Thank God for Norma Leah Nelson McCorvey's lawyers . . .

Whoa, a superprecedence event ( the “leak” of a “swinging for the fences,” “a 21 gun salute,” of “a withering takedown” of Roe v. Wade in a February 10, 2022 draft majority opinion in this decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Dobbs vs Jackson Women's Health Organization ) has me feeling like I'm spiraling, reeling ( and almost any of the 58 other synonyms for reeling ) back to the early '70s of the 20th century, remembering all of the energy I put into insuring a woman's right to choose, to have control over their own body, beating ( for once ) what is and has been the Republican patriarchy's mantra - “keep them barefoot and pregnant” - without hope of equality . . . ( in other words, as Jung suggests, “their jealousy of a woman's power to give birth” ).

And, only because it's a draft version, I'm not going to get suckered into mourning what might turn out to be the loss of this almost 50 year victory for democracy, but rather just put the following three proposed theories out there for you to discuss as to the question:  “Why the leak?” ( much thanks goes to New York University Law Professor Melissa Murray for setting me on this path ).

One theory, as unlikely as it is, is that the draft decision could have been leaked by one ( or more ) of the three ( or, perhaps, four ) dissenting judges.

A second theory, is that it could have been leaked by someone “in the middle,” wanting to stress test how a decision like this would play out in the public space.

Or, finally, it may have been leaked by one of the five ( or, perhaps, six ) majority justices who fears that there could be defectors from the majority opinion.  This is a way to backwalk the majority justices into a corner and make certain that they stay “on sides” in the “absolutist decision” that “takes no prisoners” and “really undermines and eviscerates” all of Roe v. Wade ( not to mention the possiblility of a whole series of other “rights” which rely on Roe v. Wade [ and its history ] and could be decided in the same way ).

Have at it ( in the "Enter Comment" section [ below ], if you feel up to it )!

Smiling All the Way to the Bank - The "military-industrial-banking" complex

If you've seen the movie “The International,” then you may have been struck by the following dialogue between Interpol agent Louis Salinger who is interviewing the International Bank of Business and Commerce's ( IBBC ) Security Chief, Wilhelm Wexler ( who is a former Russian Stasi Colonel and Communist hardliner ), with the Manhattan Assistant District Attorney, Eleanor Whitman, secretly listening in ):

Louis Salinger:  Skarssen [ head of IBBC ] and that bank [ IBBC ] need to answer for what they've done.  They have to be brought to justice.  You can help me do that.

Colonel Wexler:  Justice . . . is not possible.

Salinger:  Why not?

Wexler:  Because, Agent Salinger . . . your idea of justice is an illusion.  Understand the very system that you serve and protect . . . will never allow anything to happen to Skarssen or the bank.  On the contrary.  The system guarantees the IBBC's safety . . . because everyone is involved.

Salinger:  What do you mean, “everyone”?

Wexler:  Hezbollah.  CIA.  The Colombian drug cartels.  Russian organized crime.  Governments of Iran, Germany, China, your government.  Every multinational corporation, every one.  They all need banks like the IBBC . . . so that they can operate within the black and gray latitudes.  And this is why your investigative efforts . . . have either been ignored or undermined . . . and why you and I will be quietly disposed of . . . before any case against the bank ever reaches a court of law.

This was illustrated so beautifully on MSNBC back in March in a segment entitled:  “How Giant Investment Bank Goldman Sachs Is Profiting On Ukraine War.”

And, once again, I'm reminded of these lines from the movie script for the movie “American Gangster” ( modified for the illegal war crimes of Putin's war against Ukraine ):

Detective Richie Roberts:  They don't want this to stop.  It employs too many people.  Lawyers, judges, military officers and non-commissioned soldiers, prison guards, county social workers.  The day a war is stopped, hundreds of thousands of people lose their jobs.

We don't hear a peep from the 16 or 17 intelligence agencies about the place of the banks in the “military-industrial-banking complex” war effort . . . .

Which led me to ask the question on Google Search - “Which country is the largest arms dealer in the world?”  And, of course, it's still the United States.

With the United States supplying arms to 100 of the 195 countries in the world today.

To reiterate how that translates to per capita war spending in 2021?  Statistica states, “$2,651.62” ( in 2021 dollars ) for every man, woman, and child!

And, if the sanctions against Russia were to work ( cf. the findings on the Giant Investment Bank Goldman Sachs above ), then we could almost redistribute the Russian percentage in the graphic in the graphic's proportions to the other players in the graphic, resulting in a 45.8% slice of the pie for the military-industrial-banking complex in the United States - and we're talking $801,000,000,000.