SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
November, 02 2017, 02:15pm EDT
Contact:
Seth Gladstone – sgladstone@fwwatch.org, 347.778.2866
Rick Perry's Absurd Remark About Fossil Fuels and Sexual Assault
Statement of Wenonah Hauter, Executive Director, Food & Water Watch
WASHINGTON
At an energy policy forum today, Energy Secretary Rick Perry suggested that fossil fuels prevent sexual assault, stating, "From the standpoint of sexual assault, when the lights are on, when you have a light that shines, the righteousness, if you will, on those types of acts." In response, Food & Water Watch Executive Director Wenonah Hauter issued the following statement:
"Rick Perry's statement on the social virtues of fossil fuels is absurd. We all need light in the dark, but what we don't need are the host of calamitous impacts of dirty fossil fuels on society: air and water pollution, destruction of natural landscapes, deadly human health effects and global climate chaos. There are better ways to keep the lights on, Mr. Perry.
"It's time to acknowledge the better path forward: renewable power from clean and abundant resources."
Relatedly, a study from Food & Water Watch on the social impacts of the fossil fuel industry in Pennsylvania found that in counties where fossil fuel development existed, rates of sexually transmitted diseases were 62 percent higher than in areas without that industry, and arrests rates for disorderly conduct increased more quickly as well.
Food & Water Watch mobilizes regular people to build political power to move bold and uncompromised solutions to the most pressing food, water, and climate problems of our time. We work to protect people's health, communities, and democracy from the growing destructive power of the most powerful economic interests.
(202) 683-2500LATEST NEWS
DOGE Minion Accused of Self-Dealing by Participating in Attack on Consumer Watchdog Agency
"It's clear that the mission of Elon Musk and his DOGE crew has nothing to do with reducing 'waste, fraud, and abuse,' and everything to do with lining their own pockets at the expense of working people," said one advocate.
May 12, 2025
Several watchdog and advocacy groups are demanding the acting inspector general of the U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau investigate potential conflicts of interest between the Department of Government Efficiency employees who have been involved in mass layoff efforts at the U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, with a focus on one DOGE aide in particular.
The groups behind the letter, which is dated May 8, include Accountable.US, Public Citizen, Project On Government Oversight, and others.
Twenty five-year-old software engineer Gavin Kliger was detailed to work at the the CFPB starting in March as part of DOGE operations to downsize the agency, according to ProPublica.
The investigative outlet reported that Kliger holds stock in companies "that could benefit from the agency's dismantling" but went on to help oversee mass layoffs at the CFPB, despite objections reportedly raised by ethics attorneys at the agency.
The CFPB, an agency created in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis to protect consumers from deceptive or unfair practices in the consumer financial space, bars employees from owning holdings in specific firms—a list that "is tailored to include only businesses that are subject to examination by the bureau." That list is in addition to ethics regulations in place at other financial regulatory agencies and those that apply to executive branch employees more generally.
In April, ProPublica reported that Kliger owns up to $365,000 worth of shares in Apple Inc., Tesla Inc. and two cryptocurrencies. Apple and Tesla are on the list of prohibited holdings. The two cryptocurrencies, Bitcoin and Solana, are not on that list but "are nevertheless barred under agency guidance on investing in cryptocurrency firms," according to ProPublica.
In May, the outlet reported that further review of his public financial report showed that Kliger has even more holdings in companies that are on that prohibited holdings list. "Kliger also disclosed owning as much as $350,000 worth of stock in Google parent Alphabet Inc., Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway and the Chinese e-commerce company Alibaba," the reporting states.
Pointing to court records and government emails, ProPublica reported that Kliger was indeed involved in overseeing layoffs of more than 1,400 employees at the CFPB. A spokesperson for the White House repeatedly told ProPublica that Kliger "did not even manage" the layoffs, "making this entire narrative an outright lie."
Those layoffs are currently tied up in litigation.
Kliger departed the CFPB last week, according to Bloomberg Law.
"Americans expect that those who serve in office are looking out for the public interest, not their own bottom line," said Accountable.US executive director Tony Carrk in a statement on Monday. "Clearly, the Trump administration is more focused on self-enrichment schemes and making it easier for corporate special interests to take advantage of regular Americans than it is on bringing down skyrocketing costs. The CFPB inspector general must investigate this matter immediately."
