Monday, July 11, 2011

1900 - Eight-Nation Alliance - Plunder in China

Eight-Nation Alliance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Eight-Nation Alliance

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Military of the Powers during the Boxer Rebellion, with their naval ensigns, from left to right: (Naval ensign of Italy in 1900) Italy, (Flag of the United States in 1900) United States, (Naval ensign of France) France, (Naval flag of Austria Hungary in 1900)Austria-Hungary, (Naval flag of Japan) Japan, Naval flag of the German Empire Germany, (White Ensign of the United Kingdom) United Kingdom, (Naval jack of Russia)Russia. Japanese print, 1900.

The Eight-Nation Alliance (simplified Chinese: 八国联军; traditional Chinese: 八國聯軍; pinyin: bāgúo liánjūn) was an alliance of Austria-Hungary, France, Germany, Italy,Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States whose military forces intervened in China to suppress the anti-foreign Boxers and relieve the siege of the diplomatic legations in Beijing (Peking).

Contents

[hide]

[edit]Events

The Boxers, a peasant movement, had attacked and killed foreign missionaries, nationals, and Chinese Christians across northern China. The Qing government and Imperial Army supported the Boxers and under the Manchu general Ronglu, besieged foreign diplomats and civilians taking refuge in the Legation Quarter.[1] After failing in its initial attempt to relieve the Legation Quarter, in August 1900 the Allied force marched to Beijing from Tianjin, defeated the Qing Imperial ArmyWuwei Troop in several engagements, and brought an end to the Boxer Rebellion and the siege. The members of the Alliance then occupied Beijing and looted and pillaged the capital.[2][3] The forces consisted of approximately 45,000 international troops. At the end of the campaign, the Qing Imperial government signed the Boxer Protocol of 1901.[4]

[edit]Siege of the International legations

Locations of foreign diplomatic legations and front lines in Beijing during the siege.

The compound in Beijing remained under siege by the Wuwei Rear Troop of the Chinese army and some Yihetuan or Boxers, from 20 June - 14 August. A total of 473 foreign civilians, 409 soldiers from eight countries, and about 3,000 Chinese Christians took refuge in the Legation Quarter.[5] Under the command of the British minister to China, Claude Maxwell MacDonald, the legation staff and security personnel defended the compound with small arms and one old muzzle-loaded cannon discovered and unearthed by Chinese collaborators who turned it over to the allies;[6] it was nicknamed the International Gun because the barrel was British, the carriage was Italian, the shells were Russian, and the crew was American.

Also under siege in Peking was the North Cathedral, the Beitang of the Catholic Church. The Beitang was defended by 43 French and Italian soldiers, 33 foreign Catholic priests and nuns, and about 3,200 Chinese Catholics. The defenders suffered heavy casualties especially from lack of food and Chinese mines exploded in tunnels dug beneath the compound.[7]

Forces of the Eight-Nation Alliance
(1900 Boxer Rebellion)

Troops of the Eight nations alliance 1900.jpg
Troops of the Eight nations alliance in 1900.
Left to right: Britain, United States, Russia,
British India, Germany, France, Austria,
Italy, Japan.
CountriesWarships
(units)
Marines
(men)
Army
(men)
Japan1854020,300
Russia1075012,400
United Kingdom82,02010,000
France53903,130
United States22953,125
Germany5600300
Austria–Hungary4296
Italy280
Total544,97149,255

[edit]Member nations

[edit]Austria-Hungary

The Austro-Hungarian Navy sent two training ships and the cruisers SMS Kaiserin und Königin Maria Theresia, SMS Kaiserin Elisabeth, SMS Aspern, and SMS Zenta and a company of marines to the North China coast in April 1900, based at the Russia concession of Port Arthur.

In June they helped hold the Tianjin railway against Boxer forces, and also fired upon several armed junks on the Hai River nearTong-Tcheou. They also took part in the seizure of the Taku Forts commanding the approaches to Tianjin, and the boarding and capture of four Chinese destroyers by Capt. Roger Keyes of HMS Fame. In all K.u.K forces suffered only several casualties during the rebellion.

After the uprising a cruiser was maintained permanently on the China station and a detachment of marines was deployed at the embassy in Peking (Beijing).

