The List: The Enemies of Mankind

A new study has confirmed what "conspiracy theorists" have suggested for years.

The Global Economy is controlled by a few corporations, mainly banks.

Proving that there is currently no such thing as a "free market", a study released by an economic team from Zurich announced that:

"Transnational corporations form a giant bow-tie structure and that a large portion of control flows to a small tightly-knit core of financial institutions. This core can be seen as an economic “super-entity” that raises new important issues both for researchers and policy makers."

Sadly, this is not good news for America. Or the world. Trying to acquire this data has been difficult and for years we've only relied on hunches that only a few Transnational Corporations (TNCs) held control of the majority of the finances in the world. But doing the math, these researches have solid proof that the people on the top are in control.

"In effect, less than 1 per cent of the companies were able to control 40 per cent of the entire network," says James Glattfelder, one of the three researches compiling the data.

The issue is not neccesarily the "fairness" of owning so much of the world, it's more about the stability of the economy. As seen in 2008, when one of these institutions fails, it has direct and dire effects across the entire global economy.

Here's a list of the Top 50 Criminals...err...Companies that control the world:

1. Barclays plc
2. Capital Group Companies Inc
3. FMR Corporation
4. AXA
5. State Street Corporation
6. JP Morgan Chase & Co
7. Legal & General Group plc
8. Vanguard Group Inc
9. UBS AG
10. Merrill Lynch & Co Inc
11. Wellington Management Co LLP
12. Deutsche Bank AG
13. Franklin Resources Inc
14. Credit Suisse Group
15. Walton Enterprises LLC
16. Bank of New York Mellon Corp
17. Natixis
18. Goldman Sachs Group Inc
19. T Rowe Price Group Inc
20. Legg Mason Inc
21. Morgan Stanley
22. Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group Inc
23. Northern Trust Corporation
24. Société Générale
25. Bank of America Corporation
26. Lloyds TSB Group plc
27. Invesco plc
28. Allianz SE 29. TIAA
30. Old Mutual Public Limited Company
31. Aviva plc
32. Schroders plc
33. Dodge & Cox
34. Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc*
35. Sun Life Financial Inc
36. Standard Life plc
37. CNCE
38. Nomura Holdings Inc
39. The Depository Trust Company
40. Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance
41. ING Groep NV
42. Brandes Investment Partners LP
43. Unicredito Italiano SPA
44. Deposit Insurance Corporation of Japan
45. Vereniging Aegon
46. BNP Paribas
47. Affiliated Managers Group Inc
48. Resona Holdings Inc
49. Capital Group International Inc
50. China Petrochemical Group Company

Have the Republicans completely lost touch with their "fan base"?

The "It doesn't matter what you say, as long as it's Anti-Obama" policy can only take you so far.

On Friday, Republicans crawled out of the woodwork to...wait for it...CRITICIZE President Obama for his decision to bring the troops home before Jan 1st.

Republican candidate Mitt Romney released a statement:

“President Obama’s astonishing failure to secure an orderly transition in Iraq has unnecessarily put at risk the victories that were won through the blood and sacrifice of thousands of American men and women"

Always interested in what the view from the insane asylum is, here's Michele Bachmann's two cents:

"Today's announcement that we will remove all of our forces from Iraq is a political decision and not a military one; it represents the complete failure of President Obama to secure an agreement with Iraq for our troops to remain there to preserve the peace and demonstrates how far our foreign policy leadership has fallen,"

And let's not forget the forgettable. Ron Paul, your take?

"I bet the Embassy doesn't close down,"

How drole.

I'm sorry but are you out of your mind? Ya know how many soldiers in Iraq have Republican parents? ALL OF THEM. You're trying to tear Obama down on the one thing that gives these people hope? The chance to see their children, ALIVE, again?

The re-uniting of American families after a 9 YEAR war we had no place in, yeah that's the fight you wanna pick. If you ask me, you should have conceded defeat on this one and moved on.

