They are discussing them on Reddit. I have not heard of most of those cases, but the facts in some of those cases are bizarre and utterly terrifying.
Anyone ever heard of any of the cases being discussed?
They are discussing them on Reddit. I have not heard of most of those cases, but the facts in some of those cases are bizarre and utterly terrifying.
Anyone ever heard of any of the cases being discussed?
I realize this stuff is pretty horrible, and I am sure that this band, from Satan Records, truly worships Satan, which is problematic to say the least. And the lyrics and album covers of a lot of these (pornocore is the worst) seem likely to lead a few people down the wrong path. It’s dangerous art, as dangerous as violent pornography which some of it is based on the album covers and lyrics.
This band is called Sewer and they are on Satan Records, which advertises itself as the most evil music ever made.
Even though this type of music is so dangerous on certain levels that some of it should arguably be banned, I hate to say it but…I really like this song.
Hangs head in shame.
This music kicks, period. Good musicians too.
The song is called, er, Pedosadist. I know that’s terrible, and true pedosadists or more properly mysopeds are definitely very dangerous people. Even I think that’s terrible. But it’s still good music no matter how evil and dangerous it is.
Gary Palin: I see your points Robert, and your way more knowledgeable about these types of psychotic sociopaths than I am. When I saw the picture of Libby in the hat and how young and innocent she looked, this crime really struck a chord with me. When I was younger growing up in the 70’s this was relatively “uncommon,” but there were some (Charles Manson, etc) Also there were very few homosexuals, at least out in the open, and there were no transgender people ( not that I have disdain for them). This goes for where I grew up, but maybe in liberal California it was different for you.
I just wonder if this escalating type of violent crimes against women has anything to do with “feminism” and men feeling slighted and emasculated, and this is their way of rebelling against women. I think there may be a lot of truth to this.
I would bet in the 1950’s where divorce was uncommon, and families were mostly all the patriarchal type, when men were the head of the household, I think people and families were a lot happier than in today’s world, even though they didn’t have as much material wealth. Maybe you should do a blog on that subject, as you’re truly a student of human nature.
As far as being a student of human nature, I work in mental health. I have dealt with very few psychotic or psychopathic people, but I often have to rule out psychopathy or psychosis. In the group I am dealing with, I almost always rule it out. But to rule it out, you have to understand it.
Actually there were quite a few serials running around in the 1970’s. I like to think of the 1970’s as the Decade of the Serial Killer. There were an amazing number of them running around right here in California. We regularly had them running loose here in the LA area. Randy Kraft, the Hillside Strangler, the Toolbox Killers, the Sunset Strip Killers, Rodney Alcala, William Bonin, on and on. In California proper there was the Zodiac, the Hitchhiker Killer, and the Keddie Murders. Ted Bundy was running around the West.
My Mom thinks she saw Bonin and crew pick up a young male hitchhiker on a freeway entrance in Garden Grove. She thought that may have been the last ride that boy ever took.
A good friend of mine had an encounter with Randy Kraft and drank some beer and smoked some pot with him. The beer was one of Kraft’s specialty Valium-laced beers, but my friend caught on that something was wrong. Kraft tried to stop him from leaving the car, but my friend screamed at Kraft like a maniac, and Kraft was taken aback and let him go.
Back then we did not have DNA and advanced forensics, so most of these guys killed a number of times (4-10) before they were caught. It was so much easier to be a serial back then due to the more primitive forensics. Serials often targeted regular females or males, but now a lot of serials are targeting druggy street prostitutes, truck stop whores, and other marginal women whose disappearance is not even known because they are so far outside of society. It is quite hard to catch these killers because they are targeting such marginal women who hardly anyone even knows. When the serial starts targeting ordinary members of society, it’s a bit easier to catch them.
I do not think the rate of rapes or rape-murders of women has gone up since the 1970’s. I have heard that child killings have been at a flat rate of ~150/year since the 1970’s. If anything, I would assume the rate of rapes and rape-murders has gone down since the 1970’s. Sure, there has been a much-needed backlash against the sexist hate movement called Feminism, but it doesn’t seem like men’s rage over it is causing us to rape and kill women at any higher rate than we ever had. Instead a lot of men seem to be dropping out of dating and dealing with women altogether for fear of a sexual harassment, sexual assault or fake rape charge. See the Men Going Their Own Way Movement for more on this phenomenon.
