Tuesday, 30 June 2015

Deutsche Bank:
Another Lehman on the Precipice?

Deutsche Bank is one of the most successful banks ever to exist.
With close to $70* trillion dollars invested [or geared] worldwide, this is not an insignificant part of this planet's global financial structure.

Deutsche has been one of the most successful banks because it has made very careful investment decisions over decades, has taken calculated risks and has benefitted enormously from the calibre of management and client loyalty it has largely retained despite world economic fluctuations.

Greece was considered a calculated risk for Deutsche.
You will never succeed as a global bank, unless you are prepared to take some risks -and this was a very well-thought out strategy.

What nobody could have foreseen were a number of coinciding world events:
1.The near collapse of the world financial order between 2007-2008
(which, by 2009, thanks to President Obama, as history, if honestly written, will show, never happened.)

2.The collapse of Lehman Brothers -which, in my opinion, should never have been allowed to happen -and we have the British Premier of the day, Gordon Brown, to thank, in part, for that collapse.

There is a theory that Goldman Sachs 'pushed Lehman', it's bitter rival, 'under the financial bus' at a time of crises, to gain a competitive world advantage.
This is hotly refuted by Goldman Sachs but a scenario is about to unfold in Greece which maybe eerily similar.
Nobody will dispute the fact that GS 'pulled the plug' on loans to Lehman – but this occurred before it was going into bankruptcy:
''This isn't GS specific, but it's true with all of the other investment banks.
Once you think that Lehman is going under, you stop lending it money, once you stop lending it money then Lehman's situation gets worse, so ultimately you end up with this downward spiral which caused everything to blow up.
So once it seemed that Lehman was in bad shape GS and all of the other banks stopped loaning Lehman money.  One reason for this is that if you know that a company is going bankrupt, you are going to get a lot better terms if you loan it money *after* it goes into bankruptcy.'' [ Jospeh P. Wang, Chief Scientist, Bitquant Research http://www.startupbootcamp.org/mentors/joseph-wang.html ]

Socialist Prime Minister Gordon Brown, the most disliked British Prime Minister of the 21st century, certainly despised anything with a hint of global financial free enterprise - and especially American global capitalism – played no small part in influencing the British Treasury to renege on a prior understanding – and pull the plug on Lehman Brothers.
[The British 'establishment' is highly incestuous and more prone to political influence than even it's U.S. counterparts so all Prime Minister Brown had to do was pick up the phone and 'threaten' HM Treasury and Governor of the Bank of England to 'fall in line' or face future [unspecified] 'consequences' - such as loss of 'honors' being 'blackballed' fired etc. etc. etc. You need to appreciate that such 'behaviour' is pretty standard in Britain and across Europe.]

At that time, on Eurostar whilst travelling to France, I met a middle ranking executive recently made redundant from Lehman and he shared a number of interesting stories with me during our trip which helped me appreciate the overall situation.
As financial gain was not my objective, I simply took notes for future reference.

The part which GS has played in this Greek tragedy is remarkably similar (in some regards) to it's ambiguous role vis-a-vis Lehman.
On the one hand and at onetime, encouraging, creatively facilitating and cooperating, and on the other, quick to pull the plug rather than find creative solutions in times of crises.
[This role will no doubt be examined in great detail by more eminent specialists than myself when placed into a historical context in future years.]

Back to the future.  Deutsche still remains very highly levered ['geared'] and would not survive a Greek default, without special provisions, because of over exposure in this market.
But the fall of Deutsche would affect us all – and could spark another economic 9-11 – this time of global catastrophic proportion.
Therefore, as Greece politicians themselves are fully aware, some formulation to 'cushion' Greece must be developed in the interests of global financial security of the democratic world.
It is likely that Greece will agree to 'prioritize' Deutsche as top (or very near the top) of the list of priority [future] creditors for payment – despite howls of protest and threats of economic blacklisting and bullying.
This bullyboy strategy will, however, as it has to date, fall on deaf ears as far as the Greek government is concerned.
[Historically the Greek people have had to endure far more suffering than these slimey and slippery politicians in Brussels could ever devise.]
[Why is it that Northern European politicians fail to understand 'L'homme du Midi'?
They just don't understand either the philosophy nor the way of life.
They have lived too long in the cold caves of Northern Europe bereft as they are of the benefits of the perennial warmth of the Mediterranean, fine wine, women, song, fishing, olive, lime and lemon groves.
They all have holiday homes in warmer climes but fail to really appreciate the 'mode de vie.']

So, much to the chagrin of The Russian Federation, praying as it is for a global collapse of the dollar and the euro, Deutsche Bank (and the world economic order as it exists) will not collapse and a deal will at least be done with this creditor - and probably others.

As the saying goes, when you owe the bank $1000 you have a problem.
When you owe the bank $100bn, the bank has a problem.

The Greek government has played Russian Roulette down to the wire.
It has played it with genius – to be expected of the Greeks(!)
It has faced off the financial bullies of Europe - who thought their Machiavellian skills far outshone those of their 'second-rate' counterparts in Athens.

