e Comics on Yemen in the spot light

Ulf Sandmark

Ulf Sandmark, Schiller Institute, Sweden, comments on the historic multi-million demonstration in Sanaa, Yemen, August 20th, 2016. He participated in the International Conference to Support Yemeni People held in London the same day.

Yemen blast: ISIS kills up to 60 in suicide car bombing in Aden

Up to 60 people have been killed in a car bomb attack in the Yemeni city of Aden. Most of the dead were pro-government troops. August 29, 2016.  Let's get the scoop on Yemen from Karen Hudes... 

"Yemen, a jewel in the Middle East, is an Arab nation which was predominately Jewish in its early history. This segment concerns Yemen’s Jews, and the cruel war against the Yemeni people, meant to distract us from the illegal regime in the United States." - Karen Hudes June 21, 2016 PDF for this segment on Yemen

3rd Dog  

Brave Browser - Privacy-Focused Product 2019

Golden Kitty Awards

Try Brave Browser today just click the link below

Brave Browser 

e Comics on the Soap Opera of Liberty

On Liberty

The Soap Opera of Liberty

Legal Memorandum on Political Thought

Americans are taught from a young age that our government is one of limited powers. Congress cannot simply pass any law that it wishes: The Constitution prescribes limits on its lawmaking powers. Or does it? In Bond v. United States, the Supreme Court of the United States will consider whether exercise of the Treaty Power can increase Congress’s legislative powers. In other words, may Congress, through treaties, reach ends that are otherwise outside its constitutional authority? If the Court answers that question in the affirmative, the authority of the federal government could be limitless.

BOND vs. UNITED STATES

BOND v. UNITED STATES CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT No. 09–1227. Argued February 22, 2011—Decided June 16, 2011 When petitioner Bond discovered that her close friend was pregnant by Bond’s husband, she began harassing the woman. The woman suffered a minor burn after Bond put caustic substances on objects the woman was likely to touch. Bond was indicted for violating 18 U. S. C. §229, which forbids knowing possession or use, for nonpeaceful purposes, of a chemical that “can cause death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm to humans,” §§229(a); 229F(1); (7); (8), and which is part of a federal Act implementing a chemical weapons treaty ratified by the United States. The District Court denied Bond’s motion to dismiss the §229 charges on the ground that the statute exceeded Congress’ constitutional authority to enact. She entered a conditional guilty plea, reserving the right to appeal the ruling on the statute’s validity. She did just that, renewing her Tenth Amendment claim. The Third Circuit, however, accepted the Government’s position that she lacked standing. The Government has since changed its view on Bond’s standing. Held: Bond has standing to challenge the federal statute on grounds that the measure interferes with the powers reserved to States. Pp. 3–14. (a) The Third Circuit relied on a single sentence in Tennessee Elec. Power Co. v. TVA, 306 U. S. 118. Pp. 3–8. (1) The Court has disapproved of Tennessee Electric as authoritative for purposes of Article III’s case-or-controversy requirement. See Association of Data Processing Service Organizations, Inc. v. Camp, 397 U. S. 150, 152–154. Here, Article III’s standing requirement had no bearing on Bond’s capacity to assert defenses in the District Court. And Article III’s prerequisites are met with regard to her standing to appeal. Pp. 3–5 

The Washington Post 

Scalia, joined by Thomas, also concludes that the treaty power does not give Congress the authority to enact implementing statutes that go beyond the scope of Congress’ other enumerated powers under Article I. In a separate concurring opinion, Justice Thomas, joined by Scalia and Alito, argues that Section 229 is unconstitutional because the the treaty power only extends to treaties addressing “matters of international intercourse,” but does not cover “matters of purely domestic regulation” such as Bond’s conduct.

 Constitutional Law as Soap Opera Bond v United States

In recent days, conservatives have been sounding the alarm over Bond v. United States, a case that my colleagueElizabeth Wydra has described as “a constitutional dispute wrapped in a sad soap opera” – with an extramarital affair, a child born out of wedlock, and a spurned spouse seeking revenge. 