The concepts of psychosis and psychopathy are often confused in the public mind. How many times have you heard about “psychotic killers?” Thing is, when someone says that, they are almost never referring to killers who are actually psychotic. Instead they are referring to psychopathic killers and confusing them with people who are psychotic. Most people do not understand the difference between these psychological states, and this is the reason for the mix-up. Also most people assume that any maniac running around like Jack the Ripper slaughtering other humans for no good reason has to be insane or psychotic. They say this because to them such an act seems to be so outside of normal behavior that only a crazy person would do such a thing.
Psychosis and psychopathy are too different things. I suppose there are some cases where the two conditions overlap. Some paranoid schizophrenics seem to have also been psychopaths, but this is not common.
These sociopaths are not psychotic. This is an important thing to note. Only 2% of serials are psychotic. It is fairly easy to catch a psychotic serial because they are completely insane. It’s hard for crazy people to organize a trip to the bathroom, much less a serial killing spree.
Sociopaths and psychopaths are not the tiniest bit crazy. If they were even 1% nuts, they would be easier to catch. They are almost too sane in that they don’t have to worry about emotions slipping them up. These humans are like machines. If they are serials, then they are killing machines.
I would agree though that outside of the former definition of craziness which tends to emphasize impairment, sociopaths/psychopaths are indeed crazy. They’re morally crazy. And in some ways, these are craziest humans of all because they simply lack a conscience.
Instead of being crazy, sociopaths and psychopaths are better seen as sick. Or even evil. We need to take our analysis of these folks outside of the sanity/insanity paradigm and over into the moral universe of good/evil. These people aren’t crazy. They’re just evil, that’s all. This is the only way to properly understand such people.
Nope, false alarm. It was a copycat.
He killed a whore though. That’s the important part. One check. And he stabbed her. Two checks. He’s probably nuts. Three checks. But he didn’t chop her to bits. Nope. 3 out of 4 ain’t bad. It’s not an A murder, but it’s pretty good. I give him a B, maybe even B+.
I must say though this fellow has quite a sense of humor. First of all, he murders her. Then he gets a pink marker and writes “Jack” on her dead body. Hilarious! Guy should be a stand-up comic. Then he gets out a camera and takes a bunch of photos of her dead body. You like picks of dead bodies. Oh man, dude, stop, you are cracking me up. After that he goes online and researches Jack the Ripper. LOL! And then, what’s funniest of all, is he kills her in his own house after ordering her takeout from some whorehouse. That’s funny, man! Kill a woman in your own house. Ha ha, they’ll never catch you then, huh? Anyway then he flees, trying to escape. Body is found two days later, and duh, guess who is prime suspect. Mr. Jokester.
And why did he kill her? Prosecution says he didn’t feel like paying for the sex. That’s like the old joke. You know how to make a hormone? Don’t pay her! That’s pretty funny though. You buy a whore, you screw her and instead of paying her your hard-earned cash, you just kill the bitch! Think of money you could save. Ha ha! That’s a good one.
This guy’s quite a card. Looks like he’ll be telling jokes in prison for the next 30 years or so, which is where he belongs. Actually he belongs under the prison, but we can’t do that, so this will have to do.
Original here. This is one of the most popular posts on the blog. The Bizarrepedia article on the subject implies that I have one of the best accounts of this crime on the web. I think I did a good job of it. It did require quite a bit of research. Certainly it is one of the most bizarre murder mysteries of the modern era. Everyone in Australia has heard of the Beaumont Children, but few in the rest of the world have. I am republishing it here for those of you who did not read it the first time. This is one of the greatest murder mysteries of the 20th Century.
This is one of the most famous unsolved crimes in Australia or possibly in the world. Three young children went to the beach in Australia one day, met a tall, blond haired man who they seemed to be friends with, played with him a while, then walked away with him and off the face of the Earth. To this day it is unsolved.
The link will provide you with all you need to know about the case. The three children were all brothers and sisters, two older girls and their little brother. They went to the beach in the morning. While there, they met a tall, blond haired man about 35-39 years old. They seemed to know him and played with him for a while. Then he dressed them, and all four walked away from the beach. They were last seen buying a meatpie with money that the man must have given them.
