Re: [blind-democracy] Only Nonviolent Resistance Will Destroy Corporate State

Absolutely correct!
Any time we resort to the tactics of the Corporate State, we lose.
Remember the hard and fast rule: Violence begets violence.
Carl Jarvis
On 10/20/17,
comes the following message: > Only Nonviolent Resistance Will Destroy
Corporate State
> By Chris Hedges, www.truthdig.com
> October 19th, 2017
>
> Above Photo: The Oceti Sakowin camp, near the Standing Rock reservation in
> North Dakota, in November 2016. (Becker1999 / Flickr)
>
> The encampments by Native Americans at Standing Rock, N.D., from April 2016
> to February 2017 to block construction of the Dakota Access pipeline
> provided the template for future resistance movements. The action was
> nonviolent. It was sustained. It was highly organized. It was grounded in
> spiritual, intellectual and communal traditions. And it lit the conscience
> of the nation.
>
> Native American communities-more than 200 were represented at the Standing
> Rock encampments, which at times contained up to 10,000 people-called
> themselves "water protectors." Day after day, week after week, month after
> month, the demonstrators endured assaults carried out with armored
> personnel
> carriers, rubber bullets, stun guns, tear gas, cannons that shot water
> laced
> with chemicals, and sound cannons that can cause permanent hearing loss.
> Drones hovered overhead. Attack dogs were unleashed on the crowds. Hundreds
> were arrested, roughed up and held in dank, overcrowded cells. Many were
> charged with felonies. The press, or at least the press that attempted to
> report honestly, was harassed and censored, and often reporters were
> detained or arrested. And mixed in with the water protectors was a small
> army of infiltrators, spies and agents provocateurs, who often initiated
> vandalism and rock throwing at law enforcement and singled out
> anti-pipeline
> leaders for arrest.
>
> The Democratic administration of Barack Obama did not oppose the pipeline
> until after the election of Donald Trump, who approved the project in
> January 2017 soon after he became president. The water protectors failed in
> their ultimate aim to stop the construction, but if one looks at their
> stand
> as a single battle in a long war, Standing Rock was vitally important
> because it showed us how to resist.
>
> In November of last year I spoke with Kandi Mossett, one of the water
> protector leaders, when I visited the North Dakota encampments. We were
> standing over one of the sacred fires.
>
> "He starts throwing rocks at police," she said of an infiltrator who
> shadowed her and pointed her out to law enforcement for arrest. "When he
> throws rocks I see a few other people throw water bottles. One of our women
> says, 'Stop throwing shit!' So people stop. But there's instigators and
> infiltrators. We've had, here at this fire, two women who were called
> bikers
> because of the way they were dressed. When they lifted up their hands with
> everybody, people saw they had wires on. [Water protector] security went to
> them. They said, 'We see that you're miked.' They took off running. Went
> over the fence. And a car came zooming, picked them up, and they took off.
> It's not easy to keep [infiltrators] out. They can roll under the fence.
> They can come from under the security gates. We know they're here."
>
> The corporate state, no longer able to peddle a credible ideology, is
> becoming more overtly totalitarian. It will increasingly silence dissidents
> out of fear that the truth they speak will spark a contagion. It will, as
> in
> China's system of totalitarian capitalism, use the tools of censorship,
> blacklisting, infiltration, blackmailing, bribery, public defamation,
> prison
> sentences on trumped-up charges and violence. The more discredited the
> state
> becomes, the more it will communicate in the language of force.
>
> "This world is heading towards economic systems that continue to eat up
> life
> itself, even the heart of workers, and it's not sustainable," Native
> American and environmental leader Tom B.K. Goldtooth told me when we spoke
> at one of the camps last year. "We're at that point where Mother Earth is
> crying out for a revolution. Mother Earth is crying out for a new
> direction."
>
> "As far as a new regime, we'll need something based on earth
> jurisprudence,"
> he said. "A new system away from property rights, away from privatization,
> away from financialization of nature, away from control over our . DNA,
> away
> from control over seeds, away from corporations. It's a common law with
> local sovereignty. That's why it's important we have a system that
> recognizes the rights of a healthy and clean water system, ecosystem.
> Mother
> Earth has rights. We need a system that will recognize that. Mother Earth
> is
> not an object. We have an economic system that treats Mother Earth as if
> she's a liquidation issue. We have to change that. That's not sustainable."
>
> "If the pipeline is built, is that a defeat?" I asked him. He replied
> wryly,
> "That oil is going to run dry a lot sooner than they think. Maybe that
> corporation is going to go bankrupt. Who knows?"
>
> "I talk about the need for young people to have patience, to put the prayer
> first, rather than just jumping out there and putting their energy into
> action," he said. Angry reaction is "what the corporations want. That's
> what
> the government wants. They want us to react. They want us to feel that
> anger. When the anger escalates, our feelings, frustrations, it goes back
> to
> that rage. The rage of the machines. It's also unhappy. It feeds off the
> unhappiness of people."
>
> George Lakey, the Eugene M. Lang Visiting Professor for Issues in Social
> Change emeritus at Swarthmore College and a sociologist who focuses on
> nonviolent social change, talked about Sweden and Norway's response in the
> 1920 and '30s to the rise of fascism and compared it with the response in
> Italy and Germany. We live in a historical moment similar to when fascism
> was ascendant between the two world wars, he argues. Lakey was a trainer
> during the civil rights movement for Mississippi Freedom Summer and
> co-authored "A Manual for Direct Action: Strategy and Tactics for Civil
> Rights and All Other Nonviolent Protest Movements," one of the seminal
> texts
> of the civil rights movement.
>
> "Fascism was a definite threat," he said of the situation faced by Sweden
> and Norway. "And they were also experiencing [economic] depression.
> Norway's
> degree of depression was even worse than Germany's. It was the worst in
> Europe. The highest unemployment in Europe. People were literally starving.
> The pressure, the pro-fascist setup that the depression brings, was very
> present both in Sweden and in Norway. What the Nazis did there-what they
> did
> in Germany and what the fascists did in Italy-was provocation, provocation,
> provocation. 'Bait the left. The left will come. And we'll have street
> fighting.' "
>
> Street violence, he said in echoing Native American elders, always
> "strengthens the state."
>
> "It puts more pressure on the state-which is presided over by the 1
> percent-to step in more and more forcefully, with the middle class saying,
> 'We care about order. We don't want chaos,' " he said. "That's what
> happened
> in Germany. It was a strengthening of the state. This happened in Italy as
> well. That's what the game plan was for fascists in Norway and Sweden. It
> didn't work. It didn't work because the left didn't play their game. They
> didn't allow themselves to be baited into paying attention to them, doing
> street fighting."
>
> "Instead, [what was done] in the civil rights movement we would have called
> 'they kept their eyes on the prize,' " Lakey said. "They knew the prize was
> to push away the economic elite, get rid of its dominance, so they can set
> up a new economic system, which is now called the Nordic model. What they
> did was: massive strikes, massive boycotts, massive demonstrations. Not
> only
> in the urban areas, which is what you expect, but also in the rural areas.
> During the Depression [in Sweden and Norway], there were lots of farmers
> who
> had their farms foreclosed on. Farmers are perennially in debt and had no
> way of repaying that debt. When the sheriff came, farmers in that county
> would come to join them and collectively not cooperate-not violently, but
> very strongly-in such a way that the sheriff couldn't carry out the
> auction."
>
> "Remember who is actually running things, and we keep our focus on them
> both
> politically and economically," Lakey said.
>
> "The group I'm involved with [Earth Quaker Action Team] loves to go after
> corporations," he said. "We went after a bank [PNC], the seventh largest
> bank in the country but it was the No. 1 financier of mountaintop-removal
> coal mining in Appalachia. We forced that bank out of [the] business of
> financing mountaintop coal mining. Nonviolently. Disrupting. Disrupting. We
> were in bank branches all over the place. We shut down two shareholder
> meetings. We led a boycott in which people took out money from that bank
> and
> were putting it in their local credit unions. So there's more than one way
> to go after the 1 percent."
>
> "These days, a very smart way to do that is to focus on the economic
> entities that are owned by the 1 percent, who are basically responsible for
> the oppression that we experience," he said.
>
> Resistance, he stressed, will come from outside the formal political
> system.
> It will not be embraced by either of the two main political parties or the
> establishment, which is now under corporate control.
>
> "The Democratic Party is out to lunch," he said. "The Republican Party is
> actively grinding us. But even so we can make tremendous strides and start
> building that mass movement, which in Norway and Sweden was able to push
> the
> economic elites away. So that's an indication of the way to build a
> movement-which is not to take them on the way antifa suggests. Instead, in
> the way the civil rights movement did. It worked. I was there. The Ku Klux
> Klan was much stronger then than it is now. In the Deep South, the Ku Klux
> Klan virtually ran the [region]."
