Saturday, October 22, 2011

What #Occupy??? Wherever are all about-without TIME Magazine bias.

Here you go Dad, so you have a better understanding:
 
1. OccupyWallSt.org is the unofficial de facto online resource for the ongoing protests happening on Wall Street. We are an affinity group committed to doing technical support work for resistance movements. We are not affiliated with Adbusters, anonymous or any other organization.

Occupy Wall Street is a people-powered movement that began on September 17, 2011 in Liberty Square in Manhattan's Financial District, and has spread to over 100 cities in the United States and actions in over 1,500 cities globally. #OWS is fighting back against the corrosive power of major banks and multinational corporations over the democratic process, and the role of Wall Street in creating an economic collapse that has caused the greatest recession in generations. The movement is inspired by popular uprisings in Egypt and Tunisia, and aims to expose how the richest 1% of people are writing the rules of an unfair global economy that is foreclosing on our future.

Occupy Wall Street is a horizontally organized resistance movement employing the revolutionary Arab Spring tactic to restore democracy in America. We use a tool known as a "people's assembly" to facilitate collective decision making in an open, participatory and non-binding manner. We call ours the NYC General Assembly and we welcome people from all colors, genders and beliefs to attend our daily assemblies. To learn more about how you can start a people's assembly to organize your local community to fight back against social injustice, please read this quick guide on group dynamics in people's assemblies.

 
2. Why 'Occupy Wall Street' makes sense!
 
Banks are sitting on cash hoards and corporate profits are riding high – yet ordinary US taxpayers face joblessness and cuts.

If 2,000 Tea Party activists descended on Wall Street, you would probably have an equal number of reporters there covering them. Yet 2,000 people did occupy Wall Street last Saturday. They weren't carrying the banner of the Tea Party, the Gadsden flag with its coiled snake and the threat "Don't Tread on Me". Yet their message was clear: "We are the 99% that will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%." They were there, mostly young, protesting the virtually unregulated speculation of Wall Street that caused the global financial meltdown.

One of New York's better-known billionaires, Mayor Michael Bloomberg, commented on the protests: "You have a lot of kids graduating college, can't find jobs. That's what happened in Cairo. That's what happened in Madrid. You don't want those kinds of riots here."

Riots? Is that really what the Arab Spring and the European protests are about?

Perhaps to the chagrin of Mayor Bloomberg, that is exactly what inspired many who occupied Wall Street. In its most recent communiqué, the Wall Street protest umbrella group said:

"On Saturday we held a general assembly, two thousand strong. … By p.m. on Monday we still held the plaza, despite constant police presence. … We are building the world that we want to see, based on human need and sustainability, not corporate greed."

Speaking of the Tea Party, Texas Governor Rick Perry has caused a continuous fracas in the Republican presidential debates with his declaration that the US's revered social security system is a "Ponzi scheme" Charles Ponzi was the con artist who swindled thousands in 1920 with a fraudulent promise for high returns on investments. A typical Ponzi scheme involves taking money from investors, then paying them off with money taken from new investors, rather than paying them from actual earnings. Social security is actually solvent, with a trust fund of more than $2.6 trillion. The real Ponzi scheme threatening the US public is the voracious greed of Wall Street banks.

I interviewed one of the "Occupy Wall Street" protest organizers. David Graeber teaches at Goldsmiths, University of London, and has authored several books – most recently, Debt: The First 5,000 Years. Graeber points out that, in the midst of the financial crash of 2008, enormous debts between banks were renegotiated. Yet only a fraction of troubled mortgages have gotten the same treatment. He said:

"Debts between the very wealthy or between governments can always be renegotiated and always have been throughout world history. … It's when you have debts owed by the poor to the rich that suddenly debts become a sacred obligation, more important than anything else. The idea of renegotiating them becomes unthinkable."

President Barack Obama has proposed a jobs plan and further efforts to reduce the deficit. One is a so-called millionaire's tax, endorsed by billionaire Obama supporter Warren Buffett. The Republicans call the proposed tax "class warfare". Graeber commented:

"For the last 30 years, we've seen a political battle being waged by the super-rich against everyone else, and this is the latest move in the shadow dance, which is completely dysfunctional economically and politically. It's the reason why young people have just abandoned any thought of appealing to politicians. We all know what's going to happen. The tax proposals are a sort of mock populist gesture, which everyone knows will be shot down. What will actually probably happen would be more cuts to social services."

