Brian Gerrish (Common Purpose) – Child Stealing by the State
You Tube
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Brian Gerrish who outted Common Purpose now tackles Social Services. CAFCASS, social services, CPS, DCFS, you should hang your head in shame!
Friday, January 29, 2010
Cap And Trade Scam To Be Enforced At State Level
Cap And Trade Scam To Be Enforced At State Level: "Cap And Trade Scam To Be Enforced At State Level
Individuals and businesses in Austin and a plethora of other states to be taxed for emissions of life-giving gas carbon dioxide
Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
Prison Planet.com
Friday, January 29, 2010
Globalists intent on ushering in a zero-growth post-industrial society are bypassing the federal government’s stuttering efforts to implement the cap and trade scam and going directly to the states in an effort to impose their control freak tax on the very life-giving gas that we all exhale – carbon dioxide.
Even as the foundation of the argument that human emissions of CO2 cause global warming crumbles and collapses amidst scandal after scandal, energy companies and state authorities are still pushing ahead with sinister plans to mandate that individuals and businesses get government allowances and permits to emit carbon dioxide.
KLBJ radio reports that Austin Energy, which powers the city, presented to the Austin City Council “Austin Energy’s Carbon Reduction Plan,” which goes even further than the federal cap and trade bill in calling for CO2 emissions to be reduced by 20% by 2025.
The fact that energy companies are behind this again disproves the flawed notion that oil and
electricity companies oppose the global warming movement, when in fact they are its major adherents. The climate change scam is a goldmine for them because effectively licensing CO2 emissions only drives up utility prices – the costs are passed on to the consumer and their profits soar.
Austin Energy head Roger Duncan told the Austin City Council that the program would cost around $2.6 billion, but since the cost such initiatives is routinely underestimated, expect a final figure that that is significantly higher. He admitted that the plan would cause energy prices to rise.
This will of course result in much higher energy bills for the general public because they will be forced to buy permits from the government to emit the deadly life-giving gas carbon dioxide.
The program will also include a Energy Conservation Audit and Disclosure Ordinance, which will empower environmental goons to perform energy audits on every house over ten years old when it is put up for sale. The new enforcement would also require “an energy audit/rating for all non-industrial commercial buildings with 5,000 square feet or more and multifamily properties with five or more units, aged 10 years or older.”
A similar system was introduced in 2007 in the UK amidst widespread derision and loathing. Known as Home Information Packs, shortly after they were introduced the British property market crashed as sellers refused to pay the fee, which was mandatory for all home sales. The system has since become notorious as nothing more than an odious new tax.
The implementation of so-called “green economies” in other countries has devastated economies and cost millions of jobs. As the Seattle Times reported back in June, Spain’s staggering unemployment rate of over 18 per cent was partly down to massive job losses as a result of attempts to replace existing industry with wind farms and other forms of alternative energy.
In a so-called “green economy,” “Each new job entails the loss of 2.2 other jobs that are either lost or not created in other industries because of the political allocation — sub-optimum in terms of economic efficiency — of capital,” states the report.
Despite the fact that the carbon trading market, along with “smart meter” programs, have been exposed as slush fund scams owned by the very globalists fearmongering about man-made climate change – namely Al Gore and Maurice Strong – designed to line the pockets of habitual con men who have been caught over and over again lying about the evidence behind global warming, states are now adopting their own version of the scheme so that the trick can be played on an unsuspecting public who still think that cap and trade hasn’t been implemented.
In reality, as Bloomberg News reports, “State government actions are likely to dominate the emerging U.S. carbon market in 2010,” with programs set to expand. “A group of Northeastern states already has a carbon market and two more regional programs in the Midwest and West plan to follow suit,” states the article.
As we have highlighted in the past, the ultimate goal is to reduce carbon emissions by at least 80 per cent by 2050, a move that would inflict a new Great Depression, cost millions of jobs, and sink America to near third world status.
The agenda to cut carbon emissions by 80 per cent is a huge leap towards the ultimate goal, expressed by the Carnegie Institute in 2008 and afforded sober credibility by the corporate media – a complete reduction down to zero carbon emissions, which would return mankind to the agrarian age and completely reverse hundreds of years of technological progress.
This is the ultimate tax on life and a dream come true for control freaks and globalist organizations like the Bilderberg Group and the Club of Rome who have openly pushed for a “post-industrial zero-growth society” where our standards of living are drastically reduced.
As internationally bestselling author and Bilderberg expert Daniel Estulin writes in his book The Bilderberg Group, “In a post-industrial period, zero growth will be necessary to destroy vestiges of general prosperity. When there is prosperity, there is progress. Prosperity and progress make it impossible to implement repression, and you need repression if you hope to divide society into owners and slaves. The end of prosperity will bring an end to the production of nuclear-generated electric power (as well as coal-fired plants – ed) and all industrialization (except for the computer and service industries.) The remaining Canadian and American industries would be exported to poor countries such as Bolivia, Peru, Ecuador, Nicaragua, where slave labor is cheap. One of the principal objectives for NAFTA will then be realized.”
Individuals and businesses in Austin and a plethora of other states to be taxed for emissions of life-giving gas carbon dioxide
Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
Prison Planet.com
Friday, January 29, 2010
Globalists intent on ushering in a zero-growth post-industrial society are bypassing the federal government’s stuttering efforts to implement the cap and trade scam and going directly to the states in an effort to impose their control freak tax on the very life-giving gas that we all exhale – carbon dioxide.
Even as the foundation of the argument that human emissions of CO2 cause global warming crumbles and collapses amidst scandal after scandal, energy companies and state authorities are still pushing ahead with sinister plans to mandate that individuals and businesses get government allowances and permits to emit carbon dioxide.
KLBJ radio reports that Austin Energy, which powers the city, presented to the Austin City Council “Austin Energy’s Carbon Reduction Plan,” which goes even further than the federal cap and trade bill in calling for CO2 emissions to be reduced by 20% by 2025.
The fact that energy companies are behind this again disproves the flawed notion that oil and
electricity companies oppose the global warming movement, when in fact they are its major adherents. The climate change scam is a goldmine for them because effectively licensing CO2 emissions only drives up utility prices – the costs are passed on to the consumer and their profits soar.
Austin Energy head Roger Duncan told the Austin City Council that the program would cost around $2.6 billion, but since the cost such initiatives is routinely underestimated, expect a final figure that that is significantly higher. He admitted that the plan would cause energy prices to rise.
This will of course result in much higher energy bills for the general public because they will be forced to buy permits from the government to emit the deadly life-giving gas carbon dioxide.
The program will also include a Energy Conservation Audit and Disclosure Ordinance, which will empower environmental goons to perform energy audits on every house over ten years old when it is put up for sale. The new enforcement would also require “an energy audit/rating for all non-industrial commercial buildings with 5,000 square feet or more and multifamily properties with five or more units, aged 10 years or older.”
A similar system was introduced in 2007 in the UK amidst widespread derision and loathing. Known as Home Information Packs, shortly after they were introduced the British property market crashed as sellers refused to pay the fee, which was mandatory for all home sales. The system has since become notorious as nothing more than an odious new tax.
The implementation of so-called “green economies” in other countries has devastated economies and cost millions of jobs. As the Seattle Times reported back in June, Spain’s staggering unemployment rate of over 18 per cent was partly down to massive job losses as a result of attempts to replace existing industry with wind farms and other forms of alternative energy.
In a so-called “green economy,” “Each new job entails the loss of 2.2 other jobs that are either lost or not created in other industries because of the political allocation — sub-optimum in terms of economic efficiency — of capital,” states the report.
Despite the fact that the carbon trading market, along with “smart meter” programs, have been exposed as slush fund scams owned by the very globalists fearmongering about man-made climate change – namely Al Gore and Maurice Strong – designed to line the pockets of habitual con men who have been caught over and over again lying about the evidence behind global warming, states are now adopting their own version of the scheme so that the trick can be played on an unsuspecting public who still think that cap and trade hasn’t been implemented.
In reality, as Bloomberg News reports, “State government actions are likely to dominate the emerging U.S. carbon market in 2010,” with programs set to expand. “A group of Northeastern states already has a carbon market and two more regional programs in the Midwest and West plan to follow suit,” states the article.
As we have highlighted in the past, the ultimate goal is to reduce carbon emissions by at least 80 per cent by 2050, a move that would inflict a new Great Depression, cost millions of jobs, and sink America to near third world status.
The agenda to cut carbon emissions by 80 per cent is a huge leap towards the ultimate goal, expressed by the Carnegie Institute in 2008 and afforded sober credibility by the corporate media – a complete reduction down to zero carbon emissions, which would return mankind to the agrarian age and completely reverse hundreds of years of technological progress.
This is the ultimate tax on life and a dream come true for control freaks and globalist organizations like the Bilderberg Group and the Club of Rome who have openly pushed for a “post-industrial zero-growth society” where our standards of living are drastically reduced.
As internationally bestselling author and Bilderberg expert Daniel Estulin writes in his book The Bilderberg Group, “In a post-industrial period, zero growth will be necessary to destroy vestiges of general prosperity. When there is prosperity, there is progress. Prosperity and progress make it impossible to implement repression, and you need repression if you hope to divide society into owners and slaves. The end of prosperity will bring an end to the production of nuclear-generated electric power (as well as coal-fired plants – ed) and all industrialization (except for the computer and service industries.) The remaining Canadian and American industries would be exported to poor countries such as Bolivia, Peru, Ecuador, Nicaragua, where slave labor is cheap. One of the principal objectives for NAFTA will then be realized.”
Bloomberg: Maybe A Secret Banking Cabal Does Run The World After All
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Friday, January 29, 2010
In another measure of how what the establishment labels “conspiracy theory” is quickly becoming mainstream, Bloomberg News carries a story today acknowledging that those derided as “crazy” for warning that the world is run by a secret banking cabal have largely been proven right in light of the AIG cover-up.
“The idea of secret banking cabals that control the country and global economy are a given among conspiracy theorists who stockpile ammo, bottled water and peanut butter. After this week’s congressional hearing into the bailout of American International Group Inc., you have to wonder if those folks are crazy after all,” writes Bloomberg’s David Reilly today.
“Wednesday’s hearing described a secretive group deploying billions of dollars to favored banks, operating with little oversight by the public or elected officials.”
Reilly goes on to describe how the New York Fed conducted a backdoor bailout (or in plainer terms a wholesale looting of the taxpayer) of banks like Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Merrill Lynch & Co., Societe Generale and Deutsche Bank AG, and then sought to keep it secret from the public.
Reilly also highlights another telling quote by Representative Marcy Kaptur during the hearing on Wednesday, when she told Geithner, “A lot of people think that the president of the New York Fed works for the U.S. government. But in fact you work for the private banks that elected you.”
Reilly savages Tim Geithner’s denial of any involvement in the scandal and concludes with stating, “When unelected and unaccountable agencies pick banking winners while trying to end-run Congress, even as taxpayers are forced to lend, spend and guarantee about $8 trillion to prop up the financial system, our collective blood should boil.”
As we have constantly emphasized, as the global government and the financial takeover accelerates, it’s becoming harder and harder for the elite to hide the true intention of what they are doing, which is centralizing power into fewer hands, destroying sovereignty and creating a one world order run by an unelected, undemocratic authoritarian system.
So whereas “conspiracy theorists” were once sidelined as paranoid kooks, as more and more of what they warned about comes to fruition, they gain more credibility and the establishment finds it more difficult to neutralize what they are saying by means of character assassination.
The Bloomberg writer’s admission that the “conspiracy theorists” were probably right reminds us of former Clinton advisor Dick Morris’ appearance on Fox News last year, when he pointed out that people who have been sounding the alarm bells over a global government takeover for decades have also been vindicated.
“Those people who have been yelling ‘oh the UN’s gonna take over, global government’, they’ve been crazy but now – they’re right!,” stated Morris on Sean Hannity’s show.
Watch the clip below.
Prison Planet.com
Friday, January 29, 2010
In another measure of how what the establishment labels “conspiracy theory” is quickly becoming mainstream, Bloomberg News carries a story today acknowledging that those derided as “crazy” for warning that the world is run by a secret banking cabal have largely been proven right in light of the AIG cover-up.
“The idea of secret banking cabals that control the country and global economy are a given among conspiracy theorists who stockpile ammo, bottled water and peanut butter. After this week’s congressional hearing into the bailout of American International Group Inc., you have to wonder if those folks are crazy after all,” writes Bloomberg’s David Reilly today.
“Wednesday’s hearing described a secretive group deploying billions of dollars to favored banks, operating with little oversight by the public or elected officials.”
Reilly goes on to describe how the New York Fed conducted a backdoor bailout (or in plainer terms a wholesale looting of the taxpayer) of banks like Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Merrill Lynch & Co., Societe Generale and Deutsche Bank AG, and then sought to keep it secret from the public.
Reilly also highlights another telling quote by Representative Marcy Kaptur during the hearing on Wednesday, when she told Geithner, “A lot of people think that the president of the New York Fed works for the U.S. government. But in fact you work for the private banks that elected you.”
Reilly savages Tim Geithner’s denial of any involvement in the scandal and concludes with stating, “When unelected and unaccountable agencies pick banking winners while trying to end-run Congress, even as taxpayers are forced to lend, spend and guarantee about $8 trillion to prop up the financial system, our collective blood should boil.”
As we have constantly emphasized, as the global government and the financial takeover accelerates, it’s becoming harder and harder for the elite to hide the true intention of what they are doing, which is centralizing power into fewer hands, destroying sovereignty and creating a one world order run by an unelected, undemocratic authoritarian system.
So whereas “conspiracy theorists” were once sidelined as paranoid kooks, as more and more of what they warned about comes to fruition, they gain more credibility and the establishment finds it more difficult to neutralize what they are saying by means of character assassination.
The Bloomberg writer’s admission that the “conspiracy theorists” were probably right reminds us of former Clinton advisor Dick Morris’ appearance on Fox News last year, when he pointed out that people who have been sounding the alarm bells over a global government takeover for decades have also been vindicated.
“Those people who have been yelling ‘oh the UN’s gonna take over, global government’, they’ve been crazy but now – they’re right!,” stated Morris on Sean Hannity’s show.
Watch the clip below.
Friday, January 22, 2010
TSA worker plants white powder baggie on traveller as a joke
TSA worker plants white powder baggie on traveller as a joke: "TSA worker plants white powder baggie on traveller as a joke
Raw Story
Friday, January 22nd, 2010
Agent was contraband detection trainer; ‘no longer employed’ at TSA
These days, joking about anything illegal while in an airport security line will likely land you in a holding cell, and might even result in criminal charges. But this column from the Philadelphia Inquirer has some wondering whether that rule applies to TSA employees themselves.
Inquirer columnist Daniel Rubin reports that a 22-year-old University of Michigan student fell victim to a particularly cruel “joke” at the hands of a TSA employee at Philadelphia International Airport on Jan. 5.
As Rebecca Solomon passed through security on her way to boarding a Detroit-bound flight, a TSA agent pulled a small baggie filled with white powder out of her carry-on and asked, “Where did you get it?”
A panicked Solomon suffered for 20 seconds before the guard cracked a smile and said, “Just kidding.”
Rubin describes the bizarre encounter like this:
A TSA worker was staring at her. He motioned her toward him. Then he pulled a small, clear plastic bag from her carry-on — the sort of baggie that a pair of earrings might come in. Inside the bag was fine, white powder. She remembers his words: “Where did you get it?”
