April 6, 2013 - The Constantine Report    
Image
March 5th 2020 12

Are you using the best credit card when ordering food for delivery?

The key to more success is to have a lot of pillows. Always remember in the jungle there’s a lot of they in there, after you will make it to paradise. Egg whites, turkey sausage, wheat toast, water.

Continue reading
Image
March 5th 2020 12

Are you using the best credit card when ordering food for delivery?

The key to more success is to have a lot of pillows. Always remember in the jungle there’s a lot of they in there, after you will make it to paradise. Egg whites, turkey sausage, wheat toast, water.

Continue reading
Image
March 5th 2020 12

Are you using the best credit card when ordering food for delivery?

The key to more success is to have a lot of pillows. Always remember in the jungle there’s a lot of they in there, after you will make it to paradise. Egg whites, turkey sausage, wheat toast, water.

Continue reading
Image
March 5th 2020 12

Are you using the best credit card when ordering food for delivery?

The key to more success is to have a lot of pillows. Always remember in the jungle there’s a lot of they in there, after you will make it to paradise. Egg whites, turkey sausage, wheat toast, water.

Continue reading
Image
March 5th 2020 12

Are you using the best credit card when ordering food for delivery?

The key to more success is to have a lot of pillows. Always remember in the jungle there’s a lot of they in there, after you will make it to paradise. Egg whites, turkey sausage, wheat toast, water.

Continue reading
Image
March 5th 2020 12

Are you using the best credit card when ordering food for delivery?

The key to more success is to have a lot of pillows. Always remember in the jungle there’s a lot of they in there, after you will make it to paradise. Egg whites, turkey sausage, wheat toast, water.

Continue reading

Barrick Gold (CIA/Mafia Front) Co-Chairman Paid Staggering $17-million in 2012, as Company gets Generous with Executives

This is a modified py-6 that occupies the entire horizontal space of its parent.

” … Mr. Thornton is familiar with high compensation, as he is a former president of Goldman Sachs. He also has very close business ties in China, a key source of capital for the mining sector and a region where Mr. Munk wants to grow Barrick’s footprint. … “

Also see: RUPERT MURDOCH’S MAFIA/COCAINE CONNECTION, ADNAN KHASHOGGI AND BARRICK GOLD

“Barrick Gold Chairman Peter Munk Defends Augusto Pinochet & Gang Rape in New Guinea”

TORONTO — When John Thornton [a director at Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp.] accepted the role of co-chairman at Barrick Gold Corp. last year, the company certainly showed him its gratitude.

Mr. Thornton was paid a staggering US$17-million in 2012, his first year with Barrick, according to a proxy circular filed by the company. That includes an US$11.9-million “special cash sign-on payment” for him to buy Barrick shares on the open market.

The size of this signing bonus appears to be unprecedented for a director in Corporate Canada, according to governance experts. It is one of many generous payouts Barrick made to officers and directors last year, even though its stock price plunged 24.6%.

“For a director, that [signing bonus] would be unheard of, or astronomical, or whatever kind of word you want to use,” said Stephen Griggs, head of Underwood Capital Partners and the former executive director of the Canadian Coalition of Good Governance.

“For a director, that [signing bonus] would be unheard of, or astronomical, or whatever kind of word you want to use … “

However, he noted that Barrick’s chairman is really an executive chairman, as Peter Munk takes a very hands-on role. Mr. Thornton, 59, is viewed as Mr. Munk’s likely successor, and is being treated like an executive rather than a director.

“In the capacity of an executive of the company, it’s certainly also a very high number. But keep in mind that Barrick has a long history of paying its very senior executives very large amounts of money,” Mr. Griggs said.

Other Barrick leaders also received hefty payouts in 2012. Mr. Munk’s salary increased 37% from 2011, and his total compensation was nearly US$4.3-million. Former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, who has been a Barrick director since 1993, received $2.5-million (including a $1-million bonus) as he took on a new role as senior advisor of global affairs for the company. And former CEO Aaron Regent received US$12-million, mostly from a generous severance package after he was fired last June.