There were several descriptions of the man, and they all matched up. A postman saw the children in the afternoon walking along, but we now think that he saw them in the morning instead.
A woman said that a man and three small children moved into a house on her street that night. A young boy tried to run away down the street, but the man chased after him, grabbed him roughly and took him to the house.
The oldest girl was very shy, and no one understands why she let the man dress her at the beach. The children were cautious, and the thinking now is that they made friends with the man.
The children were never seen again.
Many theories have sprung up, including some that say they are still alive.
A man said he lived next door to them in the 1960’s after they were kidnapped. Police interviewed him.
A few years back, children from a family claimed that their pedophile father had killed the children along with his pedophile gang, which included prominent members of society. The children were taken to a car, shown the open trunk where the dead children were, and told that this is what would happen to them if they talked. Police said the story was credible, but nothing more was heard.
Letters supposedly written by the children came to the parents after they were gone, but all were pranks.
A Dutch psychic was called in, and he claimed the kids were buried under a warehouse. Much later, the warehouse was excavated and nothing was found.
There are several main suspects:
A very strange guy, a sadistic homosexual accountant who is associated with the extremely bizarre Family Murders which occurred much later. He is in prison after being convicted of the savage murder of a young man. However, Einem only killed boys aged 15-25 if he did the rest of the Family Murders (which he did), so the age is wrong. Also, von Einem would have had to kill three kids in 1966, stop killing for 13 years, then start killing again, but this time kill young men.
Von Einem was only 20 years old at the time, so he is the wrong age. However, he was already prematurely grey at age 20, and he was known to die his hair blond. In addition, he was recently identified from an old photo as among a crowd who was watching searchers look for the Beaumont children.
According to a 3rd party, von Einem confessed to killing the Beaumont children and also to the Adelaide Oval abduction. He said he did surgery on the kids, “connected them up,” but one had died, so he killed the others and threw their bodies off a dam into a reservoir. The dam area and reservoir were searched, but nothing was found. But this witness is not very reliable, and psychos are always confessing to crimes that they did not do.
I don’t believe he did this crime. He’s the wrong age, and the victim profile is wrong.
Yet another one and a very interesting case. In 1999, he was tried for the murder of a young girl, but the case was dismissed because he was too senile to stand trial. The case against him was very good. He died three years later. A married man who worked as a carpenter, he was also a child molester for many years. Victims continue to come forward. He also supposedly confessed to friends that he had killed the Beaumont children. The media speculates that he is the killer, but he’s dead now.
He seems to be the wrong age. He was 54 years old at the time of the Beaumont children case. He does resemble the Identikit description, and 25 years after the Adelaide Oval disappearance, a witness picked him out as the man she had seen before. But she was looking at a picture of him as an 86 year old man. At the time of the Adelaide Oval case, he would have been 61 years old. The Adelaide Oval suspect was said to be in his early 40’s. I do not believe that he did this crime.
Convicted of the murder of a 9 year old boy in 1975. A skilled sociopath, he was interviewed over three years by a retired detective who eventually came to believe that O’Neill is the perpetrator of the Beaumont children case. The media continues to propagate this line. O’Neill was only 17 years old in 1966, so he is the wrong age. I also do not feel that he looks like the Identikit of the suspect. I do not believe that O’Neill did this crime.
Derek Percy, who died just recently, is one of Australia’s most famous criminals. A sadistic pedophile, he was convicted of the horrible murder of a 12 year old girl. The crime was so savage and crazy that the jury was convinced that only an insane person could have done it, so he was found criminally insane. Others later said he was psychotic or schizophrenic. He wasn’t not crazy at all. He was simply a sociopath. He seemed to also be implicated in the murders of a few other children around this time.
He placed himself right at the crime scene on that day but said he could not recall if he did the crime or not. But Percy placed himself near the scene of every crime they questioned him about, and he always lied and said he didn’t recall if he committed the crime or not. Maps of the scene of the Beaumont crime, with the area circled in felt marker, were found in his possession Percy would have been only 16 years old at the time, and it’s thought that the perpetrator would have needed a car. Percy could not yet drive.