Two thoughts came to her in a jumble: A terrorist was using her to sneak bomb-detonating materials on the plane. Or a drug dealer had made her an unwitting mule, planting coke or some other trouble in her bag while she wasn’t looking.
Put yourself in her place and count out 20 seconds. Her heart pounded. She started to sweat. She panicked at having to explain something she couldn’t.
Now picture her expression as the TSA employee started to smile. Just kidding, he said. He waved the baggie. It was his.
And so she collected her things, stunned, and the tears began to fall.
The Inquirer’s Linda Loyd reported later Thursday that the TSA says the employee in question in the incident is “no longer employed by the agency.”
The TSA reportedly isn’t disputing Solomon’s version of events.
The employee can’t be named because of TSA privacy regulations, which also prevent the TSA from saying whether he quit or was fired. But Solomon told the Inquirer that she was told he was a trainer who taught TSA employees how to detect contraband.
Raw Story
Friday, January 22nd, 2010
Agent was contraband detection trainer; ‘no longer employed’ at TSA
These days, joking about anything illegal while in an airport security line will likely land you in a holding cell, and might even result in criminal charges. But this column from the Philadelphia Inquirer has some wondering whether that rule applies to TSA employees themselves.
Inquirer columnist Daniel Rubin reports that a 22-year-old University of Michigan student fell victim to a particularly cruel “joke” at the hands of a TSA employee at Philadelphia International Airport on Jan. 5.
As Rebecca Solomon passed through security on her way to boarding a Detroit-bound flight, a TSA agent pulled a small baggie filled with white powder out of her carry-on and asked, “Where did you get it?”
A panicked Solomon suffered for 20 seconds before the guard cracked a smile and said, “Just kidding.”
Rubin describes the bizarre encounter like this:
A TSA worker was staring at her. He motioned her toward him. Then he pulled a small, clear plastic bag from her carry-on — the sort of baggie that a pair of earrings might come in. Inside the bag was fine, white powder. She remembers his words: “Where did you get it?”
Two thoughts came to her in a jumble: A terrorist was using her to sneak bomb-detonating materials on the plane. Or a drug dealer had made her an unwitting mule, planting coke or some other trouble in her bag while she wasn’t looking.
Put yourself in her place and count out 20 seconds. Her heart pounded. She started to sweat. She panicked at having to explain something she couldn’t.
Now picture her expression as the TSA employee started to smile. Just kidding, he said. He waved the baggie. It was his.
And so she collected her things, stunned, and the tears began to fall.
The Inquirer’s Linda Loyd reported later Thursday that the TSA says the employee in question in the incident is “no longer employed by the agency.”
The TSA reportedly isn’t disputing Solomon’s version of events.
The employee can’t be named because of TSA privacy regulations, which also prevent the TSA from saying whether he quit or was fired. But Solomon told the Inquirer that she was told he was a trainer who taught TSA employees how to detect contraband.
Banks already finding ways around Obama financial reforms
Banks already finding ways around Obama financial reforms: "Banks already finding ways around Obama financial reforms
Daniel Tencer
Raw Story
Friday, January 22nd, 2010
‘If these folks want a fight, it’s a fight I’m ready to have’: Obama
On the same day that President Barack Obama announced an ambitious plan to reform the US financial system, bankers at the largest Wall Street institutions indicated that they are already finding ways around the proposed changes.
Sources at three Wall Street banks told BusinessInsider’s John Carney that “they are already finding ways to own, invest in and sponsor hedge funds and private equity funds” despite the proposed restrictions on those activities. One unnamed operative at a major bank said his firm expects the reforms to affect no more than one percent of its business.
President Obama announced two major reforms of the financial system on Thursday. The first would see the US in effect return to the separation of commercial and investment banking that was mandated by law until 1999, when that rule in the Depression-era Glass-Steagall Act was abandoned.
Many economists say allowing banks to be both lenders to the public and investors in large hedge funds and other securities contributed to the economic collapse of 2008.
The other rule would limit the size of banks, ostensibly to ensure that no banks are “too big to fail” and require taxpayer bailouts to keep the economy from collapsing.
But Wall Street bankers are pointing to a phrase in the proposed reforms — that banks will be barred “from proprietary trading operations unrelated to serving customers” — as an easy loophole to get around. John Carney reports:
The key phrase is “operations" unrelated to serving customers.” The banks plan to claim that much of the business in which it engages is related in one way or another to serving customers….
A still more devious way is to have a bank’s own employees be the customers who are invested in the internal hedge funds. That way trading operations can remain closed to outsiders while the regulatory requirement of relating the trading to customer service is met. Goldman Sachs is rumored to be considering this approach.
TOUGH TALK
In the wake of a slew of criticism accusing the president of weak leadership on the health care issue, particularly in light of the Democrats’ loss of Ted Kennedy’s old Senate seat earlier this week, Obama sounded a tougher note on the issue of financial reform than he has been known for in the past.
“If these folks want a fight, it’s a fight I’m ready to have,” Obama said Thursday in announcing the financial reforms.
“While the financial system is far stronger today than it was one year ago, it’s still operating under the same rules that led to its near collapse,” Obama said. “Never again will the American taxpayer be held hostage by a bank that is too big to fail.”
Obama dubbed his plan to separate commercial and investment banking the “Volcker rule,” after former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker, who is credited by many economists for being the architect of the economic policies that allowed the US economy to thrive during the Reagan era. For much of the past year, Volcker, who is now an economic advisor to Obama, had argued for a return to the Glass-Steagall era that separated commercial and investment banking.
The fact that a former Fed chairman considered to be economically right wing was pushing for these reforms was one major reason that the reforms began to gain traction among commentators and lawmakers.
But news that banks are already easily finding ways around the proposed reforms will likely lead to questions over whether Obama’s proposed fixes are tough enough, or whether any reforms can actually be effective in the current business environment.
“This thing is about showing the public that Obama is standing up to Wall Street,” an unnamed Wall Street insider told BusinessInsider. “So the rhetoric is heated. But the implementation will require far less change than people think right now.”
Daniel Tencer
Raw Story
Friday, January 22nd, 2010
‘If these folks want a fight, it’s a fight I’m ready to have’: Obama
On the same day that President Barack Obama announced an ambitious plan to reform the US financial system, bankers at the largest Wall Street institutions indicated that they are already finding ways around the proposed changes.
Sources at three Wall Street banks told BusinessInsider’s John Carney that “they are already finding ways to own, invest in and sponsor hedge funds and private equity funds” despite the proposed restrictions on those activities. One unnamed operative at a major bank said his firm expects the reforms to affect no more than one percent of its business.
President Obama announced two major reforms of the financial system on Thursday. The first would see the US in effect return to the separation of commercial and investment banking that was mandated by law until 1999, when that rule in the Depression-era Glass-Steagall Act was abandoned.
Many economists say allowing banks to be both lenders to the public and investors in large hedge funds and other securities contributed to the economic collapse of 2008.
The other rule would limit the size of banks, ostensibly to ensure that no banks are “too big to fail” and require taxpayer bailouts to keep the economy from collapsing.
But Wall Street bankers are pointing to a phrase in the proposed reforms — that banks will be barred “from proprietary trading operations unrelated to serving customers” — as an easy loophole to get around. John Carney reports:
The key phrase is “operations" unrelated to serving customers.” The banks plan to claim that much of the business in which it engages is related in one way or another to serving customers….
A still more devious way is to have a bank’s own employees be the customers who are invested in the internal hedge funds. That way trading operations can remain closed to outsiders while the regulatory requirement of relating the trading to customer service is met. Goldman Sachs is rumored to be considering this approach.
TOUGH TALK
In the wake of a slew of criticism accusing the president of weak leadership on the health care issue, particularly in light of the Democrats’ loss of Ted Kennedy’s old Senate seat earlier this week, Obama sounded a tougher note on the issue of financial reform than he has been known for in the past.
“If these folks want a fight, it’s a fight I’m ready to have,” Obama said Thursday in announcing the financial reforms.
“While the financial system is far stronger today than it was one year ago, it’s still operating under the same rules that led to its near collapse,” Obama said. “Never again will the American taxpayer be held hostage by a bank that is too big to fail.”
Obama dubbed his plan to separate commercial and investment banking the “Volcker rule,” after former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker, who is credited by many economists for being the architect of the economic policies that allowed the US economy to thrive during the Reagan era. For much of the past year, Volcker, who is now an economic advisor to Obama, had argued for a return to the Glass-Steagall era that separated commercial and investment banking.
The fact that a former Fed chairman considered to be economically right wing was pushing for these reforms was one major reason that the reforms began to gain traction among commentators and lawmakers.
But news that banks are already easily finding ways around the proposed reforms will likely lead to questions over whether Obama’s proposed fixes are tough enough, or whether any reforms can actually be effective in the current business environment.
“This thing is about showing the public that Obama is standing up to Wall Street,” an unnamed Wall Street insider told BusinessInsider. “So the rhetoric is heated. But the implementation will require far less change than people think right now.”
Thursday, January 14, 2010
http://www.daily.pk/fake-gold-bars-in-bank-of-england-and-fort-knox-14477/
FAKE GOLD BARS IN FORT KNOX & BANK OF ENGLAND
It’s one thing to counterfeit a twenty or hundred dollar bill. The amount of financial damage is usually limited to a specific region and only affects dozens of people and thousands of dollars. Secret Service agents quickly notify the banks on how to recognize these phony bills and retail outlets usually have procedures in place (such as special pens to test the paper) to stop their proliferation.
But what about gold? This is the most sacred of all commodities because it is thought to be the most trusted, reliable and valuable means of saving wealth.
A recent discovery — in October of 2009 — has been suppressed by the main stream media but has been circulating among the “big money” brokers and financial kingpins and is just now being revealed to the public. It involves the gold in Fort Knox — the US Treasury gold — that is the equity of our national wealth. In short, millions (with an “m”) of gold bars are fake!
Who did this? Apparently our own government.
Background
In October of 2009 the Chinese received a shipment of gold bars. Gold is regularly exchanges between countries to pay debts and to settle the so-called balance of trade. Most gold is exchanged and stored in vaults under the supervision of a special organization based in London, the London Bullion Market Association (or LBMA). When the shipment was received, the Chinese government asked that special tests be performed to guarantee the purity and weight of the gold bars. In this test, four small holed are drilled into the gold bars and the metal is then analyzed.
Officials were shocked to learn that the bars were fake. They contained cores of tungsten with only a outer coating of real gold. What’s more, these gold bars, containing serial numbers for tracking, originated in the US and had been stored in Fort Knox for years. There were reportedly between 5,600 to 5,700 bars, weighing 400 oz. each, in the shipment!
At first many gold experts assumed the fake gold originated in China, the world’s best knock-off producers. The Chinese were quick to investigate and issued a statement that implicated the US in the scheme.
What the Chinese uncovered:
Roughly 15 years ago — during the Clinton Administration [think Robert Rubin, Sir Alan Greenspan and Lawrence Summers] — between 1.3 and 1.5 million 400 oz tungsten blanks were allegedly manufactured by a very high-end, sophisticated refiner in the USA [more than 16 Thousand metric tonnes]. Subsequently, 640,000 of these tungsten blanks received their gold plating and WERE shipped to Ft. Knox and remain there to this day.
According to the Chinese investigation, the balance of this 1.3 million to 1.5 million 400 oz tungsten cache was also gold plated and then allegedly “sold” into the international market. Apparently, the global market is literally “stuffed full of 400 oz salted bars”. Perhaps as much as 600-billion dollars worth.
An obscure news item originally published in the N.Y. Post [written by Jennifer Anderson] in late Jan. 04 perhaps makes sense now.
DA investigating NYMEX executive ,Manhattan, New York, –Feb. 2, 2004.
A top executive at the New York Mercantile Exchange is being investigated by the Manhattan district attorney. Sources close to the exchange said that Stuart Smith, senior vice president of operations at the exchange, was served with a search warrant by the district attorney’s office last week. Details of the investigation have not been disclosed, but a NYMEX spokeswoman said it was unrelated to any of the exchange’s markets. She declined to comment further other than to say that charges had not been brought. A spokeswoman for the Manhattan district attorney’s office also declined comment.”
The offices of the Senior Vice President of Operations — NYMEX — is exactly where you would go to find the records [serial number and smelter of origin] for EVERY GOLD BAR ever PHYSICALLY settled on the exchange. They are required to keep these records. These precise records would show the lineage of all the physical gold settled on the exchange and hence “prove” that the amount of gold in question could not have possibly come from the U.S. mining operations — because the amounts in question coming from U.S. smelters would undoubtedly be vastly bigger than domestic mine production.
No one knows whatever happened to Stuart Smith. After his offices were raided he took “administrative leave” from the NYMEX and he has never been heard from since. Amazingly, there never was any follow up on in the media on the original story as well as ZERO developments ever stemming from D.A. Morgenthau’s office who executed the search warrant.
Are we to believe that NYMEX offices were raided, the Sr. V.P. of operations then takes leave — all for nothing?
The revelations of fake gold bars also explains another highly unusual story that also happened in 2004:
LONDON, April 14, 2004 (Reuters) — NM Rothschild & Sons Ltd., the London-based unit of investment bank Rothschild [ROT.UL], will withdraw from trading commodities, including gold, in London as it reviews its operations, it said on Wednesday.
Interestingly, GATA’s Bill Murphy speculated about this back in 2004;
“Why is Rothschild leaving the gold business at this time my colleagues and I conjectured today? Just a guess on my part, but [I] suspect something is amiss. They know a big scandal is coming and they don’t want to be a part of it… [The] Rothschild wants out before the proverbial “S” hits the fan.” — BILL MURPHY, LEMETROPOLE, 4-18-2004
What is the GATA?
The Gold Antitrust Action Committee (GATA) is an organisation which has been nipping at the heels of the US Treasury Federal Reserve for several years now. The basis of GATA’s accusations is that these institutions, in coordination with other complicit central banks and the large gold-trading investment banks in the US, have been manipulating the price of gold for decades.
What is the GLD?GLD is a short form for Good London Delivery. The London Bullion Market Association (LBMA) has defined “good delivery” as a delivery from an entity which is listed on their delivery list or meets the standards for said list and whose bars have passed testing requirements established by the associatin and updated from time to time. The bars have to be pure for AU in an area of 995.0 to 999.9 per 1000. Weight, Shape, Appearance, Marks and Weight Stamps are regulated as follows:
Weight: minimum 350 fine ounces AU; maximum 430 fine ounces AU, gross weight of a bar is expressed in troy ounces, in multiples of 0.025, rounded down to the nearest 0.025 of an troy ounce.
Dimensions: the recommended dimensions for a Good Delivery gold bar are: Top Surface: 255 x 81 mm; Bottom Surface: 236 x 57 mm; Thickness: 37 mm.
Fineness: the minimum 995.0 parts per thousand fine gold. Marks: Serial number; Assay stamp of refiner; Fineness (to four significant figures); Year of manufacture (expressed in four digits).
After reviewing their prospectus yet again, it becomes pretty clear that GLD was established to purposefully deflect investment dollars away from legitimate gold pursuits and to create a stealth, cesspool / catch-all, slush-fund and a likely destination for many of these fake tungsten bars where they would never see the light of day — hidden behind the following legalese “shield” from the law:
[Excerpt from the GLD prospectus on page 11]
“Gold bars allocated to the Trust in connection with the creation of a Basket may not meet the London Good Delivery Standards and, if a Basket is issued against such gold, the Trust may suffer a loss. Neither the Trustee nor the Custodian independently confirms the fineness of the gold bars allocated to the Trust in connection with the creation of a Basket. The gold bars allocated to the Trust by the Custodian may be different from the reported fineness or weight required by the LBMA’s standards for gold bars delivered in settlement of a gold trade, or the London Good Delivery Standards, the standards required by the Trust. If the Trustee nevertheless issues a Basket against such gold, and if the Custodian fails to satisfy its obligation to credit the Trust the amount of any deficiency, the Trust may suffer a loss.”
