Case Study ~
Ganika, of Asian Indian origin
Late 3rd stage Individuated.
This Soul's core feeling of alienation in this life has been total. She describes her life as a train wreck, one of repeated trauma and confusion While she does not claim to be a victim to her circumstances, she also does not understand her purpose here, or why she has been subjected to so much abuse.
She feels she must have done something horrible in a past life, evil to the bone, to have been born into her family of origin. “There must be something terribly wrong with me,” she has shared, and yet the question becomes WHY? What are these skipped steps about? Why did they come to be? Why did she choose this family? And What is the resolution from here?
We will start by reviewing the chart and looking at her skipped step signature.
Jupiter in Pisces in the 8th House waxing square to the nodes
SN in Gemini in the 11th House, ruler Mercury in Cancer conjunct Saturn in the 12th house.
NN in Sagittarius in the 5th House, ruler Jupiter in Pisces (her skipped step), squaring the nodes.
1. Internalizing other people's projections, in essence, BELIEVING that the nature of these negative messages are true, in particular from the mother and father as well as her sister, seen with the South Node in the 11th in Gemini, ruler Mercury conjunct Saturn in the 12th house in Cancer.
2. She has become a victim, Jupiter in Pisces, and a slave to their abuse, leading to trauma, Sn in Gemini in the 11th house, conjunct North Node of Uranus, and South Node of Venus, the trauma to her inner relationship to herself as well as in her relationships repeats. The ruler of the South Node in Gemini is Mercury and is conjunct Saturn in Cancer in the 12th, opposing the Moon in Capricorn. The South Node of Uranus is also conjunct her North Node of the Moon in Sagittarius in the 5th.
3. Being born into parents who made her feel worthless, "you are ugly, you are stupid, you are evil," repeated messages that were so constant and negative that she ended up believing that what they were saying must be true, leading to absolute doubt in herself. Jupiter in Pisces in the 8th house in Pisces, squares the ruler Neptune in Sagittarius in the 5th house. Neptune is inconjunct Saturn (ruler of the 6th), and Mercury in Cancer, ruler of the South Node in Gemini in the 8th.
4. This Soul has sacrificed herself for the sake of other people's needs. She has 'given it all away' so to speak, with the innocence of a child. Emotionally, she is still very much like a child, and her innocence has gotten her into deep water with others, leading to total disillusionment.
5. This Soul's natural innocence and believing in the best in others set her up to not see people clearly, leading to misapplied trust as a result. This extended trust in the wrong people led to a total violation of her Soul and her nature.
6. She has compensated and compromised herself by settling for less in terms of intimacy, sacrificing her own needs, leading to feeling emotionally and sexually violated.
7. She has been hiding behind her nature, and running from herself for many lifetimes, because of SHAME.
8. The shame is a result of learned and acquired guilt seen with the ruler of her South Node in Gemini, being Mercury in Cancer, conjunct Saturn, opposing the Moon in Capricorn, and squaring Pluto. Some of the guilt is natural because of choices her Soul made that lacked discrimination, but most of the shame is linked with guilt because of other people's projections, that she took on and BELIEVED were true.
9. "I deserve pain and punishment yet I do not know why" - Sado-Masochistic signature seen in the Virgo/Pisces axis. Jupiter is in Pisces square the Nodes, the ruler of the South Node in Gemini is in the 12th house in Cancer, conjunct Saturn and opposing the Moon and inconjunct Neptune in Sagittarius, the ruler of her skipped step.
10. This Soul has been in total survival mode, Pluto in the 2nd in Libra, ruler Venus in Taurus in the 10th, square Mars in Cancer in the 12th. In order to survive she has had to totally detach and separate from her emotions as best she can, which has led to an emotional suspension, yet in order to evolve it will require her to re-submerge into these watery seas. Her resistance out of fear of what she will find, has kept her stuck.
11. This Soul has surrendered in many lifetimes following too much trauma, taking her life prematurely, wanting to avoid the lessons because of emotional overwhelm and not feeling worthy to have breath in her lungs, that her life was a waste and the oxygen should be saved for another.
Because of her desire to ESCAPE the disillusioning hell hold of the human experience and the pain of her past, these early exits have only forced her Soul back into the body to experience even more brutal lessons. In the end, we can't play God.
My mother was forced into an arranged marriage with my father when she was a teenager, while she was in love with another boy. Within 3 months I was conceived, not out of love (on the contrary) and according to her I am the source of all that is evil and (still) the cause of all that goes wrong in her life.
Through the years my mother threatened to kill herself continuously, told me I was dead to her and wasn’t her child, there were several illnesses she told us about that could cause her to die because of me, my father told me several times that I would cause him to have a heart attack and he would die. My sister would get tasty food and treats but I wasn’t allowed any of them. I think apples are beautiful but I still can’t eat them because they were my diet food for years. Both my parents hit me, but my mother more so.
Being Asian Indian, raised as a Hindu, there was no escaping hearing about Karma and Reincarnation: When something good happens in your life, it is a gift/blessing from God, but when something bad happens you brought it upon yourself. You deserve all the bad things that happen to you because you must have earned it one way or another. Which can also be translated to: your Soul chose these experiences (this life) because of what it did in the past.
I understand why my mother hates me with a vengeance, maybe I would have felt the same if I was married off at 15 and pregnant at 16 with a child who will never be seen as beautiful and successful by a man who raped me.
I have a sister, who is 11 years younger. As ugly and horrid as I appear to be, as beautiful, successful and loved she is by my mother (and therefore the rest of the family as well). She is married to a man who worships her and has 2 daughters. My sister and mother are best friends. I am being treated like the street dog and my sister has always been treated, from the moment my mother was pregnant with her, like a princess.
Countless lies were told because of not having working/living permits, illegal living arrangements, family secrets, I moved so many times I’ve lost count and no friends were allowed. When I was 16, the family moved to the Netherlands. I wasn't allowed to go to school from then on, had to start working to support the family. I don't have much contact with any family members anymore.
December 2015: I heard my mother boosting how she hit me well into my twenties. I was also reminded that my mother thinks I’m ugly, have achieved nothing at all in life and calls me a whore. I wonder how many other whores there are that have had only one relationship and have been completely celibate for over 13 years.
It seems to me as if I have lived my entire life, up until starting this year 2016, with the foggiest mind not being able to see things clearly at all. I most certainly didn’t allow myself to see/feel anything negative towards the parents and sister. Just knowing that they thought what they thought was enough for me, whether it was actually true or not didn’t matter.
Today I am 13 years single, after a 7.5 year bad relationship. I do not want a relationship anymore.
I don't have friends. Surprisingly though, I don't ever feel lonely.
Please review the chart and the skipped steps in questions. Please share any comments or ask questions if you have any at this time.
Our next step is to determine what has come before and WHY this SOUL has created this reality for herself, and what she needs to do to resolve these skipped steps so she can HEAL & EVOLVE.
To enlarge the chart just click the jpg ...
on: Oct 18, 2016, 10:50 AM
|Started by Rad - Last post by Kristin|
on: Oct 18, 2016, 06:32 AM
|Started by Rad - Last post by Rad|
Mexican brands mock Trump: 'There's a common sense he's our enemy'
Companies including Tecate and Cucapá are using humor to push back against the Republican’s fighting talk (and market their products)
Duncan Tucker in Guadalajara
Tuesday 18 October 2016 12.00 BST
When a group of young Mexicans began selling “I support Donald” T-shirts to people on the streets of Los Angeles last month they drew reactions of anger and disbelief from many passersby.
The joke was on the buyers. As temperatures rose a clown nose appeared on the Republican presidential candidate and the wording on the shirts changed, crossing out “I support” and leaving “El Que Lo Lea,” which translates to “whoever reads this” but is a nod for any Mexican Spanish speaker to the popular phrase: “Whoever reads this is an asshole.”
The prank was part of a viral marketing campaign by the Mexican craft brewery Cucapá, with the sales destined to fund free beer giveaways and a big party in Mexico City.
Cucapá’s stunt was the latest in a series of advertising campaigns by Mexican businesses that have mocked and criticised the Republican candidate for his racist rhetoric.
