GoodWill Ransomware victims have to perform socially driven activities to decryption their data

May 30, 2022 By Pierluigi Paganini


ⓘ
Researchers discovered a new ransomware family called GoodWill that asks victims to donate the ransom for social causes.

CloudSEK’s Threat Intelligence Research team has disclosed a new ransomware strain called GoodWill, that demands victims the payment of a ransom through donations for social causes and financially helping people in need.

ⓘ

“The ransomware group propagates very unusual demands in exchange for the decryption key. The Robin Hood-like group claims to be interested in helping the less fortunate, rather than extorting victims for financial motivations.” reads the analysis published by CloudSEK. “The group’s multiple-paged ransom note suggests that victims perform three socially driven activities to be able to download the decryption key.”


The GoodWill ransomware is written in .NET, in order to evade detection it is packed with UPX packers and sleeps for 722.45 seconds before starting its activity.

The researchers attribute the attack to a threat actor based in India. Ransomware operators request the victims to perform three socially driven activities in exchange for the decryption key.

Researchers observed that the ransomware code is based on the HiddenTear open-source ransomware.

Victims have to donate new clothes to the homeless, record their action, and post it on social media. In addition, the victims can accompany less fortunate children to Dominos, Pizza Hut or KFC for a treat, take pictures and videos, and post them on social media.

The last action for the victims consists of providing financial assistance to anyone who needs urgent medical attention, but cannot afford it, at a nearby hospital, recording audio, and sharing it with the operators.

“Once all three activities are completed, the victims should also write a note on social media (Facebook or Instagram) on “How you transformed yourself into a kind human being by becoming a victim of a ransomware called GoodWill.” said the researchers. “Since there are no known victims/ targets for the ransomware group, their Tactics, Techniques and Procedures remain unknown.”

The researchers also shared indicators of compromise (IoCs) for this ransomware.

US Sanctions Force Evil Corp to Change Tactics

The threat actor behind the notorious Dridex campaign has switched from using its exclusive credential-harvesting malware to a ransomware-as-a-service model, to make attribution harder.

Jai Vijayan

Contributing Writer, Dark Reading

June 02, 2022

Source: Zwiebackesser via Shutterstock

Sanctions that the US government imposed on Russia-based crimeware gang Evil Corp in 2019 appear to have forced the threat actor to change tactics to remain in the cybercrime business.

New research into the group's activity by Mandiant shows that after the sanctions were put in place — after the group caused more than $100 million in losses to banks and other financial institutions by stealing sensitive information — Evil Corp switched to using ransomware in an apparent effort to obscure attribution. 

Moving on from using Dridex, its own exclusive (and easily fingerprinted) malware, Evil Corp actors have been observed deploying ransomware families used by multiple threat groups, such as Hades, WastedLocker, PhoenixLocker, and most recently LockBit, a ransomware-as-a-service option.

US regulations prohibit organizations — including ransomware victims and negotiators — from conducting any kind of financial transactions with organizations and entities on the US Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sanctions list.

"[US] sanctions have had a direct impact on threat actor operations, particularly as at least some companies involved in ransomware remediation activities, such as negotiation, refuse to facilitate payments to known sanctioned entities," Mandiant says in its report. "This can ultimately reduce threat actors' ability to be paid by victims, which is the primary driver of ransomware operations."

That means US ransomware victims need to pay closer attention to whom they are dealing with, says Jeremy Kennelly, senior manager of financial crime analysis at Mandiant Threat Intelligence.

"When dealing with a ransomware intrusion, the particular malware being deployed, or the branding on ransom notes, or shaming websites may be insufficient to determine whether the beneficiary of payments has affiliations with Evil Corp, a sanctioned entity," he says.

Sanctions Crunch

OFAC sanctioned Evil Corp and two members associated with the group for stealing more than $100 million from financial institutions in 40 countries using credentials harvested with the Dridex malware tool.

Around the time the sanctions were imposed, Evil Corp had begun renting out Dridex for use by affiliate gangs. It also had begun making its own foray into the ransomware space, initially with BitPaymer ransomware and later with DopplePaymer and WastedLocker in 2019. 

In 2020 Evil Corp. targeted more than two-dozen US organizations with ransomware, including several Fortune 500 companies in a massive WastedLocker campaign. Months after the sanctions went into effect, the threat actor stopped using WastedLocker and soon after switched to a variety of other tools, such as Hades and most recently LockBit — a ransomware-as-a service tool that gives the threat actor an opportunity to blend in with other actors.

UNC2165: Another Evolution of Evil Corp.

Mandiant says since 2019 it has investigated multiple LockBit ransomware intrusions carried out by a group that the vendor is currently tracking as UNC2165. According to Mandiant, UNC2165 has a lot of overlap with Evil Corp and is most likely an actor closely affiliated with it. For instance, in all the intrusions that Mandiant investigated, UNC2165 obtained access to the victim network via UNC1543, a financially motivated threat group that distributes FakeUpdates, a multistage JavaScript dropper for distributing malware. FakeUpdates was also the infection chain for deploying Dridex that later resulted in BitPaymer and DopplePaymer ransomware infections.

Similarly, the Hades ransomware family that Mandiant observed UNC2165 deploying had multiple code similarities to other ransomware tools tied to Evil Corp. Several of the command-and-control servers that UNC2165 has been observed using have also been linked to Evil Corp infrastructure, Mandiant says.

"The operational relationship between UNC2165 and the broader Evil Corp group is not fully understood," Kennelly says. "Mandiant has observed UNC2165 deploying Hades ransomware and operating Hades-related infrastructure. Furthermore, multiple public reports related to the deployment of other ransomware families commonly attributed to Evil Corp have involved use of infrastructure Mandiant attributes to UNC2165."