Outside in the cold Tuesday morning, the demonstrators continued their day of the protest with a march amidst a heavy police presence and the ringing of an opening bell at 9:30a.m. for a "people's exchange", just as the opening bell of the New York Stock Exchange is rung. While the bankers remained secure in their bailed-out banks, outside, the police began arresting protesters. In a just world, with a just economy, we have to wonder: who would be out in the cold? Who would be getting arrested?

Always Remember, Banks (Who actually received trillions from both the bail-outs and the Federal Reserve.) are sitting on hoards of cash & making huge profits and corporate profits are also riding high, and the republicans are still pushing for more tax cuts for these uber-rich, (And ending a payroll tax cut on the middle & lower class, thereby increasing their taxes.) as they out-source to countries where the work-force amounts to almost slave labor, like China – yet ordinary US taxpayers face joblessness, income inequality is at it's highest ever in the history of this country, 50% of Americans who do have jobs get less then $26,500 a year and service and healthcare cuts or are unaffordable to the working class. Things have to change, as corporations are buying our politicians and our government with their own greed their top priority.
 
 
Best wishes always,
Bill Harasym

"Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral." -Paolo Friere-

Rick Lazio's Lame Comment on Twitter!

Twitter

Rick Lazio @RickLazio replied to you:

@FreeSpeecch1st Obstruction? Like Obamacare, Stimulus, Trade Agreements, employee payroll taxes?. Ditch the tired blame game. #fb
In reply to…
Again @ricklazio parrots RW talking-points, being the political hack he is, refusing to acknowledge republican't obstructionism in 1st 2 yrs
Reply to @RickLazio
Want to receive mobile notifications?
Download Twitter for your phone »


"Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral." -Paolo Friere-

Friday, October 21, 2011

Re: Don't kill the messenger

Howdy you all,
Here is a back and forth exchange I had with Kermit Brown, a supposed "Christian" Wyoming lawmaker. I guess that is the norm to insult those who disagree with you. Thanks for your time.

 
You know Kermit, thanks for you kind comments, but just wondering, do you treat everyone who disagrees with you by insulting them? So why DID you responded like you did, as with all your education, you're a very condescending political hack, and obviously not the "Christian" you profess to be. It is truly sad you are a Wyoming politician and are, in the King's terms, a goat and a big one at that. You really do need some spiritual help, and I hope you find it soon. Thanks for your time, and I will not stoop to your level and your condescending attitude toward fellow Wyoming citizens! Good night and good Luck!
 
Best wishes always,
William D. Harasym
 
"This country will not be a permanently good place for any of us to live in unless we make it a reasonably good place for all of us to live in."
~Teddy Roosevelt~ In Chicago, ILLINOIS, on June 17, 1912

 

 
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2011 2:30 PM
Subject: Re: Don't kill the messenger
 
Boy!  I have to give you credit.  You are more obtuse (Lacking quickness of perception or intellect or characterized by a lack of intelligence or sensitivity. ) than most.
 
 
Kermit C. Brown
Representative House District 14
P.O. Box 817
Laramie, WY 82073
(307)745-7358
kermitbrown@wyoming.com
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2011 1:32 PM
Subject: Re: Don't kill the messenger
 
Kermit,
The facts are: YOU said this about the report- (GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT):

"How much are we going to have to spend to tell the ACLU they are wrong?"

None of the data that Brown and other members of the committee have questioned is "ACLU data." According to the most recent Annie E. Casey Foundation report Wyoming continues to have the highest rate of juvenile confinement in the nation.

And the problem is not the numbers; it is the system. Oops!

Here's another fact Kermit: "The juvenile system has been, and continues to be, a system that is inherently incapable of providing the most effective outcomes for both children and the community. It is tragic that legislators are using this smokescreen to cover up their lack of attention to this important issue."

For someone who is suppose to be an attorney, I'm kind of wondering about your??? I'm guessing that Presbyterian Christians care about their fellow men, women and children, like in love thy neighbor as thy self, and expressing compassion for the less fortunate? How am I doing so far? So... you may remember the spirituality of Christianity, like in Matthew 25: 31-46 which you might have forgotten? Or not?...