Mike Pierce, executive director of another group behind the letter, the Student Borrower Protection Center, added that "it's clear that the mission of Elon Musk and his DOGE crew has nothing to do with reducing 'waste, fraud, and abuse,' and everything to do with lining their own pockets at the expense of working people."
In the letter, the groups point to ProPublica's reporting about Kliger's holdings, note that CFPB employees are barred from owning holdings in specific companies, and cite federal law that forbids executive branch employees from participating in matters affecting their own personal financial interests.
The letter also links to research from the Student Borrower Protection Center which explores how Musk could also benefit from a less powerful CFPB.
"We urge you to swiftly investigate these clear conflicts of interest violations of Trump administration officials acting in their own personal financial interest, and we look forward to your prompt response on this matter," concludes the letter.
According to Politico, which first reported on the letter, spokespeople with the Office of Personnel Management, CFPB, and DOGE did not respond to requests for comment.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Sanders, Democrats Call Trump's Bluff on Drug Price Executive Order
"If Trump is serious," said Sen. Bernie Sanders, "he will support legislation I will soon be introducing to make sure we pay no more for prescription drugs than people in other major countries."
May 12, 2025
If U.S. President Donald Trump actually wants to curb out-of-control prescription drug prices, he'll throw his support behind legislative efforts instead of trying to do so unilaterally—an approach that's unlikely to survive legal challenges.
That was the message that Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and congressional Democrats sent to the White House after Trump signed an executive order Monday aimed at pushing "pharmaceutical manufacturers to bring prices for American patients in line with comparably developed nations."
The order resembles an effort that a federal judge blocked during Trump's first term after the pharmaceutical industry mobilized against it.
Sanders, a longtime proponent of legislative action to address exorbitant medicine prices, said he agrees it is "an outrage that the American people pay, by far, the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs."
"As Trump well knows, his executive order will be thrown out by the courts," said Sanders. "If Trump is serious about making real change rather than just issuing a press release, he will support legislation I will soon be introducing to make sure we pay no more for prescription drugs than people in other major countries. If Republicans and Democrats come together on this legislation, we can get it passed in a few weeks."
If Trump is serious about making real change rather than just issuing a press release, he will support legislation I will introduce to ensure we pay no more for prescription drugs than people in other major countries. If we come together, we can get it passed in a few weeks.
[image or embed]
— Senator Bernie Sanders (@sanders.senate.gov) May 12, 2025 at 1:01 PM
Sanders and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) have previously teamed up on a bill that would end drugmakers' monopoly control over a medication and allow generic competition if it is priced higher in the U.S. than in other rich nations.
An analysis released last year by the RAND Corporation estimated that prescription drug prices in the U.S. are, on average, 2.78 times higher than prices in Canada, Germany, France, and other comparable countries.
Khanna wrote on social media that he supports Trump's "effort to ensure Americans do not pay more for drugs than those in other countries." But, like Sanders, Khanna warned the executive order is likely doomed to fail.
"Instead of an EO that will get challenged again by Big Pharma, why not work with Bernie Sanders and me to make this law," the California Democrat wrote.
The pharmaceutical industry has made its opposition to Trump's latest order clear. In a statement, Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America CEO Stephen Ubl claimed that "importing foreign prices from socialist countries would be a bad deal for American patients and workers."
"It would mean less treatments and cures and would jeopardize the hundreds of billions our member companies are planning to invest in America," Ubl added, rehashing a common and false industry talking point.
"Donald Trump is all hat and no cattle when it comes to lowering the price of prescription drugs."
Since taking office, Trump has repeatedly claimed to support aggressive action to bring down drug prices while simultaneously working to roll back progress toward that goal. Last month, as Common Dreamsreported, Trump signed an executive order aimed at delaying Medicare price negotiations for a broad category of prescription drugs.
The price negotiations began during the Biden administration following Democratic lawmakers' passage of the Inflation Reduction Act, a law whose drug pricing provisions have so far withstood Big Pharma's legal onslaught.
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said in response to the president's executive order that "Donald Trump is all hat and no cattle when it comes to lowering the price of prescription drugs."
"Trump spent his entire first term blathering about Big Pharma, but in the end he always backed down instead of fighting for American seniors and families," said Wyden. "Democrats took on Big Pharma and won by finally giving Medicare the power to negotiate lower drug prices on behalf of seniors and capping their out-of-pocket costs for expensive prescriptions. If Trump was serious about lowering drug prices, he would work with Congress to strengthen Medicare drug price negotiations, not just sign a piece of paper."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Lots of Psychotic Murderers': Ex-Elite UK Troops Break Silence on Iraq, Afghanistan War Crimes
"They handcuffed a young boy and shot him," said one Special Air Service veteran.