It was a much rougher year for Barrick’s shareholders. The world’s biggest gold miner reported a net loss of US$670-million after taking a US$3.8-billion writedown on the Lumwana mine, acquired in the vastly overpriced takeover of Equinox Minerals Ltd. Toronto-based Barrick cut or deferred US$4-billion of capital spending and made a commitment to focus on investor returns going forward.

Mr. Thornton is familiar with high compensation, as he is a former president of Goldman Sachs. He also has very close business ties in China, a key source of capital for the mining sector and a region where Mr. Munk wants to grow Barrick’s footprint. “We need someone with the drive, the ambition, the ability, the international experience and the contacts that John can offer,” he said in a prepared statement.

John Ing, president and gold analyst at Maison Placements Canada, said the Barrick board is very “Peter-Centric” and will need a broader overhaul as Mr. Munk, 85, approaches his retirement. Mr. Thornton’s appointment is just one step in that process.

“As far as John Thornton’s compensation goes, if he or anybody can turn around Barrick, it’s miniscule if they are successful,” Mr. Ing said.

Mr. Thornton was appointed to the board in February 2012 and was named co-chairman on June 6, the same day Mr. Regent was fired and Jamie Sokalsky was named CEO.

In addition to the US$11.9-million signing bonus, Mr. Thornton’s compensation included US$1.4-million in salary, a “one-time lump sum” payment of US$1.4-million for his services as co-chairman, an annual performance incentive payment of US$1.4-million, and a special award of restricted share units worth $2-million. His base salary for 2013 is US$2.5-million.

http://business.financialpost.com/2013/03/27/barrick-co-chairman-paid-staggering-us17-million-in-2012-as-company-gets-generous-with-executives/

” … The then-president of Brooklyn College, Harry D. Gideonse, believed he was fighting a just war against communism. He stripped professors of tenure, fired instructors and employees, and barred meetings of ‘un-Americans; on campus. … “

What Academic Freedom?

Marjorie Heins Priests of Our Democracy: The Supreme Court, Academic Freedom and the Anti-Communist Purge (New York University Press, 2013)

Today, we take the concept of “academic freedom” for granted. In February 2013, city officials and Zionist groups sought to prevent a talk at Brooklyn College about the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (B.D.S.) movement against Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories. 

Mayor Bloomberg denounced efforts to prevent the talk in no uncertain terms: “If you want to go to a university where the government decides what kind of subjects are fit for discussion, I suggest you apply to a school in North Korea,” Bloomberg said at a press conference. In the face of the mayor’s rant, the college’s president, Karen L. Gould, held firm and the talk took place.

A half-century earlier it was a very different climate. The then-president of Brooklyn College, Harry D. Gideonse, believed he was fighting a just war against communism. He stripped professors of tenure, fired instructors and employees, and barred meetings of “un-Americans” on campus. For him, like many other elected officials and education administrators, the key question was simple: Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?”

Marjorie Heins’s latest book, Priests of Our Democracy: The Supreme Court, Academic Freedom and the Anti-Communist Purge, sheds light on how the so-called second Red Scare played out within the educational system, particularly at New York City colleges and public schools. Heins, a civil liberties attorney and academic, heads the Free Expression Policy Project. Her book’s title comes from Justice Felix Frankfurter who, in a 1952 Supreme Court case, Wieman v. Updegraff, wrote that teachers were “the priests of our democracy” because their task is “to foster those habits of open-mindedness and critical inquiry which alone make for responsible citizens.”

Following World War I, the U.S. witnessed the first Red Scare, one marked by the Palmer Raids and the deportation of about 500 “aliens,” including Emma Goldman and Alexander Berkman. In the wake of World War II and the cold war, the demand for loyalty reached unprecedented levels. This was the era of Joseph McCarthy, the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) and the Hollywood 10 trials. The Scare was especially virulent in New York.

In 1947, the Labor Management Act (better known as the Taft-Hartley) law was adopted, requiring federal employees and members of labor unions covered by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) to sign a loyalty oath. The oath swore union members to fidelity to the U.S. government and declared that they were not members of a group on the Attorney General’s List of Subversive Organizations. Failure to comply could lead to the union’s decertification and the union member’s dismissal. Neither First nor Fifth Amendment protections were afforded those accused of being communists. By 1956, 42 states and 2,000 county and city governments had adopted similar provisions. Heins details how the law was implemented with a vengeance in New York.