The Oracle's Message (!)
However, a word of caution: It is probably advisable for the incumbent (victorious) Greek politicians to very carefully (and wisely) choose their holiday and social destinations for the foreseeable future – should they not wish to be bushwhacked [like Dominique Strauss-Kahn] as their fortitude and successful negotiating skills (and the humiliations inflicted on the 'Godfathers' of The European Union - political and monetary- and other institutions) will neither be forgotten - nor forgiven - for a very very long time (!)

Neither should it be forgotten that there is no formulation to facilitate an exit from the monetary union structure whilst a country retains it's 'political' union status within that same entity.  This is very similar to the Warsaw Pact -
a Stalinistic entity whose tentacles bound it's Communist member countries into a military, economic and political monolithic structure - until it collapsed. 
[I should add that the issue of NATO membership for Greece is easy to facilitate outside the monetary structure of the EU.  Should Greece seek funding from Russia, in any significant amount, that would certainly complicate this relationship.  It is unlikely that the Greek people as a whole would be happy with such a course of action - Greece leaving NATO or the European Union.]

©Patrick Emek, 2015



Premier Matteo Renzi's Remarks In Berlin Today
(Come Back Silvio Berlusconi-All Is Forgiven!)

The above was not meant to say that 'Northerners' are more 'efficient' than 'Southerners'.
No, just that the lifestyles and priorities are different.
I specifically included a reference to support the statement.
It is only right that in colder Northern climes you have to be more efficient and plan for uncertainty more regularly than you do along the Mediterranean coastline where you can plan for sunshine for nearly 12 months of the year, every year.
This does not reflect on levels of efficiency but it certainly reflects in lifestyle choices.
That difference exists between the Northern Italians and their Southern counterparts.
This difference, in itself, determines the lifestyle choice.
The North of Italy has in more recent times, culturally and historically, identified with Germany and the Nordic countries - in terms of lifestyle and perception of priorities.
Premier Matteo Renzi's Remarks
It was almost a shock to hear the Italian Premier yesterday castigate his Greek counterpart - and the Greek people - as 'lazy and inefficient' - playing to historical racial stereotypes and historical differences - Italy being part of the Nazi Axis during the Second World War while the Greeks, fiercely independent, supported the Allies.
It is most unfortunate that the Italian Premier should have been so scathing in his personal attack on the Greek people.  Perhaps he should go on a 'Racial Awareness' course, funded by the European Union, before making such derogatory remarks in public again?
The media has likewise been filled with derogatory remarks - comparing Greece with Yemen, Somalia, Sudan and Zimbabwe - all in the interests of 'honest' news analysis of course (!)
Even Chancellor Angela Merkel was so embarrassed by the remarks of Premier Renzi she distanced herself from them almost immediately - with an olive branch extended to the suffering Greek people.

 What effect, if any, Premier Renzi's remarks will have on next Sunday's referendum in Greece remains to be seen.  if I was to guess, I would say the effect will be minimal - but it could well confirm the Greek people in their choice of 'for' or 'against' the referendum options.

updated with an amendment on 6th Jult, 2015:
*Deutsche Bank's derivative holdings:
It is generall accepted that the derivative holdings of DB are between $70 trillion and $74 trillion dollars. My initial figure of $90 trillion was inaccurate and based on a calculation error.


Footnote & Epilog:

It's the End Of The World - As We Know It

A theory of existence suggests everything came into being with 'The Big Bang' about 13.8 billion years ago.
A new theory, 'The Big Rip', suggests everything will 'tear apart' in approximately 11 billion (or 22 billion,depending who you speak with) years.

My take on this is that 'the Big Rip' will happen within months - should Deutsche Bank go belly up (!)