The Federal Reserve knows but is apparently part of the schemeEarlier this year GATA filed a second Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the Federal Reserve System for documents from 1990 to date having to do with gold swaps, gold swapped, or proposed gold swaps.
On Aug. 5, The Federal Reserve responded to this FOIA request by adding two more documents to those disclosed to GATA in April 2008 from the earlier FOIA request. These documents totaled 173 pages, many parts of which were redacted (blacked out). The Fed’s response also noted that there were 137 pages of documents not disclosed that were alleged to be exempt from disclosure.
GATA appealed this determination on Aug. 20. The appeal asked for more information to substantiate the legitimacy of the claimed exemptions from disclosure and an explanation on why some documents, such as one posted on the Federal Reserve Web site that discusses gold swaps, were not included in the Aug. 5 document release.
In a Sept. 17, 2009, letter on Federal Reserve System letterhead, Federal Reserve governor Kevin M. Warsh completely denied GATA’s appeal. The entire text of this letter can be examined at http://www.gata. org/files/ GATAFedRespon” onclick=”window. open(this. href);return false;” onclick=”window. open(this. href);return false;” onclick=”window. open(this. href);return false;” onclick=”window. open(this. href);return false;” onclick=”window. open(this. href);return false;” onclick=”window. open(this. href);return false;” onclick=”window. open(this. href);return false; … 7-2009.pdf.
The first paragraph on the third page is the most revealing.”In connection with your appeal, I have confirmed that the information withheld under exemption 4 consists of confidential commercial or financial information relating to the operations of the Federal Reserve Banks that was obtained within the meaning of exemption 4. This includes information relating to swap arrangements with foreign banks on behalf of the Federal Reserve System and is not the type of information that is customarily disclosed to the public. This information was properly withheld from you.”
above statement is an admission that the Federal Reserve has been involved with the fake gold bar swaps and that it refuses to disclose any information about its activities!
The above statement is an admission that the Federal Reserve has been involved with the fake gold bar swaps and that it refuses to disclose any information about its activities!
Why use tungsten?
If you are going to print fake money you need to have the special paper, otherwise the bills don’t feel right and can be easily detected by special pens that most merchants and banks use. Likewise, if you are going to fake gold bars you had better be sure they have the same weight and properties of real gold.
In early 2008 millions of dollars in gold at the central bank of Ethiopia turned out to be fake. What were supposed to be bars of solid gold turned out to be nothing more than gold-plated steel. They tried to sell the stuff to South Africa and it was sent back when the South Africans noticed this little problem. The problem with making good-quality fake gold is that gold is remarkably dense. It’s almost twice the density of lead, and two-and-a-half times more dense than steel. You don’t usually notice this because small gold rings and the like don’t weigh enough to make it obvious, but if you’ve ever held a larger bar of gold, it’s absolutely unmistakable: The stuff is very, very heavy.
The standard gold bar for bank-to-bank trade, known as a “London good delivery bar” weighs 400 troy ounces (over thirty-three pounds), yet is no bigger than a paperback novel. A bar of steel the same size would weigh only thirteen and a half pounds.
According to gold expert, Theo Gray, the problem is that there are very few metals that are as dense as gold, and with only two exceptions they all cost as much or more than gold.
The first exception is depleted uranium, which is cheap if you’re a government, but hard for individuals to get. It’s also radioactive, which could be a bit of an issue.
The second exception is a real winner:
tungsten. Tungsten is vastly cheaper than gold (maybe $30 dollars a pound compared to $12,000 a pound for gold right now). And remarkably, it has exactly the same density as gold, to three decimal places. The main differences are that it’s the wrong color, and that it’s much, much harder than gold. (Very pure gold is quite soft, you can dent it with a fingernail.)
A top-of-the-line fake gold bar should match the color, surface hardness, density, chemical, and nuclear properties of gold perfectly. To do this, you could could start with a tungsten slug about 1/8-inch smaller in each dimension than the gold bar you want, then cast a 1/16-inch layer of real pure gold all around it. This bar would feel right in the hand, it would have a dead ring when knocked as gold should, it would test right chemically, it would weigh *exactly* the right amount, and though I don’t know this for sure, I think it would also pass an x-ray fluorescence scan, the 1/16″ layer of pure gold being enough to stop the x-rays from reaching any tungsten. You’d pretty much have to drill it to find out it’s fake.
Such a top-quality fake London good delivery bar would cost about $50,000 to produce because it’s got a lot of real gold in it, but you’d still make a nice profit considering that a real one is worth closer to $400,000.
What’s going to happen now?
Politicians like Ron Paul have been demanding that the Federal Reserve be more transparent and open up their records for public scrutiny. But the Fed has consistently refused, stating that these disclosures would undermine its operation. Yes, it certainly would!
It’s one thing to counterfeit a twenty or hundred dollar bill. The amount of financial damage is usually limited to a specific region and only affects dozens of people and thousands of dollars. Secret Service agents quickly notify the banks on how to recognize these phony bills and retail outlets usually have procedures in place (such as special pens to test the paper) to stop their proliferation.
But what about gold? This is the most sacred of all commodities because it is thought to be the most trusted, reliable and valuable means of saving wealth.
A recent discovery — in October of 2009 — has been suppressed by the main stream media but has been circulating among the “big money” brokers and financial kingpins and is just now being revealed to the public. It involves the gold in Fort Knox — the US Treasury gold — that is the equity of our national wealth. In short, millions (with an “m”) of gold bars are fake!
Who did this? Apparently our own government.
Background
In October of 2009 the Chinese received a shipment of gold bars. Gold is regularly exchanges between countries to pay debts and to settle the so-called balance of trade. Most gold is exchanged and stored in vaults under the supervision of a special organization based in London, the London Bullion Market Association (or LBMA). When the shipment was received, the Chinese government asked that special tests be performed to guarantee the purity and weight of the gold bars. In this test, four small holed are drilled into the gold bars and the metal is then analyzed.
Officials were shocked to learn that the bars were fake. They contained cores of tungsten with only a outer coating of real gold. What’s more, these gold bars, containing serial numbers for tracking, originated in the US and had been stored in Fort Knox for years. There were reportedly between 5,600 to 5,700 bars, weighing 400 oz. each, in the shipment!
At first many gold experts assumed the fake gold originated in China, the world’s best knock-off producers. The Chinese were quick to investigate and issued a statement that implicated the US in the scheme.
What the Chinese uncovered:
Roughly 15 years ago — during the Clinton Administration [think Robert Rubin, Sir Alan Greenspan and Lawrence Summers] — between 1.3 and 1.5 million 400 oz tungsten blanks were allegedly manufactured by a very high-end, sophisticated refiner in the USA [more than 16 Thousand metric tonnes]. Subsequently, 640,000 of these tungsten blanks received their gold plating and WERE shipped to Ft. Knox and remain there to this day.
According to the Chinese investigation, the balance of this 1.3 million to 1.5 million 400 oz tungsten cache was also gold plated and then allegedly “sold” into the international market. Apparently, the global market is literally “stuffed full of 400 oz salted bars”. Perhaps as much as 600-billion dollars worth.
An obscure news item originally published in the N.Y. Post [written by Jennifer Anderson] in late Jan. 04 perhaps makes sense now.
DA investigating NYMEX executive ,Manhattan, New York, –Feb. 2, 2004.
A top executive at the New York Mercantile Exchange is being investigated by the Manhattan district attorney. Sources close to the exchange said that Stuart Smith, senior vice president of operations at the exchange, was served with a search warrant by the district attorney’s office last week. Details of the investigation have not been disclosed, but a NYMEX spokeswoman said it was unrelated to any of the exchange’s markets. She declined to comment further other than to say that charges had not been brought. A spokeswoman for the Manhattan district attorney’s office also declined comment.”
The offices of the Senior Vice President of Operations — NYMEX — is exactly where you would go to find the records [serial number and smelter of origin] for EVERY GOLD BAR ever PHYSICALLY settled on the exchange. They are required to keep these records. These precise records would show the lineage of all the physical gold settled on the exchange and hence “prove” that the amount of gold in question could not have possibly come from the U.S. mining operations — because the amounts in question coming from U.S. smelters would undoubtedly be vastly bigger than domestic mine production.
No one knows whatever happened to Stuart Smith. After his offices were raided he took “administrative leave” from the NYMEX and he has never been heard from since. Amazingly, there never was any follow up on in the media on the original story as well as ZERO developments ever stemming from D.A. Morgenthau’s office who executed the search warrant.
Are we to believe that NYMEX offices were raided, the Sr. V.P. of operations then takes leave — all for nothing?
The revelations of fake gold bars also explains another highly unusual story that also happened in 2004:
LONDON, April 14, 2004 (Reuters) — NM Rothschild & Sons Ltd., the London-based unit of investment bank Rothschild [ROT.UL], will withdraw from trading commodities, including gold, in London as it reviews its operations, it said on Wednesday.
Interestingly, GATA’s Bill Murphy speculated about this back in 2004;
“Why is Rothschild leaving the gold business at this time my colleagues and I conjectured today? Just a guess on my part, but [I] suspect something is amiss. They know a big scandal is coming and they don’t want to be a part of it… [The] Rothschild wants out before the proverbial “S” hits the fan.” — BILL MURPHY, LEMETROPOLE, 4-18-2004
What is the GATA?
The Gold Antitrust Action Committee (GATA) is an organisation which has been nipping at the heels of the US Treasury Federal Reserve for several years now. The basis of GATA’s accusations is that these institutions, in coordination with other complicit central banks and the large gold-trading investment banks in the US, have been manipulating the price of gold for decades.
What is the GLD?GLD is a short form for Good London Delivery. The London Bullion Market Association (LBMA) has defined “good delivery” as a delivery from an entity which is listed on their delivery list or meets the standards for said list and whose bars have passed testing requirements established by the associatin and updated from time to time. The bars have to be pure for AU in an area of 995.0 to 999.9 per 1000. Weight, Shape, Appearance, Marks and Weight Stamps are regulated as follows:
Weight: minimum 350 fine ounces AU; maximum 430 fine ounces AU, gross weight of a bar is expressed in troy ounces, in multiples of 0.025, rounded down to the nearest 0.025 of an troy ounce.
Dimensions: the recommended dimensions for a Good Delivery gold bar are: Top Surface: 255 x 81 mm; Bottom Surface: 236 x 57 mm; Thickness: 37 mm.
Fineness: the minimum 995.0 parts per thousand fine gold. Marks: Serial number; Assay stamp of refiner; Fineness (to four significant figures); Year of manufacture (expressed in four digits).
After reviewing their prospectus yet again, it becomes pretty clear that GLD was established to purposefully deflect investment dollars away from legitimate gold pursuits and to create a stealth, cesspool / catch-all, slush-fund and a likely destination for many of these fake tungsten bars where they would never see the light of day — hidden behind the following legalese “shield” from the law:
[Excerpt from the GLD prospectus on page 11]
“Gold bars allocated to the Trust in connection with the creation of a Basket may not meet the London Good Delivery Standards and, if a Basket is issued against such gold, the Trust may suffer a loss. Neither the Trustee nor the Custodian independently confirms the fineness of the gold bars allocated to the Trust in connection with the creation of a Basket. The gold bars allocated to the Trust by the Custodian may be different from the reported fineness or weight required by the LBMA’s standards for gold bars delivered in settlement of a gold trade, or the London Good Delivery Standards, the standards required by the Trust. If the Trustee nevertheless issues a Basket against such gold, and if the Custodian fails to satisfy its obligation to credit the Trust the amount of any deficiency, the Trust may suffer a loss.”
The Federal Reserve knows but is apparently part of the schemeEarlier this year GATA filed a second Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the Federal Reserve System for documents from 1990 to date having to do with gold swaps, gold swapped, or proposed gold swaps.
On Aug. 5, The Federal Reserve responded to this FOIA request by adding two more documents to those disclosed to GATA in April 2008 from the earlier FOIA request. These documents totaled 173 pages, many parts of which were redacted (blacked out). The Fed’s response also noted that there were 137 pages of documents not disclosed that were alleged to be exempt from disclosure.
GATA appealed this determination on Aug. 20. The appeal asked for more information to substantiate the legitimacy of the claimed exemptions from disclosure and an explanation on why some documents, such as one posted on the Federal Reserve Web site that discusses gold swaps, were not included in the Aug. 5 document release.
In a Sept. 17, 2009, letter on Federal Reserve System letterhead, Federal Reserve governor Kevin M. Warsh completely denied GATA’s appeal. The entire text of this letter can be examined at http://www.gata. org/files/ GATAFedRespon” onclick=”window. open(this. href);return false;” onclick=”window. open(this. href);return false;” onclick=”window. open(this. href);return false;” onclick=”window. open(this. href);return false;” onclick=”window. open(this. href);return false;” onclick=”window. open(this. href);return false;” onclick=”window. open(this. href);return false; … 7-2009.pdf.
The first paragraph on the third page is the most revealing.”In connection with your appeal, I have confirmed that the information withheld under exemption 4 consists of confidential commercial or financial information relating to the operations of the Federal Reserve Banks that was obtained within the meaning of exemption 4. This includes information relating to swap arrangements with foreign banks on behalf of the Federal Reserve System and is not the type of information that is customarily disclosed to the public. This information was properly withheld from you.”
above statement is an admission that the Federal Reserve has been involved with the fake gold bar swaps and that it refuses to disclose any information about its activities!
The above statement is an admission that the Federal Reserve has been involved with the fake gold bar swaps and that it refuses to disclose any information about its activities!
Why use tungsten?
If you are going to print fake money you need to have the special paper, otherwise the bills don’t feel right and can be easily detected by special pens that most merchants and banks use. Likewise, if you are going to fake gold bars you had better be sure they have the same weight and properties of real gold.
In early 2008 millions of dollars in gold at the central bank of Ethiopia turned out to be fake. What were supposed to be bars of solid gold turned out to be nothing more than gold-plated steel. They tried to sell the stuff to South Africa and it was sent back when the South Africans noticed this little problem. The problem with making good-quality fake gold is that gold is remarkably dense. It’s almost twice the density of lead, and two-and-a-half times more dense than steel. You don’t usually notice this because small gold rings and the like don’t weigh enough to make it obvious, but if you’ve ever held a larger bar of gold, it’s absolutely unmistakable: The stuff is very, very heavy.
The standard gold bar for bank-to-bank trade, known as a “London good delivery bar” weighs 400 troy ounces (over thirty-three pounds), yet is no bigger than a paperback novel. A bar of steel the same size would weigh only thirteen and a half pounds.
According to gold expert, Theo Gray, the problem is that there are very few metals that are as dense as gold, and with only two exceptions they all cost as much or more than gold.
The first exception is depleted uranium, which is cheap if you’re a government, but hard for individuals to get. It’s also radioactive, which could be a bit of an issue.
The second exception is a real winner:
tungsten. Tungsten is vastly cheaper than gold (maybe $30 dollars a pound compared to $12,000 a pound for gold right now). And remarkably, it has exactly the same density as gold, to three decimal places. The main differences are that it’s the wrong color, and that it’s much, much harder than gold. (Very pure gold is quite soft, you can dent it with a fingernail.)