Lieutenant Georg Ludwig von Trapp, made famous in the musical The Sound of Music, was decorated for bravery aboard the SMS Kaiserin und Königin Maria Theresia during the rebellion.

[edit]Britain

Britain provided 12,000 troops of which a large part were Indian troops.

[edit]Germany

German troops of the 1. Eastasia Infantry Regiment with captured Boxer flags.

Two German missionaries were murdered in China in 1897. Germany's reaction was to seize Kiaochow with the port of Tsingtao for use as a naval base and trading port. Tsingtao was governed and garrisoned by the Imperial German Navy. The garrison consisted of Naval Artillery batteries and the 3rd Sea battalion of Marine Infantry.

When the Boxer Rebellion broke out in the Summer of 1900 III. Seebatallion sent a small group of soldiers to Peking and Tientsin to try to protect German interests, while the majority stayed to prevent attacks against Tsingtao. The siege of the foreign legations in Peking soon convinced Germany and other European Powers that more forces were urgently needed to be sent to China. The first troops to arrive from Germany were the I. and II. Seebatallione, soon followed by the East Asian Expeditionary Corps.

[edit]France

Russian troops in Beijing.

French Forces were dispatched from French Indochina.

[edit]Italy

Italian forces were initially made up from sailors from warships. However, a larger contingent was later dispatched from Italy.

[edit]Japan

Japanese marines who served under the British commander Seymour.

The Japanese provided the largest contingent of troops; 20,840, as well as 18 warships. Of the total number, 20,300 were Imperial Japanese Army troops of the 5th Infantry Division under Lt. General Yamaguchi Motoomi, the remainder were 540 naval rikusentai from the Imperial Japanese Navy.

[edit]Russia

Russia supplied the second largest force after Japan. This was made up mainly from garrisons at Port Arthur and Vladivostok.

[edit]United States

American troops during the Boxer Rebellion.

In the United States, the suppression of the Boxer Rebellion was known as the China Relief Expedition. The United States was able to play a major role in suppressing the Boxer Rebellion largely due to the presence of American forces deployed in the Philippines since the US conquest of the Philippines. Of the foreign troops under siege, there were fifty-six American sailors and marines from USSOregon and USS Newark.[8] The main American formations that were deployed were 9th Infantry and 14th Infantry regiments, elements of the 6th Cavalry regiment, the 5th Artillery regiment, and a Marine battalion.

[edit]Aftermath

Troops of the eight countries invaded and occupied Beijing on August 14, 1900. Empress Dowager Cixi, the Emperor, and higher officials fled the Imperial Palace for Xi'an, and sent Li Hongzhang for peace talks.

"Following the taking of Peking, troops from the international force, looted the capital city and even ransacked the Forbidden City, with many Chinese treasures finding their way back to Europe."[9]

Not just the participants in the Eight-Nation Alliance but also many Chinese were responsible for the ransacking and pillaging of many historical artifacts of Chinese origin.[10]

[edit]Atrocities

German, Russian and French army had engaged in indiscriminate killing, raping, robbing and burning Chinese people and belongings.[11]

Allied troops eagerly raped women, the Germans and Russians were reported to have behaved savagely, they bayoneted their rape victims. Disgusted American marines attempted to restrain the Germans with violence, one was wounded as a result. The Allies covered up their atrocities by labeling all Chinese dead as Boxers. Other troops raped any more or less attractive women they could find. One U.S. Marine wrote that the Germans and Russians, in particular, bayoneted these women after raping them.[12] However, the Japanese did not engage in atrocities, a Japanese officer was shocked by the looting and they behaved courteously to Chinese civilians.[13]

In Beijing, Bishop Pierre-Marie-Alphonse Favier posted a bulletin: in the first 8 days after August 18, Catholic Christians may steal life necessities, and declared that robbing within 50 taels of silver need neither reporting nor compensation.[14] On December 14, 1900, a French newspaper quoted a soldier's statement: "We are open to the Church from the North palace, the priests go with us, ... they encourage us murder, robbery, robbing ... we are doing for the priests. We were ordered to do whatever we want in the city for three days, kill if want to kill, take if want to take, and the actual looting of the eight days."[15]