at

Friday, 19 June 2015

at

Wednesday, 17 June 2015


For Immediate Release: Wednesday, June 17, 2015

Study of Ebola survivors opens in Liberia

Trial to examine long-term health effects of Ebola virus disease
Print this page Share on email Share on facebook Share on twitter
The Liberia-U.S. clinical research partnership known as PREVAIL has launched a study of people in Liberia who have survived Ebola virus disease (EVD) within the past two years. The study investigators hope to better understand the long-term health consequences of EVD, determine if survivors develop immunity that will protect them from future Ebola infection, and assess whether previously EVD-infected individuals can transmit infection to close contacts and sexual partners. The study, sponsored by the Ministry of Health of Liberia and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health, will take place at various sites in Liberia and is expected to enroll approximately 7,500 people, including 1,500 people of any age who survived EVD and 6,000 of their close contacts.
“The clinical course of Ebola virus disease is reasonably well-understood, but we still have much to learn about the long-term health effects of the illness in those who recover,” said NIAID Director Anthony S. Fauci, M.D. “To unravel the many unknowns, we have expanded the focus of our partnership with Liberia’s Ministry of Health to include research on the long-term health effects of Ebola virus disease, in addition to our ongoing efforts to find an effective preventive vaccine and treatments for Ebola virus disease.”
Mosaka Fallah, Ph.D., M.P.H., former Ebola emergency-response program manager for Action Against Hunger–Liberia; Michael C. Sneller, M.D., from NIAID’s Laboratory of Immunoregulation; and Desmond Williams, M.D., Ph.D., from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, will serve as principal investigators for the study. Investigators from NIH’s National Eye Institute, the Johns Hopkins University Wilmer Eye Institute, Baltimore; the Ministry of Health of Liberia and the John F. Kennedy Medical Center in Sinkor, Monrovia, will also collaborate on the research. Enrollment began today at the John F. Kennedy Medical Center, and the study will open at the following sites later in June: C.H. Rennie Hospital in Kakata, Duport Road Clinic in Paynesville, and Redemption Hospital in Monrovia. Additional sites in Liberia are expected to join the study in the future.
Participants who test positive for HIV infection during the course of the study will be counseled and referred to treatment in accordance with standard medical practice in Liberia.
Study participants will undergo a medical history and physical and vision examination and have blood samples collected so researchers can identify and track any health issues, monitor organ and ocular function and record Ebola antibody levels. Some participants may also be asked to provide samples of bodily fluids, such as sweat, tears, and for adults, semen or cervical secretions. Participants will be asked if they would like to identify up to five close contacts (household members at the time of Ebola diagnosis and sexual partners after recovery from Ebola virus disease). Close contacts who agree to participate in the study will undergo a physical examination, have blood samples taken, and asked to complete a questionnaire detailing their contact with the Ebola survivor, such as touching, sleeping in the same bed and sexual intercourse. Staff from the NIH’s National Eye Institute have helped establish a new eye clinic at John F. Kennedy Medical Hospital, where ophthalmologists from NEI and Johns Hopkins will be evaluating study participants and their identified close contacts for visual problems. Treatment will be provided by Liberian ophthalmologists partnering in the study.
“There have been reports of inflammatory eye disease and vision loss among Ebola survivors,” said NEI Clinical Director Frederick Ferris, M.D. “Our goal is to determine the incidence and extent of Ebola-related eye disease among survivors, risk factors contributing to its development, and optimal treatment strategies.”
The research team will follow the Ebola survivors and their close contacts for up to five years with study visits occurring every six months. At each follow-up visit, participants will undergo a physical examination and additional blood draws, to allow study physicians to monitor and characterize any changes in Ebola antibody levels and to detect the presence of select medical conditions. This information will help scientists determine the evolution of Ebola antibodies and will provide insight on whether survivors can still transmit the virus and if so, whether these people get sick with Ebola virus disease.
Using data collected at these site visits, the researchers will calculate the incidence, prevalence and risk factors for various health issues experienced by survivors, such as vision problems; immune system changes; mental disorders; joint pain; diabetes; hypertension; and pregnancy complications. Close contacts will be used as a control group to assess whether the risks of these conditions are the same or different from those who have not had Ebola virus disease.
PREVAIL, or the Partnership for Research on Ebola Virus in Liberia, is a clinical research partnership between the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Liberian Ministry of Health. The new study, an Ebola natural history study known as PREVAIL III, is one of three research projects launched by the partnership. In February 2015, PREVAIL initiated two other Ebola clinical studies. PREVAIL I is a clinical trial to assess the safety and efficacy of two experimental vaccines to prevent Ebola virus infection. A total of 1,500 participants continue to be followed in the Phase 2 segment of this study. PREVAIL II is a clinical trial designed to obtain safety and efficacy data on various investigational drugs for the treatment of Ebola virus disease. The trial is ongoing in Liberia, Sierra Leone and the United States
Additional information about the PREVAIL III Ebola natural history study is available at ClinicalTrials.gov using the identifier NCT02431923. For more information about NIAID’s Ebola research, visit the NIAID Ebola webpage.
NIAID conducts and supports research—at NIH, throughout the United States, and worldwide — to study the causes of infectious and immune-mediated diseases, and to develop better means of preventing, diagnosing and treating these illnesses. News releases, fact sheets and other NIAID-related materials are available at http://www.niaid.nih.gov.
NEI leads the federal government’s research on the visual system and eye diseases. NEI supports basic and clinical science programs that result in the development of sight-saving treatments. For more information, visit https://www.nei.nih.gov.
About the National Institutes of Health (NIH): NIH, the nation's medical research agency, includes 27 Institutes and Centers and is a component of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. NIH is the primary federal agency conducting and supporting basic, clinical, and translational medical research, and is investigating the causes, treatments, and cures for both common and rare diseases. For more information about NIH and its programs, visit www.nih.gov.
NIH...Turning Discovery Into Health®
###
Up to top
This page last reviewed on June 17, 2015

Social Media Links

at

Monday, 15 June 2015

Edward Snowden: – 
Smashing the Narrative

[SPIESяUS]