After placing toxic chemicals on various surfaces on or around the home of her husband’s mistress, Carol Anne Bond was prosecuted and convicted under a federal law passed to implement an international chemical weapons treaty.  Ms. Bond’s case is scheduled for argument before the Supreme Court tomorrow, with her side being pressed by conservative super-lawyer Paul Clement.

Colorful facts aside, in the conservatives’ rendering of Bond, the very fabric of the Republic is at stake.  George Will has called it the Term’s “most momentous case,” arguing that the Roberts Court must step in to check a “government run amok.”  The Heritage Foundation warns that the case challenges a key lesson that “Americans are taught from a young age” – that “our government is a government of limited powers.”  

3rd dog   

Brave Browser - Privacy-Focused Product 2019

Golden Kitty Awards

Try Brave Browser today just click the link below

Brave Browser 

e Comics on Whitsleblowers

Image courtesy of pixtawan at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Chess is a two-player strategy board game played on a chessboard, a checkered game board with 64 squares arranged in an eight-by-eight grid. Chess is played by millions of people worldwide, both amateurs and professionals.  Each player begins the game with 16 pieces: one king, one queen, two rooks, two knights, two bishops, and eight pawns. Each of the six piece types moves differently. The most powerful piece is the queen and the least powerful piece is the pawn. The objective is to 'checkmate' the opponent's king by placing it under an inescapable threat of capture. To this end, a player's pieces are used to attack and capture the opponent's pieces, while supporting their own. In addition to checkmate, the game can be won by voluntary resignation by the opponent, which typically occurs when too much material is lost, or if checkmate appears unavoidable. Genre(s) - mind sport, abstract strategy game

This is the preferred game (strategy) of the elite.  Have you noticed the black and white checkered floor designs for the power players? Well, it's another approach that seems to use the extremes as their means to an end. However, this pragmatic view allows for the use of individuals as a tool to benefit the few. You're familiar with the far left-wing and far right-wing... and that sort of thing. Using both sides gives flight to their ideas. Of course, the plain black vs. white extreme has been overdone, and everybody gets that one.  That happens when you use the same strategy over and over too close together in time. The checkered floor forms the foundation of the game played. Pawns are usually the first to fall in this game between the elite and the other 90% of ordinary people. A pawn's passion will be used against them when the time is right for a strategic move. Often, they sacrifice the lamb (a genuinely good person fighting for the people and unwittingly used as a pawn) or some form of innocence when attempting to sway public opinion.  Case in point the Jo Cox story...  

                 

However, just days after the dramatic scene with Jo Cox the people of England voted strongly for Brexit as did Wales.  In this instance, the people call checkmate… because the people used their conscience instead of being a pawn in this chess game. 

Let’s examine the film On the Waterfront where Marlon Brando’s character is faced with examining his conscience and finding no other way but exposing criminal actions. This is an important aspect of discovering if a person is a pawn for the elite or a real whistleblower. We should discern the left and right positions with reason to arrive at the truth of the matter at hand.     

       "You're nothing, your guts are all in your wallet and in your trigger finger..."  

Marlon Brando delivers the crux of his character and of the film in his own unique style with these lines, and when the passion heats up...

 "Shut up about that conscience...  That's all I've heard about." 

Both the common man and the man of status or wealth are enticed by the  "Roman Philosophy."  And both must examine himself to make a reasonable decision on how to act.  

On the Waterfront is just as powerful and influential today as it was in 1954 because it speaks to our current political and criminal situation.  From large corporate organizations to government agencies, the common man is sick of the corruption.  

Brexit: Radical power shift proposed for UK nations.  

Marlon Brando examines his conscience and concludes he must expose the criminal actions.