A top-of-the-line fake gold bar should match the color, surface hardness, density, chemical, and nuclear properties of gold perfectly. To do this, you could could start with a tungsten slug about 1/8-inch smaller in each dimension than the gold bar you want, then cast a 1/16-inch layer of real pure gold all around it. This bar would feel right in the hand, it would have a dead ring when knocked as gold should, it would test right chemically, it would weigh *exactly* the right amount, and though I don’t know this for sure, I think it would also pass an x-ray fluorescence scan, the 1/16″ layer of pure gold being enough to stop the x-rays from reaching any tungsten. You’d pretty much have to drill it to find out it’s fake.
Such a top-quality fake London good delivery bar would cost about $50,000 to produce because it’s got a lot of real gold in it, but you’d still make a nice profit considering that a real one is worth closer to $400,000.
What’s going to happen now?
Politicians like Ron Paul have been demanding that the Federal Reserve be more transparent and open up their records for public scrutiny. But the Fed has consistently refused, stating that these disclosures would undermine its operation. Yes, it certainly would!
"Palestinians fight settlements by planning a suburb
TweetMeme Retweet Button: "Palestinians fight settlements by planning a suburb
Bulldozers are carving out a new suburb on a hilltop in the occupied West Bank. For once it isn't a Jewish settlement but the first ever planned Palestinian suburb."
The developers of Rawabi, as the community is known, hope it will one day provide much-needed housing for 40,000 people and cement Palestinian claims to the territory amid similar communities built by settlers.
"The city is not a settlement," says Bashar al-Masri, head of the Bayti Real Estate Investment Company, which is responsible for the $700 million (£430 million) project along with Qatar's Diar Real Estate Company.
"Instead it can be considered a Palestinian attempt to keep Palestinians on their land in order to contain Israeli settlement," he says.
The building of a modern suburb in the West Bank, which is governed by the Western-backed Palestinian Authority and receives considerable international aid, is in sharp contrast to the lingering devastation in the Gaza Strip, which has been under strict closure since the Hamas movement seized power in 2007.
The first phase of the Rawabi project calls for the construction of 22 residential buildings housing 20,000 people within three years. The second phase will double the occupancy over the following three years.
The city will include schools and hospitals, and the homes will be within the means of middle-class Palestinians, with units selling for $50,000 to $80,000.
Covering some 630 hectares (1,500 acres), it will be one of the largest investment projects in the occupied territories, and has won the enthusiastic support of the Palestinian Authority.
"This project proves that there are opportunities for investment in Palestine," said Hassan Abu Libdeh, teh Palestinian economics minister.
Ironically, the hilltop suburb resembles the dozens of Israeli settlements scattered across the territory, which the Palestinians have condemned as "facts on the ground" aimed at thwarting the creation of an independent state.
"The sight of Palestinian bulldozers is strange, because we are used to seeing Israeli bulldozers stealing our land and digging it up to build settlements," says Mohammed Khamis, 42, watching from a nearby village.
"There are some cynical comparisons that Palestinians are involved in this sad scene associated with Israeli settlement, but we hope that the project will be the beginning of an expansion of related investment," Abu Libdeh says.
The project is being carried out in Area A, a part of the occupied West Bank governed by the Palestinian Authority, but comes amid a general push to assert greater Palestinian control over the territory occupied by Israel in 1967.
Palestinian prime minister Salam Fayyad has vowed to construct housing and infrastructure in Area C, which is under complete Israeli military control, as part of his plan to build the institutions of a Palestinian state by 2011.
The Rawabi project nevertheless depends in part on Israel, which must open the main road between the new suburb and the nearby town of Ramallah and grant permission for the construction of new infrastructure, Masri says.
"We have not yet obtained Israeli approval, but there is no Israeli opposition to this," he says. "We have approval in principle."
As the Palestinians have accelerated projects aimed at generating economic growth following the devastating 2000 intifada, or uprising, they have demanded that Israel halt its own construction projects in the territory, which are considered illegal by the international community.
Mahmud Abbas, the Palestinian president, has refused US demands to relaunch peace talks suspended during last winter's Gaza war until Israel halts all settlement activity, including in mostly Arab east Jerusalem.
In November Israel enacted a 10-month moratorium on new building starts in the West Bank but excluded east Jerusalem, public buildings and projects already under way, prompting the Palestinians to criticise the move as insufficient.
Nearly half a million Israelis live in more than 100 settlements scattered across the West Bank and east Jerusalem, many of which resemble Western-style suburbs and house thousands of people.
Bulldozers are carving out a new suburb on a hilltop in the occupied West Bank. For once it isn't a Jewish settlement but the first ever planned Palestinian suburb."
The developers of Rawabi, as the community is known, hope it will one day provide much-needed housing for 40,000 people and cement Palestinian claims to the territory amid similar communities built by settlers.
"The city is not a settlement," says Bashar al-Masri, head of the Bayti Real Estate Investment Company, which is responsible for the $700 million (£430 million) project along with Qatar's Diar Real Estate Company.
"Instead it can be considered a Palestinian attempt to keep Palestinians on their land in order to contain Israeli settlement," he says.
The building of a modern suburb in the West Bank, which is governed by the Western-backed Palestinian Authority and receives considerable international aid, is in sharp contrast to the lingering devastation in the Gaza Strip, which has been under strict closure since the Hamas movement seized power in 2007.
The first phase of the Rawabi project calls for the construction of 22 residential buildings housing 20,000 people within three years. The second phase will double the occupancy over the following three years.
The city will include schools and hospitals, and the homes will be within the means of middle-class Palestinians, with units selling for $50,000 to $80,000.
Covering some 630 hectares (1,500 acres), it will be one of the largest investment projects in the occupied territories, and has won the enthusiastic support of the Palestinian Authority.
"This project proves that there are opportunities for investment in Palestine," said Hassan Abu Libdeh, teh Palestinian economics minister.
Ironically, the hilltop suburb resembles the dozens of Israeli settlements scattered across the territory, which the Palestinians have condemned as "facts on the ground" aimed at thwarting the creation of an independent state.
"The sight of Palestinian bulldozers is strange, because we are used to seeing Israeli bulldozers stealing our land and digging it up to build settlements," says Mohammed Khamis, 42, watching from a nearby village.
"There are some cynical comparisons that Palestinians are involved in this sad scene associated with Israeli settlement, but we hope that the project will be the beginning of an expansion of related investment," Abu Libdeh says.
The project is being carried out in Area A, a part of the occupied West Bank governed by the Palestinian Authority, but comes amid a general push to assert greater Palestinian control over the territory occupied by Israel in 1967.
Palestinian prime minister Salam Fayyad has vowed to construct housing and infrastructure in Area C, which is under complete Israeli military control, as part of his plan to build the institutions of a Palestinian state by 2011.
The Rawabi project nevertheless depends in part on Israel, which must open the main road between the new suburb and the nearby town of Ramallah and grant permission for the construction of new infrastructure, Masri says.
"We have not yet obtained Israeli approval, but there is no Israeli opposition to this," he says. "We have approval in principle."
As the Palestinians have accelerated projects aimed at generating economic growth following the devastating 2000 intifada, or uprising, they have demanded that Israel halt its own construction projects in the territory, which are considered illegal by the international community.
Mahmud Abbas, the Palestinian president, has refused US demands to relaunch peace talks suspended during last winter's Gaza war until Israel halts all settlement activity, including in mostly Arab east Jerusalem.
In November Israel enacted a 10-month moratorium on new building starts in the West Bank but excluded east Jerusalem, public buildings and projects already under way, prompting the Palestinians to criticise the move as insufficient.
Nearly half a million Israelis live in more than 100 settlements scattered across the West Bank and east Jerusalem, many of which resemble Western-style suburbs and house thousands of people.
Obama Information Czar Outlined Plan For Government To Infiltrate Conspiracy Groups
Obama Information Czar Outlined Plan For Government To Infiltrate Conspiracy Groups: "Obama Information Czar Outlined Plan For Government To Infiltrate Conspiracy Groups
Sunstein called for Cointelpro style effort to silence truth using army of hired provocateurs
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Harvard law professor Cass Sunstein, Obama’s appointee to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, outlined a plan for the government to infiltrate conspiracy groups in order to undermine them via postings on chat rooms and social networks, as well as real meetings, according to a recently uncovered article Sunstein wrote for the Journal of Political Philosophy.
As we have often warned, chat rooms, social networks and particularly article comment sections are routinely “gamed” by trolls, many of whom pose as numerous different people in order to create a fake consensus, who attempt to debunk whatever information is being discussed, no matter how credible and well documented. We have seen this on our own websites for years and although some of those individuals were acting of their own accord, a significant number appeared to be working in shifts, routinely posting the same talking points over and over again.
It is a firmly established fact that the military-industrial complex which also owns the corporate media networks in the United States has numerous programs aimed at infiltrating prominent Internet sites and spreading propaganda to counter the truth about the misdeeds of the government and the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan.
In 2006 CENTCOM, the United States Central Command, announced that a team of employees would be hired to engage “bloggers who are posting inaccurate or untrue information" about the so-called war on terror.
In May 2008, it was revealed that the Pentagon was expanding “Information Operations” on the Internet by setting up fake foreign news websites, designed to look like independent media sources but in reality carrying direct military propaganda.
Countries like Israel have also admitted to creating an army of online trolls whose job it is to infiltrate anti-war websites and act as apologists for the Zionist state’s war crimes.
In January last year, the US Air Force announced a “counter-blog” response plan aimed at fielding and reacting to material from bloggers who have “negative opinions about the US government and the Air Force.”
The plan, created by the public affairs arm of the Air Force, includes a detailed twelve-point “counter blogging” flow-chart that dictates how officers should tackle what are described as “trolls,” “ragers,” and “misguided” online writers.
New revelations highlight the fact that the Obama administration is deliberately targeting “conspiracy groups” as part of a Cointelpro style effort to silence what have become the government’s most vociferous and influential critics.
In a 2008 article published in the Journal of Political Philosophy, Obama information czar Cass Sunstein outlined a plan for the government to stealthily infiltrate groups that pose alternative theories on historical events via “chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine” those groups.
The aim of the program would be to “(break) up the hard core of extremists who supply conspiracy theories,” wrote Sunstein, with particular reference to 9/11 truth organizations.
Sunstein pointed out that simply having people in government refute conspiracy theories wouldn’t work because they are inherently untrustworthy, making it necessary to “Enlist nongovernmental officials in the effort to rebut the theories. It might ensure that credible independent experts offer the rebuttal, rather than government officials themselves. There is a tradeoff between credibility and control, however. The price of credibility is that government cannot be seen to control the independent experts,” he wrote.
“Put into English, what Sunstein is proposing is government infiltration of groups opposing prevailing policy,” writes Marc Estrin.
“It’s easy to destroy groups with “cognitive diversity.” You just take up meeting time with arguments to the point where people don’t come back. You make protest signs which alienate 90% of colleagues. You demand revolutionary violence from pacifist groups.”
This is what Sunstein is advocating when he writes of the need to infiltrate conspiracy groups and sow seeds of distrust amongst members in order to stifle the number of new recruits. This is classic “provocateur” style infiltration that came to the fore during the Cointelpro years, an FBI program from 1956-1971 that was focused around disrupting, marginalizing and neutralizing political dissidents.
“Sunstein argued that “government might undertake (legal) tactics for breaking up the tight cognitive clusters of extremist theories.” He suggested that “government agents (and their allies) might enter chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine percolating conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises, causal logic or implications for political action,” reports Raw Story.
Sunstein has also called for making websites liable for comments posted in response to articles. His book, On Rumors: How Falsehoods Spread, Why We Believe Them, What Can Be Done, was criticized by some as “a blueprint for online censorship.”
The Infowars office has been visited on numerous occasions by the FBI as a result of people posting violent comments in response to articles. Since the government now employs people to post such comments in an attempt to undermine conspiracy websites, if a law were passed making websites accountable, Sunstein’s program would allow the government to obliterate such sites from the web merely by having their own hired goons post threats against public figures.
The fact that the government is being forced to hire armies of trolls in an effort to silence the truth shows how worried they are about the effect we are having in waking up millions of people to their tyranny.
Sunstein called for Cointelpro style effort to silence truth using army of hired provocateurs
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Harvard law professor Cass Sunstein, Obama’s appointee to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, outlined a plan for the government to infiltrate conspiracy groups in order to undermine them via postings on chat rooms and social networks, as well as real meetings, according to a recently uncovered article Sunstein wrote for the Journal of Political Philosophy.
As we have often warned, chat rooms, social networks and particularly article comment sections are routinely “gamed” by trolls, many of whom pose as numerous different people in order to create a fake consensus, who attempt to debunk whatever information is being discussed, no matter how credible and well documented. We have seen this on our own websites for years and although some of those individuals were acting of their own accord, a significant number appeared to be working in shifts, routinely posting the same talking points over and over again.
It is a firmly established fact that the military-industrial complex which also owns the corporate media networks in the United States has numerous programs aimed at infiltrating prominent Internet sites and spreading propaganda to counter the truth about the misdeeds of the government and the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan.
In 2006 CENTCOM, the United States Central Command, announced that a team of employees would be hired to engage “bloggers who are posting inaccurate or untrue information" about the so-called war on terror.
In May 2008, it was revealed that the Pentagon was expanding “Information Operations” on the Internet by setting up fake foreign news websites, designed to look like independent media sources but in reality carrying direct military propaganda.
Countries like Israel have also admitted to creating an army of online trolls whose job it is to infiltrate anti-war websites and act as apologists for the Zionist state’s war crimes.
In January last year, the US Air Force announced a “counter-blog” response plan aimed at fielding and reacting to material from bloggers who have “negative opinions about the US government and the Air Force.”
The plan, created by the public affairs arm of the Air Force, includes a detailed twelve-point “counter blogging” flow-chart that dictates how officers should tackle what are described as “trolls,” “ragers,” and “misguided” online writers.
New revelations highlight the fact that the Obama administration is deliberately targeting “conspiracy groups” as part of a Cointelpro style effort to silence what have become the government’s most vociferous and influential critics.
In a 2008 article published in the Journal of Political Philosophy, Obama information czar Cass Sunstein outlined a plan for the government to stealthily infiltrate groups that pose alternative theories on historical events via “chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine” those groups.
The aim of the program would be to “(break) up the hard core of extremists who supply conspiracy theories,” wrote Sunstein, with particular reference to 9/11 truth organizations.
Sunstein pointed out that simply having people in government refute conspiracy theories wouldn’t work because they are inherently untrustworthy, making it necessary to “Enlist nongovernmental officials in the effort to rebut the theories. It might ensure that credible independent experts offer the rebuttal, rather than government officials themselves. There is a tradeoff between credibility and control, however. The price of credibility is that government cannot be seen to control the independent experts,” he wrote.
“Put into English, what Sunstein is proposing is government infiltration of groups opposing prevailing policy,” writes Marc Estrin.
“It’s easy to destroy groups with “cognitive diversity.” You just take up meeting time with arguments to the point where people don’t come back. You make protest signs which alienate 90% of colleagues. You demand revolutionary violence from pacifist groups.”
This is what Sunstein is advocating when he writes of the need to infiltrate conspiracy groups and sow seeds of distrust amongst members in order to stifle the number of new recruits. This is classic “provocateur” style infiltration that came to the fore during the Cointelpro years, an FBI program from 1956-1971 that was focused around disrupting, marginalizing and neutralizing political dissidents.