Mexican brewer Cucapá takes to the streets of Los Angeles to troll Trump: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TE9NX6e27yY
Mario García, the Cucapá founder, said the company came up with the idea after Trump’s surprise visit to Mexico in August. Upon returning to the US, Trump triumphantly proclaimed: “Mexico will pay for the wall, 100%. They don’t know it yet, but they’re going to pay.”
'Cállate, imbécil': the best Mexican responses to Donald Trump's visit..Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/31/donald-trump-mexico-memes-cartoons-pena-nieto
A native of the border town of Mexicali, García responded to Trump’s latest affront by organising the T-shirt sales and posting footage online with the message: “Someone tell Donald he paid for our beers”. The videos went viral, with Cucapá claiming they clocked up 8.3m views and 500,000 interactions within 10 days.
“As Mexicans we all feel extremely offended and we have the right to defend ourselves,” said García, whose firm sells border-related ales with names like Green Card, Runaway and La Migra, the Mexican slang term for immigration officials. “As a beer company I don’t think we’re going to reach young people by taking a formal political stance, but instead we can stay true to ourselves by taking a more humorous, irreverent stance.”
Trump has been loathed in Mexico ever since decrying its people as criminals, rapists and drug-dealers when he launched his campaign last year. With Trump urging the US to stop doing business with its southern neighbour, it was only a matter of time before Mexican companies began to respond.
Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)
I have a lawsuit in Mexico’s corrupt court system that I won but so far can’t collect. Don’t do business with Mexico!
February 24, 2015
Tecate, a Mexican beer company owned by Heineken, released a commercial on Fox News during the first presidential debate that mocked Trump’s planned border wall. In its place, Tecate proposed a new wall, “tremendous” mini beer wall, more like a very long bar, where people from both countries could meet to share ice-cold Mexican lager. “This wall may be small but it’s going to be huge,” claimed the ad.
Tecate proposes building a ‘beer wall’ between Mexico and the US: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bev4NZEFsCQ
“Being a Mexican brand, we almost felt the obligation to play into this conversation,” said Felix Palau, vice-president of Tecate USA. “We really wanted to address this notion of a wall. However, we wanted to put a positive spin on it, while raising a glass to beer’s uncanny ability to bring people together.”
He’s an easy target. It’s very difficult to find a Mexican who likes Donald Trump
Fernanda Guerra, marketing director
Larger corporations like Corona and Aeromexico have launched more subtle campaigns that also question the concept of borders, while Mexican and Argentine TV networks have used Trump’s inflammatory comments about immigrants to promote football matches taking place in the US. “We don’t have victories anymore. The American dream is dead,” Azteca, Mexico’s second largest media company, quoted Trump saying in its promotions for September’s USA v Mexico soccer match.
It’s unusual for Mexican businesses to release such political commercials. Fernanda Guerra, director of the digital marketing firm Wawa, said Mexican companies normally avoid such delicate issues for fear of losing clients or undermining important relationships. While smaller, more irreverent brands like Cucapá have less to lose from releasing bolder adverts, Guerra said larger corporations tend to be more serious and risk averse. In Trump’s case, however, companies of all sizes are taking shots at him.
“He’s an easy target. It’s very difficult to find a Mexican who likes Donald Trump,” Guerra explained. “He’s someone who’s been attacking Mexican society so there’s a common sense that he’s our enemy.”
The strength of anti-Trump sentiment on both sides of the border has created opportunities for philanthropy as well as publicity. Since launching a Trump-baiting viral campaign last year, John Rexer, founder of the Mexican liquor brand Ilegal Mezcal, has raised over $30,000 to provide educational opportunities for children in Guatemala and undocumented youths in Los Angeles and his native New York.
Illegal Mezcal takes a shot at Trump: https://vimeo.com/161727038
Inspired by a conversation with a distressed Mexican waiter in a New York restaurant, Rexer began mocking up posters of Trump’s face with a phrase the immigrant had used: “Donald eres un pendejo” (Donald you’re an asshole). His team quickly put up over 5,000 posters, projections and spray-paintings across several major US cities.
Ilegal Mezcal is now selling T-shirts with the same design to raise money for charity. In April they donated $2 for every shot of their liquor that customers consumed at 75 bars across three continents as part of a mass drinking protest dubbed “A shot at Donald”.
“Some people have been shocked, asking, ‘Should companies be taking this kind of stance?’” said Rexer, a former Mexico resident who now lives in Guatemala. “It takes some degree of risk for a brand to take a political point of view but I think Mexican brands have a responsibility to their own people. They do business with the US and they should be concerned with [Trump’s] tone, that not only affects them business-wise but also affects the bigger picture.”
on: Oct 18, 2016, 06:24 AM
|Started by Rad - Last post by Rad|
WikiLeaks says Ecuador cut off Julian Assange's internet access
Group says access was shut down soon after the publication of Hillary Clinton’s speeches and it has ‘activated appropriate contingency plans’
Nicola Slawson and agencies
Tuesday 18 October 2016 07.23 BST
Julian Assange’s internet was cut off by Ecuador, WikiLeaks has said, deflecting blame from the US and British governments, which have sparred with Assange for releasing sensitive material.
Ecuador has reiterated its determination to protect Assange despite the internet link of the WikiLeaks founder being “intentionally severed”, as WikiLeaks said.
An early morning tweet on Monday accused a “state party” of being responsible for shutting down internet access to Assange, who has been living inside the Ecuadorian embassy in London for over four years.
The tweet said the group had “activated the appropriate contingency plans”.
WikiLeaks did not immediately release more information about the incident, and the tweet attracted a storm of comments and speculation on social media from across the world.
These ranged from concerns for the Australian’s health to support for any move to stop the activities of the group.
Many felt it was no coincidence that the internet was cut just after WikiLeaks had released another batch of emails from the campaign manager of the US presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.
The anti-secrecy organisation released three transcripts on Saturday of Clinton’s paid Goldman Sachs speeches, which her campaign team had long refused to release.
The transcripts show how she bantered with the investment bank’s executives, which is likely to fuel fears among liberal Democrats that she is too cosy with Wall Street.
The Clinton camp has neither confirmed nor denied the leaked emails are authentic. There have been no indications they are fake.
It has now been confirmed that neither Clinton’s team nor any political party was responsible for Assange losing his internet access.
Assange is wanted for questioning in Sweden over a sex allegation, which he denies, but he believes that if he leaves the embassy he will be extradited to the US for questioning over the activities of WikiLeaks.
It is not yet known what Ecuador’s motivation was for cutting his Wi-Fi.
A source in the Ecuadorian government told the Press Association: “We don’t respond to speculation circulating on Twitter. Ecuador will continue to protect Julian Assange and uphold the political asylum granted to him in 2012.”
on: Oct 18, 2016, 06:22 AM
|Started by Rad - Last post by Rad|
Arabic billboard mocks Donald Trump's fear of Muslims
Highway billboard near Dearborn, Michigan, says ‘Donald Trump can’t read this, but he is scared of it’
Anti-Donald Trump billboard in Arabic in Michigan
Tuesday 18 October 2016 09.35 BST
A billboard has appeared alongside a Michigan highway mocking Donald Trump and his xenophobic rhetoric about Muslims and immigration.
The advert, placed on Interstate 94 near Dearborn, says in white Arabic text on a black background: “Donald Trump can’t read this, but he is scared of it.”
It has been paid for by the Nuisance Committee, a campaign group set up by the people behind the popular game Cards Against Humanity.
Melissa Harris, a spokesperson for the group, said Dearborn was chosen because it has one of the largest Arab-American communities in the US.
She told WWJ Newsradio 950: “I like the idea of people who do not speak Arabic having to ask their friends who do speak Arabic to translate the board for them. And I personally hope this also will generate some dialogue between Arabic speaking people and non-Arabic speaking people in Detroit and across the country.”
Special packs of cards about the US presidential candidate and his rival, Hillary Clinton, have been funding the group’s political advertising. The makers promise that “at the end of this promotion, Cards Against Humanity will tally up the sales of both packs, and depending on which pack gets more support, we will donate all the money in support of Hillary Clinton’s campaign”.
The group has previously used Star Trek’s George Takei to narrate a campaign video comparing Trump’s stance on Muslims to the US policy of internment for the Japanese during the second world war.
