Under normal practice, legal analysts say, Brennan would have legal recourse to appeal the decision, under an executive order governing access to classified information signed by former President Clinton in 1995. It is unclear, however, if Brennan has received that notification from the White House, which did not respond to an inquiry for more information.
“He is supposed to receive a written revocation setting forth the reason why and a framework as to how he can appeal that decision,” said Zaid.
The Trump regime is now contemplating a loophole through which companies can apply to use asbestos – a known carcinogen banned by most developed countries – in making adhesives, roofing material, floor tile, and other products.
What’s the justification for all of this? “The Administration’s agenda of deregulation is unleashing the … true potential of American businesses,” trumpets Trump’s Council of Economic Advisors in its 2018 economic report.
Translated: Cutting regulations means more corporate profits. More profits satisfies Trump’s donor class.
Many of Franklin’s hits, from “Chain of Fools” in 1967 to “Think” in 1968 to “Day Dreaming” in 1972, are staples of classic soul. Franklin’s contributions, however, were not only musical, but also, political—and she was an important figure in the civil rights struggles of the 1960s and 1970s.
Here are five of the Queen of Soul’s most important contributions to civil rights and politics in the United States.
1. “Respect” Became a Civil Rights Anthem
Aretha Franklin was not the first soul icon to record “Respect,” which was written by Otis Redding and originally recorded in 1965. But when the Queen of Soul recorded her famous 1967 version, it became one of her most definitive hits. Although the song is mainly about respect in romantic relationships, it was adopted as a political protest anthem by both the civil rights movement and the feminist movement. The late Jerry Wexler, who produced Franklin’s version for Atlantic Records, asserted that it “had overtones of the civil-rights movement and gender equality” and “was an appeal for dignity.”
The church in Pennsylvania was working simultaneously to shield child abusers while pushing for laws to punish women for consensual sex, so the easy charge to reach for is “hypocrisy.” But that’s an accusation that barely skims the surface. The far more troubling reality is that the willingness to cover for sexual predators is entirely consistent with advocating for restrictions on women’s reproductive rights. Both attitudes are rooted in the same poisonous commitment to putting men in positions of permanent social dominance, as well as rejecting the idea that women and children have bodily autonomy and sexual safety rights.
This truth has become more evident in the past couple of years, as the Christian right has thrown its full support behind Donald Trump. There was a significant amount of pundit chatter around the question of whether or not the self-appointed sex scolds of evangelical Christianity would hold it against Trump that he was caught on tape bragging about his adulteries and claiming that he accosts women because “when you’re a star, they let you do it.” Instead, the Christian right rallied the troops and helped Trump into the White House, where they continue to defend him as more stories come out about his payoffs to porn stars and models for their silence.
But in fact there was never any real conflict between the Christian right and Trump. Religious conservative posturing about “morality” has always been a thin cover story for the real agenda, which is enacting social control and asserting male dominance over women. Trump, who calls women “dogs” and clearly believes they have no value outside of their sexual desirability, is perfectly aligned with a conservative Christian movement whose insincere platitudes about “values” serve mainly to hobble women’s efforts at equality. Trump and the Christian right are aligned in their true belief, which is that women must be kept in their place.
Between 2011 and 2016, fracked oil and gas wells in the U.S. pumped out record-breaking amounts of wastewater, which is laced with toxic and radioactive materials, a new Duke University study concludes. The amount of wastewater from fracking rose 1,440 percent during that period.
Over the same time, the total amount of water used for fracking rose roughly half as much, 770 percent, according to the paper published today in the journal Science Advances.
“Previous studies suggested hydraulic fracturing does not use significantly more water than other energy sources, but those findings were based only on aggregated data from the early years of fracking,” Avner Vengosh, professor of geochemistry and water quality at Duke’s Nicholas School of the Environment, said in a statement. “After more than a decade of fracking operation, we now have more years of data to draw upon from multiple verifiable sources.”
The researchers predict that spike in water use will continue to climb.
The Fracking Industry Is Cannibalizing Its Own Production, Increasing Spill Risks | DeSmogBlog
The first thing to understand is that this is simply a problem of the industry being greedy. The oil producers are drilling too many wells in close proximity to one another, and when they frack the newer wells — known as child wells — those “bash” or “hit” the older wells and cause problems.
In a typical frack site, the production begins with a first test well, which is known as the parent well. The wells drilled in proximity to the parent well are called child wells.
What is happening is that not only are the child wells cannibalizing the production of the existing parent well, but when the child wells are fracked they can create “frac hits” that damage the parent well. These frac hits can reduce the pressure in the parent well leading to lower production, they can damage the parent well to the point of it being a “dead” well and, of course, they can lead to spills and environmental contamination.
Claudio Virues, a senior reservoir engineer with the oil and gas company Nexen, explained the basic problem of frac hits in the Journal of Petroleum Technology.
According to The Australian, as part of a four-hour closed-door meeting with Ms Brown, the top exec for the social media giant said: “We will help you revitalise journalism … in a few years the reverse looks like I’ll be holding your hands with your dying business like in a hospice.”
Five sources present at the meeting confirmed the comments.
She was also reported to have said: “Mark Zuckerberg doesn’t care about publishers but is giving me a lot of leeway and concessions to make these changes”.
Most people do not realize just how many times and how close the world has come to global nuclear war. A couple of US Presidents wanted to use nuclear bombs and treated them just like bullets. What about all of the other leaders who have access to nuclear bombs?
via 20+ Nuclear Doom Close Calls; Why MAD Total Nuclear Global World War III Almost Happened 20 Times So Far, What Happens AFTER A Global Nuclear War? Global Zero Nuclear Weapons Project | A Green Road Journal
The entire planet is swimming in debt, yet no one seems to criticize the system itself as being fundamentally flawed.
“A man in debt is so far a slave,” American essayist Ralph Waldo Emerson once reportedly said.
In light of this statement, I contend that I don’t need to have a college degree in economics to tell you that our current financial system enslaving the entire world is not sustainable – and headed for one hell of a spectacularly ugly crash.
Last month, the Washington-based Institute of International Finance published their latest statistics indicating that global debt had reached $247.2 trillion by the end of March this year, an increase of 11.1 percent from last year alone. In other words, since the start of this year, global debt rose by a whopping $8 trillion in just three to four months.
In 2016, the global debt was already at $164 trillion, which was equivalent to 225 percent of global GDP. The global debt-to GDP ratio currently exceeds 318 percent, having risen for the first time since the third quarter of 2016. Just the US debt to GDP ratio alone currently exceeds 100 percent. This debt-to-GDP ratio is 12 percentage points higher than in 2009, during the aftermath of the global financial crisis. We are now at levels not seen since during the 1980s and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) expects this to continue on an upward trend.
Got bubbles? Anything not sustainable is TERMINAL. It is just a question of time. When will this debt bubble burst?