Google Has It’s Staff Manipulate The U.S. Patent Office In Order To Protect Google and Hurt American Inventors and Innovation

 

Google Has It’s Staff Manipulate The U.S. Patent Office In Order To Protect Google and Hurt American Inventors and Innovation

 

 

 

*** Google controls the U.S. Patent Office

 

 

 

*** Google’s staff run the Patent Office, have revolving door job promises and massive amounts of Google stock, overtly and covertly

 

 

 

*** Google has a massive number of charges against it for robbing entrepreneurs

 

 

 

*** Google founder exposed as an “idea spy” for Google’s

 

 

 

*** Google orders its agents inside the U.S. Patent office to reverse decisions on patents, to outside inventors, that Google stole from those inventors

 

 

 

*** Google, and it’s owners, are the biggest campaign financiers of the Obama administration, which appointed them into the USPTO

 

 

 

*** FTC and SEC investigators quoted as saying that “Google Destroys Innovation”

 

How Google Steals Ideas From Entrepreneurs

 

By Sarah Dunn and Anthony Harvard

 

A recent article in The New York Times called: “How Larry Page’s Obsessions Became Google’s Business” describes how Google Boss Larry Page covertly attends technology conferences in order to get ideas from entrepreneurs. He does not seem to ever pay those entrepreneurs, for the technology he takes from them, and makes billions of dollars off of at Google.

 

Google Boss Eric Schmidt just spent over $1 Billion to try to lobby Congress to change the patent laws in order to make patents for entrepreneurs nearly illegal, and to try to make patents almost entirely unenforceable, so that Google would not have to pay for the technology it steals. Google seems to love killing the American dream.

 

Google spent millions of dollars to nominate, lobby for, influence and place it’s top lawyer in charge of the U.S. Patent Office. Now Google’s “inside-man” makes sure that patents, that Google is infringing, are either turned down or, in some cases, have their approvals reversed.

 

Google’s motto seems to be: “Why Compete When You Can Cheat”. This is a far more relevant motto than ‘Don’t be evil”.

 

The New York Times article, and hundreds of stories from entrepreneurs, describes how Mr. Page cuddles up to technologists in ordinary street wear, does not identify himself, and Hoover’s up their innovations for his company. The article, details the following:

 

Three years ago, Charles Chase, an engineer who manages Lockheed Martin’s nuclear fusion program, was sitting on a white leather couch at Google’s Solve for X conference when a man he had never met knelt down to talk to him.

 

They spent 20 minutes discussing how much time, money and technology separated humanity from a sustainable fusion reaction — that is, how to produce clean energy by mimicking the sun’s power — before Mr. Chase thought to ask the man his name.

 

I’m Larry Page,” the man said. He realized he had been talking to Google’s billionaire co-founder and chief executive.

 

He didn’t have any sort of pretension like he shouldn’t be talking to me or ‘Don’t you know who you’re talking to?’” Mr. Chase said. “We just talked.”

 

The article also reveals the show-boating of how Mr. Page likes to “ ignore the main stage and follow the scrum of fans and autograph seekers who mob him in the moments he steps outside closed doors.”

 

The article goes on to show that.. “ He is a regular at robotics conferences and intellectual gatherings like TED. Scientists say he is a good bet to attend Google’s various academic gatherings, like Solve for X and Sci Foo Camp, where he can be found having casual conversations about technology or giving advice to entrepreneurs. Mr. Page is hardly the first Silicon Valley chief with a case of intellectual wanderlust, but unlike most of his peers, he has invested far beyond his company’s core business and in many ways has made it a reflection of his personal fascinations.”

 

 

 

Further Page has “… said on several occasions that he spends a good deal of time researching new technologies, focusing on what kind of financial or logistic hurdles stand in the way of them being invented or carried out. His presence at technology events, while just a sliver of his time, is indicative of a giant idea-scouting mission that has in some sense been going on for years but is now Mr. Page’s main job.”

Photo

Sergey Brin, co-founder of Google, wearing Google Glass. Credit Carlo Allegri/Reuters

Then the article grows dark, it says: “Many former Google employees who have worked directly with Mr. Page said his managerial modus operandi was to TAKE new technologies or product ideas and generalize them to as many areas as possible. Why can’t Google Now, Google’s predictive search tool, be used to predict everything about a person’s life? Why create a portal to shop for insurance when you can create a portal to shop for every product in the world?

But corporate success means corporate sprawl, and recently Google has seen a number of engineers and others leave for younger rivals like Facebook and start-ups like Uber. Mr. Page has made personal appeals to some of them, and, at least in a few recent cases, has said he is worried that the company has become a difficult place for entrepreneurs, according to people who have met with him.”

 

People who have worked with Mr. Page say that he tries to guard his calendar, avoiding back-to-back meetings and leaving time to read, research and see new technologies that interest him.”

The articles details Page’s under-cover intelligence gathering: “ People who work with Mr. Page or have spoken with him at conferences say he tries his best to blend in, ..” “ The scope of his curiosity was apparent at Sci Foo Camp, an annual invitation-only conference that is sponsored by Google, O’Reilly Media and Digital Science.

The article goes on to reveal that Google was forced to engage in a break-up, into a front operation called “Alphabet” in order to try to create overt shell companies to build buffers from the Tsunami of legal actions that are coming after it.:

Of course, for every statement Mr. Page makes about Alphabet’s technocorporate benevolence, you can find many competitors and privacy advocates holding their noses in disgust. Technology companies like Yelp have accused the company of acting like a brutal monopolist that is using the dominance of its search engine to steer consumers toward Google services, even if that means giving the customers inferior information.

In fact, the company’s main business issue seems to be that it is doing too well. Google is facing antitrust charges in Europe, along with investigations in Europe and the United States. Those issues are now mostly Mr. Pichai’s to worry about, as Mr. Page is out looking for the next big thing.”

It is hard to imagine how even the most ambitious person could hope to revolutionize so many industries. And Mr. Page, no matter how smart, cannot possibly be an expert in every area Alphabet wants to touch.

His method is not overly technical. Instead, he tends to focus on how to make a sizable business out of whatever problem this or that technology might solve. Leslie Dewan, a nuclear engineer who founded a company that is trying to generate cheap electricity from nuclear waste, also had a brief conversation with Mr. Page at the Solve For X conference.

She said he questioned her on things like modular manufacturing and how to find the right employees.

He doesn’t have a nuclear background, but he knew the right questions to ask,” said Dr. Dewan, chief executive of Transatomic Power. “‘Have you thought about approaching the manufacturing in this way?’ ‘Have you thought about the vertical integration of the company in this way?’ ‘Have you thought about training the work force this way?’ They weren’t nuclear physics questions, but they were extremely thoughtful ways to think about how we could structure the business.”

Dr. Dewan said Mr. Page even gave her an idea for a new market opportunity that she had not thought of. Asked to be more specific, she refused. The idea was too good to share.”

Yet, Dr. Dewan did share, seduced by the understated encouragement of a top intelligence gathering officer: Larry Page.

Below, you will find a small sample of tens of thousands of blog articles and news articles discussing the overt experience of Google’s intellectual property theft. When you have a zillion billion dollars and own your own Senators, ethics do not seem to fall within range of your moral compass.

Entrepreneurs have charged that Google has overtly, stolen its video broadcasting technology, virtual reality systems, Internet balloons, search engine system, wireless technology and many other items. We spoke with technologists who showed us United States Government issued patents and communications that showed that they had designed, engineered, built, patent filed and launched a number of the technologies that Google now has filled their bank accounts from. Google’s financiers at Kleiner Perkins, Google Ventures and other groups had come to them, looked at the technologies confidentially, under the guise of “maybe we’ll invest”, and then sent the technologies over to Google to build 100% clones of.

How hard is it to sue Google for patent infringement? With Google controlling the patent office and 80% of the technology law firms, the hapless entrepreneur is out-gunned.

Google even tried the lamest shell game in history by posting ads on technology blogs asking inventors to just send Google their patents and Google would look at them and offer a low-ball check if Google thought they might get in trouble. That ploy was universally mocked on the web.

Google remains a big, dumb, reckless billionaire’s toy with no regard for the individual. As a creator, your idea is Google’s to plunder. As a citizen, your privacy is Google’s to plunder. As the buyer of elected officials and federal agencies, the law is now Google’s bitch.

American FTC investigators wrote, in their report, that “Google is a threat to domestic innovation”. The European Union investigators have found “…Google to be a private out of control corporate government that has more power than the U.S. Government.”

It is time the FBI came in and shut that train down. Google is nothing but bad news for modern society and innovation.

Does GoogleSteal Your Ideas? – Yahoo News

Does Google Steal Your Ideas? Through its myriad media mechanisms, Google has access to a worrying amount of our data – but even more than that, it has an …

news.yahoo.com/video/does-google-steal-ideas-113004631.html

GoogleStealsIdeas From Bing, Bing Steals Market Share From …

Last month, Google added a new feature to its homepage that enabled users to select a background image. Google included a gallery of professional photos to choose …

fastcompDany.com/1672922/google-steals-ideas-bing-bing-ste…

Why Google Is Stealing Apple’s Ideas – Forbes

Why Google Is Stealing Apple’s Ideas Just because you’re … Google offers its own Web-based alternative, Google Docs. Apple has an e-mail service.

forbes.com/2009/07/10/google-apple-schmidt-technolog…

Google Stealing Apple’s Ideas And Other Tales Of … – TechCrunch

This morning I woke up and saw an interesting headline on Techmeme from Forbes writer Brian Caulfield: Why Google Is Stealing Apple’s Ideas. Wow, a story …

techcrunch.com/2009/07/11/google-stealing-apples-ideas-a…

Google Retracts After Caught Stealing Ideas – Tom’s Guide

Monday this week Google launched its App Engine, which was very well received by developers and users alike. Unfortunately, attention turned elsewhere on Tuesday as …

tomsguide.com/us/google-huddlechat-campfire,news-977.html

GoogleSteals Your Ideas – YouTube

Google Steals Your Ideas Alltime Conspiracies. Subscribe Subscribed Unsubscribe 887,471 887K. Loading … – Does Google Spy On You?: https: …

youtube.com/watch?v=XKHUc2ouMXA

Does GoogleSteal Your Ideas? – AlleyWatch

Does Google Steal Your Ideas? By AlleyWatch · December 3, 2014 · 0. Op-ED, Videos . 163. … art and ideas at its fingertips. Is Google stealing our ideas? …

alleywatch.com/2014/12/does-google-steal-your-ideas/

Does GoogleSteal Your Ideas? – AOL On

Through its myriad media mechanisms, Google has access to a worrying amount of our data – but even more than that, it has an unprecedented number of our thoughts, art …

on.aol.com/video/does-google-steal-your-ideas–51849…

GoogleIdeasGoogle

Google Ideas builds products to support free expression and access to information for people who need it most — those facing violence and harassment.

google.com/ideas/

Google Ventures Launches with “We May Steal Your Idea” Caveat …

Google Ventures Launches with “We May Steal Your … Seems in the current downturn its google’s policy … I know that everyone thinks tere ideas are …

marketingpilgrim.com/2009/03/google-ventures-launches-with-we-…

Lawsuit Accuses Google, YouTube Of Stealing Sharing Idea In …

Be In, a company that created the video sharing service CamUp, is accusing Google of stealing trade secrets and violating its copyrights when it added a “Watch with …

marketingland.com/lawsuit-accuses-google-youtube-of-stealin…

Yes, Google “Stole” From Apple, And That’s A Good Thing

Image via CrunchBase Apple is currently locked in a legal battle with Samsung over claims that Samsung’s smartphones and tablets infringe on Apple’s patents.

forbes.com/sites/timothylee/2011/10/25/yes-google-st…

Is Someone Stealing Your Ideas? Let Them – CBS News

You will never create a solid career for yourself by worrying about who is stealing your ideas. People hate whiners, they hate bickering, and, most …

cbsnews.com/news/is-someone-stealing-your-ideas-let-t…

Newspiracy.com | GoogleSteals Your Ideas

Google Steals Your Ideas 0 Posted by newspiracy – January 24, 2016 – Alltime Conspiracies. Alltime Conspiracies Sun, January 24, 2016 10:50am URL: Embed:

newspiracy.com/conspiracy-theory/alltime-conspiracies/go…

Stealing Ideas Quotes – Search Quotes

Stealing Ideas quotes – 1. Don’t worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good, you’ll have to ram them down people’s throats.

searchquotes.com/search/Stealing_Ideas/

Is Google Stealing Your Content and Hijacking Your Traffic …

[Continue reading Is Google Stealing Your Content and Hijacking … Are they going to decide they can better serve the customers in your market by stealing your …

graywolfseo.com/seo/google-hijackingtraffic/

Is Google Stealing Apple’s Ideas? | Seeking Alpha

Saturday morning I woke up and saw an interesting headline on Techmeme from Forbes writer Brian Caulfield: Why Google Is Stealing Apple’s Ideas. Wow, a st

seekingalpha.com/article/148297-is-google-stealing-apples-…

They Will Steal Your Idea. They Cannot Steal What Really …

They Cannot Steal What Really Matters. 39 … Google with only millions of … The person who I was working with told me she was stealing my ideas and she was mean …

jasonlbaptiste.com/startups/they-will-steal-your-idea-they-c…

Google

Search the world’s information, including webpages, images, videos and more. Google has many special features to help you find exactly what you’re looking for.

google.com

Steal – definition of steal by The Free Dictionary

steal (stēl) v. stole (stōl), sto·len (stō′lən), steal·ing, steals v.tr. 1. To take (the property of another) without right or permission. 2. To present or …

thefreedictionary.com/steal

Google Ventures steals two marketing masterminds to blow its …

Google Ventures steals two marketing masterminds to blow its portfolio up. … The duo will be part of Google Ventures’ already large marketing team, …

venturebeat.com/2013/03/13/google-ventures-new-hires/

Google: Bing Is Cheating, Copying Our Search Results

Google has run a sting operation that it says proves Bing has been watching what people search for on Google, the sites they select from Google’s results, then uses …

searchengineland.com/google-bing-is-cheating-copying-our-searc…

Google deliberately stole information but executives ‘covered …

Google, pictured street-mapping in Bristol, has always claimed that it didn’t know its software would collect the private information

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2150606/Google-deliberately-…

Microsoft Now Sells T-Shirts That Claim Google’s Chrome …

Microsoft has started to sell t-shirts, hats, mugs, and sweatshirts that bear slogans from its Scroogled campaign that needles Google as bad on privacy.

techcrunch.com/2013/11/20/microsoft-now-sells-t-shirts-t…

Did Apple iOS 5 StealIdeas from Android? – The iPhone and …

Did Apple iOS 5 Steal Ideas … When you said google products, yeah its the same like apple … and apple steals ideas from 3rd party apps of …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ANTI GOOGLE BUS DEMANDS OF THE PUBLIC SET FOR THE NEXT PROTEST

ANTI GOOGLE BUS DEMANDS OF THE PUBLIC SET FOR THE NEXT PROTEST – February 9, 2016

 

Join The Anti-Google Event on February 9!

 

 

Recently the San Francisco Board of Supervisors revisited San Francisco’s new Commuter Shuttle Program, which regulates commuter shuttles commonly known as “Google buses.” The new legislation faced a massive out-cry, from the public opponents of the elitist shuttles. The Board decided to postpone this issue and revisit it on February 9, 2016, at San Francisco City Hall.

 

All members of the press and the public that oppose Google’s and Facebook’s privacy rape of the public, and their misogynist anti-women, Ageist and anti-black hiring practices, are asked to meet at San Francisco City Hall on February 9, 2016. Anti-Google advocates are encouraged to begin assembly in the City Hall Plaza beginning at 8AM that day.

 

The public is asked to help voice it’s continued disdain for these white, yuppie, self-centered buses that are too ashamed of who they work for to put their logos on these commuter shuttles. These shuttles are bad for commuters, bad for pedestrians, damage the economy, and our environment, not to mention they increase traffic congestion.

 

Google & Facebook Buses Hurt Our Community In The Following Ways:

 

  • Per government investigations and public surveillance at bus stops, almost no women are hired by these companies

  • Per government investigations and public surveillance at bus stops, almost almost no blacks are hired by these companies

  • Per government investigations and public surveillance at bus stops, almost nobody over 30 and certainly nobody over 40 is hired by these companies in order to keep their “Frat House” culture “pure”.

  • Per filed lawsuits, these companies abuse workers, psychologically manipulate young naive people with Google “mindfulness” and “group alignment thinking” not unlike Scientology, fire workers who question the party line, sexually abuse and pressure interns and young workers for sexual services, have been murdered by prostitutes, promise workers upside that they know does not exist and spy on their own workers.

  • These buses support massive public privacy and data harvesting for nefarious purposes.

  • These buses represent and encourage corruption and organized crime by bribing Mayoral, Supervisor and Department bosses with cash, expense payments, revolving door job promises, stock warrants, sexual services providers, Super Bowl tickets, Super Bowl party invitations, Box seats at sporting events, free Internet search engine up-ranking and hundreds of other “unjust gain” payola bribes which only benefit the elected officials of San Francisco and hurt the public by expanded corruption. The owners of these companies are under international anti-trust, corruption, monopoly and bribery investigations and have been publicly charged, by the heads of multiple nations as: “Digital Mobsters!”

  • The plain white buses are offensive to many people from the Jewish Culture because they are reminiscent of the mass transportation of Jews, via generic buses with no logos, to death camps. In light of the covert intent of these buses and the mass harvesting of bay area youth via HR programming, members of the community demand that the buses carry their corporate logos in large graphics, visible from over a block away, as every other bus does.

  • Commuters are forced to funnel around the buses and, in a dense pack city, this causes horrific traffic jams. For example, the Google buses, daily create havoc by funneling, already congested Divisadaro Street Traffic near Fulton and “Gas Station Valley” into a complete shut-down of the flow of traffic when the Google bus cuts off the entire right hand lane. These buses are a menace.

  • The driver turn-over is high and pedestrians are often not seen in time, by the novice drivers who do know every intersection and pedestrian walkway. This creates a life-threatening danger for the many pedestrians in the City and simply adds more potential vehicles to hit pedestrians.

  • A waiting bus uses a tremendous amount of energy, space and emits a variety of toxins.

  • The Buses have encouraged City of San Francisco employees and contractors to lie to the public in order to get their bribes. By lying to the public and manipulating data in order to please their handlers, they are doing the same thing that Google does when it lies to the public to sucker them in with “free stuff” then data harvests them, and lies about how they use the data to please their handlers. Two wrongs do not make a right!

 

DON’T LET THE GOOGLE BUSES RUN UNLESS THEY HAVE THE SAME PERCENTAGE OF WOMEN, BLACK, OVER 40 AND AMERICAN WORKERS GETTING ON THEM AS LIVE IN THE BAY AREA

 

Let these people know that San Francisco and California are NOT FOR SALE! ( http://www.californiaisnotforsale.com/ )

 

The companies, that these generic painted buses deliver the robot-workers to, have the (federally documented) lowest hiring numbers of American, female and black workers in the Nation, yet they get the largest free taxpayer hand-outs in America. Can you spell: C-O-R-R-U-P-T-I-O-N !?

 

San Francisco politicians are paid bribes by Google and Facebook to run these buses. The only people that benefit, in San Francisco are The Mayor and San Francisco’s new Commuter Shuttle Program executives when they get their campaign funding, golf memberships and free dinners at The Westin. After they get out of City Hall, they have been promised payola kick-back “revolving door” jobs in Silicon Valley with the very companies running these buses. These promised payola jobs are “BRIBES!” and they are felonies!

 

San Francisco has seen it’s City destroyed by an influx of bearded, naive, idiots who work, like mindless robots, for the “most evil corporations on Earth”. Silicon valley can’t house enough idiots to run it’s privacy abuse shops so it tells the Bro-grammers to “Go up and live in San Francisco, Don’t worry about the commute, we will pick you up!” San Francisco is being “culture-raped” by Silicon Valley billionaires who have zero concern about the indigenous people of the area. Much has been written about Silicon Valley’s “Rape Culture” but what does that term mean?

 

 

It refers to rich white men who were raised to believe that they had special social privileges because their parents, and fraternity houses, trained them to think that they existed in order to use others to meet their needs for pleasure, power and money.

 

 

This concept of “White Elitist Privilege” is a passed-on concept of land-owner and factory-owner control created in the feudal times of old Europe.

 

 

The people who owned the land, and resources, acquired by organized European murder fests called: “land wars”; created a mythos which sought to trick those who did not own those things into thinking that the rich owners had special powers, or special wisdom, due to some magic in their “blood-lines”.

 

 

In fact, due the the rape of servants, cousins, townspeople and siblings, almost no “blood-lines” remained pure for long in the “nobility”.

 

 

One might suggest that, “if the townspeople were stupid enough to believe that some guy named Smith had super-powers because he was named Smith, then they deserved all of the use-and abuse that they were subjected to”. This would be a Machiavellian, and harsh, assumption about people who were, essentially, brainwashed, from birth, to believe that the feudal Lord was better than them. As the CIA, and Google, have proven, it only takes a month of repetitive information iteration to brainwash the political, social or moral beliefs of any population.

 

 

In Silicon Valley the Joe Lonsdale rape case, the Ellen Pao Sex abuse case, The Ravi Kumar and Forrest Hayes Sex murder cases, The Stanford Frat house rape cover-ups, the Intern sex abuse scandals, The Stanford Professor’s Sex scandals, The Silicon Valley Hooker parties, The Rosewood Hotel Thursday Night Sex Pick-up parties and hundreds of other twisted perversions, which involve a Silicon Valley VC, or Tech exec, abusing a lower income person are flowing like water down the tainted white water rapids of technology deviancy.

 

 

Google uses Scientology-type worker culture programming to turn starving 22 year olds into blindly obedient drones. They make their workers ride on their buses, eat their food, go to their parties with their co-workers in exclusive settings, read only Google approved news, use Google devices which track them, take a battery of CIA-created psychological hiring tests, go to “mindfulness classes” to become more drone-like and, essentially, become weaponized for Google’s manipulations. The bank accounts of Google workers may be large, but their minds are empty and their ability to care about others is gone. Not only does Google turn helpless youths into robots but Google is spending more money than any other American company to displace workers with robots.

 

 

While being an intern, Stanford co-ed, or blonde divorcée, in Palo Alto, pretty much guarantees that you will face a gauntlet of high-tech date rape drugs, extortion, moral compromise and VC sexual exploitation, the rapes and social abuse do not end with the sex. All of the fraternity houses that the Silicon Valley VC’s came from have now been charged with “rape factory” abuses. These men were raised as, and trained as, abusive animals, on every level.

 

 

BUT, Imagine having your brain raped!

 

 

The VC’s buy the politicians, tax investigators, SEC officers and law enforcement agents that are supposed to stop them from doing their crimes.

 

 

These VC’s have paid billions of dollars to Presidential, Senate, Gubernatorial, Attorney General and Mayoral campaigns, as bribes, in order to buy their way out of any law enforcement attention. The FBI should be stringing them up, but…for some special reason: they don’t. This is the rape of America’s political system. It is a rape of the public trust of over 300 million citizens. Their bribes, to allow over a trillion of their tax dollars to be hidden overseas, rapes our schools of our teachers and rapes our streets of pot-hole repair. Are your local services being cut? Thank John Doerr and Eric Schmidt.

 

 

The Silicon Valley VC’s have also formed a Mafia-like Cartel. This dark and spooky men’s club came from the Skull and Bones, Bohemian Club concept of Omerta secrecy rich boys who sought to control things by only doing business with each other in order to commercialize the commercialization of monopoly creation. They do everything you saw in the Francis Ford Coppola “Godfather” movies except they wear more khaki and drive Tesla’s instead of Cadillacs.

 

 

There is no other region, in all of America, which holds the title of misogyny, prostitution and sexual extortion capital of the nation. This fact is proven by the tens of thousands of articles, and complaints published about Silicon Valley’s abuses; and about no other city in The Nation.

 

 

Ever since HP created Sandhill road, the Cartel was just white boys. Because those white boys made their profits out of flying clever, cheap Indians over from India, getting their ideas, then shipping them back to India, before they could make any stock claims, a few Indian VC’s created a sub-Cartel. While they tried to play off their cultural “robes and temples” crunchy granola marketing, few missed the reality that India is the organized rape capital of the world. The Indian VC’s turned out to rape even more that the White Frat Boy VC’s.

 

 

 

The brains of the Silicon Valley rapist VC’s have one big problem…

 

 

They have had decades of programming and training to run spreadsheets out to the smallest decimal point but they can’t invent a good, creative, idea to save their souls. They are financial experts and ideation idiots.

 

 

To get the things that their Cartel wants to exploit, they usually steal their ideas. They rape the brains of others, often without paying for it.

 

 

They invite the idea people in for a chat, under the guise and pretense of: “we are thinking about investing in your idea..” In most cases, this come-on line is total horsesh*t.

 

 

They are inviting you in to get you to give them a free data dump, your “pitch meeting” at their offices is their fishing expedition to see what they want to steal from you.

 

 

The odds are small that you will be wearing the IZOD shirt, khaki pants, short greased haircut and have the perfectly symmetrical square jawed Aryan look that the VC’s have. They will hate you the moment they see you. You have been excluded from their club the second you walked through their door. You don’t have the look. You didn’t pass the ivy league “one-of-us” sniff test.

 

 

But you still have some power, you have the idea and the technology…for the last few minutes before you open your mouth.

 

 

They will say: “…now; we are all friends here. Tell us everything. We don’t sign non-disclosure agreements but we won’t steal your idea..ha, ha.. if we stole ideas, how could we still be in business.. ha, ha..”

 

 

You just bent over and spread your cheeks for them.

 

 

They will, then, listen carefully to your idea, take notes, argue a few points to try to get you to do more of their homework and then thank you and tell you they will “discuss it internally”, which means they will immediately start organizing a thieving party if your idea had any interest for them.

 

 

All of the VC’s on SandHill road, in Palo Alto, know each other and conspire and collude together, as proven in the “AngelGate”, “No Poaching”, “The Chieky Attack”,“Sony Hack”, “HSBC Hack” and other scandals.

 

 

One VC steals the idea and passes it to another to copy it, rename it and launch it via one of their friends. YouTube, Google, Facebook, Ebay and many other famous companies were created this way. That is why the VC’s poured billions into trying to bribe Congress to overthrow the patent laws. The VC’s live in fear of paying the creators they stole from.

 

 

When they see a great idea that they want to steal, they hire their buddies at Wired, Tech Crunch, Gawker Media or Hearst Publications to write a hatchet job article, or series of blog postings that defame and character assassinate you, while denigrating your technology and saying that it is impossible for your technology to work. They do this to prevent any possibility of non-Cartel VC’s from their Silicon Valley Cartel or the NVCA (essentially the same thing) from funding you and competing with their theft scheme.

 

 

Ironically, their total clone copycat version of your technology, that they deliver, works fine. Even though they said, in their slam articles, that it was impossible for it to work.

 

 

So they raped you, thieved you, used you and shut you down. Isn’t Silicon Valley lovely?

 

 

In the Klieiner Perkins sex abuse law suit, the Tom Perkins “Nazi Scandal”, The Ray Lane tax evasion investigation, Kleiner’s Vinohd Khosla beach lawsuit, the Steven Chu Cleantech Crash and Solyndra crimes, AngelGate, The Eric Schmidt Sex Penthouse and White House manipulation investigation, The In-Q-Tel funds and an army of other scandals; one thing is clear: Silicon Valley VC’s have no respect for morality or the law.

 

 

Voters must demand that the state and federal government bring crushing investigations, and penalties, to these VC’s and tech responsibility-dodgers because their crimes affect every single citizen. We can no longer let these crazy Silicon Valley billionaire megalomaniacs dictate the future of our cities!

 

 

Thank you to everyone who came out and showed their support Tuesday afternoon. We will keep you updated on future developments.

 

 

 

COMCAST tries to punish Democrats by cutting off their NETFLIX

COMCAST tries to punish Democrats by cutting off their NETFLIX

 

 

 

  • The largest users of NETFLIX are Democrats

  • Netflix bosses are Democrats and huge lobbyist financiers

  • Democrats control the FCC

  • The FCC just told Comcast it can’t run an Internet monopoly any more

  • …So COMCAST decided to throttle the SH*T out of NETFLIX users

 

 

 

Comcast Draws Customer Ire by Putting Netflix Addicts on a Meter

Cable Giant Imposing Extra Fees For Excessive Internet Data Usage

Published on AD AGE

Comcast Corp. customers used to be able to binge on all the Netflix and YouTube videos they wanted without repercussions. Now many are being put on a diet.

In a growing number of cities, the nation’s largest cable company has begun imposing extra fees on Internet customers who use what it considers excessive amounts of data. The move could bring in new revenue to offset losses from cord-cutters dropping pay-TV service to stream videos online.

The strategy poses risks. In 2008, Time Warner Cable Inc. tried to limit customers’ Internet use then dropped the plan the next year after a public backlash. Comcast has also faced questions from regulators about why its own streaming service doesn’t count toward subscriber data limits, as well as complaints from customers and online video providers.

“It leaves a bad taste in your mouth,” said Jonathan Strong, 33, a finance manager in Charleston, South Carolina. His family — including three children who watch Netflix every night — goes over the data limit every month, resulting in as much as $20 in extra charges, he said. “It feels like we’re getting punished for our normal use.”

In almost all of Comcast’s test markets, which include Atlanta, Nashville and Miami, customers who exceed 300 gigabytes a month — the equivalent of streaming high-definition video five hours a day, by one estimate — pay $10 more for additional increments of 50 gigabytes.

In some cities, Comcast subscribers can pay $30 to $35 more for unlimited data. Those who stay under 5 gigabytes a month — about 3 hours of streaming high-definition video, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office — get $5 off their bill. Customers get a three-month grace period before being charged fees.

Small fraction
Comcast says only a small fraction of customers — about 8% — exceed the limit, in some cases because their computers are running malicious software without their knowledge. The company says usage-based billing, which is common in the wireless industry, is about fairness. Customers who only use the Internet to check e-mail shouldn’t pay the same as subscribers with bandwidth-heavy web habits like online video games, file-sharing or binge-watching web videos, the company says.

 

Chief Executive Officer Brian Roberts likens it to buying more gasoline after driving long distances or paying higher electricity bills for running the air conditioner.

‘Balanced Relationship’

“We’re just trialing ways to have a balanced relationship,” Mr. Roberts said at the Business Insider Ignition conference last month. “I don’t think it’s illogical or something people should be paranoid about.”

Customers of Philadelphia-based Comcast aren’t alone. About one-fourth of U.S. Internet subscribers have data plans that charge extra for heavy usage, according to Craig Moffett, an analyst at MoffettNathanson. AT&T Inc.’s subscribers have different usage limits based on their Internet speed. Cox Communications Inc., the fourth-largest cable operator, is testing a strategy similar to both Comcast and AT&T’s on customers in the Cleveland area who go over their monthly data allotment. Time Warner Cable offers discounts to light Internet users, according to Mr. Moffett.

Hoping to appease consumer advocates, Charter Communications Inc. has pledged not to place any limits on customers’ broadband data for three years if regulators approve its merger with Time Warner Cable and Bright House Networks LLC.

‘Insurance Policy’
For pay-TV companies, usage-based pricing is “an insurance policy against cord-cutting,” Mr. Moffett wrote in an October report. It ensures they still get paid for delivering video in the future even if more customers drop pay-TV service for Netflix Inc., Hulu or Amazon.com Inc., he said.

“What’s at stake is nothing less than the basic business model of the cable operators,” Mr. Moffett said in an interview.

The average U.S. household watches about five hours of TV a day, according to Nielsen. That same amount streamed over the Internet would probably exceed Comcast’s limit, according to Roger Lynch, chief executive officer of Dish Network Corp.‘s Sling TV, which offers an online “skinny bundle” of more than 20 channels for $20 a month. Comcast says it would take more than seven hours of video streaming a day to exceed its limit.

“It’s something we’re quite concerned about,” Mr. Lynch said in an interview. Comcast’s 300 gigabyte limit is “very restrictive” and “clearly designed to discourage customers from using over- the-top services,” he said, using the term for online video.

Last month, Netflix said its engineers are adapting movies and TV shows available on its service so customers use less bandwidth. Anne Marie Squeo, a spokeswoman for Netflix, declined to comment on Comcast’s strategy.

The U.S. Federal Communications Commission, which regulates pay-TV providers, hasn’t taken a position on usage-based pricing. Last year, the agency said such pricing may benefit consumers by offering them more options, calling it “an unresolved debate” that it will address on a case-by-case basis.

The FCC said in a December letter it wants “to ensure that we have all the facts” about Comcast’s new Stream TV service, which lets customers watch some programming on laptops, tablets and phones and doesn’t count toward their data allotments.

Mr. Lynch said that omission may violate an agreement Comcast made to not favor its own services over others and treat all Web traffic equally. Comcast spokeswoman Sena Fitzmaurice said Stream TV runs over the same network as cable service, which isn’t subject to the same rules as Internet traffic.

“Users hate wireline data caps because they create artificial scarcity that increases the cost of getting online,” said Noah Theran, a spokesman for the Internet Association, a Washington trade group that represents companies including Netflix and Google Inc.’s YouTube. “To make matters worse, limited competition in the high-speed broadband market means users often have nowhere else to turn for a better deal.”

— Bloomberg News

 

 

 

 

 

ANTI GOOGLE BUS PUBLIC INTEREST OUT CRY WINS THE DAY: NEXT PROTEST – February 9, 2016

ANTI GOOGLE BUS PUBLIC INTEREST OUT CRY WINS THE DAY: NEXT PROTEST – February 9, 2016

 

 

On Tuesday, the Board of Supervisors revisited San Francisco’s new Commuter Shuttle Program, which regulates commuter shuttles commonly known as “Google buses.” The new legislation faced a massive out-cry, from the public opponents of the elitist shuttles. The Board decided to postpone this issue and revisit it on February 9, 2016, at San Francisco City Hall.

 

All members of the press and the public that oppose Google’s and Facebook’s privacy rape of the public and their misogynist anti-women and anti-black hiring practices are asked to meet at San Francisco City Hall on February 9, 2016. Anti-Google advocates are encouraged to begin assembly in the City Hall Plaza beginning at 8AM that day.

 

The public is asked to help voice it’s continued disdain for these white, yuppie, self-centered buses that are too ashamed of who they work for to put their logos on these commuter shuttles. These shuttles are bad for commuters, bad for pedestrians, damage the economy, and our environment, not to mention they increase traffic congestion.

 

The companies, that these generic painted buses deliver the robot-workers to, have the, federally documented, lowest hiring numbers of American, female and black workers in the Nation yet they get the largest free taxpayer hand-outs in America. Can you spell: C-O-R-R-U-P-T-I-O-N !?

