Is it a Bank service or an Activist Bank, Wells Fargo?...Por que la doble-moralidad de la izquierda odia a la Madre Teresa de Calcuta?...Whoaaa what a succes and social development: Belgium euthanizes the first child!!!

Gay Activist Bank Wells Fargo Scammed Customers

By Susan Stamper Brown , CP Guest Contributor

September 14, 2016|12:38 pm

Susan Stamper Brown resides in Alaska and writes about culture, politics and current events.

If Wells Fargo was focused on bank charges and interest rates rather than political hot button issues, perhaps they wouldn't have had to fire thousands of employees for ripping off customers and be liable for millions in fines.

In a recent press release, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau [CFPB] recounted that Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. will pay "the largest penalty the CFPB has ever imposed," $185 million, because thousands of Wells Fargo employees "covertly" opened "more than two million deposit and credit card accounts," transferring funds from consumers' authorized accounts without their knowledge or consent, often racking up fees or other charges."

The press release says the employees who engaged in this "widespread illegal practice" were "spurred by sales targets and compensation incentives."

"Spurred" is a little mild, considering that CNN Money reports that a "pressure cooker environment" at Wells Fargo resulted in employees engaging "in all kinds of sordid practices."
Specifically, approximately 5,300 employees may have opened roughly 1.5 million deposit accounts, transferring funds from consumers' accounts to temporarily fund the new, unauthorized accounts. The CFPB reports that consumers were "sometimes harmed" from insufficient funds or overdraft charges. But it seems it was a win-win for Wells Fargo for those actions apparently helped the bank meet sales goals and also helped employees earn additional compensation.

Additionally, CFPB says employees applied for "roughly 565,000 credit card accounts that may not have been authorized by consumers, leading to "incurred annual fees, as well as associated finance or interest charges and other fees." They also issued and activated debit cards and created PIN numbers and fake email addresses to enroll unaware consumers in online-banking services.
All this, while Wells Fargo was simultaneously shoving social issues down consumers' throats as they've done for years.

Last year, in response to an advertisement featuring a lesbian couple, noteworthy Evangelicals like Franklin Graham said they'd had enough and closed out their accounts. Nonetheless, Wells Fargo remained resolute in its activist stance and has the right to do so.
But individuals also have the right to put their money in banks that leave what people do in the bedroom out of the boardroom.

During an interview in 2015 with the San Francisco Business Times, Wells Fargo executive Doug Case said, "… our CEO John Stumpf very frequently will talk about LGBT inclusiveness and, talk about walking the talk …"
Walking the talk? Sure, Wells Fargo repeatedly receives high rankings from the Human Rights Campaign, the largest LGBT advocacy group and political lobbying organization in the United States, the bank's latest scam is just one in a "string of infractions," reports USA Today. Wells Fargo "faced or settled four key areas of litigation as of the end of 2015" including FHA insurance claims, Visa and MasterCard interchange fees, mortgage products, and order of posting (overdraft) fees.
So why not try walking the bank talk? Obviously, Wells Fargo has lost its focus.

It is easy to do. But when a distraction sidetracks your purpose something's got to give. Wells Fargo's forgotten that a bank is not a social experimentation petri dish. It is a financial institution … a bank. Banks lend and borrow money and accept customers' deposits and pay interest in return. Then they use those funds to lend to other customers. Pure and simple.
Given that 5,300 employees, not just a handful of bad actors, were fired for what boils down to identity theft for profit, Wells Fargo would be better served serving its purpose, rather than investing time and energy bartering in social and political activism.

Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/gay-activist-bank-wells-fargo-scammed-customers-169527/#jBf184mAXFkZY8gO.99

¿Por qué el odio contra la madre Teresa de Calcuta?

Daniel Rodríguez Herrera

Existe para buena parte de la izquierda un único mandamiento. Naturalmente, no tiene nada que ver con el cristiano ni con amar a Dios o al prójimo de ninguna de las maneras. Es algo mucho más simple y onanista: Si eres de izquierdas, eres buena persona. De ahí se extrae un corolario igualmente simple: Si no eres de izquierdas, no puedes ser buena persona. Y aunque la lógica formal nos enseñe que ni partiendo de esa falsa premisa puede extraerse esa conclusión, lo cierto es que la lógica formal siempre ha tenido un papel muy escaso en la formación de las creencias políticas.