Explanation

This article was first written on 31st May but withheld to facilitate the checking of certain facts – specifically whether Mr Snowden would have been able to travel on in safety to another country after his passport was [unwisely, in my view] revoked by the State Department on the orders of the President and his Cabinet.The conclusion was that it would not have been possible for Edward Snowden to travel on in safety after his passport was revoked and the likelihood is that he would have found it very difficult to have temporary U.N. documentation issued for safe passage which would have been valid and recognised under and within U.S. extradition treaty agreement and which could not have been rendered invalid before he reached a final destination (hence his interdiction by the FBI a likely outcome.)
The alternative documentation would simply have enabled him to travel – but not with safety (sic. without him being arrested, held in detention and rendered by extradition back to United States on theft of Government property and [or] espionage charges.)Indeed, traveling to any destination on his American passport was itself now a serious problem as he was now an international fugitive and pariah, an embarrassment for most allied countries worldwide.So, bizarrely, revoking Mr Snowden's passport provided him [and his 'handlers'] with the perfect narrative they would have found quite a challenge to otherwise manufacture.
Sometimes the truth is much much stranger than fiction.
Don't expect to read or see the above in your mainstream news media reports.



''Come Into My Parlour...........''
[Die Spinne]


Not too long ago I was invited to attend a function with a prominent Waffen SS Neo-Nazi supporter as guest speaker.
I was sent a glowing list of his titles, accomplishments and membership of the most prestigious organizations you could ever imagine. The list was as long as your arm. Other than the fact that this individual is a Neo-Nazi supporter his credentials could not have read any higher – and they would put even Dr. Goebbels and Dr Mengele's qualifications and memberships both to shame.
I was informally advised by email that my attendance would only be acceptable if I was prepared to say 'nice things' about the individual and his country. [This now seems to becoming a common feature as my reputation for plain speaking is not always welcome by politicians and diplomats living in their proverbial 'bubble'.]
Of course there would be the usual photo opportunity and my name listed as 'present' and 'supporting'. So not only would a photo opportunity exist for my presence to be recorded but the record would also show that I had (if I so 'choose' - with no other option available) made 'complimentary' statements about, for want of a better word, Neo-Nazism and of course everything would be available online.

GOTCHA!
It is a well known fact that the FSB and other intelligence agencies regularly use such 'Black Ops' as false flags or with intent to blackmail or subvert individuals whom it is believed may be open to 'influence'. Indeed sometimes, from a counter intelligence perspective, the only way to find out what is really going on is to 'follow' the 'intelligence trail' when they surface for a task or mission.
British intelligence has a long history of being compromised by the KGB during the era of the Cold War. I am not, however, here to discuss the weaknesses of Western intelligence agencies here but how the FSB pulled off a master stroke in recruiting Edward Snowden. The introduction was simply intended to portray a process of programming which starts with subservience and ends with reprogramming. Classic techniques which have [in some parts of the world] replaced the more 'traditional' methods of physical torture as they have been shown over the last century to be eminently more effective and longer-lasting in terms of results and objectives.

American Hero [Working Class Hero?]
The idea that Edward Snowden, depicted in the world media as true American hero, just happened to end up in Moscow through a chance encounter with Russian 'diplomats' in Hong Kong beggars belief – but it does show how sycophantic, 'brainwashed', politically naïve individuals in the world media are today after decades of being instructed by sub-editors not to ask 'awkward questions' and just be 'politically correct' or 'toe the line' without thinking for themselves for one second, to secure approval or perhaps promotion. Unfortunately the syndrome is only too well known: Nobody asks the awkward questions of a senior colleague – even when there are obvious anomalies such as, for example, security lapses or behavior which might call into question his or her judgement4.

Asset or Spy?
For the Western media to believe that Snowden was not approached by Russian intelligence before he arrived in Moscow and to ignore the fact that it was Julian Assange who encouraged him to head East almost gives truth to the statement that the media itself, as a whole, is remarkably naïve or has 'lost the plot' (sic. it no longer has the will to ask the hard questions preferring to just blind itself to the obvious.)

NSA Officer? Oh!; Just Hop On A Plane To Moscow!
The Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) will simply not permit a U.S. Intelligence Officer to just hop on a plane to Moscow. It just does not happen this way.
In some respects the severing of informal intelligence contacts between government officers and the media since 9/11 is responsible for the situation where every State Department official is too frightened to make any contact with anyone from the media without authorization at a higher level. This also means that Officers who may have misgivings, but because of a climate of mistrust and mindful of their careers, are more likely to seek support and solace from a source well outside the system than was ever the case in the past.
The book is literally being thrown today at journalists who refuse to identify their intelligence sources of leaked classified information – making it even more difficult to find out what is really going on other than through spectacular leaks.  Enter Mr Edward Snowden and Mr Julian Assange as the knights in shining armor, protectors of democracy, the right to know, universal personal liberties and freedom for the ordinary man and woman in society.


Line KR
Line KR was the legendary foreign counter-intelligence arm of the KGB's First Intelligence Directorate. This Directorate was the elite section within the Soviet Union's overseas apparatus.
Retired KGB General Oleg Kalugin who was the youngest General in the KGB during the era of the Cold War was also head of the First Chief Directorate and was himself directly responsible for recruiting foreigners as Russian spies, is in no doubt about Edward Snowden:
''Back in Russia, according to Kalugin, Snowden is being handled by the FSB, the KGB’s successor. Kalugin claims that Snowden has shared much of his vast trove of secrets about the NSA with his Russian hosts, and in the process, has allegedly handed the FSB one of their biggest intelligence hauls and propaganda coups since the end of the Cold War 1.''
In Kalugin’s view, Snowden is guilty of treason: “Of course he is, by American standards. Snowden is a traitor,” Kalugin said. “When someone changes sides and goes over to the other side, it’s a victory,” he said.''Snowden’s value to his Russian handlers has not totally run its course, claims Kalugin, and the FSB will allegedly use him as a technical consultant and advisor on topics that interest them. His travel in the country also may be coordinated by the FSB'' Kalugin said2.

How Many Snowdens Are There In The U.S. and Amongst It's Allies?
As yesterday, the most important information for Russian spies today is military, scientific, political, technical, financial, industrial and trade intelligence. All persons engaged in such activities and their families are of standard interest to spy organisations.  Many factors will determine the level of priority or interest.
In the wake of the Snowden revelations about the National Security Agency spying on German firms to gain economic superiority in trade and negotiations, the concerns were sufficiently heightened that the Federal Office For the Protection Of the Constitution (BfV), Germany's counterintelligence agency, was instructed to investigate the Snowden claims.
The BfV concluded that
“There is currently no concrete evidence of potential involvement of U.S. intelligence services in espionage attacks on German companies,” adding, “the U.S. Government has assured the Federal Government several times that its services do not conduct economic espionage2.”
The damage has been done however and (potentially) tens of billions of dollars of trade, business and investment has been lost because of Edward Snowden's unproven revelations about the NSA spying on specific governments, politicians, diplomatic bodies, commercial, trade and scientific organisations worldwide.

The Spy [or Asset] Who Came In From the Cold: False Flag
''It cannot be ruled out that the SVR (or possibly GRU, Russian military intelligence, which is a formidable espionage service its own right) initially dealt with Ed in a false-flag operation, masking their true identity for a time, but experts who are acquainted with Russia’s “special services” understand that the Official Narrative, that Ed just up and moved to Moscow, cannot be true.
Getting to the bottom of this matter is critical to assessing the damage wrought by the Snowden Operation.''
To put it in a nutshell, too many media personalities, politicians and experts have invested too much of their reputations and future careers in promoting and portraying Edward Snowden as nothing other than a classic American hero to see such all ruined by the revelation of and his unmasking as a Russian spy.

Cover Your Ass [CYA]
''The U.S. Intelligence Community has senior people who, following in the long line of espionage bosses who really would rather not know the full story behind an epic traitor, seem to prefer to avert eyes from this issue, just as many journalists do. For them, as bad as the Snowden story is already, think how much worse it will look if Ed was really working for the Russians for years: that would be a truly epic counterintelligence fail, and careers and reputations will be ruined3.''


Anyone In The Intelligence Community (IC) Always Has A 'Backup' Or 'Fallback' Position-Just In Case Things Go Horribly Wrong
''We are expected to believe that Ed was clever enough to steal uncounted classified
NSA documents, the biggest such haul in all history, but did not remember to save
those few, critical emails that would establish that he really is a whistleblower, that he sought remedy through proper channels before he “went rogue.” Be aware that every NSA and IC (Intelligence Community) person I know keeps a file containing hard copies of all important (meaning Cover Your Ass or CYA) emails; I learned this in my first week on the job, and that file was literally the last thing I burn-bagged when I left Fort Meade for the last time. But Ed, you see, is different. At this point, it’s simple: he needs to cough up those emails – which NSA says do not exist – and provide the names of the supervisors he complained to, or pipe down4.''


SPIESяUS
If it turns out that Edward Snowden was indeed a carefully well-placed Russian spy (and there are tantalizing indications that such is in fact the case) this is undoubtedly the greatest intelligence coup by a superpower-Russia-of the 21st century to date. With Assange and Manning together they dwarf the compromise of the entire British intelligence services by the Soviet Union during the era of the Cold War making the latter pale into insignificance.
The damage to U.S. security and economic interests worldwide are incalculable (possibly in the tens of billions of dollars) and are likely to be very long lasting.
One cannot overestimate in the era of instant global interconnectivity the mortal damage which such revelations have inflicted on U.S. national security.
As with many things intelligence, where spectacular triumphs and monumental failures occur, the victors will never reveal the full facts (including the secret award of the rank of Colonel or higher in the FSB to Edward Snowden for loyal and valiant service) so as not to compromise future similar operations and likewise the vanquished are so embarrassed that CYA, at every level, is the order of the day.
Therefore the likelihood is that we will never discover the true and full disclosure details of all the facts in our lifetime, for the reasons given above.
The narrative on all sides will thus, never be shattered.


© Patrick Emek, 2015


[I would just like to add again for the record that I have always believed it serves no useful practical purpose to 'hold' Mr Assange as a 'prisoner' in London's Ecuador Embassy. Quite the opposite. Like 'The Man In the Iron Mask' he serves as an 'inspiration' for others to emulate rather than being seen as an example of future 'collective punishment' to all who would think of following. Locking the stable doors after the horse has bolted is however, sadly, the order of the day.]




References


The Snowden Operation:
Russia Against The Western Intelligence Community (John Schindler):


4.Replication of Milgram's 'Shocking' Experiments Proves 70 Percent of People will Torture Others if Ordered\;
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/025141_WHO_brain_authority.html#ixzz3bno5evTB









Idea for the subtitle SPIESяUS came to me from the movie 'Toys' - Baltimore Pictures Production; a Barry Levinson film, 1992 starring Robin Williams and LL Cool J]








at

Wednesday, 10 June 2015

Summer Food Service Program (SFSP)

Raise Awareness




Last Published: 05/14/2015


Promoting summer feeding sites in your community is one of the most important things you can do to ensure no child goes hungry this summer.  The more parents, children, and teenagers know about where sites are located, the more children will come to eat.  Anyone can do outreach using the resources we have here.  Sites, sponsors, community advocates, and volunteers can use a variety of tools to draw attention to summer meals.
Summer flyer image Summer Meals Promotional Materials
Flyers, bookmarks, postcards and more in both English and Spanish to let families know about the availability of summer meals and how to find meal locations near them.
Radio PSAs Radio Public Service Announcements (PSAs)
Download any one of the summer meals PSAs and work with your favorite local radio station to get them played for free.  Click here to learn how to work with radio stations to play PSAs for free.
PSAs to Families:
 PSAs to Recruit More Sites and Sponsors
Transcripts (some radio DJs prefer to read the PSAs themselves)
Training Videos Training Videos
Watch summer meals sites, sponsors, state agencies, and community advocates talk about their innovative strategies and successful practices.  It would be even better if you hosted a viewing for your colleagues and other community organizations.
Team Up with 211 Team Up With 2-1-1
Reach out to the 2-1-1 call center in your area to have them list your summer feeding sites as a resource for families in need.  2-1-1 provides free and confidential information and referrals to services that provide help with food, housing, employment, health care, and more.  2-1-1 is currently in all 50 states and serves over 90% of the population.  Click here to find your local 2-1-1 call center and list your sites with them.
http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/sfsp/Summer_Flyer_En_508.pdf
at

Wednesday, 3 June 2015


Historic U.S. Supreme Court Judgement

A historic decision was made in the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday 1st June.
It involved the case EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch.
It is historic not just for the majority decision or judgement but also for what is probably Justice Clarence Thomas' finest dissenting Opinion ever made as a Supreme Court Justice.

It is a case of enormous significance the reverberations of which will echo across America in the context of Civil Rights, Religious Freedom and the separation of Church and State.

I will admit that I have a personal interest in this judgement because many years ago I had knowledge of a similar situation along the lines of Abercrombie & Fitch which never reached the Courts.  The decision in the matter was not based on prejudice but on policy issues – but it likewise could (and perhaps was) perceived as based on personal prejudices. 
[Indeed for over two decades Ross Perot, the Founder of EDS, as a matter of company policy, would never hire any employee who wore a beard or moustache and it's Texas headquarters for new recruits was more akin to Boot Camp than induction training.]

This issue of headscarves also has a personal significance.   I grew up in a very traditional Christian community where women always covered themselves with a semi-veil or headscarf going into Church out of respect and tradition rather than because there were prohibitions against going uncovered.
For example, my mother and aunt would never think of going into a Church uncovered (without a headscarf) because such would be highly disrespectful.

The Case
centered around Samantha Elauf, a lady who wore a headscarf to her job interview with the firm Abercrombie & Fitch. They decided that while she ws qualified for the job, wearing a headscarf at work would be contrary to their 'appearance' policy.  On this basis they refused to employ her.
The EEOC took on her case.  The trial court ruled in favor of the EEOC-Elauf. Abercombie & Fitch appealed.  This decision was reversed by an appeals court who decided in favor of Abercrombie & Fitch.
By an 8-1 vote the U.S. Supreme Court have now reversed this decision.
What is even more important is the ruling by Justice Antonin Scalia who delivered the Opinion of The Court:
''Samantha Elauf is a practicing Muslim who, consistent with her understanding of her religion’s requirements,wears a headscarf.........
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 78 Stat. 253, as amended, prohibits two categories of employment practices. It is unlawful for an employer:
“(1) to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin;
or
(2)to limit, segregate, or classify his employees or applicants for employment in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.”
These two proscriptions, often referred to as the “disparate treatment” (or “intentional discrimination”) provision and the “disparate impact” provision, are the only causes of action under Title VII. The word “religion” is defined to “includ[e] all aspects of religious observance and practice, as well as belief, unless an employer demonstrates that he is unable to reasonably accommodate to” a“religious observance or practice without undue hardship in the conduct of the employer’s business.” §2000e(j).Abercrombie’s primary argument is that an applicant cannot show disparate treatment without first showing that an employer has “actual knowledge” of the applicant’s need for an accommodation. We disagree. Instead, an applicant need only show that his need for an accommodation was a motivating factor in the employer’s decision........''