Kennelly says it's unclear what impact Mandiant's report tying an Evil Corp-related actor to LockBit will have in the ransomware space. 

"The impact this disclosure will have on ransomware negotiators is difficult to predict," he says. "LockBit may quickly move to distance themselves from affiliates with ties to Evil Corp, or deny the allegations wholesale," he says.

Furthermore, UNC2165 has shifted their operations multiple times over the past years, and this may ultimately lead to them to again adopt an updated toolkit if ransomware negotiators halt work on LockBit cases, he notes.

JOHN BIRCH UN CONSPIRACY REDUX
GOP lawmakers push legislation to preempt WHO global pandemic treaty

Critics say the treaty and related measures vastly expand the authority and resources of the the U.N. health arm at the expense of national sovereignty.



By Aaron Kliegman
Updated: June 2, 2022

JUST THE NEWS


Critics of the World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations' health agency, breathed a sigh of relief last week when legally binding international health rules proposed by the Biden administration weren't adopted.

However, concerns remain about ongoing efforts to establish a sweeping global agreement to combat future pandemics, leading Republican Reps. Chris Stewart and Ronny Jackson, of Utah and Texas, respectively, to introduce legislation on Tuesday to preempt U.S. participation in such an arrangement.

Stewart's legislation would prohibit the use of funds to propose amendments to either the International Health Regulations (IHR) or a so-called "global pandemic treaty," or any other agreement among member states of the WHO.

The Biden administration has proposed controversial amendments to the IHR, an instrument of international law that is legally binding on WHO member countries, including the U.S.

The treaty — currently being drafted — is a separate but related initiative to create a globally binding accord on pandemic preparedness.

Supporters argue the treaty and IHR changes can address the holes exposed by the world's response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

"A pandemic treaty and IHR reform can only make the world safer from fast moving infectious diseases," Georgetown University law professor Lawrence Gostin told Just the News. "After all we have suffered during the pandemic, isn't that what we all should want?"

Critics say the measures vastly expand the authority and resources of the WHO, which they argue would be given greater control to dictate how nations respond to future pandemics and undermine national sovereignty.

"President Biden must be stopped from handing power to a corrupt body of international bureaucrats," Stewart said in a statement. "If he gets his way, the WHO will have the power to unilaterally declare a public health crisis in America. Yes, the same WHO that actively covered for China by denying their role in the origins of COVID-19. If an American citizen didn't vote someone into office, they have no business telling us how to live."

Stewart's bill would prohibit the use of funds to propose any amendments to the WHO that would supersede or modify authorities under the U.S. It would also halt U.S. WHO funding, unless the global body takes certain steps, including holding China accountable for its alleged role in the origin and spread of COVID-19.

"Congress must now pass my legislation to hold China accountable and keep American decision-making where it belongs: with the American people," said Stewart.

Jackson's legislation, meanwhile, would prohibit the use of funds to implement any obligations of the U.S. under a pandemic treaty.


"Since the onset of COVID-19, the WHO has proven to be as corrupt as its leaders are incompetent," said Jackson, former physician to the president under both Obama and Trump. "The WHO was complicit in helping the Chinese Communist Party cover up COVID-19's initial spread and origin, yet Joe Biden wants to give them control over public health matters in America. It's an insult to every American citizen who has been affected by the pandemic, and I will not stay silent as this farce of a treaty is negotiated behind the American peoples' backs."

Experts and lawmakers in recent weeks have shined a spotlight on the WHO's checkered record during the COVID-19 pandemic, warning the public health measures under discussion would centralize too much power in the hands of the WHO.

The House bills were introduced days after Republicans in the Senate unveiled similar measures last week.

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.) introduced legislation requiring any agreement resulting from the work of the WHO's intergovernmental negotiating body to be deemed a treaty per U.S. law, requiring the advice and consent of a supermajority of the Senate.

"The WHO, along with our federal health agencies, failed miserably in its response to COVID-19," Johnson said in a statement. "Its failure should not be rewarded with a new international treaty that would increase its power at the expense of American sovereignty. What the WHO does need is greater accountability and transparency. This bill makes clear to the Biden administration that any new WHO pandemic agreement must be deemed a treaty and submitted to the Senate for ratification. The sovereignty of the United States is not negotiable."

Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) introduced his own bill to prevent the WHO from unilaterally imposing public health restrictions on the U.S.

Proponents of the WHO's initiative dismissed such concerns about undermining American sovereignty.

"There is considerable disinformation and even conspiracy theories about the IHR reforms and the pandemic treaty," said Gostin, who works as director of the WHO's Collaborating Center on National and Global Health Law. "It does not allow WHO to make any decisions about U.S. health policy. WHO powers are currently weak. They need to be stronger, but it is crystal clear that WHO will not have any power to dictate U.S. domestic health policy."

Last week, the World Health Assembly, the WHO's decision-making body comprised of 194 member countries, convened in Geneva, Switzerland. Topping the agenda was the WHO's push to create a pandemic treaty.

The current working draft of the treaty would give the WHO more power to impose its recommendations to combat pandemics, potentially including lockdown measures and travel restrictions. It also calls for the WHO to establish a "new global system for surveillance" and "to deploy proactive countermeasures against misinformation and social media attacks."

Additionally, the accord includes provisions for the development of digital vaccine certificates and contact tracing "in the international context."

