2 Comments
Mar 22, 2022Liked by Erin Brockovich

This is very interesting and good information

Thank you for all the interesting information that you write about and share

Expand full comment

I shared this article on my website and FB. Thank you

Here are some sobering facts about our water. And just knowing this I wonder how in the name of God we can allow injection of toxic, radioactive, forever chemicals to be disposed of in our groundwater,which is exactly what is occurring at the Arroyo Grande Oil Field by Sentinel LLC and 100's of thousands of other injection wells across this country.

Is it allowed by exemption or exceptions to the rules? How can you make an exception or exemption to a rule that guarantees safety, health and well being? Morally, ethically you can't. Poisoning the water supply is still poisoning no matter who does it. An exception or exemption just gives the offending party immunity from prosecution. So wtf?

If I poured arsenic down my neighbors well and all the animals and anyone that drank it died, am I liable? Or is that o.k. because I was granted special dispensation by the persons in charge of making and enforcing the law? Well, here's another interesting fact. People are not held to the same standards and rules and regulations as corporations.

Corporations can be exempted and granted immunity from prosecution for first degree murder, manslaughter, in essence poisoning of vital resources, air, water and soil to be specific. Whereas, in the case of real persons they are held to a different much stricter and more stringent standards under criminal codes for the same offense.

A pardon from the President of the United States is the only thing that will save a sentenced person and it is based on proving they were unjustly convicted of the crime. And even then in many cases like, Leonard Peltier, even when proven innocent there is no pardon. Now that is criminal in the first degree.

Corporations on the other hand are granted an automatic pardon and afforded the privilege of just saying, aka, lying that their discharge and industrial by product is harmless and that is good enough to allow them to dump the poison until people and things start to die. That could pose a momentary set back for the producers but systematically doable. You can't bring the animals and people back to life but all the offending party has to do to avoid prosecution is to say; “sorry my bad. I didn't know what I was doing. It was an accident"

Our 2 tier justice system that handles real persons committing crimes against humanity and the social order one way under criminal law while at the same time handles fictitious persons differently under the quasi Administrative Rules and Regulations civil process that have automatically granted them immunity from prosecution for ‘crimes’ against humanity and the social order.

It is in fact impossible to prosecute a Corporation under Criminal law because they can not be captured and prosecuted as a person and sentenced to death or life in prison like a real person for capital crimes or any crimes for that matter. The worst that can happen to a fictitious entity that practices unsafe, unhealthy, deadly operations is a monetary settlement, you could call this capitol punishment, which really doesn't do justice to or cure or remedy the death and destruction of lives and livelihoods that was inflicted. In civil settlements of this nature they are allowed to continue doing what they are doing which guarantees more deaths, suffering, irreparable and irreversible harm wherever they are present. Whereas real persons are removed from society, incarcerated, which removes the threat to the public and prevents them from repeating their offense. Not so with corporations who are operating under a different set of rules.

Yes, a real clear and present division and divide of how the law recognizes and values lives v capitol. 2 sets of rules with 2 different standards of moral and ethical codes of conduct. Corporations are amoral and real persons are moral centric. Which is to say morals don't apply to the amoral class of 'persons.'

So the law that is based on morals and principles and treats everyone the same doesn't apply to a class of 'persons' that are fictitious and privileged in nature. Interesting. Questions really are; Is this system of justice sustainable and doable? Is it fair? It is right? Are these even valid questions in an amoral society? So who are we?

Expand full comment