“Sunstein argued that “government might undertake (legal) tactics for breaking up the tight cognitive clusters of extremist theories.” He suggested that “government agents (and their allies) might enter chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine percolating conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises, causal logic or implications for political action,” reports Raw Story.
Sunstein has also called for making websites liable for comments posted in response to articles. His book, On Rumors: How Falsehoods Spread, Why We Believe Them, What Can Be Done, was criticized by some as “a blueprint for online censorship.”
The Infowars office has been visited on numerous occasions by the FBI as a result of people posting violent comments in response to articles. Since the government now employs people to post such comments in an attempt to undermine conspiracy websites, if a law were passed making websites accountable, Sunstein’s program would allow the government to obliterate such sites from the web merely by having their own hired goons post threats against public figures.
The fact that the government is being forced to hire armies of trolls in an effort to silence the truth shows how worried they are about the effect we are having in waking up millions of people to their tyranny.
If Government Won’t Break Up the Giant Banks, Let’s Do It Ourselves
If Government Won’t Break Up the Giant Banks, Let’s Do It Ourselves: "If Government Won’t Break Up the Giant Banks, Let’s Do It Ourselves
Washington’s Blog
Thursday, January 14th, 2010
As everyone knows, the economy cannot permanently recover and truly stabilize until the giant banks are broken up. The top independent experts agree that the “too big to fails” are a drain on the economy and put the entire system at risk.
The giant banks aren’t lending much to the people who need it. Fortune pointed out in February that smaller banks are stepping in to fill the lending void left by the giant banks’ current hesitancy to make loans. Indeed, the article points out that the only reason that smaller banks haven’t been able to expand and thrive is that the too-big-to-fails have decreased competition.
Federal Reserve Governor Daniel K. Tarullo said in June:
The importance of traditional financial intermediation services, and hence of the smaller banks that typically specialize in providing those services, tends to increase during times of financial stress. Indeed, the crisis has highlighted the important continuing role of community banks…
For example, while the number of credit unions has declined by 42 percent since 1989, credit union deposits have more than quadrupled, and credit unions have increased their share of national deposits from 4.7 percent to 8.5 percent. In addition, some credit unions have shifted from the traditional membership based on a common interest to membership that encompasses anyone who lives or works within one or more local banking markets. In the last few years, some credit unions have also moved beyond their traditional focus on consumer services to provide services to small businesses," increasing the extent to which they compete with community banks.
But the government – instead of breaking up the giant banks who aren’t lending to the people who need loans – is trying to prop them up using permanent bailouts. See this, this, this and this.
And – instead of separating different business activities (such as depository banking functions and speculative investments) – the government is actually allowing companies to get involved in a wider variety of business activities.
For example, economist Simon Johnson points out that Goldman Sachs recently converted to a “financial holding company”, allowing Goldman to borrow money from the Fed at essentially no cost, and then invest it in any thing it wants. Johnson gives an example: Goldman bought a large share of the stock of a Chinese automaker. If the investment succeeds, Goldman will reap the profits. If it fails, the American taxpayers are on the hook.
And Goldman is apparently profiting from its combination of roles as both an investment brokerage house for other investors and as a large speculative investor itself. Specifically, Goldman apparently delays trades it makes for its clients long enough to use that inside knowledge of who is buying or selling what to make speculative investments for itself , oftentimes taking the exact opposite position for itself and its largest clients as the position it is recommending to its Mom and Pop investor clients.
Why are politicians letting this happen?
Could it be because the giant banks have bought and paid for Congress and the White House? See this, this and this.
We’ll Have to Do It Ourselves
If the government isn’t doing anything to fix this dangerous situation, we’ll have to do it ourselves.
As a start, if Congress won’t reimplement the Glass-Steagall Act (the Depression-era law which previously separated depository functions from speculative investing), let’s manually separate these two types of businesses.
How?
Simple: let’s pull our money out of the too big to fails and put it into small community banks and credit unions.
The giant banks may still make bucketloads of cash on their casino style speculative gambling (for now, at least), but after we’ve moved our deposits to more responsible, smaller banks which don’t gamble as much, then we will have manually separated depository banking functions from the giant banks’ speculative investing.
Get it?
The government isn’t doing the job and fixing the problems which have led to the economic crisis … so we’ll have to do it ourselves.
Note: Some people say that moving our money out of the too big to fails will just mean that the government will give them more bailouts. But this misses 3 points:
If the deposits are withdrawn, the giant banks will only be speculative gamblers, and at least our deposits will be safe and won’t be mixed with their toxic assets
The giant banks and their enablers in Washington will look even worse if they are bailing out companies that are solely and obviously gambling casinos
The head of the International Monetary Fund, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, has warned:
The public will not bail out the financial services sector for a second time if another global crisis blows up in four or five years time, the managing-director of the International Monetary Fund warned this morning.Dominique Strauss-Kahn told the CBI annual conference of business leaders that another huge call on public finances by the financial services sector would not be tolerated by the “man in the street” and could even threaten democracy.
“Most advanced economies will not accept any more [bailouts]…The political reaction will be very strong, putting some democracies at risk,” he told delegates.
In other words, the government – fearing revolt – might be more hesitant to give another round of bailouts than people assume.
I’m not looking at this with rose-colored glasses, and I realize that the TBTFs will act like the kid who killed his parents and then cries for pity since he’s an orphan.
But I think that if the government is not doing its job, we should do it ourselves, and that a focused gesture of taking things into our own hands can only help.
Washington’s Blog
Thursday, January 14th, 2010
As everyone knows, the economy cannot permanently recover and truly stabilize until the giant banks are broken up. The top independent experts agree that the “too big to fails” are a drain on the economy and put the entire system at risk.
The giant banks aren’t lending much to the people who need it. Fortune pointed out in February that smaller banks are stepping in to fill the lending void left by the giant banks’ current hesitancy to make loans. Indeed, the article points out that the only reason that smaller banks haven’t been able to expand and thrive is that the too-big-to-fails have decreased competition.
Federal Reserve Governor Daniel K. Tarullo said in June:
The importance of traditional financial intermediation services, and hence of the smaller banks that typically specialize in providing those services, tends to increase during times of financial stress. Indeed, the crisis has highlighted the important continuing role of community banks…
For example, while the number of credit unions has declined by 42 percent since 1989, credit union deposits have more than quadrupled, and credit unions have increased their share of national deposits from 4.7 percent to 8.5 percent. In addition, some credit unions have shifted from the traditional membership based on a common interest to membership that encompasses anyone who lives or works within one or more local banking markets. In the last few years, some credit unions have also moved beyond their traditional focus on consumer services to provide services to small businesses," increasing the extent to which they compete with community banks.
But the government – instead of breaking up the giant banks who aren’t lending to the people who need loans – is trying to prop them up using permanent bailouts. See this, this, this and this.
And – instead of separating different business activities (such as depository banking functions and speculative investments) – the government is actually allowing companies to get involved in a wider variety of business activities.
For example, economist Simon Johnson points out that Goldman Sachs recently converted to a “financial holding company”, allowing Goldman to borrow money from the Fed at essentially no cost, and then invest it in any thing it wants. Johnson gives an example: Goldman bought a large share of the stock of a Chinese automaker. If the investment succeeds, Goldman will reap the profits. If it fails, the American taxpayers are on the hook.
And Goldman is apparently profiting from its combination of roles as both an investment brokerage house for other investors and as a large speculative investor itself. Specifically, Goldman apparently delays trades it makes for its clients long enough to use that inside knowledge of who is buying or selling what to make speculative investments for itself , oftentimes taking the exact opposite position for itself and its largest clients as the position it is recommending to its Mom and Pop investor clients.
Why are politicians letting this happen?
Could it be because the giant banks have bought and paid for Congress and the White House? See this, this and this.
We’ll Have to Do It Ourselves
If the government isn’t doing anything to fix this dangerous situation, we’ll have to do it ourselves.
As a start, if Congress won’t reimplement the Glass-Steagall Act (the Depression-era law which previously separated depository functions from speculative investing), let’s manually separate these two types of businesses.
How?
Simple: let’s pull our money out of the too big to fails and put it into small community banks and credit unions.
The giant banks may still make bucketloads of cash on their casino style speculative gambling (for now, at least), but after we’ve moved our deposits to more responsible, smaller banks which don’t gamble as much, then we will have manually separated depository banking functions from the giant banks’ speculative investing.
Get it?
The government isn’t doing the job and fixing the problems which have led to the economic crisis … so we’ll have to do it ourselves.
Note: Some people say that moving our money out of the too big to fails will just mean that the government will give them more bailouts. But this misses 3 points:
If the deposits are withdrawn, the giant banks will only be speculative gamblers, and at least our deposits will be safe and won’t be mixed with their toxic assets
The giant banks and their enablers in Washington will look even worse if they are bailing out companies that are solely and obviously gambling casinos
The head of the International Monetary Fund, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, has warned:
The public will not bail out the financial services sector for a second time if another global crisis blows up in four or five years time, the managing-director of the International Monetary Fund warned this morning.Dominique Strauss-Kahn told the CBI annual conference of business leaders that another huge call on public finances by the financial services sector would not be tolerated by the “man in the street” and could even threaten democracy.
“Most advanced economies will not accept any more [bailouts]…The political reaction will be very strong, putting some democracies at risk,” he told delegates.
In other words, the government – fearing revolt – might be more hesitant to give another round of bailouts than people assume.
I’m not looking at this with rose-colored glasses, and I realize that the TBTFs will act like the kid who killed his parents and then cries for pity since he’s an orphan.
But I think that if the government is not doing its job, we should do it ourselves, and that a focused gesture of taking things into our own hands can only help.
Iran says nuclear scientist assassinated Zionist style
Iran says nuclear scientist assassinated Zionist style: "The Iranian president says a familiar assassination method practiced by Israel was seen in the recent assassination of an Iranian nuclear scientist.
Addressing a gathering in the southern province of Khuzestan on Thursday, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that the enemy is trying to obstruct Iran's path to scientific success.
Iranian nuclear physics scientist Dr. Massoud Ali-Mohammadi was killed in a remote-controlled bomb attack in the Iranian capital on Tuesday.
The Iranian Foreign Ministry had earlier said that Iran had found traces of US and Israeli involvement in the assassination of Ali-Mohammadi.
'The style of bombing and assassination of the martyred Dr. Ali-Mohammadi was a Zionist one,' said the Iranian president.
The president added that the enemy knows that a developed Iran would culturally and not militarily conquer the world.
'They [the enemies] want to make sure that Iran does not advance,' President Ahmadinejad said.
'The enemy cannot remove the knowledge from the Iranian nation by killing its elite,' the president added."
Addressing a gathering in the southern province of Khuzestan on Thursday, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that the enemy is trying to obstruct Iran's path to scientific success.
Iranian nuclear physics scientist Dr. Massoud Ali-Mohammadi was killed in a remote-controlled bomb attack in the Iranian capital on Tuesday.
The Iranian Foreign Ministry had earlier said that Iran had found traces of US and Israeli involvement in the assassination of Ali-Mohammadi.
'The style of bombing and assassination of the martyred Dr. Ali-Mohammadi was a Zionist one,' said the Iranian president.
The president added that the enemy knows that a developed Iran would culturally and not militarily conquer the world.
'They [the enemies] want to make sure that Iran does not advance,' President Ahmadinejad said.
'The enemy cannot remove the knowledge from the Iranian nation by killing its elite,' the president added."
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Obama Expands Federal Power Over the States with Executive Order
Obama Expands Federal Power Over the States with Executive Order: "Obama Expands Federal Power Over the States with Executive Order
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
January 12, 2010
Contrary to his election campaign promises, Obama has issued dozens of signing statements.
Obama has issued another executive order, this time establishing a so-called “Council of Governors.”
The order, signed on January 11, further diminishes the sovereignty of the states and builds on a framework for possible martial law. The executive order was completely ignored by the corporate media.
“By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 1822 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-181), and in order to strengthen further the partnership between the Federal Government and State governments to protect our Nation and its people and property,” the order reads.
The Council shall meet at the call of the Secretary of Defense or the Co-Chairs of the Council to exchange views, information, or advice with the Secretary of Defense; the Secretary of Homeland Security; the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism; the Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Engagement; the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas’ Security Affairs; the Commander, United States Northern Command; the Chief, National Guard Bureau; the Commandant of the Coast Guard; and other appropriate officials of the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Defense, and appropriate officials of other executive departments or agencies as may be designated by the Secretary of Defense or t"
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
January 12, 2010
Contrary to his election campaign promises, Obama has issued dozens of signing statements.
Obama has issued another executive order, this time establishing a so-called “Council of Governors.”
The order, signed on January 11, further diminishes the sovereignty of the states and builds on a framework for possible martial law. The executive order was completely ignored by the corporate media.
“By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 1822 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-181), and in order to strengthen further the partnership between the Federal Government and State governments to protect our Nation and its people and property,” the order reads.
The Council shall meet at the call of the Secretary of Defense or the Co-Chairs of the Council to exchange views, information, or advice with the Secretary of Defense; the Secretary of Homeland Security; the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism; the Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Engagement; the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas’ Security Affairs; the Commander, United States Northern Command; the Chief, National Guard Bureau; the Commandant of the Coast Guard; and other appropriate officials of the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Defense, and appropriate officials of other executive departments or agencies as may be designated by the Secretary of Defense or t"
Police fight cellphone recordings
ShareThis: "Police fight cellphone recordings
Witnesses taking audio of officers arrested, charged with illegal surveillance"
Simon Glik, a lawyer, was walking down Tremont Street in Boston when he saw three police officers struggling to extract a plastic bag from a teenager’s mouth. Thinking their force seemed excessive for a drug arrest, Glik pulled out his cellphone and began recording.
Within minutes, Glik said, he was in handcuffs.
“One of the officers asked me whether my phone had audio recording capabilities,’’ Glik, 33, said recently of the incident, which took place in October 2007. Glik acknowledged that it did, and then, he said, “my phone was seized, and I was arrested.’’
The charge? Illegal electronic surveillance.
Jon Surmacz, 34, experienced a similar situation. Thinking that Boston police officers were unnecessarily rough while breaking up a holiday party in Brighton he was attending in December 2008, he took out his cellphone and began recording.
Police confronted Surmacz, a webmaster at Boston University. He was arrested and, like Glik, charged with illegal surveillance.
There are no hard statistics for video recording arrests. But the experiences of Surmacz and Glik highlight what civil libertarians call a troubling misuse of the state’s wiretapping law to stifle the kind of street-level oversight that cellphone and video technology make possible.
“The police apparently do not want witnesses to what they do in public,’’ said Sarah Wunsch, a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, who helped to get the criminal charges against Surmacz dismissed.
Boston police spokeswoman Elaine Driscoll rejected the notion that police are abusing the law to block citizen oversight, saying the department trains officers about the wiretap law. “If an individual is inappropriately interfering with an arrest that could cause harm to an officer or another individual, an officer’s primary responsibility is to ensure the safety of the situation,’’ she said.
In 1968, Massachusetts became a “two-party’’ consent state, one of 12 currently in the country. Two-party consent means that all parties to a conversation must agree to be recorded on a telephone or other audio device; otherwise, the recording of conversation is illegal. The law, intended to protect the privacy rights of individuals, appears to have been triggered by a series of high-profile cases involving private detectives who were recording people without their consent.