Percy was already a very strange young man at the time of the Beaumont case. He carried a knife with him everywhere he went as a teenager, but in rural Australia at the time, this was common. As a teenager, he was spotted by other boys, who were hidden, at a watering hole. He was dressed in girls’ clothes and he was stabbing frenziedly at a pair of girl’s panties and yelling. Then he went down by the water and shit in the river. The boys repeated the story at school, but it was so weird that no one believe them.
As a teenager, he moved around a bit, but everywhere he went, women’s underwear tended to disappear. He may have also been a peeper. He was a cold and emotionless young man. He later went into the navy and was a sailor when he was arrested for the crime that locked him up.
Shortly before he died, authorities discovered a locker where he stored his possessions. Police searched it and found extensive fantasies and elaborate charts detailing his plans to abduct and murder more children. Police wanted his DNA to compare to other crimes, but he would never give it up, and as he was not a criminal, just a mental patient, they couldn’t force him. Soon before he died, he received a $200,000 Navy pension, sparking outrage across Australia.
The Adelaide Oval case took place seven years later. The suspect was almost surely the same man who took the Beaumont children. At the time of the Oval disappearance, Percy was in prison.
I do not believe that Derek Percy was the perpetrator in this case. He was too young, and he was in prison during the Oval case.
Seven years after the Beaumont case, there was an Aussie Rules match at a stadium called the Adelaide Oval. Two young girls went to the bathroom. Their parents never saw them again.
A ticket booth attendant said that a man got the girls’ attention by telling them he was trying to rescue a cat trapped under a stand. At some point, he apparently grabbed the younger girl and picked her up. A witness saw a man walking away carrying the younger girl, while the 11 year old was behind him, hitting and kicking him.
The witness thought it was strange and watched them for about a minute. The man and the two girls were seen several more times in the blocks near the stadium. The older one was still struggling with the man and hitting him. One witness thought it was so odd that he almost called police, but then thought again. The girls’ father went looking for them, but it was too late.
The suspect was a man about 41-45 years old. He is a dead ringer for the suspect in the Beaumont case, and it is almost certain that the same man committed both crimes.
Von Einem and Arthur Brown are said to be strong suspects in the Adelaide Oval case. However, the ages seem to be wrong. The suspect was 41-45 years old. Von Einem was 27 years old, and Arthur Brown was 61 years old.
I do not believe that the suspect in the Beaumont case is any of the suspects listed above. It is someone else altogether.
If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.
I plan on posting a number of articles abut this catastrophic TPP agreement that sadly looks like it is going to become law. I can’t even begin to tell you how horrific this trade agreement is. In a nutshell, it does away with all governments and makes it so corporations rule the world. Any government that passes any law that limits current or future profits of a corporation could be sued on the grounds that that law was a “trade barrier.” The corporation can sue in a kangaroo court made up of corporate types for damages,and the corporation will always win and the governments will always lose.
Government have had to pay out many millions of dollars to corporations for passing laws that limited their profits under NAFTA. And yes, all laws dealing global warming can also be challenged by this Frankenstein of a bill.
As you can see, it encourages the murder of labor leaders, union members and organizers because killing union members would not be a violation of the Labor Section of the agreement. The parts of the TPP dealing with labor and the environment are written in boilerplate and are entirely voluntary, while the sections that allow corporations to rule our lives in written in very strict legalese.
It’s worse than a catastrophe. It’s an out and out nightmare, and it’s the end of representative government as we know it. All governments will become irrelevant, and in their places, we will all be ruled by corporations. In other words, multinational corporations will become our de facto governments. It is stunning how crazy that is.
All the Republicans are for it.
Of course the Democratic Party is down with this agreement all the way. Obama is pushing it like crazy. There was a brief uprising a few months ago when it looked like the bill might not get through the Congress because so many Democrats were against it. This was followed by maniacal lobbying on the part of corporate lobbyists and an all-out propaganda blitz by the US media, 100% of which (note that we have a “free” press) supported the bill.
The “liberal” New York Times came out very strongly in favor of it and said that Obama’s legacy would ride on whether he could get this bill through or not. In other words, according to the “liberal” New York Times, if Obama could not get the bill through, then that would mean that his Presidency was a failure. So the Times threatened Obama with complete humiliation and damage to his mark in history if he could not get the TPP through.
Note that the entire “liberal” media came out in favor of this monstrosity. Note that “liberal” Obama came out in favor of it. I know some Democratic Party stalwarts who seem to support this nightmare bill. They think that people who oppose it are “extremist nuts.”