>
> Resistance, he said, means movements have to keep "pushing, pushing,
> pushing. Campaign after campaign after campaign." It must always stay "on
> the offensive. That's the secret."
>
> "As soon as they lost that sense of going on the offensive, choosing
> campaign after campaign and winning those campaigns, that was when they
> lost
> their momentum," he said of the civil rights movement. "The important thing
> about what happened in Norway and Sweden was they kept their momentum. The
> campaigns continued to grow in number and in power until the economic elite
> was out."
>
> "I was very influenced by Bayard Rustin, who was the chief strategist for
> Dr. [Martin Luther] King," he said. "I heard Bayard say over and over and
> over, 'If we don't get this economic justice thing done, in 50 years we're
> still going to have rampant racism.' He was right. But Dr. King and the
> other leaders who understood that were not able to get a sufficient number
> of people to make it. Now, the '63 march was for jobs and justice. So they
> were able to do it to some degree. They kept moving in that direction,
> involving white trade unions in that process. But in the situation of
> general prosperity, there were many people who were content with our
> economic system."
>
> Economic decline, deindustrialization, austerity, debt peonage, decay and
> collapse of social services and infrastructure and the impoverishment of
> the
> working class, Lakey said, have changed the configuration. The working
> class, in short, can no longer be bought off.
>
> "We're in a very different situation," he said. "We're still in austerity.
> There's not the degree of [contentment] that there once was. Trump has
> obviously capitalized on that fact. There's discontent. I think what Dr.
> King and Bayard and others wanted to happen in the '60s is now realizable."
>
> "The impact of ignoring climate change is going to be more and more
> disastrous," he added. "We're just through it now with [a devastating
> hurricane in] Houston. We're going to see more and more money drained off
> by
> that [kind of natural disaster]. Again, the 1 percent won't want to pay
> their fair share. What that leaves us is a population that is more and more
> discontent. We see that polarization going on. Polarization always goes
> along with increased inequality. We can expect more polarization. That's a
> part of the temptation of antifa: 'I'm more and more upset.' "
>
> "When dealing with mountaintop-removal coal mining, we went from an
> organization [Earth Quaker Action Team] that started in a living room to 13
> states," he said. "We were steadfastly nonviolent. And we were targeting
> something people understood. 'Wow, you're going after the bank that's
> financing this? I want to join that.' Even though there were some people
> who
> were like, 'We'd like a little more politeness, please.' They didn't get it
> because what we were about was making the bank's life so difficult that
> they
> would choose instead to get out of the business [of mountaintop mining]."
>
> Lakey cautioned against diverting energy to attacking neo-Nazi and white
> supremacist groups. That, he said, is a gift to the state.
>
> "There's really no need for us to shift our attention from going after the
> 1
> percent to go after, often, working-class guys on the extreme right," he
> said. "For one thing, we look at their real, genuine grievances and address
> them. For example, how many people on the right are from working-class
> families who have family members who are not being served by our health
> care
> system? Many people on the far right are from a demographic that is
> actually
> losing life expectancy for the first time in U.S. history. The health care
> system in the U.S is a mess. Obamacare is better than previous, but it's a
> mess. So what we can do is address the genuine grievances instead of
> writing
> people off as if obsession with racism is all that's going on. Fascism
> grows
> when the economy declines. So let's address the real thing instead of the
> symptom."
>
> While refusing to be baited into violent confrontations with the radical
> right, we must also be vigorous in using militant, nonviolent tactics to
> block hate speech. Article 4 of the International Covenant on the
> Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, adopted by the United
> Nations in 1965, stipulates that "all propaganda and all organizations"
> based on ideas or theories of racial or ethnic superiority should be
> illegal. It urges states to take positive steps to eliminate them.
>
> Dr. Margaret Flowers and Kevin Zeese of Popular Resistance dealt with the
> issue of hate speech recently when a Baltimore chapter of the League of
> Women Voters held a series of panel discussions on immigration. The chapter
> invited speakers from anti-immigrant white supremacist groups listed as
> hate
> groups by the Southern Poverty Law Center. Despite public outcry, the
> league
> refused to withdraw the invitations. At the initial event the speaker was
> prevented from completing his presentation by anti-racist activists and
> members of the local chapter of the Green Party.
>
> "Organizations and institutions do not have a requirement to include those
> who espouse hate," Flowers and Zeese wrote of the event. "They are not
> required to give a platform to or legitimize white supremacist views. In
> fact, one could argue that it is anti-social to do so."
>
> "We would do better as a society to debate the best ways to eliminate white
> supremacy," they added.
>
> Lakey's prescription: "Consistently occupy the moral high ground, and that
> attracts support." "It defangs those who want to do us in," he said. "It's
> not like the 1 percent was fond of the civil rights movement. They had to
> be
> dragged kicking and screaming into making concessions. J. Edgar Hoover was
> even quoted as saying, 'He's [King] the most dangerous man in America.' "
>
> And, Lakey said, "there's a psychological reward. Going for what you want,
> instead of opposing what you don't want, is itself fulfilling. It was civil
> rights. It was called the Freedom Movement. It's also called a black
> liberation movement. It was all about positivity."
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [blind-democracy] Re: FW: Remember Armistice Day

Hi Mary,
I understand that it appears that the Corporate American Empire(ACE)
has troops and advisors in places where it seems they have no
investments. But if you do a search, taking any of the areas you are
questioning, and google the name of the country or area, with the
question, "Why is the USA involved in this nation/area"?
It could be that we are "protecting" some mineral deposits. We might
be staking our claim in order to prevent another world power, like
China, from getting in ahead of us. It could be a place we feel is
important to our control of an area, like our heavy support of Israel
in order to maintain our foot in the door of the Middle East. But I
am personally convinced that the Empire is not wasting resources in
areas that have no value...present or future.
Let me know what you think.

Carl Jarvis


On 10/21/17, MARY CONVY <CCRUSER@msn.com> wrote:
> Carl, We are in far too many places where we have no corporate interests.
> What the heck are we doing in Niger and when did anyone tell us we were
> sending troops there? Get us out.
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org
> <blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org> on behalf of Carl Jarvis
> <carjar82@gmail.com>
> Sent: Friday, October 20, 2017 9:27 PM
> To: blind-democracy@freelists.org
> Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: FW: Remember Armistice Day
>
> On 10/20/17, Carl Jarvis <carjar82@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Mary,
>> Miriam summed it up perfectly. Those troops are in place to defend
>> our military industry and the corporations profiting from it. These
>> are the same corporations that have taken over our American
>> government, and turned our citizens into consumers. So every holiday
>> is another opportunity to force American Consumers to buy buy buy. We
>> have been under years of conditioning to become enraged if any upstart
>> nation dares to challenge our right(our corporate right) to plunder
>> when and where we wish.
>> And by the way, one reason I love this list so much is because we can
>> say whatever is on our mind, and those who read our words are not
>> forced in any way to accept a single word. No cash, no credit cards,
>> no coupons, no going into debt. It's all free!
>> Carl Jarvis
>>
>>
>> On 10/20/17, MARY CONVY <CCRUSER@msn.com> wrote:
>>> Carl, We have 1.3 million troops stationed around the world. They are
>>> trained to fight, not make peace. I worry much more about our
>>> militarization
>>> than commercialism of holidays.
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org
>>> <blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org> on behalf of Carl Jarvis
>>> <carjar82@gmail.com>
>>> Sent: Friday, October 20, 2017 11:48 AM
>>> To: blind-democracy@freelists.org
>>> Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: FW: Remember Armistice Day
>>>
>>> Maybe Veterans Day would be a good Holiday to take over and promote
>>> World Peace and Brother/Sisterhood. But we'd probably find a way to
>>> corrupt it, if we did. Look at what we've done to Christmas, Easter,
>>> Labor Day, Thanksgiving(football day), The Fourth of July, and even
>>> Mother's Day. All have become highly commercialized. And we wonder
>>> if Capitalism has any impact in our thinking?
>>> My dad was born on November 11, 1912, just another regular day. For
>>> his sixth birthday they declared it to be Armistice Day. But it's
>>> hard to celebrate an armistice that went South, so they changed the
>>> name to Veterans Day in honor of all the men...and later, women, who
>>> went forward to defend the right of our Capitalists to plunder
>>> wherever they chose. But anyway, since the day is used to having its
>>> name changed, calling it World Peace Day would be no big deal. And as
>>> long as Capitalism is our way of life, the name would not interfere
>>> with the Capitalists from their plundering and stealing our hard
>>> earned dollars.