 

San Francisco politicians are paid bribes by Google and Facebook to run these buses. The only people that benefit, in San Francisco are The Mayor and San Francisco’s new Commuter Shuttle Program executives when they get their campaign funding, golf memberships and free dinners at The Westin.

 

San Francisco has seen it’s City destroyed by an influx of bearded, naive, idiots who work, like mindless robots, for the “most evil corporations on Earth”. Silicon valley can’t house enough idiots to run it’s privacy abuse shops so it tells the Bro-grammers to “Go up and live in San Francisco, Don’t worry about the commute, we will pick you up!” San Francisco is being “culture-raped” by Silicon Valley billionaires who have zero concern about the indigenous people of the area. Much has been written about Silicon Valley’s “Rape Culture” but what does that term mean?

 

 

It refers to rich white men who were raised to believe that they had special social privileges because their parents, and fraternity houses, trained them to think that they existed in order to use others to meet their needs for pleasure, power and money.

 

 

This concept of “White Elitist Privilege” is a passed-on concept of land-owner and factory-owner control created in the feudal times of old Europe.

 

 

The people who owned the land, and resources, acquired by organized European murder fests called: “land wars”; created a mythos which sought to trick those who did not own those things into thinking that the rich owners had special powers, or special wisdom, due to some magic in their “blood-lines”.

 

 

In fact, due the the rape of servants, cousins, townspeople and siblings, almost no “blood-lines” remained pure for long in the “nobility”.

 

 

One might suggest that, “if the townspeople were stupid enough to believe that some guy named Smith had super-powers because he was named Smith, then they deserved all of the use-and abuse that they were subjected to”. This would be a Machiavellian, and harsh, assumption about people who were, essentially, brainwashed, from birth, to believe that the feudal Lord was better than them. As the CIA, and Google, have proven, it only takes a month of repetitive information iteration to brainwash the political, social or moral beliefs of any population.

 

 

In Silicon Valley the Joe Lonsdale rape case, the Ellen Pao Sex abuse case, The Ravi Kumar and Forrest Hayes Sex murder cases, The Stanford Frat house rape cover-ups, the Intern sex abuse scandals, The Stanford Professor’s Sex scandals, The Silicon Valley Hooker parties, The Rosewood Hotel Thursday Night Sex Pick-up parties and hundreds of other twisted perversions, which involve a Silicon Valley VC, or Tech exec, abusing a lower income person are flowing like water down the tainted white water rapids of technology deviancy.

 

 

While being an intern, Stanford co-ed, or blonde divorcée, in Palo Alto, pretty much guarantees that you will face a gauntlet of high-tech date rape drugs, extortion, moral compromise and VC sexual exploitation, the rapes and social abuse do not end with the sex. All of the fraternity houses that the Silicon Valley VC’s came from have now been charged with “rape factory” abuses. These men were raised as, and trained as, abusive animals, on every level.

 

 

BUT, Imagine having your brain raped!

 

 

The VC’s buy the politicians, tax investigators, SEC officers and law enforcement agents that are supposed to stop them from doing their crimes.

 

 

These VC’s have paid billions of dollars to Presidential, Senate, Gubernatorial, Attorney General and Mayoral campaigns, as bribes, in order to buy their way out of any law enforcement attention. The FBI should be stringing them up, but…for some special reason: they don’t. This is the rape of America’s political system. It is a rape of the public trust of over 300 million citizens. Their bribes, to allow over a trillion of their tax dollars to be hidden overseas, rapes our schools of our teachers and rapes our streets of pot-hole repair. Are your local services being cut? Thank John Doerr and Eric Schmidt.

 

 

The Silicon Valley VC’s have also formed a Mafia-like Cartel. This dark and spooky men’s club came from the Skull and Bones, Bohemian Club concept of Omerta secrecy rich boys who sought to control things by only doing business with each other in order to commercialize the commercialization of monopoly creation. They do everything you saw in the Francis Ford Coppola “Godfather” movies except they wear more khaki and drive Tesla’s instead of Cadillacs.

 

 

There is no other region, in all of America, which holds the title of misogyny, prostitution and sexual extortion capital of the nation. This fact is proven by the tens of thousands of articles, and complaints published about Silicon Valley’s abuses; and about no other city in The Nation.

 

 

Ever since HP created Sandhill road, the Cartel was just white boys. Because those white boys made their profits out of flying clever, cheap Indians over from India, getting their ideas, then shipping them back to India, before they could make any stock claims, a few Indian VC’s created a sub-Cartel. While they tried to play off their cultural “robes and temples” crunchy granola marketing, few missed the reality that India is the organized rape capital of the world. The Indian VC’s turned out to rape even more that the White Frat Boy VC’s.

 

 

The brains of the Silicon Valley rapist VC’s have one big problem…

 

 

 

They have had decades of programming and training to run spreadsheets out to the smallest decimal point but they can’t invent a good, creative, idea to save their souls. They are financial experts and ideation idiots.

 

 

To get the things that their Cartel wants to exploit, they usually steal their ideas. They rape the brains of others, often without paying for it.

 

 

They invite the idea people in for a chat, under the guise and pretense of: “we are thinking about investing in your idea..” In most cases, this come-on line is total horsesh*t.

 

 

They are inviting you in to get you to give them a free data dump, your “pitch meeting” at their offices is their fishing expedition to see what they want to steal from you.

 

 

The odds are small that you will be wearing the IZOD shirt, khaki pants, short greased haircut and have the perfectly symmetrical square jawed Aryan look that the VC’s have. They will hate you the moment they see you. You have been excluded from their club the second you walked through their door. You don’t have the look. You didn’t pass the ivy league “one-of-us” sniff test.

 

 

But you still have some power, you have the idea and the technology…for the last few minutes before you open your mouth.

 

 

They will say: “…now; we are all friends here. Tell us everything. We don’t sign non-disclosure agreements but we won’t steal your idea..ha, ha.. if we stole ideas, how could we still be in business.. ha, ha..”

 

 

You just bent over and spread your cheeks for them.

 

 

They will, then, listen carefully to your idea, take notes, argue a few points to try to get you to do more of their homework and then thank you and tell you they will “discuss it internally”, which means they will immediately start organizing a thieving party if your idea had any interest for them.

 

 

All of the VC’s on SandHill road, in Palo Alto, know each other and conspire and collude together, as proven in the “AngelGate”, “No Poaching”, “The Chieky Attack”,“Sony Hack”, “HSBC Hack” and other scandals.

 

 

One VC steals the idea and passes it to another to copy it, rename it and launch it via one of their friends. YouTube, Google, Facebook, Ebay and many other famous companies were created this way. That is why the VC’s poured billions into trying to bribe Congress to overthrow the patent laws. The VC’s live in fear of paying the creators they stole from.

 

 

When they see a great idea that they want to steal, they hire their buddies at Wired, Tech Crunch, Gawker Media or Hearst Publications to write a hatchet job article, or series of blog postings that defame and character assassinate you, while denigrating your technology and saying that it is impossible for your technology to work. They do this to prevent any possibility of non-Cartel VC’s from their Silicon Valley Cartel or the NVCA (essentially the same thing) from funding you and competing with their theft scheme.

 

 

Ironically, their total clone copycat version of your technology, that they deliver, works fine. Even though they said, in their slam articles, that it was impossible for it to work.

 

 

So they raped you, thieved you, used you and shut you down. Isn’t Silicon Valley lovely?

 

 

In the Klieiner Perkins sex abuse law suit, the Tom Perkins “Nazi Scandal”, The Ray Lane tax evasion investigation, Kleiner’s Vinohd Khosla beach lawsuit, the Steven Chu Cleantech Crash and Solyndra crimes, AngelGate, The Eric Schmidt Sex Penthouse and White House manipulation investigation, The In-Q-Tel funds and an army of other scandals; one thing is clear: Silicon Valley VC’s have no respect for morality or the law.

 

 

Voters must demand that the state and federal government bring crushing investigations, and penalties, to these VC’s and tech responsibility-dodgers because their crimes affect every single citizen.

 

 

Thank you to everyone who came out and showed their support Tuesday afternoon. We will keep you updated on future developments.

 

 

 

The -ium metals mining Corruption are the dirtiest schemes in politics

The -ium metals mining Corruption are the dirtiest schemes in politics

 

– Lithium, Indium and Uranium have led to murders and epic crimes in order to keep their dirty mining deals secret

 

– Tesla and Google investors got massive lithium kickbacks from public agencies and they funded their campaigns

 

The Clintons: is the Oregon standoff really about uranium?

 

by Jon Rappoport

 

The Clintons: is the Oregon standoff really about uranium?

 

by Jon Rappoport

 

January 27, 2016

 

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)

 

Note: This article was written before the Oregon shootout in which one man was killed and another wounded.

 

Is uranium at the heart of the Oregon Malheur federal-protestor standoff? That’s the question I’m asking. It isn’t a flippant question.

 

I realize there are many other issues swirling around this event. The Hammonds, the Bundys, militias, the feds, cattle grazing on federal lands, federal land grabs, and so on. This article isn’t meant to take apart those matters.

 

It’s meant to follow up on my previous article, in which I present a circumstantial case for the Clintons’ heavy involvement in a scheme that’s transferred 20% of US uranium production to Putin and Russia. And the key company in that piece is Uranium One. Remember the name. It’s apparently a major clue in what I’m about to discuss.

 

I also want to say, at the outset, that I don’t know how many independent news outlets and websites are covering the uranium question, or which outlet initiated this line of investigation. I’m relying on one provocative January 23 article at intellihub, by Shepard Ambellas:

 

“Clinton Foundation took massive payoffs, promised Hammond Ranch and other publicly owned lands to Russians, along with one-fifth of our uranium ore.”

 

Down in the body of that article, the author provides a link to a page at the US Bureau of Land Management (BLM), which is a federal agency under the Department of the Interior.

 

On that BLM page (“National BLM > OR/WA > Energy > Uranium Energy”), in a section titled, “Uranium on BLM-Administered Lands in OR/WA,” [(image of webpage forthcoming)] is the following statement:

 

“In September 2011, a representative from Oregon Energy, L.L.C. (formally Uranium One), met with local citizens, and county and state officials, to discuss the possibility of opening a uranium oxide (‘yellowcake’) mine in southern Malheur County in southeastern Oregon. Oregon Energy is interested in developing a 17-Claim parcel of land known as the Aurora Project through an open pit mining method. Besides the mine, there would be a mill for processing. The claim area occupies about 450 acres and is also referred to as the ‘New U’ uranium claims.

 

“On May 7, 2012, Oregon Energy LLC made a presentation to the BLM outlining its plans for development for the mine.

 

“The Vale District has agreed to work with Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife on mitigation for the ‘New U’ uranium claims, which are located in core sage grouse habitat. Although the lands encompassing the claims have been designated core, the area is frequented by rockhounds and hunters, and has a crisscrossing of off-highway vehicle (OHV) roads and other significant land disturbance from the defunct Bretz Mercury Mine, abandoned in the 1960s.

 

“However, by the fall of 2012 the company said that it was putting its plans for the mine on hold until the uncertainty surrounding sage grouse issues was resolved.”

 

The first sentence in that BLM section ties together several key elements of the story: Uranium One; a uranium mine; southern Malheur County. Southern Malheur is the general area of the federal-protestor standoff. Let me give you that first sentence again:

 

“In September 2011, a representative from Oregon Energy, L.L.C. (formally Uranium One), met with local citizens, and county and state officials, to discuss the possibility of opening a uranium oxide (‘yellowcake’) mine in southern Malheur County in southeastern Oregon.”

 

What does this have to do with Hillary and Bill Clinton? I’ll reprint my previous article so you can read the details, but the short version is: there’s a case to be made that they, through Uranium One and the Clinton Foundation, facilitated the sale of Uranium One to Putin and the Russians. And if so, and if this area of Oregon is projected to be part of that uranium mining deal, then we are looking at a stunning “coincidence”: the US federal government is coming down hard on a group of protestors who are occupying, for their own reasons, a very valuable piece of territory that goes far beyond the issue of private cattle grazing on government land.

 

It comes under the heading of those old familiar lines: you have no idea what you’re involved in; you have no idea who you’re messing with; this is way over your head; you just stepped into the middle of something that’s bigger than you can imagine.

 


 

Here is my previous article in full, “The Clintons: how Putin grabbed a fifth of all US uranium.” I’ll have a few important comments to make after the article:

 

—She’s the next US President, if an old socialist, a cowboy real estate hustler, and a bunch of emails can’t stop her.

 

He already was the President.

 

They’re married. Cue the dawn sunrise and violins for the beautiful first couple of American politics. Wow. In a land where they’re the first couple, does anybody have tickets to sell for the next flight to Mars?

 

Before I board my flight, what about the uranium scandal?

 

The what?

 

Before I quote a NY Times piece on this, consider—suppose, just suppose the beautiful first couple has been running a kind of parallel operation to the government, in the form of a foundation that is taking in major chunks of cash from people who want political favors. Just suppose. And a few donors who are ponying up those $$ want to sell a company to the Russians. But because this company sells a very, very sensitive product, and that product happens to come out of the ground in the US, agencies of the US government have to approve the sale. And one of those agencies that does approve the sale happens to be headed up by half of that beautiful couple. And this sensitive American product, well, the last person you’d want to control it is the head of a place called Russia—he can sit in Moscow and have complete dominion over this product that exists on US soil…and nobody thinks this is a problem, as half of the beautiful couple runs for President of the United States. It’s a yawn. It was a big story for a day or two, and then it sank below memory and everybody moved on. Forget about it. Who cares?

 

Memory is short. On April 23, 2015, the NY Times ran a story under the headline: “Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal”.

 

The bare bones of the story: a Canadian company called Uranium One controls a great deal of uranium production in the US. It was sold to Russia (meaning Putin and his minions). So Putin now controls 20% of US uranium production.

 

From the Times:

 

“…the sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States.”

 

From the Times:

 

“The [Pravda] article, in January 2013, detailed how the Russian atomic energy agency, Rosatom, had taken over a Canadian company [Uranium One] with uranium-mining stakes stretching from Central Asia to the American West. The deal made Rosatom one of the world’s largest uranium producers and brought Mr. Putin closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain.

 

“But the untold story behind that story is one that involves not just the Russian president, but also a former American president and a woman who would like to be the next one.

 

“At the heart of the tale are several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who have been major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family. Members of that group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One.

 

Frank Giustra…a mining financier, has donated $31.3 million to the foundation run by former President Bill Clinton…”

 

“Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal [to sell Uranium One to Putin] had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

 

“As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.

 

“And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.

 

“At the time, both Rosatom and the United States government made promises intended to ease concerns about ceding control of the company’s assets to the Russians. Those promises have been repeatedly broken, records show.

 

“Whether the donations [to the Clinton Foundation] played any role in the approval of the uranium deal is unknown. But the episode underscores the special ethical challenges presented by the Clinton Foundation, headed by a former president who relied heavily on foreign cash to accumulate $250 million in assets even as his wife helped steer American foreign policy as secretary of state, presiding over decisions with the potential to benefit the foundation’s donors.

 

“In a statement, Brian Fallon, a spokesman for Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign, said no one ‘has ever produced a shred of evidence supporting the theory that Hillary Clinton ever took action as secretary of state to support the interests of donors to the Clinton Foundation.’ He emphasized that multiple United States agencies, as well as the Canadian government, had signed off on the [uranium] deal and that, in general, such matters were handled at a level below the secretary. ‘To suggest the State Department, under then-Secretary Clinton, exerted undue influence in the U.S. government’s review of the sale of Uranium One is utterly baseless,’ he added.”

 

—The US State Dept. had to sign off on the deal giving Putin control over US uranium. Hillary headed up the State Dept. Much money from Canadian mining executives, who obviously wanted the deal to go through, found its way into the Clinton Foundation. The Foundation concealed these donations.

 

That’s called a circumstantial case. Every such case is different, and has to be judged by assessing probabilities. But for example, if an examination of two involved prominent figures revealed they were serial liars, it would strengthen a verdict of guilty.

 

If you’re Putin and you’re sitting in Moscow, and the uranium deal has just dropped this bonanza into your lap, what’s your reaction—after you stop laughing and popping champagne corks? Or maybe you never really stop laughing. Maybe this is a joke that keeps on giving. You wake up in the middle of the night with a big grin plastered on your face, and you can’t figure out why…and then you remember, oh yeah, the uranium deal. The US uranium. Who’s running the show in America? Ha-ha-ha. Some egregious dolt? Maybe he’s a sleeper agent we forgot about and he reactivated himself. And this foundation—how can the beautiful couple get away with that? And she’s going to be the next President? Can we give her a medal? Can we put up a statue of her in a park? Does Bill need any more hookers?

 

You shake your head and go back to sleep. You see a parade of little boats carrying uranium from the US to Russia. A pretty line of putt-putt boats. You chuckle. Row, row, row your boat…merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily…life is but a dream.

 

Good times.

 

—end of article—

 

So we have the Clintons, and Uranium One sold to Putin, and that sale gives him control of 20% of US uranium production. Now we have an area in Southern Oregon which has uranium, and in this area, the feds are coming down on the protestors and the occupiers.

 

What are the feds really trying to protect? Are they just trying to stop cattle grazing and routine burns on that land, or is there something more far precious at stake?

 

The feds aren’t known for making delicate distinctions. People are raising a bit of hell in the general (or specific) area where uranium mining could commence. Get them out of there! Move them off! No more cattle grazing here! This is a matter of national security!

 

Or it was. Now it’s a matter of Russian national security.

 

Make deal, protect the dealers. It’s business.

 

Consider the potential scandal and the massive irony: US citizens are asserting their sovereign right to use federal land, land that should never have been co-opted by the federal government in the first place—and now it turns out to be Russian land.

 

Jon Rappoport

 

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

 

 

 

 

Elections, Globalist, Government Fraud.

 

Post navigation

 

← The Clintons: how Putin grabbed a fifth of all US uranium

 

Human psychodrama on the world stage →

 

19 comments on “The Clintons: is the Oregon standoff really about uranium?”

 

  1. n3angus says:

    January 27, 2016 at 1:28 am

    Its has become obvious that Uranium One is running the show in the west called the takeover of resources and is very interested in the
    activities in southeastern Oregon by the posts on its facebook page , https://www.facebook.com/Uranium-One-1683613478585571/timeline , and with the Fox News story here , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcW2xTkh7rs , that talks about the 13 million acres that
    they intend to take away from the Western States for various economic
    activities like SEZ , http://www.solareis.anl.gov/sez/index.cfm

    We have started a Petition to use the same
    process of allowing for state citizens to receive just dividend royalties as
    Alaska Citizens are doing . I just started a petition calling for
    Royalties to be paid to state citizens off any economic activity on States
    lands like Alaskans get , on the White House Petitions site, We the People.
    Will you sign it? http://wh.gov/iwuee

    Any Economic activity on State lands should return a Dividend to the
    citizens of that state .

    Reply

 

  1. sunaj57 says:

    January 27, 2016 at 6:46 am

    The people who signed off on giving US territory or uranium to foreign countries should be tried for treason and jailed and these assets be returned to their rightful owners-the people of the United States

    Reply

 

 

independently of experimental observations.

Reply

 

  1. odie says:

    January 27, 2016 at 8:33 am

    and humanity slept on.

    Reply

 

    • Oliver Manuel says:

      January 27, 2016 at 9:32 am

      George Orwell realized what was happening in 1946 and moved from London to the Scottish Isle of Jura in 1946 to start writing a futuristic novel, “Nineteen Eighty-Four.”

      Orwell thought we would awaken to totalitarian rule by 1984, but we slept through 1984 and only partially awoke when Climaregate emails were released in Nov 2009.

 

 

 

  1. From Québec says:

    January 27, 2016 at 6:37 pm

    Nice investigative reporting, Jon.

    But, what else to expect from the Clintons?

    But, you know what, I much prefer seing the Uranium in the hands of Putin, who is trying to re-build his country, than to see the Uranium in the hands of Obama, who is trying to destroy his country.

    I also think that, n3angus, is right , about allowing for state citizens to receive just dividend royalties as Alaska Citizens are doing

    Off topic:

    Jon, you do not have to publish this. It was for your own information.

    Donald Trump’s announced that he was skipping the upcoming Fox News debate.

    “Instead of attending the debate, Trump’s campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, said they will hold an event in Iowa to raise money for wounded veterans.

    “And Fox will go from probably having 24 million viewers to about 2 million,” he said.

    Reply

 

  1. Oliver K. Manuel says:

    January 27, 2016 at 8:31 pm

    As the truth comes out, notice the false veneer of respectability on this 26 Jan 2016 paper:

    http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0147905

    Reply

 

 

 

  1. Sean Oliver says:

    January 27, 2016 at 8:58 pm

    This is a little off topic maybe? but here it is anyway! Watch the whole video if you can!>>

    Fukushima & How Globe And Mail Hoodwinked Uranium Stockholders Jan 4th 2015

    Reply

 

  1. Jim G. says:

    January 28, 2016 at 11:39 am

    I forwarded Jon’s above article to a friend of mine, who sent me back the following article. Clearly there has been a lot going on from behind the scenes regarding prosecution, along with an agenda that we’re not being told about:
    http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/01/04/unbelievable-update-oregon-bundy-militia-standoff-the-federal-prosecutor-at-the-heart-of-the-hammond-family-problem/

    Reply

 

  1. enki says:

    January 28, 2016 at 1:15 pm

    Within the spectrum of ….ASSET STRIPPING……Oregon acreages, you might like to consider …GOLD.

    The lands in question have been said to be rich in gold, veritable ….GOLD MINES…in fact.

    Upcoming developments in the gold market feature China’s intention to peg the Yuan to gold….in the first week of April 2016.

    http://www.goldstockbull.com/articles/gold-price-discovery-moving-to-china-in-april/

    Fort Knox and the Fed are thought to be empty, so China’s move could prove embarrassing for USA Inc: and, more particularly the….. RAT-child khazar MAFIA.

    Bloomberg has suggested gold may soar to $64,000.00 per oz.

    If, the Bloomberg estimate is true……..
    OREGON may be a GOLD MINE……………USA Inc:/RKM …… is DESPERATE to STEAL.

    http://www.goldcore.com/us/gold-blog/gold-at-64000-bloombergs-china-gold-price/

    It appears that due to the …..”DISAPPEARANCES”….of gold stocks, the market is exhibiting signs of stress.

    http://investmentwatchblog.com/did-comex-just-receive-a-physical-gold-bailout-from-the-feds/

    Finally the…. RAT-child khazar MAFIA….appear to have done such a tremendous job of annihilating/stealing gold stocks and, manipulating gold prices, the result is the gold market no longer displays a shred of integrity.

    http://www.abeldanger.net/2011/02/gata-gold-market-manipulation-huge.html#more

 

Test, using billions of people, proves that TESLA CARS destroy the environment

Technology |

 

Related: Tech, Environment, China, Global Energy News

In coal-powered China, electric car surge fuels fear of worsening smog

BEIJING | By Jake Spring

 

A customer checks a BYD e6 electric car at a dealership in Beijing, China, in this December 9, 2015 file picture.

 

Reuters/Jason Lee/Files

 

Automakers’ latest projections for rapid growth of China’s green car market have added to concerns of worsening smog as the uptake of electric vehicles powered by coal-fired grids races ahead of a switch to cleaner energy.

 

Volkswagen AG (VOWG_p.DE) plans 15 new-energy models over 3-5 years, its China chief told a green car conference in Beijing on Saturday, predicting – like the government – that Chinese production of electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles would grow almost six times to 2 million annually by 2020.

 

At the same event, BYD Co Ltd’s (002594.SZ) (1211.HK) chairman told media that the Chinese automaker’s electric vehicle sales would double in each of the next three years.

 

The government has been promoting electric vehicles to cut the smog that frequently envelops Chinese cities, helping sales quadruple last year and making China the biggest market, the finance minister said at the conference. Less than 1 percent of passenger cars are now new energy, but the pace of growth raises their potential to worsen smog.

 

A series of studies by Tsinghua University, whose alumni includes the incumbent president, showed electric vehicles charged in China produce two to five times as much particulate matter and chemicals that contribute to smog versus petrol-engine cars. Hybrid vehicles fare little better.

 

“International experience shows that cleaning up the air doesn’t need to rely on electric vehicles,” said Los Angeles-based An Feng, director of the Innovation Center for Energy and Transportation. “Clean up the power plants.”

 

China plans to convert the grid to renewable fuel or clean-coal technology as part of efforts to cut carbon emissions by 60 percent by 2020.

 

That will speed the green impact of electric vehicles, said environmental science professor Huo Hong at the elite Tsinghua university. But that goal will be “really difficult to achieve.”

 

Tsinghua’s studies call into question the wisdom of aggressively promoting vehicles which the university said could not be considered environmentally friendly for at least a decade in many areas of China unless grid reform accelerates.

 

China’s industry, environment and science ministries, which devise most new energy vehicle policies, did not respond to requests for comment. BYD and Volkswagen declined to immediately comment.

 

POLICY MISMATCH

 

To promote new-energy vehicles, the government has offered various incentives in recent years including tax breaks, and set targets such as having 5 million new-energy vehicles on the road by 2020 – more than 8 times the current number.

 

Authorities in some cities particularly affected by smog have gone further. Beijing and Tianjin, for instance, have exempted new-energy vehicles from limits on the number of new cars granted license plates, and exempted them from driving restrictions that other cars face on certain days of the week.

 

This month, the industrial Hebei province decreed that all new residential complexes must have car-charging facilities.

 

In western Beijing, 62-year-old retired truck and taxi driver Zhang Zhijun bought a BYD Tang hybrid last month and plans to trade in his petrol-engine Toyota Corolla for an electric car for short rides like taking his grandson to school.

 

“Right now smog is very heavy in China. This way, if everyone does their part, it will definitely cut down on pollution,” Zhang said.

 

But Beijing, Tianjin and Hebei are all more than 90 percent reliant on coal for energy, Tsinghua’s research showed.

 

Huo and academics point out that, at the very least, the proliferation of electric vehicles pushes more sources of pollution away from heavily populated urban centers.

 

Whatever the impact, Qin Lihong, president of startup electric automaker NextEV, said cleaning the grid would be the quickest route to clear skies.

 

“It’s much easier for society to make hundreds of power plants better than change the hundreds of millions of cars in thousands of cities,” he said.

 

(Reporting by Jake Spring; Additional reporting by Beijing newsroom; Editing by Christopher Cushing)

 

 

Is Panasonic The Most Unethical Company in Tech?

 

 

 

Elon Musk will do anything for dirty tech deal’s to increase his wealth and self-promotion via taxpayer pig troughs. He loves to partner with the dirtiest name in electronics: Panasonic.

 

 

 

Apparently, twisted minds think alike. When will the FBI finally shut both of these bad actors down?

 

 

 

Panasonic kills workers. Lies, runs corruption operations, dumps goods, builds toxic factories and well, just take a look:

 

 

 

Panasonic charged with price-fixing on car components

 

 

 

Dustin Walsh
Crain’s Detroit Business

 

A federal grand jury in Detroit indicted another Japanese automotive executive on Tuesday for involvement in an international pricing-fixing conspiracy.

 

According to the charges filed in U.S. District Court, Shinichi Kotani, an executive for Panasonic Corp., participated in fixing prices on switches and steering angles sensors for Toyota Motor Corp. vehicles sold in the U.S.

 

The indictment alleges Kotani and co-conspirators participated in big-rigging meetings in the U.S. and Japan from January 2004 until at least February 2010.

 

Besides various executive roles in Japan, Kotani served as vice president of automotive systems for Panasonic Automotive Systems Co. of America in Peachtree, Ga., from April 2008 until July 2009.

 

Panasonic also has an automotive technical center in suburban Detroit. Attempts to reach a company official for comment were unsuccessful. Efforts to locate an attorney for Kotani also were unsuccessful.

 

Kotani faces a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison and $1 million in fines for violating the Sherman Act.

 

The indictment — part of a broad ongoing U.S. investigation into supplier price fixing — is the second coming out of Detroit in the past week. Regulators in Europe and Japan have been conducting similar investigations.

 

On Sept. 19, Ryoji Fukudome and Toshihiko Nagashima, executives for Tokyo-based Fujikura Ltd., were indicted for allegedly fixing prices on wire harnesses sold to Fuji Heavy Industries. The parts were allegedly used in Fuji’s Subaru vehicle line sold in the U.S.

 

Earlier this month, Shingo Okuda, an executive at G.S. Electech Inc., was indicted by a federal grand jury in the Eastern District of Kentucky for bid-rigging on wire assemblies sold to Toyota.

 

In July, Panasonic pleaded guilty to its role in the conspiracy and was sentenced to pay a $45.8 million criminal fine.

 

The investigation has led to 11 companies and 19 executives, including Kotani, charged in the price-fixing conspiracy.

 

More than $874 million in criminal fines have been imposed on the companies, and 14 executives have been sentenced to prison ranging from a year to two years each.

 

The list of companies that have pleaded guilty include Panasonic, Sanyo Electric Co., Diamond Electric Manufacturing Co., Tokai Rika, Autoliv, TRW Deutschland Holding GmbH, Nippon Seiki Co., Fujikura, Furukawa Electric Co., Denso Corp., Yazaki Corp. and G.S. Electech.

 

 

 

Panasonic will spend up to $1.6 billion on Tesla gigafactory

 

Posted by Charles Morris & filed under Newswire, The Tech.

 

 

Panasonic has been involved with Tesla’s Gigafactory from the beginning of the project, but until now, it hasn’t said exactly how much it plans to invest.

Now Panasonic President Kazuhiro Tsuga has told Marketwatch that the company will invest up to $1.6 billion, hoping to secure its future in automotive electronics.

 

Sales to carmakers represented about 15 percent of Panasonic’s revenue in 2015, but the company aims to double that over the next four years. That objective is highly dependent on Tesla’s ability to meet its goal of selling 500,000 cars a year by 2020, as batteries are expected to provide the lion’s share of Panasonic’s automotive-market sales.

 

“We are sort of waiting on the demand from Tesla,” Mr. Tsuga said. “If Tesla succeeds and the electric vehicle becomes mainstream, the world will be changed and we will have lots of opportunity to grow.”

 

 

Tesla and Panasonic plan to build the factory in eight phases, and are currently in the first phase. So far, the Japanese company’s investment has been small, but by the time the Gig is fully up to speed, Panasonic will have provided between 1.5 and 1.6 billion dollars, out of a total price tag of 4 to 5 billion, Mr. Tsuga said.

 

Panasonic employees were expected to arrive in Nevada at the end of 2015 to prepare for the start of cell production. The factory will begin producing batteries this year for Tesla’s Powerwall energy storage business.

 

 

 

Source: Marketwatch via Green Car Reports

 

Tags: Panasonic, Tesla Gigafactory

 

 

 

 

Panasonic and Its Subsidiary Sanyo Agree to Plead Guilty in Separate Price-Fixing Conspiracies Involving Automotive Parts and Battery Cells

 

Lg Chem Ltd. Agrees to Plead Guilty to Price-fixing Conspiracy Involving Battery Cells, First Charges Filed in Battery Cell Investigation

 

Panasonic Corp. and its subsidiary, SANYO Electric Co. Ltd., have agreed to plead guilty and to pay a total of $56.5 million in criminal fines for their roles in separate price-fixing conspiracies involving automotive parts and battery cells, the Department of Justice announced today.  LG Chem Ltd., a leading manufacturer of secondary batteries, has agreed to plead guilty and to pay a $1.056 million criminal fine for price fixing involving battery cells.

 

  Osaka, Japan-based Panasonic agreed to pay a $45.8 million criminal fine for its role in the automotive parts conspiracy. SANYO agreed to pay a $10.731 million criminal fine for its role in the battery cells conspiracy.  The guilty pleas against SANYO and LG Chem are the first in the department’s ongoing investigation into anticompetitive conduct in the cylindrical lithium ion battery cell industry.

The three-count felony charge against Panasonic was filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan.  Separate one-count felony charges were filed against SANYO and LG Chem in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.  As part of the plea agreements, which are subject to court approval, the charged companies have agreed to cooperate in the department’s ongoing antitrust investigations.

 

 Panasonic has agreed to plead guilty for its role in a conspiracy to fix prices of switches, steering angle sensors and automotive high intensity discharge (HID) ballasts installed in cars sold in the United States and elsewhere.  SANYO and LG Chem Ltd. have agreed to plead guilty for their roles in a conspiracy to fix the prices of cylindrical lithium ion battery cells sold worldwide for use in notebook computer battery packs.

 

 “Panasonic is charged with participating in separate price-fixing conspiracies affecting numerous parts used in cars made and sold in the United States while its subsidiary was also fixing prices on battery cells used by consumers of notebook computers,” said Scott D. Hammond, Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division’s criminal enforcement program.  “Pleading guilty and cooperating with the division’s ongoing investigations is a necessary step in changing a corporate culture that turned customers into price-fixing victims.” 

 

 According to the first count of a three-count felony charge filed today in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan in Detroit, Panasonic participated in a conspiracy to rig bids for, and to fix, stabilize and maintain the prices of steering wheel switches, turn switches, wiper switches, combination switches and door courtesy switches sold to Toyota Motor Corp. and Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America Inc. in the United States and elsewhere. According to the court document, Panasonic and its co-conspirators carried out the conspiracy from at least as early as September 2003 until at least February 2010.

 

 The second count charges that Panasonic, during this same time period, participated in a conspiracy to rig bids for, and to fix, stabilize, and maintain the prices of steering angle sensors sold to Toyota in the United States and elsewhere. The department said that Panasonic and its co-conspirators agreed, during meetings and conversations, to suppress and eliminate competition in the automotive parts industry by agreeing to rig bids for, and to fix, stabilize, and maintain the prices of steering angle sensors sold to Toyota Motor Corp. and Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America Inc. in the United States and elsewhere.

 

 According to the third count of the charge, from at least as early as July 1998 and continuing until at least February 2010, Panasonic and its co-conspirators participated in a conspiracy to suppress and eliminate competition in the automotive parts industry by agreeing, during meetings and conversations, to rig bids for, and to fix, stabilize, and maintain the prices of automotive HID ballasts sold to Honda Motor Co. Ltd. and American Honda Motor Co. Inc., Mazda Motor Corp. and Mazda Motor of America Inc., and Nissan Motor Co. Ltd. and Nissan North America Inc. in the United States and elsewhere.

 

 I ncluding Panasonic, 11 companies and 15 executives have pleaded guilty or agreed to plead guilty and have agreed to pay a total of more than $874 million in criminal fines as a result of the auto parts investigation. Additionally, 12 of the individuals have been sentenced to pay criminal fines and to serve jail sentences ranging from a year and a day to two years each. The three additional executives have agreed to serve time in prison and are currently awaiting sentencing.