 31 "When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne.32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

   34 "Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in,36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'

   37 "Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'

   40 "The King will reply, 'Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.'

   41 "Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.'

   44 "They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?'

   45 "He will reply, 'Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'

   46 "Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."

You can justify and rationalize any which way you want, but sometimes it takes a real man to admit when he is wrong, so take care there Kermit. Thanks for your time.

Have a great weekend, and Good day and good luck!

Best wishes always,

Bill Harasym

"This country will not be a permanently good place for any of us to live in unless we make it a reasonably good place for all of us to live in."
~Teddy Roosevelt~  In Chicago, ILLINOIS, on June 17, 1912

 

 
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2011 12:07 PM
Subject: Re: Don't kill the messenger
 
The problem, in fact, is the numbers.  You should get your facts straight.
 
Kermit C. Brown
Representative House District 14
P.O. Box 817
Laramie, WY 82073
(307)745-7358
kermitbrown@wyoming.com
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2011 11:51 AM
Subject: Don't kill the messenger
 

Don't kill the messenger!

For the past 50 years the state of Wyoming has refused to provide a uniform justice system for the children of our state. As a result over 80 percent of our juveniles are processed through adult court often with no access to assessment, evaluation, counseling, probation or other appropriate services.

According to the most recent Annie E. Casey Foundation report Wyoming continues to have the highest rate of juvenile confinement in the nation.

In 2010 the Wyoming American Civil Liberties Union released a report, "Inequality in the Equality State: The Damaged Juvenile Justice and Detention System in Wyoming." Unfortunately, the response to this report from the Joint Judiciary Committee has been to try and "kill the messenger."

Instead of responding with concern and well thought out action the committee has denounced the data and Co-Chairman Kermit Brown last week asked, "How much are we going to have to spend to tell the ACLU they are wrong?"

None of the data that Brown and other members of the committee have questioned is "ACLU data." Not one number was researched, collected or documented by the ACLU. All data included in the report came from the most recent and accurate data available from the Wyoming Attorney General's Office and the Department of Justice. In addition, reports dating back 40 years level the same type of criticism as the current reports.

The problem is not the numbers; it is the system. The juvenile system has been, and continues to be, a system that is inherently incapable of providing the most effective outcomes for both children and the community. It is tragic that legislators are using this smokescreen to cover up their lack of attention to this important issue.

LINDA BURT, Cheyenne                  Executive Director, Wyoming American Civil Liberties Union



 
Best wishes always,
Bill Harasym

"Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the powerless
means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral." -Paolo Friere-

Don't kill the messenger

 
 
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2011 12:07 PM
Subject: Re: Don't kill the messenger
 
The problem, in fact, is the numbers.  You should get your facts straight.
 
Kermit C. Brown
Representative House District 14
P.O. Box 817
Laramie, WY 82073
(307)745-7358
kermitbrown@wyoming.com
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2011 11:51 AM
Subject: Don't kill the messenger
 

Don't kill the messenger!

For the past 50 years the state of Wyoming has refused to provide a uniform justice system for the children of our state. As a result over 80 percent of our juveniles are processed through adult court often with no access to assessment, evaluation, counseling, probation or other appropriate services.

According to the most recent Annie E. Casey Foundation report Wyoming continues to have the highest rate of juvenile confinement in the nation.

In 2010 the Wyoming American Civil Liberties Union released a report, "Inequality in the Equality State: The Damaged Juvenile Justice and Detention System in Wyoming." Unfortunately, the response to this report from the Joint Judiciary Committee has been to try and "kill the messenger."

Instead of responding with concern and well thought out action the committee has denounced the data and Co-Chairman Kermit Brown last week asked, "How much are we going to have to spend to tell the ACLU they are wrong?"

None of the data that Brown and other members of the committee have questioned is "ACLU data." Not one number was researched, collected or documented by the ACLU. All data included in the report came from the most recent and accurate data available from the Wyoming Attorney General's Office and the Department of Justice. In addition, reports dating back 40 years level the same type of criticism as the current reports.