The use of Arabic writing to poke fun at a fear of Islam was seen earlier this year in a tote bag designed by Rock Paper Scissors in Haifa. It read: “This text has no other purpose than to terrify those who are afraid of the Arabic language.”
on: Oct 18, 2016, 06:18 AM
|Started by Rad - Last post by Rad|
Donald Trump's dark warning that dead will rise to rig the election
Facts, or lack thereof, prove no barrier to voter fraud claim as Republican candidate effectively rejects the election result – before the votes have been counted
Ben Jacobs in Washington
Tuesday 18 October 2016 12.41 BST
Donald Trump has continued an unprecedented effort by a major presidential candidate to effectively declare the presidential election invalid before voters have even had their say.
On Monday, just over three weeks before election day, the Republican nominee repeated his unsupported claim that voter fraud was rampant and specifically stated in a rally in Green Bay, Wisconsin that ballots cast by undocumented immigrants led to Barack Obama’s victory in North Carolina in 2008. “People who died 10 years ago are still voting,” he claimed.
Trump’s Wisconsin appearance came after a series of provocative tweets culminating on Monday morning when he wrote: “Of course there is large scale voter fraud happening on and before election day. Why do Republican leaders deny what is going on? So naive!” Never before has a major presidential candidate in effect rejected the results before the election has been held.
In remarks that were mostly scripted Trump spoke darkly about the election he has long described as “rigged” and made specific unfounded claims about in-person voter fraud.
Previously Trump has only spoken in dogwhistles about voter fraud in “certain communities”.
On Monday he specifically said that 1.8 million dead people would vote – and for “somebody else”. The statement was apparently a reference to the fact that one 2012 study found up to 1.8 million active voter registrations from deceased voters. In reality the study it found no evidence of fraud or that any illegitimate ballots were cast – it simply meant state voter databases were out of date.
Trump also insisted without evidence: “We have voters all over the country where they’re not even citizens of the country and they’re voting.”
The Republican nominee’s unsupported allegations came as he continued to attack the press for reporting on a series of accusations against him of sexual assault and misconduct.
Since a tape was released of Trump bragging about grabbing women “by the pussy”, nine women have come forward with accusations that he groped them without consent.
Trump has insisted that the allegations are “false stuff”, suggested the women were motivated by financial gain and that some of them were not attractive enough for him to grope anyway. On Friday he portrayed the New York Times’ reporting on the subject as part of a Mexican conspiracy to defeat him.
On Monday Trump described the press at the Wisconsin rally as “the enemies back there” and repeatedly accused the media of “poisoning the minds of voters … the media is an extension of the Clinton campaign”.
As the crowd chanted “CNN sucks,” Trump answered: “They really do.”
He continued to conjure imagery of shadowy backers behind Hillary Clinton: “Her international donors control every move she made … history will record that 2017 is the year America lost its independence.”
In one display of policy substance, Trump proposed ethics reforms including a five-year ban on executive branch officials lobbying the government after leaving public service, and a similar ban for staffers on Capitol Hill.
Trump also showed some restraint towards at least one of his Republican critics. After attacking Paul Ryan repeatedly on Twitter on Sunday, describing him as “a man who doesn’t know how to win”, the candidate refrained in the speaker’s home state.
The two have had a notably frosty relationship, although Ryan insists he will vote for Trump in November. Still, Trump’s Wisconsin crowd chanted “Paul Ryan sucks”.
Ryan had implicitly rebuked Trump’s claims of a rigged election on Saturday when AshLee Strong, his spokesperson, said in a statement: “Our democracy relies on confidence in election results and the speaker is fully confident the states will carry out this election with integrity.”
The Republican nominee’s wife, Melania, made her first public appearance since her plagiarized speech at the RNC in July. She spoke to Anderson Cooper to defend her husband in the aftermath of the leaked tape and the barrage of allegations of sexual misconduct.
Melania Trump insisted that Access Hollywood host Billy Bush had “egged on” her husband to make inappropriate remarks and blamed a media conspiracy for their release. “It was the media, it was NBC, it was Access Hollywood, it was the left-leaning media,” she told CNN.
With the third presidential debate looming, Hillary Clinton didn’t hold any rallies but Bill and Chelsea Clinton did appear at a celebrity-studded concert to raise campaign funds in midtown Manhattan on Monday night.
Trump Creeps Out America By Trying To Kiss A Little Girl Who Didn’t Want To Be Kissed
By Jason Easley on Mon, Oct 17th, 2016 at 10:51 pm
Donald Trump thought it would be a great idea to change his image by kissing a young African-American girl on stage during his rally in Wisconsin. The result was creepy on every level imaginable.
Donald Trump thought it would be a great idea to change his image by kissing a young African-American girl on stage during his rally in Wisconsin. The result was creepy on every level imaginable.
Here is a GIF of the kiss:
Nooooooooo! pic.twitter.com/mT3UrGygVK #Trump
— David Beard (@dabeard) October 18, 2016
Clearly, the young lady wanted nothing to do with this stranger kissing her.
However, the scene gets truly creepy when you realize that he tried to kiss a child on the mouth. Trump has repeatedly made sexual comments about underage girls, so it is not a good idea in any way, shape or form to have Trump out in public giving little girls unwanted kisses on the mouth.
The whole scene was off-putting and confirmed the image of Donald Trump underage girl oogling, creepy sexual predator, who should never be allowed within 500 feet of a public school.
Donald Trump trying to kiss a young child on the mouth who didn’t want to be kissed at all was wrong on about a million different levels.
Forget the African-American vote; Trump will be lucky if that kid doesn’t beg her parents to file a restraining order.
Howard Stern: I knew what I was doing when I had Trump on show to talk about sex
Los Angeles Times
17 Oct 2016 at 21:14 ET
Donald Trump's frequent appearances on Howard Stern's radio show have repeatedly come back to haunt the GOP presidential nominee, with his rating scale for women's appearances, his sex life and his position on the Iraq war all fodder for election-season discussion.
Now, the shock jock is speaking out for the first time about Trump, the role his radio show has played in the campaign and the controversial statements Trump made about women.
Stern, a Democrat, said he wasn't replaying his interviews with Trump because to do so would be a "betrayal."
"Donald Trump did the show in an effort to be entertaining and have fun with us," Stern said on his show on Sirius satellite radio. "I fully knew what I was doing when I interviewed Trump. I knew I had a guy who loved to talk about sex. ... I had a guy who loved to evaluate women on a scale of 1 to 10. These are avenues I went down because I knew it would entertain the audience."
Stern, who considers Trump a friend, said he has asked why Trump is running for president and said he was surprised the recordings from his radio show didn't emerge earlier.
"I said, 'Why are you doing this?' " Stern said he asked Trump earlier this year. " 'Why would a guy with billions of dollars (run for president)? ... Don't you know what they're gonna do to you? Don't you know they're gonna open up everything?' "
Stern, whose radio career was built on raunchy talk, also weighed in on the videotape that recently emerged where Trump says he can kiss and grope women without their consent because of his celebrity. Stern disputed Trump's defense that the words were merely "locker room talk."
"I have never been in the room when someone has said, 'Grab them by the pussy,' " said Stern, repeating the phrase Trump used in the 2005 recording. "No one's ever advocated going that step where you get a little bit, 'Hey I'm going to invade someone's space.' "
Melania Trump’s Defense Of Her Husband’s Sexual Assault Just Made Things Even Worse
By Jason Easley on Mon, Oct 17th, 2016 at 5:28 pm
Melania Trump’s defense of her husband is that he is a 70-year-old man-child that got led around by Billy Bush. This is not the picture of a future commander-in-chief.
Melania Trump says her husband was egged on by Billy Bush when he made sexually aggressive remarks in a 2005 tape https://t.co/p0mCRSCTRx
— CNN (@CNN) October 17, 2016
CNN reported on Anderson Cooper’s interview with Mrs. Trump:
“I said to my husband that, you know, the language was inappropriate. It’s not acceptable. And I was surprised, because that is not the man that I know,” the wife of the Republican presidential nominee said in an exclusive interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper, which is set to air at 8 p.m. ET Monday.
“And as you can see from the tape, the cameras were not on — it was only a mic. And I wonder if they even knew that the mic was on,” she said, referring to Trump and NBC’s “Access Hollywood” host Billy Bush.
She said they were engaged in “boy talk, and he was led on — like, egged on — from the host to say dirty and bad stuff.”