 

 

 

“The FBI remains committed to protecting American consumers and businesses from corporate corruption. The conduct of Panasonic, SANYO, and LG Chem resulted in inflated production costs for notebook computers and cars purchased by U.S. consumers,” said Joseph S. Campbell, FBI Criminal Investigative Division Deputy Assistant Director.  “These investigations illustrate our efforts to ensure market fairness for U.S. businesses by bringing corporations to justice when their commercial activity violates antitrust laws.”

 

 According to the one-count felony charge filed today in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in San Francisco, SANYO and LG Chem engaged in a conspiracy to fix the price of the cylindrical lithium ion battery cells used in notebook computer battery packs from about April 2007 until about September 2008. Cylindrical lithium ion battery cells are rechargeable batteries that are often incorporated in groups into more powerful battery packs commonly used to power electronic devices.

 

 According to the charges, SANYO, LG Chem and their co-conspirators carried out the conspiracy by, among other things, agreeing during meetings and conversations to price cylindrical lithium ion battery cells for use in notebook computer battery packs to customers at predetermined levels and issuing price quotations to customers in accordance with those agreements. The department also said that SANYO, LG Chem and their co-conspirators collected and exchanged information for the purpose of monitoring and enforcing adherence to the agreed-upon prices and took steps to conceal the conspiracy.

 

 Panasonic, SANYO and LG Chem are each charged with price fixing in violation of the Sherman Act, which carries a maximum penalty of a $100 million criminal fine for corporations. The maximum fine for the company may be increased to twice the gain derived from the crime or twice the loss suffered by the victims, if either of those amounts is greater than the statutory maximum fine.

 

 Today’s charges arose from an ongoing investigation in the cylindrical lithium ion battery cells industry being conducted by the Antitrust Division’s San Francisco Office and the FBI in San Francisco as well as an ongoing federal antitrust investigation into price fixing, bid rigging and other anticompetitive conduct in the automotive parts industry, which is being conducted by each of the Antitrust Division’s criminal enforcement sections and the FBI. Today’s automotive parts charges were brought by the Antitrust Division’s National Criminal Enforcement Section and the FBI’s Detroit Field Office, with the assistance of the FBI headquarters’ International Corruption Unit. Anyone with information on price fixing, bid rigging and other anticompetitive conduct related to other products in the automotive parts industry should contact the Antitrust Division’s Citizen Complaint Center at 1-888-647-3258, visit www.justice.gov/atr/contact/newcase.html or call the FBI’s Detroit Field Office at 313-965-2323. Anyone with information concerning illegal or anticompetitive conduct in the battery industry is urged to call the Antitrust Division’s San Francisco Office at 415-436-6660 or visit www.justice.gov/atr/contact/newcase.htm.

 

 

Panasonic Execs Charged In Price-Fixing Sting

 

By Kaitlin Ugolik

Law360, New York — A grand jury in Michigan on Tuesday indicted former executives of Panasonic Corp., Whirlpool Corp. and Tecumseh Products Co. for their alleged participation in an international refrigerant compressor price-fixing scheme.

The indictment is the first in an ongoing investigation by the U .S. Department of Justice into price-fixing and other anti-competitive practices in the worldwide refrigerant compressor market.

“Cracking down on international price-fixing cartels has been, and will continue to be, among the most significant priorities for the Antitrust Division,” Sharis Pozen, Special Investigator, said.

 

FBI Probing Kickbacks By Panasonic Supplier

By

The FBI said this week federal prosecutors charged William McMahon, CEO and co-owner of Trustin Technology, and Sean Volin, who was a manager for Pansonic Corp. of North America at its Secaucus, N.J., office, with wire fraud. McMahon paid kickbacks to Volin to ensure his company would continue to receive contracts from Panasonic that brought tens of millions of dollars to the company, the FBI said in a statement.

Tell Sony and Panasonic: Stop Poisoning Tijuana’s Workers!

Marisa Natale 

 

 

I am writing to address the manufacturing practices of international corporations in Mexico, especially Tijuana. The workers in their plants are treated inhumanely, and they are destroying the communities around their factories. They are able to escape fair treatment of their workers and responsible chemical use by moving their manufacturing to Mexico – out of sight and out of mind of their customers. The fact that any company would be so deliberately manipulative is disgusting and unbelievable.

            The chemicals the workers are constantly exposed to are killing them – they are inhaling lead, burning their skin with chemical adhesives and giving birth to children with defects. They have sores and infections in their lungs and organs. They are going to die young – their children are living in the company waste and filth.

They are offered no rights, no protection, and no fair treatment. To make matters worse, they do not get a reprieve at home. The worker communities surrounding the plants are wastelands of corporate footprints. The rivers run with chemicals – the rivers that serve as drinking, cooking and washing water for the inhabitants. The ground is saturated with dangerous and harmful substances used in their factories. When the rains run, the polluted rivers overrun into people’s homes and they must cross them on foot simply to get to work, where they are exposed to even more chemicals.

            They are not responsible for the workers’ living conditions. They are not responsible for downed power lines, education issues or lack of proper homes. However, nothing I have mentioned in this petition is beyond their control. They can stop the use of dangerous and deadly chemicals in factories. They can clean up their act. They can stop letting their chemicals run off into the workers’ water supplies, homes and bodies. They can hire an environmental task force to clean up the communities that they have ruined, which would create legitimate jobs. They can hire engineers to figure out solutions to replace the deadly chemicals with harmless ones that still enable them to produce a high-quality product.

            Sony and Panasonic are committed to serving their customers with dignity and respect – but their employees deserve to be treated in the same way. Until Sony and Panasonic change their production practices and clean up the communities they have ruined, I am instituting a boycott of their products.  This is unacceptable and will not be allowed to continue – as free Americans we vote with our dollars and we cannot choose to vote for their companies until change happens.

 

So when you buy a piece of electronic equipment, whether it is a television or a camera cable, to a microwave or a toaster, LOOK FOR THE SONY/PANASONIC LABEL. Sony brands many of its products clearly, but you may have to look carefully for the Panasonic name. Don’t allow this to continue. If the profit margins aren’t working, Panasonic and Sony will have to change their manufacturing practices, and we have to make it hurt where it counts for them to listen. Aim high! Invite your friends! Sign away! We want as many thousands of signatures as possible!

 

 

Letter to

 

 

 

Panasonic Communications

 

We are writing to you to address your manufacturing practices in Mexico, especially Tijuana. The workers in your plants are treated inhumanely, and you are destroying the communities around your factories. You are able to escape fair treatment of your workers and responsible chemical use by moving your manufacturing to Mexico – out

 

Panasonic’s Toxic Factories Take Toll On China’s Labor Force

 

 

 

By

Jane Spencer and

Juliet Ye

Over the holidays, millions of American children received Chinese-made toys powered by cadmium batteries.

Cadmium batteries are safe to use. They are also cheap, saving American parents about $1.50 on the average toy, compared with pricier batteries.

But cadmium batteries can be hazardous to make. In southern China, Wang Fengping worked for years in plants that produced cadmium batteries for the likes of Mattel Inc., Toys “R” Us Inc. and Wal-Mart Stores Inc. Like hundreds of her colleagues, Ms. Wang regularly inhaled the toxic red cadmium dust that filled the air in the plant.

Now, at 45, Ms. Wang is often too weak to walk. Her kidneys have failed, and her doctors have identified cadmium poisoning as the likely culprit. About 400 other workers at her former employer, Hong Kong-based GP Batteries International Ltd., have been found to harbor unsafe levels of cadmium, a toxic metal like mercury and lead that can cause kidney failure, lung cancer and bone disease.

In recent months, Americans have discovered the dark side of their reliance on cheap Chinese goods. From lead-tainted toys to contaminated pet food, the safety of Chinese products is suddenly an American obsession.

But in China, workers making goods for American consumers have long borne the brunt of a global manufacturing system that puts cost cutting ahead of safety. The search for cheaper production means dirty industries are migrating to countries with few worker protections and lenient regulatory environments.

The nickel-cadmium battery illustrates this trend. Once widely manufactured in the West, the batteries are now largely made in China, where the industry is sickening workers and poisoning the soil and water.

Now, some regulators and companies are taking action. This year, the European Union is banning the sale of nearly all cadmium batteries. A few companies, including Hasbro Inc., are eschewing the battery.

Yet cadmium batteries, a technology dating back to 1899, continue to represent 3% of total battery sales, and are still widely used in toys, power tools, cordless phones and other gadgets sold in the U.S. Besides being inexpensive, they can provide a quick surge of power.

The near-disappearance of the American cadmium-battery industry can be understood from a visit to an overgrown field in Cold Spring, N.Y. Here, the Marathon Battery factory churned out nickel-cadmium batteries for the U.S. military for three decades. After the plant was shuttered in 1979, the cadmium-laden ground became one of the nation’s highest-profile superfund sites, sparking a $130 million clean-up and a class-action lawsuit by nearby residents that was settled for millions of dollars in 1998.

Poisoned Words

Edited excerpts from Ms. Wang’s blog, written in Chinese and translated by The Wall Street Journal. Click on the image to go to the blog itself.

ENLARGE

  • From the blog’s undated introduction
    Hello friends! Do you want to know how Gold Peak Battery treats its cadmium-poisoned employees? Would you like to hear a personal account from a victim of workplace cadmium poisoning? Panasonic Battery and past and present battery factory workers, would you like to know more specific facts? Then please read my blog, and let’s unite in concern for cadmium poisoning!

  • Nov. 20, 2007 — Global warming, colder heart
    It was hard to get up to eat a bit of breakfast, my head hurt and my whole body felt discomfort, but finally I decided to go outside. Everyone is talking about global warming, temperatures are rising, but today I felt the wind was pretty strong and the temperature colder than yesterday. I felt as if I was sleepwalking through unfamiliar streets. After a while, I gathered my thoughts and returned home.

  • Nov. 11, 2007 — The visible and the invisible
    Our society is full of love; if a person gets into trouble, others will help. But when it comes to occupational diseases — a hidden killer — that cannot be seen, I’m afraid that it’s very difficult for those without personal experience to understand. Most workers have limited knowledge, ultimately you don’t know how many hidden killers are in your workplace. The boss knows, but he won’t tell you!

  • Nov. 11, 2007 — First application for an occupational illness diagnosis
    My name is Wang Fengping. I am an engineer in the engineering department of the Gold Peak Battery Factory in Huizhou city, Guandong province. I was born in May 1962 and began work at Gold Peak on August 1, 1995. From that date until December 2005, I was continuously engaged in the production and follow-up design of manufacturing equipment and machinery. This entry includes an account of all of Ms. Wang’s jobs, workplaces, names of co-workers, and whether those employees had symptoms similar to Ms. Wang’s.

  • Nov, 7, 2007 — Poem, in Chinese and English
    “It is my prayer, it is my longing, that we may pass from this life together / a longing which shall never perish from the earth, / but shall have place in the heart of every wife that loves, / until the end of the time; and it shall be called by my name.”

As the U.S. and other Western nations tightened their regulation of cadmium, production of nickel-cadmium batteries moved to less-developed countries, most of it eventually winding up in China. “Everything was transferred to China because no one wanted to deal with the waste from cadmium,” says Josef Daniel-Ivad, vice president for research and development at Pure Energy Visions, an Ontario battery company.

Today, only two American companies still make cadmium batteries, and they specialize in high-end batteries for use in equipment such as aircraft engines. U.S. laws require them to follow strict guidelines on worker safety and environmental protection.

In China, government standards on cadmium exposure are in line with those endorsed by the World Health Organization. And without question, there are safe cadmium plants in China.

But having rules and enforcing them are two different things. China has dozens of so-called “hot spots” where the cadmium contamination is similar to levels at U.S. superfund sites. More that 10% of China’s arable land is contaminated with heavy metals such as cadmium, according to the State Environmental Protection Agency, and the metals are entering China’s food supply. At least a dozen academic studies in the past two years have found unsafe levels of cadmium in fruit and vegetables grown in Chinese soil. In a study published last year, researchers at the Guangdong Institute of Ecology found excessive levels of cadmium in Chinese cabbage grown in Foshan. The battery industry isn’t the only source of environmental cadmium contamination in China, but it is a major contributor.

Often, these risks extend to workers. Last year, at least 20 workers at a Panasonic Corp. cadmium-battery plant in Wuxi were found to have elevated levels of the toxin, and two were diagnosed as poisoned. In 2005, 1,000 workers at Huanyu Power Source Co., based in Xinxiang, Henan, were also found with cadmium exposure. Both Panasonic and Huanyu say they have taken care of the affected workers, providing health care and compensation exceeding the requirements of Chinese law.

Yet these findings didn’t necessarily result from corporate or government vigilance. The Panasonic-plant contamination, for instance, came to light after some workers watched a television show about cadmium poisoning — and got themselves tested.

Protest about contamination at the GP plants has persisted in part because of the determination of Ms. Wang, a GP engineer, to publicize the matter.

Born into a relatively well-off family, Ms. Wang attended university and obtained an engineering degree before hiring on at a newly opened GP factory in the southern Chinese city of Huizhou, a fast-growing center of China’s electronics industry. The year was 1995, and GP Batteries, a Singapore-listed unit of Hong Kong-listed Gold Peak Industries (Holdings) Ltd. Huizhou, was a prestigious employer, eventually becoming one of the largest makers of nickel-cadmium batteries in China.

As a machine designer, Ms. Wang worked in the management offices of a walled compound of pink-tiled buildings where some 1,500 women in matching blue smocks worked 12-hour days assembling nickel-cadmium battery packs for toys and other products. GP’s clients eventually came to include dozens of U.S. companies including Energizer Battery Co., Proctor & Gamble Co.’s Duracell, Spectrum Brands Inc.’s Ray-O-Vac, Hasbro, Mattel, Wal-Mart and Toys “R” Us.

For years, factory workers complained about illnesses — nausea, hair loss and exhaustion, for instance. But GP management says it wasn’t aware of the extent of the cadmium danger. “We knew it was dangerous, but we thought that if it was handled in a reasonable manner you should be OK,” says Henry Leung, chief operating officer of GP Batteries. “This is all new for China.”

At the factory, Ms. Wang spent the bulk of her time in an office, quietly sketching machine designs. But between 2002 and 2004, she spent long hours in production areas, inhaling cadmium dust, according to a lawsuit filed by Ms. Wang against the factory.

In 2003, some sick workers paid for their own tests at an occupational-disease hospital and learned they had elevated cadmium levels. The news touched off panic on the factory floor, and workers demanded the company pay for cadmium tests. Hundreds of workers eventually went on strike.

GP says it began paying for cadmium checkups in mid-2004, as soon as the region set up facilities that could handle large volumes of cadmium testing. In the initial tests, 177 workers showed levels of cadmium above China’s safe-exposure limit, and two qualified as poisoned. Dozens were immediately hospitalized.

Cadmium affects people in radically different ways, so many GP workers with elevated levels aren’t sick, but may become so in the years ahead.

Roughly 900 workers quit their jobs, and GP offered cadmium-affected workers one-time exit compensation starting at about $500. GP says the average package was $2,100. Many workers say the compensation failed to cover their medical bills.

GP says it has paid out more than $1 million in compensation and medical care for affected workers and has exceeded the legal requirements. “We want to take care of workers,” says GP’s Mr. Leung, but he says some workers are feigning sickness to obtain money. “They want to be recorded as poisoned, so people will keep giving them compensation,” he says.

Ms. Wang watched on the sidelines as the bitter saga unfolded at her factory. During her nine years at the factory, she rarely had contact with rank-and-file workers, and her $540 weekly salary was nearly triple what they earned. While other workers ate in a cafeteria, Ms. Wang sat in a manager’s dining room with table cloths and porcelain dishes.

But in October of 2004, when GP first paid for companywide cadmium tests, Ms. Wang’s result came back showing cadmium levels above the safe-exposure limit set by the Chinese government. However, to qualify for continuing monitoring, China’s occupational-disease laws require two consecutive positive tests. A second test showed Ms. Wang’s cadmium level in the normal range, disqualifying her for assistance.

Three occupational-medicine doctors — in London, Sweden and the U.S. — who reviewed Ms. Wang’s medical records for The Wall Street Journal say her initial test showed clear indications of kidney damage, a marker of possible cadmium poisoning.

“There’s no doubt that in 2004, she had smoking-gun-type indicators of kidney damage, and in a person who works with cadmium, that should not be ignored,” says Dr. Arch Carson, an expert in occupational medicine and environmental sciences at the University of Texas School of Public Health.

GP says it relies on medical experts at government-run occupational-disease hospitals in the nearby city of Guangzhou to determine if workers required monitoring.

Having no symptoms, Ms. Wang continued playing badminton and jogging. But in early 2006, she began to feel extremely weak, and suffered headaches. Her skin began to age rapidly, and her eyes became sunken hollows. In November 2006, Ms. Wang was diagnosed at a local hospital with chronic renal failure that doctors said would likely shorten her life.

On Dec. 25, 2006, Ms. Wang approached GP management with news of her diagnosis. She requested that GP send her to the occupational-disease hospital in Guangzhou, which has facilities for treating cadmium exposure.

ENLARGE

A stalemate ensued. The company says it was willing to help, but that Ms. Wang refused to follow local legal procedures. Local laws required that Ms. Wang visit a local hospital first, in order to be referred to the main occupational-disease hospital in Guangzhou. The company says Ms. Wang demanded they send her directly to the Guangzhou hospital, in violation of regulations.

In May, Ms. Wang sued the factory for $400,000 in compensation and medical care. To build her case, Ms. Wang used her access to company computers to download files that showed other workers in her department were exposed to cadmium. GP says there is no evidence that Ms. Wang’s illness is related to cadmium, and doctors at the Guangzhou Occupational Disease Hospital say her kidney failure doesn’t meet the criteria for occupational disease.

By last summer, Ms. Wang’s health was failing. According to medical records from a hospital in Nanjing, she was admitted with a fever and a respiratory infection. Doctors there treated her for chronic renal failure, and listed “long-term exposure to cadmium-containing substances” as a possible cause, according to her medical records.

As workers, including Ms. Wang, sought to bring attention to the issue, a public-relations battle erupted. In 2005, GP filed a lawsuit against labor-rights groups representing the workers, charging libel. The case is moving through Hong Kong courts.

On their way to an interview with a Wall Street Journal reporter in August, Ms. Wang and several colleagues were pulled over by police and detained for nearly 13 hours in a Huizhou police station, according to several sources familiar with the incident. A person present at the Huizhou police station says the workers were told they would be charged with treason if they spoke to the media again. The Huizhou government says its police detained no battery workers.

Ms. Wang stopped answering her cellphone after the incident with the Huizhou police. But she began writing a blog to advise victims of cadmium poisoning. A recent post, in Chinese, said, “Basically, occupational disease could be prevented but it costs money. Money is the gold of bosses. And for them, the lives of workers are worthless.”

After revelations of its cadmium-battery problems arose, GP quit making them at its plants, and now outsources that production to independent factories in China.

In America, five years after Hasbro stopped using nickel-cadmium batteries, Mattel and Toys “R” Us are yet to follow suit, but say they are exploring alternatives. Wal-Mart no longer purchases cadmium batteries from GP but declined to comment on whether it still uses them in its products.

Mattel says cadmium batteries have some performance advantages over alternatives, such as a better ability to retain a charge when not used for long periods.

—Sky Canaves in Hong Kong contributed to this article.

 

Panasonic ‘covered up’ poisoning at battery factory, report claims

By Texyt Staff – Sat, 04/28/2007 – 11:51.

Panasonic hid evidence that workers were poisoned at a battery factory, a report in a Chinese newspaper claims. Even pregnant women were not warned they might have been exposed to high levels of Cadmium, a potentially lethal heavy metal, the report alleges, quoting a manager who says he was laid off when he threatened to turn whistleblower.

The allegations are being made by a former human resources manager according to an article in the 21st Century Economic Report, a newspaper published by China’s respected Southern Daily Group (Linked sites are in Chinese).

Panasonic has not yet responded to a request for comment on the case, which is claimed to have taken place over the past three years at a factory (photo) manufacturing rechargeable Nickel-Cadmium batteries in Wuxi, north of Shanghai. Exposure to even tiny amounts of Cadmium is known to increase the risk of cancer and can lead to a variety of crippling and potentially-fatal health conditions.

‘Health reports buried’, claim

The newspaper’s source, named as ex-human resources manager, Pan Wei, claims he was hired by the company in October 2006. Later that same month, he told reporters, the company doctor gave him safety reports on Cadmium exposure to sign.

The original health tests showed that ten staff had Cadmium levels above safety limits, Mr. Pan said. However, an overall safety report stated that no staff had any such problem.

The doctor told Pan that this was normal procedure, and staff with dangerous Cadmium exposure were rotated to different work until their health reports improved, the ex-manager alleges.

Continued for three years?

According to the newspaper article: “Pan realized that since 2003, the company has handled the staff health examination every year, and every year the examination says all the staff have no problem, so none of the staff have been notified of the real poisonous Cadmium level”

The story continues: “The doctor said, this is our normal procedure. The director of the factory has signed his name, and higher people above have signed their names too. So you sign your name and there will be no problem”

Pregnant workers affected, report claims

Some workers had left the factory to work at other jobs where they might be exposed to Cadmium poisoning, without realizing they already had dangerous levels of Cadmium in their bodies, Pan alleges. In addition, he says, some of those affected were pregnant. Pan claims he was laid off after he demanded executives warn these workers of the risk. Panasonic informed him he had not performed satisfactorily during his probationary employment period, he says.

Panasonic is a trading name of Japan’s giant Matsushita Electric Industrial group. The company has not yet responded to a request for comment on this case.

Public perception

Leading Japanese firms such as Matsushita are major investors in Chinese manufacturing. However, Chinese people have mixed perceptions about Japan. While they admire the country’s advanced economy and culture, they also tend to believe that Japan has abused China in the past, particularly during the Second World War, and has failed to apologize adequately.

This negative perception has been fed by a heavy diet of official anti-Japanese propaganda, including school text books which harp upon Japan’s historical misdeeds.

In this environment, Japanese firms operating in China are highly sensitive to negative publicity which might combine with smouldering anti-Japanese sentiment to ignite a firestorm of criticism.

Update April 29: ‘ The website of the Wuxi battery factory was taken offline yesterday’ – removed this line as the website was only taken offline temporarily and is currently accessible with no obvious changes from the previous version – thanks to anonymous commenter below.

Red Dust – documentary on cadmium poisoning in Chinese women battery workers for Tesla Cars

 

Aug 06, 2010

 

 

Red Dust, a documentary directed by Karin Mak, chronicles the struggle for justice by women workers in China who have been poisoned by cadmium while manufacturing nickel-cadmium batteries. 

 

Click here to view the trailer.

Cadmium has been in the international and USA news lately as found in jewellery and McDonald’s Shrek glasses. However, the majority of cadmium is used for production of nickel-cadmium batteries, a type of rechargeable battery.

Cadmium is a very toxic heavy metal and the brave women in the film live with its debilitating effects in addition to risking their safety in their fight for justice. It covers themes of workers’ rights, globalization, occupational safety and health, China’s economic development and women’s rights.

 

Red cadmium dust drifted freely in China’s nickel-cadmium battery factories owned and operated by GP BATTERIES (GP), one of the world’s top battery manufacturers. Ren, a migrant worker originally from Sichuan, suffers from frequent headaches and breathing difficulties. If untreated, the cadmium poisoning can lead to kidney failure, cancer, and even death.

Red Dust tells an unexamined side of China’s economic development: the resistance, courage, and hope of workers battling occupational disease, demanding justice from the local government and global capital. Chinese migrant workers are deemed disposable by factory owners and are stereotypically viewed as quiet and passive victims. However, Ren and other GP workers (Min, Fu, and Wu) fight back. Labor issues are very sensitive in China, and workers who publicly discuss their struggles do so at great risk. The audience discovers along with the filmmaker, a Chinese American, the horrors of the global assembly line.

This documentary is about women who are the engine of the global economy. Although the film takes place in China, the characters’ experiences are universal to workers on the margins around the world, where poverty, migration, and workplace hazards are common realities.

 

The film is 20 minutes, in Mandarin and Sichuanhua, with English subtitles. 

 

 What is Cadmium Poisoning?
Cadmium (cd) is a heavy metal used primarily in the production of nickel-cadmium batteries. Workers exposed to cadmium can suffer symptoms such as memory loss, dizziness, headaches, lack of strength, and pain in the back and limbs. In 2006, the European Union banned cadmium in electronics due to its extremely toxic properties.

Workers who suffer from cadmium poisoning may not look sick, and serious health issues may take several years to arise. Once cadmium enters the body, it takes between seven to thirty years for the body to flush it out, which is particularly harmful for the kidneys. Cadmium poisoning has also been linked to kidney failure and cancer. The effects of cadmium poisoning can be fatal. In 2006, Fu Hong Qin, a co-worker of the women featured in RED DUST, died from kidney failure. She had worked at a GP BATTERIES factory for 2 years.

Unsafe workplaces are not uncommon in China. According to the country’s State Administration for Work Safety (SAWS) 2004 report, China has the world’s highest number of occupational disease victims and deaths resulting from occupational diseases.

 

Click here to read more.

 

The director

 

Karin T Mak was born and raised in St. Louis, Missouri, USA to immigrants originally from Hong Kong. She spent several years on immigrant and workers’ rights campaigns in California. In 2003, she received the prestigious New Voices Fellowship to work with Sweatshop Watch, a Los Angeles-based non-profit educating the public about globalization. Mak is winner of the 2008 Roy W. Dean LA Film Grant.

 

Panasonic also face issue like hiding evidence that workers were poisoned at a battery factory in China . During that time, Panasonic are manufacturing rechargeable Nickel-Cadmium batteries in Wuxi, north of Shanghai. The worker were not warned when they have been exposed to high level of Cadmium, a potentially lethal heavy metal that can lead to a variety of crippling and potentially-fatal health conditions thus increasing the risk of death

 

 

 

 

 

How Did Elon Musk get involved in so many dirty schemes?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Elon Musk is a Lying Scumbag” say critics!

It is, now, well known that all of Elon Musk’s companies would not exist, today, if not for White House kick-backs and West Wing mandated steam-rolling of his competitors, in order to protect his loose relationship with morality.

The many news article about how Musk has based his whole career on getting handed taxpayer cash, as Payola, in exchange for his partners funding political campaigns, are published around the world.

While Musk may be a con-artist, carpet bagger and public funds thief, one has to wonder if his ability to convincingly lie is incumbent to his nature.

Is he like all of those zillions of guys that you see on that TV show: “48 Hours”? You know, the ones who meet the girl, her family says “he is wonderful”, his co-workers say he “was the nicest guy”. His neighbor says he “wouldn’t hurt a fly’… and you always find out he cut off her head, ate her liver and chopped her into sausage. Is he like that? Always smiling, but hiding a meat cleaver behind the smile?

Musk has taken nearly two decades to sell only as many cars as a “real” car company sells in two weeks? He says he had to “figure out” how to build a car, so that is why it took so long. Is that true? Why did he spend so long, on something so rudimentary, only to have it turn out to be “ the official car of douchebags and assholes”?

In those two decades, he has spent more money on those few cars than other real car companies spent on 10 cars. He says his run of the mill car was “so hard to build” and that was why it was $118,000.00 over budget PER CAR, at the time he applied for federal emergency cash. Was it really hard to build or was he siphoning money out to political campaigns?

He says the car is “Totally different” but it is the same electric car layout that electric cars have had since the 1800’s. The Nissan Leaf and all of the other famous car company electric cars did not have any of the problems, delays or issues that Musk always has. Is he lying or just an idiot?

Critics say that Tesla was created to war-profiteer Afghan lithium that his campaign financier partners had inside deals with Russian mobsters for. They say that Solar City was created to accept kick-backs from Steven Chu at the Department of Energy and that Space X was created so Musk’s partners, at spy agency IN-Q-Tel, could profit off of public surveillance systems. Musk says “no”, in spite of millions of pages of evidence to the contrary. Is he lying?

Bernie Tse, and about 18 Tesla employees, worked for Elon Musk to create a battery sales division, but that fell apart when massive amounts of federal reports emerged, in 2006 and 2007 that proved that Tesla partner: Panasonic, was involved in bribes, crime, dumping, killing workers with poison chemicals and other crimes. At the same time, Elon Musk saw reports that confirmed that his lithium ion would blow up spontaneously, catch on fire when stressed by a car, exude toxic fumes that cause cancer, liver damage, cellular breakdown and fetal mutation and that you had to invade Afghanistan and Bolivia to get the lithium. Even, today, as Tesla’s, hover-boards, and numerous lithium ion devices, explode regularly, Musk says there is “no problem” with lithium ion. Is he lying?

The Department of Energy documents filed by Elon Musk, to get taxpayer cash have over 100 things that Musk promised, in writing, that turned out to never have happened and/or never been true. Did he lie..or just have a few typos?

His numerous divorces and break-ups have resulted in people, who knew him intimately, saying he was a “fraud and a “liar”.

His co-founders at Tesla sued him saying he was a “liar” and a “scam artist”.

His investors have said, in lawsuits, that he is a “liar” and a “fraud”.

Erick Strickland, the head of the highway safety agency, was confronted with covering up the DRAMATIC number of safety issues known about the Tesla. He quit the next day. What doesn’t Musk quit?

In a recent article about Musk and Space X, with a cover photo depicting Musk in the company of rats, his own employees are quoted calling him a “liar”.

There are hundreds and hundreds of news articles describing different things that Musk has lied about.

Is Musk really a liar? Is he a scumbag Silicon Valley misogynist laboring under another facade of self-deluded privilege and narcissistic self-promoting elitism?

While Musk’s partner: Google, gladly spins out Musk’s “Look-at-me” self glorification press hype on a daily basis, is Musk telling the truth in those wild-eyed pronouncements?

In his latest press hype: Musk now wants to build a haven for the 1%, On Mars, much like his peer: Vinohd Khosla tried to build a haven for 1%-ers on a public beach, he took over, in Half Moon Bay, California.

We can only pray that Musk will go to Mars as soon as possible. Ideally, tomorrow…and stay there!

 

 

 

 

 

 

BUSTED! FACEBOOK caught manipulating the Internet for its billionaire owners private desires

BUSTED! FACEBOOK caught manipulating the Internet for its billionaire owners private desires

 

 

 

– FACEBOOK found to be the world’s largest political correctness engine

 

 

 

– Every private thing you do on FACEBOOK is sold to Hillary Clinton’s campaign, which can’t keep national secrets secret

 

 

 

– Former staff say FACEBOOK was created to manipulate elections using “mood manipulation” and “Subliminal PsyOps techniques”

 

The big myth Facebook needs everyone to believe

 
 

In the middle of January, in a change noticed nowhere but Spain, Facebook added six words to a single dialogue box – and inadvertently stumbled into a tortuous national debate.

The dialogue box is part of Facebook’s content-reporting process, the means by which users can request that the social network censor their friends. The six words appeared to invite Spanish users to report on a new category of things: Under the option “it’s inappropriate, it annoys me, or I don’t like it,” Facebook listed Spain’s millennium-old national pastime, bullfighting.

Bullfighting is a controversial sport; even within Spain, few people still follow it. But columnists from Madrid to Malaga bristled at the suggestion that a federally recognized piece of heritage could be branded offensive.

“Facebook equates bullfighting with prostitution,” declared ABC, the country’s third-largest newspaper, on Jan. 14. Days later, when Facebook inevitably backtracked and deleted its references to bullfighting – clarifying, in a statement to The Post, that it had been included mistakenly – Spain’s second-largest paper, El Mundo, rejoiced that the network had “rectified” the situation.

[You don’t know it, but you’re working for Facebook. For free.]

But unfortunately for the suits at Facebook, who had suffered considerable headaches over the bullfighting mess, that situation was just the latest in a string of unintended clashes as inevitable as they are endless. As Facebook has tentacled out from Palo Alto, Calif., gaining control of an ever-larger slice of the global commons, the network has found itself in a tenuous and culturally awkward position: how to determine a single standard of what is and is not acceptable – and apply it uniformly, from Maui to Morocco.

For Facebook and other platforms like it, incidents such as the bullfighting kerfuffle betray a larger, existential difficulty: How can you possibly impose a single moral framework on a vast and varying patchwork of global communities?

If you ask Facebook this question, the social-media behemoth will deny doing any such thing. Facebook says its community standards are inert, universal, agnostic to place and time. The site doesn’t advance any worldview, it claims, besides the non-controversial opinion that people should “connect” online.

“Every day, people come to Facebook to connect with people and issues they care about,” a spokeswoman said in a statement. “Given the diversity of the Facebook community, this means that sometimes people share information that is controversial or offends others. That’s why we have a set of global Community Standards that explain what you can and cannot do on our service. . . We work hard to strike the right balance between enabling expression while providing a safe and respectful experience.”

Facebook has modified its standards several times in response to pressure from advocacy groups – although the site has deliberately obscured those edits, and the process by which Facebook determines its guidelines remains stubbornly obtuse. On top of that, at least some of the low-level contract workers who enforce Facebook’s rules are embedded in the region – or at least the time zone – whose content they moderate. The social network staffs its moderation team in 24 languages, 24 hours a day.

[An hour-by-hour look at how a conspiracy theory becomes ‘truth’ on Facebook]

In response to recent criticism that Facebook has mishandled takedown requests from users in the Middle East, Facebook’s policy director for the region assured users that “all reports are assessed by teams of multilingual, impartial and highly trained people” – including native speakers of Hebrew and Arabic, who presumably understand the region’s particular issues.

And yet, observers remain deeply skeptical of Facebook’s claims that it is somehow value-neutral or globally inclusive, or that its guiding principles are solely “respect” and “safety.” There’s no doubt, said Tarleton Gillespie, a principal researcher at Microsoft Research, New England, that the company advances a specific moral framework – one that is less of the world than of the United States, and less of the United States than of Silicon Valley.

If you study Facebook’s community standards, going back to the long-forgotten time when users voted on a version of them, the site has always erred on the side of radical free speech, corporate opaqueness and a certain American prudishness: Its values are those of the early Web, moderated by capitalist conservatism.

The values that Facebook articulates are not always the ones it enforces. Below that top-level standard are the unknown thousands of invisible click-workers forced to interpret it, and below them are the self-deputized users flagging their friends’ content. Between the site’s demonstrably U.S. orientation and the layers of obfuscation below, there can be little doubt that the values Facebook ends up imposing on its “community” of 1.55 billion people are not agreed upon by many – perhaps even most – of them.

Somehow, it seems that we only notice the imposition when there’s a glitch in the machine: I can’t use a tribal name on Facebook? The site maligned bullfighting? Why, how dare this private company impose its worldview on me!

