THE CORPORATION

The modern day corporation is the most powerful economic institution in the world. Able to influence and dictate the social and economic policies of governments around the world. But how did this situation arise and what is the fundamental nature of the corporation? In this documentary the Canadian law professor and legal theorist Joel Bakan analyzes and dissects the 150 year legal construct of the corporation as a 'person'. The corporation is not a normal 'person', it is a 'person' devoid of any moral or ethical considerations, devoid of any empathy or mercy for its victims. It is person geared towards the pursuit of one objective, the bottom line.
The modern day corporation has all the legal rights of a real person but cannot be held liable in the same way. As Baron Thurlow put it ''They have no soul to save, and they have no body to incarcerate''

Some quotes from the documentary:

'all publicly traded corporations have been structured through a series of legal decisions to have a peculiar and disturbing characteristic. They are required by law to place the financial interests of their owners above competing interests. In fact the corporation is legally bound to put it’s bottom line ahead of everything else. Even the public good. '

'One day we found a big pile of Nike’s internal pricing documents. Nike assigns a time frame to each operation. The don’t talk about minutes. They break the time frame into ten thousandths of a second. You get to the bottom of all 22 operations to give the workers 6.6 minutes to make the shirt. It’s 70 cents an hour in the Dominican Republic that 6.6 minutes equals 8 cents. These are Nike’s documents..that means the wages come to 3 tenths of 1 percent of retail price. This is the reality. It’s the science of exploitation'

'..the corporation remains as it was at the time of its origins, as a mad business institution in the middle of the nineteenth century, and legally designated “person” designed to valorize self interest and invalidate moral concern. Most people would find its “personality” abnormal, even psychopathic, in a human being, yet curiously we accept it in society’s most powerful institutions.'







The link to the rest of the documentary: http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=FA50FBC214A6CE87

Manfred Max Neef describes Useful Economists versus Speculative Mathematicians (an important distinction indeed)

AMY GOODMAN: What do you think we need to change?
MANFRED MAX-NEEF: Oh, almost everything. We are simply, dramatically stupid. We act systematically against the evidences we have. We know everything that should not be done. There’s nobody that doesn’t know that. Particularly the big politicians know exactly what should not be done. Yet they do it. After what happened since October 2008, I mean, elementally, you would think what? That now they’re going to change. I mean, they see that the model is not working. The model is even poisonous, you know? Dramatically poisonous. And what is the result, and what happened in the last meeting of the European Union? They are more fundamentalist now than before. So, the only thing you know that you can be sure of, that the next crisis is coming, and it will be twice as much as this one. And for that one, there won’t be enough money anymore. So that will be it. And that is the consequence of systematical human stupidity. 
AMY GOODMAN: So, to avoid another catastrophe, collision, if you were in charge, what would you say has to happen? 
MANFRED MAX-NEEF: First of all, we need cultured economists again, who know the history, where they come from, how the ideas originated, who did what, and so on and so on; second, an economics now that understands itself very clearly as a subsystem of a larger system that is finite, the biosphere, hence economic growth as an impossibility; and third, a system that understands that it cannot function without the seriousness of ecosystems. And economists know nothing about ecosystems. They don’t know nothing about thermodynamics, you know, nothing about biodiversity or anything. I mean, they are totally ignorant in that respect. And I don’t see what harm it would do, you know, to an economist to know that if the beasts would disappear, he would disappear as well, because there wouldn’t be food anymore. But he doesn’t know that, you know, that we depend absolutely from nature. But for these economists we have, nature is a subsystem of the economy. I mean, it’s absolutely crazy

CIA drones killed U.S. citizens in Pakistan, book says

This article from the Washington Post discusses Bob Woodward's new book and reveals more about the reality that sovereignty no longer matters to the U.S. Empire anyway.  Check out the quote attributed to President Zardari of Pakistan below.... now that is the type of puppet the U.S. just loves to promote, such a bastion of democracy???
Source

CIA drones killed “many Westerners, including some U.S. passport holders” in Pakistan’s tribal area during the George W. Bush administration, the new book by Bob Woodward says.

Woodward,a longtime Washington Post journalist, writes in "Obama's Wars" that then-CIA Director Gen. Michael Hayden disclosed the killings to Pakistani president Asif Ali Zardari during a meeting in New York on Nov. 12, 2008. Hayden was succeeded by Leon J. Panetta in 2009.