These people support anything that Obama does. If Obama is for it, then they support it. He can push the most reactionary stuff you could imagine, and these stalwarts will never oppose Obama or any other Democrat for one second. We really need to get away from this insane partisanship, as it is irrational.
To these folks, everything Republicans do its bad and everything Democrats do is good. Unfortunately, once you take that POV, Democrats are free to act as rightwing as they want to, and their moronic stalwarts will support everything they do because it’s treason to oppose a Democrat.
I will be posting more abuo9t this awful and insane trade agreement in the coming days, but this will be good for a starter.
U.S. President Barack Obama’s capstone to his Presidency, his proposed megalithic international ‘trade’ treaties, are finally coming into their home-stretch, with the Pacific deal finally being made public on Thursday November 5th.
The final Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) proposed treaty would leave each signatory nation liable to be sued by any international corporation that objects to any new regulation, or increase in regulation, regarding climate change, otherwise known as global warming. In no terminology is that phenomenon even so much as just mentioned in the “Environment” chapter.
Regarding labor issues, including slavery, the “Labour” chapter of the TPP contains merely platitudes. (Obama allowed Malaysia into the compact despite its notoriously poor record of non-enforcement of its ban on slavery, because he wants the U.S. to control the Strait of Malacca in order to impede China’s economic and military expansion; it’s part of Obama’s anti-China policy. Almost everything that he does has different motives than the ones his rhetoric claims.)
Throughout, the treaty would place international corporations in ever-increasing control over all regulations regarding workers’ rights, the environment, product safety, and consumer protection. But the environmental and labor sections are particularly blatant insults to the public — a craven homage to the top stockholders in international corporations. The World’s Richest 80 people own the same amount of wealth as the world’s bottom 50%; and Obama represents those and other super-rich and their friends and servants in the lobbying and other associated industries. But he also represents the even richer people who aren’t even on that list, such as King Salman of Saudi Arabia, the world’s richest person. It’s people such as that who will be the real beneficiaries of Obama’s ‘trade’ treaties. The public will be harmed, enormously, wherever these treaties become law.
The full meaning of the terms that are set forth in the TPP agreement won’t be publicly known for at least four years, but the explicit terms that were made public on November 5th, and that will be presented to the 12 participating nations for signing, are entirely consistent with what had been expected on the basis of Wikileaks and other earlier published information.
The 12 participating nations are: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, United States, and Vietnam. Three countries were excluded by U.S. President Obama, because the U.S. doesn’t yet control them and they are instead viewed as being not allied with the main axis of U.S. international power: U.S., Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, and Israel. Those three outright-excluded countries are Russia, China, and India. (India, of course, has hostile relations with Pakistan, which is Sunni and therefore part of the Saudi-Qatar-Turkey portion of the U.S. international core, basically the Sunni portion of the core. By contrast, Russia and China have been determinedly independent of the U.S., and are therefore treated by President Obama as being hostile nations: he wants instead to isolate them, to choke off their access to markets, as much as possible. This same motivation also factored largely in his coup to take control of Ukraine, through which Russia’s gas passes on its way into the EU, the world’s largest gas-market.)
6 nations that Obama had invited into the TPP were ultimately unwilling to accept Obama’s terms and so were excluded when the final text was published: Colombia, Philippines, Thailand, Taiwan, South Korea, and Indonesia.
The phrases “global warming” and “climate change” don’t appear anywhere in the entire TPP document, nor does “climate” nor “warming” — it’s an area that’s entirely left to international corporations in each one of the separate participating nations to assault as much as they wish in order to gain competitive advantage against all of the other corporations that operate in the given nation: i.e., something for each corporation to sacrifice in order to be able to lower the given company’s costs. That raises its profit-margin. This also means that if any international corporation claims to be subjected in any participating nation, to global-warming regulation or enforcement which poses a barrier or impediment to that corporation’s profits, then that corporation may sue that given nation, and fines might be assessed against that nation (i.e., against its taxpayers) for such regulation or enforcement. National publics are no longer sovereign.
The “Labour” chapter is a string of platitudes, such as, “Article 19.7: Corporate Social Responsibility: Each Party shall endeavor to encourage enterprises to voluntarily adopt corporate social responsibility initiatives on labor issues that have been endorsed or supported by that Party.”