2
''The disparate-treatment provision forbids employers to:
(1) “fail . . . to hire” an applicant (2) “because of ” (3) “such individual’s . . . religion” (which includes his religious practice). Here, of course, Abercrombie (1) failed to hire Elauf. The parties concede that (if Elauf sincerely believes that her religion so requires) Elauf ’s wearing of a head scarf is (3) a “religious practice.” All that remains is whether she was not hired (2) “because of ” her religious practice.''

Concurring with the Judgement Justice Samuel Alito Jr.,added:
''In sum, the EEOC was required in this case to prove that Abercrombie rejected Elauf because of a practice that Abercrombie knew was religious. It is undisputed that Abercrombie rejected Elauf because she wore a headscarf, and there is ample evidence in the summary judgment record to prove that Abercrombie knew that Elauf is a Muslim and that she wore the scarf for a religious reason. The Tenth Circuit therefore erred in ordering the entry of summary judgment for Abercrombie. On remand, the Tenth Circuit can consider whether there is sufficient evidence to support summary judgment in favor of the EEOC on the question of Abercrombie’s knowledge. The Tenth Circuit will also be required to address Abercrombie’s claim that it could not have accommodated Elauf ’s wearing the headscarf on the job without undue hardship.''

The Dissenting Voice (concurring in part and dissenting in other parts) In This Case Was That Of Justice Clarence Thomas:
''JUSTICE THOMAS, concurring in part and dissenting in part.''
''I agree with the Court that there are two—and only two—causes of action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as understood by our precedents: a disparate treatment (or intentional-discrimination) claim and a disparate-impact claim. Ante,at 3. Our agreement ends there. Unlike the majority, I adhere to what I had thought before today was an undisputed proposition: Mere application of a neutral policy cannot constitute “intentional discrimination.” Because the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) can prevail here only if Abercrombie engaged in intentional discrimination, and because Abercrombie’s application of its neutral Look Policy does not meet that description, I would affirm the judgment of the Tenth Circuit.''
I
''This case turns on whether Abercrombie’s conduct constituted “intentional discrimination” within the mean ing of 42 U. S. C. §1981a(a)(1). That provision allows a Title VII plaintiff to “recover compensatory and punitive damages” only against an employer “who engaged in unlawful intentional discrimination (not an employment practice that is unlawful because of its disparate impact).” The damages award EEOC obtained against Abercrombie is thus proper only if that company engaged in “intentional discrimination”—as opposed to “an employment practice that is unlawful because of its disparate impact”—within the meaning of §1981a(a)(1).
The terms “intentional discrimination” and “disparate impact” have settled meanings in federal employment discrimination law. “[I]ntentional discrimination . . .
occur[s] where an employer has treated a particular person less favorably than others because of a protected trait.” Ricci v.DeStefano, 557 U. S. 557, 577 (2009) (internal quotation marks and alteration omitted). “[D]isparate-impact claims,” by contrast, “involve employment practices that are facially neutral in their treatment of different groups but that in fact fall more harshly on one group than another and cannot be justified by business necessity.” Raytheon Co.v.Hernandez , 540 U. S. 44, 52 (2003) (internal quotation marks omitted). Conceived by this Court in Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U. S. 424 (1971), this “theory of discrimination” provides that “a facially neutral employment practice may bedeemed illegally discriminatory without evidence of the employer’s subjective intent to discriminate that is required in a disparate-treatment case,” Raytheon, supra,at 52–53 (internal quotation marks and alteration omitted).
I would hold that Abercrombie’s conduct did not constitute “intentional discriminatio
n.” Abercrombie refused to create an exception to its neutral Look Policy for Samantha Elauf ’s religious practice of wearing a headscarf. Ante,at 2. In doing so, it did not treat religious practices less favorably than similar secular practices, but instead remained neutral with regard to religious practices. To be sure, the effects of Abercrombie’s neutral Look Policy, absent an accommodation, fall more harshly on those who wear headscarves as an aspect of their faith. But that is a classic case of an alleged disparate impact. It is not what we have previously understood to be a case of disparate treatment because Elauf received the same treatment from Abercrombie as any other applicant who appeared unable to comply with the company’s Look Policy. See ibid. ; App. 134, 144. Because I cannot classify Abercrombie’s conduct as “intentional discrimination,” I would affirm. ''
II
A