[edit]See also

[edit]References

  1. ^ Grant Hayter-Menzies, Pamela Kyle Crossley (2008). Imperial masquerade: the legend of Princess Der Ling. Hong Kong University Press. p. 89. ISBN 9622098819. Retrieved 2010-10-31.
  2. ^ O'Conner, David The Boxer Rebellion London:Robert Hale & Company, 1973, Chap. 16. ISBN 0-7091-4780-5
  3. ^ Hevia, James L. 'Looting and its discontents: Moral discourse and the plunder of Beijing, 1900-1901' in R. Bickers and R.G. Tiedemann (eds.), The Boxers, China, and the world Lanham, Maryland:ROwman & Littlefield Publishers, 2009
  4. ^ Eight-Nation Alliance in Section 4
  5. ^ Thompson, 84-85
  6. ^ Benjamin R. Beede (1994). The War of 1898, and U.S. interventions, 1898-1934: an encyclopedia. Taylor & Francis. p. 50. ISBN 0824056248. Retrieved 2010-06-28.
  7. ^ Thompson, 85, 170-171
  8. ^ The Boxer Rebellion and the U.S. Navy, 1900-1901
  9. ^ Kenneth G. Clark THE BOXER UPRISING 1899 - 1900. Russo-Japanese War Research Society
  10. ^ "China and the allies", by H. Savage-Landor
  11. ^ 《拳事杂记》
  12. ^ Robert B. Edgerton (1997). Warriors of the rising sun: a history of the Japanese military. W. W. Norton & Company. p. 80. ISBN 0393040852. Retrieved 25 April 2011. "Other troops raped any more or less attractive women they could find. One U.S. Marine wrote that the Germans and Russians, in particular, bayoneted these women after raping them. Several U.S. Marines, hardly squeamish men, where so sickened by what they saw that they violently restrained some of their more rapacious German allies, leaving at least one wounded."
  13. ^ Robert B. Edgerton (1997). Warriors of the rising sun: a history of the Japanese military. W. W. Norton & Company. p. 80. ISBN 0393040852. Retrieved 2010-11-28. "A Japanese officer who observed the looting with horror asked an American newsman if international law had changed since he had been instructed about it. The American could only shug."
  14. ^ 《遣使会年鉴》 1902, page 229-230
  15. ^ "Northern Sobernews", 1900-12-14

[edit]Books

  • Harrington, Peter. Peking 1900: The Boxer Rebellion. Oxford: Osprey, 2001. ISBN 1-84176-181-8
  • Thompson, Larry Clinton. William Scott Ament and the Boxer Rebellion. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2009. [[1]

WW1 - Puerto Rico Joins USA - Jones Act

World War I - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In 1917, the U.S. Congress gave U.S. citizenship to Puerto Ricans when they were drafted to participate in World War I, as part of the Jones Act.

WW1 - Germany Asks Mexico To Join the Fight Against the USA

World War I - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In January 1917, Germany resumed unrestricted submarine warfare. The German Foreign minister, in the Zimmermann Telegram, told Mexico that U.S. entry was likely once unrestricted submarine warfare began, and invited Mexico to join the war as Germany's ally against the United States. In return, the Germans would send Mexico money and help it recover the territories of Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona that Mexico lost during the Mexican-American War 70 years earlier.[99] Wilson released the Zimmerman note to the public and Americans saw it as a casus belli—a cause for war.


Friday, July 8, 2011

Did the CIA and/or IMF Assassinate Kirchner As Threat to All Debtor Nations? #PIGS

I would like to know what the Argentinian people think! Was there an investigation into his death? It could be a coincidence that the IMF had motive and the CIA has a track record.  These things need to be worked out.

Hmm. So far the IMF has failed with Chavez, Morales, and Castro. Need more help?

 The CIA took out the democratically elected leader of Iran and replaced him with a tyrant - the shaw http://www.iranchamber.com/history/coup53/coup53p1.php

 The CIA took out Torrijos in Panama and put in Noriega until he became a liability.http://www.wattpad.com/1240590-cia-hit-list-omar-torrijos-supreme-chief-of-panama?p=1

 The CIA setup Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, traded weapons with Iran with money from the cocaine trade in Latin America (Iran Contra)

And many more...

http://www.trutv.com/conspiracy/assassinations/cia-hits-misses/gallery.html?curPhoto=18
Amplify’d from readersupportednews.org

The Assassination of Nestor Kirchner by the IMF


Wednesday, 05 January 2011 01:08
Kirchner became the President of Argentina in 2002. He stood up to the IMF and refused to impose austerity measures on his people in order to repay the IMF. Because of the effectiveness of his non-austere economic policies, last month, Argentina finished paying off the last of the debt.