In arresting people such as Glik and Surmacz, police are saying that they have not consented to being recorded, that their privacy rights have therefore been violated, and that the citizen action was criminal.
“The statute has been misconstrued by Boston police,’’ said June Jensen, the lawyer who represented Glik and succeeded in getting his charges dismissed. The law, she said, does not prohibit public recording of anyone. “You could go to the Boston Common and snap pictures and record if you want; you can do that.’’Continued...
Ever since the police beating of Rodney King in Los Angeles in 1991 was videotaped, and with the advent of media-sharing websites like Facebook and YouTube, the practice of openly recording police activity has become commonplace. But in Massachusetts and other states, the arrests of street videographers, whether they use cellphones or other video technology, offers a dramatic illustration of the collision between new technology and policing practices.
“Police are not used to ceding power, and these tools are forcing them to cede power,’’ said David Ardia, director of the Citizen Media Law Project at Harvard’s Berkman Center for Internet and Society.
Ardia said the proliferation of cellphone and other technology has equipped people to record actions in public. “As a society, we should be asking ourselves whether we want to make that into a criminal activity,’’ he said.
In Pennsylvania, another two-party state, individuals using cellphones to record police activities have also ended up in police custody.
But one Pennsylvania jurisdiction has reaffirmed individuals’ right to videotape in public. Police in Spring City and East Vincent Township agreed to adopt a written policy confirming the legality of videotaping police while on duty. The policy was hammered out as part of a settlement between authorities and ACLU attorneys representing a Spring City man who had been arrested several times last year for following police and taping them.
In Massachusetts, Wunsch said Attorney General Martha Coakley and police chiefs should be informing officers not to abuse the law by charging civilians with illegally recording them in public.
The cases are the courts’ concern, said Coakley spokesman Harry Pierre. “At this time, this office has not issued any advisory or opinion on this issue.’’
Massachusetts has seen several cases in which civilians were charged criminally with violating the state’s electronic surveillance law for recording police, including a case that was reviewed by the Supreme Judicial Court.
Michael Hyde, a 31-year-old musician, began secretly recording police after he was stopped in Abington in late 1998 and the encounter turned testy. He then used the recording as the basis for a harassment complaint. The police, in turn, charged Hyde with illegal wiretapping. Focusing on the secret nature of the recording, the SJC upheld the conviction in 2001.
“Secret tape recording by private individuals has been unequivocally banned, and, unless and until the Legislature changes the statute, what was done here cannot be done lawfully,’’ the SJC ruled in a 4-to-2 decision.
In a sharply worded dissent, Chief Justice Margaret Marshall criticized the majority view of a law that, in effect, punished citizen watchdogs and allowed police officers to conceal possible misconduct behind a “cloak of privacy.’’
“Citizens have a particularly important role to play when the official conduct at issue is that of the police,’’ Marshall wrote. “Their role cannot be performed if citizens must fear criminal reprisals when they seek to hold government officials responsible by recording, secretly recording on occasion, an interaction between a citizen and a police officer.’’
Since that ruling, the outcome of Massachusetts criminal cases involving the recording of police by citizens has turned mainly on this question of secret vs. public recording.
Jeffrey Manzelli, 46, a Cambridge sound engineer, was convicted of illegal wiretapping and disorderly conduct for recording MBTA police at an antiwar rally on Boston Common in 2002. Though he said he had openly recorded the officer, his conviction was upheld in 2007 on the grounds that he had made the recording using a microphone hidden in the sleeve of his jacket.
Peter Lowney, 39, a political activist from Newton, was convicted of illegal wiretapping in 2007 after Boston University police accused him of hiding a camera in his coat during a protest on Commonwealth Avenue.
Charges of illegal wiretapping against documentary filmmaker and citizen journalist Emily Peyton were not prosecuted, however, because she had openly videotaped police arresting an antiwar protester in December 2007 at a Greenfield grocery store plaza, first from the parking lot and then from her car. Likewise with Simon Glik and Jon Surmacz; their cases were eventually dismissed, a key factor being the open way they had used their cellphones.
Surmacz said he never thought that using his cellphone to record police in public might be a crime. “One of the reasons I got my phone out . . . was from going to YouTube where there are dozens of videos of things like this,’’ said Surmacz, a webmaster at BU who is also a part-time producer at Boston.com.
It took five months for Surmacz, with the ACLU, to get the charges of illegal wiretapping and disorderly conduct dismissed. Surmacz said he would do it again.
“Because I didn’t do anything wrong,’’ he said. “Had I recorded an officer saving someone’s life, I almost guarantee you that they wouldn’t have come up to me and say, ‘Hey, you just recorded me saving that person’s life. You’re under arrest.’ ’’
The New England Center for Investigative Reporting at Boston University is an investigative reporting collaborative. This story was done under the guidance of BU professors Dick Lehr and Mitchell Zuckoff.
© Copyright 2010 Globe Newspaper Company.
Witnesses taking audio of officers arrested, charged with illegal surveillance"
Simon Glik, a lawyer, was walking down Tremont Street in Boston when he saw three police officers struggling to extract a plastic bag from a teenager’s mouth. Thinking their force seemed excessive for a drug arrest, Glik pulled out his cellphone and began recording.
Within minutes, Glik said, he was in handcuffs.
“One of the officers asked me whether my phone had audio recording capabilities,’’ Glik, 33, said recently of the incident, which took place in October 2007. Glik acknowledged that it did, and then, he said, “my phone was seized, and I was arrested.’’
The charge? Illegal electronic surveillance.
Jon Surmacz, 34, experienced a similar situation. Thinking that Boston police officers were unnecessarily rough while breaking up a holiday party in Brighton he was attending in December 2008, he took out his cellphone and began recording.
Police confronted Surmacz, a webmaster at Boston University. He was arrested and, like Glik, charged with illegal surveillance.
There are no hard statistics for video recording arrests. But the experiences of Surmacz and Glik highlight what civil libertarians call a troubling misuse of the state’s wiretapping law to stifle the kind of street-level oversight that cellphone and video technology make possible.
“The police apparently do not want witnesses to what they do in public,’’ said Sarah Wunsch, a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, who helped to get the criminal charges against Surmacz dismissed.
Boston police spokeswoman Elaine Driscoll rejected the notion that police are abusing the law to block citizen oversight, saying the department trains officers about the wiretap law. “If an individual is inappropriately interfering with an arrest that could cause harm to an officer or another individual, an officer’s primary responsibility is to ensure the safety of the situation,’’ she said.
In 1968, Massachusetts became a “two-party’’ consent state, one of 12 currently in the country. Two-party consent means that all parties to a conversation must agree to be recorded on a telephone or other audio device; otherwise, the recording of conversation is illegal. The law, intended to protect the privacy rights of individuals, appears to have been triggered by a series of high-profile cases involving private detectives who were recording people without their consent.
In arresting people such as Glik and Surmacz, police are saying that they have not consented to being recorded, that their privacy rights have therefore been violated, and that the citizen action was criminal.
“The statute has been misconstrued by Boston police,’’ said June Jensen, the lawyer who represented Glik and succeeded in getting his charges dismissed. The law, she said, does not prohibit public recording of anyone. “You could go to the Boston Common and snap pictures and record if you want; you can do that.’’Continued...
Ever since the police beating of Rodney King in Los Angeles in 1991 was videotaped, and with the advent of media-sharing websites like Facebook and YouTube, the practice of openly recording police activity has become commonplace. But in Massachusetts and other states, the arrests of street videographers, whether they use cellphones or other video technology, offers a dramatic illustration of the collision between new technology and policing practices.
“Police are not used to ceding power, and these tools are forcing them to cede power,’’ said David Ardia, director of the Citizen Media Law Project at Harvard’s Berkman Center for Internet and Society.
Ardia said the proliferation of cellphone and other technology has equipped people to record actions in public. “As a society, we should be asking ourselves whether we want to make that into a criminal activity,’’ he said.
In Pennsylvania, another two-party state, individuals using cellphones to record police activities have also ended up in police custody.
But one Pennsylvania jurisdiction has reaffirmed individuals’ right to videotape in public. Police in Spring City and East Vincent Township agreed to adopt a written policy confirming the legality of videotaping police while on duty. The policy was hammered out as part of a settlement between authorities and ACLU attorneys representing a Spring City man who had been arrested several times last year for following police and taping them.
In Massachusetts, Wunsch said Attorney General Martha Coakley and police chiefs should be informing officers not to abuse the law by charging civilians with illegally recording them in public.
The cases are the courts’ concern, said Coakley spokesman Harry Pierre. “At this time, this office has not issued any advisory or opinion on this issue.’’
Massachusetts has seen several cases in which civilians were charged criminally with violating the state’s electronic surveillance law for recording police, including a case that was reviewed by the Supreme Judicial Court.
Michael Hyde, a 31-year-old musician, began secretly recording police after he was stopped in Abington in late 1998 and the encounter turned testy. He then used the recording as the basis for a harassment complaint. The police, in turn, charged Hyde with illegal wiretapping. Focusing on the secret nature of the recording, the SJC upheld the conviction in 2001.
“Secret tape recording by private individuals has been unequivocally banned, and, unless and until the Legislature changes the statute, what was done here cannot be done lawfully,’’ the SJC ruled in a 4-to-2 decision.
In a sharply worded dissent, Chief Justice Margaret Marshall criticized the majority view of a law that, in effect, punished citizen watchdogs and allowed police officers to conceal possible misconduct behind a “cloak of privacy.’’
“Citizens have a particularly important role to play when the official conduct at issue is that of the police,’’ Marshall wrote. “Their role cannot be performed if citizens must fear criminal reprisals when they seek to hold government officials responsible by recording, secretly recording on occasion, an interaction between a citizen and a police officer.’’
Since that ruling, the outcome of Massachusetts criminal cases involving the recording of police by citizens has turned mainly on this question of secret vs. public recording.
Jeffrey Manzelli, 46, a Cambridge sound engineer, was convicted of illegal wiretapping and disorderly conduct for recording MBTA police at an antiwar rally on Boston Common in 2002. Though he said he had openly recorded the officer, his conviction was upheld in 2007 on the grounds that he had made the recording using a microphone hidden in the sleeve of his jacket.
Peter Lowney, 39, a political activist from Newton, was convicted of illegal wiretapping in 2007 after Boston University police accused him of hiding a camera in his coat during a protest on Commonwealth Avenue.
Charges of illegal wiretapping against documentary filmmaker and citizen journalist Emily Peyton were not prosecuted, however, because she had openly videotaped police arresting an antiwar protester in December 2007 at a Greenfield grocery store plaza, first from the parking lot and then from her car. Likewise with Simon Glik and Jon Surmacz; their cases were eventually dismissed, a key factor being the open way they had used their cellphones.
Surmacz said he never thought that using his cellphone to record police in public might be a crime. “One of the reasons I got my phone out . . . was from going to YouTube where there are dozens of videos of things like this,’’ said Surmacz, a webmaster at BU who is also a part-time producer at Boston.com.
It took five months for Surmacz, with the ACLU, to get the charges of illegal wiretapping and disorderly conduct dismissed. Surmacz said he would do it again.
“Because I didn’t do anything wrong,’’ he said. “Had I recorded an officer saving someone’s life, I almost guarantee you that they wouldn’t have come up to me and say, ‘Hey, you just recorded me saving that person’s life. You’re under arrest.’ ’’
The New England Center for Investigative Reporting at Boston University is an investigative reporting collaborative. This story was done under the guidance of BU professors Dick Lehr and Mitchell Zuckoff.
© Copyright 2010 Globe Newspaper Company.
Monday, January 11, 2010
401k/IRA Screw Job Coming? Karl Denninger 321gold ...inc ...s
Jan 11, 2010 401k/IRA Screw Job Coming? Karl Denninger 321gold ...inc ...s: "401k/IRA Screw Job Coming?
Karl Denninger
Market Ticker
Jan 11, 2010
Now this is a guaranteed rape job.
In a short conversation this noontime that CNBC apparently has omitted from their archives (Why's that folks?) Rick Santelli was talking about a potential to effectively force money into the Treasury market.
Where would they get this?
From your 401k and IRA accounts!
From Businessweek:
The U.S. Treasury and Labor Departments will ask for public comment as soon as next week on ways to promote the conversion of 401(k) savings and Individual Retirement Accounts into annuities or other steady payment streams, according to Assistant Labor Secretary Phyllis C. Borzi and Deputy Assistant Treasury Secretary Mark Iwry, who are spearheading the effort.
Let me tell you what this is - it is an attempt to prevent the collapse of the Treasury market!
Forcing people into Treasuries as an 'annuity' is exactly what Social Security allegedly is. Except that Treasury stole the money that was collected in FICA taxes and spent it!
Guess what? They'll do that here too - you're going to 'invest' in Treasuries which of course are effectively a CALL option on the future taxing ability of the government.
The problem is that with an aging population and the immigrant problem (illegal immigrants that is), along with offshoring, the aggregate wage base will drop and thus this is the most dangerous investment of all!
What's even worse is that the government has intentionally suppressed Treasury yields during this crisis (and will keep doing so by various means, including manipulating the CPI - the 'inflation index' - as they have for the last 30 years) so as to guarantee that you lose over time comp"
Karl Denninger
Market Ticker
Jan 11, 2010
Now this is a guaranteed rape job.
In a short conversation this noontime that CNBC apparently has omitted from their archives (Why's that folks?) Rick Santelli was talking about a potential to effectively force money into the Treasury market.
Where would they get this?
From your 401k and IRA accounts!
From Businessweek:
The U.S. Treasury and Labor Departments will ask for public comment as soon as next week on ways to promote the conversion of 401(k) savings and Individual Retirement Accounts into annuities or other steady payment streams, according to Assistant Labor Secretary Phyllis C. Borzi and Deputy Assistant Treasury Secretary Mark Iwry, who are spearheading the effort.
Let me tell you what this is - it is an attempt to prevent the collapse of the Treasury market!
Forcing people into Treasuries as an 'annuity' is exactly what Social Security allegedly is. Except that Treasury stole the money that was collected in FICA taxes and spent it!
Guess what? They'll do that here too - you're going to 'invest' in Treasuries which of course are effectively a CALL option on the future taxing ability of the government.
The problem is that with an aging population and the immigrant problem (illegal immigrants that is), along with offshoring, the aggregate wage base will drop and thus this is the most dangerous investment of all!
What's even worse is that the government has intentionally suppressed Treasury yields during this crisis (and will keep doing so by various means, including manipulating the CPI - the 'inflation index' - as they have for the last 30 years) so as to guarantee that you lose over time comp"
Australian Adept Unveiled World Satanic Control
ShareThis: "Australian Adept Unveiled World Satanic Control
January 3, 2010
by Henry Makow Ph.D.
In an explosive deathbed confession, a former head of the satanist 'Alpha Lodge' in Sydney, Australia, revealed the pervasive worldwide power of organized Satanism, which is synonymous with the Illuminati.
'Things are not as they seem -- and they have not been for a long, long time,' he wrote, describing a wholesale betrayal of society by its ostensible leaders.
'Petor Narsagonan' aka 'Frater 616' died March 25, 2004. Recently, his executor, an 'Aloysius Fozdyke' (their satanic names) sent the 15 pp. document by email to Arthur Cristian, webmaster of 'loveforlife.com.au'
'I have felt it necessary to edit very little of this work,' 'Fozdyke' wrote to Cristian, 'although legal considerations have ensured that some names and details were excised. It was His intention to have this published in the popular media.'
What follows is a synopsis of this shocking document focusing on Satanic power and influence.
