Good Guys VS Bad Guys: Facts Nobody Wants to KNow
well put humbled and your dad was a very wise man.
edit: if we didn’t have this industrial military complex running the world maybe we would find ourself working for peace without bombs and guns. My dad would have loved that.
and what about structural violence and inequality - the UK and the USA trail behind many African states, Eastern and Western Europe. The USA is on a par with China and worse than India, Russia and the UK!
"... and the love of money is the root of all evil.."
so watching the "bankers wars" video I am drawn to a question and its this what is the wts doing bunkering down and stockpiling money.. ?
If the s*** hits the fan with even a "limited" nuclear war the effect on economies around the planet will be long term catastrophic and all the dollars they have haemorrhaged out of the faithful wont be worth anything so why are they doing it??
if we didn’t have this industrial military complex running the world maybe we would find ourself working for peace without bombs and guns - if all the world's countries gave up the bomb and bullet, terrorist groups like ISIS and Al-Qaeda would rule and the planet would be under Sharia.
Good morning, Ruby. Thanks. He was a really honest man.
I know you’re at work- and l am going to market. Would you explain more what you meant in this:
and what about structural violence and inequality - the UK and the USA trail behind many African states, Eastern and Western Europe.
zeb- good question about racing for money. Eventually this pursuit will eat up every thing and every one, sooner or later. Money is the means to achieve goals. There is madness and death when money is both the means AND the end —that doesn’t even describe capitalism, does it?
sorry humbled I should have said I was referring to gini index.
That is an idea that of course comes to mind, luhe. But don’t you think it would be good to secure peace after reducing liberated areas to rubble and destitution? If the only method you have for fighting evil is destruction and death it is hard to hold the ground you gain in war.
There is no incentive for arms manufacturers to lobby for an end of oppression, war, conflict. They have lobbyists in Washington. I wonder why?
“If all you have in your toolbox is a hammer then everything begins to look like a nail.”
Ruby mentioned structural violence and inequality being examined as somefacts to face. Lively folk will not put up with structural violence and inequality forever. If those who hold power don’t care to examine the validity of claims of this abuse ,and no peaceful redress is available, people “misbehave”.
But to be clear I am absolutely opposed to the industrial military complex running the world.
Luhe- sorry for a huge copy and paste. But here is why we can’t let the industrial military complex run the world
We're in an era where financial and political transactions are far too sophisticated and subtle for us to pull out the "War Profiteering" label and have it stick.
Let's call it what it is: Crony Capitalism
I agree with the facts of Gary Teal's response, if not the analysis.
Cheney, as former CEO of Halliburton, did have a severance package which included a set amount in deferred cash compensation, as will as over 400,000 shares in stock options. This is common practice for CEOs of major corporations, whether or not they are about to be vice president.
When he became vice president, Cheney was not legally required to sever his financial interests with Halliburton (the Vice President is not subject to conflict of interest regulations). However, it'd be bad form (and a media nightmare) to keep these direct ties.
In an attempt to avoid the appearance of a conflict, Cheney signed a legal agreement stating that all post-tax benefits received from exercising the stock options would be donated to charity. (In addition to the 20% going to Capital Partners for Education, as mentioned by Gary; 40% would go to George Washington University's medical faculty and 40% to the University of Wyoming). It also said that he would not take a tax deduction for these charitable contributions.
While it's possible that altruism was one of the motivating factors behind purchasing insurance guaranteeing the charity would receive the income, regardless of whether Halliburton was solvent -- More likely the primarily motivating factor was in closing any perceived loopholes in the "conflict of interest" case: no matter what events happened later (or what events Cheney might cause to happen later), X amount of money was guaranteed to go to Y causes.**
In short, this was very carefully crafted to ensure that "not a penny" went directly from Halliburton into Cheney's pockets.
I also agree with the facts of Christopher Rodreguez's response, if not the analysis.
While Cheney didn't make anything off of Halliburton due to the occupation of Iraq, as Christopher outlines Halliburton and KBR certainly made out quite well thanks to the policies of the Bush Administration and Cheney's influence in energy and defense policy.
In fact, the whole military/defense and energy sectors made out quite well due to Iraq war and post-war reconstruction contracts.
Anyone who is an executive in, who is heavily invested in, or who is otherwise affiliated with the private/political revolving door in the defense sector personally profited. This includes Cheney -- as well as members of Cheney's family, his business associates, executives at Halliburton, their families, their business associates ... and so on and so on. This isn't "evil" -- it's "just business and politics."
As is usually the case, the exact amount of profit depends on the level of wealth invested, and the contacts available to leverage for ... political donations, new business contracts, board seats, etc.
I have no love for Cheney. But trying to connect the dots from Cheney ... Direct Cash Profit is a no-go.
Plenty of people, with varying levels of direct and indirect political influence, profited from the wars: Republicans, Democrats, lobbyists, contractors, corporate fat cats. It's not a simple sound-byte super-villain scenario. Cheney is the easiest-to-spot target -- but he's playing by the rules of a much bigger game that started long before he entered the scene.
It's a layer of corruption deeply embedded within our government, that allows (and expects) wealthy corporate-connected folks look out for the interests and profits of their wealthy corporate-connected friends (and donors).
** It is worth noting that the independent Congressional Research Service stated that receiving deferred compensation and holding stock options constitutes a "financial interest", regardless.K
UNTHINKABLE thought for the day.
The “worst man-made humanitarian crisis of our time...” has been identified by United Nations officials.
Do you know? Do you care?
The answer is YEMEN
But wait--there's more!
The man who created the worst humanitarian crisis has been celebrated by titans of government and Silicon Valley recently.
Who? Mohammed bin Salman.
The Saudi Crown Prince who was Saudi defense minister in March 2015 as the New York Times has reported, “took the lead, launching the war… without full coordination across the security services.”
Yes, cluster bombs. Banned under international law continue to be used against Yemen.
The de facto ruler of one the richest countries in the Arab world has been bombing and besieging the poorest country in the Arab world for the past three years
Who is celebrating this fellow?
Major Hollywood bosses like Brian Grazer and Bob Iger,
Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson.
Tech titans of Silicon Valley like Tim Cook, Jeff Bezos and Evan Spiegel, to the heads of Harvard and MIT.
Also, “liberal interventionists,” such as Bill Clinton and John Kerry, to liberal capitalists, such as Lloyd Blankfein and Michael Bloomberg.
But ALL THESE PEOPLE demand we bomb Assad in Syria.
Here is our UNTHINKABLE THOUGHT for today:
Our leaders of industry and political heroes are simply bald-faced HYPOCRITES.
Why? He's tall, charming, handsome, rich and calls himself a "reformer". Oh--and starting this June, he'll ALLOW WOMEN TO DRIVE in Arabia. But--only with a male guardian present.
Oh, and only for certain hours of the day.
From The Guardian June 19,2017
“Paul, an anti-interventionist Republican pushing the resolution(to require congress to vote on -what amounts to-war), railed against the senators who were more concerned about the jobs the weapons manufacturers could generate than the lives of Yemeni children. “I am embarrassed that people are talking about making a buck while 17 million people are threatened with famine,” he said.
He didn’t mention that many of the senators, Democrats and Republicans alike, have taken tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from the same corporations benefitting from the sales.”