The WHO's intergovernmental negotiating body will meet multiple times this and next month to continue on the working draft of the pandemic treaty. The goal is to deliver a progress report to the World Health Assembly in 2023 and adopt the agreement by 2024.

Also topping the World Health Assembly's agenda was voting on America's proposed amendments to the IHR.

The Biden administration quietly submitted the proposed amendments in January, but they weren't made public until last month and only received major attention ahead of the World Health Assembly.

The administration's proposed amendments to the IHR would, among other changes, expand the power of the WHO to declare pandemics and other health emergencies. The U.S. proposal specifically deleted a key line from the old version of the IHR that required the WHO to consult with and attempt to obtain verification from countries in whose territory the public health issue in question is allegedly occurring before declaring an emergency and pushing certain recommendations.

The U.S. proposal would also establish "compliance committees" in each WHO member country to gather information and promote compliance with regulations.

Critics were concerned the measures would be adopted at the World Health Assembly and empower the WHO in significant ways.

However, the only IHR amendments actually adopted at the gathering "appear to be very minor in scope," according to Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor of medicine at Stanford University.

Most notably, the changes shrink the time period in which a country can oppose amendments to the IRH from 18 months to 10 months and shrink the time lag after which new amendments come into effect after adoption from 24 months to 12 months.

The Biden administration's original proposal — which met with opposition at the assembly from dozens of countries, especially from Africa — was effectively deferred. A committee was formed to review the U.S. amendments and recommend adoption of some or all the measures at a later date.

"There is no current consensus on IHR reform, and there is also considerable opposition to the Biden administration proposals within the U.S., especially among conservative Republicans," said Gostin. "Yet, I am optimistic that some reforms will probably be adopted next May," the date of the next World Health Assembly.

Still, U.S. critics of the WHO hailed the delay as a victory — but a temporary one.

The WHO didn't respond to a request for comment for this story.

'Disaster for Millions of Kids' Looms as GOP Obstruction Threatens School Meal Programs

"There is no reason that children should go hungry in the world's wealthiest nation," said Rep. Jamaal Bowman. "Congress needs to renew the federal school lunch waivers."


A child puts her mask back on after finishing lunch in the cafeteria of Medora Elementary School on March 17, 2021 in Louisville, Kentucky. (Photo: Jon Cherry/Getty Images)

JAKE JOHNSON

June 2, 2022

In fewer than 30 days, a slew of federal waivers that have enabled schools across the United States to provide free breakfast and lunch to students during the coronavirus pandemic are set to expire, potentially leaving millions of children without easy access to critical meals.

And to the dismay of advocates, Congress—which is currently on recess—doesn't appear poised to act.

"Summer—already the hungriest time of year—will be particularly hard for kids when many summer sites will be unable to open."

"There is no urgency and political appetite to even have this conversation," Jillien Meier, director of the No Kid Hungry campaign, told Vox's Rachel Cohen on Wednesday. "Frankly this is not a priority for Congress and the White House. People are really focused on having a 'return to normal'... folks aren't talking about it and they have no clue that this crisis is looming."

In March, obstruction by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and much of his Republican caucus tanked an effort to include a temporary extension of the waivers in an omnibus spending package.

First approved in 2020, the waivers have given the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) authority to lift regulatory obstacles to universal school meals such as income-based eligibility requirements, which entailed paperwork and other onerous red tape.

Because of the flexibilities offered by the waivers, an estimated 10 million additional children nationwide were able to access school meals—progress that advocates fear will be lost if Congress allows the waivers to lapse. Some states are rushing to enact their own universal free school meal programs in anticipation of losing the waivers.

"The consequences of not extending waivers are severe," Lisa Davis, senior vice president of the advocacy organization Share Our Strength, warned in March after the Senate unveiled an omnibus spending package that omitted waiver extensions.

"Without them, schools will face financial penalties for not meeting federal nutrition requirements, even though they have no choice," said Davis. "They will have fewer financial resources to meet higher prices for food and other goods, staffing, and transportation. Summer—already the hungriest time of year—will be particularly hard for kids when many summer sites will be unable to open."

"Children in rural communities," Davis added, "will face more barriers to accessing summer meals when important flexibilities like multiple meal pickup and delivery options disappear."

Related Content

'This Is Evil': McConnell Blocking Extension of Free School Lunch Waivers

As Vox reported Wednesday, "hundreds of advocacy groups, school districts, and elected officials have urged Congress to reauthorize the waivers for the next school year, at a price tag of roughly $11 billion," but Republican lawmakers are still standing in the way.

"Senate Agriculture Committee Chair Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) told Politico that the last-minute opposition to including school meal waivers in their March spending bill came from... McConnell," Vox noted. "A few weeks following this surprise, Stabenow introduced the Support Kids Not Red Tape Act to extend the waivers, but so far, it has formal backing only from Democrats, plus Republicans Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins."

"Even moderate Democrats Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema support the extension," the outlet added.



Last-minute pressure on Congress to preserve the school meal waivers comes amid growing evidence that child hunger is rising across the U.S. thanks to lawmakers' failure to extend the boosted Child Tax Credit (CTC), a program that Manchin opposed.

"Expiration of the advance CTC was associated with a 12% increase in food insufficiency in households with children relative to households without children by February—and rates of food insufficiency continued to climb since February," researchers Julia Raifman and Allison Bovell-Ammon wrote in a blog post for the Economic Policy Institute last month.

"Even brief disruptions in access to food can have lasting consequences," they noted. "Not having enough to eat often disrupts children's cognitive and emotional development and education. This was the case for a child who disclosed that the reason she was fidgeting and not paying attention in class was that she did not have enough food to eat."