Kirchner told Oliver Stone the bankers threatened constantly ("siempre") to kill him.

People in Spain, Greece, and Ireland were calling on their governments to follow Kirchner's lead, and reject "austerity". There is every reason to think that the IMF bankers also threatened to murder the Prime Ministers of these countries, all off whom knuckled under to the IMF in the days after Kirchner's sudden and unexpected death from a "heart attack".

Did the IMF finally follow through on their threats to murder Kirchner, in order to give credence to their threats against the Euro-peons? There is every reason to think so.

The video

... shows Kirchner describing the threats as constant ("siempre")
... shows European populists calling on the people to support following Kirchner's example
... shows the head of the CIA, William Colby, describing a CIA pistol that shoots an ice-dart that leaves the target dead from heart attack, with "no evidence to indicate that the target was hit."
Read more at readersupportednews.org

Somalia Disaster

The movie black hawk down was based on a true story but didnt share the facts that congress defunded the project right in the middle and thats why our troops were left stranded and they were all killed.

We now have an african command to protect the suez canal and our oil interests in the region


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Ying and Yang of Optimism and Pessism

Motivated reasoning - people choose to believe what they want to believe, perception is reality in individuals and the masses




- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Tuesday, July 5, 2011

Ignorance is Bliss

Soy mas feliz cuando vivo en la ignorancia.  Ignorance is bliss.

The more I learn about the inherent evils of human society, I realize that the only way to LIVE is to focus on my family being safe and secure and just enjoy our own life.

Puerto Rico police chief quits amid crime concerns

Amplify’d from www.miamiherald.com

Puerto Rico police chief quits amid crime concerns

By DANICA COTO

Associated Press


SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico --
Puerto Rico's police chief resigned Saturday amid sharp criticism over a rising homicide rate in the U.S. territory and allegations of police abuse.

Jose Figueroa Sancha stepped down after less than three years overseeing a 19,000-strong force.

"You, my fellow police officers ... represent the hope of a society that is going through a profound crisis in values," he said in a statement.


Figueroa did not say why he was leaving, but Gov. Luis Fortuno said in a statement that it was due to unspecified health problems.

Figueroa was appointed chief in November 2008 after working 23 years in the FBI. His resignation comes as the island of 4 million people battles a soaring crime rate: 568 killings so far this year, compared with 470 reported in the same period last year.

June was reportedly one of the bloodiest months on record, with nearly 30 people killed last weekend alone, including an 11-year-old boy. One of the most high-profile killings of the month was that of bank executive Maurice J. Spagnoletti, who was shot while driving home along one of the capital's busiest highways. No one has been arrested.

Figueroa inherited a high homicide rate, but the island also recorded its second-worst year for killings under his watch in 2010, when hundreds of National Guard troops were activated to fight crime. Despite their presence, more than 955 people were killed last year, compared with a record 995 people reported killed in 1994.

Figueroa, however, said the guard's presence reduced most crimes, including offenses such as robbery, assault and rape, by 11 percent.

Anibal Vega Borges, mayor of the northern town of Toa Baja, said Figueroa made an enormous effort to battle crime, despite limited resources.

"The police chief job is a hot seat that requires much composure and integrity," he said. "Figueroa Sancha leaves a positive contribution ... during a period of social and economic crisis. His Achilles' heel was the increase in killings."

William Ramirez, executive director of the ACLU in Puerto Rico, celebrated Figueroa's departure.

"Personally, I think this is long overdue," he said. "From the beginning, it was evident that he was not the person to be leading the police department."

The ACLU issued a recent report alleging police brutality against university students, union leaders and journalists. Ramirez also criticized Figueroa for activating riot squads during student protests.

"He has not done his job well, and he has failed to acknowledge that," Ramirez said. "He's not effective in any way. It's not that he's not effective in some areas. It's in all areas."