Loyalty oaths have a long and disquieting history in the U.S. As Heins explains, “they kept resurfacing, especially in times of political uncertainty.” Such “uncertainty” marked the second Red Scare—as well as the Civil War, World War I, and the Depression, periods during which both federal and state/local officials used oaths to buttress the call for patriotism.

In 1949, New York state legislators adopted the Feinberg Law to block “subversive propaganda” from being “disseminated among children in their tender years.” It required all local boards of education to dismiss any teacher having committed “treasonable or seditious acts or utterances” or for belonging to an organization advocating the overthrow of the government by “force, violence or any unlawful means.” Over 1,000 teachers were targeted. The Act was not found unconstitutional until 1967.

New York City reinforced state provisions with its very onerous section 903 of the City Charter. It stated that the Board of Education could fire anyone for “insubordination” or for refusing to answer questions pertaining to one’s political beliefs, thus prohibiting employees from seeking protection against self-incrimination. Many simply resigned to avoid the humiliation of a very public redbaiting campaign.

Heins’s book is a story in two parts. One part is a history of the great American fear, the legal and political anti-communist tyranny of the cold war decades; the other story is that of the human response to such fear, including the remarkable stories of educators who fought injustice, including Irving Adler, Oscar Shaftel, Vera Shlakman, George Starbuck, and Harry Keyishian.

The Warren Court (1953-1969), most remembered for its 1954 landmark Brown v. Board of Education decision, also brought change with regard to loyalty oaths and educators. On June 17, 1957, a day some labeled “Red Monday,” the Court ruled against loyalty oaths in four cases. These decisions marked the turning point in the anti-communist hysteria gripping the nation. As Justice Earl Warren wrote, “To impose any straitjacket upon the intellectual leaders in our colleges and universities would imperil the future of our nation.”

Heins is a cautious analyst, knowing that the freedoms extended by the Warren Court could be pulled back by later decisions, especially given the strict conservatives who have been appointed by Republican presidents. She concludes her valuable study detailing how, over the last half-century, academic freedom continues to be challenged by local officials. Most remarkable, Heins notes, was that “post-9/11 censorship was not nearly as pervasive and deeply rooted as the anti-subversive purges of the 1950s.” Except for a few isolated incidents in which local officials assailed anti-war teach-ins, educators were not targeted in post-9/11 “anti-terrorism” loyalty campaigns.

Priests of Our Democracy, along with Clarence Taylor’s complementary study, Reds at the Blackboard: Communism, Civil Rights, and the New York City Teachers Union (Columbia, 2011), serve as a reminder that Americans can’t take First Amendment rights for granted. Both authors document how academic freedom and other forms of expression remain terrains of political conflict.

About the Author

DAVID ROSEN is author of Sex Scandal America: Politics & the Ritual of Public Shaming, writes the Media Current blog for Filmmaker, and regularly contributes to AlterNet, CounterPunch, and the Huffington Post. Check out www.DavidRosenWrites.com. He can be reached at drosennyc@verizon.net.

http://www.brooklynrail.org/2013/04/books/what-academic-freedom

The Nazis systematically persecuted artists whose work they did not approve of, denouncing it as “degenerate art.” A new exhibition shows how the disastrous consequences of the campaign can still be felt today.

Surveying the artworks in the exhibition “Art in Berlin 1933-1938: Berated, Banned and Burned,” it’s not immediately obvious why Nazi officials so vehemently disapproved of them.

There’s Anne Ratowski’s sober “Kitchen Still Life with Fish,” picturing four fish spread across a wooden board alongside a small knife and eggs in a bowl. With its reflections and subtle plays of light, it looks almost like an Old Master painting.

It wasn’t Ratowski’s painterly technique that the National Socialists objected to, but the fact that she was Jewish and affiliated with a left-wing group of artists. That’s why, after the Nazi’s seizure of power in 1933, she found it increasingly difficult to exhibit her work. In the end she left Germany and fell into obscurity – a bitter triumph for the Nazis.

Arbitrary judgment of artworks

The exhibition at the Berlinische Galerie, which runs through August 12, is part of a larger project organized by the city of Berlin in 2013, entitled “Diversity Destroyed: Berlin 1933-1938-1945.”