Como el mundo no suele encajar dentro de esquemas tan simples, estos progres se esfuerzan en meter la realidad dentro de su visión del mundo a martillazos. Este fin de semana, con motivo de la canonización de la Madre Teresa, pudimos ver en acción uno de ellos: la demonización de cualquier adversario, por más sagrado que pueda ser visto por la gente, siempre y cuando no se ajuste a su esquema mental. Como ejemplo, tanto los periódicos españoles izquierdistas Público y El País nos enseñaron lo “mala” que la Madre Teresa fue en realidad, entre otras cosas por ser católica y estar en contra del aborto. Y, naturalmente, el aquelarre de las redes sociales lo amplificó.

Teresa de Calcuta fue una persona real, y como tal tuvo luces y sombras, claro que sí. Pero es curioso que sólo pongan la lupa en alguien que, pareciendo la más pura definición de buena persona, al mismo tiempo es difícil encajar como militante izquierdista. Por poner un ejemplo, si buscan algo parecido a “El lado oscuro de Nelson Mandela” en estos mismos medios, no encontrarán nada. Porque a Mandela, mal que bien, sí lo podían colocar dentro de la izquierda política, y por tanto tenía permiso para ser buena persona, pese a que, como todo ser humano de carne y hueso, tuviera sus luces y sus sombras.

Así, no nos puede sorprender que llamen a la Madre Teresa “puto cacahuete miserable”. Porque lo esencial no es lo que se diga o haga, sino la pertenencia a la secta. Y la monja albanesa consagró, con mayor o menor acierto, su vida a los demás sin pasar por ese trago izquierdista. Así es difícil mantener la ficción de que la Iglesia no es más que un nido de pederastas. Normal que quienes se creen buenos por tener las ideas “correctas” sin necesidad de mover un dedo por el prójimo busquen la excusa que sea para condenarla. Lo que sea con tal de seguir viviendo en su complaciente océano de autosatisfacción moral.

© Libertad Digital

Belgium euthanizes first minor child under new law

By Cassy Fiano | September 18, 2016 , 08:49pm

Two years ago, Belgium’s King Philippe signed into law a bill that allowed children to be euthanized. It was a controversial move, one that drew international condemnation, including from the American Academy of Pediatrics. After the bill became law, any child could legally be euthanized, if they asked to be and had parental consent.

Children did not need to be terminally ill; they only needed to be “in great pain” and for there to be no available treatment. Defenders of the bill point to the requirement of approval from both doctors and psychiatrists as proof that the law is fair and safe — yet the entire reason the bill was passed to begin with was because children were already being euthanized in Belgium. Instead of prosecuting the doctors who were illegally euthanizing children, Belgium just made it legal.
And Belgium has just euthanized their first child.

The identity of the child has been kept private, but the child was reportedly a 17-year-old suffering from an incurable illness. The nature of the illness has also not been disclosed. A member of Belgium’s federal euthanasia commission confirmed that the child has been killed.

Wim Distelmans, a notorious Belgian doctor who euthanized a transgender man and blind twins and arranged an “inspiring” tour of Auschwitz, chairs Belgium’s Federal Control and Evaluation Committee on Euthanasia, and applauds the allowance of euthanasia for children. He admitted that few children had requested euthanasia, but “that does not mean we should deny them the right to a dignified death.” Belgian Senator Jean-Jacques De Gucht also spoke in favor of the child’s euthanasia. “I think it’s very important that we, as a society, have given the opportunity to those people to decide for themselves in what manner they cope with that situation,” he said.

Euthanasia has been legal in Belgium for 14 years now, and the number of people requesting assisted suicide has steadily risen each year, including among those who are not terminally ill. Belgium is the only country in the world that allows minor children of any age to be euthanized.