Last year, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) led the introduction of a bill that would enact a permanent, universal, and nationwide free school meals program, guaranteeing free breakfast, lunch, dinner, and a snack to all school children no matter their family income.

The legislation, which would also eliminate school meal debt, has not received a vote in the House or the Senate.

Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.), a former educator and co-sponsor of the measure, tweeted Thursday that "there is no reason that children should go hungry in the world's wealthiest nation."

"Congress needs to renew the federal school lunch waivers," Bowman added, "and guarantee meals to children in need."

House Dems Say Amazon 'Obstructing' Probe of Warehouse Collapse That Killed Six

A congressional review of last year's tragedy "seeks to determine whether Amazon's corporate practices put employee safety first, or… is merely paying lip service to this principle."


Workers remove debris from an Amazon Fulfillment Center in Edwardsville, Illinois, on December 11, 2021, after it was hit by a tornado. (Photo: Tim Vizer/AFP via Getty Images)

JESSICA CORBETT

June 2, 2022

A trio of Democrats from the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Reform on Thursday accused Amazon of "obstructing" its investigation into the December 2021 collapse of a warehouse in Illinois that killed six employees.

"The committee's investigation is of crucial importance to the American people."

The collapse resulting from tornado damage at the Amazon fulfillment center in Edwardsville has heightened scrutiny of the e-commerce giant's labor practices. In late March, the House committee requested documents from the company related to the event, internal reviews of it, and broader extreme weather policies.

The panel's chair, Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.), joined with Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Cori Bush (D-Mo.) for a Thursday letter to Amazon president and CEO Andy Jassy highlighting that the company "has failed to meaningfully comply with the committee's requests."

"These documents were due on April 14, 2022," the letter states. "Amazon still has not produced any of the key categories of documents identified by committee staff, let alone the full set of materials the committee requested."

"On May 17, 2022, counsel to Amazon claimed that Amazon is withholding these documents based on work-product and attorney-client privileges," the document continues. "As committee staff previously informed your counsel, the committee, under chairs of both parties, does not recognize common-law privileges as valid reasons to withhold documents from Congress."

"Amazon's inability to produce even this limited set of materials in a timely manner is troubling," the letter adds, "given that the company represented to members of Congress more than four months ago that it was 'conducting a thorough internal investigation' into the Edwardsville events, and 'cooperating' with an inquiry by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)."

Since the March request for records, the letter points out, "OSHA revealed that an inspection of the Edwardsville facility 'raised concerns about the potential risk to employees during severe weather emergencies,' and recommended that Amazon 'voluntarily take the necessary steps to eliminate or materially reduce your employees' exposure' to the risk factors OSHA identified."

The document also cast doubt on Amazon's willingness to address issues internally, noting that last month, "shareholders—following the company's recommendation—defeated a proposal for an independent audit of working conditions at the company's warehouses," a vote that came the same day that they approved Jassy's compensation package worth over $212 million.

According to the Democratic lawmakers:


The committee's investigation is of crucial importance to the American people. Employers like Amazon must prioritize worker safety over the corporate bottom line. Our investigation into Amazon's response to the events in Edwardsville and other extreme weather events seeks to determine whether Amazon's corporate practices put employee safety first, or whether your company, which now employs nearly one million people in the United States, is merely paying lip service to this principle. As we noted back in March, "This investigation will inform legislative efforts to curb unfair labor practices, strengthen protections for workers, and address the effects of climate change on worker safety."

"The committee will grant an extension until June 8, 2022, for Amazon to complete its document production," the letter concludes. "If Amazon fails to do so, the committee will have no choice but to consider alternative measures to obtain full compliance."

The warning came a day after Jassy received another letter from members of Congress related to other labor concerns—specifically, plans reported by The Intercept in April to ban certain terms like union, living wage, and slave labor from an internal messaging application.


Bush and Ocasio-Cortez partnered with Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and Cory Booker (D-N.Y.) for that letter, which says that the plan could be illegal and "Amazon's compliance with federal labor laws is an important matter of public concern especially given the company's status as one of the largest retailers in the country."

"This disturbing report is part of a pattern of worker exploitation, retaliation, and union-busting on the part of Amazon," the app-related letter adds, requesting documents and responses to a series of questions by June 16.

IT IS MISOGYNY

Toxic Masculinity, A Root Cause for Mass Shootings

If a mass shooter doesn't have an assault rifle, he can't kill a mass number of people. This is crucial. However, if we want to eliminate this problem altogether, we also need to focus on the deeper reasons of how these killers are created.

Tirza Clarke listens as the names of victims of recent mass shootings are read aloud during a vigil at the Sunrise Amphitheater on May 28, 2022 in Sunrise, Florida. Moms Demand Action, a national organization that works to prevent gun violence, held the vigil to mourn the victims of the mass shootings in Buffalo, New York, and Uvalde, Texas. (Photo: Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

REAGAN ROSS

June 2, 2022

In 2009, I wrote a short op-ed for The Oregonian on why men—and it is almost always men—become mass shooters. Re-reading the piece, I think it still holds up fairly well, though what is distressing is how 13 years later, we still find ourselves with this disturbing phenomenon. Considering the massacre of little children at Robb Elementary School and the Buffalo massacre, I felt compelled to re-visit my thoughts, amplify some key points. Most pointedly, like so many others, I am especially tormented by this recent atrocity, the killing of children aged 9 thru 11. Like how I felt about the Sandy Hook tragedy, I cannot fathom how such horrors can be inflicted on our children. And like so many others, I am with those who stress guns as the simplest way to ameliorate these mass shootings. Gun regulation is absolutely essential to at least cutting down on the number of mass shootings, legislation like background checks and assault rifle bans especially—obviously—key to keep weapons of war out of the hands of potential deranged killers.