Last year, the government appointed an independent monitor for the police department and announced more training for all officers in response to brutality allegations.

But the department's image became further marred when FBI agents arrested 77 police officers in October on charges that they aided drug traffickers. The arrests marked one of the largest police corruption investigations in the FBI's history.

Fortuno praised Figueroa for his work and called him a person of integrity.

"(He) was an incorruptible, tireless, relentless fighter against crime and drug trafficking," he said. "Under his command, powerful drug trafficking organizations were attacked and dismantled like never before seen in Puerto Rico."

On Friday, Fortuno signed a new budget that awarded $759 million to the police department, a slight increase from last year. Another 536 police cadets also are expected to join the force.

Fortuno said retired Col. Jose Luis Rivera will serve as interim police chief.

Juan Dalmau, secretary-general of the minority Puerto Rican Independence Party, said the government needs to attack the island's rampant drug abuse and encourage students to stay in school to help drive down crime.

"If a multidisciplinary focus is not adopted to stop crime, we will continue to see the same rise in criminality regardless of who they name as superintendent," he said.

Read more at www.miamiherald.com
 

Puerto Ricans Increasingly Involved in Drug Trade & Violence

I've seen their involvement in the drug trade first hand in northern California. 7/4/2011 there was some sort of a coup, I imagine over the local Mexican cartels. I think the US military was involved in taking out some of their leaders...



And the Puerto Ricans are imitating the black American gangsters of the 1980's. Obviously most are not involved, but where you see drugs, sex trade, gun running, etc it is the evil downward spiral. Keep an eye out for these folks.



Obama's recent visit was prompted by their economic conditions and the massive inflow of PRs into the States, along with the drugs. I dont have the full connection and explanation, yet..

Amplify’d from www2.tbo.com

For Puerto Ricans, what will it be — state, colony or nation?
Commentary



By


LUISITA LOPEZ TORREGROSA




|

Los Angeles Times






Published: June 27, 2011


President Barack Obama's blink-of-an-eye visit to Puerto Rico, the first by a sitting American president since John F. Kennedy in 1961, put the spotlight on the island for maybe 10 minutes, just about as long as his arrival speech promising economic help to the island and support for whatever course its residents decide on when it comes to whether or not to become the 51st state.

Brisk as it was, the president's trip had a triple purpose: One was to appeal to the growing number of Puerto Rican voters in the key presidential state of Florida and the burgeoning nationwide Hispanic population; two was to reaffirm his 2008 campaign promise that he would set up a mechanism for resolving the island's political status during his first term; and three was to raise money for the Democrats and his campaign.

The visit came soon after a White House task force on Puerto Rico's status issued a report recommending that the island hold a two-step plebiscite by the end of 2012 to determine whether it should remain a protectorate or become part of the United States.

Obama vowed during his speech that his administration would support whatever Puerto Rico decides, but therein lies the dilemma.

About half the voters in Puerto Rico support statehood; the other half want to remain a commonwealth, keeping the self-rule territorial status forged for it in the 1950s. Only a small minority supports full independence. While all Puerto Ricans hold American citizenship, those who live on the island have no voting representative in the U.S. Congress, do not pay federal taxes and cannot vote in presidential elections, though they may vote in primaries. (In 2008 Obama lost to Hillary Rodham Clinton.)

Obama's intervention comes at a critical time.

Despite $7 billion in federal stimulus money for Puerto Rico, the island's Republican administration has slashed the budget and dismissed thousands of government workers. Unemployment has always been a problem on the island. Ten years ago, at the end of the prosperous 1990s, the island's rate was 11.7 percent, according to the Department of Labor and Human Resources. Today, it has climbed to a highly alarming 16.2 percent (compared with about 9 percent on the mainland).

Violence is rampant, driven in part by increased drug trafficking. Puerto Rico has less than half the population of New York City, but last year it had nearly twice as many murders, with 955 killings, according to FBI figures.

"We've hit bottom," Luis Agrait, the director of the history department of the University of Puerto Rico, told me during a spirited discussion at his San Juan apartment.

Statehood could bring parity with other states in economic aid and would confer full-fledged citizenship (with additional voting rights and representation in government) on Puerto Ricans. The economic benefits, according to the 2011 White House task force report, would at least partially offset the effect of federal income taxes.