Hayden and his deputy, Stephen Kappes, had gone to meet with Zardari, elected only two months earlier, to gauge his reaction to the drone strikes, which were generating widespread protests in Pakistan.

According to Woodward’s unattributed account of the meeting, Zardari said, “Kill the seniors. Collateral damage worries you Americans. It does not worry me.”

Hayden had told Zardari that “many Westerners, including some U.S. passport holders, had been killed five days earlier on the Kam Sham training camp in the tribal area of North Warziristan,” Woodward writes. “But the CIA would not reveal the particulars due to the implications under American law.”

“A top secret CIA map detailing the attacks had been given to the Pakistanis,” Woodward continues. “Missing from it was the alarming fact about the American deaths … The CIA was not going to elaborate.”

The CIA declined to comment for the record or make Kappes, who resigned in April, available for comment. Hayden did not respond to requests for comment.

On Friday the Justice Department faces a deadline to respond to a suit by two human rights groups challenging the Obama administration’s right to kill U.S. citizen Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical proselytizer based in Yemen.

Have the International Financiers Decided to Rule Out an Attack on Iran?

Promulagating Manmade Laws - By Shaykh Uthaymeen

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly:
Promulgating man-made laws that are contrary to the rulings of Allah and His Messenger concerning matters of blood, honour and wealth, is an act of major kufr which puts one beyond the pale of Islam. There is no doubt whatsoever concerning that, and there is no difference of opinion concerning it among the Muslim scholars. Promulgating such laws is competing with Allah, may He be exalted, in His rule and is going against Him in His laws. Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): “Or have they partners with Allaah (false gods) who have instituted for them a religion which Allaah has not ordained?” [al-Shoora 42:21].

And Allah says concerning obedience to one who permits dead meat (interpretation of the meaning):

“Eat not (O believers) of that (meat) on which Allaah’s Name has not been pronounced (at the time of the slaughtering of the animal), for sure it is Fisq (a sin and disobedience of Allaah). And certainly, the Shayaateen (devils) do inspire their friends (from mankind) to dispute with you, and if you obey them [by making Al‑Maytah (a dead animal) legal by eating it], then you would indeed be Mushrikoon (polytheists); [because they (devils and their friends) made lawful to you to eat that which Allaah has made unlawful to eat and you obeyed them by considering it lawful to eat, and by doing so you worshipped them; and to worship others besides Allaah is polytheism]”

[al-An‘aam 6:121].

And Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Have you not seen those (hypocrites) who claim that they believe in that which has been sent down to you, and that which was sent down before you, and they wish to go for judgement (in their disputes) to the Taaghoot (false judges) while they have been ordered to reject them. But Shaytaan (Satan) wishes to lead them far astray.

61. And when it is said to them: ‘Come to what Allaah has sent down and to the Messenger (Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم),’ you (Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) see the hypocrites turn away from you (Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) with aversion”

[al-Nisa’ 4:60-61].

If this is the ruling of Allah concerning the one who wants to refer for judgement to false judges, then how about the false judge himself who promulgates laws instead of Allah.

How can legislation that is contrary to the laws of Allah not be kufr, when it inevitably implies permitting that which is forbidden and forbidding that which is permitted, or giving the legislators the right to do that, so they have the right to permit whatever they want and to forbid whatever they want; whatever the majority agrees upon must be carried out and the one who goes against it is punished and criminalised. This is the ultimate kufr.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: If a person regards as permissible that on which there is scholarly consensus that it is forbidden, or regards as forbidden that on which there is scholarly consensus that it is permitted, or he alters a law on which there is consensus, then he is a kaafir and apostate, according to the consensus of the fuqaha’.

End quote from Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa, 3/267

Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said: The one who forsakes the law that was revealed to Muhammad ibn ‘Abd-Allah, the Seal of the Prophets (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and refers for judgement to any other law that has been abrogated, has committed an act of kufr, so how about the one who refers for judgement to al-Yaasa and gives it precedence? The one who does that is a kaafir according to the consensus of the Muslims.

End quote from al-Bidaayah wa’l-Nihaayah, 13/139.

Al-Yaasa (also known as al-Yaasiq) refers to the laws of the Tatar Genghis Khan, who forced the people to refer to them for judgement.