President Obama’s Trade Representative, his longtime personal friend Michael Froman, organized and largely wrote Obama’s proposed trade treaties: TPP for the Pacific, and TTIP and TISA for the Atlantic. Froman told the AFL-CIO and U.S. Senators that when countries such as Colombia systematically murder labor-union organizers, it’s no violation of workers’ rights — nothing that’s of any concern to the U.S. regarding this country’s international trade policies or the enforcement of them. On 22 April 2015, Huffington Post, one of the few U.S. news media to report honestly on these treaties, bannered AFL-CIO’s Trumka: USTR Told Us Murder Isn’t a Violation, and Michael McAuliff reported that, “Defenders of the White House push for sweeping trade deals argue they include tough enforcement of labor standards. But a top union leader scoffed at such claims Tuesday, revealing that [Obama] administration officials have said privately that they don’t consider even the killings of labor organizers to be violations of those pacts.”
In other words: This is, and will be, the low level of the playing-field that U.S. workers will be competing against in TPP etc., just as it is already, in the far-smaller existing NAFTA (which Hillary Clinton had helped to pass in Congress during the early 1990s). (Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama, all campaigned for the Presidency by attacking Republicans for pushing such ‘trade’ deals. Their actions when they gain power, contradict their words. America and virtually the entire world has become rule of a suckered public, by perhaps as many as a thousand psychopathic aristocrats who own the international corporations and ‘news’ media, and who regularly do business with each other though they wall themselves off from the public.
Typically, at their level, it makes no real difference which country their passport is from.) “Trumka said that even after the Obama administration crafted an agreement to tighten labor protections four years ago, some 105 labor organizers have been killed, and more than 1,300 have been threatened with death.” The Obama Administration is ignoring the tightened regulations that it itself had managed to get nominally implemented on paper. “Pressed for details about Trumka’s assertion that murder doesn’t count as a violation of labor rules, Thea Lee, the AFL-CIO deputy chief of staff, told HuffPost that USTR officials said in at least two meetings where she was present that killing and brutalizing organizers would not be considered interfering with labor rights under the terms of the trade measures.”
Furthermore: “’We documented five or six murders of Guatemalan trade unionists that the government had failed to effectively investigate or prosecute,’ Lee said. ‘The USTR told us that the murders of trade unionists or violence against trade unionists was not a violation of the labor chapter.’”
That U.S. Trade Representative, Michael Froman, is the same person Obama has negotiating with foreign governments, and with international corporations, both Obama’s TPP, and his TTIP & TISA.
The most important chapter in the TPP treaty is “Dispute Settlement,” which sets forth the means by which corporations will sue countries for alleged violations of their stockholders ‘rights’ to extract profits from operations of those corporations in the signatory countries. The underlying assumption here is that the rights of international stockholders take precedence over the rights (even over the sovereignty rights) of the citizens of any participating country.
Instead of these suits being judged according to any nation’s laws, they are allowed to be addressed only by means of private arbitration “Panels.” The Dispute Settlement chapter contains “Article 28.9: Composition of Panels.” Section #1 there is simply: “The panel shall comprise three members.” Each of the two Parties will appoint a member; one for the suing corporation, and the other for the sued nation; and both of those members will then jointly select a third member “from the roster established pursuant to Article 28.10.3”; and this third member will automatically “serve as chair.”
Article 28.10.3 says that anyone who possesses “expertise or experience in law, international trade, other matters covered by this Agreement, or the resolution of disputes arising under international trade agreements” may be selected for the roster, so long as the individual meets vague criteria such as that they “be independent of, and not be affiliated with or take instructions from, any Party.” No penalty is laid out for anyone on the roster who lies about any of that. Basically, anyone may become a person on the roster, even non-lawyers may, and even corrupt individuals may, especially because there are no penalties for anyone on the roster, none at all is stated.
Then, “Article 28.19,” section 8: “If a monetary assessment is to be paid to the complaining Party, then it shall be paid in U.S. currency, or in an equivalent amount of the currency of the responding Party or in another currency agreed to by the disputing Parties.”