The curators of the exhibition have elected a simple but effective way to convey just how viciously the Nazis went about “destroying diversity.” To the left of Ratowski’s painting hangs Hans Böttcher’s Expressionist “Still Life with Green Cat,” and to the right Rudolf Ausleger’s “Still Life with Pipe” in the French Cubist tradition.

“They are three very different examples of artistic genre,” exhibition curator Heinz Stahlhut explained. “These paintings illustrate how broad the spectrum of art in Berlin was before the Nazis came to power.”

The three landscape paintings on the wall opposite are yet another testament to that. The curator’s aim was to make clear just how little the Nazi’s disapproval and persecution of particular artists had to do with aesthetics.

“There was always a racist or political justification,” Stahlhut said. Disconcertingly, the Nazi campaign enjoyed lasting success. “For many of the persecuted artists it was either extremely difficult, or impossible for them to restart their careers after 1945.”

Fostering a toxic climate

In the context of the exhibition, a work by the oft derided writer, cabaret artist and painter Joachim Ringelnatz appears to be a terrifying premonition. In “Herbstgang” (Autum Walk, 1929), two people stumble through an apocalyptic landscape containing a crucifix. Ringelnatz was also persecuted by the Nazis. After 1933 he was forbidden from performing or exhibiting and his books were burned. He died of tuberculosis in November 1934 in Berlin.

The treatment of Ringelnatz is just one example of the toxic climate the Nazis fostered in the art world of the 1930s.

In the center of the exhibition rooms on the first floor, glass display cabinets contain documents from artists’ archives. One of them is Wolfgang Willrich’s “The Purging of the Temple of Art,” the book that provided the basis for the “degenerate art” campaign. Alongside the book is an open pocket calendar that belonged to the Dada artist Hannah Höch. In it she noted her thoughts about a visit to the Nazis’ “Degenerate Art” exhibition in 1937: “All public collections are represented here,” she wrote in bewilderment. “After all the open agitation, it’s astounding how disciplined the public are behaving.”

Decimation of national collections

Extracts of the correspondence between the gallerist Ferdinand Möller and the racist director of Dusseldorf’s Folkwang Museum, Klaus Graf von Baudissin, can also be seen.

Möller was denounced as a dealer of “shallow, decadent and freemasonic art of degradation supported by a rotten upper-class” in the magazine, The SA Man.In contrast stood Baudissin, for whom only a fervent National Socialist could be an artist. Baudissin pushed for the selling-off of modern, “degenerate” art from museums across the German Reich.

The Nazis made a lot of money, but museum collections bled to death. After the end of the war it took a long time before the gaps in national collections could be in anywhere close to filled.

When the Berlinische Galerie was established, one of its central objectives was to give formerly persecuted artists an appropriate space, curator Stahlhut explained. The museum is home to the permanent exhibition “Art in Berlin 1880-1980,” encompassing works by artists such as Otto Dix, Hannah Höch and Franz Nussbaum.

Now almost a dozen works from that exhibition are marked with orange stickers with accompanying texts explaining how they fall into the “diversity destroyed” theme.

Learning the value of diversity

The exhibition “Berated, Banned and Burned” also encompasses photography and architecture in Berlin before the Third Reich.

Outtakes by the fashion photographer Else Ernestine Neuländer-Simon – better known under the pseudonym Yva – convey an air of buoyancy that existed in the German capital during the 1920s. A model of the Einstein Tower in Potsdam by the architect Erich Mendelssohn illustrates how sophisticated modern architecture in Berlin had come to be. Mendelssohn managed to emigrate. Yva perished in the Sobibor concentration camp.

Small notices alongside the exhibits inform visitors about the artists’ fates, though the information provided is scant.

The 2013 theme “Diversity Destroyed” and exhibition at the Berlinische Galerie look back 80 years into the past. Over 500 exhibitions and events to be staged in the capital city this year highlight exactly what has been lost – much of it irretrievably. Looking at the works in the exhibition, it’s inevitable that visitors will leave in a contemplative mood. But then modern-day Berlin awaits – a city that survived the caesura in 1933, now once again a creative, multicultural European capital.

http://www.dw.de/how-the-nazis-destroyed-diversity-in-art/a-16719223