The problem is not the numbers; it is the system. The juvenile system has been, and continues to be, a system that is inherently incapable of providing the most effective outcomes for both children and the community. It is tragic that legislators are using this smokescreen to cover up their lack of attention to this important issue.

LINDA BURT, Cheyenne                  Executive Director, Wyoming American Civil Liberties Union



Read more: http://trib.com/opinion/letters/don-t-kill-the-messenger/article_9104003d-8f24-5392-af42-4f21e6ea9077.html#ixzz1bRKQuDhw
 
 
Best wishes always,
Bill Harasym

"Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the powerless
means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral." -Paolo Friere-

Thursday, October 20, 2011

Official message from Congressman Cynthia Lummis on 10-20-11

 

October 20, 2011

 

William Harasym

200 Smith Street, Apt. 410

Sheridan, Wyoming 82801-3842


 

Dear William:

 

Thank you for contacting me regarding abortion funding under Obama Care.  It is good to hear from you.

 

I am opposed to any taxpayer dollars going towards abortion funding.  That is why I supported the Stupak/Pitts amendment to the House-passed healthcare bill that passed in the fall of 2009.  The Stupak/Pitts amendment passed by a vote of 240-194.  This amendment, had it been accepted by the U.S. Senate, would have prevented federal health insurance subsidies from going towards health plans that offer abortion services.  This is consistent with the Hyde Amendment, which requires that no federal funding can go towards elective abortions.  Under Stupak/Pitts, individuals would have to use their own funds to pay for elective abortions or they would have to purchase separate supplemental coverage that is not federally subsidized.  

 

Unfortunately, the final healthcare bill signed by President Obama in the spring of 2010 included the abortion language from the Senate-passed bill and not the Stupak/Pitts amendment.  The Senate language is essentially an accounting gimmick that will force pro-life Americans to fund abortions through their insurance premium payments.  There is no difference in requiring Americans to fund abortions through tax dollars or through insurance premiums, if both are forced upon them by the federal government.

 

President Obama pledged to fix the abortion language and signed an Executive Order to this effect.  There is some disagreement over whether the Executive Order actually brings Obama Care closer to Stupak/Pitts or represents no more than enforcement of the Senate provisions.  Regardless, the public should not have to rely on the discretion and generosity of the President, who at any point could rescind even his own Executive Order.

 

With a new Republican Majority in the House of Representatives, I am proud to say that I voted for H.R. 358, the Protect Life Act.  Introduced by Rep. Joe Pitts (R-PA), this legislation passed the House on October 13, 2011 by a vote of 251-172. 

 

H.R. 358 would return Obama Care to the Stupak/Pitts approach by barring funding from being used to pay for abortions or abortion coverage.  The bill clarifies that issuers who do offer elective abortion coverage must also offer a plan that is identical except that it does not cover elective abortion, meaning families would never have to choose between abortion coverage or selecting the plan that otherwise meets their needs.  In addition, the bill bars state, local or federal programs or entities in receipt of Obama Care funds from discriminating against medical providers based on their refusal to provide, train in, or refer for abortions.  H.R. 358 now goes to the U.S. Senate, where I hope it is regarded favorably.

 

Thank you again for taking the time to write to me.  I value your input.  If you haven't done so already, I would like to encourage you to visit my website at www.lummis.house.gov.  There you can sign up to receive my newsletter, and have access to a wealth of other information.  I won't flood your email box, but I will provide you with updates once in a while about activities in Washington that affect our lives in Wyoming.  I hope you will sign up so that we can stay in close touch, and I look forward to seeing you in Wyoming.

 

 

Sincerely,

z

Cynthia M. Lummis

Member of Congress


 

Friday, October 14, 2011

William Harasym added you to his circles and invited you to join Google+

William Harasym added you to his circles and invited you to join Google+.
Join Google+
Google+ makes sharing on the web more like sharing in real life.
Circles
An easy way to share some things with college buddies, others with your parents, and almost nothing with your boss. Just like in real life.
Hangouts
Conversations are better face-to-face. Join a video hangout from your computer or mobile phone to catch up, watch YouTube videos together, or swap stories with up to 9 of your friends at once.
Mobile
Lightning-fast group chat. Photos that upload themselves. A bird's-eye view of what's happening nearby. We built Google+ with mobile in mind.
You received this message because williamharasym.forcongress@blogger.com signed up the Google+ waitlist. Unsubscribe from these emails.