Undoubtedly the one who promulgates laws himself commits a greater act of kufr and is more misguided than one who refers to them for judgement.

Al-‘Allaamah Muhammad al-Ameen al-Shanqeeti (may Allah have mercy on him) said: From verses such as that in which Allah says (interpretation of the meaning) “and He makes none to share in His Decision and His Rule” [al-Kahf 18:26], it may be understood that the followers of those who promulgate laws other than those which Allah has ordained are associating others with Allah (shirk). This understanding is explained clearly in other verses, such as the verse which speaks of those who follow the laws of the Shaytaan in permitting dead meat, claiming that it has been killed by Allah [and thus should be permitted]:

“Eat not (O believers) of that (meat) on which Allaah’s Name has not been pronounced (at the time of the slaughtering of the animal), for sure it is Fisq (a sin and disobedience of Allaah). And certainly, the Shayaateen (devils) do inspire their friends (from mankind) to dispute with you, and if you obey them [by making Al‑Maytah (a dead animal) legal by eating it], then you would indeed be Mushrikoon (polytheists)”

[al-An‘aam 6:121].

Here Allah clearly states that they would be mushrikoon by obeying them. This is associating others with Allah in terms of obedience and following laws that are contrary to that which Allah has ordained -- which is what is meant by worshipping the Shaytaan in the verse in which Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Did I not command you, O Children of Adam, that you should not worship Shaytaan (Satan). Verily, he is a plain enemy to you.

61. And that you should worship Me [Alone Islamic Monotheism, and set up not rivals, associate‑gods with Me]. That is the Straight Path”

[Ya-Seen 36:60-61].

And Allah tells us that His Prophet Ibraaheem said (interpretation of the meaning):

“ ‘O my father! Worship not Shaitân (Satan). Verily, Shaitân (Satan) has been a rebel against the Most Gracious (Allaah)’”

[Maryam 19:44].

And Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“They (all those who worship others than Allaah) invoke nothing but female deities besides Him (Allaah), and they invoke nothing but Shaytaan (Satan), a persistent rebel!”

[al-Nisa’ 4:117], i.e., they do not worship anything but a devil, i.e., by following his laws. Hence Allah calls those whom they obey in the sins that they made attractive to them “partners”, as in the verse (interpretation of the meaning) “And so to many of the Mushrikoon (polytheists) their (Allaah’s so‑called) ‘partners’ have made fair-seeming the killing of their children, in order to lead them to their own destruction and cause confusion in their religion” [al-An ‘am 6:137]. The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) explained this to ‘Adiyy ibn Haatim (may Allah be pleased with him) when he asked him about the verse in which Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): “They (Jews and Christians) took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allaah” [al-Tawbah 9:31]. He explained that they permitted to them that which Allah has forbidden and they forbade to them that which Allah has permitted, and they [the people] followed them in that; that is how they took them as lords.

One of the clearest proofs concerning that is the fact that in Soorat al-Nisa’, Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, mentioned those who want to refer for judgement to something other than the laws prescribed by Him and wonders at their claim to be believers, because their claim to be believers even though they want to refer for judgement to false judges shows that they have reached a level of lying which is astounding. That is what Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Have you not seen those (hypocrites) who claim that they believe in that which has been sent down to you, and that which was sent down before you, and they wish to go for judgement (in their disputes) to the Taaghoot (false judges) while they have been ordered to reject them. But Shaytaan (Satan) wishes to lead them far astray”

[al-Nisa’ 4:60].

From the divinely revealed texts that we have quoted, it becomes very clear to everyone that with regard to those who follow man-made laws promulgated by the Shaytaan on the lips of his supporters which are contrary to that which Allah has prescribed on the lips of His Messengers (blessings and peace of Allah be upon them), there is no doubt that they are kaafirs and mushriks, except for the one whom Allah has blinded to the light of Revelation and left to go astray.

And he said:

As for the legal system that is contrary to the laws prescribed by the Creator of heaven and earth, ruling according to it constitutes disbelief in the Creator of heaven and earth, such as the claim that giving precedence to the male over the female in inheritance is not fair and it is necessary to make them equal in inheritance, and the claim that plural marriage is unjust, or that divorce is unfair to the woman, and that stoning, cutting off the hand and so on are barbaric acts that should not be done to people, and so on.