May 12, 2025
Dozens of former United Kingdom Special Forces troops or those who served with them have broken their silence to describe alleged war crimes they witnessed—including the execution of children—during the U.S.-led wars on Afghanistan and Iraq.
BBC's "Panorama"—which has repeatedly aired episodes focused on war crimes committed by British soldiers during the so-called War on Terror—on Monday featured testimonies from 30 former U.K. Special Forces (UKSF) members, including Special Air Service (SAS), Special Boat Service (SBS), and supporting troops who served in Afghanistan and Iraq.
"They handcuffed a young boy and shot him," recalled one SAS veteran who fought in Afghanistan. "He was clearly a child, not even close to fighting age."
"It's not justified, killing people in their sleep."
Another veteran who served with the SAS said that killing was "intoxicating" for some soldiers and became "an addictive thing to do," adding that there were "lots of psychotic murderers" among the ranks.
"On some operations, the troop would go into guesthouse-type buildings and kill everyone there," he said. "They'd go in and shoot everyone sleeping there, on entry. It's not justified, killing people in their sleep."
One SBS veteran described executions of wounded people who posed no threat, including one man who was being treated by a medic when "one of our blokes came up to him."
"There was a bang. He'd been shot in the head at point-blank range," the veteran recalled, describing the killing and other like it as "completely unnecessary."
"These are not mercy killings," he said. "It's murder."
Another veteran recounted a fellow SAS commando who kept track of the dozens of Afghans he'd killed during his six-month deployment.
"It seemed like he was trying to get a kill on every operation, every night someone got killed," the former soldier said, adding that his colleague was "notorious in the squadron; he genuinely seemed like a psychopath."
The soldier allegedly slit the throat of an injured Afghan man after telling an officer not to shoot him again, "because he wanted to go and finish the wounded guy off with his knife."
Another veteran said "everyone knew" what was happening and that to avoid scrutiny for executions, British troops would plant "drop weapons" on victims' bodies to make it appear as if they were militants. U.S. troops—who widely engaged in this war crime—called it "dead-checking."
One veteran said that "there was implicit approval for what was happening" from commanders.
"We understood how to write up serious incident reviews so they wouldn't trigger a referral to the military police," he explained. "If it looked like a shooting could represent a breach of the rules of conflict, you'd get a phone call from the legal adviser or one of the staff officers in HQ. They'd pick you up on it and help you to clarify the language. 'Do you remember someone making a sudden move?' 'Oh yeah, I do now.' That sort of thing. It was built into the way we operated."
"Panorama" also confirmed for the first time that former Conservative U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron, who was in office from 2010-16, was repeatedly warned that British troops were committing war crimes.
Gen. Douglas Lute, a former U.S. ambassador to NATO, told "Panorama" that then-Afghan President Hamid Karzai—who repeatedly condemned American war crimes in his country—was "so consistent with his complaints about night raids, civilian casualties, and detentions that there was no senior Western diplomat or military leader who would have missed the fact that this was a major irritant for him."
In 2020, the International Criminal Court determined that British troops committed war crimes in Iraq but declined to prosecute any alleged perpetrators.
Documented war crimes committed by U.S. troops, mercenaries, and other private contractors in nations including Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Libya, and Syria during the ongoing War on Terror include but are not limited to murder of civilians and detainees, extraordinary rendition, torture, rape, and jailing and sexual abuse of women and girls held as bargaining chips.
Whistleblowers who exposed these and other illegalities—including WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, former NSA operative Edward Snowden, former Army analyst Chelsea Manning, former CIA intelligence officer John Kiriakou, and others—were almost always the only ones ever punished in connection with the crimes they exposed.
Other coalition troops—including Afghans, Iraqis, Australians, Germans, Poles, and Canadians—have allegedly committed atrocities during the War on Terror, as have Taliban, al-Qaeda, Islamic State, and other militants.
According to the Costs of War Project at Brown University's Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs, "at least 940,000 people have died due to direct war violence, including civilians, armed forces on all sides, contractors, journalists, and humanitarian workers" in U.S.-led wars since 9/11. This figure includes at least 408,000 civilians.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular