absolute legal immunity versus the Law of Karma, or life under Babylon the Great

   

-Shasta

 Is there such a thing as absolute legal immunity in reality?  Of course not, since the cosmic Law of Karma exists!  One makes more karma by the process of karma-dodging or shifting it onto someone else.  The universe is not stupid!!      

  Certain mega-corporations or a group of them have been granted absolute legal immunity, as for example, Congress/President 2008 (and US Supreme Court 2012) granted to the Telecoms-- though this violates the 4th amendment to US Constitution. But the list of legal immunity grants is quite long--I mention just a few examples:

1)

22 U.S. Code § 288a - Privileges, exemptions, and immunities of international organizations

International organizations shall enjoy the status, immunities, exemptions, and privileges set forth in this section, as follows:

International organizations shall enjoy the status, immunities, exemptions, and privileges set forth in this section, as follows:

(a) International organizations shall, to the extent consistent with the instrument creating them, possess the capacity—

(i)

to contract;

(ii)

to acquire and dispose of real and personal property;

(iii)

to institute legal proceedings.

(b) 

International organizations, their property and their assets, wherever located, and by whomsoever held, shall enjoy the same immunity from suit and every form of judicial process as is enjoyed by foreign governments, except to the extent that such organizations may expressly waive their immunity for the purpose of any proceedings or by the terms of any contract.

(c) 

Property and assets of international organizations, wherever located and by whomsoever held, shall be immune from search, unless such immunity be expressly waived, and from confiscation. The archives of international organizations shall be inviolable.

(d) 

Insofar as concerns customs duties and internal-revenue taxes imposed upon or by reason of importation, and the procedures in connection therewith; the registration of foreign agents; and the treatment of official communications, the privileges, exemptions, and immunities to which international organizations shall be entitled shall be those accorded under similar circumstances to foreign governments.

(Dec. 29, 1945, ch. 652, title I, § 2, 59 Stat. 669.)   https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/22/288a

.....................................................................................................................................................

2)   The US  Foreign Soveign Immunities Act, 1976, also offers added protections for some traditionally significant sovereign assets.   One type of entity that receives such added protection is foreign central banks.   https://harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/vol_12402_toosovereign.pdf
....................................................................................................................................................

3)    Some private funds are now (2012) suing the Bank of International Settlements at Basel (which is commonly considered out of reach of creditors) and drawing unwelcome attention to the bank's hyper-privelged legal immunities.  https://books.google.com/books?id=NLs2jde6kEQC&pg=PT158&lpg=PT158&dq=imf+legal+immunity+haven&source=bl&ots=vjr_7Ys3Sg&sig=g5J6-epOsRf1uiiIphsWUblVrcw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjdvOSWxu_YAhVm5IMKHdJtD-QQ6AEIOTAD#v=onepage&q=imf%20legal%20immunity%20haven&f=false

......................................................................................................................................

4)     4-5-16   Since Atkinson v. Inter-American Development Bank, 1998, decided in the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, the US Supreme Court has repeatedly held that, in 1945, foreign states were not absolutely immune.[2]   As already noted, foreign states received immunity only where Dept.of State suggested it, or, if DOS was silent, where executive or legislative policy required it.  In 1952, DOS formally adopted the “restrictive theory” of sovereign immunity, under which immunity shields only a foreign nation’s public acts, not its commercial acts.  

On 3-24-16 the  US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit did not consider the plaintiffs’ argument that recent Supreme Court cases overturned the DC Circuit decisions but held instead that it should be heard and decided by the DC Circuit on appeal.  (This case concerned International Finance Corp, World Bank's private sector lending arm, and their claim to absolute legal immunity. -r)    http://www.brettonwoodsproject.org/2016/04/ifc-claims-absolute-immunity-to-avoid-justice-but-will-it-hold-up-in-court/

.....................................................................................................................................

5)      2-7-12   American veterans and the entire country of Viet Nam affected by Agent Orange have been shafted beyond imagination due to corruption within the US government and US courts.  US courts have protected Monsanto and Dow Chemical from liability and criminal prosecution.  The US government has shielded Monsanto and Dow from the massive cost of medical treatment for victims and environmental remediation cleanup costs that would drive these corporations into bankruptcy....

• President Reagans’s administration, in cahoots with the CDC, thwarted a $43 million Congressional Study of Agent Orange in 1987 to protect itself and its corporate pals Monsanto & Dow from accountability to US veterans and the people of Viet Nam.

• US Courts dismissed veterans’ Agent Orange lawsuits based on a Supreme Court precedent, known as the Feres Doctrine, freeing the government of responsibility for deaths and injuries related to military service.

• The Supreme Court refused to hear American and Vietnamese victims’ lawsuits against Monsanto, Dow and other Agent Orange manufacturers on 3 separate occasions.  Remember that the Supreme Court collects their checks from the federal government.