On the other hand, opponents of statehood say that commonwealth status allows more independence from Washington and the preservation of a distinct bilingual culture rooted in the island's Spanish heritage.

Meanwhile, the island continues to bleed residents. Today, more Puerto Ricans live on the mainland (4.6 million) than on the island (3.5 million), and the exodus has become critical. A recent study by the Puerto Rico Statistics Institute found that the island has a net loss of about 35,000 people a year, and those who migrate out tend to be better educated and higher earning than those who are left behind or who migrate in. In the past decade many have moved to Central Florida, mainly to Orlando and Tampa, where Puerto Ricans now number approximately 850,000. Unlike the mostly blue-collar and unschooled Puerto Ricans who immigrated to New York and other points north in the 1940s and 1950s, today's newcomers support statehood and lean Republican.

In San Juan, President Obama addressed a people mired in economic crisis and facing a major political quandary: Who are we? Are we a state, a colony, a nation? For nearly 60 years that has been a dilemma for Puerto Ricans, and it is high time to make a decisive choice.



Luisita Lopez Torregrosa, a former editor at The New York Times, is a columnist for the International Herald Tribune. She wrote this for the Los Angeles Times.

Read more at www2.tbo.com
 

Emotional Intelligence

I read this book a long time ago and the lessons that are supposed to be learned have to be practiced all the time or you forget.  Whenever you enter a new paradigm, it is difficult to remember the lessons from your past.

Emotional intelligence refers to the capacity for recognizing our own feelings and those of others for motivating ourselves and for managing emotions well in ourselves and in our relationships - Daniel Goleman 1998 Working with Emotional Intelligence.

This is from a blogpost I found while researching the issue.


EMOTIONAL HIJACKING: THE TRIGGER TO AN UNHEALTHY MIND

Emotional hijacking is a state when an individual's cognitions are overpowered by his/her emotions. It is usually referred to in the context of aggression or fearfulness.

With respect to aggression, it can be said to be a sudden unleashing of rage towards another person. It is an extreme emotional outburst or an emotional explosion caused by an incident that may trigger anger or fear in an individual.

Such incidents happen many a times. There are a number of situations in which a person might get angry or upset and without even thinking about anything he/she might just lose his/her cool and simply explode with emotions and attack the other person verbally or even physically. For instance, an individual might suddenly get extremely angry and begin to shout at his/her friend and even slur him/her. In an extreme case, a disgusted husband might suddenly get upset and beat up his wife badly. In more extreme cases, a person might kill another person with an outburst of anger. 

Wife beating and killing a person due to emotional hijacking can be rare, but incidents of individuals quarreling with each other and in the process damaging a relationship are quite common. Such moments do not last very long, but the time that it lasts does enough damage. Most of the times, a person regrets getting into such an act. 
Justify Full
Research shows that such emotional explosions are neuralhijackings. In such a moment, a center in the limbic system (a part of the brain), the amygadala, the seat of all emotions in the brain, takes over the neocortex. The neocortex is the part of the brain that is responsible for our thinking. During thismoment the neocortex stops functioning. The amygdala gets triggered and in an instant takes control of the brain, in a sense hijacking it. Thus, it is called emotional hijacking.

Emotional hijacking does not occur just like that out of no where. Usually certain past events that are disturbing to the individual keep building up resulting in the sudden emotional outburst. If a person is facing some problems for quite some time, they start playing on the mind and a moment may occur when he/she cannot take it any longer, which may result in the extreme explosion of emotions. A person may be too stressed out, or a person might be a bit angry for something that might have occurred before. In such a moment if something happens that further causes distress, then the chances of emotional hijacking to occur increase to a great extent.

Emotional hijacking takes place in an instant and by the time it gets over it can do a lot of damage to the person in many ways. If emotional hijacking keeps on occurring time and again then, it will have an immediate negative affect on the individual’s ability to have relationships as well as the quality of his/her current relationships. Emotional hijacking occurring too often in a person will give the impression to others of the individual being a loose cannon. People will begin to dislike his/her behaviour and may keep a distance from him/her. Likewise, his/her peers, friends, and others who are close to him/her may begin to dislike him/her, because nobody would like to be at the receiving end of a person’s extreme rage, especially when the person has a close relationship with them.