>>>
>>> Carl Jarvis
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/20/17, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@optonline.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: info=rootsaction.org@mail.salsalabs.net
>>>> [mailto:info=rootsaction.org@mail.salsalabs.net] On Behalf Of
>>>> RootsAction
>>>> Team
>>>> Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2017 9:50 AM
>>>> To: miriamvieni@optonline.net
>>>> Subject: Remember Armistice Day
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=g4ALppWDQm%2FIzlDEuRpykstN6gJxKKWV>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=RTeGsFrTKRUp17ByCnGEeEpApkR0dS1R>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Originally called "Armistice Day," the holiday began in 1918,
>>>> celebrating
>>>> the end of World War I and the idea of ending all war. A 10-year
>>>> campaign
>>>> launched that year resulted in the ratification of the Kellogg-Briand
>>>> Pact
>>>> which legally banned all war-making.
>>>>
>>>> <http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=I3Ld2GMK79gSk8IFlpaOOUpApkR0dS1R>
>>>> Click here to remind your Representative, Senators, and President of
>>>> Armistice Day, also known as Remembrance Day.
>>>>
>>>> The Kellogg-Briand Pact reads:
>>>>
>>>> "The High Contracting Parties solemly declare in the names of their
>>>> respective peoples that they condemn recourse to war for the solution
>>>> of
>>>> international controversies, and renounce it, as an instrument of
>>>> national
>>>> policy in their relations with one another.
>>>>
>>>> "The High Contracting Parties agree that the settlement or solution of
>>>> all
>>>> disputes or conflicts of whatever nature or of whatever origin they may
>>>> be,
>>>> which may arise among them, shall never be sought except by pacific
>>>> means."
>>>>
>>>> Click here to ask your elected officials to read the Kellogg-Briand
>>>> Pact
>>>> with this message
>>>> <http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=OxHOb4MBBGla7aEg%2BhvF50pApkR0dS1R>
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>> As your constituent, I'm writing to remind you that war-making is
>>>> illegal.
>>>>
>>>> The United States is party, with much of the world, to a treaty banning
>>>> all
>>>> war.
>>>>
>>>> The Kellogg-Briand Pact states:
>>>>
>>>> "The High Contracting Parties solemly declare in the names of their
>>>> respective peoples that they condemn recourse to war for the solution
>>>> of
>>>> international controversies, and renounce it, as an instrument of
>>>> national
>>>> policy in their relations with one another.
>>>>
>>>> "The High Contracting Parties agree that the settlement or solution of
>>>> all
>>>> disputes or conflicts of whatever nature or of whatever origin they may
>>>> be,
>>>> which may arise among them, shall never be sought except by pacific
>>>> means."
>>>>
>>>> Please bear this in mind going forward.
>>>>
>>>> <http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=aW8Df38gFXDVU18jjST2a8tN6gJxKKWV>
>>>> Act now by clicking here.
>>>>
>>>> After doing this action, please use the tools on the next webpage to
>>>> share
>>>> it with your friends.
>>>>
>>>> This work is only possible with your financial support.
>>>> <http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=3wAIpEuo%2FHlCorARtfGc0kpApkR0dS1R>
>>>> Please chip in $3 now.
>>>>
>>>> -- The RootsAction.org Team
>>>>
>>>> P.S. RootsAction is an independent online force endorsed by Jim
>>>> Hightower,
>>>> Barbara Ehrenreich, Cornel West, Daniel Ellsberg, Glenn Greenwald,
>>>> Naomi
>>>> Klein, Bill Fletcher Jr., Laura Flanders, former U.S. Senator James
>>>> Abourezk, Frances Fox Piven, Lila Garrett, Phil Donahue, Sonali
>>>> Kolhatkar,
>>>> and many others.
>>>>
>>>> Background:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> <http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=eJQ%2F5S3VDGipXeqRwZXNQkpApkR0dS1R>
>>>>> World Beyond War: Armistice Day 99 Years On and the Need for a Peace
>>>>> to
>>>>> End All Wars
>>>>>
>>>>> <http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=kmEgcav5xBd51YZMD%2BUgWEpApkR0dS1R>
>>>>> David Swanson: When the World Outlawed War
>>>>>
>>>>> <http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=7HN7dK70%2Bf4BY21TrL7PaUpApkR0dS1R>
>>>>> Scott Shapiro and Oona Hathaway: The Internationalists
>>>>>
>>>>> <http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=JNMVMmRhu%2F3my%2FPT5wuVpUpApkR0dS1R>
>>>>> List of Upcoming Armistice Day Events
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=3qTWgKSHRgPA%2BqnWgWxS1EpApkR0dS1R>
>>>> www.RootsAction.org<http://www.RootsAction.org>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=zbKQ1kxHAqNlh6s%2BAHb1jEpApkR0dS1R>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=Sgmn4EU3sg9U7Nwy56%2BF40pApkR0dS1R>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=WT0hhZB9ydq5XWb4UFhqnUpApkR0dS1R>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=E15U2oeM9S4uBRm9ChaEX0pApkR0dS1R>
>>>> Unsubscribe
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.salsalabs.com/?email>
>>>>
>>>> <http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/dia/TrackImage?key=3615986222>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

Re: [blind-democracy] From Aggressive Overtures to Sexual Assault: Harvey Weinstein's Accusers Tell Their Stories

Denial! How many ugly ways do we need to encounter Denial before we
realize that we are hiding behind it?
The fact is that given unlimited power, powerful men believe that they
can do just about anything they want to do. Powerful men prove this
point over and over again.
The same can be said for powerful nations. This is why we need limits
on our governments and limits on the activities of powerful men.
We simply must face our own nature and find ways of harnessing it,
rather than denying it.

Carl Jarvis


On 10/11/17, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@optonline.net> wrote:
> Harvey Weinstein. (image: Oliver Munday/Raymond Hall/GC Images/Getty
> Images)
>
>
> From Aggressive Overtures to Sexual Assault: Harvey Weinstein's Accusers
> Tell Their Stories
>
> By Ronan Farrow, The New Yorker
> 10 October 17
>
> Multiple women share harrowing accounts of sexual assault and harassment by
> the film executive.
>
> Since the establishment of the first studios a century ago, there have been
> few movie executives as dominant, or as domineering, as Harvey Weinstein.
> As
> the co-founder of the production-and-distribution companies Miramax and the
> Weinstein Company, he helped to reinvent the model for independent films,
> with movies such as "Sex, Lies, and Videotape," "The English Patient,"
> "Pulp
> Fiction," "The Crying Game," "Shakespeare in Love," and "The King's
> Speech."
> Beyond Hollywood, he has exercised his influence as a prolific fund-raiser
> for Democratic Party candidates, including Barack Obama and Hillary
> Clinton.
> Weinstein combined a keen eye for promising scripts, directors, and actors
> with a bullying, even threatening, style of doing business, inspiring both
> fear and gratitude. His movies have earned more than three hundred Oscar
> nominations, and, at the annual awards ceremonies, he has been thanked more
> than almost anyone else in movie history, just after Steven Spielberg and
> right before God.
>
> For more than twenty years, Weinstein has also been trailed by rumors of
> sexual harassment and assault. This has been an open secret to many in
> Hollywood and beyond, but previous attempts by many publications, including
> The New Yorker, to investigate and publish the story over the years fell
> short of the demands of journalistic evidence. Too few people were willing
> to speak, much less allow a reporter to use their names, and Weinstein and
> his associates used nondisclosure agreements, monetary payoffs, and legal
> threats to suppress these myriad stories. Asia Argento, an Italian film
> actress and director, told me that she did not speak out until
> now—Weinstein, she told me, forcibly performed oral sex on her—because she
> feared that Weinstein would "crush" her. "I know he has crushed a lot of
> people before," Argento said. "That's why this story—in my case, it's
> twenty
> years old; some of them are older—has never come out."
>
> Last week, the New York Times, in a powerful report by Jodi Kantor and
> Megan
> Twohey, revealed multiple allegations of sexual harassment against
> Weinstein, a story that led to the resignation of four members of his
> company's all-male board, and to Weinstein's firing from the company.
>
> The story, however, is more complex, and there is more to know and to
> understand. In the course of a ten-month investigation, I was told by
> thirteen women that, between the nineteen-nineties and 2015, Weinstein
> sexually harassed or assaulted them, allegations that corroborate and
> overlap with the Times' revelations, and also include far more serious
> claims.
>
> Three women—among them Argento and a former aspiring actress named Lucia
> Evans—told me that Weinstein raped them, allegations that include Weinstein
> forcibly performing or receiving oral sex and forcing vaginal sex. Four
> women said that they experienced unwanted touching that could be classified
> as an assault. In an audio recording captured during a New York Police
> Department sting operation in 2015 and made public here for the first time,
> Weinstein admits to groping a Filipina-Italian model named Ambra Battilana
> Gutierrez, describing it as behavior he is "used to." Four of the women I
> interviewed cited encounters in which Weinstein exposed himself or
> masturbated in front of them.
