Smith & Wesson To Pay Over $2 Million To SEC For Bribing Governments

justinacuff:

According to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), while trying to lock down deals with certain governments, Smith & Wesson bribed or attempted to bribe foreign officials through personal gifts of cash and weapons. Apparently, the company earned more than $100,000 as a result of the bribes, and will be forfeiting related profits, interest on the profits, and a $1.9 million penalty for violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA).

As part of the deal reached with the U.S. government, Smith & Wesson will have to report their FCPA compliance efforts to the SEC for two years. They have not admitted or denied guilt, but have fired their entire international sales staff as a result of the allegations.

Read more here

oh-snap-pro-choice:

justprochoicethings:

Seriously. You want to be coddled from birth to grave? Talk about feminist entitlement.

How dare someone want their own fucking insurance which they PAY for to cover medication that is essential to most people’s lives? Do you know how many people rely on birth control for its effects on periods, or how it treats ovarian cysts? No obviously not so shut up with your ignorant shit

This has so enraged me I can’t find the words right now so I’m just going to leave this here and let my excellent followers come up with the words.

This rhetoric of “both sides” implies that pain and fault belong equally to Palestinians and Israelis. It erases manifold, unmistakable, qualitative and quantitative differences at play in Israel’s attack on the Gaza Strip and the political-historical context in which this is taking place — most centrally, that what is occurring is part of a settler-colonial invasion.

“Both sides” rhetoric refuses to make even the easiest, most obvious judgment, to which any honest evaluation of the information points: that Israel is massacring Palestinian adults and children, 77% of whom are civilians, and subjecting them to collective punishment; that Israel evidently claims for itself a right to extra-judicially execute anyone who it says is a Hamas member, a practice too few among even Palestine’s allies have denounced; that Israel is bombarding what is essentially a giant refugee camp home to an imprisoned population of a people Israel has ethnically cleansed, occupied, subjected to apartheid, and repeatedly slaughtered; that international law does not grant Israel a “right to defend itself” against the Gaza Strip. And that international law does grant Palestinians a right to resist using armed struggle.

To employ “both sides” rhetoric completely misrepresents the situation. It is not “both sides” who take thousands of political prisoners. Both sides do not systematically torture each other. Both sides do not control each other’s freedom of movement, or access to the sea, drinking water, and education.

Greg Shupak - "A Plague on One House" via Jacobin Magazine

In addition to these distinctions, the “both sides” idea is dangerous because it is immobilizing. With its use, it becomes impossible to demand an end to colonial practices. And that is exactly the point.

(via mizoguchi)

To Tumblr, Love Pixel Union
>