According to Melania Trump, her husband is either a sexual predator who bragged about assaulting women or he is a weak minded buffoon who only bragged about sexually assaulting women to impress Access Hollywood host Billy Bush.
Neither one of these options screams future President Of The United States.
One suspects that the Trump’s have moved beyond trying to save what increasingly looks like a doomed presidential campaign, and are now trying to save their brand so that they still have a business left to go back to after the election ends.
The Trump campaign has managed to do the impossible. They have managed to make Donald Trump look even more incompetent and unfit for the White House.
Women And Donald Trump: Watch Us Take Him Down
By Ramona Grigg
"PUSSY GRABS BACK" by Kim Boekbinder is not work-safe and contains an eff bomb in addition to the pussy [cat?] refrain. - eds.
Every woman alive knows personally or knows about those puffy-chested, foul-mouthed, egotistical bullies who hike up their big, bad britches and talk trash about having loads of fun with our private parts. Until now, not a single one of them ended up being a major party's candidate for President of the United States. That's a new one.
Ever since Donald Trump swept the primaries in June and stepped up his awesomely awful reign of terror, I've been doing a lot of hand-wringing, mainly on Facebook, admitting for all the world to see that this guy Trump, a nothingburger in ways too many to count, was scaring the bejeesus out of me. I've been horrified, terrified, scarified and very nearly petrified.
I'm a woman who came of age in the 1950s. My looks were nothing extraordinary but I've had my share of "accidental" brushes against my breasts, unwelcome nuzzles and attempts at kisses, and, yes, of outright gropes.
Countless times I've heard the kinds of suggestive words clueless, stupid men and boys apparently believe are all it takes to turn us on.
I doubt there are many women who have been lucky enough to sidestep any of it. It happens. But I think it's safe to say this is the first time in our history a known serial groper and admitted sexual predator has come this close to becoming President of the United States. (Okay, stop. Don't even go there. Bill Clinton may have been a low-life serial philanderer in his younger days but he didn't mic up and brag about it; he didn't make it an essential part of who he is. He was impeached. He paid a price, and for all I know it cured him.)
But back to Trump: As of this day and yesterday and the day before, he's hemorrhaging voters and donors and party leaders as fast as the slime will flow. He has taken to sniffing and stalking and threatening to jail his opponent as soon as he dons his robes and takes the throne. He's threatening to sue the growing numbers of women who are accusing him of gross indecency. He's threatening to sue the New York Times for using his own actions to condemn him. He's making noises against the First Amendment, trying to scare off the press.
He blames everyone, but he mainly blames women, and for once he's right. We are working to take him down. No mystery. Oh, he still has his female followers--those women who will stand next to a guy wearing a tee shirt that says "She's a Cunt" and smile at the camera, those women who wear the title "Trump supporter" and, no matter what, will defend him with a grin. But, thank Hera, they're in the minority. The rest of us are working to take Donald Trump down. To take him down.
Just before Donald Trump was seen last week stalking around the stage channeling Benito Mussolini, conjuring up New World Order conspiracies, calling out his accusers, our First Lady, Michelle Obama, gave the speech of her life, talking in exquisitely painful language about sexual predation (without mentioning names), and the effect it has on women:
This is not something that we can ignore. It's not something we can just sweep under the rug as just another disturbing footnote in a sad election season. Because this was not just a "lewd conversation." This wasn't just locker-room banter. This was a powerful individual speaking freely and openly about sexually predatory behavior, and actually bragging about kissing and groping women, using language so obscene that many of us were worried about our children hearing it when we turn on the TV.
And to make matters worse, it now seems very clear that this isn't an isolated incident. It's one of countless examples of how he has treated women his whole life. And I have to tell you that I listen to all of this and I feel it so personally, and I'm sure that many of you do too, particularly the women. The shameful comments about our bodies. The disrespect of our ambitions and intellect. The belief that you can do anything you want to a woman.
It is cruel. It's frightening. And the truth is, it hurts. It hurts. It's like that sick, sinking feeling you get when you're walking down the street minding your own business and some guy yells out vulgar words about your body. Or when you see that guy at work that stands just a little too close, stares a little too long, and makes you feel uncomfortable in your own skin.
It's that feeling of terror and violation that too many women have felt when someone has grabbed them, or forced himself on them and they've said no but he didn't listen — something that we know happens on college campuses and countless other places every single day. It reminds us of stories we heard from our mothers and grandmothers about how, back in their day, the boss could say and do whatever he pleased to the women in the office, and even though they worked so hard, jumped over every hurdle to prove themselves, it was never enough.
It happens. And it's not just Donald Trump, it's every man who sees a woman's body as a mindless, soulless playground; it's every man who goes into government believing a woman's body is his to legislate.
But I can't leave this page without acknowledging the millions of men who get it, who are outraged by Donald Trump's words and actions, and who are speaking out. You are our greatest allies, our friends, our heroes, the loves of our lives. You are our husbands, fathers, sons, brothers, friends. You energize us. It's our fight but we couldn't do this without you.
Click to watch 'pussy grabs back': https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUh15js14Pg
Historic Margin Among Women Voters Gives Clinton Massive Lead In New National Poll
By Sean Colarossi on Mon, Oct 17th, 2016 at 9:57 pm
Clinton leads by 9 points nationally and a whopping 19 points among women.
Much to the chagrin of Donald Trump and company, women will actually vote in the upcoming general election. According to a new CBS poll released on Monday, that doesn’t bode well for the Republican nominee.
In a two-way race between Hillary Clinton and Trump, the Democratic nominee leads by a whopping 11 points, 51 – 40 percent. In head-to-head contests, this is the four straight poll showing Clinton breaking the critical 50 percent threshold.
The CBS survey also shows Clinton maintaining a nine-point edge – 47 to 38 – in a race that includes third-party candidates Gary “Aleppo” Johnson and Jill Stein.
The reason behind Clinton’s surge is simple: women.
New CBS poll: Clinton leads Trump by 9 points nationally in 4-way race. She holds a 19-point advantage over Trump among women.
— Sabrina Siddiqui (@SabrinaSiddiqui) October 17, 2016
Clinton’s 19-point lead among female voters, according to CBS, “would be the largest margin for a Democrat among women going back to 1972 when exit polls were first conducted.”
Of course, Trump’s plummeting numbers among women are no surprise given the fact that he was recently caught on tape literally bragging about how he can sexually assault women because of his celebrity status.
But Trump is also losing ground among voters with whom Republican candidates generally perform well.
Among white women – a group former GOP nominee Mitt Romney won by 14 points – the race is essentially even between Clinton and Trump.
Even men are starting to walk away from Trump. After winning this group by 11 points earlier in the month, Trump now just has a two-point edge over Clinton.
The overall trend for the Republican nominee isn’t just bad; it’s catastrophic.
New CBS national poll shows Clinton with 9-point lead over Trump in 4-way contest. https://t.co/huXHji6lDZ pic.twitter.com/YsZjW7gj0s
— Jim Roberts (@nycjim) October 17, 2016
With just three weeks until Election Day, Donald Trump is sinking fast. Not because of a rigged process or a media conspiring against him, but because the Republican nominee has repeatedly proven himself too unstable and unfit to be president.
There is still time left, but it looks like voters are about to toss Trump into the ash heap of history where he belongs.
Here are 10 Trump attacks on Clinton & Obama that actually describe who he is
October 17, 2016
Even though Mike Pence has laughably claimed that Donald Trump doesn't like to insult people, and it's Hillary Clinton who's running the "insult-driven campaign," the GOP presidential candidate has fueled his attempted run to the White House largely on insults, attacks and child-like temper-tantrums unlike any we've ever seen in U.S. politics.
However, what's ironic about all of this is that many of the things he's accused other people of being - are actually what he is. Especially when it comes to Hillary Clinton and President Obama.
Let's run through a few of these.
Weak: This is a word he's used to describe both Obama and Clinton, two people who've endured more scrutiny than possibly any two politicians in history, yet continue to stand tall and strong as leaders of their party. While both have their critics, they're still two people who are heavily respected both domestically and internationally by a lot of people.
Meanwhile, Trump's the man-baby who can't take criticism from a former Miss Universe without a week-long hissy fit culminating in a 3 a.m. Twitter tirade where he calls her "disgusting" and tries to slander her by telling people that she made a sex tape - even though she didn't.