This is not merely a problem for Facebook; Gillespie, the Microsoft researcher, calls it the unsolvable “basic paradox” of all Internet companies: They’re private and they have their own corporate motives, but they’re called upon to police public speech. Alas, as their public grows more diverse, the worldviews of the “community” and its corporate sponsor would appear to align less and less. As of 2013, eight of the world’s 10 top Web properties were based in the United States – and 81 percent of their users were located outside of it. (If nothing else, there’s a compelling statistical reason why Google, Amazon.com, Facebook and Apple, collectively acronymed “GAFA,” have been called the new face of “American cultural imperialism.”)

Facebook will never make everyone happy, of course; nor does anyone suggest it should. But in a better world, the largest social network would at least admit that it’s not an impartial, value-neutral observer. After all, every single thing Facebook does – from advance a single global “community,” to add six extra words in a dialogue box – reshapes the public space of its users.

“The myth of the social network as a neutral space is crumbling, but it’s still very powerful,” Gillespie said. “For Facebook to finally say, ‘Yes, we construct social life online. We construct public discourse’ – that would be so important, but for them, dangerous.”

Liked that? Try these!

Caitlin Dewey is The Post’s digital culture critic. Follow her on Twitter @caitlindewey or subscribe to her daily newsletter on all things Internet. (tinyletter.com/cdewey)
 

Think Target and Home Depot invade your privacy? Political campaigns might be worse

When presidential candidates turn to data crunchers at Rocket Fuel in Silicon Valley for help finding voters who want tougher immigration enforcement, the firm comes up with a surprisingly specific answer: Chevy truck drivers who like Starbucks.

The data modeling from Rocket Fuel shows that this group leans against a path to citizenship for workers in the U.S. illegally. And these particular voters have become surprisingly easy – some argue creepily so – for campaigns to find and approach. So have consumers of frozen vegetables, who are more likely to oppose abortion. As have people curious about diabetes, a group that tends to settle on a candidate early in the race.

“Knowing the nuances of each voter beyond whether they lean right or left makes every difference,” said JC Medici, the firm’s national director of politics and advocacy. “We can identify what people are persuadable.”

TRAIL GUIDE: All the latest news on the 2016 presidential campaign >>

But as presidential campaigns push into a new frontier of voter targeting, scouring social media accounts, online browsing habits and retail purchasing records of millions of Americans, they have brought a privacy imposition unprecedented in politics. By some estimates, political candidates are collecting more personal information on Americans than even the most aggressive retailers. Questions are emerging about how much risk the new order of digital campaigning is creating for unwitting voters as the vast troves of data accumulated by political operations becomes increasingly attractive to hackers.

The security breach last month at the major voter database controlled by the Democratic National Committee, and another days later involving a large political data firm, have raised concerns about the fitness of candidates to safely manage their data. At the same time, the methods used by independent “data brokers” that acquire and disseminate private details for political campaigns and scores of other clients are at the center of a years-long regulatory battle, with the Federal Trade Commission warning Congress that consumers need more protections.

Yet the push for more accountability and transparency rules on the accumulation of private data is faltering in Congress, where lawmakers are reluctant to rein in the industry that they increasingly rely on to win elections.

“This is the Wild West,” said Tim Sparapani, a data privacy consultant and former director of public policy for Facebook. “There is nothing that is off-limits to political data mining.” The fleeting, impulsive nature of campaigns, he said, means they often have far less stringent security procedures than retailers and social media firms, which themselves often fail to adequately protect sensitive information.

The mining of such data for politics is not a new phenomenon. Presidential candidates began pioneering the approach more than a decade ago, and it was a key part of Barack Obama’s winning strategy in 2008 and 2012. But technological advancements, plunging storage costs and a proliferation of data firms have substantially increased the ability of campaigns to inhale troves of strikingly personal information about voters, spit it into algorithms, and use the results to narrowly customize messaging and outreach to each individual household.

“There is a tremendous amount of data out there and the question is what types of controls are in place and how secure is it,” said Craig Spiezle, executive director of the nonprofit Online Trust Alliance. The group’s recent audit of campaign websites for privacy, security and consumer protection gave three-quarters of the candidates failing grades.

The campaigns and the data companies are cagey about what particular personal voter details they are trafficking in.

One firm, Aristotle, boasts how it helped a senior senator win reelection in 2014 using “over 500 demographic and consumer points, which created a unique voter profile of each constituent.” Company officials declined an interview request.

When investigators in Congress and the FTC looked into the universe of what data brokers make available to their clients – be they political, corporate or nonprofit – some of the findings were unsettling. One company was selling lists of rape victims; another was offering up the home addresses of police officers.

The data companies are required by law to keep the names of individuals separate from the pile of data accumulated about them. Instead, each voter is assigned an online identification number, and when a campaign wants to target a particular group – say, drivers of hybrid vehicles or gun owners – the computers coordinate a robocall, or a volunteer’s canvassing list, or a digital advertisement with relevant accounts.

See more of our top stories on Facebook >>

Since campaigns are ultimately in the business of finding particular people and getting them to show up to vote, some scholars are dubious their digital targeting efforts offer the same level of anonymity as those of corporations.

“A retailer doesn’t care what person is behind a particular online profile, just that they are buying new sneakers,” said Ira Rubinstein, a research fellow at New York University School of Law who specializes in data privacy. “This is about targeting very specific people to go out and vote.”

————

For the record

7:44 a.m.: An earlier version of this story misspelled the name of New York University research fellow Ira Rubinstein as Rubenstein.

———— 

An exhaustive paper Rubinstein recently published on voter privacy found that “political dossiers may be the largest unregulated assemblage of personal data in contemporary American life.”

Basic privacy guidelines that apply to other industries don’t appear to apply to candidates. Some do not even have clear privacy policies posted on their websites, which would be grounds for a private business to have their site shut down under both federal and California law, according to the Online Trust Alliance.

Rules that require companies to notify their customers if there has been a data breach also do not necessarily apply to campaigns, Rubinstein said.

“It’s an unregulated entity whose only goal is to elect a candidate over a short term, then it goes away,” he said. “They are not circumstances in which security is made a priority.”

Campaign digital strategists take umbrage. They say their operations are constantly withstanding the attacks of hackers, and that candidates are in no position to be cavalier with all the sensitive information on their servers, as voters would punish them for it.

Yet it is also unclear whether many voters are aware how much could be on those servers. Among the regulations the Federal Trade Commission is urging Congress to implement is one that would allow consumers to find out what information the data brokers are selling to their many clients, political campaigns among them. Consumers could more easily adjust which data are being sold or could opt out of the monitoring altogether.

“The problem with the data broker industry is consumers have no idea this is going on,” said FTC commissioner Julie Brill. “They are creating hundreds of millions of profiles of American consumers. … Some of this information can impact consumers in a negative way.”

Back at Rocket Fuel, which specializes in placing potential voters into  hundreds of different audiences, each targeted for a package of digital advertisements specifically catered to their interests, there are warnings that more regulation could have its own unintended consequences.

“We’d no longer be able to put the right message in front of the right people,” Medici said. “If what we are putting in front of voters is relevant to them and of interest, it is a natural part of the process.”

Twitter: @evanhalper

ALSO

Donald Trump helps rally Iowa’s Latinos – mostly to caucus against him

Donald Trump, feuding with Fox News over Megyn Kelly, pulls out of GOP debate

In Clinton-Sanders battle, two candidates with very different visions

 

 

U.S. Department of Energy Faces Hell Storm Of Charges

Nikki Haley Sues Energy Department For $1 Million A Day Over Nuclear Waste

Nikki Haley Sues Energy Department For $1 Million A Day Over Nuclear Waste bing news

Republican South Carolina Gov. Nikki Ha­ley outlined a lawsuit against the Department of Energy (DOE) Tuesday for $1 million in daily fines after the agency failed to meet a Jan. 1 legal deadline to complete a program which was supposed to turn …

bing news

http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/27/nikk[…]or-1-million-a-day-over-nuclear-waste/

 

South Carolina Governor will take legal steps against US Department of Energy

22 hour(s), 40 minute(s) ago cached

She said that the people of South Carolina will not let DOE continue its violation of the federal law. MOX or the Savanah River Site mix-oxide project is made to turn weapon-grade plutonium into a commercial nuclear reactor fuel, it is now behind

google news

http://www.lawyerherald.com/articles/2[…]ps-against-us-department-of-energy.htm

 

U.S. Department Of Energy And New Mexico Finalize $74M In Settlement Agreements For Nuclear Waste Incidents Of 2014

Jan 26, 2016 cached

U.S. Department Of Energy And New Mexico Finalize $74M In Settlement Agreements For Nuclear Waste Incidents Of 2014 bing news

Washington, DC — Today, the New Mexico Environment Department, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and its contractors signed two settlement agreements to resolve the State of New Mexico Environment Department’s claims against DOE and its contractors …

bing news

http://breakingenergy.com/2016/01/26/u[…]s-for-nuclear-waste-incidents-of-2014/

Department Of Energy Hacked Over 150 Times In Four Years

Sep 13, 2015 cached

Department Of Energy Hacked Over 150 Times In Four Years digg

The US Department of Energy, the agency that helps regulate our power grid, nuclear arsenal, and national labs, has been hacked 159 times between 2010 and 2014, according to a review of f…

digg

http://gizmodo.com/department-of-energ[…]over-150-times-in-four-year-1730259071

 

Department of Energy attempts cover-up and whitewash of the most criminally corrupt program in U.S. history!

 

By Donna Gleason – Special to Voat

 

 

The American energy department is flooding news outlets with articles that seek to convince voters that its mind-numbing crimes, epic failures and horrific political payola scams never happened.

In a campaign which mirrors the twisted revisionist perversions of “the-holocaust-never-happened” people, The Department of Energy believes it can convince the voters that it has truly only delivered green-energy Unicorn farts to America and that voters should bow, on their knees to the god-like wonder of Secretary Moniz’s bizarre haircut. “Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain”, they trumpet, Oz-like, across the press release circuits.

The FACTS are quite different than the cotton candy clouds of PR hype that have recently emerged from the DOE in a tsunami of press BS.

The DOE lost over a trillion taxpayer dollars because of their crony-ism and failures

The DOE handed Goldman Sachs tens of billions of dollars of upfront fees and bankruptcy tax write-offs for jamming ” cleantech” companies into the death line, where they instantly went bankrupt after filling up the campaign investors bank accounts via illegal skims.

The DOE handed campaign billionaire financier Frank Guistra, now under investigation in both the funding of Obama’s and Hillary’s campaigns, illicit lithium and uranium contracts. The DOE, under a bill for emergency green energy funding in a “crisis-level domestic economy” handed U.S. taxpayer cash to Russian mobster billionaires in the Ener1 and Severstal give-aways, in exchange for kick backs in Afghanistan mining deals. Ener1 immediately went bankrupt, yet campaign billionaires made a hundred million dollars in profit by exploiting tax write-offs.

The DOE funded Solyndra, which had covert ownership by Senator Feinstein. Solyndra immediately went bankrupt and got raided by the FBI. Solyndra dumped toxic materials, was shown to have been owned by campaign financiers and lost over $500M in taxpayer cash. Goldman Sachs made over $40M on the failure. Solyndra’s tubes exploded into flames, on their own, on users roofs, as did panels from other DOE funded, Afghanistan-mined, projects.

 

A123 got taxpayer cash; was co-owned by DOE officials, relied on Afghan lithium mining contracts, suddenly went bankrupt, after getting the taxpayer cash, and the Sachs Cartel took a windfall on the tax write-off, again.

The same thing happened with Abound Solar. Sudden bankruptcy, toxic dumping, investigations.

The DOE funded the most cancer-causing; factory worker killing; fire starting; fetus mutating; liver damaging; airplane crashing; explosive; self-flame initiating; Afghan War profiteered program in the world: Lithium ion batteries. DOE staff and bosses own the lithium ion companies, and their stock. Even DOE’s own scientists wrote extensive papers about this toxic material which becomes increasingly unstable over time, explodes when it gets wet, or bumped, and may have been why Afghanistan was invaded. By the way, that Afghan war has now lost American taxpayers over $6 Trillion dollars according to major universities.

The DOE funded the campaign financier called: Fisker Cars. Then millions of dollars of lithium ion Fisker cars blew up and melted into slag heaps when they got wet in a storm. Your Tesla and Fisker blow up if their batteries get wet. The global crisis of exploding hover-boards, proves how deadly these batteries are. Fisker was suddenly bankrupt, taxpayers lost more money, Goldman Sachs made a profit on “fees”, “skims”, “stock pumps” and “write-offs and the company was sold to China, via Senator Feinstein’s husband, a close buddy of China’s.

Silicon Valley collusion firm: Kleiner Perkins, paid to put Department of Energy staff in office so that those DOE bosses could crony-kick-back the DOE cash to ONLY Kleiner Perkins and their Cartel members who own most of Google. History now proves that only Kleiner/Google Cartel members got cash and every single one of their competitors were denied and sabotaged by DOE staff working with Google and Kleiner hit job resources.

The DOE funded the giant solar mirror project called Ivanpah. The system never worked for anything but roasting birds in mid air, blinding pilots and wasting money. It was not only not the promised “free” or “cheap electricity”, it turned out to be the most expensive electricity in America. To underscore the failure, special supplemental generators had to be built to even keep Ivanpah going.

Elon Musk has now been revealed to exist in the world only due to tens of billions of dollars of government handouts and monopoly rights, given to him, and his backers in a crony payoff scheme. He famously built toxic, exploding cars, rockets and a battery factory that poisons its workers and the environment. Most of Musk’s crony payoffs came from DOE, which hired his business partners to make “fair” decisions.

DOE solicited hundreds of companies and asked them to bring the best technologies on Earth to help the nation. Their request was a sham. It was a cover story for a bundle of cash that had already covertly been hard-wired and secretly promised to a handful of political crony’s. None of those great American innovators were ever going to be given a chance at that cash and DOE knew that from the day they announced the grant and loan programs. DOE defrauded the applicants, tricked them into waiting and spending money on false promises, and used them to manufacture the cover story that the program was ” open to all”. It wasn’t. The DOE programs are rigged, and staged, for the exclusive purpose of crony payola compensation in exchange for the payment of political bribes.

60 Minutes has an investigative episode, which you can see on their website, called: ” THE CLEANTECH CRASH”. It details how Kleiner Cartel members raped taxpayer’s, using the Department of Energy as their bitch, and then gave America’s technology to China at low ball prices. Senator Feinstein’s family assisted with that and profited on the China deals. The whole thing stinks from Palo Alto to Beijing.

 

There are hundreds of other hard facts and proven examples of organized crime-level corruption and historical failures in the Department of Energy period from 2007 to today. This is not “spin”. This is not an opinion that is “subject to interpretation”. These are hard facts with proven evidence from the GAO, The SEC, The NSA, Chinese Hackers, The FBI, The U.S. Senate and the national news media. All of these corrupt crony failures happened. They happened at the Department of Energy. It is a travesty for the Department of Energy to use taxpayer resources to try to cover it up and re-write historical facts.

Now the Department of Transportation (DOT) is being used to conduit cash kickbacks, again, to Tesla and Google for their Afghan War mining scam contracts to exploit dirty lithium ion in their “driver-less cars”. This is just an extension of the DOE crony kick-back program.

Does that sound like the DOE was ” successful”? They were successful in operating the largest criminal revolving door and bribery payoff campaign, ever! Their efforts on behalf of America, and the voters, were an epic failure.

Department of Energy officials say that they “conducted massive due diligence on each applicant”, but the only due diligence that was undertaken by Steven Chu and Secretary Moniz was that they were very diligent about ensuring that only campaign financiers got the money, and that all other applicants were stone-walled and sabotaged.

 

There are a plethora of reports and investigations citing “White House orders” to manipulate the Department of Energy program funding to exclusively benefit campaign financiers. This brings about the famous Watergate question: “ What did the President know and when did he know it?”

 

Bibliography and Evidence Sets

Filed with law enforcement. the public, the media, and the court system in an extensive number of duplicate repositories.

An extensive number of documents, reports, white papers, grand jury reviews, indictments, news stories and law enforcement reports have been published. These materials document, in deep detail, the crimes and corruption that certain politicians, their staff and campaign financiers, engaged in, in order to stop outsiders from competing with their crony deals. There were an extensive number of victims of these malicious attacks by elected officials. The following bibliography provides indisputable evidence of the crimes and cover-ups.

These are the key outside materials of interest in this matter. Click the highlighted item to download the document, usually a .pdf or image file:


REPOSITORY ONE –

Download Area –

FREE E-BOOK. DOWNLOAD THE WIKI-CREATED FREE ADOBE PDF BOOK: “THE SILICON COUP”

The Silicon Coup. An ongoing internet authored book about the characters and historical circumstances involved in the biggest corruption case in modern times:
Click This Link To Download >>> The Silicon Coup 4.5e

Get a free copy, in other digital formats, at:
https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/593602

Additional free downloads:

A Corruption bibliography. A list of top documents that cover the corruption procedures used by the suspects in this case:
Click This Link To Download >>> Corruption Bibliography 2015

The Solyndra Appendix. Actual emails and documents, acquired by Senate investigators, showing corrupt collusion between elected officials and Silicon Valley VC’s:
Click This Link To Download >>> TheSolyndraAppendixPt1HIGH

The Political Retribution Tactics used against competing applicants by federal and state officials, illegally:
Click This Link To Download >>> POLITICAL PAYBACK TACTICS USED

The Book of Tesla. A live document, constantly expanding, detailing the most audacious one of the crony kick-back schemes in the “Cleantech Crash”:
THE BOOK OF TESLA EDIT ODT V.3.0c

A Discussion Site: http://thecleantechcrash.wordpress.com

A Discussion Site: https://policystudy.wordpress.com

The U.S. Senate Investigation which found the Department of Energy Program to be rife with corruption and kickbacks:
Click This Link To Download >>> FINAL-DOE-Loan-Guarantees-Report

More On the U.S. Senate Investigation:
Click This Link To Download >>> House Oversight Committee Reports $14B Missing

Check back here to download the free public WIKI Book with detailed public investigation lessons, tips and procedures to deploy CIA/FBI-class investigative journalism skills, from the comfort of your living room, to “fry”, or legally terminate, any criminally corrupt politician or campaign financier.
Click This Link To Download >>> How To Investigate and Terminate 1.7

How Google was “Weapon-ized” as a defamation and political payback tool in the Department of Energy scam. Google executives and Google investors were a large part of the scam, using their company to rig voter perceptions, and stock market valuations, in favor of elected officials and their campaign financiers:
Click This Link To Download >>> How Google was Weaponized Against Consumers 1.2

Click This Link To Download >>> How Google Bribed It’s Way To The Top: https://crimesquad1.files.wordpress.com/2015/12/how-google-bribed-its-way-to-the-top.pdf

The Corruption Of Senator Feinstein. A detailed, constantly updated, analysis about how one elected official used their office to enrich them-self and damage millions of taxpayers, in this case.
Click This Link To Download >>> The Corruption Of Senator Feinstein.

A University analysis of the Department of Energy Corruption:
Click This Link To Download >>> AADeRugy_testimony_final

REPOSITORY TWO –

THE MOST REFERENCED LINKS, REPOSITORIES AND ARTICLE SETS:

http:/www.xyzcase.com

http://thecleantechcrash.wordpress.com

http://vcracket.weebly.com

http://greencorruption.blogspot.com

http://www.paybackpolitics.org

http://wp.me/P6h5en-60q

http://www.crimebusters77.com/xyz-case-investigation-22-documentation/who-is-gawker-media/

http://www.policystudy.wordpress.com

http://www.teslawow.com

http://gawker-media-attacks.weebly.com

http://thegaryconleycase.weebly.com

http://congressionalreview.weebly.com

Evidence Data and Video Sets, Mirrors

https://policystudy.wordpress.com/top-videos/

http://wp.me/P6h5en-60q

https://vimeo.com/126887156

http://www.FBI.gov

http://www.dailycaller.com

http://www.voat.co

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/zqiewke7y0ixgv6/AACsXYtbh7XUoNINhTTWRBHwa?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/xhv8ii2blr8olma/AACypntka0OmZhvtNQ6b6Z3ja?dl=0

Films About This Case:

In addition to the many films linked on this WIKI, a number of feature films detail the exact methods and actions that took place in this matter, among them:

THE BIG SHORT
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1596363/

TOO BIG TOO FAIL
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Too_Big_to_Fail_(film)

INSIDE JOB
http://www.sonyclassics.com/insidejob/

MERCHANTS OF DOUBT
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchants_of_Doubt_(film)

Automated mass internet manipulation attack “Troll Farm” Tactics used by The Silicon Valley Cartel to hype Tesla, Pump Stocks and Attack Reporters:

http://www.news.com.au/technology/online/columbia-chemical-hoax-tracked-to-troll-farm-dubbed-the-internet-research-agency/story-fnjwnhzf-1227383608441

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3297994/posts?page=17

http://okcupidtrolls.tumblr.com/

http://mightygirl.com/2015/06/02/russian-troll-farms/

VENTURE CAPITAL COLLUSION, MARKET RIGGING, VALUATION FIXING:

Silicon Valley cartel: Apple, Google, and others 

A group of 60,000 Silicon Valley workers got clearance today to move ahead with a lawsuit based on an explosive allegation that Apple, Google, Adobe, and …

slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2014/01/15/silicon_valley_…

More results

The Cartels of Silicon Valley – CounterPunch

Last week Mark Ames published an article that should forever destroy any connection between theSilicon Valley tech billionaires and libertarian worldviews.

counterpunch.org/2014/02/06/the-cartels-of-silicon-valley/

More results

The Silicon Valley cartel | MetaFilter

Mark Ames on Silicon Valley’s conspiracy to drive down workers’ wages: In early 2005, as demand for Silicon Valley engineers began booming, Apple’s Steve Jobs …

metafilter.com/135966/The-Silicon-Valley-cartel

More results

Former NYC Regulator: Uber a ‘SiliconValley Cartel’ in ..

Silicon Valley’s latest class of transportation disruptors, which is led by Uber and Lyft, can be described in a myriad of ways, but the word “cartel …

foxbusiness.com/technology/2014/07/24/former-nyc-regulato…

More results

Mexican Cartel Links to Silicon Valley | NBC Bay Area

Often, families living in Silicon Valley work for the cartel processing the drugs, sometimes out of their homes. “It is a business,” he said.

nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Mexican-Cartel-Links-to-Silico…

More results

Silicon Valley fends off cartel concerns | GlobalPost

Mexico’s Silicon Valley fends off cartel concerns. Tech geeks scramble to build the next Facebook in the drug war’s shadow. Tweet. Enlarge.

globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/americas/mexico/120…

More results

Silicon Valley Anti-Poaching Cartel Went Beyond a Few Tech 

The gentleman’s agreement that several Silicon Valley firms are now widely known to have taken part in to minimize employee poaching within their own circles went …

yro.slashdot.org/story/14/03/23/1945242/silicon-valley-ant…

More results

REVEALED: Court docs show role of Pixar and Dreamworks

Just when the tech giants behind the Silicon Valley “Techtopus” wage fixing cartel thought the worst was behind them, US District Judge Lucy Koh has thrown a …

pando.com/2014/07/07/revealed-court-docs-show-role-…

More results

The Techtopus The Silicon Valley Wage Suppression Cartel 

The Techtopus The Silicon Valley Wage Suppression Cartel W Mark Ames, TV Series Full Episodes English Subtitles

tvseriesonline.xyz/bVhXTMpP-d0/the-techtopus-the-silicon-val…

More results

Silicon Valley Drug Bust Shows Strong Ties To Mexican Cartels 

Patrick Vanier, Santa Clara County, Silicon Valley, … Silicon Valley Drug Bust Show Strong Ties To Mexican Cartel; KCBS’ Matt Bigler Reports

sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2014/04/25/silicon-valley-drug-bust-shows…

More results

Engineers Allege Hiring Collusion in SiliconValley – NYTimes.com

A class-action suit by Silicon Valley engineers against companies including Google, Apple and Intel has revealed details of an agreement among them not to …

nytimes.com/2014/03/01/technology/engineers-allege-hi…

More results

Elon Musk: Government’s $5 Billion Man – Investors.com

C apitalism 2015: In corporate finance today, the theme is “Go where the money is.” For Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla, SolarCity and SpaceX, the place to hunt for cash isn …

news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/060515-756051-elon-musk-ma…

More results

Elon Musk | AgainstCronyCapitalism.org

Elon Musk, as likable a guy as he is and as cool as his cars are, is a big time crony capitalist. In fact, as the LA Times reports, crony capitalism is absolutely …

againstcronycapitalism.org/tag/elon-musk/

More results

Tesla Loving Care | The American

But that doesn’t mean we won’t continue to be forced to “help” Elon Musk build these mobile … Tesla Loving Care. The charmed life of a crony corporatist …

spectator.org/articles/61877/tesla-loving-care

More results

Elon Musk’s growing empire is fueled by $4.9 billion in crony cash. Let’s crowd-fund Elon Musk’s trip to Mars and send him there as fast as possible ..

Elon Musk’s growing empire is fueled by $4.9 billion in government subsidies … Musk/Tesla and company are very good about repaying Govt loans.

 

 

 

 

Peer-to-Peer Internet and “Neighbor-Networked Web” just made ISP’s obsolete overnight

 

 

FREE UN-CAPPED, UN-THROTTLED, ULTRA-HIGH-SPEED INTERNET WITHOUT CENSORING HAS ARRIVED AND THERE IS NO POSSIBLE WAY TO STOP IT

 

The founder of Aereo is promising to bring gigabit internet to every home

 

 

At a launch event in New York City today, Chaitanya “Chet” Kanojia, the founder of the now-deceased startup Aereo, launched an ambitious new wireless hub called Starry. Starry is supposed to offer gigabit internet to the home, but delivered over a wireless network rather than a traditional wired one. The technology was built by the same antenna experts who made Aereo, and may run into its own regulatory troubles as it attempts to leverage unlicensed bands of spectrum.

 

“It’s a little bit like witchcraft.”

 

Like Aereo, Starry is a questionably ambitious idea. Kanojia wants to deliver extremely high-speed internet over the air using millimeter waves, which don’t travel very far and aren’t very good at penetrating obstacles — not even water in the air. That means Starry will have a lot of technical hurdles to overcome. The company is only presenting a sleek wireless hub at its event today, but it seems like more hardware — perhaps something outside the home — will be needed to fully connect to Starry’s gigabit wireless network. It also means that Starry will need to set up broadcast points in very close proximity to its customers or use some sort of mesh technology to improve its reach. Doing that would likely make it harder for Starry to reach its goal of gigabit speeds. So, to be very clear, there’s a lot to be skeptical about here.

 

Starry hasn’t provided details on how it’ll get around the many technical limitations in its way. “What are millimeter waves you ask? It’s a little bit like witchcraft,” Kanojia says. The company keeps repeating a dense list of technologies — OFDM modulation, MU-MIMO, active phased array — which apparently add up to a solution. Kanojia acknowledges that no one has attempted internet delivery over millimeter waves before because it’s difficult to get a connection from outside to inside of a house. But Starry has supposedly figured out a way to “steer” the signal using a bank of tiny antennas that increase the connection’s power and accuracy. “People historically assumed fiber was the answer at all times,” Kanojia says. Starry’s approach, he claims, is “the most meaningful, scalable architecture anyone has proposed to this point.”

 

 

Kanojia says that he wanted to launch Starry to give consumers an option about how they get internet. Most people are stuck with only one choice of internet provider — two if they’re lucky — and it’s difficult for new competitors to enter the space. Laying wires is expensive, as is launching a more traditional wireless network, so Kanojia is once again in charge of a company taking an unconventional approach in an attempt to quickly enter and disrupt an established market.

 

The company’s hub, called Starry Station, doubles as a Wi-Fi router that can be controlled through a small touchscreen. The Station is supposed to include a built-in “internet health monitoring system,” which will break down how much bandwidth different devices are using throughout the home and can suggest creating new networks to better suit specific devices.

 

“Did he say what the solution was?”

 

Starry still has a lot to prove. “A phased array is the worst possible choice for millimeter wave antenna. It’s terrible. I don’t understand it. The feed structure is very lossy, and it’s not cost-effective compared to a reflector or lens antenna,” says Spencer Webb, an antenna consultant and President of AntennaSys. “[Kanojia] said it’s hard to go from the outside to the inside, but did he say what the solution was? Millimeter wave won’t go through a window.”

 

Starry will launch its service first in Boston, with its hub selling for $349.99. It hasn’t said yet how much it’ll cost to get internet service delivered to that hub, but it has said that there will be no contracts or data caps. Sales will start on February 5th, with deliveries beginning in March. Starry plans to launch in additional cities throughout the year.

 

 

To start using free-forever internet today, see:

 

SopCast – Free P2P internet TV | live football, NBA, cricket

 

cached

 

SopCast is a simple, free way to broadcast video and audio or watch the video and listen to radio on the Internet. Adopting P2P(Peer-to-Peer) technology, It is very …

 

bing yahoo

 

http://sopcast.com/

 

FilesOverMiles – Send files direct to other users (P2P …

 

cached

 

Your files are sent the shortest way – directly between the recipient and you. There are no intermediate servers slowing down the process. Try FilesOverMiles and send …

 

bing yahoo

 

http://www.filesovermiles.com/

 

Freenet

 

cached

 

wikidata

 

http://www.freenetproject.org

 

Peer to Peer: Das neue Internet | ZEIT ONLINE – Die Zeit

 

cached

 

Kein Problem: Wer seine Daten den umstrittenen Internet-Giganten nicht … Office -Anwendung, Video- und Datentausch über P2P-Netzwerke.

 

google

 

http://www.zeit.de/zeit-wissen/2012/05/Das-alternative-Netz

 

wikipedia PPTV

 

cached

 

wikipedia

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PPTV

 

Peer-to-peer – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

cached

 

Peer-to-peer (P2P) computing or networking is a distributed application architecture that partitions tasks or work loads between peers. Peers are equally privileged …

 

bing google

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer-to-peer

 

Shareaza – Bringing P2P Together

 

cached

 

Shareaza is a peer-to-peer client for Windows that allows you to download any file-type found on several popular P2P networks. Shareaza is FREE & contains NO Spyware …

 

bing yahoo

 

http://shareaza.sourceforge.net/

 

Watch Football Online

 

cached

 

Watch Football Online. Football live streaming from England, Spain, Germany, Italy and France to your pc or mobile devices. It is free preview only.

 

bing yahoo

 

http://asiaplatetv.com/

 

Ares – [Home] Download latest version 2.3.8

 

cached

 

AresGalaxy is a free Filesharing-Bittorrent p2p client connected to TCP supernode/leaf network and UDP DHT network. Ares features a built-in directshow media player …

 

bing

 

http://aresgalaxy.sourceforge.net/

 

Peer-to-Peer – Wikipedia

 

cached

 

Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Connection (von englisch peer „Gleichgestellter“, … auf dem Internet realisiert werden, ist daher ein zweites internes Overlay-Netz, welches …

 

google

 

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer-to-Peer

 

Ares | Ares Download – P2P File Sharing Program |…

 

cached

 

Ares.net is the official Ares website of the ONLY working version of Ares – the revolutionary P2P file-sharing platform that lets you download unlimited free music …

 

yahoo

 

http://www.ares.net/

 

gulli.com – Internet – Filesharing – Grundwissen – P2P

 

cached

 

P2P steht eigentlich für Peer-to-Peer, also die Verbindung zwischen zwei Teilnehmern einer Tauschbörse. Gemeint ist hierbei also der direkte Austausch von …

 

google

 

http://www.gulli.com/internet/filesharing/grundlagen/p2p

 

P2P/Winsock/Internet Programming VB.NET tutorial

 

cached

 

Welcome to the p2p.wrox.com Forums. You are currently viewing the VB.NET section of the Wrox Programmer to Programmer discussions. This is a community of tens of …

 

bing

 

http://p2p.wrox.com/vb-net/9681-p2p-wi%5B…%5Drogramming-vbulletin-net-tutorial.html

 

Internet2 Peer to Peer Working Group – P2P WG

 

cached

 

The Internet2 End-to-End Performance Initiative (E2Epi) is aimed at improving end-to-end performance in the network infrastructure by focusing resources and …

 

google

 

http://p2p.internet2.edu/

 

The Pirate Bay founders are building a P2P internet | KitGuru

 

cached

 

6 Jan 2014 … The Pirate Bay has been shaking up the internet for over a decade at this point, first by helping popularise torrents, then by its founders …

 

google

 

http://www.kitguru.net/gaming/security%5B…%5D-bay-founders-building-a-p2p-internet/

 

How to setup and configure DVR Cloud P2P …

 

cached

 

Complete version of how to connect DVR to Internet and Android mobile and laptop or Internet Explorer settings from http://www.cctvcameraspy.com In this video we …

 

bing

 

 

The Alternative P2P Wireless Internet Network: The Netsukuku Idea

 

cached

 

Would it be possible, using p2p and wireless technologies, to gain independence from internet providers and make free and open net …

 

google

 

http://www.masternewmedia.org/the-alte%5B…%5Ds-internet-network-the-netsukuku-idea/

 

P2P, Top-Downloads für Linux – Download – heise online

 

cached

 

Internet, Dateitransfer, P2P, 12 Programme für Linux bei heise Download.

 

google

 

http://www.heise.de/download/linux/internet/dateitransfer/p2p-50003505129/

 

Firechat Enables Private Off-The-Internet (P2P) – Disruptive Telephony

 

cached

 

In the text he outlines how they do decentralized “off-the-grid” private messaging using an ad hoc mesh network established between users of …

 

google

 

http://www.disruptivetelephony.com/201%5B…%5Dp2p-messaging-using-mobile-phones.html

 

 

 

How the FBI Could Force DOJ to Prosecute Hillary Clinton

How the FBI Could Force DOJ to Prosecute Hillary Clinton
 
by Jim Geraghty
 
Could the Hillary Clinton e-mail saga end with FBI Director James Comey resigning in protest? Ken Cuccinelli, the former attorney general of Virginia, knows the laws regarding classified information firsthand. In his private practice, Cuccinelli defended a Marine lieutenant colonel court martialed on charges of possessing such information outside a secure facility. He says Clinton’s actions in the e-mail scandal clearly satisfy all five requirements necessary to sustain charges of mishandling classified material, and constitute a breach perhaps even more glaring than the one for which General David Petraeus was convicted. Like Petraeus, Clinton was clearly “an employee of the United States government.” Like Petraeus, Clinton obtained and created “documents and materials containing classified information” through her work at the State Department. In response to a Congressional inquiry earlier this month, I. Charles McCullough, III, the inspector general of the intelligence community, declared that an intelligence official examined “several dozen e-mails containing classified information determined . . . to be . . . CONFIDENTIAL, SECRET, and TOP SECRET/SAP information” residing on Clinton’s server. (SAP is an acronym for ‘special access programs,’ a level of classification above top secret.)
 