Sunday, October 2, 2011

Politicalgates: In new bombshell story, "Bloomberg Markets" reveal...

Politicalgates: In new bombshell story, "Bloomberg Markets" reveal...: By Patrick

Thanks to our excellent contacts, we got hold of a copy of the still unpublished November issue of "Bloomberg Markets" magazine, because the cover story sounds more than just promising:


Bloomberg cover story


We can reveal that this promise has been kept!

In a bold and spectacular move, Bloomberg Markets Magazine wrote a story titled "The secret sins of Koch Industries" which does not only focus on several new revelations, but also provides a comprehensive overview about scandals of Koch Industries which happened during the last decades. The story also explicitly puts the well known political activities of the Koch Brothers in context with their highly questionable behaviour in business.

The story is a fine piece of investigative reporting and spans over 14 pages in the magazine, without the adverts. No less than 15 Bloomberg-journalists in several countries have worked on it. It is fascinating to see that such a major investigative piece about a highly political issue does appear in a business magazine and not in one of the more "traditional" political magazines or newspapers.

This is Pulitzer-Prize territory. This article is destined to make large waves, not just because of the particular revelations, but also because of the highly impressive and almost surprising depth of reporting. It is obvious that no expense was spared for this article. Next to Jane Mayer's ground breaking piece about the Koch Brothers in the New Yorker, this article by Bloomberg Markets Magazine undoubtedly represents another PR-disaster for the Koch Brothers, and could also have severe consequences.

Bloomberg Markets Magazine reveals in this article for example that:

- Koch Industries used the European offices of their subsidiary Koch-Glitsch to sell millions of dollars of petrochemical equipment to Iran in an apparent violation of the US-Iran trade embargo, as recently as 2007

- Internal documents of Koch Industries prove that the company took elaborate steps to ensure that their US-employees weren't involved in the sales to Iran

- While is not 100% certain at this point that Koch Industries did in fact violate US law, according to Bloomberg Markets Magazine, internal memos show for example that the details of the sales with Iran were meticulously checked by US lawyers of Koch Industries and coordinated with the lawyers in order to fully ensure that no visible involvement of US-citizens took place

- Koch Industries paid bribes in six countries from 2002 to 2008 to win business in Africa, India and the Middle East, comparable to similar behaviour of German technology giant Siemens (Siemens subsequently had to pay a $ 1.6 billion fine!)

- Koch Industries sacked a compliance officer in France in June 2009 who discovered the illegal bribes at Koch Industries subsidiary Koch-Glitsch

- These revelations were made possible through newly discovered documents from two labour court cases in France

- Bloomberg Markets reveals that former employees of Koch Industries harshly criticize the company for their internal practises and ethics

- The story also covers in great detail over several pages earlier violations of Koch Industries: The company in the past "rigged prices with competitors, lied to regulators and repeatedly run afoul of environmental regulations, resulting in five criminal convictions since 1999 in the U.S. and Canada"

These are just examples of the revelations. There is a lot more in the article - please buy the magazine and read the details yourself.



At the heart of the new revelations is the subsidiary Koch-Glitsch, which according to their website has their main offices in the USA, Italy and South Korea. The Bloomberg article mentions that their German office was closed in 2009. The offices in Germany and Italy were apparently at the heart of the new allegations regarding Iran. The new discoveries could easily develop into a massive scandal with unforeseeable consequences for Koch Industries.




Koch-Glitsch was formed in 1997 with the acquisition of selected assets of Glitsch, Inc. by Koch Engineering Company, Inc. It is the best of both Koch Engineering and Glitsch, Inc. with a continuing commitment to providing value-added products to our customers.

Koch-Glitsch is a Koch Chemical Technology Group, LLC company that serves the refining, chemical, and petrochemical industries. Koch-Glitsch offers one-stop shopping for many customers because of the related product lines of our affiliated companies. Diagnostic scans, combustion burners, modular mass transfer skids, and heat transfer products are just a few of the many products available from other companies within Koch Chemical Technology Group, LLC.