In fact, pretty much any time someone dares to hurt Trump's fragile ego he melts down like a toddler whose parents won't buy them a new toy.
Crooked: This is Trump's nickname for Clinton - yet he's probably the most crooked person to ever win a party's presidential nomination. From his continued refusal to release his tax returns, to the fact he was found guilty of creating fake anti-gambling groups that used racism to slander Native Americans trying to build casinos that would compete with is, this is someone who's actually admitted to trying to buy off politicians - yet he has the nerve to call others crooked?
Dishonest/Liar: Without a doubt, Trump is the most dishonest person to ever win a major party's presidential nomination. This is someone who doesn't just lie, he literally makes up his own version of reality based on whatever the hell seems to pop into his head at the time he says it. He will deny he said things that there's indisputable evidence he said and accuse people of things without a shred of evidence to back up whatever he's claiming, and there's no point in fact checking him because facts don't matter.
Sure, all politicians lie, but I've never seen one lie like Trump. He'll take something that's been soundly debunked (such as this nonsense that Clinton started the birther conspiracies) and just keep repeating it no matter how many times someone points out that what he's saying isn't remotely true - it simply doesn't matter.
Helping strengthen ISIS: I'm sorry, but of the three individuals, only Donald Trump has been used in ISIS recruitment propaganda.
Bad judgement: Last time I checked, he was the only one of the three with multiple bankruptcies, had three different campaign managers in just a few months and lost nearly one billion dollars in a single year due to poor business decisions. And whatever happened to Trump Steaks, Trump Vodka and Trump University? Oh, they were all failures (if not outright frauds in the case of Trump U) - along with a whole host of other products.
Lack Stamina: Hillary Clinton has been dealing with relentless political attacks, and has been a public servant, for nearly a quarter century. She's endured hundreds of millions of dollars spent attacking and slandering her, yet here she is on the precipice of potentially becoming our next president.
Meanwhile, Trump is in the middle of one of the most epic meltdowns in political history… because he apparently can't handle even a few weeks of intense media scrutiny.
They're stupid: Two highly educated, well-spoken and immensely informed individuals who can talk specifics about policy, government and foreign affairs for hours - vs. a guy with the vocabulary of a temperamental 4th grader who says he uses "the best words - the best."
They're rigging the election: This isn't a direct attack on Obama or Clinton, but it involves them. He's claiming that some forces tied to both are behind some elaborate plot to "rig" the election against him.
However, the truth is, what Trump's been trying to do for months is push this "the system is rigged" nonsense to try to intimidate the press into backing off of him and set the stage for the litany of excuses he'll give if he loses on November 8th.
But what he's also trying to do is set the stage to where millions of Americans cast doubt on the outcome of this election because his plan to intimidate and try to control the press isn't working. He's tried to bully debate moderators into not fact-checking him; suggested his supporters should become "poll watchers" (which is a tactic used decades ago to try to keep minorities from showing up to vote); he's claimed the entirety of the media and even the polls (at least the ones not favorable to him) are all "rigged against him" because they're not telling him what he wants to hear; and he's aggressively lashing out at anyone who criticizes him hoping to deter others from doing the same thing in the future.
This is someone who's purposely trying to use his influence to strong-arm the press, undermine an election and build armies of his followers to commit blatant voter intimidation hoping he can "rig" the election in his favor.
Luckily none of this seems to be working, but it's clear that's what he's spent the last few months trying to do.
They're insiders who are part of the problem: Sorry, but a guy who admits to trying to buy off politicians doesn't get the right to claim that he's the ethical one. A big reason why our government is so inefficient and corrupt is because of people like Trump who've spent decades using their money and influence to push politicians to support legislation that benefits them at the expense of everyone else.
It takes a special kind of fool to believe that the best way to fix a problem is by handing power over to the very type of person who was largely responsible for creating it in the first place. All Trump's trying to do is cut out the middleman so he can directly influence policy to benefit his interests on his own without having to use his own money to do so.
A bigot/horrible to women: Yes, the self-admitted sexual predator and man whose company was found to have been racially discriminating against minorities has accused Clinton of being worse to woman and of being a bigot. I'm sure between the growing list of women accusing him of sexual harassment and re-tweeting white supremacist propaganda, he'll come up with a good explanation for his accusations against her.
There are plenty more, but I'll cut it off there. At this point, all I can do is laugh when I see Trump go on his tirades against Hillary Clinton and President Obama, accusing them of being exactly who he is.
The White House Mocks Donald Trump’s Suspicious Habit Of Snorting During Debates
By Jason Easley on Mon, Oct 17th, 2016 at 3:55 pm
Donald Trump’s suspicious habit of snorting his way through presidential debates was mocked by White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest after he was asked about Trump’s call for drug tests before the third presidential debate.
Earnest responded when asked about Trump’s suggestion that debate participants should be drug tested, “So, you’re telling me that the candidate who snorted his way through the first two debates is accusing the other candidate of taking drugs? That’s a curious development in the campaign.”
Press Secretary Earnest was asked what he was trying to say with his response. He answered, “Just trying to have a little fun.”
Everyone who watched the first two debates has wondered if Trump’s constant snorting means that he is on something, but what I noticed was that Trump tends to snort when he tells his most outrageous lies. The snort may less of a sign of a drug problem, and more of a liar’s tell.
It is ironic that the man who behaves like he is on drugs is accusing his opponent of being on drugs. Projection has been the one consistency of the Trump campaign. Trump claimed that the Clinton’s foundation was engaged in fraud, but it has been proven that it was Trump’s foundation that was misusing charity funds. Trump claimed Clinton is erratic and unstable when he has been a poster child of instability from the moment he stepped off of escalator at Trump Tower to declare his candidacy.
The examples of Trump’s projection are endless, but the idea that the guy who sounds and acts like he is on something accusing his opponent of being on drugs was too absurd and silly for even the White House to pass up.
Even the White House seems to be wondering what’s wrong with Donald Trump?
The picture at the bottom perfectly symbolizes the 'average' Trump supporter. Click on the video links below so you can see and hear for yourself the 'intelligence' of this typical Trump supporter. Within this imbecilic Trump supporters consciousness it simply has no idea that it is in fact functioning pretty much at the level of cretinism. Just the opposite: it actually thinks it is intelligent, smart, and has it all figured out. And this Trump supporter is pathetically, tragically, is just like the 50 MILLION OR SO OF THE AMERICAN POPULATION THAT SUPPORT THE EVIL FILTH CALLED TRUMP. USA ! USA ! USA !
Trump Supporter: Let's Take Hillary Out
By John Amato
Dan Bowman, an avid Trump supporter told a WSJ reporter at a Cincinnati rally last Thursday that if Secretary Clinton is elected, "Hillary needs to be taken out."
He continued, “If she gets into government, I’ll do everything in my power to take her out of power. If I have to be a patriot, I will.”
When the reporter asked what he meant, Bowman replied, "Take it any way you want to take it."
The reporter then asked, "That sounded like a threat."
Bowman replied, "What do you think a patriot is?”
Dan Bowman was also interviewed by the Boston Globe and the result was not pretty.
If she’s in office, I hope we can start a coup. She should be in prison or shot. That’s how I feel about it,” Dan Bowman, a 50-year-old contractor, said of Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee. “We’re going to have a revolution and take them out of office if that’s what it takes.
There’s going to be a lot of bloodshed. But that’s what it’s going to take. . . . I would do whatever I can for my country.”He then placed a Trump mask on his face and posed for pictures.
With Trump constantly telling followers like Bowman that the election is already rigged, it's not a stretch to think that his fiery words will be put into practice.
Armed insurrection, he we come.
Click to watch this imbecilic supporter of Trumps: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SoQTaM50tKg
on: Oct 18, 2016, 05:55 AM
|Started by Rad - Last post by Rad|
Pig Putin's paranoia: fear and loathing inside the Kremlin
New book by journalist who spent years interviewing dozens of sources reveals a regime where disloyalty is the biggest crime
For many people in the west, Russian politics has become synonymous with the country’s secretive president, Pig Putin, who has been known to disappear for weeks without explanation.
But Pig Putin does not work alone. As with most world leaders, he has a network of powerful allies around him – allies who both support and deceive him, according to a new book by the Russian journalist and opposition activist Mikhail Zygar.