Satanic influence is 'now so pervasive as not to be readily noticed,' Frater says.
Satanists are laced throughout Australian society, and the pattern is replicated everywhere.
They include politicians, doctors, high ranking police officers, lawyers, decorated military men, media personalities, fashion models and social workers. The most talented have lifestyles maintained by crime under a veneer of respectable professionalism and knowledge. Marginal types (prostitutes, drug dealers) are important to Satanism but are merely tools.
Frater explains he got involved in a satanic group in university in 1971. 'I fell through a crack in reality...I escap"
January 3, 2010
by Henry Makow Ph.D.
In an explosive deathbed confession, a former head of the satanist 'Alpha Lodge' in Sydney, Australia, revealed the pervasive worldwide power of organized Satanism, which is synonymous with the Illuminati.
'Things are not as they seem -- and they have not been for a long, long time,' he wrote, describing a wholesale betrayal of society by its ostensible leaders.
'Petor Narsagonan' aka 'Frater 616' died March 25, 2004. Recently, his executor, an 'Aloysius Fozdyke' (their satanic names) sent the 15 pp. document by email to Arthur Cristian, webmaster of 'loveforlife.com.au'
'I have felt it necessary to edit very little of this work,' 'Fozdyke' wrote to Cristian, 'although legal considerations have ensured that some names and details were excised. It was His intention to have this published in the popular media.'
What follows is a synopsis of this shocking document focusing on Satanic power and influence.
Satanic influence is 'now so pervasive as not to be readily noticed,' Frater says.
Satanists are laced throughout Australian society, and the pattern is replicated everywhere.
They include politicians, doctors, high ranking police officers, lawyers, decorated military men, media personalities, fashion models and social workers. The most talented have lifestyles maintained by crime under a veneer of respectable professionalism and knowledge. Marginal types (prostitutes, drug dealers) are important to Satanism but are merely tools.
Frater explains he got involved in a satanic group in university in 1971. 'I fell through a crack in reality...I escap"
"New speed cameras enrage Arizona drivers
An attempt to introduce UK-style fixed speed cameras in America has ended in a public revolt, with motorists binning speeding tickets worth $90 million (£60 million)."
The Arizona scheme, which was the first statewide effort to bring speed camera enforcement to the US, is now on the verge of bankruptcy and could be dumped.
Many Americans, including judges and elected officials, regard the devices as an unconstitutional tax collection method and have flatly refused to pay the fines, the Times reports.
"I see all the cameras in Arizona completely coming down," Shawn Dow, who is leading the public revolt via his chairmanship of Arizona Citizens Against Photo Radar, told the paper. "The citizens of Arizona took away the cash cow of Arizona by refusing to pay." He is now trying to get the cameras banned in November's elections.
Although about 700,000 tickets have been issued since Arizona's 76-camera plan was rolled out last year, a mere $37 million of the $127 million in fines and surcharges has been collected. That is because Arizonans have realised that they can simply ignore tickets sent to them in the post, and the authorities cannot prove that they have received them. Unless the tickets are served in person something Arizona cannot afford to do they become void after three months.
Motorists have shown their opposition to the machines in other ways, placing large cardboard boxes over them, decorating them with sticky notes, attacking them with pickaxes and, in one case, setting off the cameras while standing in front wearing a monkey mask.
The company hired to install Arizona's cameras, Redflex, is under financial pressure, because it invested $16 million upfront in the equipment. But it says it is persevering. "Redflex is in this for the long haul," it said.
An attempt to introduce UK-style fixed speed cameras in America has ended in a public revolt, with motorists binning speeding tickets worth $90 million (£60 million)."
The Arizona scheme, which was the first statewide effort to bring speed camera enforcement to the US, is now on the verge of bankruptcy and could be dumped.
Many Americans, including judges and elected officials, regard the devices as an unconstitutional tax collection method and have flatly refused to pay the fines, the Times reports.
"I see all the cameras in Arizona completely coming down," Shawn Dow, who is leading the public revolt via his chairmanship of Arizona Citizens Against Photo Radar, told the paper. "The citizens of Arizona took away the cash cow of Arizona by refusing to pay." He is now trying to get the cameras banned in November's elections.
Although about 700,000 tickets have been issued since Arizona's 76-camera plan was rolled out last year, a mere $37 million of the $127 million in fines and surcharges has been collected. That is because Arizonans have realised that they can simply ignore tickets sent to them in the post, and the authorities cannot prove that they have received them. Unless the tickets are served in person something Arizona cannot afford to do they become void after three months.
Motorists have shown their opposition to the machines in other ways, placing large cardboard boxes over them, decorating them with sticky notes, attacking them with pickaxes and, in one case, setting off the cameras while standing in front wearing a monkey mask.
The company hired to install Arizona's cameras, Redflex, is under financial pressure, because it invested $16 million upfront in the equipment. But it says it is persevering. "Redflex is in this for the long haul," it said.
Corrupt China officials pocket 50 billion: media
Corrupt China officials pocket 50 billion: media: "Corrupt China officials pocket 50 billion: media
AFP
Monday , January 11th, 2010
Thousands of officials have fled China over the past 30 years with some 50 billion dollars in public funds, state media said Monday, as the government scrambles to stem the tide of corruption.
As many as 4,000 officials have disappeared, using criminal gangs, mainly in the United States and Australia, to launder their ill-gotten gains, buy real estate and set up false identities, the Global Times said.
A joint task force involving 15 Chinese ministries has been set up to choke off graft in government ranks, the paper said.
In 2009, authorities investigated 103 cases involving the outbound travel of more than 300 officials, the paper said, citing a party official tasked with disciplinary issues.
Full article here"
AFP
Monday , January 11th, 2010
Thousands of officials have fled China over the past 30 years with some 50 billion dollars in public funds, state media said Monday, as the government scrambles to stem the tide of corruption.
As many as 4,000 officials have disappeared, using criminal gangs, mainly in the United States and Australia, to launder their ill-gotten gains, buy real estate and set up false identities, the Global Times said.
A joint task force involving 15 Chinese ministries has been set up to choke off graft in government ranks, the paper said.
In 2009, authorities investigated 103 cases involving the outbound travel of more than 300 officials, the paper said, citing a party official tasked with disciplinary issues.
Full article here"
Lawmaker presses NY Fed on AIG payment details
Lawmaker presses NY Fed on AIG payment details: "Lawmaker presses NY Fed on AIG payment details
David Lawder
Reuters
Monday , January 11th, 2010
A U.S. lawmaker said on Sunday he is seeking more information from the New York Federal Reserve Bank about its controversial emails on insurer AIG’s bailout, saying he was shocked that the disclosures were never brought to then-bank president Timothy Geithner’s attention.
U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa, the California Republican who last week distributed email exchanges over AIG’s decision not to disclose specific payments to banks in a December 24, 2008 Securities and Exchange Commission filing, released a letter from the New York Fed responding to the controversy.
In the letter, New York Fed general counsel Thomas Baxter said Geithner, now U.S. Treasury Secretary, had no involvement in the deliberations about the disclosures — consistent with statements he made last week.
“In my judgment, as the New York Fed’s chief legal officer, disclosure matters of this nature did not warrant the attention of the president,” Baxter wrote in the letter dated Friday. “Further, Mr. Geithner played no role in, and had no knowledge of, the disclosure deliberations and communications referenced in those emails,” Baxter wrote.
Full article here"
David Lawder
Reuters
Monday , January 11th, 2010
A U.S. lawmaker said on Sunday he is seeking more information from the New York Federal Reserve Bank about its controversial emails on insurer AIG’s bailout, saying he was shocked that the disclosures were never brought to then-bank president Timothy Geithner’s attention.
U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa, the California Republican who last week distributed email exchanges over AIG’s decision not to disclose specific payments to banks in a December 24, 2008 Securities and Exchange Commission filing, released a letter from the New York Fed responding to the controversy.
In the letter, New York Fed general counsel Thomas Baxter said Geithner, now U.S. Treasury Secretary, had no involvement in the deliberations about the disclosures — consistent with statements he made last week.
“In my judgment, as the New York Fed’s chief legal officer, disclosure matters of this nature did not warrant the attention of the president,” Baxter wrote in the letter dated Friday. “Further, Mr. Geithner played no role in, and had no knowledge of, the disclosure deliberations and communications referenced in those emails,” Baxter wrote.
Full article here"
America slides deeper into depression as Wall Street revels
America slides deeper into depression as Wall Street revels: "America slides deeper into depression as Wall Street revels
Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
London Telegraph
Monday , January 11th, 2010
December was the worst month for US unemployment since the Great Recession began.
The labour force contracted by 661,000. This did not show up in the headline jobless rate because so many Americans dropped out of the system. The broad U6 category of unemployment rose to 17.3pc. That is the one that matters.
Wall Street rallied. Bulls hope that weak jobs data will postpone monetary tightening: a silver lining in every catastrophe, or perhaps a further exhibit of market infantilism.
The home foreclosure guillotine usually drops a year or so after people lose their job, and exhaust their savings. The local sheriff will escort them out of the door, often with some sympathy –– just like the police in 1932, mostly Irish Catholics who tithed 1pc of their pay for soup kitchens.
Realtytrac says defaults and repossessions have been running at over 300,000 a month since February. One million American families lost their homes in the fourth quarter. Moody’s Economy.com expects another 2.4m homes to go this year. Taken together, this looks awfully like Steinbeck’s Grapes of Wrath.
Full article here"
Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
London Telegraph
Monday , January 11th, 2010
December was the worst month for US unemployment since the Great Recession began.
The labour force contracted by 661,000. This did not show up in the headline jobless rate because so many Americans dropped out of the system. The broad U6 category of unemployment rose to 17.3pc. That is the one that matters.
Wall Street rallied. Bulls hope that weak jobs data will postpone monetary tightening: a silver lining in every catastrophe, or perhaps a further exhibit of market infantilism.
The home foreclosure guillotine usually drops a year or so after people lose their job, and exhaust their savings. The local sheriff will escort them out of the door, often with some sympathy –– just like the police in 1932, mostly Irish Catholics who tithed 1pc of their pay for soup kitchens.
Realtytrac says defaults and repossessions have been running at over 300,000 a month since February. One million American families lost their homes in the fourth quarter. Moody’s Economy.com expects another 2.4m homes to go this year. Taken together, this looks awfully like Steinbeck’s Grapes of Wrath.
Full article here"
Ron Paul: Geithner Should Be Fired Over Bankergate
Ron Paul: Geithner Should Be Fired Over Bankergate: "Ron Paul: Geithner Should Be Fired Over Bankergate
Congressman says scandal proves need to strip Federal Reserve of its powers
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, January 11, 2010
Congressman Ron Paul has called for Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner to be fired for his involvement in the AIG bailout scandal, adding that the fiasco proves the Fed should be stripped of its powers and audited.
Explosive emails released last week could see Treasury secretary Timothy Geithner become embroiled in criminal charges for his role in a cover up that exposes the monumental criminality behind the $182.3 billion bailout of American International Group Inc.
In November and December 2008, The Federal Reserve Bank of New York instructed the bailed out AIG to hide from the public details regarding payments the insurance giant made to banks, including Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Societe Generale SA.
Using Fed secured taxpayer bailout money, AIG paid several banks 100 percent of the face value of credit-default swaps, as other financial institutions were negotiating deep discounts for the unregulated paper assets that do not have to be backed by cash.
Via his Texas Straight Talk phone update, Congressman Paul said today that Geithner had helped hide from taxpayers the fact that banks were compensated for “making some horrifically bad decisions”.
“These banks should have suffered the consequences of the huge risks they were taking,” said the Congressman. “After all, they kept plenty of rewards when times were good. Instead, the Fed found a way to socialize these major losses so these banks could survive and continue making more bad decisions, at the expense of the American people and the value of the dollar"
Congressman says scandal proves need to strip Federal Reserve of its powers
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, January 11, 2010
Congressman Ron Paul has called for Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner to be fired for his involvement in the AIG bailout scandal, adding that the fiasco proves the Fed should be stripped of its powers and audited.
Explosive emails released last week could see Treasury secretary Timothy Geithner become embroiled in criminal charges for his role in a cover up that exposes the monumental criminality behind the $182.3 billion bailout of American International Group Inc.
In November and December 2008, The Federal Reserve Bank of New York instructed the bailed out AIG to hide from the public details regarding payments the insurance giant made to banks, including Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Societe Generale SA.
Using Fed secured taxpayer bailout money, AIG paid several banks 100 percent of the face value of credit-default swaps, as other financial institutions were negotiating deep discounts for the unregulated paper assets that do not have to be backed by cash.
Via his Texas Straight Talk phone update, Congressman Paul said today that Geithner had helped hide from taxpayers the fact that banks were compensated for “making some horrifically bad decisions”.
“These banks should have suffered the consequences of the huge risks they were taking,” said the Congressman. “After all, they kept plenty of rewards when times were good. Instead, the Fed found a way to socialize these major losses so these banks could survive and continue making more bad decisions, at the expense of the American people and the value of the dollar"
Bankergate: Emails Expose Criminal Financial Dictatorship At Work
Bankergate: Emails Expose Criminal Financial Dictatorship At Work: "Bankergate: Emails Expose Criminal Financial Dictatorship At Work"
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
ESCAPE FROM POTTERSVILLE:
THE NORTH DAKOTA MODEL FOR CAPITALIZING COMMUNITY BANKS
Ellen Brown, January 3rd, 2010
http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/pottersville.php
Where can our floundering community banks get the capital to make room on their books for substantial new loans? An innovative answer is provided by the state of North Dakota.
Arianna Huffington just posted an article on the Huffington Post that has sparked a remarkable wave of interest, evoking nearly 5,000 comments in less than a week. Called “Move Your Money,” the article maintains that we can get credit flowing again on Main Street by moving our money out of the Wall Street behemoths and into our local community banks. This solution has been suggested before, but Arianna added the very appealing draw of a video clip featuring Jimmy Stewart in It’s a Wonderful Life. In the holiday season, we are all hungry for a glimpse of that wonderful movie that used to be a mainstay of Christmas, showing daily throughout the holidays. The copyright holders have suddenly gotten very Scrooge-like and are allowing it to be shown only once a year on NBC. Whatever their motives, Wall Street no doubt approves of this restriction, since the movie continually reminded viewers of the potentially villainous nature of Big Banking.
Pulling our money out of Wall Street and putting it into our local community banks is an idea with definite popular appeal. Unfortunately, however, this move alone won't be sufficient to strengthen the small banks. Community banks lack capital – money that belongs to the bank -- and the deposits of customers don’t count as capital. Rather, they represent liabilities of the bank, since the money has to be available for the depositors on demand. Bank “capital” is the money paid in by investors plus accumulated retained earnings. It is the net worth of the bank, or assets minus liabilities. Lending ability is limited by a bank’s assets, not its deposits; and today, investors willing to build up the asset base of small community banks are scarce, due to the banks’ increasing propensity to go bankrupt.
It’s a Wonderful Life actually illustrated the weakness of local community banking without major capital backup. George Bailey’s bank was a savings and loan, which lent out the deposits of its customers. It “borrowed short and lent long,” meaning it took in short-term deposits and made long-term mortgage loans with them. When the customers panicked and all came for their deposits at once, the money was not to be had. George’s neighbors and family saved the day by raiding their cookie jars, but that miracle cannot be counted on outside Hollywood.
