[GPSCC-chat] ENDORSE MOVE TO AMEND RALLY & FORWARD

Sat Jan 7 14:18:48 PST 2012

I'm afraid that Drew's dead horse is about to be turned into hamburger. (Besides, there are actually 2 people on this list who have expressed interest in the discussion directly, besides Drew and Spencer.   One by e-mail and one at the GP meeting last time.  When MTA comes up with an e-mail discussion list I will be happy to continue the conversation over there, but I don't see one yet.)   I found this article 

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/world/uk-drug-companies-retain-tight-grip-on-medical-profession-162370.html  while reading the Epoch Times yesterday.  It seems that despite the lack of inalienable corporate personhood in the UK, drug companies are doing just fine and they are doing an admirable job (not) of escaping most forms of accountability.  This may be a good reason to have my positive values amendment Section 1 instead of merely taking rights away and replacing them with "softer rights" in the form of statutes.  

There was also a piece of good news located here:
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/united-states/nuclear-power-industry-in-weakened-state-168618.htm
I'm not sure if this is just a propoganda piece designed to put us back to sleep on the issue of nuclear power or if it really is a real bit of good news, but apparently the nuke industry is only able to build 10% of the number of new nuclear power plants by 2020 compared to their original goal established in 2002.

I apologize in advance for the long load times for the Epoch Times web pages.  I can never imagine the value of loading up a web page with so many MB of images and CSS or whatever it is that they put there that it runs and loads terribly slowly on most computers. Oh well.

John Thielking
From: John Thielking <pagesincolor at yahoo.com>
To: Spencer Graves <spencer.graves at prodsyse.com>; "sosfbay-discuss at cagreens org" <sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org> 
Sent: Saturday, January 7, 2012 1:24 PM
Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] ENDORSE MOVE TO AMEND RALLY & FORWARD

The ink was scarcely dry on my previous post when I ran across this beauty 
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/01/06/new-bill-known-as-enemy-expatriation-act-would-allow-government-to-strip-citizenship-without-conviction/  and left the following comment:

This article in part is already more disinformation.  NDAA section 1021 is separate and distinct from Section 1022.  Section 1021 is silent on weather it does not apply to US Citizens and so by default IT DOES apply to US citizens.  Only Section 1022 specifically states (and implies in the title of the section) that it does not apply to US citizens. If the concerns of this article are valid, this is just one more example of two sides duking it out using American Exceptionalism as the core of their argument. Various Congresspeople introduce amendments to limit the rights of artificial entities in agreement with various Occupy factions and what do we get in response? Surprise surprise, we get a bill that says that lo and behold some people can be declared to be non people.  We need to wake up and start living in the 21st century, instead of the 19th century. That goes for both sides of the debates.

Spencer:

If we enact amendments that state positive values and gaurantee accountability (as opposed to merely mandating that Congress invent new Uber rights for corps) then Corporations will no longer be unaccountable and above the law. Focus groups or no focus groups.

John Thielking
From: Spencer Graves <spencer.graves at prodsyse.com>
To: "sosfbay-discuss at cagreens org" <sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org> 
Sent: Saturday, January 7, 2012 1:09 PM
Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] ENDORSE MOVE TO AMEND RALLY & FORWARD

Hi, John and Drew:  

JOHN:  

      Citizens United surely must know about Move to Amend by now and doubtless is spending lots of money to figure out how to defeat it. The standard approach to this kind of thing is to run focus groups and sample surveys to identify what kind of ad campaign would convince the public that they need corporations to be above the law.
      The claim that small businesses need to be “person” under the law is, in my judgment, exactly the kind of thing that could be identified by focus groups and sample surveys as an argument that could be used to defeat Move to Amend. As long as big businesses are people under the law, natural persons and small businesses are subject to the whims of the wealthy. DREW:  How do you know that the US and Iraq are the only two countries that have corporate personhood?  I'd like to make sure before I repeat that too many times.  
      Spencer       
On 1/7/2012 12:22 PM, Drew wrote: 
My take is that American Exceptionalism is exactly what lead to the bizarre and dangeroud form of artificial personhood being granted the rights that only real people should have - as I'd explained before in most all of the rest of the world artificial entities are considered fictitious legal "persons" yes, and are given "rights", yes, but not inalienable rights that are hard wired into the constitution in a way that IMO only real people should be protected. In the rest of the world the government and legal system are recognized as having the ability to freely regulate artificial entities - as I believe common sense would agree, but you're arguing against.
>John, really IMO you're discussion points have been made here and to continue on this list is just beating a dead horse. I agree however that the matter is worthy of discussion within the MTA - just not here since there is where you could actually impact the wording of the amendment but here we really can't. It makes sense to address the question with those that have direct input on it and leave off the rest of us who don't see the merit in your proposal and who's discussion list needs to focus on items that we share in common, not those of only one member who has been given full opportunity to state his peace but hasn't persuaded the group to his point of view.
>Green is care!
>Drew
>Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android 
>_______________________________________________
sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss
-- 
Spencer Graves, PE, PhD
President and Chief Technology Officer
Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc.
751 Emerson Ct.
San José, CA 95126
ph:  408-655-4567
web: www.structuremonitoring.com _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing listsosfbay-discuss at cagreens.orghttp://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss_______________________________________________sosfbay-discuss mailing listsosfbay-discuss at cagreens.orghttp://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cagreens.org/pipermail/sosfbay-discuss_lists.cagreens.org/attachments/20120107/cf936bd5/attachment.html>