Like Petraeus, Clinton “knowingly removed such documents or materials.” Cuccinelli points out that she actually committed this crime on a significant scale three separate times: First, by setting up her e-mail system to route messages to and through her unsecured server, then by moving the server to Platte River Networks, a private company, in June of 2013, and then by transferring the server’s contents to her private lawyers in 2014. RELATED: Why the Justice Department Won’t Work with the FBI on Clinton’s E-mail Case Like Petraeus, Clinton did not have the authority to remove classified information from secure locations. “Simply being secretary of state does not allow Hillary Clinton to ‘authorize herself’ to deviate from the requirements of retaining and transmitting classified documents, materials, and information,” Cuccinelli says. “There is no known evidence, and Clinton has not asserted, that her arrangement to use the private e-mail server in her home was undertaken with proper authority as it relates to classified documents, materials, or information.” And like Petraeus, Clinton demonstrated the “intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location.” A private residence can be an “authorized” location, and non-government servers and networks can be “authorized” to house and transfer classified materials, but there are specific and stringent requirements for such authorization, and there is no indication that Clinton undertook the steps necessary to obtain it for her house, her private server, Platte River Networks, or her lawyers. “If she had, she would not have offered the ‘my house is guarded by the Secret Service’ excuse,” Cuccinelli says. Share article on Facebook share Tweet article tweet As FBI Director, Comey was completely in the loop on the decision to bring charges against Petraeus, so Clinton’s case is familiar territory for him. Cuccinelli says that if the FBI’s handling of Petraeus is any guide, Comey’s agents are likely to recommend a Clinton indictment to the Department of Justice. Then, the issue becomes really high-stakes. There is no time limit on how long Attorney General Loretta Lynch and the DOJ can take in reviewing the FBI’s recommendation and the evidence on which it’s based. But if the Department of Justice gives the signal that they’re going to ignore the FBI’s investigations, or drag out their own review past election day, Cuccinelli — along with Judge Andrew Napolitano, Roger Stone, Charles Krauthammer, and other observers — predicts that Comey will resign in protest, and other high-level FBI officials could follow him out the door. More Clinton E-mail Scandal Hillary Can’t Pin E-mailgate on the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy Why the Justice Department Won’t Work with the FBI on Clinton’s E-mail Case State Department Seeks to Delay Release of Final Clinton E-mails until After Iowa & New Hampshire Not many people remember that Comey almost resigned a high-profile law-enforcement job once before, upset because he thought White House politics were overruling the law.
 
Back in 2004, Comey was Attorney General John Ashcroft’s top deputy. The Justice Department determined that the Bush administration’s domestic-surveillance program, run by the National Security Agency, was illegal. Ashcroft was hospitalized at the time with a pancreatic ailment, and his authority had been transferred to Comey during the hospitalization. Then–White House counsel Alberto R. Gonzales and President Bush’s chief of staff, Andrew H. Card Jr., went to the hospital to persuade Ashcroft to re-authorize the program. Comey and then–FBI director Robert Mueller raced to the hospital to lobby Ashcroft against signing the authorization papers. Ultimately, Bush agreed with the Justice Department’s assessment and scrapped the program. Comey later told Congress that he, Ashcroft, Mueller, and their aides had prepared a mass resignation in case the White House ignored or defied their legal assessment. In short, Comey’s been willing to defy a White House before, as Obama acknowledged in announcing his nomination to head the FBI: To know Jim Comey is also to know his fierce independence and his deep integrity. Like Bob [Mueller], he’s that rarity in Washington sometimes — he doesn’t care about politics; he only cares about getting the job done. At key moments, when it’s mattered most, he joined Bob in standing up for what he believed was right. He was prepared to give up a job he loved rather than be part of something he felt was fundamentally wrong. Is Comey still prepared to give up the job rather than be part of something he feels is fundamentally wrong? If, as those who know him suspect, it will much harder for the Department of Justice to ignore what his bureau has to say about Clinton’s dangerous misconduct. — Jim Geraghty is the senior political correspondent for National Review.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430343/hillary-clinton-email-scandal-fbi-director-james-comey-resign-protest

Department of Energy attempts cover-up and whitewash of the most criminally corrupt program in U.S. history!

Department of Energy attempts cover-up and whitewash of the most criminally corrupt program in U.S. history!

By Donna Gleason – Special to Voat

The American energy department is flooding news outlets with articles that seek to convince voters that its mind-numbing crimes, epic failures and horrific political payola scams never happened.

In a campaign which mirrors the twisted revisionist perversions of “the-holocaust-never-happened” people, The Department of Energy believes it can convince the voters that it has truly only delivered green-energy Unicorn farts to America and that voters should bow, on their knees to the god-like wonder of Secretary Moniz’s bizarre haircut. “Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain”, they trumpet, Oz-like, across the press release circuits.

The FACTS are quite different than the cotton candy clouds of PR hype that have recently emerged from the DOE in a tsunami of press BS.

The DOE lost over a trillion taxpayer dollars because of their crony-ism and failures

The DOE handed Goldman Sachs tens of billions of dollars of upfront fees and bankruptcy tax write-offs for jamming ” cleantech” companies into the death line, where they instantly went bankrupt after filling up the campaign investors bank accounts via illegal skims.

The DOE handed campaign billionaire financier Frank Guistra, now under investigation in both the funding of Obama’s and Hillary’s campaigns, illicit lithium and uranium contracts. The DOE, under a bill for emergency green energy funding in a “crisis-level domestic economy” handed U.S. taxpayer cash to Russian mobster billionaires in the Ener1 and Severstal give-aways, in exchange for kick backs in Afghanistan mining deals. Ener1 immediately went bankrupt, yet campaign billionaires made a hundred million dollars in profit by exploiting tax write-offs.

The DOE funded Solyndra, which had covert ownership by Senator Feinstein. Solyndra immediately went bankrupt and got raided by the FBI. Solyndra dumped toxic materials, was shown to have been owned by campaign financiers and lost over $500M in taxpayer cash. Goldman Sachs made over $40M on the failure. Solyndra’s tubes exploded into flames, on their own, on users roofs, as did panels from other DOE funded, Afghanistan-mined, projects.

A123 got taxpayer cash; was co-owned by DOE officials, relied on Afghan lithium mining contracts, suddenly went bankrupt, after getting the taxpayer cash, and the Sachs Cartel took a windfall on the tax write-off, again.

The same thing happened with Abound Solar. Sudden bankruptcy, toxic dumping, investigations.

The DOE funded the most cancer-causing; factory worker killing; fire starting; fetus mutating; liver damaging; airplane crashing; explosive; self-flame initiating; Afghan War profiteered program in the world: Lithium ion batteries. DOE staff and bosses own the lithium ion companies, and their stock. Even DOE’s own scientists wrote extensive papers about this toxic material which becomes increasingly unstable over time, explodes when it gets wet, or bumped, and may have been why Afghanistan was invaded. By the way, that Afghan war has now lost American taxpayers over $6 Trillion dollars according to major universities.

The DOE funded the campaign financier called: Fisker Cars. Then millions of dollars of lithium ion Fisker cars blew up and melted into slag heaps when they got wet in a storm. Your Tesla and Fisker blow up if their batteries get wet. The global crisis of exploding hover-boards, proves how deadly these batteries are. Fisker was suddenly bankrupt, taxpayers lost more money, Goldman Sachs made a profit on “fees”, “skims”, “stock pumps” and “write-offs and the company was sold to China, via Senator Feinstein’s husband, a close buddy of China’s.

Silicon Valley collusion firm: Kleiner Perkins, paid to put Department of Energy staff in office so that those DOE bosses could crony-kick-back the DOE cash to ONLY Kleiner Perkins and their Cartel members who own most of Google. History now proves that only Kleiner/Google Cartel members got cash and every single one of their competitors were denied and sabotaged by DOE staff working with Google and Kleiner hit job resources.

The DOE funded the giant solar mirror project called Ivanpah. The system never worked for anything but roasting birds in mid air, blinding pilots and wasting money. It was not only not the promised “free” or “cheap electricity”, it turned out to be the most expensive electricity in America. To underscore the failure, special supplemental generators had to be built to even keep Ivanpah going.

Elon Musk has now been revealed to exist in the world only due to tens of billions of dollars of government handouts and monopoly rights, given to him, and his backers in a crony payoff scheme. He famously built toxic, exploding cars, rockets and a battery factory that poisons its workers and the environment. Most of Musk’s crony payoffs came from DOE, which hired his business partners to make “fair” decisions.

DOE solicited hundreds of companies and asked them to bring the best technologies on Earth to help the nation. Their request was a sham. It was a cover story for a bundle of cash that had already covertly been hard-wired and secretly promised to a handful of political crony’s. None of those great American innovators were ever going to be given a chance at that cash and DOE knew that from the day they announced the grant and loan programs. DOE defrauded the applicants, tricked them into waiting and spending money on false promises, and used them to manufacture the cover story that the program was ” open to all”. It wasn’t. The DOE programs are rigged, and staged, for the exclusive purpose of crony payola compensation in exchange for the payment of political bribes.

60 Minutes has an investigative episode, which you can see on their website, called: ” THE CLEANTECH CRASH”. It details how Kleiner Cartel members raped taxpayer’s, using the Department of Energy as their bitch, and then gave America’s technology to China at low ball prices. Senator Feinstein’s family assisted with that and profited on the China deals. The whole thing stinks from Palo Alto to Beijing.

There are hundreds of other hard facts and proven examples of organized crime-level corruption and historical failures in the Department of Energy period from 2007 to today. This is not “spin”. This is not an opinion that is “subject to interpretation”. These are hard facts with proven evidence from the GAO, The SEC, The NSA, Chinese Hackers, The FBI, The U.S. Senate and the national news media. All of these corrupt crony failures happened. They happened at the Department of Energy. It is a travesty for the Department of Energy to use taxpayer resources to try to cover it up and re-write historical facts.

Now the Department of Transportation (DOT) is being used to conduit cash kickbacks, again, to Tesla and Google for their Afghan War mining scam contracts to exploit dirty lithium ion in their “driver-less cars”. This is just an extension of the DOE crony kick-back program.

Does that sound like the DOE was ” successful”? They were successful in operating the largest criminal revolving door and bribery payoff campaign, ever! Their efforts on behalf of America, and the voters, were an epic failure.

Department of Energy officials say that they “conducted massive due diligence on each applicant”, but the only due diligence that was undertaken by Steven Chu and Secretary Moniz was that they were very diligent about ensuring that only campaign financiers got the money, and that all other applicants were stone-walled and sabotaged.

There are a plethora of reports and investigations citing “White House orders” to manipulate the Department of Energy program funding to exclusively benefit campaign financiers. This brings about the famous Watergate question: “ What did the President know and when did he know it?”

Obama Spends How Much On This Failed Car Program?

Obama Spends How Much On This Failed Car Program?

car program

A scandal-plagued “green” auto program that’s fleeced American taxpayers out of huge sums just got another $58 million from the Obama administration to support the development of advanced technology vehicles that meet higher efficiency standards.

The experimental program is known as Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing (ATVM) and it’s one of the president’s many disastrous green-energy investments. The public funds are funneled through the Department of Energy (DOE), which is handing out cash like candy on Halloween. In all, the administration has set aside an astounding $25 billion for the cause and a chunk of it has already been lost on initiatives that have failed miserably.

Among them is fly-by-night electric car company called Fisker Automotive that shut down after getting an eye-popping $193 million from the government. The Obama DOE originally pledged $529 million for the California startup but the cash finally stopped flowing when Fisker laid off three quarters of its employees and announced it was on the verge of bankruptcy.

Judicial Watch has an ongoing investigation into the Fisker scandal and has sued the DOE for records detailing the government “loan” that will obviously never be repaid because the company went under. The Obama administration touted it as a great investment in a company that would create thousands of jobs in a region hit hard by unemployment. The administration also promised Fisker would develop two lines of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles that could run up to 300 miles on a rechargeable Lithium-ion battery. None of this ever came close to materializing and instead taxpayers got stuck with the huge loss of this failed experiment.

Soon after Fisker’s collapse another startup called Vehicle Production Group (VPG) went under after losing $50 million in taxpayer funds. VPG was supposed to create special vans for the disabled that run on compressed natural gas. Here’s how the Obama administration justified funding this experiment with public dollars: “This project invests in a socially and environmentally responsible product that will create new jobs, promote the use of alternative fuels, and help the U.S. maintain its competitive edge in the automotive industry.” The DOE eventually took the page down, but JW got the quote straight from the agency’s announcement touting VPG, which turned out to be yet another costly failure for taxpayers.

This hasn’t stopped the administration from pouring big bucks into these dubious green energy initiatives. In announcing the $58 million ATVM allocation this month, the DOE has the audacity to claim that the controversial program has enjoyed great “successes.” The agency press release says the funding will solicit projects across vehicle technologies like energy storage, electric drive systems, materials, fuels and lubricants and advanced combustion.

The technologies will help save American consumers money and decrease carbon emissions by increasing the fuel efficiency of conventional cars and trucks, according to the agency. It will also support the administration’s goal to make electric vehicles as affordable as gas-powered vehicles by 2022. “These successful investments in next-generation vehicle technologies are a clear example of the impact innovation can have on industry and consumers,” said DOE Secretary Ernest Moniz.

DOES GOOGLE BRIBE POLITICIANS TO GIVE IT FREE GOVERNMENT HAND OUTS AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE?

ERIC-SCHMIDT-CONNECTIONS

DOES GOOGLE BRIBE POLITICIANS TO GIVE IT FREE GOVERNMENT HAND OUTS AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE?

Google is now the world’s largest private government and it has more power than the U.S. Government

Google’s worldwide web of tax loopholes: Osborne under fire as Google is set to pay THREE times as much tax in France – even though it employs thousands more people and does more business in Britain

  • Government accused of agreeing ‘derisory’ £130m tax deal with Google
  • Google set to pay £380m in France despite UK being its largest base
  • French officials refusing to allow sales to be funneled via Dublin not Paris
  • But HMRC’s ‘sweetheart deal’ backs Google’s claim it has no fixed UK base
  • George Osborne had hailed £130m deal as a ‘victory for the taxpayer’
  • But Downing Street and MPs have distanced themselves from his claims

By Martin Robinson, Uk Chief Reporter and Lucy Crossley for MailOnline and Jason Groves – Deputy Political Editor, Daily Mail

 

 

+18

Google is set to pay three times more back tax to France than the UK, despite making three times as much money and employing four times more staff in its British outpost (pictured)

The Government was today accused of gross incompetence after agreeing Google could pay £130milllion in tax even though the web giant is about to hand over three times more in France.

Aggressive French officials are close to getting £380million from Google even though Britain is its biggest market outside the US and employs thousands more people than in France.

Paris tax bosses have refused to accept Google’s ploy of funnelling its international sales via Dublin to benefit from Ireland’s lower tax rate.

George Osborne hailed the £130million deal as a ‘victory’ for the taxpayer but critics branded it ‘derisory’ because Google has made around £6billion in profit in the UK in the past decade.

Yesterday even Downing Street distanced itself from the Chancellor’s claims and the agreement is now going to be subject to three inquiries.

Both Google and HM Revenue and Customs are now set to be hauled in front of MPs to explain the deal, after the Commons public accounts committee and the Treasury committee last night launched separate inquiries.

Sources at the National Audit Office revealed they are also poised to investigate the deal.

HMRC officials have taken six years to get the the internet giant to pay back just £130million to cover a decade of back-taxes.

This means they have been taxed at a rate that may be as low as 3 per cent – although the Government is still refusing to disclose what they charged them for ‘confidentiality’ reasons, minister David Gauke said yesterday.

Experts have claimed the bill should be closer to £200million a year.

Meg Hillier, who chairs the Commons public accounts committee, said it was just a ‘cosy deal’, adding: ‘It beggars belief that they didn’t challenge that basic question (of no fixed base). It underlines my real concerns about HMRC not keeping up with the big guys.’

But the French authorities have been aggressively chasing Google for more than 500million euros, furious at the tax avoidance ploy used by the firm, which registered all European sales in Dublin and benefitted from the lower tax rate in Ireland.

‘We have a hard time believing that some 150 well-paid salespeople with advanced degrees employed by one particular company in France are nothing more than busboys for Ireland,’  a French official said last year, according to The Times. Italy is also reportedly demanding £1billion from Google.

Google uses a complicated web of businesses across the globe to reduce its tax bill and still claims it has no ‘fixed base’ in the UK despite its plans for a £1billion central London office housing up to 5,000 staff. Currently its thousands of UK employees are split between two offices.

 

+18

HQ: This is Google’s UK reception at one of its central London offices, where thousands are employed, but it insists that it has no ‘fixed base’ in Britain

 

+18

French authorities have been aggressively chasing Google for more than 500 Euros, furious at the tax avoidance ploy used by the firm, which registered all European sales in Dublin and benefitted from the lower tax rate in Ireland. Pictured is Google’s office in Paris

HOW GOOGLE FUNNELS ITS MONEY VIA A WEB OF COMPANIES TO SHRINK ITS TAX BILL

 

+18

Web: This is Google’s complicated web of holding companies that allows the web giant to reduce its international tax bill. Google US has set up two Irish companies, one of which is based in Bermuda, with a middle company in the Netherlands. The network allows revenue from around the world to be sent back to Bermuda via Ireland and Holland, with their generous tax rates, allowing Google to reduce its tax bill

Google manages to reduce its tax bill by using a set of subsidiary companies across the globe.

The network – nicknamed the ‘Double Irish and Dutch Sandwich’ – is hugely controversial but totally legal.

Google moved its headquarters for Europe, the Middle East and Africa to Ireland in 2008 to benefit from the country’s lower tax rate on profits.

In Britain, its biggest market outside the US, Google is classified as having no ‘fixed base’ so none of its sales are technically made in the UK.

It means when a British company buys a Google advert for the UK, for example, the money goes straight to Dublin, meaning it pays little tax to the UK Treasury.

After paying Ireland’s lower corporation tax rate of 12.5%, international profits are then funnelled via Google Netherlands Holdings, taking advantage of generous tax laws there.

The profits are then sent to Google’s main overseas company, another Irish business domiciled in Bermuda – where the corporation tax rate is zero.

This complicated arrangement is explained by experts as the Double Irish and Dutch Sandwich – with the Irish businesses being the bread and the Dutch subsidiary being its filling.

It means that Google’s overseas tax rate on all its profits falls to around five per cent when in the UK it would have to pay 20 per cent.

Though this process has been branded ‘immoral’ by MPs, it is not illegal and Google says it has abided by international tax rules.

The company also says its Bermuda operation does not impact the tax it pays in the UK.

Executives say the reported UK profit margins are far below the group average because most of its algorithms and codes, which drive the company’s profits, are developed outside the country.

Google still pays the majority of its taxes in America, but on its American profits only.

 

Google’s sales were valued at £3.8 billion in Britain during 2013 but it paid just £20.4 million in UK taxes that year. Between 2006 and 2011 the company’s revenue in the UK hit around £12.6 billion but its corporation tax payments for the period totalled £11.2 million

Its tax set-up allows the business to send UK sales revenue through an Irish subsidiary and legally avoid corporation tax in Britain.

That cash is then funneled via Holland, which offers a tax break too, and on to a holding company in Bermuda, which has a zero rate of corporation tax.

Money from all of Google’s international businesses is sent to Bermuda in the same way.

MPs on all sides demanded further action to extract tax from Google and other giant corporations like Apple, Starbucks, Amazon and Facebook that make huge sums in the UK but pay little or no tax.

The Times has also reported that HMRC officials failed to question Google’s claim that it had no ‘permanent establishment’ in the UK.

This enabled the company to avoid paying millions in UK corporation tax, by booking sales through Ireland, with the profits then diverted to Bermuda – one of the world’s biggest tax havens.

Britain is Google’s biggest foreign market, and the UK wing has four times as many staff as Google France.

Tax expert Steve Lewis, who featured in the BBC Two show The Town That Took on the Taxman where locals took their businesses offshire, branded the situation ‘ridiculous’.

He said: ‘Google must have been over the moon with how lightly it got off. They probably thought all their Christmases and New Years had come at once.

‘If you look at their turnover for the UK it is eight figures – the money they should pay back should have been around £1 billion, not £130 million.

 

+18

George Osborne, pictured, is facing three inquiries over his deal with Google that will see the internet giant pay £130m to cover a decade of back-taxes

‘If a small firm makes an error with its tax return there’s no tolerance whatsoever. You’re not in any position to negotiate – you have to pay the fine plus interest.’

Mr Osborne has faced a barrage of criticism over the deal with HMRC, which covers money owed since 2005.

And even Downing Street yesterday distanced itself from Mr Osborne’s claim that the agreement was a ‘victory’ for the taxpayer, as Tory MPs queued up to demand further action to extract tax from Google and other giant corporations that contribute little or nothing in the UK.

Treasury committee chairman Andrew Tyrie said tax law had become a ‘piece of elastic’ that allowed corporations to get away with paying almost nothing.

He said: ‘The complexity of tax law is turning what should be a straightforward principle – that everybody should pay the correct amount of tax – into a piece of elastic. For corporation tax the problem is exacerbated by the globalisation of economic activity and any liability to tax that accompanies it.’

Labour said the deal set a dangerous precedent, and asked why ministers were settling for so little, when Italy was demanding £1billion from Google.

Shadow chancellor John McDonnell said analysis by experts suggested ‘the effective rate of tax faced by Google is around 3 per cent’ – against the current corporation tax rate of 20 per cent.

Treasury minister David Gauke dismissed the figure, saying Google was paying a higher rate of tax on its profits in the UK. But he flatly refused to tell MPs what the real rate was, or how it had been calculated.

Labour MP Rachel Reeves, a member of the Treasury committee, said the deal was an insult to taxpayers. She added: ‘A lot of people are struggling to fill out their tax returns right now – they can’t go and have a word with HMRC and say, ‘I think I’ll just pay £1,000 this year.’ They have to pay their fair share.’

The deal with Google announced on Friday covers a period dating back to 2005. Mr Osborne hailed it as ‘a victory for the action we’ve taken’.

+18

Google has agreed to pay just £130million in taxes dating back to 2005. The amount was branded ‘derisory’ in light of the fact that the firm racked up sales of £4.5billion in Britain in 2014 alone

Downing Street today played down reports that it was distancing itself from the Chancellor, who had described the deal as a ‘victory’ and a ‘major success’.

‘The Prime Minister and the Chancellor are of the same mind on this,’ a Downing Street spokesman said. ‘This was a good deal. There is no difference in the position – the Prime Minister and Chancellor’s view on this is the same.’

OTHER GIANTS IN THE DOCK: MAJOR FIRMS AND CORPORATION TAX 

Facebook: The social media titan paid just £4,327 in corporation tax in 2014, despite reporting UK revenues of £105million.

Apple: The US-based technology firm behind the iPad and the iPhone made £34billion in profit during the year to September 2014.

Experts estimate that the UK accounted for £1.9billion of that profit, but the firm only paid £11.8million in British corporation tax.

Amazon: The online shopping giant took £5.3billion in sales from British shoppers in 2014 but paid just £11.9million in tax after announcing profits of £34.4million.

Starbucks: The coffee chain paid just £8.6million of tax over 14 years between 1998 and 2012 when sales totalled £3billion.

But latest company filings show it paid £8.1million in corporation tax for last year on profits of £34.2million.

The spokesman said the tax settlement was agreed with Google by HMRC, adding: ‘No ministers were involved in agreeing this deal. It is done by HMRC on an operational basis.’

He added: ‘The key point on this is that HMRC is satisfied with the tax due and what it has collected.’

The spokesman said he was aware of ‘speculation’ that France is seeking more than 500 million euros from Google, but added: ‘Clearly at this stage, there’s no outcome, so it does remain to be seen how much they get.’

London Mayor Boris Johnson also hit out at the ‘derisory’ tax settlement, and called for reform of the tax system.

Mr Osborne dodged scrutiny of the deal in the Commons yesterday, preferring to press ahead with a pre-arranged trip to Liverpool with Microsoft billionaire Bill Gates. Instead, it was left to Mr Gauke to deal with the criticism from MPs on all sides.

Tory Anne Main asked why HMRC had allowed Google to avoid paying its taxes for so many years and fellow Conservative Mark Garnier questioned whether the internet giant had broken the law. Mr Gauke flatly refused to disclose details, citing taxpayer confidentiality. He insisted the deal was good for Britain, and said it provided ‘solid evidence’ that firms were responding to strengthened rules.

Google’s sales were valued at £3.8billion in Britain during 2013 but it paid just £20.4million in UK taxes that year. Between 2006 and 2011 the company’s revenue in the UK hit around £12.6billion but its corporation tax payments for the period totalled £11.2million.

It said: ‘After a six-year audit by the tax authority we are paying the amount of tax that HMRC agrees we should pay. Governments make tax law, the tax authorities enforce the law and Google complies with the law.’

Revealed: The incredibly close links between Google and Downing Street

David Cameron and the Tories have links to the very top of Google going back decades.

The Prime Minister has enjoyed a special relationship with former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, who made billions making the business into a global powerhouse.

For years Mr Schmidt was on Mr Cameron’s business advisory board, which is used as a ‘sounding board’ on business matters, but the Google executive left in July.

The billionaire has reportedly also offered Mr Cameron on economic policy.

 

+18

Former Google CEO and now executive chairman Eric Schmidt chats to Prime Minister David Cameron at a drinks reception – and has in the past advised Cameron on economic matters

 

+18

+18

Links: Steve Hilton was David Cameron’s policy guru and his wife Rachel Whetstone (together left) was a Google PR executive who worked for the Tories (right with Boris Johnson)

The links do not end there because Steve Hilton, once the Prime Minister’s closest political adviser, is married to Rachel Whetstone, who was vice-president of global communications at Google until last year before she moved to Uber.

Rachel Whetstone is a former No 10 aide and was Michael Howard’s director of communications when he was Tory leader and Mr Cameron is godfather to her younger son.

Mr Hilton was godfather to Ivan Cameron, the late eldest child of David and Samantha.

Hilton and Whetstone have been called the ‘most powerful couple in Britain’ while she and Mr Cameron have known each other since starting at Conservative Central Office in their early 20s.

Hilton and Whetstone later bought a Oxfordshire holiday home close to the Camerons.

Last year Mr Hilton, who quit as Mr Cameron’s former chief strategist, admitted too many of those at the heart of government go to the same dinner parties and send their children to the same schools.

Mr Hilton warned: ‘Regardless of who’s in office, the same people are in power. It is a democracy in name only, operating on behalf of a tiny elite no matter the electoral outcome.’

In 2013 David Cameron, accompanied by his wife Samantha and their daughter Florence, went to the wedding of a Naomi Gummer, a senior Google executive with the brief of ‘public policy’.

She was previously a political adviser to Jeremy Hunt when he was Culture Secretary in charge of internet regulation – so he was in attendance too.

 

+18

+18

Guests: David Cameron and his wife Samantha attended the wedding of Naomi Gummer, right with husband Henry,  a senior Google executive with the brief of ‘public policy’.

The Hilton/Whetstone axis is not the only relationship between Google and Government.

Eric Schmidt, the former CEO of Google, has long been close to Downing Street and has in the past advised Cameron on economic matters.

In 2006, Mr Cameron travelled from visiting Google in Silicon Valley to Bournemouth to address the Conservative Party conference.

Then in 2010 when Cameron announced a review of Britain’s intellectual property laws as the founders of Google have said they could never have started their company in Britain’.

In 2012 it emerged that Tory ministers held meetings with Google an average of once a month.

Official records show that David Cameron met Google executives three times and Chancellor George Osborne four times.

Google has held five meetings with the UK government over the past two years to discuss launching driverless cars in Britain.

It is not just a case of former government policy staff exiting through Westminster’s ‘revolving door’ to Google – it works the other way too.

Tim Chatwin was Mr Cameron’s head of strategic communications and had worked closely with Mr Hilton since the start of the Cameron modernisation project. He joined Google after the 2012 Tory conference.

Amy Fisher was once Google’s PR chief for European affairs and later bagged a job advising then Justice Secretary Chris Grayling.

 

+18

Tim Chatwin was Mr Cameron’s head of strategic communications and joined Google after the 2012 Tory conference

LABOUR WRITES TO CHANCELLOR AND TELLS HIM: THESE ARE THE 8 QUESTIONS YOU MUST ANSWER ON THE £130M GOOGLE TAX DEAL

Labour shadow chancellor John McDonnell today wrote to George Osborne demanding more information on Google’s tax bill.

In his letter he said that there are eight questions he must answer:

  • Firstly, please can you clarify exactly when you were first made aware of the details of the deal with Google? Did you (or any other Treasury Minister) personally sign it off, and were other Ministers involved in the settlement?
  • What discussions, if any, did you or members of your private office have with HMRC and with Google representatives about the deal?
  • Did HM Treasury and HMRC discuss details of the deal with Number 10 before the announcement was made?
  • What is HMRC’s understanding of the effective tax rate faced by Google over the past 10 years as a result of this settlement?
  • Are you confident that this deal will not undermine international co-operation on tax avoidance, such as the OECD base erosion and profit shifting scheme?
  • Can you clarify whether Google is changing the company structures that enabled this avoidance to take place over the past decade?
  • What concerns, if any, do you have that this agreement creates a precedent for future deals with other large technology corporations?
  • To help ensure HMRC is best placed to address complex issues like this will you now halt the programme of HMRC staffing cuts?

Is the Google sweetheart deal another blunder by HMRC boss Dame Disaster?

Google’s £130million ‘sweetheart deal’ with the taxman could be another blunder by HM Revenue and Customs boss nicknamed Dame Disaster.

HMRC has refused to say who signed off on the Google agreement but Treasury sources have said that the deal is likely to have been signed off by Lin Homer.

It is not the first ‘sweetheart deal’ agreed with HMRC as her predecessor Dave Hartnett also signed off agreements which saved Starbucks and Vodafone millions or even billions in tax payments.

 

+18

High life: Dame Lin Homer is pictured here sipping champagne on a plane after an HMRC crisis and as boss it is likely she has signed off the Google deal

An inquiry into Google’s tax arrangements started in 2009 when Mr Hartnett was in charge before he left in 2012 and Mrs Homer took over.

Her tenure has been tarnished by a string of blunders and she will stand down two years early in April with a pension worth £2.2million.

Her 35-year career in the public sector has been dogged by a string of scandals and failures.

 

+18

Previous HMRC boss Dave Hartnett, pictured, also signed off agreements which saved Starbucks and Vodafone millions or even billions in tax payments.

In 2005, as chief executive of Birmingham City Council, she was caught up in a postal votes scandal, which a judge said would have ‘disgraced a banana republic’.

Election judge Richard Mawrey said Mrs Homer, acting as the city’s returning officer, had ‘thrown the rule book out of the window’.

She went on to become the £200,000-a-year boss of the immigration system, at the time it was branded ‘not fit for purpose’ by the then Home Secretary John Reid.

During her time in charge it emerged that 1,000 foreign criminals had been mistakenly released, and 450,000 asylum case files were discovered dumped in boxes at the Home Office.

She later became head of the now defunct UK Border Agency, where she was criticised by MPs for a ‘catastrophic leadership failure’.

Despite the criticism, she was rewarded with a new post as head of HMRC.

At the time of her appointment, in 2012, the Home Affairs Committee said it was ‘astounded’ that she was being promoted to become the chief executive at Revenue & Customs adding: ‘The status quo, in which catastrophic leadership failure is no obstacle to promotion, is totally unacceptable.’

Recently pictures emerged of her as she raised a glass of champagne in first class, this is the head as she jetted off to America as her department floundered.

Days before her summer holiday last July she announced that 18million of the 60million annual calls to the HMRC helpline were never answered by staff.

Dame Lin was forced to set aside an extra £45million to improve customer service because so many calls were never picked up or were met with a busy tone.

She said at the time: ‘Despite our best efforts, our call performance hasn’t been up to scratch and we apologise to all those customers who have struggled to get through to us’.

But instead of staying in the UK, photographs from her husband Ian’s Facebook account reveal they still went to America for a summer break.

THE BILLIONAIRE GOOGLE BOSSES WHO CLAIM TO BE PAID AS LITTLE AS $1

+18

Larry Page, 42, Google co-founder and chief executive at Alphabet – Google’s parent company

Salary: $1

Worth: £36.8bn

Computer scientist and entrepreneur Page (right) co-founded Google Inc with Sergey Brin – his friend at Stanford University – in 1998, when they developed a search engine that listed results according to the popularity of the pages as part of a research project.

Both men became billionaires in August 2004 when Google held its initial public offering.

Page stepped aside as CEO in August 2001 in favour of Eric Schmidt, but re-assumed the role in April 2011. Last July he announced his intention to step aside a second time, in order to to become CEO of Alphabet.

Documents filed with regulators in April last year also disclosed that Page and the company’s other founder, Sergey Brin, limited their 2014 pay to $1 each, as has been their practice for years.

In 2011, he splashed out $45m on his own super yacht – but unlike many moguls, he bought his yacht second-hand.

Last year, a survey by review site Glassdoor named him as the highest-rated chief executive in America.

 

+18

Sergey Brin, 42, Google co-founder, Alphabet President and head of Google X

Salary: $1

Worth: £36bn

Born in the Soviet Union, Brin (right) and his family moved to the US when he was six years old. He met Google co-founder Page in 1995 after he went to Stanford University to study computer science, and the pair set up what was initially called BackRub would become the internet giant as part of a project.

Like Page, Brin takes a salary of just $1, but his wealth is estimated at £36bn.

Brin is also an investor in Airship Ventures and a private space travel company, Space Adventures. He became a benefactor for research into Parkinson’s disease, after his mother, Eugenia was diagnosed with the disease. He also learned he has a genetic mutation increasing the odds that he he too will get it, and in February 2014, Brin and his now ex-wife Anne Wojcicki donated $53 million to Michael J Fox Foundation.

After the couple’s separation in 2013, Wojcicki remained in the couple’s $7million Los Altos home with their two children.

 

+18

Eric Schmidt, 60, Executive chairman at Alphabet

Pay/bonuses: $109m

Worth: $9billion

Schmidt (right) was brought in as Google’s CEO in 2001 by creators Sergey Brin and Larry Page, who relied on his expertise to turn their modest internet search engine into a global media powerhouse.

Also known for his colourful private life, Schmidt is among the world’s richest people with an estimated fortune of $9 billion, according to Forbes.

He reportedly owns a $72.3million superyacht, a $15 million penthouse in Manhatten, a home near Google’s Silicon Valley HQ, and a $38 million estate in Montecito, California

In April last year it was revealed he had earned nearly $109 million in that financial year while the company’s stock slumped. Most of this consisted of stock valued at $100 million – the largest stock package that Schmidt had received since 2011 when Google Inc. awarded him a bundle valued at $94 million at the time he relinquished the CEO’s job to company co-founder Larry Page.