Monsters Are Not Born, They Are Created

But, to my mind, as I touched on in that earlier piece—titled "Young mena and violence"—to truly end these horrors and to just create a safer society in general, we need to get at the root causes of what turns these people/kids into killers. After all, as I've said so many times to whomever will listen, monsters are not born, they are created. And if we want to stop them from being created, just subjecting them to our hate and/or punishing them is not enough. We must get at the root causes of what creates them and stop them from being created.

While there are many root causes to this complex issue, to my mind, the most crucial element are toxic masculinity ideologies that create toxic masculinity men. I've been researching masculinity for over twenty years, and it has become clear to me that toxic masculinity ideologies (compounded by other toxic ideologies—I'll come back to this in a moment) are a crucial root cause for what is to my mind a deeply unhealthy (toxic) masculinity in our culture.

Defining Toxic Masculinity

By toxic masculinity ideologies I'm referring to patriarchy, phallocentrism, and hypermasculinity. Patriarchy is a way of being that entails normalizing such toxic attributes as dominance, power, control, and authority/hierarchizing. Patriarchy is associated with paternalism or what psychoanalyst/theorist Jacques Lacan called "the law of the father," the belief that men—and it usually is men though not always (think Margaret Thatcher!)—are the inexorable authority figure, determining the choices and ways of being of Others. Patriarchal/toxic masculinity men believe that this is their entitled position in the world and when they don't get it, they feel aggrieved. Phallocentrism is defined by how we center and encourage phallic (masculine) power, the phallus being a symbol for masculine power and that which is used to reinforce and prove one's masculinity. Guns of course are the prototypical phallic symbol of masculine power. Hypermasculinity is defined as the suppression of attributes ideologically associated with the "feminine" and the accentuation of those attributes ideologically defined as "masculine," e.g., the suppression of emotion and other "feminine" attributes (empathy, sympathy, compassion, etc.), dominating Others (people of color, people of different nationalities/ethnicities, women, LGBTQ+ people, those deemed un-masculine or "weak," etc.), violence as a natural and necessary outlet and response, stressing "manly" (phallic) characteristics and behavior (showy displays of one's power and dominance, etc.) and so on. All the above are the ingredients for creating sociopaths; all told, toxic masculinity ideologies turn men into unempathetic sociopaths.

Of course, only a tiny percentage of such toxic masculinity sociopaths become mass killers, but the point is not that this is the singular root cause but rather that it is a crucial base ingredient. I would argue that all toxic masculinity men are sociopaths, they just exhibit that sociopathy in different ways. In short, the combination of a striving for power, dominance, control, and authority—the constant need to reinforce one's sense of a phallic masculine self—combined with a low degree or even zero degree of empathy and compassion for Others creates the conditions for sociopathy. We see this not only with these (mostly white) male mass shooters (and other destructive males) but also with the men who create the conditions for these mass shooters to exist, phallic men both keeping in place this unhealthy and dangerous hypermasculinity in men (be "manly," don't show emotions, exert your authority, don't seek help for mental health issues, etc.) and giving such men an outlet to constantly reinforce their never ending need to reinforce their masculinity, whether that be in the form of phallic guns or seeing other people as Others. In terms of latter, toxic masculinity men have always needed an Other to differentiate the self, people of color, women, LGBTQ+ people, Jewish people, etc. existing for them to constantly give them an Other that distinguishes their self as superior, the feeling and expression of "superiority" itself registering for them their sense of their own phallic (masculine) power. (I'm not specifically focusing on this element here but when toxic masculinity and white supremacy/xenophobia/LGBTQphobia/misogyny/anti-Semitism are combined we get yet another root cause for many of these mass shootings, the Buffalo mass shooting being the latest example.)

Compounding Toxic Ideologies

I should just touch on here a compounding element in this toxic stew, other toxic ideologies. Capitalism especially exacerbates toxic masculinity ideologies. In short, capitalism is a mercenary, predatory, survival of the fittest economic system/ideology and it breeds this way of being in people. Indeed, I would argue that capitalism is a patriarchy ideology, which is in part why it became the economic system/ideology of choice, since it too informs in so many ways toxic masculinity ways of being. One could even make the case that our most successful capitalists are successful because they must be sociopaths, their entire way of being living for constant and relentless—albeit unsustainable—profit increases and growth, which can only happen at the expense of Others and the planet, which are constantly dominated, controlled, and exploited. As I suggest above, other toxic ideologies also compound toxic masculinity ideologies, such as religious belief systems, white supremacy, and heteronormativity, all of which are Othering ideologies that potentially feed that need for toxic masculinity men to reinforce their sense of (superior) phallic power.

Of course, more pointedly, capitalism is also behind the drive by the NRA to keep assault rifles on the market, a key source of much of their profit and power. That, in turn, is why the NRA pours so much money into the coffers of politicians, mostly Republicans but some Democrats as well. Both the NRA and NRA owned politicians can't come out and say that, so they use toxic masculinity ideologies for their own self-interest, exploiting toxic masculinity ideologies in ways that feed toxic masculinity men's need for their phallic power, guns again being a key reinforcer but also just doing what right wingers have learned to do so well, create alternative realities (disinformation, conspiracy theories) that also feed into phallic drives that reinforce masculinity. We see this with the NRA's disinformation campaigns that Democrats wanting to ban assault rifles is just the first step to "taking your guns away." The many conspiracy theories on the dangers of our government all are based on the tried and true tactics of using fear, hatred, and rage to create a threat that needs to be engaged, the source of (white nationalist) militias and assault rifle ownership.