According to Bloomberg, the products of Koch Industries which were sold to Iran helped to build the largest methanol plant in the world. The German engineer George Bentu, who worked for Koch-Glitsch from 2001 to 2007 is quoted saying that the company used "every single chance to do business with Iran", and that his concerns were brushed aside when he first discovered documents about the deals with Iran: "Bentu says his boss told him not to worry, that the company's U.S. lawyers made sure the deals with Iran were legal", according to the magazine.

It is not difficult to find the details about the provisions of the US-Iran embargo. Due to the fact that Iran has been viewed for many years as a supporter of terrorism, sanctions were put in place in the mid-1990s. The website of the US-treasury explains all the details. The treasury even provides a leaflet with precise information about the details of the trade embargo. There it says:

Iran embargo details

"Trade and investment activities with Iran by U.S. persons,
wherever located, are prohibited"

It will probably surprise nobody that Koch Industries sees nothing wrong with the practices of Koch-Glitsch. A spokesperson of Koch Industries is quoted in the article with saying that "Koch-Glitsch had protocols in place that were consistent with applicable U.S. laws allowing such sales at the foreign subsidiary level."

However, I have great doubts that such arguments will be an effective defence. The documents prove, according to Bloomberg, that the sales with Iran were coordinated with the US lawyers, basically in order to ensure that the documentation is "clean." In my opinion, it appears that Koch Industries had an elaborate scheme in place to circumvent the embargo, and US citizens were involved in "supervising" the scheme. I also question whether Koch-Glitsch is a "foreign subsidiary", as the company also has three offices in the USA.

As it is mentioned in the article, German technology giant Siemens had to pay a fine of $ 1.6 billion for paying bribes in four countries. It now has been discovered through the new documents that Koch Industries paid bribes in six countries in order to win business, over the course of several years. It is also revealed in the story that Koch Industries was aware of the danger, having seen what happened to Siemens.

Salon today reported that the upcoming story already seemed to make the Koch Brothers very nervous:

Here’s a rule of thumb about public relations: When P.R. pros begin furiously spinning a story before it has even come out, there’s a pretty good chance the story is going to be damaging to the reputation of said P.R. pros’ bosses.

And that’s exactly what we’re seeing right now, as an anonymous person or persons in the orbit of the billionaire conservative donors Charles and David Koch try to discredit a forthcoming story in Bloomberg Markets magazine.

Based on the prebuttal items appearing this week in the Washington Examiner, the Daily Caller, and U.S. News and World Report, the Bloomberg story focuses on alleged malfeasance and/or fraud and/or bad behavior by the conglomerate Koch Industries.

One of those episodes apparently involves bribery by a Koch subsidiary in France, according to the piece by Washington Examiner editorial page editor Mark Tapscott. He reports that “Bloomberg reporters have been trolling among former Koch employees overseas in search of disaffected voices willing to talk,” but Tapscott suspects the story may be animated by bias against the Tea Party. And he notes that, “Koch USA officials say they were as surprised and angered as anybody else when they were first apprised of the bribery allegations, and moved as quickly as possible to get to the bottom of the situation and fix it.”

All three of the prebuttal stories cite an unnamed source who was interviewed for the Bloomberg story; it’s not clear if that same source spoke with all three publications. The Examiner describes the source as a former government official.

Well, fact is that story in Bloomberg Markets Magazine is based on solid reporting, with documented evidence and witnesses on the record. This will be a tough ride for the Koch Brothers. There is nothing to "discredit." The article is an effort of almost monumental proportions, carefully researched by no less than 15 journalists all over the globe, and very courageous at the same time. I believe that since Enron the business press hasn't delivered a similar slam dunk.

The summary by "Bloomberg Markets" is damning:

For six decades around the world, Koch Industries blazed a path to riches - in part, by making illicit payments to win contracts, trading with a terrorist state, fixing prices, neglecting safety and ignoring environmental regulations. At the same time, Charles and David Koch have promoted a form of government that interferes less with company actions.

+++

The political activities of the Koch Brothers are also mentioned in the article, but this is not the main emphasis of the story by Bloomberg. However, the Koch Brothers won't like it one bit how Bloomberg "connects" their huge financial support for example of the Tea Party movement with their questionable business dealings.