>
> Sixteen former and current executives and assistants at Weinstein's
> companies told me that they witnessed or had knowledge of unwanted sexual
> advances and touching at events associated with Weinstein's films and in
> the
> workplace. They and others describe a pattern of professional meetings that
> were little more than thin pretexts for sexual advances on young actresses
> and models. All sixteen said that the behavior was widely known within both
> Miramax and the Weinstein Company. Messages sent by Irwin Reiter, a senior
> company executive, to Emily Nestor, one of the women who alleged that she
> was harassed at the company, described the "mistreatment of women" as a
> serial problem that the Weinstein Company was struggling with in recent
> years. Other employees described what was, in essence, a culture of
> complicity at Weinstein's places of business, with numerous people
> throughout the companies fully aware of his behavior but either abetting it
> or looking the other way. Some employees said that they were enlisted in
> subterfuge to make the victims feel safe. A female executive with the
> company described how Weinstein assistants and others served as a
> "honeypot"—they would initially join a meeting, but then Weinstein would
> dismiss them, leaving him alone with the woman.
>
> Virtually all of the people I spoke with told me that they were frightened
> of retaliation. "If Harvey were to discover my identity, I'm worried that
> he
> could ruin my life," one former employee told me. Many said that they had
> seen Weinstein's associates confront and intimidate those who crossed him,
> and feared that they would be similarly targeted. Four actresses, including
> Mira Sorvino and Rosanna Arquette, told me they suspected that, after they
> rejected Weinstein's advances or complained about them to company
> representatives, Weinstein had them removed from projects or dissuaded
> people from hiring them. Multiple sources said that Weinstein frequently
> bragged about planting items in media outlets about those who spoke against
> him; these sources feared that they might be similarly targeted. Several
> pointed to Gutierrez's case, in 2015: after she went to the police,
> negative
> items discussing her sexual history and impugning her credibility began
> rapidly appearing in New York gossip pages. (In the taped conversation with
> Gutierrez, Weinstein asks her to join him for "five minutes," and warns,
> "Don't ruin your friendship with me for five minutes.")
>
> Several former employees told me that they were speaking about Weinstein's
> alleged behavior now because they hoped to protect women in the future.
> "This wasn't a one-off. This wasn't a period of time," an executive who
> worked for Weinstein for many years told me. "This was ongoing predatory
> behavior towards women—whether they consented or not."
>
> It's likely that women have recently felt increasingly emboldened to talk
> about their experiences because of the way the world has changed regarding
> issues of sex and power. These disclosures follow in the wake of stories
> alleging sexual misconduct by public figures, including Bill O'Reilly,
> Roger
> Ailes, Bill Cosby, and Donald Trump. In October, 2016, a month before the
> election, a tape emerged of Trump telling a celebrity-news reporter, "And
> when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. . . . Grab 'em
> by the pussy. You can do anything." This past April, O'Reilly, a host at
> Fox
> News, was forced to resign after Fox was discovered to have paid five women
> millions of dollars in exchange for silence about their accusations of
> sexual harassment. Ailes, the former head of Fox News, resigned last July,
> after he was accused of sexual harassment. Cosby went on trial this summer,
> charged with drugging and sexually assaulting a woman. The trial ended with
> a hung jury.
>
> On October 5th, in an initial effort at damage control, Weinstein responded
> to the Times piece by issuing a statement partly acknowledging what he had
> done, saying, "I appreciate the way I've behaved with colleagues in the
> past
> has caused a lot of pain, and I sincerely apologize for it." In an
> interview
> with the New York Post, he said, "I've got to deal with my personality,
> I've
> got to work on my temper, I have got to dig deep. I know a lot of people
> would like me to go into a facility, and I may well just do that—I will go
> anywhere I can learn more about myself." Weinstein went on, "In the past I
> used to compliment people, and some took it as me being sexual, I won't do
> that again." In his statement to the Times, Weinstein claimed that he would
> "channel that anger" into a fight against the leadership of the National
> Rifle Association. He also said that it was not "coincidental" that he was
> organizing a foundation for women directors at the University of Southern
> California. "It will be named after my mom and I won't disappoint her."
>
> Sallie Hofmeister, a spokesperson for Weinstein, issued a statement in
> response to the allegations in this article. It reads in full: "Any
> allegations of non-consensual sex are unequivocally denied by Mr.
> Weinstein.
> Mr. Weinstein has further confirmed that there were never any acts of
> retaliation against any women for refusing his advances. Mr. Weinstein
> obviously can't speak to anonymous allegations, but with respect to any
> women who have made allegations on the record, Mr. Weinstein believes that
> all of these relationships were consensual. Mr. Weinstein has begun
> counseling, has listened to the community and is pursuing a better path.
> Mr.
> Weinstein is hoping that, if he makes enough progress, he will be given a
> second chance."
>
> While Weinstein and his representatives have said that the incidents were
> consensual, and were not widespread or severe, the women I spoke to tell a
> very different story.
>
> 2.
>
> Lucia Stoller, now Lucia Evans, was approached by Weinstein at Cipriani
> Upstairs, a club in New York, in 2004, the summer before her senior year at
> Middlebury College. Evans wanted to be an actress, and although she had
> heard rumors about Weinstein she let him have her number. Weinstein began
> calling her late at night, or having an assistant call her, asking to meet.
> She declined, but said that she would do readings during the day for a
> casting executive. Before long, an assistant called to set up a daytime
> meeting at the Miramax office, in Tribeca, first with Weinstein and then
> with a casting executive, who was a woman. "I was, like, 'Oh, a woman,
> great, I feel safe,' " Evans said.
>
> When Evans arrived for the meeting, the building was full of people. She
> was
> led to an office with exercise equipment and takeout boxes on the floor,
> where she met with Weinstein alone. Evans said that she found him
> frightening. "The type of control he exerted, it was very real," she told
> me. "Even just his presence was intimidating."
>
> In the meeting, Evans recalled, "he immediately was simultaneously
> flattering me and demeaning me and making me feel bad about myself."
> Weinstein told her that she'd "be great in 'Project Runway' "—the show,
> which Weinstein helped produce, premièred later that year—but only if she
> lost weight. He also told her about two scripts, a horror movie and a teen
> love story, and said one of his associates would discuss them with her.
>
> "At that point, after that, is when he assaulted me," Evans said. "He
> forced
> me to perform oral sex on him." As she objected, Weinstein took his penis
> out of his pants and pulled her head down onto it. "I said, over and over,
> 'I don't want to do this, stop, don't,' " she said. "I tried to get away,
> but maybe I didn't try hard enough. I didn't want to kick him or fight
> him."
> In the end, she said, "He's a big guy. He overpowered me." At a certain
> point, she said, "I just sort of gave up. That's the most horrible part of
> it, and that's why he's been able to do this for so long to so many women:
> people give up, and then they feel like it's their fault."
>
> Weinstein appeared to find the encounter unremarkable. "It was like it was
> just another day for him," Evans said. "It was no emotion." Afterward, she
> said, he acted as if nothing had happened. She wondered how Weinstein's
> staff could not know what was going on.
>
> After the encounter, she met with the female casting executive, who sent
> her
> the scripts, and also came to one of her acting-class readings a few weeks
> later. (Evans does not believe that the executive was aware of Weinstein's
> behavior.) Weinstein, Evans said, began calling her again late at night.
> Evans told me that the entire sequence of events had a routine quality. "It
> feels like a very streamlined process," she said. "Female casting director,
> Harvey wants to meet. Everything was designed to make me feel comfortable
> before it happened. And then the shame in what happened was also designed
> to
> keep me quiet."
>
> Evans said that, after the incident, "I just put it in a part of my brain
> and closed the door." She continued to blame herself for not fighting
> harder. "It was always my fault for not stopping him," she said. "I had an
> eating problem for years. I was disgusted with myself. It's funny, all
> these
> unrelated things I did to hurt myself because of this one thing." Evans
> told
> friends some of what had happened, but felt largely unable to talk about
> it.
> "I ruined several really good relationships because of this. My schoolwork
> definitely suffered, and my roommates told me to go to a therapist because
> they thought I was going to kill myself."
>
> In the years that followed, Evans encountered Weinstein occasionally. Once,
> while she was walking her dog in Greenwich Village, she saw him getting
> into
> a car. "I very clearly saw him. I made eye contact," she said. "I remember
> getting chills down my spine just looking at him. I was so horrified. I
> have
> nightmares about him to this day."
>
> 3.
>
> Asia Argento, an actress born in Rome, played the role of a glamorous thief
> named Beatrice in the crime drama "B. Monkey," which was released in the
> U.S. in 1999. The distributor was Miramax. In a series of long and often
> emotional interviews, Argento told me that Weinstein assaulted her while
> they worked together.