The journalist founded the independent news network Dozhd (Rain), which was shut down by the government in 2014. He has spent years interviewing dozens of sources inside the Kremlin, and his book, All the Kremlin’s Men, paints a convincing portrait of the inside world of Russian politics, a place shrouded in conspiracy where “the biggest crime is being disloyal”.
Disputes over military action in Syria; events in Ukraine and nuclear posturing in the Baltics have left international tensions between Russia and the west at a post–cold war high, but at home Putin’s approval ratings remain strong and he is preparing to run for president again in early 2018.
So how did he get there? And what drives him forward? The Guardian asked Zygar to talk through his key findings from inside the seat of Russia’s power.
According to one of Zygar’s sources inside the Kremlin, Putin was initially reluctant to support the multibillion-dollar bid to host the Winter Olympics in Sochi in 2014.
To persuade him, his press secretary, Dmitry Peskov, is said to have arranged for a pro-Olympics advertising campaign on billboards along the motorway Putin uses to travel into Moscow.
Zygar claims radio ads were also produced, timed for when they knew Putin would be listening to the radio in his car. When Zygar asked Peskov to confirm his part in the ad campaign, the secretary didn’t deny it but said: “Sometimes we have to use tricky methods.”
The president went on to put his full support and $50bn behind the Games.
Zygar’s book lists several sources inside the government who say that Putin was so convinced that the backstabbing and politicking of the hit Netflix series House of Cards accurately mirrored western politics that he instructed his colleagues to watch it.
Zygar claims that for Putin, the scheming protagonist Frank Underwood “represents the typical American politician” – which is why he prefers to support figures such as Italy’s former prime minister Silvio Berlusconi or Donald Trump, who are more “practical” and “cynical”, says Zygar.
Russia’s decision to illegally annex Crimea, formerly part of Ukraine, was not part of a long-term strategy to “reclaim” the peninsula but was rushed through in three months, the book claims.
“No one was ready for it, nobody expected it, so it was a surprise for the Russian public who previously had no public desire for Crimea ‘coming back home’,” says Zygar.
This is in stark contrast to the short war with Georgia in 2008 over the contested republic of South Ossetia, which was preceded by months of TV programmes warning about Georgia’s aggression, he adds.
Putin and the men behind him, including the security council head Nikolai Patrushev and intelligence officer Boris Ratnikov, fully believe their own propaganda: that the US is hellbent on destroying Russia, says Zygar.
Zygar points to the time when Patrushev, one of the president’s top advisers, gave an interview to a prominent state newspaper claiming that the US was “jealous of Russia’s great natural resources”. His source? A KGB psychic who claims to have read the former US secretary of state Madeleine Albright’s mind in a trance.
The current goal of foreign policy in Ukraine is to leave everything as it is, according to a source close to Vladislav Surkov, Putin’s main adviser on the country.
Based on the information Zygar collected, he predicts that the region – caught in a tussle between the national army and pro-Russia separatists – will be left in “some sort of frozen conflict” rather than transform or develop economically.
This helps Russia’s cause because “it’s leverage that can be used against Ukraine … It cannot develop its economy. It’s always affected by civil unrest,” Zygar says.
Putin has built a personality cult around his hardman stunts over the past 15 years, the most infamous being him riding a horse topless in Siberia’s Tuva region in 2009 and doing the butterfly in a cold Siberian lake.
Zygar says the idea was to show the Russian public that Putin is “young, energetic and active ... a real man”. What they may not know is that Putin had to swim across the lake three times before the killer shot was nailed, or so the book claims.
Another reason for Putin’s hardman photoshoot, taken when he was prime minister, was to show that he was different, better and stronger than Dmitry Medvedev, who was president between 2008 and 2012.
According to Zygar’s sources inside the Kremlin, Putin wanted to be president again and convinced Medvedev to step aside in the 2011 elections by warning him that Russia could be a target of a new conspiracy organised by the US.
Putin is quoted in the book as telling Medvedev that the “the situation is hard and we could end up losing the country if leadership isn’t strong enough”. He went on to win the election in 2011 and was inaugurated in May 2012, when Medvedev became prime minister.
The most important event shaping modern political life in Russia was the staging of opposition protests in winter 2011-12, when thousands of Muscovites took to the streets to protest against the government.
According to Zygar, this left Putin with one conclusion: that his support base was no longer the middle-class intellectual elite living in the capital, but the working-class heartlands across the country, who were “more conservative, more religious, distrustful of reformers and feel more nostalgia for the Soviet period” – a legacy evident in many of Putin’s subsequent policies.
on: Oct 18, 2016, 05:50 AM
|Started by Rad - Last post by Rad|
After Sister Lucy Kurien witnessed a woman’s murder, she saved thousands of others
As India marks the first anniversary of the Delhi gang rape that rocked the nation, YES! talks with Sister Lucy Kurien — whose life was changed forever when she saw a young woman set on fire.
By Christa Hillstrom,
YES! Magazine 10/18/2016
If you sit in the slums on the outskirts of Pune in the evening, you will hear shouting and yelling from all sorts of places, Sister Lucy Kurien says of her home in South India. Much of the fighting is fueled by alcohol, and sometimes it explodes into bruises, scars, and broken bones. "The women don’t even retaliate."
It's a sound the Catholic nun from Kerala has been listening to since 1997, when she founded Maher, a shelter for survivors of domestic violence outside of Pune. In the nearly 17 years that she has been welcoming battered women and children—as well as women at risk for street violence and trafficking—Sr. Lucy has known thousands of women whose families were shattered by violence and poverty.
Moved by the destitution she first witnessed as a child in India's cities and inspired by Mother Teresa's side-by-side work with the poor in Kolkata, Sr. Lucy spent much of her youth wondering what she could do to end inequality and the violence she saw resulting from it.
Then one night, the young nun witnessed a gruesome murder that shifted the course of her life: She held a young, pregnant woman who had been doused with kerosene and lit on fire—by her husband. Just one day before, the same terrorized woman had begged Sr. Lucy for help, but there was nowhere for her to sleep in the convent.
The woman died, but Sr. Lucy's conviction that she was supposed to do something for the women of her country sprang to life that night.
According to the World Health Organisation, globally, 30 percent of women in relationships have experienced violence from an intimate partner. That's nearly one in three. And 38 percent of murders of women worldwide are committed by those partners.
"Risk factors" for becoming a perpetrator include "low education, exposure to child maltreatment or witnessing violence in the family, harmful use of alcohol, attitudes accepting of violence, and gender inequality"—all systemic issues in India and, by degrees, most of the rest of the world.
Sr. Lucy, who sat down with YES! while visiting Seattle to meet with domestic violence service providers battling similar troubles, founded Maher as a refuge for women whose poverty prevents them from being able to leave abusive homes on their own.
In the short-term, Maher provides immediate shelter, interventions, and even reconciliation. But in the long-term, the community focuses on the slow, meticulous work of transformation: upending India's systemic violence, exploitation, and segregation—of men and women, but also of rich and poor.
This week marks the one-year anniversary of the the infamous murder of a 23-year-old student on a bus in India (most widely referred to as the Delhi "gang rape," though it was ultimately a brutal murder with undertones of lynching).
The tragedy was commemorated throughout the country this week, but many Indians remain outraged and frustrated that so little progress has been made in addressing the root causes of violence against women.
Sr. Lucy understands this frustration.
Many years ago, in the days right after she witnessed the immolation, she had no idea how to channel her rage.
"I have nothing," she told her mentor, a priest. "What will I do?"
"You have love in your heart," he told her.
"But with just love, what will I do?"
Here's what she did.
Christa Hillstrom: You were born in a rural village in Kerala, where there is relatively less gender inequality than the rest of India. You moved to Mumbai at a young age. What struck you about the city, compared to where you grew up?
Sr. Lucy Kurien: We had no school where I was born at that time, so we moved to Mumbai when I was 12.
It was the first time I saw the slums.
In the village where I was coming from everybody had their home, their farm. It was a self-sufficient kind of village. I don’t think there was anyone going hungry. There was a lot of poverty in other ways, but not for food and shelter.
But then when I moved into the city, I saw all the people—the first thing was that the women were sitting on the roadside for a toilet. That shocked me. I said, "Oh my God, why are the people ..."
In those days there was no TV or anything to help me know anything about another state of India. I had never even heard about a slum.