Alec Baldwin: Campaign Finance Reform on OWS

Alec Baldwin took a trip down to Occupy Wall St. to see what was really going on. In this clip, the 30 Rock actor discusses:

Campaign Finance Reform: Specifically a floor, not a ceiling, on how to cap elections. He claims you will never be able to stop people from spending their own money on elections, but we can limit the amount of corporate influence AND provide a basic level of money to anyone that runs for their party. For example; Free airtime from television stations for debates.

Corporate Ownership of Media: "Corporations that have taken over the media companies have made sure that the rules have been changed"

Energy Consumption "We wouldn't be doing most of what we're doing around the world if it weren't for oil"and when people complain about gas being 5 dollars a gallon "Gasoline that they're buying really cost them 105 dollars a gallon because of all the money you paid in taxes that went to the defense department to go fight a war overseas to get that oil for you"

Alec Baldwin has increasingly stated he is interested in political office, specifically Mayor of NYC. He makes a dig at current Mayor Bloomberg during this interview, which could be seen as a political ploy to gather support from a large voting electorate. Regardless, he seems to have tapped into a current of political angst and seems to know what he's talking about based on this clip.

In a separate clip, while speaking to CNN representatives, he gave reasons for attending OWS:

"I came down to see for myself, because uh everything that I'm seeing on television quite frankly, is really just about a way to try to characterize who these people are in some kind of uh...traditional and ultimately uncomplicated way. With all due respect, most of the media reporting has been about who the media thinks they are rather than coming for myself to see what they want and why they're here. And I'm not gonna accomplish anything in an hour or two or even a week, to really hear what people articulate about what they want to change..."

Jon Bon Jovi spearheading Charitable Restaurants

Jon Bon Jovi has taken a new and important step in focusing on how our world could run.

He's opened a charity restaurant that is pay-what-you-can.

The "Soul Kitchen" opened Oct 19th in Redbank, New Jersey. It's a restaurant where, in exchange for washing a few dishes or cooking a meal or two, you receive a free meal voucher. Jovi himself washes dishes at the restaurant.

"This is not a soup kitchen," he said. "You can come here with the dignity of linens and silver,

and you're served a healthy nutritious meal. This is not burgers and fries."

At the opening, meals included: grilled chicken breasts, grilled salmon with soul seasonings, crusted catfish, sauteed greens and sweet potato mash.

There is also a donation area for those who can afford to pay.

"When I learned that one in six people in this country goes to bed hungry, I thought this was the next phase of the (Jon Bon Jovi Soul Foundation's) work."

It's refreshing to see someone creating a business not for profit, but to help fellow Americans.

Rachel Maddow Debunks Reaganomics "Tax Cuts For Top 2% Grow Jobs"

Bobby Kennedy JR on Tavis Smiley

I'm posting this interview because it was one of the most eye opening discussions I've seen in years. I know it's long, but if you read it, I guarantee you'll have the same opinion as Tavis by the end. "Thank you so much. Oh, man, thanks for what you're doing. Wow."

http://video.pbs.org/video/2013363935/

Check it out. Bobby Kennedy Jr knows exactly what's going on in this country.

Calvin and Hobbes: A lesson in Capitalism

Bill Waterson got it. Decades ago. This is, in effect, Herman Cain's road to the Whitehouse.

On Guns...

My Dear America,

I'm not quite sure you've noticed this, so I feel obligated to mention it. The political climate in this country has reached a dangerous level. Don't believe me?

We're all aware that on Saturday, January 8th 2011 an assassin attempted to take the life of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D) To call it anything less than an assassination attempt would be a blatant spit-in-the-eye to those killed with the bullets from Jared Loughner's extended, 30 round magazine.

