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