I remember I spent a sleepless night, saying, "Why, why, why—why are they so poor? I can’t understand." Something started working within me.
Hillstrom: Over the years, did you start to find answers to that question?
Sr. Lucy: I would ask my friends, teachers, and the nuns with whom I was living. They explained to me, those people are very poor and they migrated from different parts of the country. Some things they explained.
But I said, "Why is nobody doing anything for them?"
And they said, "How much can we do, compared to the population? What do you think that we can do?"
Hillstrom: And you were around 13? It must have been a very impressionable time.
Sr. Lucy: Yes. I was brought up in a Catholic family, so when I was 19 I decided that I will become a nun.
Of course, I wanted to join Mother Teresa’s order—I even filled out my form. But my parents at that time did not allow me. They said, "It will be too strong for you."
So I joined the Holy Cross order, and afterward I understood that our sisters did not have that [Mother Teresa] type of work—they were doing mostly teaching and nursing. They also had some kind of orphanage, but not the way I was dreaming.
Hillstrom: When you were dreaming about it, what did you imagine?
Sister Lucy: I was thinking that I will be working directly with them, the poor. I will be staying with those people. At Holy Cross, I was staying with my sisters and the life was much better [than the surrounding community]. My life was not touching with the lives of the poor. We were doing work for them—not with them. I wanted my life to be with them.
Hillstrom: You felt called to be closer.
Sr. Lucy: Yes.
Hillstrom: What happened?
Sr. Lucy: I continued working there for nine years.
While I was working at the convent, a woman came to me asking for shelter. She told me that her husband was in love with another woman, and this man, she told me that he was an alcoholic. She said, "If I stay with him he will beat me. I need to go out from the house."
But where to send her was a big problem, because there in the convent we would never take a layperson. I said to myself, "What should I do to help this woman?" I knew it was a genuine story because she was weeping her eyes out. I felt bad to send her away, but I had no choice.
It so happened that that very night she and her husband must have had some fight. He poured kerosene on her and set her on fire.
This woman was seven months pregnant.
I heard the shouting because our convent was very close to the slum. So I went there, like any other onlooker, to see what was happening.
She came running. She told me, "Save me! Save me!"
Hillstrom: She came running to you?
Sr. Lucy: Yeah... Yeah. She was standing there at the same spot where she was burned. That’s when I realized, "Oh my God it’s the same woman."
With the help of the people of the slum, I tried to shift her to the hospital. It was so difficult for us to find anything, because we had no car—nobody had anything.
When I shifted her to the hospital, the doctor told me that she was already 90 percent burned because her sari had caught fire immediately. She was fully burned. And... I asked the doctor if anything could be done to save the baby ... But what he found was also a fully burned baby.
I was holding this… the fetus, they had given to me. I was wondering what I should do. I was completely devastated.
I was so angry with myself from that time onward because what I felt was that this woman who came to me—I did not help her in time. That was the guilt feeling that I was going through. So much so that as the days went by I became very angry person. All this frustration was leading into anger.
Hillstrom: What direction did your anger take?
Sr. Lucy: For no reason, I was getting angry with people who were living with me. I was never like that—never. My friends advised me, "Lucy, you should go for some counseling because you are becoming something you’re not."
I went for help to one of the priests, and he told me, "Instead of sitting down here and getting frustrated, go out and do something."
I said, "Go out and do what? I have no education, I have no money—what will I do?"
Father was very clever. He said, "But you have love in your heart. Hold on—God will show you the way."
Hillstrom: How did that happen?
Sr. Lucy: I feel like the divine worked with me and walked with me. This priest went to Germany to teach the Bhagavad Gita. An Austrian man met him and told him, "I would like to help a women’s project in India." Immediately Father thought of me because I had written several letters to him.
Hillstrom: What did your letters say?
Sr. Lucy: I had always written: "When I see a woman on the street, I am restless. When I stand next to a child who is begging, I am very unhappy." Things like that. I used to write to him what my feeling was when I would see women being harassed.
These women used to tell me their stories. I had never heard such stories because I was coming from a very secure family where I had seen my father and mother living very happily. So I couldn’t imagine that some things can exist in a family where there is love.
Then the women started telling me things: "I had no food," "He was drunk." One of the women told me that he put her hand in the rice pot where she was cooking. I couldn’t imagine a man could do that. And she said, "My children and I starved last night."
These stories were disturbing me. I used to come to the back of the convent and share what the women had told me. I said, "How can human beings go through this?"
Hillstrom: So this is what you wrote to your friend, the priest.
Sr. Lucy: Yes, and he showed the letters to the man from Austria, who came to India and saw that I really wanted to do something for the women. He saw that if there was money, I would do a good job.
He told me, before leaving, "Lucy, go ahead and start the work—I'll help you." It was my first experience with a European person.
I bought a small piece of land in Pune. Soon after buying the land, I noticed that whenever I spoke to people—wherever I was working—they had so much trust. They started giving me money—20 rupees or 50 rupees, whatever they could share. That’s the time I realized, "Oh my God, they are trusting me with their money—which means they trust me."
That helped me.
Hillstrom: Just regular people?
Sr. Lucy: Yeah, just regular people. Ordinary people from the village. Even the women who were suffering.
In 1997, we were able to open our first home. From then on, we had more than 2,400 cases coming to us.
Hillstrom: What happens when they come to you?
Sr. Lucy: Any woman who has no home can walk into our house. Sometimes women are brought by the police. Sometimes we pick them up. Suppose we see a woman lying under a tree or on the street. We go and talk to them to see why they are there.
Often they are mentally disturbed; sometimes it’s a small misunderstanding between them and their husbands, and so we counsel the husband and the women and see if they can come back together.
If that fails, then we send the women for some training, finding them jobs. Most of these women are illiterate. If women are educated and have a job, they don’t need a home like Maher. It’s because they have no work and nowhere to go that they need to come here.
Hillstrom: After hearing these thousands of stories, what issues have emerged as the biggest problems for women and families in India?
Sr. Lucy: Very often, [abuse happens] because women are not educated. In India, among the poorer class, the belief system is that educating a girl is like watering the plants in another person’s garden. She gets married and goes away. So what happens is they are pushed toward getting married, producing children, and looking out of the kitchen.
The women are treated badly because it’s a male-dominated society—the understanding, even in the women, is "I am lower; I am only worthy of looking after his children."
Hillstrom: Boys and men are clearly also an important part of the Maher community, and with your family counseling you are also reaching out to men in the wider community. Many of them are the perpetrators. You also try to understand and address what's influencing them.
I think of the four men who were sentenced to death this fall for raping and killing that woman in Delhi. Those men, who were once boys, also came from very difficult, impoverished backgrounds. They were shaped and raised by the same culture you're talking about. How do you feel about their fate?
Sr. Lucy: It’s not that Maher is against men or anything like that. What we are against is the system. I don’t like when men treat the women as a thing to control. To be used. To be raped. This system is handed down, over generations.
Killing those four men is not going to give an answer to the problem. I’m not a person for killing. I would say, put them in a place and give them a lot of counseling, prayer sessions. Make them realize their mistakes. By hanging those four men—that’s not going to be an answer. Everything has to change.
Hillstrom: You're quite an unconventional thinker. Not everyone is able to see things the way you did when you first came to Mumbai, and the way you still do today. Where do you think that came from?
Sr. Lucy: When I was little, my mother brought outcasts to our table. Once I remember a woman came to our house who was of a very low caste. My mother told me, "Go to the kitchen, take a handful of rice, and give it to that beggar woman."
So I went inside and I took the thing and I threw it to her, like that, and my mother noticed immediately. I was in a playing mode. My mother told me, "Come here," and she turned to the beggar woman and said, "Please wait."
And she said sorry to her. She made me go a second time to the kitchen, take more rice, and she said, "Can you do that with more respect?"
That made me think. Why did my mother make me do that?
Though my mother did not fight or make noise about what she was doing, these little things were there.
She was from a very upper-caste family. When she married my father and came [to his village]—he is a really simple man and he lived along with the lower-caste people—I have a feeling she must have seen the pain. They were not educated, and she was educated. They used to call her the Indira Gandhi of the village.
Many of those women used to come running to my mother. She sheltered them.