And in your country where too often we are left cleaning up messes rather than preemptively stopping them from starting, one could at least hold onto the glimmer of hope that because of this something might change. That perhaps we would realize the "rile em up" attitude being touted by the far right wing conservatives might be creating a hostile atmosphere where tragedies like this can occur? That in such a tragedy, solace could be found in new legislation preventing rifles, handguns and firearms in general from falling into the hands of the mentally unstable? That perhaps for more than a single week, the leaders in this country could stop bickering long enough to do something, or at least until Representative Giffords could leave her hospital bed?

Ah, but you America... You are not so simple.

You see America, one of the things you love so dearly, that you cling to like a child with a blankie, is the precious Constitution. Don't get me wrong, the United States Constitution is a great document. I just wish your citizens would actually read it!

As you very well may know, the Second Amendment is not actually written in the Constitution. It's part of the Bill of Rights, which actually make up the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution. An Amendment is when lawmakers decide that the Constitution is not perfect, and they can change it at will. The Constitution is such an amazing document because it allows it's citizens to alter their own government based on the changing times. With such incredible foresight, your Founding Fathers realized that life in 1776 might not be the same as 2011. So with the incorporation of Amendments, we now see the path towards a more perfect union.

Well these days the Amendments come few and far between. You only have 27 and the the last one just sets the date that congress can get paid. Ya know, for a country that cycles through pop stars like popsicles, you sure don't like to change much. Regardless, just remember when your citizens wave their Second Amendment rights around like a rallying banner, they're actually celebrating a change made to the original constitution. And in effect, celebrating the ability to change something that seems so permanent and so important.

In 1791 they didn't have semi-automatic handguns or fully automatic rifles. They had black powdered pistols, at best. America, do you know how hard it is to do a drive-by in a horse and buggy with powder spilling all over your lap? Guns were hard to come by, and the use of one meant a steady hand and a dueler's mentality and training. Nowadays anyone, ANYONE can get one.

If I lived in Arizona, my roommate could go to the store, pass a background check, purchase a gun, come home and sell it to me for 10 bucks, and it's legally mine. I didn't have to pass a background check, not that I wouldn't be able to. But how difficult is it really to get a gun here? Clearly not very.

Now, lets break out the dusty scrolls of Colonial Era and take a look at what's written as the 2nd entry in the Bill of Rights. ""[T]he people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and their own state, or the United States, or the purpose of killing game; and no law shall be passed for disarming the people or any of them, unless for crimes committed..."^[31

Now keeping in mind they probably weren't referring to American's wearing around furry bear arms, let's take a look at that first sentence. Your people have a right to bear arms...What kind of arms? What constitutes an arm? Is an arm simply a firearm? Are all firearms guns? Do all firearms have to fire bullets? I'd like to receive a little clarification here. I mean, it is ONLY the Bill of Right's we're referring to here.

Back in 1791, they had this. Those were their firearms. And this of course does not include melee weapons such as swords and axes, that had been referenced as "arms" for centuries beforehand. Your selection was vast indeed: A blunderbuss or a pistol. Carbines were mostly found with militaries unless you were a dedicated gun collector...or blacksmith...

And it is THIS language that we pay attention to?! Language uttered from the mouths of men who had never seen a semi-automatic rifle, a fully auto hand gun or even an extended magazine.

America, you've changed. And we're doing you a serious disservice by not getting with the times. How many people have to DIE until we realize that maybe altering a 200 year old decree might serve our society a little better? "Arms" may have become way more deadly, but also technology has progressed in a positive way regarding weaponry. Now there are "arms" that stun, that fire rubber bullets and immoveable foam. There are "arms" that, in self defense, they would save both the victim and the attacker. In short, there are "arms" that don't kill.

If Jared Loughner had fired a rubber bullet during his assassination, it's very likely the outcome for Rep. Gabrielle Giffords would have been the same. But for 9 year old Christina Green, things could have been a lifetime different.

So rather than discussing the dismantling of our entire Second Amendment's principles, I merely suggest maybe it's time we amend what we think the word "arms" means?