>
> At the time, Argento was twenty-one and a rising actress who had twice won
> the Italian equivalent of the Oscar. Argento said that, in 1997, one of
> Weinstein's producers invited her to what she understood to be a party
> thrown by Miramax at the Hôtel du Cap-Eden-Roc, on the French Riviera.
> Argento felt professionally obliged to attend. When the producer led her
> upstairs that evening, she said, there was no party—only a hotel room,
> empty
> but for Weinstein: "I'm, like, 'Where is the fucking party?' " She recalled
> the producer telling her, "Oh, we got here too early," before he left her
> alone with Weinstein. (The producer denies bringing Argento to the room
> that
> night.) At first, Weinstein was solicitous, praising her work. Then he left
> the room. When he returned, he was wearing a bathrobe and holding a bottle
> of lotion. "He asks me to give a massage. I was, like, 'Look, man, I am no
> fucking fool,' " Argento said. "But, looking back, I am a fucking fool. And
> I am still trying to come to grips with what happened."
>
> Argento said that, after she reluctantly agreed to give Weinstein a
> massage,
> he pulled her skirt up, forced her legs apart, and performed oral sex on
> her
> as she repeatedly told him to stop. Weinstein "terrified me, and he was so
> big," she said. "It wouldn't stop. It was a nightmare."
>
> At some point, Argento said, she stopped saying no and feigned enjoyment,
> because she thought it was the only way the assault would end. "I was not
> willing," she told me. "I said, 'No, no, no.' . . . It's twisted. A big fat
> man wanting to eat you. It's a scary fairy tale." Argento, who insisted
> that
> she wanted to tell her story in all its complexity, said that she didn't
> physically fight him off, something that has prompted years of guilt.
>
> "The thing with being a victim is I felt responsible," she said. "Because,
> if I were a strong woman, I would have kicked him in the balls and run
> away.
> But I didn't. And so I felt responsible." She described the incident as a
> "horrible trauma." Decades later, she said, oral sex is still ruined for
> her. "I've been damaged," she told me. "Just talking to you about it, my
> whole body is shaking."
>
> Argento recalled sitting on the bed after the incident, her clothes "in
> shambles," her makeup smeared. She said that she told Weinstein, "I am not
> a
> whore," and that he began laughing. He said he'd put the phrase on a
> T-shirt. Afterward, Argento said, "He kept contacting me." For a few
> months,
> Weinstein seemed obsessed, offering her expensive gifts.
>
> What complicates the story, Argento readily allowed, is that she eventually
> yielded to Weinstein's further advances and even grew close to him.
> Weinstein dined with her, and introduced her to his mother. Argento told
> me,
> "He made it sound like he was my friend and he really appreciated me." She
> said that she had consensual sexual relations with him multiple times over
> the course of the next five years, though she described the encounters as
> one-sided and "onanistic." The first occasion, several months after the
> alleged assault, came before the release of "B. Monkey." "I felt I had to,"
> she said. "Because I had the movie coming out and I didn't want to anger
> him." She believed that Weinstein would ruin her career if she didn't
> comply. Years later, when she was a single mother dealing with childcare,
> Weinstein offered to pay for a nanny. She said that she felt "obliged" to
> submit to his sexual advances.
>
> Argento said that she knew this contact would be used to attack the
> credibility of her allegation. In part, she said, the initial assault made
> her feel overpowered each time she encountered Weinstein, even years later.
> "Just his body, his presence, his face, bring me back to the little girl
> that I was when I was twenty-one," she told me. "When I see him, it makes
> me
> feel little and stupid and weak." She broke down as she struggled to
> explain. "After the rape, he won," she said.
>
> In 2000, Argento released "Scarlet Diva," a movie that she wrote and
> directed. In the film, a heavyset producer corners the character of Anna,
> who is played by Argento, in a hotel room, asks her for a massage, and
> tries
> to assault her. After the movie came out, women began approaching Argento,
> saying that they recognized Weinstein's behavior in the portrayal. "People
> would ask me about him because of the scene in the movie," she said. Some
> recounted similar details to her: meetings and professional events moved to
> hotel rooms, bathrobes and massage requests, and, in one other case, forced
> oral sex.
>
> Weinstein, according to Argento, saw the film after it was released in the
> U.S., and apparently recognized himself. "Ha, ha, very funny," Argento
> remembered him saying to her. But he also said that he was "sorry for
> whatever happened." The movie's most significant departure from the
> real-life incident, Argento told me, was how the hotel-room scene ended.
> "In
> the movie I wrote," she said, "I ran away."
>
> Other women were too afraid to allow me to use their names, but their
> stories are uncannily similar to these allegations. One, a woman who worked
> with Weinstein, explained her reluctance to be identified. "He drags your
> name through the mud, and he'll come after you hard with his legal team."
>
> Like other women in this article, she said that Weinstein brought her to a
> hotel room under a professional pretext, changed into a bathrobe, and
> "forced himself on me sexually." She said no, repeatedly and clearly.
> Afterward, she experienced "horror, disbelief, and shame," and considered
> going to the police. "I thought it would be a 'He said, she said,' and I
> thought about how impressive his legal team is, and I thought about how
> much
> I would lose, and I decided to just move forward," she said. The woman
> continued to have professional contact with Weinstein after the alleged
> rape, and acknowledged that subsequent communications between them might
> suggest a normal working relationship. "I was in a vulnerable position and
> I
> needed my job," she told me. "It just increases the shame and the guilt."
>
> 4.
>
> Mira Sorvino, who starred in several of Weinstein's films, told me that he
> sexually harassed her and tried to pressure her into a physical
> relationship
> while they worked together. She said that, at the Toronto International
> Film
> Festival in September, 1995, she found herself in a hotel room with
> Weinstein, who produced the movie she was there to promote, "Mighty
> Aphrodite," for which she later won an Academy Award. "He started massaging
> my shoulders, which made me very uncomfortable, and then tried to get more
> physical, sort of chasing me around," she recalled. She scrambled for ways
> to ward him off, telling him it was against her religion to date married
> men. (At the time, Weinstein was married to Eve Chilton, a former
> assistant.) Then she left the room.
>
> A few weeks later, in New York City, her phone rang after midnight. It was
> Weinstein, saying that he had new marketing ideas for the film and asking
> to
> meet. Sorvino offered to meet him at an all-night diner, but he told her he
> was coming over to her apartment and hung up. "I freaked out," she told me.
> She called a friend and asked him to come over and pose as her boyfriend.
> The friend hadn't arrived by the time Weinstein rang her doorbell. "Harvey
> had managed to bypass my doorman," she said. "I opened the door terrified,
> brandishing my twenty-pound Chihuahua mix in front of me, as though that
> would do any good." When she told Weinstein that her new boyfriend was on
> his way, Weinstein became dejected and left.
>
> Sorvino said that she struggled for years with whether to come forward with
> her story, partly because she was aware that it was mild compared to the
> experiences of other women, including another actress she spoke to at the
> time. (That actress told me that she locked herself in a hotel bathroom to
> escape Weinstein, and that he masturbated in front of her. She said it was
> "a classic case" of "someone not understanding the word 'no'. . . I must
> have said no a thousand times.") The fact that Weinstein was so
> instrumental
> to Sorvino's success also made her hesitate: "I have great respect for
> Harvey as an artist, and owe him and his brother a debt of gratitude for
> the
> early success in my career, including the Oscar." She had professional
> contact with Weinstein for years after the incident, and remains close
> friends with his brother and business partner, Bob Weinstein. (She said
> that
> she never told Bob about his brother's behavior.)
>
> Sorvino said that she felt afraid and intimidated, and that the incidents
> had a significant impact on her. When she told a female employee at Miramax
> about the harassment, the woman's reaction "was shock and horror that I had
> mentioned it." Sorvino appeared in a few more of Weinstein's films
> afterward, but felt that saying no to Weinstein and reporting the
> harassment
> had ultimately hurt her career. She said, "There may have been other
> factors, but I definitely felt iced out and that my rejection of Harvey had
> something to do with it."
>
> 5.
>
> In March, 2015, Ambra Battilana Gutierrez, who was once a finalist in the
> Miss Italy contest, met Harvey Weinstein at a reception for "New York
> Spring
> Spectacular," a show that he was producing at Radio City Music Hall.
> Weinstein introduced himself to Gutierrez, who was twenty-two, remarking
> repeatedly that she looked like the actress Mila Kunis.
>
> Following the event, Gutierrez's agency e-mailed to say that Weinstein
> wanted to set up a business meeting as soon as possible. Gutierrez arrived
> at Weinstein's office in Tribeca early the next evening with her modelling
> portfolio. In the office, she sat with Weinstein on a couch to review the
> portfolio, and he began staring at her breasts, asking if they were real.