The Essential Need for Gun Safety

Bringing this back to mass shooters, the easiest response (or one would think!) to addressing this horrifying "new normal" we seem to have come to disturbingly accept is to just create stringent gun regulations, like so many other countries have done with success, especially in terms of banning these weapons of war (assault guns) and installing rigorous background checks. The common sense of this is incontrovertible: If a mass shooter doesn't have an assault rifle, he can't kill a mass number of people. For certain, that would cut way down on mass shooters, as it did during the time period that assault guns were actually banned in this country, from 1995 to 2004.

Making the Explicit Link to Mass Shooters

However, if we want to eliminate this problem altogether (and ameliorate other issues, such as the ever present threat of authoritarianism and fascism, which are direct toxic masculinity ideologies), we also need to focus on the root causes of these killers and that means understanding and addressing how these killers are created. The shooter who slaughtered our children at Robb Elementary purportedly had a speech impediment and was cruelly bullied when he was young, bullying also a symptom of our unhealthy toxic masculinity culture. He also apparently had a terrible home environment. Such an upbringing couldn't have but led to a thoroughly dysfunctional individual and untreated mental health issues. That doesn't mean of course that every such young person with mental illnesses will become a killer, but it does mean that many if not most toxic masculinity young men will have issues that left untreated could potentially lead to (self) destructive choices. That is, when young toxic masculinity men with mental illnesses grow up in a society permeated with toxic masculinity ideological indoctrination and messaging, that influence—that combination—can potentially lead to the most disturbing of (self) destructive choices.

More pointedly, like so many other young toxic masculinity males who are filled with a sense of victimization or lack of control—all of which for toxic masculinity males can only induce a feeling of emasculation—the Robb Elementary shooter chose to express that rage and hate in the only way that toxic masculinity men can, through acts of phallic violence. Most if not all shooters feel wronged or persecuted in some way and thus need to fight back in a way that gives them back a feeling of power and dominance and control—gives them back their sense of phallic power—mass shootings becoming one avenue to that end. Even the suicide aspect of this act could be seen as empowering, since this final act is part of their need to reassert control, not to mention that in their twisted minds, they can only see their heinous act as some glorious act of (phallic) retribution or pay back against a society that has caused them so much pain and suffering.

The Struggle for Fundamental Change Continues

In some ways, talking just about guns is an easy way out for well-intentioned (Democratic) politicians and pundits, since focusing on the real root causes—yes, toxic masculinity ideologies but also capitalism, consumerism, white supremacy/xenophobia, heteronormativity, misogyny—is challenging to say the least especially in terms of forcing us to confront aspects of ourselves that would necessitate real radical (progressive) change. But since the very politicians, pundits, and general populace who we need to enact such change are also deeply entwined in the very (toxic) ideological norms that we need to change, I'm afraid such changes mean a very long struggle indeed for those of us doing the heavy lifting of enacting such changes. Still, we have seen the beginnings of this radical change, both here in this country and around the world (for one thing, masculinity is getting healthier, especially with younger generations). And so even though this struggle to progress humanity to a more humanitarian way of being is long and hard and ongoing, it is happening and that becomes the impetus for all of us to never end the struggle for a better, healthier masculinity/humanity.

Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.



REAGAN ROSS is an assistant professor at Montana State University. He teaches film and media studies, with a focus on gender studies and masculinity studies.

Codify Arctic Refuge Protections, Say Campaigners Amid Big Oil Exodus

"We support Congress and the Biden administration taking long-overdue action to... reestablish protections for this crown jewel of our national wildlife refuge system," said one activist.

Gwich'in Arctic defenders pose outside the U.S. Capitol on May 20, 2022 in Washington, D.C., where the Indigenous activists met with members of Congress and the Biden administration.

 (Photo: Sierra Club/Twitter)


BRETT WILKINS

June 2, 2022

Conservationists and climate campaigners on Thursday welcomed the news that another fossil fuel company has canceled a controversial Trump-era lease to drill for oil in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, while calling on policymakers to permanently protect the pristine wilderness from future threats.

"As oil companies terminate and cancel leases, it's time for Congress to stop the leasing program for good."

According to the Anchorage Daily News, Regenerate Alaska, a subsidiary of Australia-based 88 Energy, joined Hilcorp and Chevron—which earlier this week terminated pre-existing leases inside the ANWR—in canceling its lease. Major banks and insurers have also stopped financing and covering Arctic fossil fuel projects.

"These exits clearly demonstrate that international companies recognize what we have known all along," said the Gwich'in Steering Committee, a group of Arctic defenders from the country's northernmost Indigenous people.

"Drilling in the Arctic Refuge is not worth the economic risk and liability that results from development on sacred lands without the consent of Indigenous peoples," the committee added.

Regenerate Alaska, the only company to directly acquire land in the 19.3 million-acre refuge, bid about $800,000 to lease 23,000 acres along the reserve's western boundary during the January 2021 lease sale.

However, the Biden administration last year blocked new exploration inside ANWR, while subsequently ordering a review of its predecessor's controversial move to open up the previously protected refuge to fossil fuel extraction as part of its national energy independence policy.

"This is positive news for the climate and the human rights of Indigenous people whose survival depends on a healthy, thriving calving ground for the Porcupine caribou herd, and further proves that the oil industry recognizes drilling on sacred lands is bad business," Karlin Itchoak, the Alaska state director at the Wilderness Society, said in a statement.