A whistleblower (whistle-blower or whistleblower) is a person who exposes misconduct, alleged dishonest or illegal activity occurring in an organization. The alleged misconduct may be classified in many ways; for example, a violation of the law, rule, regulation and/or a direct threat to the public interest, such as fraud, health and safety violations, and corruption. Whistleblowers may make their allegations internally (for example, to other people within the accused organization) or externally (to regulators, law enforcement agencies, to the media or to groups concerned with the issues).

The Continental Congress enacted the first whistleblower protection law in the United States on July 30, 1778, by a unanimous vote.  The Continental Congress was moved to act after an incident in 1777 when Richard Marven and Samuel Shaw blew the whistle and suffered severe retaliation by Esek Hopkins, the commander-in-chief of the Continental Navy. Congress declared that the United States would defend the two whistleblowers against a libel suit filed against them by Hopkins. The Continental Congress also declared it the duty of "all persons in the service of the United States, as well as all other the inhabitants thereof" to inform the Continental Congress or proper authorities of "misconduct, frauds or misdemeanors committed by any officers in the service of these states, which may come to their knowledge."  - Wikipedia

Conscience is an aptitude, faculty, intuition or judgment that assists in distinguishing right from wrong. Moral judgment may derive from values or norms (principles and rules). In psychological terms, conscience is often described as leading to feelings of remorse when a human commits actions that go against his/her moral values and to feelings of rectitude or integrity when actions conform to such norms. The extent to which conscience informs moral judgment before an action and whether such moral judgments are or should be based on reason has occasioned debate through much of the history of Western philosophy.- Wikipedia

This Western philosophy is eloquently expressed in On the Waterfront.  We will discover the deeper aspects of this powerful film when we review the relevant points found in Cicero's Teaching on Natural Law by Thomas G. West.   (St. John's Review, Summer 1981. Vol. 32)

We are in the midst of a crisis - not always evident in the comfortable lives we lead, but a crisis nonetheless.  A sign of the crisis is the ongoing political collapse of the West; the liberal democracies of America and Europe are barely willing to defend themselves against the insolence of petty tyrants and the armed imperialism of the Soviet Union. Why this somnolent slide into voluntary weakness? Because we are not convinced that we have anything to fight for. We are ready to believe the worst of ourselves, and the best of our adversaries, because we no longer fully believe that we deserve to survive.  That is because we no longer know what the West is, and why its preservation matters for nurturing and sustaining the noblest and best of human activities.  In particular, we in America no longer know why the United States is the best hope for the modern world.

"Marcus Tullius Cicero was a Roman philosopher, politician, lawyer, orator, political theorist, consul and constitutionalist. His works rank among the most influential in European culture, and today still constitute one of the most important bodies of primary material for the writing and revision of Roman history."  -Wikipedia

Why is this important?

Cicero, or rather Roman philosophy generally, represents for Heidegger an important stage in the gradual forgetting of the Greek discovery of nature, a forgetting process which has marked the whole history of the West.  According to Heidegger, the very translation of Greek philosophy into Latin effaced that insight.  Roman philosophy conceived natura, the nature of things, as present-at-hand and readily available to easy philosophic contemplation and the formulation of ethical doctrines.  It thereby failed to renew the vibrant amplitude of the Greek physis, which embraces the emergence and coming-to-be of things no less than their distinct standing-forth in full presence before the mind's eye. The Roman narrowing of nature therefore prepared the way for the modern view of beings as mere disposable resources, easily accessible to human projects and manipulation.

...By tremendous efforts Greek philosophy had achieved its insight into the distinction between and yet necessary belonging-together of nature and convention, being and appearance, truth and opinion, an insight anticipated in the dark lyrics of the pre-Socratic thinkers and given its consummate expression in the works of Plato and Aristotle. But now, in the moribund Roman republic, this grasp upon the tense unity of nature and convention was forgotten by politicians unformed by philosophy and philosophers disdainful of politics.  