Making this kind of system rule the lives of people in society and their wealth, honour, lineage, reason and religion, is disbelief in the Creator of heaven and earth and a transgression against the divine system prescribed by the One Who created all things and Who knows best what is in their best interests; may He be glorified and exalted far above having any lawgiver besides Him.

“Or have they partners with Allaah (false gods) who have instituted for them a religion which Allaah has not ordained?”

[al-Shoora 42:21]

“Say (O Muhammad to these polytheists): ‘Tell me, what provision Allaah has sent down to you! And you have made of it lawful and unlawful.’ Say (O Muhammad): ‘Has Allaah permitted you (to do so), or do you invent a lie against Allaah?’”

[Yoonus 10:59]

“Say: ‘Verily, those who invent a lie against Allaah will never be successful’”

[Yoonus 10:69].

End quote from Adwa’ al-Bayaan, commentary on the verse (interpretation of the meaning): “and He makes none to share in His Decision and His Rule” [al-Kahf 18:26].

End quote from Majma‘ al-Fatawa wa Rasaa’il al-Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, 6/161.

"A Decade of Insanity"

Bob Prechter is a consumate "Bear" but the statistical tool he uses here, namely analyzing opinions and sentiment with regard to the futures markets, documents a scary economic reality. In fact, while in the short term free money from the Fed and stimulus may produce profits and prevent catastrophe, it looks like everyone has very bearish perspectives when it comes to the long term and that is across assett class. It is an important argument to understand as economics becomes more and more about perception and less abuot fundamentals.  Someday, fundamentals bite and we are witnessing the bankruptcy of the global economy overtime.  Unless we build an alternaitve and mobilize now, when gradual declien culminates in crescendo and becomes cataclysim, saying "I told you so" will mean absolutely nothing.

Sweden's Far Right Gains Seat in Parliament

Voters in Sweden’s Parliamentary Elections yesterday gave 5.7 percent of the vote to Sweden's Far Right Social Democratic Party.  This will give the party 20 seats in Sweden's Parliament. The political platform they ran on was largely anti-immigration and especially addressed the issue of Muslim immigrants.  Below is a commercial run in order to call attention to Burqa-clad social service recipients taking from grandma's pension. It is with near certainty, that the future will see a rise in right-wing political representation in nearly all Western European nations. Part of this rise will certainly be associated with rising Muslim populations and economic decline.  In global conditions, that are becoming eerily reminiscent of the World War II era, one must wonder if the path is being paved in the West for a return to old fashioned fascism. 

Niall Ferguson - Will Debt Trigger the Collapse of the Anglo-American Empire?

Niall Ferguson discusses the end of empires and the economics of debt repayment overtaking defense spending as a potential cause of withdrawal for imperialist exercise of power. He goes through a nice history here of imperialist practice and then discusses the implications of this point that are starting to face the U.S. today.

As we see the impossibility of a world dominated by America with everybody either falling into line with policies that serve U.S. national interests or getting obliterated by the military might that backs the American Empire's soft power, we must recognize that empires have never recognized that it is no longer feasible to maintain empire, contrary to what many scholars of international relations would have us believe. Historians like Chalmers Johnson may cite the British as an example for the U.S., an example of an empire that accepted it could no longer maintain its overseas operations and colonialism and withdrew peacefully into a sovereign nation state. However, this concept of the history of British Empire is in many ways false.

The two World Wars were initiated largely as a result of the necessary manipulations that must occur in international relations when there is an imperialist power. Germany's rise prior to WWI initiated heavy behind-the-scenes manipulations largely influenced by the British power and WWII witnessed fascism backed by international financier and corporate Anglo-powers built in order to take on the Russian threat turn unpredictably towards Western Europe. It was perhaps this strategic blunder that ended British imperialist divide-and-conquer rulership, but with the rise of American power in the post World War II era the industrial and military might of America was to be used in order to protect the speculative financial power of the City of London and its creation within America on Wall Street. Thus the British Empire never ended, it became the Anglo-American Empire.

Out of the ashes of World War II rose a neo-imperialism that has used indigenous rather than foreign colonial masters, international financial institutions, and American military intervention to create a world that still sees the majority of the southern hemispheres natural resources go to the Western Europe and America. The machinations for another World War are being set forth before our eyes as a result of the collapse of the financialized, imperialist order and even as the sovereign nation state status of America is destroyed we must know that the real enemy of humanity is a set of principles and actors that embody and encompass them, not the American nation state.