Peter Winsor, executive director of the Alaska Wilderness League, said in a statement that "88 Energy canceling its lease interest on the heels of Chevron and Hilcorp divesting themselves of their own Arctic Refuge holdings is the clearest sign yet that there is zero interest out there in industrializing the wildest place left in America. We have long known that the American people don't want drilling in the Arctic Refuge."

The Gwich'in call the area "Iizhik Gwats'an Gwandaii Goodlit"—or "the sacred place where life begins"—and rely on the region's rich biodiversity, especially its 200,000-strong Porcupine caribou herd, for their survival.

Around 270 species call the refuge home, including all of the world's remaining South Beaufort Sea polar bears, 250 musk oxen, Arctic foxes, and hundreds of thousands of snow geese and other birds which fly there from all 50 states and around the world.

The Republican-controlled Congress approved drilling in the massive, pristine ANWR in 2017. In what was called a parting gift to the fossil fuel industry, the Trump administration in its final weeks held the lease auction that raised only $14.4 million and drew no bids from major fossil fuel corporations.

"The 2021 oil and gas lease sale for the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge was an epic failure, generating less than 1% of the revenue outlined in the 2017 Tax Act," Winsor noted.

Referring to ANWR drilling, he added that "the Gwich'in people don't want it, and we now have further proof that the oil industry doesn't want it either."

"Companies are already pulling out of their leases—let's permanently protect this land."

"Congress opened the Arctic Refuge to oil drilling in 2017 backed by the ridiculous promise of industry enthusiasm leading to billions in federal revenue from lease sales," Winsor added. "That promise continues to be exposed for the lie that was and we support Congress and the Biden administration taking long-overdue action to restore fiscal common sense and reestablish protections for this crown jewel of our national wildlife refuge system."

Ellen Montgomery, public lands campaign director at Environment America, said in a statement that "oil companies, including 88 Energy, Chevron, and Hilcorp, have recognized that there is no future for fossil fuel extraction in this sensitive environment. As oil companies terminate and cancel leases, it's time for Congress to stop the leasing program for good."

Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) joined the conservationists' calls to codify ANWR protections.

"Drilling in the Arctic Refuge poses huge risks to the Gwich'in, to threatened Arctic ecosystems, and to our climate. It's all risk, no reward," he tweeted Thursday. "Companies are already pulling out of their leases—let's permanently protect this land."

CRIMINAL CAPITALI$M

Cocaine Trafficking Case of Erdoğan Associate Appears to Be a Tactic to Deflect Pressure

by Abdullah Bozkurt
Nordic Monitor
June 2, 2022

Abdullah Bozkurt, a Middle East Forum Writing Fellow, is a Swedish-based investigative journalist and analyst who runs the Nordic Research and Monitoring Network and is chairman of the Stockholm Center for Freedom.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan (L) with Ali Osman Akat (R), who was arrested and released on drug trafficking charges.

The arrest and release of a Turkish businessman close to the government on drug trafficking charges, only after an alert from German authorities, appears to follow classic stalling tactics often used by the government of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to deflect international criticism.

Time and again the Erdoğan government has "sandbagged" efforts to effectively investigate criminal conduct when the investigation incriminated or implicated senior government officials, members of the ruling Islamist elite or their associates.

At times, it allowed investigations and judicial proceedings to move forward only in a very controlled environment to paint a false picture that the government is cracking down on criminal or terrorist elements when in fact it is doing nothing but whitewashing wrongdoings or helping criminals go free with a slap on the wrist.

This case looks to be one of those the Erdoğan government is keen to contain. Ali Osman Akat, the owner of companies selling cosmetic products under the name Lactone Holding A.Ş. and Lactone Kozmetik A.Ş., was identified as a suspect in a drug trafficking network after German federal customs service Bundeszollverwaltung officers searched the contents of a Turkey-bound shipment. The cargo left Bogota, Colombia, and arrived in Istanbul after going through Customs while in transit in Panama, the US and Germany.

The inspection at Leipzig/Halle Airport on November 20, 2021 of three pieces of cargo revealed 116 kilograms of cocaine mixed in with iron dust particles. German police alerted Turkey and provided a copy of their inspection. At the request of Turkey, German authorities agreed to let the shipment proceed with mutual consent that the bust would be made in Turkey at the final destination where the suspects would receive the cargo.

The recipient of the cargo was listed as Süleyman Yekenkunrul, owner of trading firm Prufier İç ve Dış Ticaret Ltd. Şirketi and an associate of Akat. It was sent from a man named Carlos Aguilar Call from Colombia. The contact phone for the delivery belonged to Tevfik Akan Atak, an employee of Akat and the general coordinator at Lactone for foreign trade.

The cargo was taken from Germany by Turkish Customs officials and brought back to Istanbul on December 7, 2021. The findings of the German authorities were verified in a separate inspection done at a lab in Ankara on December 13, 2021.

Under orders from the Turkish prosecutor, gendarmes replaced the cocaine with sand of the same color — which was odd and against standard operating procedure in such planned busts — delivered the cargo posing as couriers to the listed address in Istanbul's Maslak district and detained six people on December 15, 2021.

In the arraignment on December 17, Akat was quickly released by the investigating judge and Atak and Yekenkunrul were formally arrested. The same judge who ordered Akat's release decided to arrest him on January 6, 2022 after a challenge filed by the prosecutor, which means a political directive was conveyed to the court that Akat was to remain in pretrial detention for a while. Other suspects Ali Karataş, Sarra Chouıekh and Mustafa Güldiken were all released pending trial.