...Cicero strove to reyoke the sundered pair.

Poetry and law (law taken in a wide sense, like the Greek nomos, to include custom and tradition) appear immortalize the transient or even to bring non-being into being by touching our minds and memories through words.  If philosophy, which strives uncompromisingly to unveil the true nature of things, is the antithesis of poetry, it would likewise seem to be the enemy of the traditions and beliefs on which law depends and which in some measure law is.  The beginning of Cicero's laws unobtrusively questions whether law contains any truth whatever. Law, like poetry, may be nothing more than a fiction that furnishes pleasure by establishing trust in eternally binding precepts and practices.  Cicero forestalls this positivist inference by drawing a distinction between two senses of the word law: the popular sense, according to which law is "that which sanctions in writing whatever it wishes, either by commanding or prohibiting," and the more learned sense, derived from nature itself, according to which law is 

"The mind and reason of the prudent man."    

...Law is natural in the same way that reason is natural, as a gift of nature bestowed on every human being.  But only in the prudent man, whose reason is developed as far as it can be, does reason become "correct," and so only his commands and prohibitions are truly "law."  ...Even if complete knowledge of good is unavailable, as Cicero's skeptism implies, we may infer that an approximation to wisdom is accessible through the assiduous exercise of understanding. Cicero's final peroration to Book I paints a picture of perfect wisdom that can be a standard, even if unattained, of human striving.  Self-knowledge is the key.  For once we learn that we are equipped by nature for acquiring wisdom, and we sense that the mind, as sort of image of the gods, is worthy of care and cultivation.

In conclusion, passion is the beginning of discernment.

3rd Dog

Brave Browser - Privacy-Focused Product 2019

Golden Kitty Awards

Try Brave Browser today just click the link below

Brave Browser  

e Comics on Revenge Primetime Drama

"Let's send them a message."

CIA Director: '28 pages' contain inaccurate Information. The Hill

You know that real-world drama is found in primetime soap operas vs. mainstream media.  And... you can't help but see the high drama of 911 sprinkled inside the plot of Revenge.  

      

Revenge Primetime Drama has become ABC's highest-rated series... 

Revenge is an American television soap opera/drama series, created by Mike Kelley and starring Madeleine Stowe and Emily VanCamp, which debuted on September 21, 2011 (9-11) on ABC. It is loosely based on the novel The Count of Monte Cristo in terms of plot. During its first season it aired on Wednesdays at 10:00 pm (Eastern), and later airing on Sundays at 9:00 pm for seasons 2 through 4.

The series was picked up for a full season by the ABC network television after garnering a 3.3 Nielsen rating in the 18–49 age advertising demographics for its pilot episode and regularly winning its timeslot against every other television network (CBS, Fox, The CW, and NBC) in 18–34 demos. Madeleine Stowe was nominated for the 2012 Golden Globe Award for Outstanding Lead Actress in a TV Drama, while the series was nominated for Favorite New TV Drama at the 2012 People's Choice Awards. Revenge has become ABC's highest-rated series in Wednesday’s 10 p.m. timeslot since Lost's 2006–2007 season and has become the only new series in more than four years to replicate the 18–49 demo ratings success that Lost had in its timeslot since leaving the air. - Wikipedia

The MPP:  Money, Power, and Politics. 

"Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves." - Confucius (504 B.C.)

Revenge Season 1 Episode 1

"For the truly wronged real satisfaction can only be found in one of two places absolute forgiveness or mortal vindication."  If you've watched Revenge Primetime Drama, then you've realized this is a cautionary tale.  The real melodrama is in our mainstream media. The irony is that those high ratings created a critical mass of people who choose to move forward with absolute forgiveness instead of more high drama in our real-world affairs.            

- 3rd Dog   

Brave Browser - Privacy-Focused Product 2019

Golden Kitty Awards

Try Brave Browser today just click the link below

Brave Browser    

e Comics on Special Correspondents

Special Correspondence

Ricky Gervais's hilarious comedy follows a struggling radio journalist and his hapless technician faking frontline war reports from an NYC hideout.  