There is no appeals-process. If a nation gets fined and yet believes that something was wrong with the panel’s decision, there is no recourse. No matter how much a particular decision might happen to have been arrived at in contradiction of that nation’s laws and courts and legal precedents, the panels’ decisions aren’t appealable in any national legal system. Whatever precedents might become established from these panels’ subsequent record of decisions will constitute no part of any nation’s legal system, but instead create an entirely new forming body of case-law in an evolving international government which consists of international corporations and their panelists, and of whatever other panelists are acceptable to those corporate panelists. Voters have no representation, they’re merely sued. Stockholders have representation, they do the suing, of the various nations’ taxpayers, for ‘violating’ the ‘rights’ of stockholders.
The roster of authorized panelists available to be chosen by any corporation’s panelists in conjunction with by any nation’s panelists, is customarily composed of individuals who move back and forth between government and private-sector roles, through a “revolving door,” so that on both ends of that, the ultimate control is with the owners of the controlling blocs of stock in various international corporations. This is the newly evolving world government. It will not block any nation from legislating protections of workers, or of consumers, or of the environment; it will simply hold a power to extract from any participating nation’s taxpayers fines for ‘violating’ the ‘rights’ of stockholders in international corporations. Citizens will increasingly be held under the axe, and the top stockholders in international corporations will be holding it. This isn’t the type of world government that was anticipated by Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Albert Einstein, the founders of the U.N., and by the other early (pre-1954) proponents of world government. But, since 1954, the plans for this anti-democratic form of emerging world government were laid; and, now, those plans are the ones that are being placed into effect.
Thus, on 26 October 2015, the United Nations Independent Expert on the Promotion of a Democratic and Equitable International Order, the international legal expert Alfred de Zayas, headlined, UN Expert Calls for Abolition of Investor-State Dispute Settlement Arbitrations. That’s the system, otherwise called “ISDS,” which already exists in a few much smaller international-trade treaties, and which is now being introduced on the largest scale ever in TPP and in Obama’s other proposed treaties. The U.N. press release, calling for its “abolition” or explicit outlawing, said:
In his fourth report to the UN General Assembly, Mr. de Zayas focuses on the adverse human rights impacts of free trade and investment agreements and calls for the abolition of Investor-State dispute settlement mechanism (ISDS) that accompanies most of these agreements.
“Over the past twenty-five years bilateral international treaties and free trade agreements with investor-state-dispute-settlement have adversely impacted the international order and undermined fundamental principles of the UN, State sovereignty, democracy and the rule of law. It prompts moral vertigo in the unbiased observer,” he noted.
Far from contributing to human rights and development, ISDS has compromised the State’s regulatory functions and resulted in growing inequality among States and within them,” the expert stated.
Earlier, on 5 May 2015, I headlined, “UN Lawyer Calls TTP & TTIP ‘A Dystopian future in Which Corporations and not Democratically Elected Governments Call the Shots’.” I close now by repeating the opening of that report:
The Obama-proposed international-trade deals, if passed into law, will lead to “a dystopian future in which corporations and not democratically elected governments call the shots,” says Alfred De Zayas, the UN’s Special Rapporteur on Promotion of a Democratic and Equitable International Order.
These two mammoth trade-pacts, one (TTIP) for Atlantic nations, and the other (TTP) for Pacific nations excluding China (since Obama is against China), would transfer regulations of corporations to corporations themselves, and away from democratically elected governments. Regulation of working conditions and of the environment, as well as of product-safety including toxic foods and poisonous air and other consumer issues, would be placed into the hands of panels whose members will be appointed by large international corporations. Their decisions will remove the power of democratically elected governments to control these things. “Red tape” that’s imposed by elected national governments would be eliminated — replaced by the international mega-corporate version.
De Zayas was quoted in Britain’s Guardian on May 4th as saying also that, “The bottom line is that these agreements must be revised, modified or terminated,”because they would vastly harm publics everywhere, even though they would enormously benefit the top executives of corporations by giving them control as a sort of corporate-imposed world government, answerable to the people who control those corporations.
Apparently ISIS has been executing Christians for refusing to convert to Islam – they were ordered to convert or die. The phrase “Islam was spread by the sword” refers to how Islam spread. Many non-Muslims were offered the choice of “convert or die.” If they refused, they got the sword – they usually got their heads chopped off. This is how Islam spread – by the mass murder of non-Muslims, often Christians.