Akat was again released at the first hearing on May 20, 2022.

Among the red flags in the case that make it appear to be a hush-up operation rather than a real crackdown on cocaine traffickers is that the bust was never publicized by the government, which is unusual. In most cases the Interior Ministry and the police invite the press to take photos and videos of the seized drugs and the suspects, and an official statement is issued describing how successful law enforcement was in the operation.

This never happened. The public knew about it only four months later when the Sabah daily, owned by President Erdoğan's family, decided to run a story, on April 13, 2022. The paper had footage from the bust, which means the government leaked it at a time that would best serve its interests. More likely, the Erdoğan government wanted to make the case public to ease the pressure amid serious allegations that Turkey had turned into a cocaine trafficking route amid seizures of drugs in Spain, Colombia and other places that were destined for Turkey.

But it appears the Erdoğan government did not intend to seriously pursue the case after an initial splash in the media, and judges controlled by the Erdoğan government quietly let Akat go at the first hearing, during which he blamed one of his employees and said the employee ordered the shipment containing the cocaine.

Although Akat and five other suspects were indicted on drug trafficking charges with a recommended 135 years in prison in total for the suspects, his quick release from prison at the first hearing in the case further confirmed suspicions that the government is keen to derail the case at the end. The opposition parties in Parliament criticized the government and asked under whose orders the key suspect was released despite serious charges against him.

In his defense, Akat denied having any knowledge of the drugs and blamed Atak, the general coordinator of the company. Phone records and chat messages, however, showed that Akat had frequently given orders to Atak in Customs matters, prompting the prosecutor to believe that such a high value cargo could not have been shipped without prior authorization of the owner.

In August 2017 Akat became president of the Turkish American Business Association (TABA), a business interest group that was established in 1987 to promote business relations between the US and Turkey, to encourage American investment in Turkey and to assist its members in networking. It is also a representative of American Chamber of Commerce in Turkey. He served there for five years.

His membership in TABA was terminated after the news of his arrest over the cocaine bust was made public.

Photos shared by Akat on social media show he is close to senior government officials. He has pictures with President Erdoğan, Parliament Speaker Mustafa Şentop and a number of Cabinet ministers including Interior Minister Süleyman Soylu, in charge of cracking down on drug trafficking. He had a contract to supply cleaning products to parliament and made 348,000 Turkish lira from the sale.

In one picture he also appeared next to Egemen Bağış, a disgraced former minister who was in the past charged with taking bribes from an Iranian operative. Bağış is currently serving as Turkish ambassador to Czechia and has allegedly been facilitating drug trafficking in Europe using his diplomatic privileges.

Lactone does not have a long track record in business but quickly expanded to increase its capital to 12 million Turkish lira in 2020 from 200,000 Turkish lira in 2017.

Akat's lawyer claimed the innocence of his client and his hope that he will be exonerated of all charges.

Nordic Monitor previously reported that Turkey has become an emerging route for large-scale cocaine trafficking, an unprecedented development, and it is alleged that a politically connected, powerful new player may have appeared on the scene to move large quantities of the drug through Turkish seaports.

The spotlight turned on Turkey in June 2020 when Colombia's narcotics police seized almost five tons of cocaine. The drug was in two containers that were to travel by sea from the port of Buenaventura to Turkey and had a street value of $265 million in the illegal market.

Sedat Peker, a convicted mob boss and former ally of the Turkish president, also claimed senior government officials were involved in the cocaine trade. Peker named Interior Minister Soylu and his associates as influential people who were involved in facilitating the cocaine trafficking through Turkey. Peker had partnered with Soylu for years in running criminal syndicates.

AND THAT SAYS IT ALL ABOUT INFLATION

Credit card borrowing hits 16-year high as mortgage approvals crash, says BofE

31May2022


Credit card borrowing hits 16-year high as mortgage approvals crash, says BofE

Mortgage borrowing dropped by over a third in April, while credit card borrowing rose to a 16-year high as the cost of living crisis begins to hit consumers, according to recent data.

According to the Bank of England, net mortgage borrowing in April fell to £4.1 billion. This represents a stark 36% month-on-month drop, down from a total of £6.4 billion borrowed in March.

At the same time, Brits used credit cards to borrow around £700 million in April, an 11.6% rise compared to April 2021 - the highest annual jump in credit card spending since 2005.

When including overdrafts, personal loans, and car finance with these figures, a total of £1.4 billion was borrowed in the UK last month. This is the third month in a row that consumer borrowing has topped £1 billion, according to the BofE.

Both of these figures represent ominous signs that the British public is beginning to feel the impact of the cost of living crisis. Rising energy prices and record inflation has led to the biggest reduction in domestic disposable income in decades.

Speaking on the decline of mortgage borrowing, Hina Bhudia, partner at Knight Frank Finance, said: “Activity among purchasers is ebbing as the cost of living squeeze shrinks the pool of buyers. Rates on certain products have doubled in the past twelve months and there is a real sense of urgency among many borrowers who sense they must act soon or reassess what they can afford.”

The increase in personal borrowing, including credit cards and car finance, was also attributed to the cost of living crisis, with the head of personal finance at investment firm AJ Bell, Laura Suter, saying:

“As a nation we’ve now put more than £3billion on credit cards in the past three months, and another £1.6billion on other forms of credit, including personal loans and car finance.

“What the figures show is a divided nation, with many households still managing to save cash despite prices rising around them. Although it’s a far cry from the bumper savings the nation was making during lockdown, with the prospect of tougher timers ahead lots of households have tightened their belts and saved some cash in their emergency funds.”