All news articles, including images and/or videos, were shown are the property of their respected owners and used by the Fair Use doctrine of The US Copyright Laws.

Hiding in plain sight are the details of world e comics (economics) and politics.  I say e comics because what the mass media feeds you is hilarious.  The truth is often revealed in flippant reporting which leads you to disregard what’s revealed or exaggerated reporting on a particular issue which leads you to tunnel vision.  Entertainment (Entrainment) is the name of the game that the Network of Global Corporate Control uses to keep their plans moving forward without resistance from you.

*Commentaries on these videos incorporate satire, documentation, and references for the viewer’s entertainment.*

3rd Dog  

Brave Browser - Privacy-Focused Product 2019

Golden Kitty Awards

Try Brave Browser today just click the link below

Brave Browser  

The New Deal vs. The Raw Deal

 The New Deal vs. The Raw Deal

The New Deal was a series of domestic programs enacted in the United States between 1933 and 1938, and a few that came later. They included both laws passed by Congress as well as presidential executive orders during the first term (1933–37) of President Franklin D. Roosevelt. The programs were in response to the Great Depression and focused on what historians refer to as the "3 Rs": Relief, Recovery, and Reform. That is Relief for the unemployed and poor; Recovery of the economy to normal levels; and Reform of the financial system to prevent a repeat depression. - Wikipedia

Let There Be Light

The RAW DEAL is happening now, and YOU have a part to play.  The painful truth has been exposed by many individuals, groups, and by the very source of OUR pain.  Yes, the Network of Global Corporate Control as identified by Karen Hudes, Attorney for the Global Debt Facility and World Bank Whistle-blower, will eventually lose the tug of war as shown in a power transition model. What's the BIG deal about the power transition model? 

I know it all sounds GREEK to the layperson!  

In this tug of war between the New Dealmakers and the Raw Deal shakers, Karen Hudes has taken the helm of this large boat on stormy seas because her position within the world bank allowed her to discover the corruption as well as bring the corruption into the light.  As stated in this Update on Bringing the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development into Compliance posted today. As a bondholder, she has the right to ask about the corruption, and as the world bank attorney, she has the power to form agreements with the appropriate parties involved for the benefit of the PEOPLE.  

Why is that the case?  The reconstruction of monetary systems on a global scale is the role of the World Bank and could actually perform the "3Rs" that is Relief for the unemployed and poor; Recovery of the economy to normal levels; and Reform of the financial system to prevent a repeat depression.  

The network of Corporate Control vs. the Coalition for the Rule of Law. 

Turning about without capsizing. 

The I DEAL is for everyone to share this information far and wide!  We need 20 percent of people in critical positions of power to move to the other side of the boat to prevent it from capsizing. I'm talking about the 80/20 rule which is a rough guide about normal distributions.   

The Pareto Principle is the observation (not law) that most things in life are not distributed evenly. It can mean all of the following things:

• 20% of the input creates 80% of the result
• 20% of the workers produce 80% of the result
• 20% of the customers create 80% of the revenue
• 20% of the bugs cause 80% of the crashes
• 20% of the features cause 80% of the usage
• And on and on…

You are not carrying 100% of the load. However, you can be a part of this deal.  If we can reach 20% of those individuals in power positions with reason and maybe a little fear that we're on to the game, then a peaceful transition to the "3Rs" will be accomplished.  The monopoly game played in our country can stop if we the PEOPLE turn the tables on this situation.  If you haven't heard about this situation and are in disbelieve, then take a look at the constitutional changes that are allowed the Network of Corporate Control to exist.    

3rd Dog

Brave Browser - Privacy-Focused Product 2019

Golden Kitty Awards

Try Brave Browser today just click the link below

Brave Browser