We now have proof of an incredible 100,000 Georgians beheaded or burned alive because they refused to convert to Islam. The martyrs of Otranto are 813 Italian Christians beheaded because they refused to convert to Islam. In 1389, there was a mass slaughter of Copts in Egypt. Many had been converted at the point of the sword, but later they marched into Cairo, stating that they were returning to Christianity. All of the men were seized by the Muslims and beheaded in an open square in front of their women. This was done in order to terrorize the women, but the women refused to be fazed, so all of the women were then killed.
The most recent case involves 12 Christians – men, women and a 12 year old boy – who were seized by ISIL in Aleppo and ordered to convert in front of a crowd. They refused. The boy had his fingertips chopped off. He was then badly beaten. The three men were then badly beaten. Then all four were crucified, causing their deaths.
Next eight Christians, six men and two women between the ages of 29-33 were brought before the large crowd and ordered to convert. They refused. The two women were then raped in public. While they were being raped, the women prayed which caused their captors to beat them even harder. Then all eight were beheaded. After they were killed, their headless bodies were then crucified and left up for two days.
This woman was murdered by US-supported Nazi forces in the Odessa Massacre. This massacre was planned in advance. The Nazi forces attacked a peaceful camp of pro-federalism demonstrators in front of the Labor Ministry. The demonstrators ran into the Ministry for safety. Their camp was then set on fire.
The Nazis, along with their allies in the Odessa Police, then attacked the building with firebombs and guns. The people inside the building did not fight back at all, as they had no weapons. They had no guns and no firebombs, and they certainly did not throw any of the firebombs back at their attackers.
The Nazis pumped some sort of a poison gas into the building which debilitated a a lot of those inside. Then they broke in. They murdered everyone they could get their hands on inside the building. All women were raped and then shot in the head or beaten to death. The woman in the photo above was simply a Labor Ministry employee who happened to be working in the building on that day. She was eight months pregnant. America’s proxy Nazi forces strangled her with a cord. Most of the people who were killed were set on fire. In general, only their upper bodies were set on fire before the fires were put out with fire extinguishers. The purpose was to destroy their faces and hands so the victims could not be identified.
The investigation of this crime by the Ukrainian Nazi government was a complete farce. 100% of the violence that day was blamed on Russia and the pro-federalist demonstrators. The Nazi street thugs were not mentioned at all. The only people were arrested were the federalist victims of these Nazis. All were charged with terrorism offenses and sentenced to 10-20 year prison terms. Many other federalist protestors who escaped are on “Wanted for Terrorism” lists. Quite a few have fled the area, some for Novorussia and others for Russia itself.
I honestly think that the US Deep State, mainstream media and CIA must control Wikipedia. If you go to the Wikipedia article on this Odessa Massacre, you will read not one single true sentence there. All you will read are the lies about this incident perpetrated by the US government, the Nazi government in Kiev, and the corrupt, lying using MSM.
It is quite a long article and what is amazing about it is that there is not even one single sentence in that article that is true.
Wikipedia is completely controlled by The Hegemon and it is nothing but a mouthpiece for US imperialism and the American Empire. Worse than useless.
After previous armed robberies, one night Robert J. Dowlut shot and seriously wounded a jewelry shop owner in a robbery. Later he went to the home his girlfriend Camille shared with her mother Anne Marie Yocum. Dowlut had never gotten along with his girlfriend’s mother, and the mother did not approve of Dowlut dating her daughter. He walked into Anne Marie Yocum’s house. She looked up, startled. He shot her once and then shot her again, this time dead, on the stairwell. Then he ditched the murder weapon, a Webley Mark VI revolver, in a cemetery.
The investigation was botched, his right to an attorney was repeatedly denied, and he was repeatedly threatended with physical harm if he did not confess. It’s amazing they did not beat the conviction out of him. He was convicted and served six years in prison but was released when a judge voided the conviction due to massive prosecutorial misconduct in the course of his interrogation. The DA declined to try the case again as much of the evidence revolved around his confession after he was arrested, evidence which would now not be allowed in court.
Dowlut went on to become a successful attorney. At age 68, he is one of the NRA’s top attorneys and is recognized as one of the country’s leading experts on the Second Amendment and state gun laws.
As you can see, he has a very good reason to believe in the right to bear arms.