The savings and loan model collapsed completely in the 1980s. Since then, all banks have been allowed to create credit as needed just by writing it as loans on their books, a system called “fractional reserve” lending. Banks can do this up to a certain limit, which used to be capped by a “reserve requirement” of 10%. That meant the bank had to have on hand a sum equal to 10% of its deposits, either in its vault as cash or in the bank’s reserve account at its local Federal Reserve bank. But many exceptions were carved out of the rule, and the banks devised ways to get around it.
That was when the Bank for International Settlements stepped in and imposed “capital requirements.” The BIS is the “central bankers’ central bank” in Basel, Switzerland. In 1988, its Basel Committee on Banking Supervision published a set of minimal requirements for banks, called Basel I. No longer would “reserves” in the form of other people’s deposits be sufficient to cover loan losses. The Committee said that loans had to be classified according to risk, and that the banks had to maintain real capital – their own money – generally equal to 8% of these “risk-weighted” assets. Half of this had to be “Tier 1" capital, completely liquid assets in the form of equity owned by shareholders – funds paid in by investors plus retained earnings. The other half could include such things as unencumbered real estate and loans, but they still had to be the bank’s own assets, not the depositors’.
For a number of years, U.S. banks managed to get around this rule too. They did it by removing loans from their books, bundling them up as “securities,” and selling them off to investors. But when the "shadow lenders" – the investors buying the bundled loans – realized these securities were far more risky than alleged, they exited the market; and they aren’t expected to return any time soon. That means banks are now stuck with their loans; and if the loans go into default, as many are doing, the assets of the banks must be marked down. The banks can then become “zombie banks” (unable to make new loans) or can go bankrupt and have to close their doors.
The final blow to the easy credit provided by U.S. banks came with another stricture on capital, called Basel II. It manifested in the U.S. as the “mark-to-market” rule, which required a bank’s loan portfolio to be valued at what it could be sold for (the “market”), not its original book value. In today’s unfavorable market, that meant a huge drop in asset value for the banks, dramatically reducing their ability to generate new loans. When the announcement was made in November 2007 that this rule was going to be imposed on U.S. banks, credit dried up and the stock market plunged. The market did not begin to recover until 2009, when the rule was largely lifted. However, on December 17, 2009, the Basel Committee announced plans to impose even tighter capital requirements. The foreseeable result is the collapse of yet more community banks and the drying up of yet more credit on Main Street.
Anchoring Community Banks to State-owned Banks
Where can our floundering community banks get the capital to make room on their books for substantial new loans? An innovative answer is provided by the state of North Dakota, one of only two states (along with Montana) expected to meet its budget in 2010. North Dakota was also the only state to actually gain jobs in 2009 while other states were losing them. Since 2000, North Dakota’s GNP has grown 56 percent, personal income has grown 43 percent and wages have grown 34 percent. The state not only has no funding problems, but in 2009 it had a budget surplus of $1.3 billion, the largest it ever had – not bad for a state of only 700,000 people.
North Dakota is the only state in the union to own its own bank. The Bank of North Dakota (BND) was established by the state legislature in 1919 specifically to free farmers and small businessmen from the clutches of out-of-state bankers and railroad men. Its populist organizers originally conceived of the bank as a credit union-like institution that would provide an alternative to predatory lenders, but conservative interests later took control and suppressed these commercial lending functions. The BND now chiefly acts as a central bank, with functions similar to those of a branch of the Federal Reserve.
However, the BND differs from the Federal Reserve in significant ways. The stock of the branches of the Fed is 100% privately owned by banks. The BND is 100% owned by the state, and it is required to operate in the interest of the public. Its stated mission is to deliver sound financial services that promote agriculture, commerce and industry in North Dakota.
Although the BND is operated in the public interest, it avoids rivalry with private banks by partnering with them. Most lending is originated by a local bank. The BND then comes in to participate in the loan, share risk, buy down the interest rate and buy up loans, thereby freeing up banks to lend more. One of the BND's functions is to provide a secondary market for real estate loans, which it buys from local banks. Its residential loan portfolio is now $500 billion to $600 billion. This function has helped the state avoid the credit crisis that afflicted Wall Street when the secondary market for loans collapsed in late 2007 and helped it reduce its foreclosure rate. The secondary market provided by the “shadow lenders” is provided in North Dakota by the BND, something other state banks could do for their community banks as well.
Other services the Bank provides include guarantees for entrepreneurial startups and student loans, the purchase of municipal bonds from public institutions, and a well-funded disaster loan program. When North Dakota failed to meet its state budget a few years ago, the BND met the shortfall. The BND has an account with the Federal Reserve Bank, but its deposits are not insured by the FDIC. Rather, they are guaranteed by the State of North Dakota itself - a prudent move today, when the FDIC is verging on bankruptcy.
A New Vision for a New Decade
A state-owned bank has enormous advantages over smaller private institutions: states own huge amounts of capital (cash, investments, buildings, land, parks and other infrastructure), and they can think farther ahead than their quarterly profit statements, allowing them to take long-term risks. Their asset bases are not marred by oversized salaries and bonuses, they have no shareholders expecting a sizable cut, and they have not marred their books with bad derivatives bets, unmarketable collateralized debt obligations and mark-to-market accounting problems.
The BND is set up as a dba: "the State of North Dakota doing business as the Bank of North Dakota." Technically, that makes the capital of the state the capital of the bank. The BND's return on equity is about 25 percent. It pays a hefty dividend to the state, projected at over $60 million in 2009. In the last decade, the BND has turned back a third of a billion dollars to the state's general fund, offsetting taxes.
By law, the state and all its agencies must deposit their funds in the bank, which pays a competitive interest rate to the state treasurer. The bank also accepts funds from other depositors. These copious deposits can then be used to plow money back into the state in the form of loans.
Although the BND operates mainly as a “bankers’ bank,” other publicly-owned banks, including the Commonwealth Bank of Australia, have successfully engaged in direct commercial lending as well. This has proven to be a win-win for both the borrowers and the government. The public bank model also offers exciting possibilities for refinancing the state’s own debts and funding infrastructure nearly interest-free. For a fuller discussion, see “Cut Wall Street Out! How States Can Finance Their Own Recovery.”
For three centuries, the United States has thrived on what Benjamin Franklin called “ready money” and today we call “ready credit.” We can have that abundance again, by generating our own credit through our own state and local banks. Just as George Bailey needed a visit from an angel to point the way, so we just need the vision to see the possibilities.
Arianna’s vision for moving our money from the large banks into our local community banks is a very admirable first step. However, those community banks are not likely to have sufficient capital to free up credit for their local businesses and other customers without the partnership of state-owned banks, or the publicly-owned banks of counties and larger cities, which also have ample capital assets. A number of states, counties and cities are actively exploring this option. The BND model shows us how government-owned banks and community banks can work together to get money flowing back to Main Street again.
THE NORTH DAKOTA MODEL FOR CAPITALIZING COMMUNITY BANKS
Ellen Brown, January 3rd, 2010
http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/pottersville.php
Where can our floundering community banks get the capital to make room on their books for substantial new loans? An innovative answer is provided by the state of North Dakota.
Arianna Huffington just posted an article on the Huffington Post that has sparked a remarkable wave of interest, evoking nearly 5,000 comments in less than a week. Called “Move Your Money,” the article maintains that we can get credit flowing again on Main Street by moving our money out of the Wall Street behemoths and into our local community banks. This solution has been suggested before, but Arianna added the very appealing draw of a video clip featuring Jimmy Stewart in It’s a Wonderful Life. In the holiday season, we are all hungry for a glimpse of that wonderful movie that used to be a mainstay of Christmas, showing daily throughout the holidays. The copyright holders have suddenly gotten very Scrooge-like and are allowing it to be shown only once a year on NBC. Whatever their motives, Wall Street no doubt approves of this restriction, since the movie continually reminded viewers of the potentially villainous nature of Big Banking.
Pulling our money out of Wall Street and putting it into our local community banks is an idea with definite popular appeal. Unfortunately, however, this move alone won't be sufficient to strengthen the small banks. Community banks lack capital – money that belongs to the bank -- and the deposits of customers don’t count as capital. Rather, they represent liabilities of the bank, since the money has to be available for the depositors on demand. Bank “capital” is the money paid in by investors plus accumulated retained earnings. It is the net worth of the bank, or assets minus liabilities. Lending ability is limited by a bank’s assets, not its deposits; and today, investors willing to build up the asset base of small community banks are scarce, due to the banks’ increasing propensity to go bankrupt.
It’s a Wonderful Life actually illustrated the weakness of local community banking without major capital backup. George Bailey’s bank was a savings and loan, which lent out the deposits of its customers. It “borrowed short and lent long,” meaning it took in short-term deposits and made long-term mortgage loans with them. When the customers panicked and all came for their deposits at once, the money was not to be had. George’s neighbors and family saved the day by raiding their cookie jars, but that miracle cannot be counted on outside Hollywood.
The savings and loan model collapsed completely in the 1980s. Since then, all banks have been allowed to create credit as needed just by writing it as loans on their books, a system called “fractional reserve” lending. Banks can do this up to a certain limit, which used to be capped by a “reserve requirement” of 10%. That meant the bank had to have on hand a sum equal to 10% of its deposits, either in its vault as cash or in the bank’s reserve account at its local Federal Reserve bank. But many exceptions were carved out of the rule, and the banks devised ways to get around it.
That was when the Bank for International Settlements stepped in and imposed “capital requirements.” The BIS is the “central bankers’ central bank” in Basel, Switzerland. In 1988, its Basel Committee on Banking Supervision published a set of minimal requirements for banks, called Basel I. No longer would “reserves” in the form of other people’s deposits be sufficient to cover loan losses. The Committee said that loans had to be classified according to risk, and that the banks had to maintain real capital – their own money – generally equal to 8% of these “risk-weighted” assets. Half of this had to be “Tier 1" capital, completely liquid assets in the form of equity owned by shareholders – funds paid in by investors plus retained earnings. The other half could include such things as unencumbered real estate and loans, but they still had to be the bank’s own assets, not the depositors’.
For a number of years, U.S. banks managed to get around this rule too. They did it by removing loans from their books, bundling them up as “securities,” and selling them off to investors. But when the "shadow lenders" – the investors buying the bundled loans – realized these securities were far more risky than alleged, they exited the market; and they aren’t expected to return any time soon. That means banks are now stuck with their loans; and if the loans go into default, as many are doing, the assets of the banks must be marked down. The banks can then become “zombie banks” (unable to make new loans) or can go bankrupt and have to close their doors.
The final blow to the easy credit provided by U.S. banks came with another stricture on capital, called Basel II. It manifested in the U.S. as the “mark-to-market” rule, which required a bank’s loan portfolio to be valued at what it could be sold for (the “market”), not its original book value. In today’s unfavorable market, that meant a huge drop in asset value for the banks, dramatically reducing their ability to generate new loans. When the announcement was made in November 2007 that this rule was going to be imposed on U.S. banks, credit dried up and the stock market plunged. The market did not begin to recover until 2009, when the rule was largely lifted. However, on December 17, 2009, the Basel Committee announced plans to impose even tighter capital requirements. The foreseeable result is the collapse of yet more community banks and the drying up of yet more credit on Main Street.
Anchoring Community Banks to State-owned Banks
Where can our floundering community banks get the capital to make room on their books for substantial new loans? An innovative answer is provided by the state of North Dakota, one of only two states (along with Montana) expected to meet its budget in 2010. North Dakota was also the only state to actually gain jobs in 2009 while other states were losing them. Since 2000, North Dakota’s GNP has grown 56 percent, personal income has grown 43 percent and wages have grown 34 percent. The state not only has no funding problems, but in 2009 it had a budget surplus of $1.3 billion, the largest it ever had – not bad for a state of only 700,000 people.
North Dakota is the only state in the union to own its own bank. The Bank of North Dakota (BND) was established by the state legislature in 1919 specifically to free farmers and small businessmen from the clutches of out-of-state bankers and railroad men. Its populist organizers originally conceived of the bank as a credit union-like institution that would provide an alternative to predatory lenders, but conservative interests later took control and suppressed these commercial lending functions. The BND now chiefly acts as a central bank, with functions similar to those of a branch of the Federal Reserve.
However, the BND differs from the Federal Reserve in significant ways. The stock of the branches of the Fed is 100% privately owned by banks. The BND is 100% owned by the state, and it is required to operate in the interest of the public. Its stated mission is to deliver sound financial services that promote agriculture, commerce and industry in North Dakota.
Although the BND is operated in the public interest, it avoids rivalry with private banks by partnering with them. Most lending is originated by a local bank. The BND then comes in to participate in the loan, share risk, buy down the interest rate and buy up loans, thereby freeing up banks to lend more. One of the BND's functions is to provide a secondary market for real estate loans, which it buys from local banks. Its residential loan portfolio is now $500 billion to $600 billion. This function has helped the state avoid the credit crisis that afflicted Wall Street when the secondary market for loans collapsed in late 2007 and helped it reduce its foreclosure rate. The secondary market provided by the “shadow lenders” is provided in North Dakota by the BND, something other state banks could do for their community banks as well.
Other services the Bank provides include guarantees for entrepreneurial startups and student loans, the purchase of municipal bonds from public institutions, and a well-funded disaster loan program. When North Dakota failed to meet its state budget a few years ago, the BND met the shortfall. The BND has an account with the Federal Reserve Bank, but its deposits are not insured by the FDIC. Rather, they are guaranteed by the State of North Dakota itself - a prudent move today, when the FDIC is verging on bankruptcy.
A New Vision for a New Decade
A state-owned bank has enormous advantages over smaller private institutions: states own huge amounts of capital (cash, investments, buildings, land, parks and other infrastructure), and they can think farther ahead than their quarterly profit statements, allowing them to take long-term risks. Their asset bases are not marred by oversized salaries and bonuses, they have no shareholders expecting a sizable cut, and they have not marred their books with bad derivatives bets, unmarketable collateralized debt obligations and mark-to-market accounting problems.
The BND is set up as a dba: "the State of North Dakota doing business as the Bank of North Dakota." Technically, that makes the capital of the state the capital of the bank. The BND's return on equity is about 25 percent. It pays a hefty dividend to the state, projected at over $60 million in 2009. In the last decade, the BND has turned back a third of a billion dollars to the state's general fund, offsetting taxes.
By law, the state and all its agencies must deposit their funds in the bank, which pays a competitive interest rate to the state treasurer. The bank also accepts funds from other depositors. These copious deposits can then be used to plow money back into the state in the form of loans.
Although the BND operates mainly as a “bankers’ bank,” other publicly-owned banks, including the Commonwealth Bank of Australia, have successfully engaged in direct commercial lending as well. This has proven to be a win-win for both the borrowers and the government. The public bank model also offers exciting possibilities for refinancing the state’s own debts and funding infrastructure nearly interest-free. For a fuller discussion, see “Cut Wall Street Out! How States Can Finance Their Own Recovery.”
For three centuries, the United States has thrived on what Benjamin Franklin called “ready money” and today we call “ready credit.” We can have that abundance again, by generating our own credit through our own state and local banks. Just as George Bailey needed a visit from an angel to point the way, so we just need the vision to see the possibilities.
Arianna’s vision for moving our money from the large banks into our local community banks is a very admirable first step. However, those community banks are not likely to have sufficient capital to free up credit for their local businesses and other customers without the partnership of state-owned banks, or the publicly-owned banks of counties and larger cities, which also have ample capital assets. A number of states, counties and cities are actively exploring this option. The BND model shows us how government-owned banks and community banks can work together to get money flowing back to Main Street again.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)