Schmidt also pocketed a $1.25 million salary, a $6 million bonus and perks valued at nearly $1 million. His total pay last year soared by more than five-fold from 2013 when his Google compensation was valued at $19.3 million.

 

+18

Sundar Pinchai, 43, Google chief executive

Pay/Bonuses: $50m

Worth: $150m

Long-hailed as a rising star in the company, Pinchai (right) was promoted to Google’s chief executive last August as part of the firm’s radical shake-up and Alphabet rebrand.

Twitter tried to poach him in 2011, and he was slated to become Microsoft CEO in 2013, but stuck with Google – where he has ascended to the top in just over six years.

The 43-year-old married father-of-two (one son, one daughter) was born in Chennai, India, and reportedly did not own a telephone until he was 12.

Pichai moved to America after his bachelor’s degree in engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur.

He went to Stanford for his MSc, the University of Pennsylvania for his MBA, then worked in business management and engineering before joining Google in 2004.

At Google he was one of the driving forces behind Gmail and Google Maps, and has headed up the development side of Chrome and Chrome OS.

He is widely described as ‘nice’, ‘mild-mannered’ and warm’.


Read more:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3416939/Government-fire-Google-pay-THREE-times-tax-France-employs-thousands-people-does-business-Britain.html#ixzz3yMzS5mAH
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

DOES GOOGLE BRIBE POLITICIANS TO GIVE IT FREE GOVERNMENT HAND OUTS AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE?

Google’s worldwide web of tax loopholes: Osborne under fire as Google is set to pay THREE times as much tax in France – even though it employs thousands more people and does more business in Britain

  • Government accused of agreeing ‘derisory’ £130m tax deal with Google
  • Google set to pay £380m in France despite UK being its largest base
  • French officials refusing to allow sales to be funneled via Dublin not Paris
  • But HMRC’s ‘sweetheart deal’ backs Google’s claim it has no fixed UK base
  • George Osborne had hailed £130m deal as a ‘victory for the taxpayer’
  • But Downing Street and MPs have distanced themselves from his claims
Google is set to pay three times more back tax to France than the UK, despite making three times as much money and employing four times more staff in its British outpost (pictured)

Google is set to pay three times more back tax to France than the UK, despite making three times as much money and employing four times more staff in its British outpost (pictured)

The Government was today accused of gross incompetence after agreeing Google could pay £130milllion in tax even though the web giant is about to hand over three times more in France.

Aggressive French officials are close to getting £380million from Google even though Britain is its biggest market outside the US and employs thousands more people than in France.

Paris tax bosses have refused to accept Google’s ploy of funnelling its international sales via Dublin to benefit from Ireland’s lower tax rate.

George Osborne hailed the £130million deal as a ‘victory’ for the taxpayer but critics branded it ‘derisory’ because Google has made around £6billion in profit in the UK in the past decade.

Yesterday even Downing Street distanced itself from the Chancellor’s claims and the agreement is now going to be subject to three inquiries.

Both Google and HM Revenue and Customs are now set to be hauled in front of MPs to explain the deal, after the Commons public accounts committee and the Treasury committee last night launched separate inquiries. 

Sources at the National Audit Office revealed they are also poised to investigate the deal. 

HMRC officials have taken six years to get the the internet giant to pay back just £130million to cover a decade of back-taxes.

This means they have been taxed at a rate that may be as low as 3 per cent – although the Government is still refusing to disclose what they charged them for ‘confidentiality’ reasons, minister David Gauke said yesterday. 

Experts have claimed the bill should be closer to £200million a year. 

Meg Hillier, who chairs the Commons public accounts committee, said it was just a ‘cosy deal’, adding: ‘It beggars belief that they didn’t challenge that basic question (of no fixed base). It underlines my real concerns about HMRC not keeping up with the big guys.’ 

But the French authorities have been aggressively chasing Google for more than 500million euros, furious at the tax avoidance ploy used by the firm, which registered all European sales in Dublin and benefitted from the lower tax rate in Ireland.

‘We have a hard time believing that some 150 well-paid salespeople with advanced degrees employed by one particular company in France are nothing more than busboys for Ireland,’  a French official said last year, according to The Times. Italy is also reportedly demanding £1billion from Google. 

Google uses a complicated web of businesses across the globe to reduce its tax bill and still claims it has no ‘fixed base’ in the UK despite its plans for a £1billion central London office housing up to 5,000 staff. Currently its thousands of UK employees are split between two offices.  

HQ: This is Google's UK reception at one of its central London offices, where thousands are employed, but it insists that it has no 'fixed base' in Britain

HQ: This is Google’s UK reception at one of its central London offices, where thousands are employed, but it insists that it has no ‘fixed base’ in Britain

French authorities have been aggressively chasing Google for more than 500 Euros, furious at the tax avoidance ploy used by the firm, which registered all European sales in Dublin and benefitted from the lower tax rate in Ireland. Pictured is Google's office in Paris

French authorities have been aggressively chasing Google for more than 500 Euros, furious at the tax avoidance ploy used by the firm, which registered all European sales in Dublin and benefitted from the lower tax rate in Ireland. Pictured is Google’s office in Paris

HOW GOOGLE FUNNELS ITS MONEY VIA A WEB OF COMPANIES TO SHRINK ITS TAX BILL

Web: This is Google’s complicated web of holding companies that allows the web giant to reduce its international tax bill. Google US has set up two Irish companies, one of which is based in Bermuda, with a middle company in the Netherlands. The network allows revenue from around the world to be sent back to Bermuda via Ireland and Holland, with their generous tax rates, allowing Google to reduce its tax bill

Google manages to reduce its tax bill by using a set of subsidiary companies across the globe.

The network – nicknamed the ‘Double Irish and Dutch Sandwich’ – is hugely controversial but totally legal.

Google moved its headquarters for Europe, the Middle East and Africa to Ireland in 2008 to benefit from the country’s lower tax rate on profits.

In Britain, its biggest market outside the US, Google is classified as having no ‘fixed base’ so none of its sales are technically made in the UK.

It means when a British company buys a Google advert for the UK, for example, the money goes straight to Dublin, meaning it pays little tax to the UK Treasury.

After paying Ireland’s lower corporation tax rate of 12.5%, international profits are then funnelled via Google Netherlands Holdings, taking advantage of generous tax laws there.

The profits are then sent to Google’s main overseas company, another Irish business domiciled in Bermuda – where the corporation tax rate is zero. 

This complicated arrangement is explained by experts as the Double Irish and Dutch Sandwich – with the Irish businesses being the bread and the Dutch subsidiary being its filling. 

It means that Google’s overseas tax rate on all its profits falls to around five per cent when in the UK it would have to pay 20 per cent.

Though this process has been branded ‘immoral’ by MPs, it is not illegal and Google says it has abided by international tax rules. 

The company also says its Bermuda operation does not impact the tax it pays in the UK.

Executives say the reported UK profit margins are far below the group average because most of its algorithms and codes, which drive the company’s profits, are developed outside the country.

Google still pays the majority of its taxes in America, but on its American profits only. 

 
 
 

Google’s sales were valued at £3.8 billion in Britain during 2013 but it paid just £20.4 million in UK taxes that year. Between 2006 and 2011 the company’s revenue in the UK hit around £12.6 billion but its corporation tax payments for the period totalled £11.2 million 

Its tax set-up allows the business to send UK sales revenue through an Irish subsidiary and legally avoid corporation tax in Britain.

That cash is then funneled via Holland, which offers a tax break too, and on to a holding company in Bermuda, which has a zero rate of corporation tax. 

Money from all of Google’s international businesses is sent to Bermuda in the same way.

MPs on all sides demanded further action to extract tax from Google and other giant corporations like Apple, Starbucks, Amazon and Facebook that make huge sums in the UK but pay little or no tax. 

The Times has also reported that HMRC officials failed to question Google’s claim that it had no ‘permanent establishment’ in the UK. 

This enabled the company to avoid paying millions in UK corporation tax, by booking sales through Ireland, with the profits then diverted to Bermuda – one of the world’s biggest tax havens. 

Britain is Google’s biggest foreign market, and the UK wing has four times as many staff as Google France. 

Tax expert Steve Lewis, who featured in the BBC Two show The Town That Took on the Taxman where locals took their businesses offshire, branded the situation ‘ridiculous’.

He said: ‘Google must have been over the moon with how lightly it got off. They probably thought all their Christmases and New Years had come at once.

‘If you look at their turnover for the UK it is eight figures – the money they should pay back should have been around £1 billion, not £130 million.

George Osborne, pictured, is facing three inquiries over his deal with Google that will see the internet giant pay £130m to cover a decade of back-taxes

George Osborne, pictured, is facing three inquiries over his deal with Google that will see the internet giant pay £130m to cover a decade of back-taxes

‘If a small firm makes an error with its tax return there’s no tolerance whatsoever. You’re not in any position to negotiate – you have to pay the fine plus interest.’ 

Mr Osborne has faced a barrage of criticism over the deal with HMRC, which covers money owed since 2005. 

And even Downing Street yesterday distanced itself from Mr Osborne’s claim that the agreement was a ‘victory’ for the taxpayer, as Tory MPs queued up to demand further action to extract tax from Google and other giant corporations that contribute little or nothing in the UK. 

Treasury committee chairman Andrew Tyrie said tax law had become a ‘piece of elastic’ that allowed corporations to get away with paying almost nothing.

He said: ‘The complexity of tax law is turning what should be a straightforward principle – that everybody should pay the correct amount of tax – into a piece of elastic. For corporation tax the problem is exacerbated by the globalisation of economic activity and any liability to tax that accompanies it.’

Labour said the deal set a dangerous precedent, and asked why ministers were settling for so little, when Italy was demanding £1billion from Google.

Shadow chancellor John McDonnell said analysis by experts suggested ‘the effective rate of tax faced by Google is around 3 per cent’ – against the current corporation tax rate of 20 per cent.

Treasury minister David Gauke dismissed the figure, saying Google was paying a higher rate of tax on its profits in the UK. But he flatly refused to tell MPs what the real rate was, or how it had been calculated.

Labour MP Rachel Reeves, a member of the Treasury committee, said the deal was an insult to taxpayers. She added: ‘A lot of people are struggling to fill out their tax returns right now – they can’t go and have a word with HMRC and say, ‘I think I’ll just pay £1,000 this year.’ They have to pay their fair share.’

The deal with Google announced on Friday covers a period dating back to 2005. Mr Osborne hailed it as ‘a victory for the action we’ve taken’.

 
 
 
Google has agreed to pay just £130million in taxes dating back to 2005. The amount was branded 'derisory' in light of the fact that the firm racked up sales of £4.5billion in Britain in 2014 alone

Google has agreed to pay just £130million in taxes dating back to 2005. The amount was branded ‘derisory’ in light of the fact that the firm racked up sales of £4.5billion in Britain in 2014 alone

Downing Street today played down reports that it was distancing itself from the Chancellor, who had described the deal as a ‘victory’ and a ‘major success’.

‘The Prime Minister and the Chancellor are of the same mind on this,’ a Downing Street spokesman said. ‘This was a good deal. There is no difference in the position – the Prime Minister and Chancellor’s view on this is the same.’

OTHER GIANTS IN THE DOCK: MAJOR FIRMS AND CORPORATION TAX 

Facebook: The social media titan paid just £4,327 in corporation tax in 2014, despite reporting UK revenues of £105million.

Apple: The US-based technology firm behind the iPad and the iPhone made £34billion in profit during the year to September 2014.

Experts estimate that the UK accounted for £1.9billion of that profit, but the firm only paid £11.8million in British corporation tax.

Amazon: The online shopping giant took £5.3billion in sales from British shoppers in 2014 but paid just £11.9million in tax after announcing profits of £34.4million.

Starbucks: The coffee chain paid just £8.6million of tax over 14 years between 1998 and 2012 when sales totalled £3billion.

But latest company filings show it paid £8.1million in corporation tax for last year on profits of £34.2million.

The spokesman said the tax settlement was agreed with Google by HMRC, adding: ‘No ministers were involved in agreeing this deal. It is done by HMRC on an operational basis.’

He added: ‘The key point on this is that HMRC is satisfied with the tax due and what it has collected.’

The spokesman said he was aware of ‘speculation’ that France is seeking more than 500 million euros from Google, but added: ‘Clearly at this stage, there’s no outcome, so it does remain to be seen how much they get.’

London Mayor Boris Johnson also hit out at the ‘derisory’ tax settlement, and called for reform of the tax system.

Mr Osborne dodged scrutiny of the deal in the Commons yesterday, preferring to press ahead with a pre-arranged trip to Liverpool with Microsoft billionaire Bill Gates. Instead, it was left to Mr Gauke to deal with the criticism from MPs on all sides.

Tory Anne Main asked why HMRC had allowed Google to avoid paying its taxes for so many years and fellow Conservative Mark Garnier questioned whether the internet giant had broken the law. Mr Gauke flatly refused to disclose details, citing taxpayer confidentiality. He insisted the deal was good for Britain, and said it provided ‘solid evidence’ that firms were responding to strengthened rules.

Google’s sales were valued at £3.8billion in Britain during 2013 but it paid just £20.4million in UK taxes that year. Between 2006 and 2011 the company’s revenue in the UK hit around £12.6billion but its corporation tax payments for the period totalled £11.2million.

It said: ‘After a six-year audit by the tax authority we are paying the amount of tax that HMRC agrees we should pay. Governments make tax law, the tax authorities enforce the law and Google complies with the law.’ 

Revealed: The incredibly close links between Google and Downing Street  

David Cameron and the Tories have links to the very top of Google going back decades.

The Prime Minister has enjoyed a special relationship with former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, who made billions making the business into a global powerhouse.

For years Mr Schmidt was on Mr Cameron’s business advisory board, which is used as a ‘sounding board’ on business matters, but the Google executive left in July.

The billionaire has reportedly also offered Mr Cameron on economic policy.

Former Google CEO and now executive chairman Eric Schmidt chats to Prime Minister David Cameron at a drinks reception - and has in the past advised Cameron on economic matters

Former Google CEO and now executive chairman Eric Schmidt chats to Prime Minister David Cameron at a drinks reception – and has in the past advised Cameron on economic matters

Links: Steve Hilton (left) was David Cameron's policy guru and his wife Rachel Whetstone (right) was a Google PR executive who worked for the Tories

Rachel Whetstone and Boris Johnson

Links: Steve Hilton was David Cameron’s policy guru and his wife Rachel Whetstone (together left) was a Google PR executive who worked for the Tories (right with Boris Johnson)

The links do not end there because Steve Hilton, once the Prime Minister’s closest political adviser, is married to Rachel Whetstone, who was vice-president of global communications at Google until last year before she moved to Uber.

Rachel Whetstone is a former No 10 aide and was Michael Howard’s director of communications when he was Tory leader and Mr Cameron is godfather to her younger son.

Mr Hilton was godfather to Ivan Cameron, the late eldest child of David and Samantha.

Hilton and Whetstone have been called the ‘most powerful couple in Britain’ while she and Mr Cameron have known each other since starting at Conservative Central Office in their early 20s.

Hilton and Whetstone later bought a Oxfordshire holiday home close to the Camerons. 

Last year Mr Hilton, who quit as Mr Cameron’s former chief strategist, admitted too many of those at the heart of government go to the same dinner parties and send their children to the same schools.

Mr Hilton warned: ‘Regardless of who’s in office, the same people are in power. It is a democracy in name only, operating on behalf of a tiny elite no matter the electoral outcome.’ 

In 2013 David Cameron, accompanied by his wife Samantha and their daughter Florence, went to the wedding of a Naomi Gummer, a senior Google executive with the brief of ‘public policy’.

She was previously a political adviser to Jeremy Hunt when he was Culture Secretary in charge of internet regulation – so he was in attendance too.

David Cameron and his wife Samantha attended the wedding of Google exec Naomi Gummer

Google executive Naomi Gummer with husband Henry

Guests: David Cameron and his wife Samantha attended the wedding of Naomi Gummer, right with husband Henry,  a senior Google executive with the brief of ‘public policy’.

The Hilton/Whetstone axis is not the only relationship between Google and Government.

Eric Schmidt, the former CEO of Google, has long been close to Downing Street and has in the past advised Cameron on economic matters.

In 2006, Mr Cameron travelled from visiting Google in Silicon Valley to Bournemouth to address the Conservative Party conference.

Then in 2010 when Cameron announced a review of Britain’s intellectual property laws as the founders of Google have said they could never have started their company in Britain’.

In 2012 it emerged that Tory ministers held meetings with Google an average of once a month. 

Official records show that David Cameron met Google executives three times and Chancellor George Osborne four times. 

Google has held five meetings with the UK government over the past two years to discuss launching driverless cars in Britain.

It is not just a case of former government policy staff exiting through Westminster’s ‘revolving door’ to Google – it works the other way too.

Tim Chatwin was Mr Cameron’s head of strategic communications and had worked closely with Mr Hilton since the start of the Cameron modernisation project. He joined Google after the 2012 Tory conference.

Amy Fisher was once Google’s PR chief for European affairs and later bagged a job advising then Justice Secretary Chris Grayling.

Tim Chatwin was Mr Cameron's head of strategic communications and joined Google after the 2012 Tory conference

Tim Chatwin was Mr Cameron’s head of strategic communications and joined Google after the 2012 Tory conference

LABOUR WRITES TO CHANCELLOR AND TELLS HIM: THESE ARE THE 8 QUESTIONS YOU MUST ANSWER ON THE £130M GOOGLE TAX DEAL

Labour shadow chancellor John McDonnell today wrote to George Osborne demanding more information on Google’s tax bill.

In his letter he said that there are eight questions he must answer:

  • Firstly, please can you clarify exactly when you were first made aware of the details of the deal with Google? Did you (or any other Treasury Minister) personally sign it off, and were other Ministers involved in the settlement?
  • What discussions, if any, did you or members of your private office have with HMRC and with Google representatives about the deal?
  • Did HM Treasury and HMRC discuss details of the deal with Number 10 before the announcement was made?
  • What is HMRC’s understanding of the effective tax rate faced by Google over the past 10 years as a result of this settlement?
  • Are you confident that this deal will not undermine international co-operation on tax avoidance, such as the OECD base erosion and profit shifting scheme?
  • Can you clarify whether Google is changing the company structures that enabled this avoidance to take place over the past decade?
  • What concerns, if any, do you have that this agreement creates a precedent for future deals with other large technology corporations?
  • To help ensure HMRC is best placed to address complex issues like this will you now halt the programme of HMRC staffing cuts? 

Is the Google sweetheart deal another blunder by HMRC boss Dame Disaster? 

Google’s £130million ‘sweetheart deal’ with the taxman could be another blunder by HM Revenue and Customs boss nicknamed Dame Disaster.

HMRC has refused to say who signed off on the Google agreement but Treasury sources have said that the deal is likely to have been signed off by Lin Homer.

It is not the first ‘sweetheart deal’ agreed with HMRC as her predecessor Dave Hartnett also signed off agreements which saved Starbucks and Vodafone millions or even billions in tax payments.

High life: Dame Lin Homer is pictured here sipping champagne on a plane after an HMRC crisis and as boss it is likely she has signed off the Google deal

High life: Dame Lin Homer is pictured here sipping champagne on a plane after an HMRC crisis and as boss it is likely she has signed off the Google deal

An inquiry into Google’s tax arrangements started in 2009 when Mr Hartnett was in charge before he left in 2012 and Mrs Homer took over. 

Her tenure has been tarnished by a string of blunders and she will stand down two years early in April with a pension worth £2.2million.

Her 35-year career in the public sector has been dogged by a string of scandals and failures.

Previous HMRC boss Dave Hartnett, pictured, also signed off agreements which saved Starbucks and Vodafone millions or even billions in tax payments.

 

Previous HMRC boss Dave Hartnett, pictured, also signed off agreements which saved Starbucks and Vodafone millions or even billions in tax payments.

In 2005, as chief executive of Birmingham City Council, she was caught up in a postal votes scandal, which a judge said would have ‘disgraced a banana republic’.

Election judge Richard Mawrey said Mrs Homer, acting as the city’s returning officer, had ‘thrown the rule book out of the window’.

She went on to become the £200,000-a-year boss of the immigration system, at the time it was branded ‘not fit for purpose’ by the then Home Secretary John Reid.

During her time in charge it emerged that 1,000 foreign criminals had been mistakenly released, and 450,000 asylum case files were discovered dumped in boxes at the Home Office.

She later became head of the now defunct UK Border Agency, where she was criticised by MPs for a ‘catastrophic leadership failure’.

Despite the criticism, she was rewarded with a new post as head of HMRC.

At the time of her appointment, in 2012, the Home Affairs Committee said it was ‘astounded’ that she was being promoted to become the chief executive at Revenue & Customs adding: ‘The status quo, in which catastrophic leadership failure is no obstacle to promotion, is totally unacceptable.’

Recently pictures emerged of her as she raised a glass of champagne in first class, this is the head as she jetted off to America as her department floundered. 

Days before her summer holiday last July she announced that 18million of the 60million annual calls to the HMRC helpline were never answered by staff.

Dame Lin was forced to set aside an extra £45million to improve customer service because so many calls were never picked up or were met with a busy tone. 

She said at the time: ‘Despite our best efforts, our call performance hasn’t been up to scratch and we apologise to all those customers who have struggled to get through to us’.

But instead of staying in the UK, photographs from her husband Ian’s Facebook account reveal they still went to America for a summer break.

THE BILLIONAIRE GOOGLE BOSSES WHO CLAIM TO BE PAID AS LITTLE AS $1

Larry Page, 42, Google co-founder and chief executive at Alphabet – Google’s parent company

Salary: $1

Worth: £36.8bn

Computer scientist and entrepreneur Page (right) co-founded Google Inc with Sergey Brin – his friend at Stanford University – in 1998, when they developed a search engine that listed results according to the popularity of the pages as part of a research project.

Both men became billionaires in August 2004 when Google held its initial public offering.

Page stepped aside as CEO in August 2001 in favour of Eric Schmidt, but re-assumed the role in April 2011. Last July he announced his intention to step aside a second time, in order to to become CEO of Alphabet.

Documents filed with regulators in April last year also disclosed that Page and the company’s other founder, Sergey Brin, limited their 2014 pay to $1 each, as has been their practice for years.

In 2011, he splashed out $45m on his own super yacht – but unlike many moguls, he bought his yacht second-hand.

Last year, a survey by review site Glassdoor named him as the highest-rated chief executive in America.

Sergey Brin, 42, Google co-founder, Alphabet President and head of Google X

Salary: $1

Worth: £36bn

Born in the Soviet Union, Brin (right) and his family moved to the US when he was six years old. He met Google co-founder Page in 1995 after he went to Stanford University to study computer science, and the pair set up what was initially called BackRub would become the internet giant as part of a project.

Like Page, Brin takes a salary of just $1, but his wealth is estimated at £36bn.

Brin is also an investor in Airship Ventures and a private space travel company, Space Adventures. He became a benefactor for research into Parkinson’s disease, after his mother, Eugenia was diagnosed with the disease. He also learned he has a genetic mutation increasing the odds that he he too will get it, and in February 2014, Brin and his now ex-wife Anne Wojcicki donated $53 million to Michael J Fox Foundation.

After the couple’s separation in 2013, Wojcicki remained in the couple’s $7million Los Altos home with their two children.

Eric Schmidt, 60, Executive chairman at Alphabet

Pay/bonuses: $109m

Worth: $9billion

Schmidt (right) was brought in as Google’s CEO in 2001 by creators Sergey Brin and Larry Page, who relied on his expertise to turn their modest internet search engine into a global media powerhouse.

Also known for his colourful private life, Schmidt is among the world’s richest people with an estimated fortune of $9 billion, according to Forbes.

He reportedly owns a $72.3million superyacht, a $15 million penthouse in Manhatten, a home near Google’s Silicon Valley HQ, and a $38 million estate in Montecito, California

In April last year it was revealed he had earned nearly $109 million in that financial year while the company’s stock slumped. Most of this consisted of stock valued at $100 million – the largest stock package that Schmidt had received since 2011 when Google Inc. awarded him a bundle valued at $94 million at the time he relinquished the CEO’s job to company co-founder Larry Page.

Schmidt also pocketed a $1.25 million salary, a $6 million bonus and perks valued at nearly $1 million. His total pay last year soared by more than five-fold from 2013 when his Google compensation was valued at $19.3 million.

Sundar Pinchai, 43, Google chief executive

Pay/Bonuses: $50m

Worth: $150m

Long-hailed as a rising star in the company, Pinchai (right) was promoted to Google’s chief executive last August as part of the firm’s radical shake-up and Alphabet rebrand.

Twitter tried to poach him in 2011, and he was slated to become Microsoft CEO in 2013, but stuck with Google – where he has ascended to the top in just over six years.

The 43-year-old married father-of-two (one son, one daughter) was born in Chennai, India, and reportedly did not own a telephone until he was 12.

Pichai moved to America after his bachelor’s degree in engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur.

He went to Stanford for his MSc, the University of Pennsylvania for his MBA, then worked in business management and engineering before joining Google in 2004.

At Google he was one of the driving forces behind Gmail and Google Maps, and has headed up the development side of Chrome and Chrome OS.

He is widely described as ‘nice’, ‘mild-mannered’ and warm’. 

Backlash builds against Google tax deal

Backlash builds against Google tax deal

 

 

 

 

FRANCE-INTERNET-GOOGLE...A person prepares to search the internet using the Google search engine, on May 14, 2014, in Lille. In a surprise ruling on May 13, the EU's top court said individuals have the right to ask US Internet giant Google to delete personal data produced by its ubiquitous search engine. AFP PHOTO / PHILIPPE HUGUEN (Photo credit should read PHILIPPE HUGUEN/AFP/Getty Images)

Downing Street distanced itself on Monday from George Osborne’s claim that the tax deal with Google represented “a major success”, amid growing criticism of the settlement.

Google’s agreement to pay £130m in back taxes to the UK government has reignited a controversy that pushed tax avoidance to the top of the international agenda three years ago.

The deal ended a decade-long probe by tax authorities into whether the tech group had skirted its tax bill by allocating profits earned in the UK — its second biggest market — to its European base in Ireland, where tax rates are lower

Conservative MPs — led by Boris Johnson, London mayor — have lined up to criticise what they said was a “derisory” payment by the US multinational.

Andrew Tyrie, chairman of the Commons treasury committee, announced an inquiry into corporate taxation saying that fundamental reforms would “probably now have to be considered”.

The chancellor’s enthusiastic reception of the Google agreement was not echoed by Number 10. David Cameron’s spokesman declined to repeat Mr Osborne’s assertion that the deal was a “major success” and “a victory”.

“It’s a step forward but there’s more to do,” the prime minister’s spokesman said. “We have made it clear that we want to see low taxes for business but tax must be paid. Clearly there is more work for the government to do to make sure multinational companies pay their tax.”

David Gauke, treasury minister, was forced to defend the deal in the House of Commons and rejected suggestions from some MPs that Google’s effective tax rate was just 3 per cent. But he said he could not say what rate the company had paid because he was not privy to tax information.

[Critics form] an unholy alliance between myself, The Sun, the mayor of London and even No 10

– John McDonnell

He reminded MPs that international rules dating back to the 1920s decree that corporation tax was paid on the basis of where economic activity takes place rather than where profit was made.

But Mr Tyrie’s treasury committee will look at whether the rules need to be changed. MPs are also expected to call multinationals such as Google, Facebook and Amazon to give evidence on their tax affairs.

John McDonnell, shadow chancellor, claimed the deal with Google had helped to form “an unholy alliance between myself, The Sun, the mayor of London and even Number 10”.

Steve Baker, one Tory MP, said the Google deal was “derisory”, echoing the view of Mr Johnson, and “totally unacceptable” to the public. The Sun newspaper said it was “a kick in the goolies”.

The issue of corporation tax has also been rising up the US political agenda. On Monday, Johnson Controls revived a debate about tax-cutting “inversion” deals, after it agreed a $20bn combination with Tyco International which would move the US manufacturer’s domicile to Ireland.

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2016. You may share using our article tools.
Please don’t cut articles from FT.com and redistribute by email or post to the web.

 

COMMENTS (34)
 
By submitting this comment I confirm that I have read and agreed to the FT Terms and Conditions. Please also see our commenting guidelines.

 

Sierra One 35 minutes ago

Perhaps we should see the £130m as the *price* Google decided it would pay to *buy* the termination of the UK’s “decade-long probe by tax authorities into whether the tech group had skirted its tax bill”.

It is Mr Osborne’s Treasury and HMRC that have an interest in spinning this as Google agreeing to pay “back taxes”; i.e. a victory by them over Google. But Google would rather not hear (nor say) the word “tax” at all. “What avoidance? We broke no law! End of.” True — and revealing:

What we actually learn from this episode is the going rate for buying the silence of Mr Osborne’s Treasury: circa 3%. Think about that for a moment.

Perhaps henceforth Mr Osborne should be known as “Mr 3%”. And perhaps *Never knowingly undersold* can be made the UK’s corporation tax policy; works as a Tweet too.

(More trivially: Clumsy of Mr Osborne to expose himself this way to his “friend” Boris.)

Citizen88 49 minutes ago

High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1df11896-c383-11e5-b3b1-7b2481276e45.html#ixzz3yJMEbkXv

The debate is not really about the Google payment but the highlighting of the arcane and anachronistic tax system we have.  Corporate and personal.  Application of existing rules is also poor as it is difficult to imagine a personal tax payer, without penalty, being given up to 10 years to argue the toss. For Google to take that time and employ advisors you know the outcome was worth it.

Reform however badly needed should not be underestimated.  While living in Hong Kong many years ago the US Congress sent a committe to review the spectacularly successful tax system of 15% flat (personal) and 16.5% if your employer paid for your housing.  Their simplified conclusion: a 25% flat tax would collect a meaningfully larger tax revenue but be over-run by the unemployment in legal, accounting and government employment.  It is much the same with reform of Corporate Tax.  With the added complexity of the stock market and braoder corporate financing as companies were forced to pay closer to or at headline tax rates. Headline tax rates are frankly meaningless when the majority of companies structure to minimise.

As a previous commentor suggested changes to the system reflecting the times in which we live would transform the collection and amount.  Now at a time where interest rates are at historic and predicted long term lows is the best time to make the change.  We also need to be cognisant of the numbers that companies, particularly public, want to promote and therefore require some honesty.  For example a 5% tax on gross earnings may be more relevant today.  A recent Australian review of public companies showed that of 1539 corporate entities, 38 per cent did not pay any tax in 2013-14, 22 per cent incurred a current year loss, 8 per cent offset tax profit against prior year tax losses, and 7 per cent used franking credits and other offsets (such as foreign tax credits and research and development tax breaks) to reduce their tax.  It may be the rules but the rules appear broke.  The UK sitution is likely to be similar.

This reform is financially and socially important.  The employees of these companies have often supped at the State teat and if we are prevented from recovering some societal benefit through corporations and personal tax at reasonable levels we kill the society we are meant to enhance for our very economic success.  Of course reform of government spending should follow hand in hand.  Like the Google tax investigation it is a decade long  process but the context of a fairer system working as stated (e.g. headline rates are the tax rates) is worth fighting for.

Citizen88 55 minutes ago

The debate is not really about the Google payment but the highlighting of the arcane and anachronistic tax system we have.  Corporate and personal.  Application of existing rules is also poor as it is difficult to imagine a personal tax payer, without penalty, being given up to 10 years to argue the toss. For Google to take that time and employ advisors you know the outcome was worth it.

Reform however badly needed should not be underestimated.  While living in Hong Kong many years ago the US Congress sent a committe to review the spectacularly successful tax system of 15% flat (personal) and 16.5% if your employer paid for your housing.  Their simplified conclusion: a 25% flat tax would collect a meaningfully larger tax revenue but be over-run by the unemployment in legal, accounting and government employment.  It is much the same with reform of Corporate Tax.  With the added complexity of the stock market and braoder corporate financing as companies were forced to pay closer to or at headline tax rates. Headline tax rates are frankly meaningless when the majority of companies structure to minimise.

As a previous commentor suggested changes to the system reflecting the times in which we live would transform the collection and amount.  Now at a time where interest rates are at historic and predicted long term lows is the best time to make the change.  We also need to be cognisant of the numbers that companies, particularly corporate, want to promote and therefore require some honesty.  For example a 5% tax on gross earnings may be more relevant today.

This reform is financially and socially important.  The employees of these companies have often supped at the State teat and if we are prevented from recovering some societal benefit through corporations and personal tax at reasonable levels we kill the society we are meant to enhance for our very economic success.  Of course reform of government spending should follow hand in hand.  Like the Google tax investigation it is a decade long  process but the context of a fairer system working as stated (e.g. headline rates are the tax rates) is worth fighting for.

L’anziano 1 hour ago

Hold on a minute. Google obeyed the law. So does Starbucks. So does Amazon. So does Apple. These are not charitable organisations, they’re set up to make money. What did you expect them to do? If the law is flawed, then for goodness sake, change the law. Politicians, if you’ve designed a flawed tax system, that’s your fault! It’s no good posturing and trying to lay the blame at the feet of the ‘evil Americans’. The UK is a democracy. All you have to do – particularly in the ‘elected dictatorship’-style democracy which exists here – is pass legislation. It clearly won’t be unpopular to kick the evil corporations in the teeth.

Somehow, though, I’ll bet politicians will prefer to ‘line up’ to criticise the big, bad American corporations and demand extra-legal ‘shake down’ payments whilst maintaining their lower corporate tax rate than the US as well as their cozy relationships with these corporations. Heaven forbid they do anything so bold as to legislate!

This is complete PR hogwash!

Vyvian 3 hours ago

So Google has settled a 10 year review by HMRC by agreeing to pay £130m. In doing so Google negotiated with the HMRC and one assumes that HMRC applied tax laws as legislated for by the UK parliament (and not the multinationals ) for that period of 10 years. So unless the HMRC is totally incompetent what’s the issue?

The multinationals after all play the international tax game to their advantage, not surprisingly – that is the logical rational approach.

So rather than rail with  pathetic socialist envy or opportunistic populist rage, do something about it,  you politicians. Then look around at the rest of the world laughing at a country that positively seems to enjoy defecating  where it eats its meals….and encouraging those same multinationals to relocate

Unless there is international consenus on tax , it will always be as has been.

Ca 3 hours ago

Its probably time to abolish Corporation Tax thereby ending all the farcical tax ‘planning’ which seeks to divert taxable profit into lower tax jurisdictions, or make it 10% but disallow interest payments or insist on at least a 50% equity or or or. So many simple things a Government could do to sort this out but don’t. 