> Gutierrez later told officers of the New York Police Department Special
> Victims Division that Weinstein then lunged at her, groping her breasts and
> attempting to put a hand up her skirt while she protested. He finally
> backed
> off and told her that his assistant would give her tickets to "Finding
> Neverland," a Broadway musical that he was producing. He said that he would
> meet her at the show that evening.
>
> Instead of going to the show that night, Gutierrez went to the nearest
> N.Y.P.D. precinct station and reported the assault. Weinstein telephoned
> her
> later that evening, annoyed that she had failed to appear at the show. She
> picked up the call while sitting with investigators from the Special
> Victims
> Division, who listened in on the call and devised a plan: Gutierrez would
> agree to see the show the following day and then meet with Weinstein. She
> would wear a wire and attempt to extract a confession or incriminating
> statement.
>
> The next day, Gutierrez met Weinstein at the bar of the Tribeca Grand
> Hotel.
> A team of undercover officers helped guide her through the interaction. On
> the recording, which I have heard in full, Weinstein lists actresses whose
> careers he has helped and offers Gutierrez the services of a dialect coach.
> Then he presses her to join him in his hotel room while he showers.
> Gutierrez says no repeatedly; Weinstein persists, and after a while she
> accedes to his demand to go upstairs. But, standing in the hallway outside
> his room, she refuses to go farther. In an increasingly tense exchange, he
> presses her to enter. Gutierrez says, "I don't want to," "I want to leave,"
> and "I want to go downstairs." She asks him directly why he groped her
> breasts the day before.
>
> "Oh, please, I'm sorry, just come on in," Weinstein says. "I'm used to
> that.
> Come on. Please."
>
> "You're used to that?" Gutierrez asks, sounding incredulous.
>
> "Yes," Weinstein says. He later adds, "I won't do it again."
>
> After almost two minutes of back-and-forth in the hallway, Weinstein
> finally
> agrees to let her leave.
>
> According to a law-enforcement source, Weinstein, if charged, would have
> most likely faced a count of sexual abuse in the third degree, a
> misdemeanor
> punishable by a maximum of three months in jail. But, as the police
> investigation proceeded and the allegation was widely reported, details
> about Gutierrez's past began to appear in the tabloids. In 2010, as a young
> contestant in a beauty pageant associated with the former Italian Prime
> Minister Silvio Berlusconi, Gutierrez had attended one of his infamous
> Bunga
> Bunga parties. She claimed that she had been unaware of the nature of the
> party before arriving, and eventually became a witness in a bribery case
> against Berlusconi, which is still ongoing. Gossip outlets also reported
> that Gutierrez, as a teen-ager, had made an allegation of sexual assault
> against an older Italian businessman but later declined to coöperate with
> prosecutors.
>
> Two sources close to the police investigation said that they had no reason
> to doubt Gutierrez's account of the incident. One of them, a police source,
> said that the department had collected more than enough evidence to
> prosecute Weinstein. But the other source said that Gutierrez's statements
> about her past complicated the case for the office of the Manhattan
> District
> Attorney, Cyrus Vance, Jr. After two weeks of investigation, the District
> Attorney's office decided not to file charges. The D.A.'s office declined
> to
> comment on this story but pointed me to its statement at the time: "This
> case was taken seriously from the outset, with a thorough investigation
> conducted by our Sex Crimes Unit. After analyzing the available evidence,
> including multiple interviews with both parties, a criminal charge is not
> supported."
>
> "We had the evidence," the police source involved in the operation told me.
> "It's a case that made me angrier than I thought possible, and I have been
> on the force a long time."
>
> Gutierrez, when contacted for this story, said that she was unable to
> discuss the incident. According to a source close to the matter, after the
> D.A.'s office decided not to press charges, Gutierrez, facing Weinstein's
> legal team, and in return for a payment, signed a highly restrictive
> nondisclosure agreement with Weinstein, including an affidavit stating that
> the acts Weinstein admits to in the recording never happened.
>
> Weinstein's use of such settlements was reported by the Times and confirmed
> to me by numerous sources. A former employee with firsthand knowledge of
> two
> settlement negotiations that took place in London in the nineteen-nineties
> recalled, "It felt like David versus Goliath . . . the guy with all the
> money and the power flexing his muscle and quashing the allegations and
> getting rid of them."
>
> 6.
>
> Last week's Times story disclosed a complaint to the Weinstein Company's
> office of human resources, filed on behalf of a temporary front-desk
> assistant named Emily Nestor in December, 2014. Her own account of
> Weinstein's conduct is being made public here for the first time. Nestor
> was
> twenty-five when she started the job, and, after finishing law school and
> starting business school, was considering a career in the movie industry.
> On
> her first day in the position, Nestor said, two employees told her that she
> was Weinstein's "type" physically. When Weinstein arrived at the office, he
> made comments about her appearance, referring to her as "the pretty girl."
> He asked how old she was, and then sent all of his assistants out of the
> room and made her write down her telephone number.
>
> Weinstein told her to meet him for drinks that night. Nestor invented an
> excuse. When he insisted, she suggested an early-morning coffee the next
> day, assuming that he wouldn't accept. He did, and told her to meet him at
> the Peninsula in Beverly Hills, where he was staying. Nestor said that she
> had talked with friends in the entertainment industry and employees in the
> company who had warned her about Weinstein's reputation. "I dressed very
> frumpy," she said.
>
> Nestor told me that the meeting was the "most excruciating and
> uncomfortable
> hour of my life." After Weinstein offered her career help, she said, he
> began to boast about his sexual liaisons with other women, including famous
> actresses. "He said, 'You know, we could have a lot of fun,' " Nestor
> recalled. "I could put you in my London office, and you could work there
> and
> you could be my girlfriend." She declined. He asked to hold her hand; she
> said no. In Nestor's account of the exchange, Weinstein said, "Oh, the
> girls
> always say no. You know, 'No, no.' And then they have a beer or two and
> then
> they're throwing themselves at me." In a tone that Nestor described as
> "very
> weirdly proud," Weinstein added "that he'd never had to do anything like
> Bill Cosby." She assumed that he meant he'd never drugged a woman. "It's
> just a bizarre thing to be so proud of," she said. "That you've never had
> to
> resort to doing that. It was just so far removed from reality and normal
> rules of consent."
>
> "Textbook sexual harassment" was how Nestor described Weinstein's behavior
> to me. "It's a pretty clear case of sexual harassment when your superior,
> the C.E.O., asks one of their inferiors, a temp, to have sex with them,
> essentially in exchange for mentorship." She recalled refusing his advances
> at least a dozen times. " 'No' did not mean 'no' to him," she said. "I was
> very aware of how inappropriate it was. But I felt trapped."
>
> Throughout the breakfast, she said, Weinstein interrupted their
> conversation
> to yell into his cell phone, enraged over a spat that Amy Adams, a star in
> the Weinstein movie "Big Eyes," was having in the press. Afterward,
> Weinstein told Nestor to keep an eye on the news cycle, which he promised
> would be spun in his favor. Later in the day, there were indeed negative
> news items about his opponents, and Weinstein stopped by Nestor's desk to
> be
> sure that she'd seen them.
>
> By that point, Nestor recalled, "I was very afraid of him. And I knew how
> well connected he was. And how if I pissed him off then I could never have
> a
> career in that industry." Still, she told the friend who referred her to
> the
> job about the incident, and he alerted the company's office of human
> resources, which contacted her. (The friend did not respond to a request
> for
> comment.) Nestor had a conversation with company officials about the matter
> but didn't pursue it further: the officials said that Weinstein would be
> informed of anything she told them, a practice not uncommon in smaller
> businesses. Several former Weinstein employees told me that the company's
> human-resources department was utterly ineffective; one female executive
> described it as "a place where you went to when you didn't want anything to
> get done. That was common knowledge across the board. Because everything
> funnelled back to Harvey." She described the department's typical response
> to allegations of misconduct as "This is his company. If you don't like it,
> you can leave."
>
> Nestor told me that some people at the company did seem concerned. Irwin
> Reiter, a senior executive who had worked for Weinstein for almost three
> decades, sent her a series of messages via LinkedIn. "We view this very
> seriously and I personally am very sorry your first day was like this,"
> Reiter wrote. "Also if there are further unwanted advances, please let us
> know." Last year, just before the Presidential election, he reached out
> again, writing, "All this Trump stuff made me think of you." He described
> Nestor's experience as part of Weinstein's serial misconduct. "I've fought
> him about mistreatment of women 3 weeks before the incident with you. I
> even
> wrote him an email that got me labelled by him as sex police," he wrote.
> "The fight I had with him about you was epic. I told him if you were my
> daughter he would have not made out so well." (Reiter declined to comment,
> but his lawyer, Debra Katz, confirmed the authenticity of the messages and
> said that Reiter had made diligent efforts to raise these issues, to no
> avail. Katz also said that Reiter "is eager to coöperate fully with any
> outside investigation.")