I have been planning to write a longer post about the Koch Brothers for a while. Politicalgates already published a detailed post about the Koch-group "Americans for Prosperity" in February this year, written by our contributor Nomad.

Recently, I saw the full version of the excellent documentary "Astroturfwars - How corporate America fakes a grassroots revolution" by Australian filmmaker Taki Oldham. Despite the fact that I already knew quite a lot about the Tea Party movement and the corporate fake grassroots groups in general, I was still taken aback by the shocking revelations in this documentary, and asked myself how it is possible that in the USA such a solid piece of reporting has not been shown on mainstream TV. The documentary has been distributed over the internet, but I would be surprised if more than a few thousand people in total have watched it so far.

I later discovered that Taki Oldham afterwards created an updated, shorter version of the documentary, called "The Billionaires Tea Party." This version is about 55 minutes long, instead of the original 90 minutes, and it also includes some new and updated facts. I was happy to discover that the new version is available in full length on youtube. However, some excellent, additional clips from the original documentary "astroturfwars" are also available on youtube HERE. More clips on Taki Oldham's website HERE!

In addition, you also find a very informative clip about the Koch Brothers and Americans for Prosperity HERE.




Taki Oldham examines in detail the phenomenon of the "front groups" like "Americans for Prosperity", and discovers that these front groups are extensively used in the fight against government healthcare, climate change legislation and in supporting the Tea Party movement, and that Koch Industries are at the heart of many of these front groups.

During my research, I was surprised to discover that the concept of a front-group was first developed by the German propaganda genius and communist Willi Münzenberg in the 1920s, which prompted me to buy a biography of Willi Münzenberg, published by Harper Collins as well as a book in German language which he wrote himself, called "Propaganda as a weapon", in which he sharply analyses the methods of Nazi-propaganda. The methods of the Nazis were very different from Münzenberg's tactics, as he preferred covert operations in which the person of desire doesn't even know that he or she is being subjected to propaganda. Therefore Münzenberg developed with great skill the concept of the "front groups", a concept that proved to be so effective that it later was adapted for example by the tobacco industry, and then by the Koch Brothers. It is always nice to learn new and additional facts while originally researching a different topic. Münzenberg was most likely killed by Stalin's henchmen in 1940, a few years after Münzenberg, who in earlier years was a very good personal friend of Lenin, turned into an anti-Stalinist.

Münzenberg emphasised the need for a front group to completely hide the real "owners." This is a lesson which the Koch Brothers haven't learned, because despite all their attempts to act as secretly as possible, they are still far too transparent - which is fortunate.

They also took elaborate steps to ensure that the content of their "infamous" meetings with business leaders and journalists are kept secret. However, they failed miserably. The most recent revelations were several sensational recordings from inside the secret "Summer Seminar" in June 2011, which were published by Mother Jones (here and here) and the Brad Blog (here and here).

Today, I created a clip with some of the most important remarks by Charles Koch, in which he says that "we have Saddam Hussein", and that the next 18 months will be the "mother of all wars, for the life or death of this country."

However, I believe that he will now have some additional problems...




Good night, and good luck! :-)

+++

PLEASE RE-TWEET:


+++

UPDATE:

One of our readers just sent me this advert for a speech by Koch Industries corporate communication director Melissa Cohlmia, which will take place on Thursday, October 20, from 9.30 am to 10.30 am at Wichita State University. The topic of the speech is more than appropriate: "The integrated marketing approach to crisis communication."


It just so happens that Melissa Cohlmia is the Koch Industries spokesperson who is quoted in the Bloomberg article several times, always with the same "Everything is fine - nothing to see here" statements. So her "marketing approach to crisis communication" is already quite obvious. Deny, refute, deflect. However, I have to say that her statements in the article are far from convincing, given the overwhelming documentation which is provided by "Bloomberg Markets" magazine.

I wonder if she has anything interesting to say, or if she will answer questions? Is somebody living close and has time to attend the speech?

+++

UPDATE 2:

I just looked into our statcounter, and I discovered that we have new visitors.

Charles & David, I am truly sorry that we ruined your Sunday. We all cherish our weekends, but unfortunately I couldn't wait any longer to publish the story.

Koch Brothers IP - summary