Nicki 5 hours ago

Osborne does seem to specialise in foot in mouth disease.

MaxSense 3 hours ago

Give him a break. He’s a bloody historian. What can he know about taxes… or the whole fiscal system for that matter.

Anthony Dunn 2 hours ago

@MaxSense 

On the basis of his revolting kow-towing to the Chinese last year, Gideon clearly knows *$%! all about history either.  It grieves me to see such a remarkable lack of historical understanding paraded in the manner that Gideon has chosen to display his ignorance.  But, I suppose, to be fair, he was only doing as instructed by his paymasters in the Hedge Fund industry.

Abacab 5 hours ago

After a six-year investigation, HMRC have stated that Google have paid their tax. Now we have eveyone from the Labour party, the FT, and the prime minister’s office demanding that companies “pay their tax”. Well Google have paid their tax. This payment reflects what Google actually do in the UK, which is to sell something created, developed and operated outside the UK.

The FT’s argument amounts to little more than “there’s a large pile of cash over there – I want some of it”. And as it’s an “American”, and “multinational” pile of cash, then nothing more needs to be said really – does it? Clearly it’s immoral, if not downright evil, to have a pile of cash like that and not to give me some.

2RecommendReply

How Google Steals Ideas and Technologies From Entrepreneurs – Part 1

How Google Steals Ideas From Entrepreneurs

By Sarah Dunn and Anthony Harvard

A recent article in The New York Times called: “How Larry Page’s Obsessions Became Google’s Business” describes how Google Boss Larry Page covertly attends technology conferences in order to get ideas from entrepreneurs. He does not seem to ever pay those entrepreneurs, for the technology he takes from them, and makes billions of dollars off of at Google.

Google Boss Eric Schmidt just spent over $1 Billion to try to lobby Congress to change the patent laws in order to make patents for entrepreneurs nearly illegal, and to try to make patents almost entirely unenforceable, so that Google would not have to pay for the technology it steals. Google seems to love killing the American dream.

Google spent millions of dollars to nominate, lobby for, influence and place it’s top lawyer in charge of the U.S. Patent Office. Now Google’s “inside-man” makes sure that patents, that Google is infringing, are either turned down or, in some cases, have their approvals reversed.

Google’s motto seems to be: “Why Compete When You Can Cheat”. This is a far more relevant motto than ‘Don’t be evil”.

The New York Times article, and hundreds of stories from entrepreneurs, describes how Mr. Page cuddles up to technologists in ordinary street wear, does not identify himself, and Hoover’s up their innovations for his company. The article, details the following:

Three years ago, Charles Chase, an engineer who manages Lockheed Martin’s nuclear fusion program, was sitting on a white leather couch at Google’s Solve for X conference when a man he had never met knelt down to talk to him.

They spent 20 minutes discussing how much time, money and technology separated humanity from a sustainable fusion reaction — that is, how to produce clean energy by mimicking the sun’s power — before Mr. Chase thought to ask the man his name.

I’m Larry Page,” the man said. He realized he had been talking to Google’s billionaire co-founder and chief executive.

He didn’t have any sort of pretension like he shouldn’t be talking to me or ‘Don’t you know who you’re talking to?’” Mr. Chase said. “We just talked.”

The article also reveals the show-boating of how Mr. Page likes to “ ignore the main stage and follow the scrum of fans and autograph seekers who mob him in the moments he steps outside closed doors.”

The article goes on to show that.. “ He is a regular at robotics conferences and intellectual gatherings like TED. Scientists say he is a good bet to attend Google’s various academic gatherings, like Solve for X and Sci Foo Camp, where he can be found having casual conversations about technology or giving advice to entrepreneurs. Mr. Page is hardly the first Silicon Valley chief with a case of intellectual wanderlust, but unlike most of his peers, he has invested far beyond his company’s core business and in many ways has made it a reflection of his personal fascinations.”

Further Page has “… said on several occasions that he spends a good deal of time researching new technologies, focusing on what kind of financial or logistic hurdles stand in the way of them being invented or carried out. His presence at technology events, while just a sliver of his time, is indicative of a giant idea-scouting mission that has in some sense been going on for years but is now Mr. Page’s main job.”

Photo

Sergey Brin, co-founder of Google, wearing Google Glass. Credit Carlo Allegri/Reuters

Then the article grows dark, it says: “Many former Google employees who have worked directly with Mr. Page said his managerial modus operandi was to TAKE new technologies or product ideas and generalize them to as many areas as possible. Why can’t Google Now, Google’s predictive search tool, be used to predict everything about a person’s life? Why create a portal to shop for insurance when you can create a portal to shop for every product in the world?

But corporate success means corporate sprawl, and recently Google has seen a number of engineers and others leave for younger rivals like Facebook and start-ups like Uber. Mr. Page has made personal appeals to some of them, and, at least in a few recent cases, has said he is worried that the company has become a difficult place for entrepreneurs, according to people who have met with him.”

People who have worked with Mr. Page say that he tries to guard his calendar, avoiding back-to-back meetings and leaving time to read, research and see new technologies that interest him.”

The articles details Page’s under-cover intelligence gathering: “ People who work with Mr. Page or have spoken with him at conferences say he tries his best to blend in, ..” “ The scope of his curiosity was apparent at Sci Foo Camp, an annual invitation-only conference that is sponsored by Google, O’Reilly Media and Digital Science.

The article goes on to reveal that Google was forced to engage in a break-up, into a front operation called “Alphabet” in order to try to create overt shell companies to build buffers from the Tsunami of legal actions that are coming after it.:

Of course, for every statement Mr. Page makes about Alphabet’s technocorporate benevolence, you can find many competitors and privacy advocates holding their noses in disgust. Technology companies like Yelp have accused the company of acting like a brutal monopolist that is using the dominance of its search engine to steer consumers toward Google services, even if that means giving the customers inferior information.

In fact, the company’s main business issue seems to be that it is doing too well. Google is facing antitrust charges in Europe, along with investigations in Europe and the United States. Those issues are now mostly Mr. Pichai’s to worry about, as Mr. Page is out looking for the next big thing.”

It is hard to imagine how even the most ambitious person could hope to revolutionize so many industries. And Mr. Page, no matter how smart, cannot possibly be an expert in every area Alphabet wants to touch.

His method is not overly technical. Instead, he tends to focus on how to make a sizable business out of whatever problem this or that technology might solve. Leslie Dewan, a nuclear engineer who founded a company that is trying to generate cheap electricity from nuclear waste, also had a brief conversation with Mr. Page at the Solve For X conference.

She said he questioned her on things like modular manufacturing and how to find the right employees.

He doesn’t have a nuclear background, but he knew the right questions to ask,” said Dr. Dewan, chief executive of Transatomic Power. “‘Have you thought about approaching the manufacturing in this way?’ ‘Have you thought about the vertical integration of the company in this way?’ ‘Have you thought about training the work force this way?’ They weren’t nuclear physics questions, but they were extremely thoughtful ways to think about how we could structure the business.”

Dr. Dewan said Mr. Page even gave her an idea for a new market opportunity that she had not thought of. Asked to be more specific, she refused. The idea was too good to share.”

Yet, Dr. Dewan did share, seduced by the understated encouragement of a top intelligence gathering officer: Larry Page.

Below, you will find a small sample of tens of thousands of blog articles and news articles discussing the overt experience of Google’s intellectual property theft. When you have a zillion billion dollars and own your own Senators, ethics do not seem to fall within range of your moral compass.

Entrepreneurs have charged that Google has overtly, stolen its video broadcasting technology, virtual reality systems, Internet balloons, search engine system, wireless technology and many other items. We spoke with technologists who showed us United States Government issued patents and communications that showed that they had designed, engineered, built, patent filed and launched a number of the technologies that Google now has filled their bank accounts from. Google’s financiers at Kleiner Perkins, Google Ventures and other groups had come to them, looked at the technologies confidentially, under the guise of “maybe we’ll invest”, and then sent the technologies over to Google to build 100% clones of.

How hard is it to sue Google for patent infringement? With Google controlling the patent office and 80% of the technology law firms, the hapless entrepreneur is out-gunned.

Google even tried the lamest shell game in history by posting ads on technology blogs asking inventors to just send Google their patents and Google would look at them and offer a low-ball check if Google thought they might get in trouble. That ploy was universally mocked on the web.

Google remains a big, dumb, reckless billionaire’s toy with no regard for the individual. As a creator, your idea is Google’s to plunder. As a citizen, your privacy is Google’s to plunder. As the buyer of elected officials and federal agencies, the law is now Google’s bitch.

American FTC investigators wrote, in their report, that “Google is a threat to domestic innovation”. The European Union investigators have found “…Google to be a private out of control corporate government that has more power than the U.S. Government.”

It is time the FBI came in and shut that train down. Google is nothing but bad news for modern society and innovation.

How Google Steals Ideas From Entrepreneurs! The Google Innovation Theft Factory

How Google Steals Ideas From Entrepreneurs

 

By Sarah Dunn and Anthony Harvard

 

A recent article in The New York Times called: “How Larry Page’s Obsessions Became Google’s Business” describes how Google Boss Larry Page covertly attends technology conferences in order to get ideas from entrepreneurs. He does not seem to ever pay those entrepreneurs, for the technology he takes from them, and makes billions of dollars off of at Google.

 

Google Boss Eric Schmidt just spent over $1 Billion to try to lobby Congress to change the patent laws in order to make patents for entrepreneurs nearly illegal, and to try to make patents almost entirely unenforceable, so that Google would not have to pay for the technology it steals. Google seems to love killing the American dream.

 

Google spent millions of dollars to nominate, lobby for, influence and place it’s top lawyer in charge of the U.S. Patent Office. Now Google’s “inside-man” makes sure that patents, that Google is infringing, are either turned down or, in some cases, have their approvals reversed.

 

Google’s motto seems to be: “Why Compete When You Can Cheat”. This is a far more relevant motto than ‘Don’t be evil”.

 

The New York Times article, and hundreds of stories from entrepreneurs, describes how Mr. Page cuddles up to technologists in ordinary street wear, does not identify himself, and Hoover’s up their innovations for his company. The article, details the following:

 

Three years ago, Charles Chase, an engineer who manages Lockheed Martin’s nuclear fusion program, was sitting on a white leather couch at Google’s Solve for X conference when a man he had never met knelt down to talk to him.

 

They spent 20 minutes discussing how much time, money and technology separated humanity from a sustainable fusion reaction — that is, how to produce clean energy by mimicking the sun’s power — before Mr. Chase thought to ask the man his name.

 

I’m Larry Page,” the man said. He realized he had been talking to Google’s billionaire co-founder and chief executive.

 

He didn’t have any sort of pretension like he shouldn’t be talking to me or ‘Don’t you know who you’re talking to?’” Mr. Chase said. “We just talked.”

 

The article also reveals the show-boating of how Mr. Page likes to “ ignore the main stage and follow the scrum of fans and autograph seekers who mob him in the moments he steps outside closed doors.”

 

The article goes on to show that.. He is a regular at robotics conferences and intellectual gatherings like TED. Scientists say he is a good bet to attend Google’s various academic gatherings, like Solve for X and Sci Foo Camp, where he can be found having casual conversations about technology or giving advice to entrepreneurs. Mr. Page is hardly the first Silicon Valley chief with a case of intellectual wanderlust, but unlike most of his peers, he has invested far beyond his company’s core business and in many ways has made it a reflection of his personal fascinations.”

 

 

 

Further Page has “… said on several occasions that he spends a good deal of time researching new technologies, focusing on what kind of financial or logistic hurdles stand in the way of them being invented or carried out. His presence at technology events, while just a sliver of his time, is indicative of a giant idea-scouting mission that has in some sense been going on for years but is now Mr. Page’s main job.”

 

Photo

 

 

Sergey Brin, co-founder of Google, wearing Google Glass. Credit Carlo Allegri/Reuters

 

Then the article grows dark, it says: Many former Google employees who have worked directly with Mr. Page said his managerial modus operandi was to TAKE new technologies or product ideas and generalize them to as many areas as possible. Why can’t Google Now, Google’s predictive search tool, be used to predict everything about a person’s life? Why create a portal to shop for insurance when you can create a portal to shop for every product in the world?

 

But corporate success means corporate sprawl, and recently Google has seen a number of engineers and others leave for younger rivals like Facebook and start-ups like Uber. Mr. Page has made personal appeals to some of them, and, at least in a few recent cases, has said he is worried that the company has become a difficult place for entrepreneurs, according to people who have met with him.”

 

People who have worked with Mr. Page say that he tries to guard his calendar, avoiding back-to-back meetings and leaving time to read, research and see new technologies that interest him.”

 

The articles details Page’s under-cover intelligence gathering: People who work with Mr. Page or have spoken with him at conferences say he tries his best to blend in, ..” “ The scope of his curiosity was apparent at Sci Foo Camp, an annual invitation-only conference that is sponsored by Google, O’Reilly Media and Digital Science.

 

 

 

The article goes on to reveal that Google was forced to engage in a break-up, into a front operation called “Alphabet” in order to try to create overt shell companies to build buffers from the Tsunami of legal actions that are coming after it.:

 

Of course, for every statement Mr. Page makes about Alphabet’s technocorporate benevolence, you can find many competitors and privacy advocates holding their noses in disgust. Technology companies like Yelp have accused the company of acting like a brutal monopolist that is using the dominance of its search engine to steer consumers toward Google services, even if that means giving the customers inferior information.

 

In fact, the company’s main business issue seems to be that it is doing too well. Google is facing antitrust charges in Europe, along with investigations in Europe and the United States. Those issues are now mostly Mr. Pichai’s to worry about, as Mr. Page is out looking for the next big thing.”

 

It is hard to imagine how even the most ambitious person could hope to revolutionize so many industries. And Mr. Page, no matter how smart, cannot possibly be an expert in every area Alphabet wants to touch.

 

His method is not overly technical. Instead, he tends to focus on how to make a sizable business out of whatever problem this or that technology might solve. Leslie Dewan, a nuclear engineer who founded a company that is trying to generate cheap electricity from nuclear waste, also had a brief conversation with Mr. Page at the Solve For X conference.

 

She said he questioned her on things like modular manufacturing and how to find the right employees.

 

He doesn’t have a nuclear background, but he knew the right questions to ask,” said Dr. Dewan, chief executive of Transatomic Power. “‘Have you thought about approaching the manufacturing in this way?’ ‘Have you thought about the vertical integration of the company in this way?’ ‘Have you thought about training the work force this way?’ They weren’t nuclear physics questions, but they were extremely thoughtful ways to think about how we could structure the business.”

 

Dr. Dewan said Mr. Page even gave her an idea for a new market opportunity that she had not thought of. Asked to be more specific, she refused. The idea was too good to share.”

 

Yet, Dr. Dewan did share, seduced by the understated encouragement of a top intelligence gathering officer: Larry Page.

 

Below, you will find a small sample of tens of thousands of blog articles and news articles discussing the overt experience of Google’s intellectual property theft. When you have a zillion billion dollars and own your own Senators, ethics do not seem to fall within range of your moral compass.

 

Entrepreneurs have charged that Google has overtly, stolen its video broadcasting technology, virtual reality systems, Internet balloons, search engine system, wireless technology and many other items. We spoke with technologists who showed us United States Government issued patents and communications that showed that they had designed, engineered, built, patent filed and launched a number of the technologies that Google now has filled their bank accounts from. Google’s financiers at Kleiner Perkins, Google Ventures and other groups had come to them, looked at the technologies confidentially, under the guise of “maybe we’ll invest”, and then sent the technologies over to Google to build 100% clones of.

 

How hard is it to sue Google for patent infringement? With Google controlling the patent office and 80% of the technology law firms, the hapless entrepreneur is out-gunned.

 

Google even tried the lamest shell game in history by posting ads on technology blogs asking inventors to just send Google their patents and Google would look at them and offer a low-ball check if Google thought they might get in trouble. That ploy was universally mocked on the web.

 

Google remains a big, dumb, reckless billionaire’s toy with no regard for the individual. As a creator, your idea is Google’s to plunder. As a citizen, your privacy is Google’s to plunder. As the buyer of elected officials and federal agencies, the law is now Google’s bitch.

 

American FTC investigators wrote, in their report, that “Google is a threat to domestic innovation”. The European Union investigators have found “…Google to be a private out of control corporate government that has more power than the U.S. Government.”

 

It is time the FBI came in and shut that train down. Google is nothing but bad news for modern society and innovation.

 

Does Google Steal Your Ideas? – Yahoo News

 

Does Google Steal Your Ideas? Through its myriad media mechanisms, Google has access to a worrying amount of our data – but even more than that, it has an …

news.yahoo.com/video/does-google-steal-ideas-113004631.html

 

Google Steals Ideas From Bing, Bing Steals Market Share From …

 

Last month, Google added a new feature to its homepage that enabled users to select a background image. Google included a gallery of professional photos to choose …

 

fastcompDany.com/1672922/google-steals-ideas-bing-bing-ste…

 

Why Google Is Stealing Apple’s Ideas – Forbes

 

Why Google Is Stealing Apple’s Ideas Just because you’re … Google offers its own Web-based

 

 

 

Google Stealing Apple’s Ideas And Other Tales Of … – TechCrunch

 

This morning I woke up and saw an interesting headline on Techmeme from Forbes writer Brian Caulfield: Why Google Is Stealing Apple’s Ideas. Wow, a story …

 

techcrunch.com/2009/07/11/google-stealing-apples-ideas-a…

 

 

Google Retracts After Caught Stealing Ideas – Tom’s Guide

 

Monday this week Google launched its App Engine, which was very well received by developers and users alike. Unfortunately, attention turned elsewhere on Tuesday as …

 

tomsguide.com/us/google-huddlechat-campfire,news-977.html

Google Steals Your Ideas – YouTube

 

Google Steals Your Ideas Alltime Conspiracies. Subscribe Subscribed Unsubscribe 887,471 887K. Loading … – Does Google Spy On You?: https: …

 

youtube.com/watch?v=XKHUc2ouMXA

Google Ventures Launches with “We May Steal Your Idea” Caveat …

 

Google Ventures Launches with “We May Steal Your … Seems in the current downturn its google’s policy … I know that everyone thinks tere ideas are …

 

marketingpilgrim.com/2009/03/google-ventures-launches-with-we-…

Lawsuit Accuses Google, YouTube Of Stealing Sharing Idea In …

 

Be In, a company that created the video sharing service CamUp, is accusing Google of stealing trade secrets and violating its copyrights when it added a “Watch with …

 

marketingland.com/lawsuit-accuses-google-youtube-of-stealin…

 

Newspiracy.com | Google Steals Your Ideas

 

Google Steals Your Ideas 0 Posted by newspiracy – January 24, 2016 – Alltime Conspiracies. Alltime Conspiracies Sun, January 24, 2016 10:50am URL: Embed:

 

newspiracy.com/conspiracy-theory/alltime-conspiracies/go…

 

Is Google Stealing Your Content and Hijacking Your Traffic …

 

[Continue reading Is Google Stealing Your Content and Hijacking … Are they going to decide they can better serve the customers in your market by stealing your …

 

graywolfseo.com/seo/google-hijackingtraffic/

Google deliberately stole information but executives ‘covered …

 

Google, pictured street-mapping in Bristol, has always claimed that it didn’t know its software would collect the private information

 

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2150606/Google-deliberately-…

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

GOOGLE Executives Just Steal Ideas They Want

Is Panasonic The Most Unethical Company in Tech?

Is Panasonic The Most Unethical Company in Tech?

 

 

 

Elon Musk will do anything for dirty tech deal’s to increase his wealth and self-promotion via taxpayer pig troughs. He loves to partner with the dirtiest name in electronics: Panasonic.

 

 

 

Apparently, twisted minds think alike. When will the FBI finally shut both of these bad actors down?

 

 

 

Panasonic kills workers. Lies, runs corruption operations, dumps goods, builds toxic factories and well, just take a look:

 

 

 

Panasonic charged with price-fixing on car components

 

 

 

Dustin Walsh  RSS feed
Crain’s Detroit Business

 

A federal grand jury in Detroit indicted another Japanese automotive executive on Tuesday for involvement in an international pricing-fixing conspiracy.

 

According to the charges filed in U.S. District Court, Shinichi Kotani, an executive for Panasonic Corp., participated in fixing prices on switches and steering angles sensors for Toyota Motor Corp. vehicles sold in the U.S.

 

The indictment alleges Kotani and co-conspirators participated in big-rigging meetings in the U.S. and Japan from January 2004 until at least February 2010.

 

Besides various executive roles in Japan, Kotani served as vice president of automotive systems for Panasonic Automotive Systems Co. of America in Peachtree, Ga., from April 2008 until July 2009.

 

Panasonic also has an automotive technical center in suburban Detroit. Attempts to reach a company official for comment were unsuccessful. Efforts to locate an attorney for Kotani also were unsuccessful.

 

Kotani faces a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison and $1 million in fines for violating the Sherman Act.

 

The indictment — part of a broad ongoing U.S. investigation into supplier price fixing — is the second coming out of Detroit in the past week. Regulators in Europe and Japan have been conducting similar investigations.

 

On Sept. 19, Ryoji Fukudome and Toshihiko Nagashima, executives for Tokyo-based Fujikura Ltd., were indicted for allegedly fixing prices on wire harnesses sold to Fuji Heavy Industries. The parts were allegedly used in Fuji’s Subaru vehicle line sold in the U.S.

 

Earlier this month, Shingo Okuda, an executive at G.S. Electech Inc., was indicted by a federal grand jury in the Eastern District of Kentucky for bid-rigging on wire assemblies sold to Toyota.

 

In July, Panasonic pleaded guilty to its role in the conspiracy and was sentenced to pay a $45.8 million criminal fine.

 

The investigation has led to 11 companies and 19 executives, including Kotani, charged in the price-fixing conspiracy.

 

More than $874 million in criminal fines have been imposed on the companies, and 14 executives have been sentenced to prison ranging from a year to two years each.

 

The list of companies that have pleaded guilty include Panasonic, Sanyo Electric Co., Diamond Electric Manufacturing Co., Tokai Rika, Autoliv, TRW Deutschland Holding GmbH, Nippon Seiki Co., Fujikura, Furukawa Electric Co., Denso Corp., Yazaki Corp. and G.S. Electech.

 

 

 

Panasonic will spend up to $1.6 billion on Tesla gigafactory

 

Posted by Charles Morris & filed under Newswire, The Tech.

 

Panasonic Li-ion 18650 (ChargedEVs) 2

 

Panasonic has been involved with Tesla’s Gigafactory from the beginning of the project, but until now, it hasn’t said exactly how much it plans to invest.

 

Now Panasonic President Kazuhiro Tsuga has told Marketwatch that the company will invest up to $1.6 billion, hoping to secure its future in automotive electronics.

 

Sales to carmakers represented about 15 percent of Panasonic’s revenue in 2015, but the company aims to double that over the next four years. That objective is highly dependent on Tesla’s ability to meet its goal of selling 500,000 cars a year by 2020, as batteries are expected to provide the lion’s share of Panasonic’s automotive-market sales.

 

“We are sort of waiting on the demand from Tesla,” Mr. Tsuga said. “If Tesla succeeds and the electric vehicle becomes mainstream, the world will be changed and we will have lots of opportunity to grow.”

 

 

Tesla and Panasonic plan to build the factory in eight phases, and are currently in the first phase. So far, the Japanese company’s investment has been small, but by the time the Gig is fully up to speed, Panasonic will have provided between 1.5 and 1.6 billion dollars, out of a total price tag of 4 to 5 billion, Mr. Tsuga said.

 

Panasonic employees were expected to arrive in Nevada at the end of 2015 to prepare for the start of cell production. The factory will begin producing batteries this year for Tesla’s Powerwall energy storage business.

 

 

 

Source: Marketwatch via Green Car Reports

 

Tags: Panasonic, Tesla Gigafactory

 

 

 

 

Panasonic and Its Subsidiary Sanyo Agree to Plead Guilty in Separate Price-Fixing Conspiracies Involving Automotive Parts and Battery Cells

 

Agrees to Plead Guilty to Price-fixing Conspiracy Involving Battery Cells, First Charges Filed in Battery Cell Investigation

Panasonic Corp. and its subsidiary, SANYO Electric Co. Ltd., have agreed to plead guilty and to pay a total of $56.5 million in criminal fines for their roles in separate price-fixing conspiracies involving automotive parts and battery cells, the Department of Justice announced today.  LG Chem Ltd., a leading manufacturer of secondary batteries, has agreed to plead guilty and to pay a $1.056 million criminal fine for price fixing involving battery cells.

 

  Osaka, Japan-based Panasonic agreed to pay a $45.8 million criminal fine for its role in the automotive parts conspiracy. SANYO agreed to pay a $10.731 million criminal fine for its role in the battery cells conspiracy.  The guilty pleas against SANYO and LG Chem are the first in the department’s ongoing investigation into anticompetitive conduct in the cylindrical lithium ion battery cell industry.

 

 The three-count felony charge against Panasonic was filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan.  Separate one-count felony charges were filed against SANYO and LG Chem in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.  As part of the plea agreements, which are subject to court approval, the charged companies have agreed to cooperate in the department’s ongoing antitrust investigations.

 

 Panasonic has agreed to plead guilty for its role in a conspiracy to fix prices of switches, steering angle sensors and automotive high intensity discharge (HID) ballasts installed in cars sold in the United States and elsewhere.  SANYO and LG Chem Ltd. have agreed to plead guilty for their roles in a conspiracy to fix the prices of cylindrical lithium ion battery cells sold worldwide for use in notebook computer battery packs.

 

 “Panasonic is charged with participating in separate price-fixing conspiracies affecting numerous parts used in cars made and sold in the United States while its subsidiary was also fixing prices on battery cells used by consumers of notebook computers,” said Scott D. Hammond, Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division’s criminal enforcement program.  “Pleading guilty and cooperating with the division’s ongoing investigations is a necessary step in changing a corporate culture that turned customers into price-fixing victims.” 

 

 According to the first count of a three-count felony charge filed today in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan in Detroit, Panasonic participated in a conspiracy to rig bids for, and to fix, stabilize and maintain the prices of steering wheel switches, turn switches, wiper switches, combination switches and door courtesy switches sold to Toyota Motor Corp. and Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America Inc. in the United States and elsewhere. According to the court document, Panasonic and its co-conspirators carried out the conspiracy from at least as early as September 2003 until at least February 2010.

 

 The second count charges that Panasonic, during this same time period, participated in a conspiracy to rig bids for, and to fix, stabilize, and maintain the prices of steering angle sensors sold to Toyota in the United States and elsewhere. The department said that Panasonic and its co-conspirators agreed, during meetings and conversations, to suppress and eliminate competition in the automotive parts industry by agreeing to rig bids for, and to fix, stabilize, and maintain the prices of steering angle sensors sold to Toyota Motor Corp. and Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America Inc. in the United States and elsewhere.

 

 According to the third count of the charge, from at least as early as July 1998 and continuing until at least February 2010, Panasonic and its co-conspirators participated in a conspiracy to suppress and eliminate competition in the automotive parts industry by agreeing, during meetings and conversations, to rig bids for, and to fix, stabilize, and maintain the prices of automotive HID ballasts sold to Honda Motor Co. Ltd. and American Honda Motor Co. Inc., Mazda Motor Corp. and Mazda Motor of America Inc., and Nissan Motor Co. Ltd. and Nissan North America Inc. in the United States and elsewhere.

 

 I ncluding Panasonic, 11 companies and 15 executives have pleaded guilty or agreed to plead guilty and have agreed to pay a total of more than $874 million in criminal fines as a result of the auto parts investigation. Additionally, 12 of the individuals have been sentenced to pay criminal fines and to serve jail sentences ranging from a year and a day to two years each. The three additional executives have agreed to serve time in prison and are currently awaiting sentencing.

 

 

 

“The FBI remains committed to protecting American consumers and businesses from corporate corruption. The conduct of Panasonic, SANYO, and LG Chem resulted in inflated production costs for notebook computers and cars purchased by U.S. consumers,” said Joseph S. Campbell, FBI Criminal Investigative Division Deputy Assistant Director.  “These investigations illustrate our efforts to ensure market fairness for U.S. businesses by bringing corporations to justice when their commercial activity violates antitrust laws.”

 

 According to the one-count felony charge filed today in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in San Francisco, SANYO and LG Chem engaged in a conspiracy to fix the price of the cylindrical lithium ion battery cells used in notebook computer battery packs from about April 2007 until about September 2008. Cylindrical lithium ion battery cells are rechargeable batteries that are often incorporated in groups into more powerful battery packs commonly used to power electronic devices.

 

 According to the charges, SANYO, LG Chem and their co-conspirators carried out the conspiracy by, among other things, agreeing during meetings and conversations to price cylindrical lithium ion battery cells for use in notebook computer battery packs to customers at predetermined levels and issuing price quotations to customers in accordance with those agreements. The department also said that SANYO, LG Chem and their co-conspirators collected and exchanged information for the purpose of monitoring and enforcing adherence to the agreed-upon prices and took steps to conceal the conspiracy.

 

 Panasonic, SANYO and LG Chem are each charged with price fixing in violation of the Sherman Act, which carries a maximum penalty of a $100 million criminal fine for corporations. The maximum fine for the company may be increased to twice the gain derived from the crime or twice the loss suffered by the victims, if either of those amounts is greater than the statutory maximum fine.

 

 Today’s charges arose from an ongoing investigation in the cylindrical lithium ion battery cells industry being conducted by the Antitrust Division’s San Francisco Office and the FBI in San Francisco as well as an ongoing federal antitrust investigation into price fixing, bid rigging and other anticompetitive conduct in the automotive parts industry, which is being conducted by each of the Antitrust Division’s criminal enforcement sections and the FBI. Today’s automotive parts charges were brought by the Antitrust Division’s National Criminal Enforcement Section and the FBI’s Detroit Field Office, with the assistance of the FBI headquarters’ International Corruption Unit. Anyone with information on price fixing, bid rigging and other anticompetitive conduct related to other products in the automotive parts industry should contact the Antitrust Division’s Citizen Complaint Center at 1-888-647-3258, visit www.justice.gov/atr/contact/newcase.html or call the FBI’s Detroit Field Office at 313-965-2323. Anyone with information concerning illegal or anticompetitive conduct in the battery industry is urged to call the Antitrust Division’s San Francisco Office at 415-436-6660 or visit www.justice.gov/atr/contact/newcase.htm.

 

 

Panasonic Execs Charged In Price-Fixing Sting

 

By Kaitlin Ugolik

Law360, New York — A grand jury in Michigan on Tuesday indicted former executives of Panasonic Corp., Whirlpool Corp. and Tecumseh Products Co. for their alleged participation in an international refrigerant compressor price-fixing scheme.

The indictment is the first in an ongoing investigation by the U .S. Department of Justice into price-fixing and other anti-competitive practices in the worldwide refrigerant compressor market.

“Cracking down on international price-fixing cartels has been, and will continue to be, among the most significant priorities for the Antitrust Division,” Sharis Pozen, Special Investigator, said.

 

FBI Probing Kickbacks By Panasonic Supplier

 

By

 

 

The FBI said this week federal prosecutors charged William McMahon, CEO and co-owner of Trustin Technology, and Sean Volin, who was a manager for Pansonic Corp. of North America at its Secaucus, N.J., office, with wire fraud. McMahon paid kickbacks to Volin to ensure his company would continue to receive contracts from Panasonic that brought tens of millions of dollars to the company, the FBI said in a statement.

 

 

Tell Sony and Panasonic: Stop Poisoning Tijuana’s Workers!

 

 

Marisa Natale 

 

 

 

 

 

I am writing to address the manufacturing practices of international corporations in Mexico, especially Tijuana. The workers in their plants are treated inhumanely, and they are destroying the communities around their factories. They are able to escape fair treatment of their workers and responsible chemical use by moving their manufacturing to Mexico – out of sight and out of mind of their customers. The fact that any company would be so deliberately manipulative is disgusting and unbelievable.

 

            The chemicals the workers are constantly exposed to are killing them – they are inhaling lead, burning their skin with chemical adhesives and giving birth to children with defects. They have sores and infections in their lungs and organs. They are going to die young – their children are living in the company waste and filth.

 

They are offered no rights, no protection, and no fair treatment. To make matters worse, they do not get a reprieve at home. The worker communities surrounding the plants are wastelands of corporate footprints. The rivers run with chemicals – the rivers that serve as drinking, cooking and washing water for the inhabitants. The ground is saturated with dangerous and harmful substances used in their factories. When the rains run, the polluted rivers overrun into people’s homes and they must cross them on foot simply to get to work, where they are exposed to even more chemicals.

 

            They are not responsible for the workers’ living conditions. They are not responsible for downed power lines, education issues or lack of proper homes. However, nothing I have mentioned in this petition is beyond their control. They can stop the use of dangerous and deadly chemicals in factories. They can clean up their act. They can stop letting their chemicals run off into the workers’ water supplies, homes and bodies. They can hire an environmental task force to clean up the communities that they have ruined, which would create legitimate jobs. They can hire engineers to figure out solutions to replace the deadly chemicals with harmless ones that still enable them to produce a high-quality product.

 

            Sony and Panasonic are committed to serving their customers with dignity and respect – but their employees deserve to be treated in the same way. Until Sony and Panasonic change their production practices and clean up the communities they have ruined, I am instituting a boycott of their products.  This is unacceptable and will not be allowed to continue – as free Americans we vote with our dollars and we cannot choose to vote for their companies until change happens.

 

 

 

So when you buy a piece of electronic equipment, whether it is a television or a camera cable, to a microwave or a toaster, LOOK FOR THE SONY/PANASONIC LABEL. Sony brands many of its products clearly, but you may have to look carefully for the Panasonic name. Don’t allow this to continue. If the profit margins aren’t working, Panasonic and Sony will have to change their manufacturing practices, and we have to make it hurt where it counts for them to listen. Aim high! Invite your friends! Sign away! We want as many thousands of signatures as possible!

 

 

 

Letter to

 

Panasonic Communications

We are writing to you to address your manufacturing practices in Mexico, especially Tijuana. The workers in your plants are treated inhumanely, and you are destroying the communities around your factories. You are able to escape fair treatment of your workers and responsible chemical use by moving your manufacturing to Mexico – out

Read more 

 

Panasonic’s Toxic Factories Take Toll On China’s Labor Force

 

 

 

By

 

Jane Spencer and

 

Juliet Ye

 

Over the holidays, millions of American children received Chinese-made toys powered by cadmium batteries.

 

Cadmium batteries are safe to use. They are also cheap, saving American parents about $1.50 on the average toy, compared with pricier batteries.

 

But cadmium batteries can be hazardous to make. In southern China, Wang Fengping worked for years in plants that produced cadmium batteries for the likes of Mattel Inc., Toys “R” Us Inc. and Wal-Mart Stores Inc. Like hundreds of her colleagues, Ms. Wang regularly inhaled the toxic red cadmium dust that filled the air in the plant.