>
> Though no assault occurred, and Nestor completed her temporary placement,
> she was profoundly affected by the incident. "I was definitely traumatized
> for a while, in terms of feeling so harassed and frightened," she said. "It
> made me feel incredibly discouraged that this could be something that
> happens on a regular basis. I actually decided not to go into entertainment
> because of this incident."
>
> 7.
>
> Emma de Caunes, a French actress, met Weinstein in 2010, at a party at the
> Cannes Film Festival. A few months later, he asked her to a lunch meeting
> at
> the Hôtel Ritz in Paris. In the meeting, Weinstein told de Caunes that he
> was going to be producing a movie with a prominent director, that he
> planned
> to shoot it in France, and that it had a strong female role. It was an
> adaptation of a book, he said, but he claimed he couldn't remember the
> title. "But I'll give it to you," Weinstein said, according to de Caunes.
> "I
> have it in my room."
>
> De Caunes replied that she had to leave, since she was already running late
> for a TV show she was hosting—Eminem was appearing on the show that
> afternoon, and she hadn't written her questions yet. Weinstein pleaded with
> her to retrieve the book with him, and finally she agreed. As they got to
> his room, she received a telephone call from one of her colleagues, and
> Weinstein disappeared into a bathroom, leaving the door open. She assumed
> that he was washing his hands.
>
> "When I hung up the phone, I heard the shower go on in the bathroom," she
> said. "I was, like, What the fuck, is he taking a shower?" Weinstein came
> out, naked and with an erection. "What are you doing?" she asked. Weinstein
> demanded that she lie on the bed and told her that many other women had
> done
> so before her.
>
> "I was very petrified," de Caunes said. "But I didn't want to show him that
> I was petrified, because I could feel that the more I was freaking out, the
> more he was excited." She added, "It was like a hunter with a wild animal.
> The fear turns him on." De Caunes told Weinstein that she was leaving, and
> he panicked. "We haven't done anything!" she remembered him saying. "It's
> like being in a Walt Disney movie!"
>
> De Caunes told me, "I looked at him and I said—it took all my courage—but I
> said, 'I've always hated Walt Disney movies.' And then I left. I slammed
> the
> door." She was shaking on the stairs down to the lobby. A director she was
> working with on the TV show confirmed that she arrived at the studio
> distraught and that she recounted what had happened. Weinstein called
> relentlessly over the next few hours, offering de Caunes gifts and
> repeating
> that nothing had happened.
>
> De Caunes, who was in her early thirties at the time, was already an
> established actress, but she wondered what would happen to younger and more
> vulnerable women in the same situation. Over the years, she said, she's
> heard similar accounts from friends. "I know that everybody—I mean
> everybody—in Hollywood knows that it's happening," de Caunes said. "He's
> not
> even really hiding. I mean, the way he does it, so many people are involved
> and see what's happening. But everyone's too scared to say anything."
>
> 8.
>
> One evening in the early nineties, the actress Rosanna Arquette was
> supposed
> to meet Weinstein for dinner at the Beverly Hills Hotel to pick up the
> script for a new film. At the hotel, Arquette was told to meet Weinstein
> upstairs, in his room.
>
> Arquette recalled that, when she arrived at the room, Weinstein opened the
> door wearing a white bathrobe. Weinstein said that his neck was sore and
> that he needed a massage. She told him that she could recommend a good
> masseuse. "Then he grabbed my hand," she said. He put it on his neck. When
> she yanked her hand away, she told me, Weinstein grabbed it again and
> pulled
> it toward his penis, which was visible and erect. "My heart was really
> racing. I was in a fight-or-flight moment," she said. She told Weinstein,
> "I
> will never do that."
>
> Weinstein told her that she was making a huge mistake by rejecting him, and
> named an actress and a model who he claimed had given in to his sexual
> overtures and whose careers he said he had advanced as a result. Arquette
> said she told him, "I'll never be that girl," and left.
>
> Arquette said that after she rejected Weinstein her career suffered. In one
> case, she believes, she lost a role because of it. "He made things very
> difficult for me for years," she told me. She did appear in one subsequent
> Weinstein film, "Pulp Fiction," which she attributes to the small size of
> the role and Weinstein's deference to the filmmaker, Quentin Tarantino.
> (Disputes later arose over her entitlement to payment out of the film's
> proceeds.) Arquette said that her silence was the result of Weinstein's
> power and reputation for vindictiveness. "He's going to be working very
> hard
> to track people down and silence people," she explained. "To hurt people.
> That's what he does."
>
> There are other examples of Weinstein's modus operandi. Jessica Barth, an
> actress who met Weinstein at a Golden Globes party in January, 2011, told
> me
> that Weinstein invited her to a business meeting at the Peninsula. When she
> arrived, he asked her over the phone to come up to his room. Weinstein
> assured her it was "no big deal"—because of his high profile, he simply
> wanted privacy to "talk career stuff." In the room, Barth found that
> Weinstein had ordered champagne and sushi.
>
> Barth said that, in the conversation that followed, he alternated between
> offering to cast her in a film and demanding a naked massage in bed. "So,
> what would happen if, say, we're having some champagne and I take my
> clothes
> off and you give me a massage?" she recalled him asking. "And I'm, like,
> 'That's not going to happen.' "
>
> When she moved toward the door to leave, Weinstein lashed out, saying that
> she needed to lose weight "to compete with Mila Kunis," and then,
> apparently
> in an effort to mollify her, promising a meeting with one of his female
> executives. "He gave me her number, and I walked out and I started
> bawling,"
> Barth told me. (Immediately after the incident, she spoke with two
> individuals who confirmed to me that she related her account to them at the
> time.) Barth said that the promised meeting at Weinstein's office seemed to
> be purely a formality. "I just knew it was bullshit," she said. (The
> executive she met with did not respond to requests for comment.)
>
> 9.
>
> Weinstein's behavior deeply affected the day-to-day operations of his
> company. Current and former Weinstein employees described a pattern of
> meetings and strained complicity that closely matches the accounts of the
> many women I interviewed. The employees spoke on condition of anonymity,
> they said, because of fears about their careers in Hollywood and because of
> provisos in their work contracts.
>
> "There was a large volume of these types of meetings that Harvey would have
> with aspiring actresses and models," one female executive told me. "He
> would
> have them late at night, usually at hotel bars or in hotel rooms. And, in
> order to make these women feel more comfortable, he would ask a female
> executive or assistant to start those meetings with him." She said that she
> was repeatedly asked to join the meetings but refused.
>
> The female executive said that she was especially disturbed by the
> involvement of other employees. "It almost felt like the executive or
> assistant was made to be a honeypot to lure these women in, to make them
> feel safe," she said. "Then he would dismiss the executive or the
> assistant,
> and then these women were alone with him. And that did not feel like it was
> appropriate behavior or safe behavior."
>
> One former employee said that she was frequently asked to join for the
> beginning of meetings that, she said, had in many cases already been moved
> from day to night and from hotel lobbies to hotel rooms. She said that
> Weinstein's conduct in the meetings was brazen. During a meeting with a
> model, the former employee said, he turned to her and demanded, "Tell her
> how good of a boyfriend I am." She said that when she refused to join one
> such meeting, Weinstein became enraged. Often, she was asked to keep track
> of the women, who, in keeping with a practice established by Weinstein's
> assistants, were all filed under the same label in her phone: F.O.H., which
> stood for "Friend of Harvey." She said that the pattern of meetings was
> nearly uninterrupted in her years working for Weinstein. "I have to say,
> the
> behavior did stop for a little bit after the groping thing," she said,
> referring to Ambra Battilana Gutierrez's allegation to the police, "but he
> couldn't help himself. A few months later, he was back at it."
>
> Two staffers who facilitated these meetings said that they felt morally
> compromised by them. One male former staffer said that many of the women
> seemed "not aware of the nature of those meetings" and "were definitely
> scared." He said most of the encounters that he saw seemed consensual, but
> others gave him pause. He was especially troubled by his memory of one
> young
> woman: "You just feel terrible because you could tell this girl, very
> young,
> not from our country, was now in a room waiting for him to come up there in
> the middle of the day, and we were not to bother them." He said that he was
> never asked to facilitate these meetings for men.
>
> None of the former executives or assistants I spoke to quit because of the
> misconduct, but many expressed guilt and regret about not having said or
> done more. They spoke about what they believed to be a culture of silence
> about sexual assault inside Miramax and the Weinstein Company and across
> the
> entertainment industry more broadly.
>
> 10.