We must rightfully enter a war with the ideology that is imperialism, the economics of Pharaoh; where religion is wealth, power and satanic passion for the life of this world. In failing to recognize that Niall Ferguson, as a realist and Harvard/Oxford defender of “benefit of empire” (as if there is such a thing), fails to grasp that the world today can only be understood by looking at ideology. Seeing the world through a lens of nation states that serve their own interests prevents one from truly understanding that the American Empire is not one country's arrogance forced on the world through a series of private influences that span the globe. The American Empire is a truly global endeavor. While the bankruptcy of its military means it may not continue in long protracted wars that does not rule out the possibility of creating World War III in order to preserve Western civilization’s domination. Therefore, this lecture and the lecturer are important to listen to, but only in so far as they help to create an antithetical Islamic solution for the global empire today will the world be able to work its way from underneath the shackles of imperialist control.

For an important historical breakdown of the efforts of the British Empire to maintain their imperialism even after realizing that British might was no longer suitable for their cause please read Carol Quigley's book published posthumously in 1981.... the book was written in the 1940's but captured a pretty good snapshot of the mechanisms for power and control that went on to infiltrate America and create the conditions for indigenous imperialism there today. The pdf is below, and these themes will become all the important at islampolicy.com as we build our delivery capacities and develop increased conversations here over time. Please take time to watch, listen and read to the material on this site in the meantime as we prepare to initiate the discourse that will contribute to Islamic resistance to the satanic imperialist mechanisms that govern the world today and substitute them with divine laws and liberation based on obedience and understanding in submission to Allah and the Prophet Muhammad (saws).

Carol Quiqley Anglo-American Establishment 285p

Crisis group report: Drums of War, Israel and the "Axis of Resistance"

The following is a report by Crisis group. The report (read HERE) looks at the geopolitical interplay between Israel,Syria, Iran, the Lebanese state, Hezbollah and other regional actors.

One important highlight is that the report points out that any future war between Israel and Hezbollah is likely to be more intense, with greater numbers of civilian casualties and greater possibility of regionalisation.

"Four years after the last war, the situation in the Levant is
paradoxical. It is exceptionally quiet and uniquely dangerous,
both for the same reason. The build-up in military
forces and threats of an all-out war that would spare neither
civilians nor civilian infrastructure, together with the
worrisome prospect of its regionalisation, are effectively
deterring all sides. Today, none of the parties can soberly
contemplate the prospect of a conflict that would be uncontrolled,
unprecedented and unscripted."

Dahiya doctrine

In the aftermath of the 2006 war the Israeli Government established the Winograd commission. The commsion concluded that Israel failed to achieve a military victory, that in their words " the 2nd Lebanon war [was] … a serious missed opportunity. Israel initiated a long war, which ended without its clear military victory. A semi-military organisation of a few thousand men resisted, for a few weeks, the strongest army in the Middle East, which enjoyed full air superiority and size and technology advantages. The barrage of rockets aimed at Israel’s civilian population lasted throughout the war, and the IDF did not provide an effective response to it"

Furthermore despite that deaths of around 1200 civilians (many of whom were children), and billions of dollars worth of damage to Lebanon's infrastructure, the commission added Israeli military had not used sufficient force, and that Israel deterrence capability required in future wars a greater disproportionate use of force:

"Israel cannot survive in this region, and cannot live in it in peace or at least non-war, unless people in Israel itself and in its surroundings believe that Israel has the political and military leadership, military capabilities, and social robustness that will allow her to deter those of its neighbors who wish to harm her, and to prevent them – if necessary through the use of military force – from achieving their goal"

These conclusion lead to the development of the 'Dahiya doctrine' (Dahiya refers to the southern Beirut neighborhood that was devastated by Israeli air strikes in 2006). This new doctrine is best explanied by quoting Major General Eizencourt, head of Israel’s Northern Command.

"What happened to the Dahiya neighbourhood... will happen to each village from which Israel is fired on. We will apply disproportionate force and inflict huge damage and destruction …. The next war must be decided quickly, aggressively, and without seeking international
approval …. Hizbollah understands very well that firing from villages will lead to their destruction."

The report is well worth read as it provides the reader with lot of information regarding the political situation and the possibility of war breaking out in the near future.