Emotional hijacking also creates a lot of negativity within the atmosphere. If a person due to an extreme outburst of anger shouts very loudly it has a bad affect on the mood of not only others, but also on the individual himself/herself. Such an emotional outburst is not at all good for the mental and emotional stability of the person. One incident of emotional hijacking can lead to a severe mood swing, so one can imagine what will happen if this happens very often. Such kind of behaviour will also increase the stress level of the person. In extreme cases it can cause high blood pressure and even heart problems. Therefore, emotional hijacking can have a very bad affect on a person’s mental as well as physical health.
Instead of facing the negative consequences of emotional hijacking it is much better to try to prevent it as much as possible. One way to do this is to try to reason and thus challenge the anger provoking thoughts. Emotional hijacking is more of an impulse driven reaction. The person should try to think before he/she reacts in such an aggressive manner and in a way try to hold back that impulse. He/she should try to channelize his/her thoughts to a more rationalistic way and try to bring down the level of anger. This is a very good way to counter emotional hijacking, but it is easier said than done. During an episode of emotional hijacking, a person becomes cognitively incapacitated. He/she almost loses the ability to think at that moment.

The best way to prevent emotional hijacking is to just move away from that place and go for a walk as soon as one realizes that matters can become worse. This works as a distraction from the anger provoking thoughts for the person. The person buys out some time, which helps in relaxation of thoughts and makes the individual calm down. In such a situation the left prefrontal lobe (the front-left side of the brain) of the person comes into being. When the anger provoking thoughts get distracted, the left prefrontal lobe, which is responsible for maintaining emotional balance, works as a counter mechanism towards the amygdala and dampens its affect on the brain. Thus, the person comes back to his/her normal and calm phase and is able to prevent emotional hijacking.

In situations like this, watching television or listening to music can also help in distracting one from anger provoking thoughts and thus make the individual calm down. Distraction from such thoughts also helps the person to get into a more pleasant mood. If a person goes out for a walk, he/she might find the surroundings pleasant, which will have a positive affect on the mood and make him/her happier at that moment. The same thing happens when a person begins to watch television or listens to music at that moment.

Other ways of preventing emotional hijacking is deep breathing and muscle relaxation. This helps in changing the body’s high arousal of anger to a low-arousal state. It also, in a way, works as a distraction from whatever triggered the anger.

It is very obvious that emotional hijacking is a very unpleasant phenomenon.The consequences of emotional hijacking are nothing but bad, be it on mood, relationships, or the overall health of the individual. A person should always try to be in a positive frame of mind and try to be as emotionally relaxed and calm as possible. The more positive frame of mind the person is in the more chances are that he/she will be away from emotional hijacking and the more chances are that he/she will be an emotionally healthy person.

Sunday, July 3, 2011

Congress Damned to Repeat the Errors of 2008 Crisis

the arguments Republicans are using to defend outrageous tax loopholes. How can people simultaneously demand savage cuts in Medicare and Medicaid and defend special tax breaks favoring hedge fund managers and owners of corporate jets?

Amplify’d from www.nytimes.com
Corporate Cash Con
Published: July 3, 2011











Watching the evolution of economic discussion in Washington over the past couple of years has been a disheartening experience. Month by month, the discourse has gotten more primitive; with stunning speed, the lessons of the 2008 financial crisis have been forgotten, and the very ideas that got us into the crisis — regulation is always bad, what’s good for the bankers is good for America, tax cuts are the universal elixir — have regained their hold.



And now trickle-down economics — specifically, the idea that anything that increases corporate profits is good for the economy — is making a comeback.


On the face of it, this seems bizarre. Over the last two years profits have soared while employment has remained disastrously high. Why should anyone believe that handing even more money to corporations, no strings attached, would lead to faster job creation?


Nonetheless, trickle-down is clearly on the ascendant — and even some Democrats are buying into it. What am I talking about? Consider first the arguments Republicans are using to defend outrageous tax loopholes. How can people simultaneously demand savage cuts in Medicare and Medicaid and defend special tax breaks favoring hedge fund managers and owners of corporate jets?