>
> Weinstein and his legal and public-relations teams have conducted a
> decades-long campaign to suppress these stories. In recent months, that
> campaign escalated. Weinstein and his associates began calling many of the
> women in this story. Weinstein asked Argento to meet with a private
> investigator and give testimony on his behalf. One actress who initially
> spoke to me on the record later asked that her allegation be removed. "I'm
> so sorry," she wrote. "The legal angle is coming at me and I have no
> recourse." Weinstein and his legal team have threatened to sue multiple
> media outlets, including the New York Times.
>
> Several of the former executives and assistants in this story said that
> they
> had received calls from Weinstein in which he attempted to determine if
> they
> had talked to me or warned them not to. These employees continued to
> participate in the article partly because they felt there was a growing
> culture of accountability, embodied in the relatively recent disclosures
> about high-profile men like Cosby and Ailes. "I think a lot of us had
> thought—and hoped—over the years that it would come out sooner," the former
> executive who was aware of the two legal settlements in London told me.
> "But
> I think now is the right time, in this current climate, for the truth."
>
> The female executive who declined inappropriate meetings told me that her
> lawyer advised her that she could be exposed to hundreds of thousands of
> dollars in lawsuits for violating the nondisclosure agreement attached to
> her employment contract. "I believe this is more important than keeping a
> confidentiality agreement," she said. "The more of us that can confirm or
> validate for these women if this did happen, I think it's really important
> for their justice to do that." She continued, "I wish I could have done
> more. I wish I could have stopped it. And this is my way of doing that
> now."
>
> "He's been systematically doing this for a very long time," the former
> employee who had been made to act as a "honeypot" told me. She said that
> she
> often thinks of something Weinstein whispered—to himself, as far as she
> could tell—after one of his many shouting sprees at the office. It so
> unnerved her that she pulled out her iPhone and tapped it into a memo, word
> for word: "There are things I've done that nobody knows."
>
>
> e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [blind-democracy] FW: Top 5 Signs Donald Trump Might Be an Effing Moron

To Brian and Others who are Charmed by the Words of Donald Trump,
First and foremost Donald Trump is a Promoter. And that which he
promotes is Donald Trump. This, in and of itself, does not make
Donald Trump a liar. Top flight promoters look their product over and
enlarge the positive aspects while diminishing the negative. The old
example is the saying, "he can sell an icebox to and Eskimo". Despite
freezing weather, the promoter might focus on the fact that a good
icebox can be used to keep leftovers out of the way from pets and
small children. And the top of the icebox makes a fine shelf!
Donald Trump admittedly has done a fine job of selling Donald Trump.
How can we argue over his recent victory? But in spite of that
victory, Donald Trump remains nothing but a Flim Flam Man, the
incarnation of P.T. Barnum, who said, "There's a sucker born every
minute". This is not to take anything away from Donald Trump's skill
of deception. He has fooled enough voters to land himself in the
White House. This brings up the suggestion by Brian that Donald Trump
is the first outsider to win that high office. If you are saying that
he has no formal political experience, then that is true, assuming we
discount the dog fight that goes on among the "Captains of Industry".
And by the way, those are the skills Donald Trump is applying to his
new job. But many presidents came out of the backwoods and out from
under rocks. It's interesting that we quietly accept our nation
turning over our democracy to Generals. Talk about not having the
political tools to run this Republic? And of course we have the
Lawyers who have been trained in corporate firms...well, there was Abe
Lincoln, and used to the back stabbing tactics used in plying their
trade. But Donald Trump is the Poster Boy for the Corporate
Capitalists running this American Oligarchy. You can't get more "in"
than Donald Trump. And if you doubt that he is the Fair Hair Boy,
just look at the folks he's selected to serve on his Cabinet.
The difference between the past "Leaders" of our nation, and Donald
Trump, is that for the first time in our nation's history, the Ruling
Class has been forced to take the actual offices rather than merely
manipulating their highly paid puppets.
Based on my readings of past Empires, our once glorious land(if you
are White) is in its final death throes. My best advice is to do what
you can to take care of the ones you love the most.

Carl Jarvis


On 10/7/17, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@optonline.net> wrote:
> Below is a private response to the article that I posted, written by Juan
> Cole. I don't know why Brian chose to send this response privately, but I
> think it requires a public response from me and from anyone else who chooses
> to respond. I'd suggest that if you respond, you include Brian's address to
> ensure that he receives your response.
>
> First of all, running the country is not like running a business. People who
> run businesses, do so in order to profit financially. Running the country is
> a public trust. It requires a very different skill set and one does it in
> order to ensure that all citizens benefit equally from being Americans.
>
> Second: If you've read any books about Mr. Trump, you'd know that he has not
> been successful in business. He has been in debt most of the time. First, he
> was bailed out by his father. Then, he was bailed out by banks with which
> his father had influence. Additionally, he was involved in a lot of
> businesses with criminals all over the world, and although a great deal of
> money has passed through his hands, he has been involved in money laundering
> schemes and the actual amount of money that is his, is questionable. This is
> one of the reasons that he has refused to make his income tax returns
> public.
>
> Third: Mr. Trump lies constantly about most things and his lies are obvious
> and have been pointed out by many journalists. Everything that I've written
> about him above, has appeared in books and articles and interviews by
> investigative journalists.
>
> Miriam
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian [mailto:sackriderbrian45@gmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2017 6:36 PM
> To: Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@optonline.net>
> Subject: Re: [blind-democracy] Top 5 Signs Donald Trump Might Be an Effing
> Moron
>
> I think that Juan Coal is the efing moron here. Trump is a very
> sucessful business man and extremely wealthy. Is he? if he was a moron he
> would not have not gotten whear he is today. How many business owners have
> ever been president of the Usa? Running the country is just like a
> business. Trump is the first outsider to become president he is not bought
> and paid for. anyone will believes Juan is also a moron it's takes one to
> know one.
>
> Brian Sackrider
>
>
> On 10/6/2017 10:01 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
>> You'll be pleased to know that this comes from Reader Supported News
>> so I did manage to resubscribe.
>> Miriam
>>
>> Donald Trump. (photo: Alex Brandon/AP)
>>
>> Top 5 Signs Donald Trump Might Be an Effing Moron
>>
>> By Juan Cole, Informed Comment
>> 06 October 17
>>
>> Carol E. Lee at NBC reported Wednesday that last summer Rex Tillerson,
>> the secretary of state, called Trump a "f*cking moron." The remark
>> came after a number of incidents in which Trump had contradicted
>> Tillerson on policy, and directly after Trump made salacious remarks to a
>> crowd of boy scouts.
>> Tillerson at one point had led the Boy Scouts.
>>
>> The justice of Tillerson's remark is obvious. Here are some examples:
>>
>> 1. Trump joined with Saudi Arabia in beating up on little Qatar,
>> calling the small Gulf monarchy "terrorists." Qatar hosts the US Air
>> Force base al-Udeid and helped capture Khaled Sheikh Muhammad, proving
>> itself a key ally in fighting extremism. For Saudi Arabia to accuse
>> Qatar of fostering extremism is a bit rich, but Trump joined in.
>>
>> 2. The Iran nuclear deal is one of the more successful such
>> negotiations in modern history and a model for how the UN Security
>> Council could curb nuclear proliferation. Trump is determined to
>> undermine the deal, which would reinforce the suspicions and militancy
>> of countries such as North Korea, making it even more difficult to
>> handle.
>>
>> 3. Trump pulled out of the Paris climate accords on the grounds that
>> they are too constricting and detract from US sovereignty. But the
>> accords allow each nation to set its own priorities! Even Tillerson,
>> who when it comes to climate change, is Satan incarnate, wanted to
>> stay in Paris (I presume because it could be used as a fig leaf for
>> inaction on carbon dioxide emissions).
>>
>> 4. Trump went to Puerto Rico on Tuesday and made the presidency a
>> laughingstock. He maintained that Katrina had been a much more
>> devastating storm than Irma and that because they weren't actually
>> dead the Puerto Ricans weren't suffering as much. We don't know the
>> death toll in Puerto Rico because 95 percent of the island doesn't
>> have electricity and not all the dead have been found by institutions
>> of the commonwealth. Moreover, catastrophic hurricanes are not a race
>> where one state wins and another loses. Then Trump gave out supplies
>> at a church, including flashlights, but he remarked to recipients that
>> they didn't need flashlights any more. They do. He made hurricane relief
>> all about himself instead of about the victims.
>> It was so bizarre a performance that "moron" doesn't begin to cover it.
>>
>> 5. Trump gave away US foreign policy to Exxon Mobil, the big oil
>> company, which had been led by Mr. Tillerson up until his move to the
>> State Department. The US should be making a frantic and concerted
>> effort to get off fossil fuels, not coddling Big Oil interests.
>> Appointing Tillerson to run the State Department, and letting him gut
>> it in favor of lucrative oil deals for his former corporation is just
>> about the most moronic thing you could imagine.
>>
>>
>> e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>