INDIA: How can this (above) possibly occur in nature? http://go.nasa.gov/2iy4xvU
I have not posted shots of India because it is always smeared with this kind of fog/haze,
which I thought might be photoshop obfuscation. This shot from Jan.17, makes me think this is true. They really want to hide whatever they are doing to India, and my friend who was there, told me he frequently saw aerosol sprayed trails even in the Himalayas.
Big Business Taking over State Supreme Courts
How Campaign Contributions to Judges Tip the Scales Against Individuals
By Billy Corriher Posted on August 13, 2012
In state courts across our country, corporate special interests are donating money to the campaigns of judges who interpret the law in a manner that benefits their contributors rather than citizens seeking justice. Americans are starting to wake up to this danger, according to recent polls, and are worried that individuals without money to contribute may not receive a fair hearing in state courts. In a recent poll 89 percent of respondents said they “believe the influence of campaign contributions on judges’ rulings is a problem.”
Judges swear an oath that they will answer to the law, not campaign contributors. If a person is wronged, he or she can hope to find impartial justice in a court, where everyone—rich or poor, weak or powerful—is equal in the eyes of the law. But this principle is less and less true with each passing judicial election.
Thirty-nine states elect their high court judges, and enormous amounts of money are pouring into judges’ campaign war chests. Fueled by money from corporate interests and lobbyists, spending on judicial campaigns has exploded in the last two decades. In 1990 candidates for state supreme courts only raised around $3 million, but by the mid-1990s, campaigns were raking in more than five times that amount, fueled by extremely costly races in Alabama and Texas. The 2000 race saw high-court candidates raise more than $45 million.
Since then, corporate America’s influence over the judiciary has grown. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, in particular, has become a powerful player in judicial races. From 2001 to 2003 its preferred candidates won 21 of 24 elections. The chamber spent more than $1 million to aid the 2006 campaigns of two Ohio Supreme Court justices, and in the most recent high court election in Alabama, money from the state’s chamber accounted for 40 percent of all campaign contributions.
… With money playing such a large role in judicial elections, the interest groups with the most money increasingly have an advantage. In courtrooms across our country, big corporations and other special interests are tilting the playing field in their favor. Many Americans perceive our government and corporate institutions as interdependent components of a system in which powerful elites play by a different set of rules than ordinary citizens. Some feel that only those donating money can play a role in governing. The cozy relationship between government and big business has become increasingly clear in our judicial elections.
… The vast majority of legal disputes in the United States —95 percent—are settled in state courts. Those who have been harmed by an unsafe product or an on-thejob injury would most likely look to state courts for justice. With judges backed by big business taking over our courts, are there any remaining institutions that can hold powerful corporations accountable?
… Even judges are alarmed at the growing influence of money on courts. A 2002 survey found that 84 percent of state judges are concerned about interest groups spending money on judicial campaigns.
… Before the flood of corporate money began, media reports focused on judges being influenced by campaign donations from trial lawyers with cases pending before them. Corporate interests were concerned that donations from trial lawyers resulted in courts that favored individuals suing corporations. Businesses that were the frequent target of lawsuits, such as insurance and tobacco companies, pushed legislation to limit litigation. This phenomenon also spurred big business to enter the fray of judicial politics.
As this report shows, this effort has been very successful. Even if the practice of trial lawyers donating to judicial campaign to influence judges was a problem, the corporate interests have more than compensated for any perceived disadvantage they faced. Donations from corporate America are now overwhelming donations from trial lawyers, labor unions, and groups that support progressive judicial candidates.
… Big business is tightening its grip on our courts. Instead of serving as a last resort for Americans seeking justice, judges are bending the law to satisfy the concerns of their corporate donors.
MEXICO (above and two below) http://go.nasa.gov/2iy3axd
Sepia & contrast enhanced (ab0ve) http://go.nasa.gov/2iEg9Zb
North of Antarctica & east of Africa (three above) http://go.nasa.gov/2iDRtjI
The North Atlantic Ocean (ab0ve) / Jan.16, 2017 http://go.nasa.gov/2iy5cxl