Well, here’s what a spokesman for Eric Cantor, the House majority leader, told Greg Sargent of The Washington Post: “You can’t help the wage earner by taxing the wage payer offering a job.” He went on to imply, disingenuously, that the tax breaks at issue mainly help small businesses (they’re actually mainly for big corporations). But the basic argument was that anything that leaves more money in the hands of corporations will mean more jobs. That is, it’s pure trickle-down.


And then there’s the repatriation issue.


U.S. corporations are supposed to pay taxes on the profits of their overseas subsidiaries — but only when those profits are transferred back to the parent company. Now there’s a move afoot — driven, of course, by a major lobbying campaign — to offer an amnesty under which companies could move funds back while paying hardly any taxes. And even some Democrats are supporting this idea, claiming that it would create jobs.


As opponents of this plan point out, we’ve already seen this movie: A similar tax holiday was offered in 2004, with a similar sales pitch. And it was a total failure. Companies did indeed take advantage of the amnesty to move a lot of money back to the United States. But they used that money to pay dividends, pay down debt, buy up other companies, buy back their own stock — pretty much everything except increasing investment and creating jobs. Indeed, there’s no evidence that the 2004 tax holiday did anything at all to stimulate the economy.


What the tax holiday did do, however, was give big corporations a chance to avoid paying taxes, because they would eventually have repatriated, and paid taxes on, much of the money they brought in under the amnesty. And it also gave these companies an incentive to move even more jobs overseas, since they now know that there’s a good chance that they’ll be able to bring overseas profits home nearly tax-free under future amnesties.


Yet as I said, there’s a push for a repeat of this disastrous performance. And this time around the circumstances are even worse. Think about it: How can anyone imagine that lack of corporate cash is what’s holding back recovery in America right now? After all, it’s widely understood that corporations are already sitting on large amounts of cash that they aren’t investing in their own businesses.


In fact, that idle cash has become a major conservative talking point, with right-wingers claiming that businesses are failing to invest because of political uncertainty. That’s almost surely false: the evidence strongly says that the real reason businesses are sitting on cash is lack of consumer demand. In any case, if corporations already have plenty of cash they’re not using, why would giving them a tax break that adds to this pile of cash do anything to accelerate recovery?


It wouldn’t, of course; claims that a corporate tax holiday would create jobs, or that ending the tax break for corporate jets would destroy jobs, are nonsense.


So here’s what you should answer to anyone defending big giveaways to corporations: Lack of corporate cash is not the problem facing America. Big business already has the money it needs to expand; what it lacks is a reason to expand with consumers still on the ropes and the government slashing spending.


What our economy needs is direct job creation by the government and mortgage-debt relief for stressed consumers. What it very much does not need is a transfer of billions of dollars to corporations that have no intention of hiring anyone except more lobbyists.

Read more at www.nytimes.com
 

US Gas is CHEAP Compared to Europe- Learn WHY!

And this doesn't even include the cost of our military to defend our oil and natural gas interests around the world. That is estimated at $100B a year. Look up the Carter Doctrine. See President Carter vocalize this back in 1979.

Amplify’d from motherjones.com

US Gas Is Artificially Cheap: What We Don't Pay for at the Pump


California has some of the dirtiest air in the nation. Consequently, it has some of the strictest rules for gasoline, meaning it burns cleaner than it does in many other states. But cleaner fuels are more expensive.

Clean air requirements, combined with supply and refining constraints, make the price of California gas consistently among the highest in the nation. Turmoil in the Middle East is another factor that pushes up the global price of crude oil. Even though the average price for a gallon of regular unleaded gas in California fluctuates around $4, some experts argue that $4 a gallon is much less than the real cost.

Watch an animated video, produced by the Center for Investigative Reporting, that explores the "external costs" of gas consumption–including the price of pollution and health problems caused by it:

Compared with other industrialized countries, the US has it cheap. The Economist notes that American consumers pay about half of what Europeans pay, which is up to about $8.50 per gallon (or $2.25 per liter). The media website Good has a nifty chart showing the disparity in prices across the Atlantic, and PBS' NewsHour explains the effect Middle East turmoil has on the retail price of gas. While politicians on both sides of the aisle bicker about why gas is expensive, US Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., is one who explains the real reasons, and as Grist reporter David Roberts notes, he is lonely in doing so.

Read more at motherjones.com