 

 

Now, at 45, Ms. Wang is often too weak to walk. Her kidneys have failed, and her doctors have identified cadmium poisoning as the likely culprit. About 400 other workers at her former employer, Hong Kong-based GP Batteries International Ltd., have been found to harbor unsafe levels of cadmium, a toxic metal like mercury and lead that can cause kidney failure, lung cancer and bone disease.

 

In recent months, Americans have discovered the dark side of their reliance on cheap Chinese goods. From lead-tainted toys to contaminated pet food, the safety of Chinese products is suddenly an American obsession.

 

But in China, workers making goods for American consumers have long borne the brunt of a global manufacturing system that puts cost cutting ahead of safety. The search for cheaper production means dirty industries are migrating to countries with few worker protections and lenient regulatory environments.

 

The nickel-cadmium battery illustrates this trend. Once widely manufactured in the West, the batteries are now largely made in China, where the industry is sickening workers and poisoning the soil and water.

 

Now, some regulators and companies are taking action. This year, the European Union is banning the sale of nearly all cadmium batteries. A few companies, including Hasbro Inc., are eschewing the battery.

 

Yet cadmium batteries, a technology dating back to 1899, continue to represent 3% of total battery sales, and are still widely used in toys, power tools, cordless phones and other gadgets sold in the U.S. Besides being inexpensive, they can provide a quick surge of power.

 

The near-disappearance of the American cadmium-battery industry can be understood from a visit to an overgrown field in Cold Spring, N.Y. Here, the Marathon Battery factory churned out nickel-cadmium batteries for the U.S. military for three decades. After the plant was shuttered in 1979, the cadmium-laden ground became one of the nation’s highest-profile superfund sites, sparking a $130 million clean-up and a class-action lawsuit by nearby residents that was settled for millions of dollars in 1998.

 

Poisoned Words

 

Edited excerpts from Ms. Wang’s blog, written in Chinese and translated by The Wall Street Journal. Click on the image to go to the blog itself.

 

ENLARGE

  • From the blog’s undated introduction
    Hello friends! Do you want to know how Gold Peak Battery treats its cadmium-poisoned employees? Would you like to hear a personal account from a victim of workplace cadmium poisoning? Panasonic Battery and past and present battery factory workers, would you like to know more specific facts? Then please read my blog, and let’s unite in concern for cadmium poisoning!

  • Nov. 20, 2007 — Global warming, colder heart
    It was hard to get up to eat a bit of breakfast, my head hurt and my whole body felt discomfort, but finally I decided to go outside. Everyone is talking about global warming, temperatures are rising, but today I felt the wind was pretty strong and the temperature colder than yesterday. I felt as if I was sleepwalking through unfamiliar streets. After a while, I gathered my thoughts and returned home.

  • Nov. 11, 2007 — The visible and the invisible
    Our society is full of love; if a person gets into trouble, others will help. But when it comes to occupational diseases — a hidden killer — that cannot be seen, I’m afraid that it’s very difficult for those without personal experience to understand. Most workers have limited knowledge, ultimately you don’t know how many hidden killers are in your workplace. The boss knows, but he won’t tell you!

  • Nov. 11, 2007 — First application for an occupational illness diagnosis
    My name is Wang Fengping. I am an engineer in the engineering department of the Gold Peak Battery Factory in Huizhou city, Guandong province. I was born in May 1962 and began work at Gold Peak on August 1, 1995. From that date until December 2005, I was continuously engaged in the production and follow-up design of manufacturing equipment and machinery. This entry includes an account of all of Ms. Wang’s jobs, workplaces, names of co-workers, and whether those employees had symptoms similar to Ms. Wang’s.

  • Nov, 7, 2007 — Poem, in Chinese and English
    “It is my prayer, it is my longing, that we may pass from this life together / a longing which shall never perish from the earth, / but shall have place in the heart of every wife that loves, / until the end of the time; and it shall be called by my name.”

 

As the U.S. and other Western nations tightened their regulation of cadmium, production of nickel-cadmium batteries moved to less-developed countries, most of it eventually winding up in China. “Everything was transferred to China because no one wanted to deal with the waste from cadmium,” says Josef Daniel-Ivad, vice president for research and development at Pure Energy Visions, an Ontario battery company.

 

Today, only two American companies still make cadmium batteries, and they specialize in high-end batteries for use in equipment such as aircraft engines. U.S. laws require them to follow strict guidelines on worker safety and environmental protection.

 

In China, government standards on cadmium exposure are in line with those endorsed by the World Health Organization. And without question, there are safe cadmium plants in China.

 

But having rules and enforcing them are two different things. China has dozens of so-called “hot spots” where the cadmium contamination is similar to levels at U.S. superfund sites. More that 10% of China’s arable land is contaminated with heavy metals such as cadmium, according to the State Environmental Protection Agency, and the metals are entering China’s food supply. At least a dozen academic studies in the past two years have found unsafe levels of cadmium in fruit and vegetables grown in Chinese soil. In a study published last year, researchers at the Guangdong Institute of Ecology found excessive levels of cadmium in Chinese cabbage grown in Foshan. The battery industry isn’t the only source of environmental cadmium contamination in China, but it is a major contributor.

 

Often, these risks extend to workers. Last year, at least 20 workers at a Panasonic Corp. cadmium-battery plant in Wuxi were found to have elevated levels of the toxin, and two were diagnosed as poisoned. In 2005, 1,000 workers at Huanyu Power Source Co., based in Xinxiang, Henan, were also found with cadmium exposure. Both Panasonic and Huanyu say they have taken care of the affected workers, providing health care and compensation exceeding the requirements of Chinese law.

 

Yet these findings didn’t necessarily result from corporate or government vigilance. The Panasonic-plant contamination, for instance, came to light after some workers watched a television show about cadmium poisoning — and got themselves tested.

 

Protest about contamination at the GP plants has persisted in part because of the determination of Ms. Wang, a GP engineer, to publicize the matter.

 

Born into a relatively well-off family, Ms. Wang attended university and obtained an engineering degree before hiring on at a newly opened GP factory in the southern Chinese city of Huizhou, a fast-growing center of China’s electronics industry. The year was 1995, and GP Batteries, a Singapore-listed unit of Hong Kong-listed Gold Peak Industries (Holdings) Ltd. Huizhou, was a prestigious employer, eventually becoming one of the largest makers of nickel-cadmium batteries in China.

 

As a machine designer, Ms. Wang worked in the management offices of a walled compound of pink-tiled buildings where some 1,500 women in matching blue smocks worked 12-hour days assembling nickel-cadmium battery packs for toys and other products. GP’s clients eventually came to include dozens of U.S. companies including Energizer Battery Co., Proctor & Gamble Co.’s Duracell, Spectrum Brands Inc.’s Ray-O-Vac, Hasbro, Mattel, Wal-Mart and Toys “R” Us.

 

For years, factory workers complained about illnesses — nausea, hair loss and exhaustion, for instance. But GP management says it wasn’t aware of the extent of the cadmium danger. “We knew it was dangerous, but we thought that if it was handled in a reasonable manner you should be OK,” says Henry Leung, chief operating officer of GP Batteries. “This is all new for China.”

 

At the factory, Ms. Wang spent the bulk of her time in an office, quietly sketching machine designs. But between 2002 and 2004, she spent long hours in production areas, inhaling cadmium dust, according to a lawsuit filed by Ms. Wang against the factory.

 

In 2003, some sick workers paid for their own tests at an occupational-disease hospital and learned they had elevated cadmium levels. The news touched off panic on the factory floor, and workers demanded the company pay for cadmium tests. Hundreds of workers eventually went on strike.

 

GP says it began paying for cadmium checkups in mid-2004, as soon as the region set up facilities that could handle large volumes of cadmium testing. In the initial tests, 177 workers showed levels of cadmium above China’s safe-exposure limit, and two qualified as poisoned. Dozens were immediately hospitalized.

 

Cadmium affects people in radically different ways, so many GP workers with elevated levels aren’t sick, but may become so in the years ahead.

 

Roughly 900 workers quit their jobs, and GP offered cadmium-affected workers one-time exit compensation starting at about $500. GP says the average package was $2,100. Many workers say the compensation failed to cover their medical bills.

 

GP says it has paid out more than $1 million in compensation and medical care for affected workers and has exceeded the legal requirements. “We want to take care of workers,” says GP’s Mr. Leung, but he says some workers are feigning sickness to obtain money. “They want to be recorded as poisoned, so people will keep giving them compensation,” he says.

 

Ms. Wang watched on the sidelines as the bitter saga unfolded at her factory. During her nine years at the factory, she rarely had contact with rank-and-file workers, and her $540 weekly salary was nearly triple what they earned. While other workers ate in a cafeteria, Ms. Wang sat in a manager’s dining room with table cloths and porcelain dishes.

 

But in October of 2004, when GP first paid for companywide cadmium tests, Ms. Wang’s result came back showing cadmium levels above the safe-exposure limit set by the Chinese government. However, to qualify for continuing monitoring, China’s occupational-disease laws require two consecutive positive tests. A second test showed Ms. Wang’s cadmium level in the normal range, disqualifying her for assistance.

 

Three occupational-medicine doctors — in London, Sweden and the U.S. — who reviewed Ms. Wang’s medical records for The Wall Street Journal say her initial test showed clear indications of kidney damage, a marker of possible cadmium poisoning.

 

“There’s no doubt that in 2004, she had smoking-gun-type indicators of kidney damage, and in a person who works with cadmium, that should not be ignored,” says Dr. Arch Carson, an expert in occupational medicine and environmental sciences at the University of Texas School of Public Health.

 

GP says it relies on medical experts at government-run occupational-disease hospitals in the nearby city of Guangzhou to determine if workers required monitoring.

 

Having no symptoms, Ms. Wang continued playing badminton and jogging. But in early 2006, she began to feel extremely weak, and suffered headaches. Her skin began to age rapidly, and her eyes became sunken hollows. In November 2006, Ms. Wang was diagnosed at a local hospital with chronic renal failure that doctors said would likely shorten her life.

 

On Dec. 25, 2006, Ms. Wang approached GP management with news of her diagnosis. She requested that GP send her to the occupational-disease hospital in Guangzhou, which has facilities for treating cadmium exposure.

 

ENLARGE

 

A stalemate ensued. The company says it was willing to help, but that Ms. Wang refused to follow local legal procedures. Local laws required that Ms. Wang visit a local hospital first, in order to be referred to the main occupational-disease hospital in Guangzhou. The company says Ms. Wang demanded they send her directly to the Guangzhou hospital, in violation of regulations.

 

In May, Ms. Wang sued the factory for $400,000 in compensation and medical care. To build her case, Ms. Wang used her access to company computers to download files that showed other workers in her department were exposed to cadmium. GP says there is no evidence that Ms. Wang’s illness is related to cadmium, and doctors at the Guangzhou Occupational Disease Hospital say her kidney failure doesn’t meet the criteria for occupational disease.

 

By last summer, Ms. Wang’s health was failing. According to medical records from a hospital in Nanjing, she was admitted with a fever and a respiratory infection. Doctors there treated her for chronic renal failure, and listed “long-term exposure to cadmium-containing substances” as a possible cause, according to her medical records.

 

As workers, including Ms. Wang, sought to bring attention to the issue, a public-relations battle erupted. In 2005, GP filed a lawsuit against labor-rights groups representing the workers, charging libel. The case is moving through Hong Kong courts.

 

On their way to an interview with a Wall Street Journal reporter in August, Ms. Wang and several colleagues were pulled over by police and detained for nearly 13 hours in a Huizhou police station, according to several sources familiar with the incident. A person present at the Huizhou police station says the workers were told they would be charged with treason if they spoke to the media again. The Huizhou government says its police detained no battery workers.

 

Ms. Wang stopped answering her cellphone after the incident with the Huizhou police. But she began writing a blog to advise victims of cadmium poisoning. A recent post, in Chinese, said, “Basically, occupational disease could be prevented but it costs money. Money is the gold of bosses. And for them, the lives of workers are worthless.”

 

After revelations of its cadmium-battery problems arose, GP quit making them at its plants, and now outsources that production to independent factories in China.

 

In America, five years after Hasbro stopped using nickel-cadmium batteries, Mattel and Toys “R” Us are yet to follow suit, but say they are exploring alternatives. Wal-Mart no longer purchases cadmium batteries from GP but declined to comment on whether it still uses them in its products.

 

Mattel says cadmium batteries have some performance advantages over alternatives, such as a better ability to retain a charge when not used for long periods.

 

—Sky Canaves in Hong Kong contributed to this article.

 

Panasonic ‘covered up’ poisoning at battery factory, report claims

 

By Texyt Staff – Sat, 04/28/2007 – 11:51.

 

 

Panasonic hid evidence that workers were poisoned at a battery factory, a report in a Chinese newspaper claims. Even pregnant women were not warned they might have been exposed to high levels of Cadmium, a potentially lethal heavy metal, the report alleges, quoting a manager who says he was laid off when he threatened to turn whistleblower.

 

The allegations are being made by a former human resources manager according to an article in the 21st Century Economic Report, a newspaper published by China’s respected Southern Daily Group (Linked sites are in Chinese).

 

panasonic_china_wuxi_battery_factory Panasonic has not yet responded to a request for comment on the case, which is claimed to have taken place over the past three years at a factory (photo) manufacturing rechargeable Nickel-Cadmium batteries in Wuxi, north of Shanghai.

 

Exposure to even tiny amounts of Cadmium is known to increase the risk of cancer and can lead to a variety of crippling and potentially-fatal health conditions.

 

‘Health reports buried’, claim

 

The newspaper’s source, named as ex-human resources manager, Pan Wei, claims he was hired by the company in October 2006. Later that same month, he told reporters, the company doctor gave him safety reports on Cadmium exposure to sign.

 

The original health tests showed that ten staff had Cadmium levels above safety limits, Mr. Pan said. However, an overall safety report stated that no staff had any such problem.

 

The doctor told Pan that this was normal procedure, and staff with dangerous Cadmium exposure were rotated to different work until their health reports improved, the ex-manager alleges.

 

Continued for three years?

 

According to the newspaper article: “Pan realized that since 2003, the company has handled the staff health examination every year, and every year the examination says all the staff have no problem, so none of the staff have been notified of the real poisonous Cadmium level”

 

The story continues: “The doctor said, this is our normal procedure. The director of the factory has signed his name, and higher people above have signed their names too. So you sign your name and there will be no problem”

 

Pregnant workers affected, report claims

 

panasonic china battery brands Some workers had left the factory to work at other jobs where they might be exposed to Cadmium poisoning, without realizing they already had dangerous levels of Cadmium in their bodies, Pan alleges. In addition, he says, some of those affected were pregnant.

 

Pan claims he was laid off after he demanded executives warn these workers of the risk. Panasonic informed him he had not performed satisfactorily during his probationary employment period, he says.

 

Panasonic is a trading name of Japan’s giant Matsushita Electric Industrial group. The company has not yet responded to a request for comment on this case.

 

Public perception

 

Leading Japanese firms such as Matsushita are major investors in Chinese manufacturing. However, Chinese people have mixed perceptions about Japan. While they admire the country’s advanced economy and culture, they also tend to believe that Japan has abused China in the past, particularly during the Second World War, and has failed to apologize adequately.

 

This negative perception has been fed by a heavy diet of official anti-Japanese propaganda, including school text books which harp upon Japan’s historical misdeeds.

 

In this environment, Japanese firms operating in China are highly sensitive to negative publicity which might combine with smouldering anti-Japanese sentiment to ignite a firestorm of criticism.

 

Update April 29: ‘ The website of the Wuxi battery factory was taken offline yesterday’ – removed this line as the website was only taken offline temporarily and is currently accessible with no obvious changes from the previous version – thanks to anonymous commenter below.

 

 

Red Dust – documentary on cadmium poisoning in Chinese women battery workers for Tesla Cars

 

Aug 06, 2010

 

 

Red Dust, a documentary directed by Karin Mak, chronicles the struggle for justice by women workers in China who have been poisoned by cadmium while manufacturing nickel-cadmium batteries. 

 

Click here to view the trailer.

Cadmium has been in the international and USA news lately as found in jewellery and McDonald’s Shrek glasses. However, the majority of cadmium is used for production of nickel-cadmium batteries, a type of rechargeable battery.

Cadmium is a very toxic heavy metal and the brave women in the film live with its debilitating effects in addition to risking their safety in their fight for justice. It covers themes of workers’ rights, globalization, occupational safety and health, China’s economic development and women’s rights.

 

Red cadmium dust drifted freely in China’s nickel-cadmium battery factories owned and operated by GP BATTERIES (GP), one of the world’s top battery manufacturers. Ren, a migrant worker originally from Sichuan, suffers from frequent headaches and breathing difficulties. If untreated, the cadmium poisoning can lead to kidney failure, cancer, and even death.

Red Dust tells an unexamined side of China’s economic development: the resistance, courage, and hope of workers battling occupational disease, demanding justice from the local government and global capital. Chinese migrant workers are deemed disposable by factory owners and are stereotypically viewed as quiet and passive victims. However, Ren and other GP workers (Min, Fu, and Wu) fight back. Labor issues are very sensitive in China, and workers who publicly discuss their struggles do so at great risk. The audience discovers along with the filmmaker, a Chinese American, the horrors of the global assembly line.

This documentary is about women who are the engine of the global economy. Although the film takes place in China, the characters’ experiences are universal to workers on the margins around the world, where poverty, migration, and workplace hazards are common realities.

 

The film is 20 minutes, in Mandarin and Sichuanhua, with English subtitles. 

 

 What is Cadmium Poisoning?
Cadmium (cd) is a heavy metal used primarily in the production of nickel-cadmium batteries. Workers exposed to cadmium can suffer symptoms such as memory loss, dizziness, headaches, lack of strength, and pain in the back and limbs. In 2006, the European Union banned cadmium in electronics due to its extremely toxic properties.

Workers who suffer from cadmium poisoning may not look sick, and serious health issues may take several years to arise. Once cadmium enters the body, it takes between seven to thirty years for the body to flush it out, which is particularly harmful for the kidneys. Cadmium poisoning has also been linked to kidney failure and cancer. The effects of cadmium poisoning can be fatal. In 2006, Fu Hong Qin, a co-worker of the women featured in RED DUST, died from kidney failure. She had worked at a GP BATTERIES factory for 2 years.

Unsafe workplaces are not uncommon in China. According to the country’s State Administration for Work Safety (SAWS) 2004 report, China has the world’s highest number of occupational disease victims and deaths resulting from occupational diseases.

 

Click here to read more.

 

The director

 

Karin T Mak was born and raised in St. Louis, Missouri, USA to immigrants originally from Hong Kong. She spent several years on immigrant and workers’ rights campaigns in California. In 2003, she received the prestigious New Voices Fellowship to work with Sweatshop Watch, a Los Angeles-based non-profit educating the public about globalization. Mak is winner of the 2008 Roy W. Dean LA Film Grant.

 

Panasonic also face issue like hiding evidence that workers were poisoned at a battery factory in China . During that time, Panasonic are manufacturing rechargeable Nickel-Cadmium batteries in Wuxi, north of Shanghai. The worker were not warned when they have been exposed to high level of Cadmium, a potentially lethal heavy metal that can lead to a variety of crippling and potentially-fatal health conditions thus increasing the risk of death

 

 

 

There are thousands of news articles disclosing severe crimes, lies and corruption by Panasonic. Check it our for yourself…

 

 

 

 

 

 

Twitter is dead because it was the political bitch of a few twisted venture capitalists

Twitter is dead because it was the political bitch of a few twisted venture capitalists

 

 

Twitter was bought and owned by Elon Musk, Eric Schmidt and the twisted sisters of Kliener Perkins. They made Twitter their bitch and caused every sane adult to finally answer, when asked if they Tweet: “What’s the point?”

THAT is the point! Twitter is the most pointless empire ever created. It does nothing for anybody except make kids commit suicide from cyber-bullying, harass people, cause mental problems from accelerated narcissism, trick you into spying on yourself for the NSA, privacy abuse you, expose you to hackers and much more that is just bad !

Twitter was a tool to espouse their self glorification and political ideology while using the public as a white noise blanket to create the appearance of group echoes.

Those echoes, though, turned out to be computerized robot trolls, android click-farms, and corporate hype machines with no actual humans behind them. The Twitter-verse was almost entirely fake.

Twitter was tooled to elect certain politicians and to try to get public buy-in on certain laws that would benefit Kleiner and the Goldman Sachs frat house boys club.

Singer Adelle figured that out and bypassed the bogus world of “social media” in her latest album release. It was a huge hit because she realized that “social media” was just contrived Silicon Valley BS that made no difference to anybody.

Elon Musk bought massive numbers of Twitter accounts, epic numbers of fake follower’s and paid to get himself forced on every single new sign-up as a top “suggested person to follow”. What an arrogant conceited ass!

Twitter was a white boy self-masturbatweeting world of yuppie children. Twitter hated hiring women and Black’s and only hired Indians and Chinese until they got the code done and then shipped them back to Asia before they could get any stock options.

Twitter staff had epic sex scandals, an utter lack of real world experience and an overt desire to only hire people ” like themselves ” to try to run a message service that masqueraded as being “inclusive”.

A huge bunch of people want ISIS to stop Tweeting. They can have their wish by letting Twitter die.

It was a hell-hole of boys, tech and ego that built a walled garden experience which no user actually cared about. Humans are easy to manipulate into routine duties. Twitter made a few routine clicks replace thought and intellectual discourse. That only goes so far. The Emporers New Clothes have been illuminated as nothing more than a digital facade.

Nobody on Earth needs, or wants Twitter. Stupid kids will use it for awhile to harass each other but they soon grow bored and it is gone. The fabled ” we will get them while they are young and own them until they start making money” promise of Twitter’s business plan is as false as the Emporers imaginary robe.

 

 

 

Jack Dorsey confirms four more Twitter executives to leave company

 

Jack Dorsey dismisses ‘inaccurate press rumours’ about sudden departure of four senior staff, promoting Adam Bain and Adam Messinger to fill the gaps

 

CTO Adam Messinger is to take on more responsibility after the departure of four senior staff.

 

Jemima Kiss in San Francisco

 

@jemimakiss

 

 

Twitter’s chief executive responded to the sudden departure of four senior executives on Sunday by tweeting a detailed statement emphasising their contribution to the company as it moved from “near zero revenue to the over-$2bn run rate it is today”.

 

Jack Dorsey confirmed that senior vice-president of engineering Alex Roetter, vice-president of global media Katie Jacobs Stanton, HR vice-president Skip Schipper and senior vice-president of product Kevin Weil are all leaving the embattled social media firm.

 

Attempting to reassure staff and investors about the stability of the company, Dorsey said chief operating officer Adam Bain would be taking on additional responsibilities, including “revenue-related product teams”, media and HR.

 

— Jack (@jack) January 25, 2016

 

I’m forever grateful to @aroetter, @katies, @skipschipper & @kevinweil for everything they’ve given to Twitter. They are absolutely amazing!

 

Chief technology officer Adam Messinger will be heading up engineering, consumer product, design and research, user services and Twitter mobile development platform Fabric. Dorsey said the two of them would be partnering “day and night” to coordinate the company’s development.

 

Twitter is under increasing pressure from shareholders to increase revenues and become more aggressive against competitors including Facebook and younger rivals such as Snapchat.

 

 

Stock rout demotes Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey from billionaire to millionaire

 

Read more

 

Dorsey said he had wanted to talk to Twitter staff about the changes later in the week, but now needed to set the record straight after “inaccurate press rumours”. He did not explain which reports were inaccurate, although news of the departures was first reported by Re/code earlier in the day.

 

“I’m sad to announce that Alex Roetter, Skip Schipper, Katie Stanton and Kevin Weil have chosen to leave the company. Alex and Kevin, both here over five years, scaled the ads product and engineering teams,” he said. “[They] have run all of product and engineering together for the last 18 months, helping to drive an increased pace of execution.

 

“Katie, also here over five years, has grown a global team that brings the world’s best, most engaging, and most powerful content onto our services.”

 

Schipper, he said, “played a key role scaling our HR functions … globally”. All four are said to be planning time off.

 

Twitter is planning to announce two new board members, a new chief marketing officer and a head of PR, according to Re/code and the New York Times.

 

— Chris Sacca (@sacca) January 24, 2016

 

One of @jack‘s strongest talents is landing top shelf talent and board members. https://t.co/lUltVIMCyh

 

Long-time Twitter investor Chris Sacca, who has also been outspoken in his criticism of the company, said Dorsey would be able to appoint strong talent, but that Twitter would need to ensure new board members increased the diversity of the board.

 

 

 

Is Elon Musk Google’s bitch or Vice Versa?

Google and Elon Musk both bribe the same politicians.

Each owns part of the companies of the other.

The bag men and money people, for both, are the same people.

They both exploit Afghan war profiteering mining deals.

They both have “driver-less” car projects which solicit federal cash to exploit lithium mined from Afghanistan, that their partner: Goldman Sachs commodity rigged.

They both own Cartel-like monopolies.

They both got funding from, and hired the staff of, the CIA’s IN-Q-TEL.

They both are run by media-called: “meglomaniacs” and “narcissists”

They both use the same “Flash-boy” providers.

They work together to manipulate press coverage to hide negative stories about themselves.

They both attack their mutual competitors with moles, defamation, internet search engine rigging, massive meat puppet and troll campaigns and covert control of Twitter.

Neither would exist today without White House support.

They both use Dirty Tricks and Political Espionage.

They both hire the same lobbyists, political hit-job operators and shill reporters.

They both dictate policy decisions to elected officials.

They both got billions of dollars of taxpayer cash from the same people.

How Larry Page’s Obsessions Became Google’s Business

Photo

Credit Minh Uong/The New York Times

Three years ago, Charles Chase, an engineer who manages Lockheed Martin’s nuclear fusion program, was sitting on a white leather couch at Google’s Solve for X conference when a man he had never met knelt down to talk to him.

They spent 20 minutes discussing how much time, money and technology separated humanity from a sustainable fusion reaction — that is, how to produce clean energy by mimicking the sun’s power — before Mr. Chase thought to ask the man his name.

“I’m Larry Page,” the man said. He realized he had been talking to Google’s billionaire co-founder and chief executive.

“He didn’t have any sort of pretension like he shouldn’t be talking to me or ‘Don’t you know who you’re talking to?’” Mr. Chase said. “We just talked.”

Related Coverage

Google Announces Stock Buyback as Earnings Rise

European Publishers Play Lobbying Role Against Google

Google Goal in Restructuring as Alphabet: Autonomy

Google to Reorganize as Alphabet to Keep Its Lead as an Innovator

Larry Page is not a typical chief executive, and in many of the most visible ways, he is not a C.E.O. at all. Corporate leaders tend to spend a good deal of time talking at investor conferences or introducing new products on auditorium stages. Mr. Page, who is 42, has not been on an earnings call since 2013, and the best way to find him at Google I/O — an annual gathering where the company unveils new products — is to ignore the main stage and follow the scrum of fans and autograph seekers who mob him in the moments he steps outside closed doors.

Photo

A prototype for a car Google is developing. Credit Google

But just because he has faded from public view does not mean he is a recluse. He is a regular at robotics conferences and intellectual gatherings like TED. Scientists say he is a good bet to attend Google’s various academic gatherings, like Solve for X and Sci Foo Camp, where he can be found having casual conversations about technology or giving advice to entrepreneurs.

Mr. Page is hardly the first Silicon Valley chief with a case of intellectual wanderlust, but unlike most of his peers, he has invested far beyond his company’s core business and in many ways has made it a reflection of his personal fascinations.

He intends to push even further with Alphabet, a holding company that separates Google’s various cash-rich advertising businesses from the list of speculative projects like self-driving cars that capture the imagination but do not make much money. Alphabet companies and investments span disciplines from biotechnology to energy generation to space travel to artificial intelligence to urban planning.

Investors will get a good look at the scope of those ambitions on Feb. 1, when the company, in its fourth-quarter earnings report, will disclose for the first time the costs and income of the collection of projects outside of Google’s core business.

As chief executive of Alphabet, Mr. Page is tasked with figuring how to spin Google’s billions in advertising profits into new companies and industries. When he announced the reorganization last summer, he said that he and Sergey Brin, Google’s other founder, would do this by finding new people and technologies to invest in, while at the same time slimming down Google — now called Google Inc., a subsidiary of Alphabet — so their leaders would have more autonomy.

Photo

Sundar Pichai, chief of Google Inc. Credit Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

“In general, our model is to have a strong C.E.O. who runs each business, with Sergey and me in service to them as needed,” Mr. Page wrote in a letter to investors. He said that he and Mr. Brin would be responsible for picking those chief executives, monitoring their progress and determining their pay.

Google’s day-to-day management was left to Sundar Pichai, the company’s new chief executive. His job will not be about preventing cancer or launching rocket ships, but to keep Google’s advertising machine humming, to keep innovating in emerging areas like machine learning and virtual reality — all while steering the company through a thicket of regulatory troubles that could drag on for years.

Mr. Page’s new role is part talent scout and part technology visionary. He still has to find the chief executives of many of the other Alphabet businesses.

And he has said on several occasions that he spends a good deal of time researching new technologies, focusing on what kind of financial or logistic hurdles stand in the way of them being invented or carried out.

His presence at technology events, while just a sliver of his time, is indicative of a giant idea-scouting mission that has in some sense been going on for years but is now Mr. Page’s main job.

Photo

Sergey Brin, co-founder of Google, wearing Google Glass. Credit Carlo Allegri/Reuters

In the investor letter, he put it this way: “Sergey and I are seriously in the business of starting new things.”

An Interest in Cool Things

Mr. Page has always had a wide range of interests. As an undergraduate at the University of Michigan, he worked on solar cars, music synthesizers and once proposed that the school build a tram through campus. He arrived at Stanford’s computer science doctorate program in 1995, and had a list of initial research ideas, including self-driving cars and using the web’s many hyperlinks to improve Internet search. His thesis adviser, Terry Winograd, steered him toward search.

“Even before he came to Stanford he was interested in cool technical things that could be done,” Mr. Winograd said. “What makes something interesting for him is a big technical challenge. It’s not so much where it’s headed but what the ride is like.”

Inside Google, Mr. Page is known for asking a lot of questions about how people do their jobs and challenging their assumptions about why things are as they are. In an interview at the Fortune Global Forum last year, Mr. Page said he enjoyed talking to people who ran the company’s data centers.

Photo

LinkNYC Wi-Fi consoles, a product of Sidewalk Labs, a company owned by Google. Credit Cole Wilson for The New York Times

“I ask them, like, ‘How does the transformer work?’ ‘How does the power come in?’ ‘What do we pay for that?’” he said. “And I’m thinking about it kind of both as an entrepreneur and as a business person. And I’m thinking ‘What are those opportunities?’”

Another question he likes to ask: “Why can’t this be bigger?”

Mr. Page declined multiple requests for comment, and many of the people who spoke about him requested anonymity because they were not supposed to talk about internal company matters.

Many former Google employees who have worked directly with Mr. Page said his managerial modus operandi was to take new technologies or product ideas and generalize them to as many areas as possible. Why can’t Google Now, Google’s predictive search tool, be used to predict everything about a person’s life? Why create a portal to shop for insurance when you can create a portal to shop for every product in the world?

But corporate success means corporate sprawl, and recently Google has seen a number of engineers and others leave for younger rivals like Facebook and start-ups like Uber. Mr. Page has made personal appeals to some of them, and, at least in a few recent cases, has said he is worried that the company has become a difficult place for entrepreneurs, according to people who have met with him.

What Is Separated Under Alphabet?
  • Google: search, advertising, maps, YouTube and Android.

  • Calico, an anti-aging biotech company

  • Sidewalk, a company focused on smart cities

  • Nest, a maker of Internet-connected devices for the home

  • Fiber, high-speed Internet service in a number of American cities

  • Investment arms, such as Google Ventures and Google Capital

  • Incubator projects, such as Google X, which is developing self-driving cars and delivery drones

Part of Mr. Page’s pitch included emphasizing how dedicated he was to “moonshots” like interplanetary travel, or offering employees time and money to pursue new projects of their own. By breaking Google into Alphabet, Mr. Page is hoping to make it a more welcoming home for employees to build new businesses, as well as for potential acquisition targets.

It will also rid his office of the kind of dull-but-necessary annoyances of running a major corporation. Several recently departed Google staff members said that as chief executive of Google, Mr. Page had found himself in the middle of various turf wars, like how to integrate Google Plus, the company’s struggling social media effort, with other products like YouTube, or where to put Google Now, which resided in the Android team but was moved to the search group.

Such disputes are a big reason Mr. Page had been shedding managerial duties and delegating the bulk of his product oversight to Mr. Pichai, these people said. In a 2014 memo to the company announcing Mr. Pichai’s promotion to product chief, Mr. Page said the move would allow him to “focus on the bigger picture” at Google and have more time to get the company’s next generation of big bets off the ground.

People who have worked with Mr. Page say that he tries to guard his calendar, avoiding back-to-back meetings and leaving time to read, research and see new technologies that interest him.

Given that he is worth in the neighborhood of $40 billion and created the world’s most famous website, Mr. Page has the tendency to attract a crowd when he attends technology events. At last year’s Darpa Robotics Challenge, he was trailed closely by a handler who at times acted as a buffer between Mr. Page and would-be cellphone photographers. That commotion could annoy anyone, but it is particularly troubling for Mr. Page, who, because of damaged vocal cords, speaks just above a whisper and sometimes uses a microphone in small meetings.

Photo

A Project Loon balloon. Credit Google

At home in Palo Alto, Mr. Page tries to have the most normal life possible, driving his children to school or taking his family to local street fairs, according to people who know him or have seen him at such events.

And at Google, even events that are decidedly not normal aspire to a kind of casualness. Take the Camp, an exclusive and secretive event that Google holds at a resort in Sicily and where invitees have included Elon Musk, the chief executive of Tesla Motors and SpaceX, Lloyd C. Blankfein, the chief executive of Goldman Sachs, and Tory Burch, the fashion designer.

One attendee, who asked to remain anonymous because guests were not supposed to discuss the gathering, recalls being surprised by how much time Mr. Page spent with his children.

In public remarks, Mr. Page has said how important his father, Carl V. Page, a computer science professor at Michigan State University who died in 1996, was to his choice of career.

“My dad was really interested in technology,” Mr. Page said at Google I/O in 2013, the last time he took the stage at the event. “He actually drove me and my family all the way across the country to go to a robotics conference. And then we got there and he thought it was so important that his young son go to the conference, one of the few times I’ve seen him really argue with someone to get in someone underage successfully into the conference, and that was me.”

Photo