For more information on the Maher Ashram, click here.
on: Oct 18, 2016, 05:43 AM
|Started by Rad - Last post by Rad|
Orangutan orphan baby joins pack at Borneo rescue centre - video
This footage was released by the International Animal Rescue Orangutan Centre of Gatot, the youngest and smallest orangutan in its rehabilitation centre in Ketapang, West Borneo, Indonesia. Four-month-old Galot is seen joining other orangutan babies for the first time. Gatot has been at the centre since August
Click to watch: <iframe src="https://embed.theguardian.com/embed/video/world/video/2016/oct/18/orangutan-orphan-baby-joins-pack-at-borneo-rescue-centre-video" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
on: Oct 18, 2016, 05:39 AM
|Started by Rad - Last post by Rad|
The Republican controlled US Senate could block landmark HFC climate treaty, legal experts warn
A new deal to reduce the use of powerful climate-changing chemicals will require Senate approval in the US, reports Climate Central
John Upton for Climate Central, part of the Guardian Environment Network
Tuesday 18 October 2016 09.38 BST
The jubilation and relief that flowed from United Nations climate talks in Rwanda over the weekend may be short-lived in the U.S., where legal experts say the agreement risks being blocked by Republican senators.
Weary U.N. diplomats finalized a deal Saturday to phase out the use of most HFCs, which are chemicals used in refrigerators and air conditioners and by other industries. The agreement was designed to accelerate a shift to safer substitutes for some of the world’s fastest growing and worst greenhouse gases.
“We’re seeing an unparalleled momentum to tackle climate change,” said Harjeet Singh, a Delhi-based climate change expert with the nonprofit ActionAid. “The willingness to act has resulted in an enthusiastic plucking of low hanging fruits. But in order to keep people and the planet safe, we need to reach much further.”
The agreement was struck weeks before a more all-encompassing global climate deal, the Paris agreement takes legal force, following its hurried ratification in recent months by President Obama and other world leaders. Global temperatures have risen about 1°F since the 1800s, with heat-trapping air pollution making heat waves, floods and destructive storms more likely and more severe.
The Paris agreement calls on countries to voluntarily reduce their overall climate impacts, focusing heavily on electricity, clean transportation and land clearing. The voluntary nature of the agreement was accepted by other countries in part to help Obama avoid the need for lawmaker approval prior to U.S. ratification of the pact.
But American experts on international environmental law say ratifying the new HFC agreement would almost certainly require a two-thirds vote from the Senate. If enough countries formally agree to join, the new agreement could take effect in 2019.
“This is different from Paris, in that it requires ratification — and that’s concerning to me,” said Michael Wara, and expert on energy and environmental law at Stanford. “This is going to require getting Republicans to vote for it.”
Although past generations of Republican leaders, including presidents Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and George Bush Sr., championed environmental laws, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump and most Republican senators today oppose efforts to slow global warming.
Republicans currently control both chambers of Congress and they have been steadfast in their opposition to nearly all legislation involving climate change.
If Trump wins next month’s election, his campaign statements on environmental issues strongly suggest he would not pursue American ratification of the HFC agreement. But even if Hillary Clinton wins, Republicans may yet be able to block America from entering into the agreement.
“I worry about her ability to have enough cocktails with enough Republican senators to get this over the hump,” Wara said. “That’s a heavy lift.”
The U.S. State Department, which helped negotiate the HFC deal, is saying publicly that it hasn’t figured out whether the new agreement will require Senate ratification.
If America failed to ratify the agreement, it’s hard to predict how the global use of HFCs would be affected, though it may cause the leaders of other countries to balk at the idea of joining the pact, slowing momentum on climate action.
“We will need to examine the content and the form of the agreed amendment, as well as relevant practice, in order to determine the appropriate approval process,” State Department spokeswoman Emily White said in an email on Monday.
The agreement reached in the Rwandan city of Kigali on Saturday would expand the kinds of gases covered by theMontreal Protocol. That was a 1987 agreement that helped save the ozone layer by nearly eradicating the use of chemicals called CFCs. Countries and companies often complied with the agreement by switching to HFCs, which are safe for the ozone layer but contribute to global warming.
As demand for air conditioners and fridges has been growing, including in rapidly developing countries, HFCs have been escaping into the atmosphere. The HFC pollution has been helping to heat the planet — further increasing demand for air conditioning.
By limiting the use of HFCs, the new Montreal Protocol amendments could reduce global warming by 1°F by 2100. They could also drive investments in research and development, making alternative products more affordable.
“Prices are going to be dropping faster than people expect,” said Durwood Zaelke of the nonprofit Institute for Governance & Sustainable Development.
The EPA is working to force American manufacturers to find climate-friendly alternatives to HFCs. The White House has been pressuring world leaders to update the Montreal Protocol to cover climate-changing gases since early in Obama’s presidency.
In 2014, India dropped its opposition to using the Montreal Protocol for climate protections, formally embracing America’s proposal, allowing the HFC deal to be struck over the weekend. Under the terms of the new agreement, developing countries like India and Pakistan could take longer to phase out their uses of HFCs than developed countries.
If America fails to join the new agreement, developing countries may also be dissuaded from joining, threatening to scuttle its potential success.
“The amendment would, in fact, require a two-thirds vote of the Senate for the U.S. to join,” said University of Virginia professor John Setear, pointing to provisions in the Vienna Convention, a 1961 agreement dealing with treaties that underpins the Montreal Protocol.
“The president is going to have to go to the Senate or face a lot of political heat,” Setear said. “This amendment has been sold as a climate change measure, not an ozone layer measure. The Senate hates climate change measures.”
on: Oct 18, 2016, 05:36 AM
|Started by Rad - Last post by Rad|
Green subsidies to push UK energy bills higher than planned
National Audit Office says household bills will be £17 higher annually than planned by 2020 due to the installation rate of windfarms and solar panels
Tuesday 18 October 2016 06.01 BST
Household energy bills in four years’ time will be £17 higher annually than planned because of the number of windfarms and solar panels installed in recent years, according to the government’s spending watchdog.
The amount of money levied on bills each year to pay for renewable energy subsidies is capped under a system called the levy control framework, to limit costs for consumers and businesses. The cap was set at £7.1bn for 2020/21, but government officials warned last year it was on track to hit £9.1bn because so much green energy was being deployed.
The National Audit Office revised this down on Tuesday to £8.7bn, or £110 of what is forecast be a £991 average annual household bill by 2020, up £17 on what it would have been if the cap was met.
But energy department officials were quick to point out that the new forecast is within the 20% of ‘headroom’ that is allowed over the cap.
The NAO said the framework had failed to provide value for money because the expected overshoot meant there was now little money to support further new renewables up to 2020. Spending more later would have been more cost-effective because the price of building green energy is coming down, the watchdog said.
Sir Amyas Morse, auditor general of the NAO, said: “The levy control framework has helped make some of the impacts of renewable energy policies on consumers clearer. But government’s forecasting, allocation of the budget and approach to dealing with uncertainty has been poor, and so has not supported value for money.”
In a report published on Tuesday, the NAO blamed the expected overspend on the energy department being slow to see that more renewable energy was being deployed than expected because of the subsidies. Offshore windfarms have generated more electricity than expected, too. Officials were also accused of failing to gather market intelligence frequently enough.
But lower than expected fossil fuel prices had also played a small role, because the most recent subsidy schemes for windfarms – contracts for difference – pay their operators a top-up payment above the price of wholesale electricity, which has been lower than was forecast.
“The department took too long to discover that it was on course to exceed the framework cap,” said the report. “One reason for increased forecast costs was the global slump in fossil fuel prices, a development which energy market experts in general were not expecting.”
The NAO said the Department of Energy and Climate Change, now part of an enlarged business department, had got better at managing the framework since 2015. The future of the framework and support for green energy beyond 2020-21 is not yet clear, but energy experts have said they hope for clarity in the autumn statement.
The report also said that the cost of paying gas and coal power station operators to provide standby power during the winter - under the ‘capacity market’ - would account for an increasing cost on bills. The scheme, plus a levy to make the draughtiest homes more efficient and the cost of fitting smart meters is expected to make up £54 of an average household bill in 2020, though these are not covered by the levy control framework.
A spokesman for the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy said: “Our top priority is ensuring that families and businesses have a secure, affordable, clean energy supply. Our actions have reduced projected costs on the levy control framework by around £520m, and we continue to make further improvements to deliver value for money for consumers.”