of Minnesota Judicial Reform and Accountability TEA Party.
Don Mashak, the leader of Minnesota Judicial Reform and Accountability TEA Party has announced a name change and reorganization of said group. (Don Mashak is also the author of this article)
The groups name will change to "TEA PArty Transparency, Accountability and Reform" or Tea Party TAR for short. It also will appear as #TPTAR on Twitter.
The group will be organized around issues rather than localities, as most other TEA Party groups are.
The primary issues of the group will be:
1) Judicial Transparency, Accountability and Reform
2) Fiscal Transparency
3) Public Education reform
To read the rest of the Article, Please visit Examiner.com
http://www.examiner.com/independent-in-minneapolis/reorganization-of-minnesota-judicial-reform-and-accountability-tea-party
Those were my thoughts.
Don Mashak
The Cynical Patriot
http://twitter.com/dmashakThis is an except from an article I wrote on Examiner.com:
Announcing the... more
-