''Resisting this straightforward application of §1981a, the majority expands the meaning of “intentional discrimination” to include a refusal to give a religious applicant“favored treatment.” Ante,at 6–7. But contrary to the majority’s assumption, this novel theory of discrimination is not commanded by the relevant statutory text. Title VII makes it illegal for an employer “to fail or refuse to hire . . . any individual . . . because of such individual’s . . . religion.” §2000e–2(a)(1). And as used in Title VII, “[t]he term ‘religion’ includes all aspects of religious observance and practice, as well as belief, unless an employer demonstrates that he is unable to reasonably accommodate to an employee’s or prospective employee’s religious observance or practice without undue hardship on the conduct of the employer’s business.” §2000e(j). With this gloss on the definition of “religion” in §2000e 2(a)(1), the majority concludes that an employer may violate Title VII if he “refuse[s] to hire . . . any individual . . . because of such individual’s . . . religious . . . practice” (unless he has an “undue hardship” defense). See ante,at 3–4. But inserting the statutory definition of religion into §2000e–2(a) does not answer the question whether Abercrombie’s refusal to hire Elauf was “because of her religious practice.” At first glance, the phrase “because of such individual’s religious practice” could mean one of two things. Under one reading, it could prohibit taking an action because of the religious nature of an employee’s particular practice. Under the alternative reading, it could prohibit taking an action because of an employee’s practice that happens to be religious.''
''The distinction is perhaps best understood by example. Suppose an employer with a neutral grooming policy forbidding facial hair refuses to hire a Muslim who wears a beard for religious reasons. Assuming the employer applied the neutral grooming policy to all applicants, the motivation behind the refusal to hire the Muslim applicant would not be the religious nature of his beard, but its existence. Under the first reading, then, the Muslim applicant would lack an intentional-discrimination claim, as he was not refused employment “because of ” the religious nature of his practice. But under the second reading, he would have such a claim, as he was refused employment “because of ” a practice that happens to be religious in nature. ''
''One problem with the second, more expansive reading is that it would punish employers who have no discriminatory motive. If the phrase “because of such individual’s religious practice” sweeps in any case in which an employer takes an adverse action because of a practice that happens to be religious in nature, an employer who had no idea that a particular practice was religious would be penalized. That strict-liability vi ew is plainly at odds with the concept of intentional discrimination. Cf.Raytheon, supra,at 54, n. 7 (“If [the employer] were truly unaware that such a disability existed, it would be impossible for her hiring decision to have been based, even in part, on[the applicant’s] disability. And, if no part of the hiring decision turned on [the applicant’s] status as disabled, he cannot, ipso facto, have been subject to disparate treatment”). Surprisingly, the majority leaves the door open to this strict-liability theory, reserving the question whether an employer who does not even “suspec[t] that the practice in question is a religious practice” can nonetheless be punished for intentional discrimination. ''
Ante,at 6, n. 3. ''For purposes of today’s decision, however, the majority opts for a compromise, albeit one that lacks a foothold in the text and fares no better under our precedents. The majority construes §2000e–2(a)(1) to punish employers
who refuse to accommodate applicants under neutral policies when they act “with the motive of avoiding accommodation.”
Ante, at 5. ''But an employer who is aware that strictly applying a neutral policy will have an adverse effect on a religious group, and applies the policy anyway,
is not engaged in intentional discrimination, at least as that term has traditionally been understood. As the Court explained many decades ago, “ ‘Discriminatory purpose’i.e., the purpose necessary for a claim of intentional discrimination—demands “more than . . . awareness of consequences. It implies that the decisionmaker . . . selected or reaffirmed a particular course of action at least in part ‘because of,’ not merely ‘in spite of,’ its adverse effects upon an identifiable group.” ''Personnel Administrator of Mass. v.Feeney , 442 U. S. 256, 279 (1979) (internal citation and footnote omitted). I do not dispute that a refusal to accommodate can, in some circumstances, constitute intentional discrimination. If an employer declines to accommodate a particular religious practice, yet accommodates a similar secular (or other denominational) practice, then that may be proof that he has “treated a particular person less favorably than others because of [a religious practice].” Ricci , 557 U. S., at 577 (internal quotation marks and alteration omitted); see also, e.g., Dixon v. Hallmark Cos., 627 F. 3d 849, 853 (CA11 2010) (addressing a policy forbidding display of “religious items” in management offices). But merely refusing to create an exception to a neutral policy for a religious practice canno t be described as treating a particular applicant “less favorably than others.” The majority itself appears to recognize that its construction requires something more than equal treatment. See ante, at 6–7 (“Title VII does not demand mere neutrality with regard to religious practices,” but instead “gives them favored treatment”). But equal treatment is not disparate treatment, and that basic principle should have disposed of this case. ''…......................''The Court today rightly puts to rest the notion that Title VII creates a freestanding religious-accommodation claim, ante,at 3, but creates in its stead an entirely new form of liability: the disparate-treat ment-based-on-equal-treatment claim. Because I do not think that Congress’ 1972 redefinition of “religion” also redefined “intentional discrimination,” I would affirm the judgment of the Tenth Circuit. I respectfully dissent from the portions of the majority’s decision that take the contrary view. ''


                                               [Judgement ends]
  
References:
                                                         

   
 The above picture/print is either in The Holy Land, Persia, Ottoman Syria, Yemen or other Persian Gulf area circa 1896-1902
                                          ©Patrick Emek, 2015


















at