• Agent Orange makers hide behind government contractor immunity, despite the fact that dioxin contaminated herbicide 2,4,5-T was produced long before they were contractors for the government (50 million tons of the herbicide was sprayed in the US per year). No modifications were used for Monsanto & Dow’s herbicide — half the ingredients in Agent Orange — so the immunity defense falls flat.

• Boehringer, a German 2,4,5-T herbicide producer notified Dow in 1957 about dioxin hazards and that dioxin could be eliminated by slow cooking the herbicide for about 12 hours. It appears that Dow and Monsanto continued cooking 2,4,5-T quickly in 45 minutes. Higher output led to higher profits.  Monsanto’s formula contained high levels of dioxin and was dirtier than Dow’s product.

• Monsanto was not only aware in 1950 that dioxin was a health danger, but they also created a fraudulent health study.

• In 1965 Dow met in secret with other Agent Orange manufacturers to discuss the toxicity hazards of dioxin and their fear over a government investigation and restrictive regulations.

• Weinstein based his ruling on Monsanto’s expert study that was later proven to be fraudulent.

•  Weinstein dismissed all other veterans’ lawsuits against Monsanto and Dow.

•  Weinstein took over a case that was unlawfully transferred to his federal court as it had been filed in the state of Texas.  He dismissed that case.

•  Astonishingly, Weistein created a second new rule of law to protect Monsanto and Dow.  Weinstein invented immunity for government contractors!   Approximately 11 million gallons of Agent Orange was dumped on Viet Nam between 1962 to 1970.  It is estimated that Agent Orange is responsible for 400,000 deaths, 3 million victims of disease and 500,000 children born with birth defects.
  Over 14 million acres of Vietnamese forests were sprayed. Agent Orange was also dumped in water supplies.
  In 2004, Vietnamese victims filed a lawsuit against Dow, Monsanto and other manufacturers of Agent Orange.  Judge Weinstein (yes, the same Judge Weinstein) presided over this case and dismissed it.  Weinstein used the excuse that Monsanto and Dow had government sovereign immunity that extended to them because they were government contractors.  He also ruled that Agent Orange was not considered a poison during that period, under international law.  The Supreme Court refused to hear this case, too. http://naturalsociety.com/white-house-us-courts-and-epa-shaft-veterans-to-protect-monsanto/#ixzz554CSxagf 
  ..................................................................................................................................................
• 6)  The settlement left the tobacco industry immune from future state and federal suits  https://www.npr.org/2013/10/13/233449505/15-years-later-where-did-all-the-cigarette-money-go
• ..........................................................................................................................................................

7)     Capitalist (transnational) ideology rests on the concept of “markets” being so efficient that they should be allowed to work without human intervention.  But what is a market?  Under (transnational) capitalism, it is nothing more than the aggregate interests of the most powerful and largest financiers and industrialists.  No wonder that “markets” “decide” that neoliberal austerity must be ruthlessly imposed — it is those at the top of vast corporate institutions who benefit from the decisions that the World Bank, and similar institutions, consistently make.

Markets do not sit in the clouds, beyond human control, as some perfect mechanism.  They impose the will of those with the most who can not ever have enough.  Markets are not ordained by some higher power — everything of human creation can be undone by human hands.  https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/03/24/world-bank-declares-itself-above-the-law/

...........................................................................................................................

8)      7-5-17   The IMF are made up of political, Illuminati, global elitist “who continually exempt themselves from things they force on us,“ according to Haven.  Any one of the many executives, officers, representatives, employees, etc. receive special treatment when it comes to the rest of the seven billion people on Earth.  The IMF are free from any and all regulations or search of private property and assets.  They are also free from infringement of archives.  Worst of all, they are immune from the judicial process and taxation!      http://asheepnomore.net/2017/07/05/nwo-update-imf-granted-themselves-complete-immunity-from-any-form-of-legal-prosecution-or-taxation/2/

.........................................................................................................................................

9)      2015-6     The World Bank Group, BIS and IMF are exempt from any kind of financial regulation and judicial proceedings.  The following information is excerpts from legislation pertaining to:   1. Bank for International Settlements.   2. World Bank Group.  3. International Monetary Fund.

The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) opened for business on 17 May 1930 in Basel, Switzerland, where it still has its headquarters today.  The BIS was founded by J.P. Morgan & Co and six privately owned central banks (p.445).  Since its founding, the BIS has established two representative offices: in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (1998) and in Mexico City (2002).  The BIS was created at the Hague Conference that dealt with the issue of German war reparation payments arising from the 1919 Treaty of Versailles.    https://www.change.org/p/united-nations-revoke-world-bank-group-bis-imf-immunities-from-financial-regulation-judicial-action