Despite the fact that the term “new world order” was mentioned in
connection with the G20 this week hundreds of times by both global leaders and
in news reports, it is still regarded as a “conspiracy theory” by that
bastion of truthiness, Wikipedia.
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown himself yesterday announced
that the G20 heralded the
creation of a “new world order” which would involve increased global
regulation of economic markets.
A
Google News search provides well over a thousand results of reports
including the term “new world order” over the past couple of weeks.
Despite the fact that world leaders have been talking about a
“new world order” for decades, in the context of the political agenda to
diminish the power of sovereign states in favor of a move towards global
governance, it was still regarded as a delusion of paranoid conspiracy theorists
by the establishment media until relatively recently.
Now even
Fox News and Sean Hannity are throwing their arms in the air and admitting
that the “conspiracy theorists were right” as the agenda for global
government is openly announced.
However,
the online encyclopedia Wikipedia, which is notorious for being completely
infested with maniacally obsessive trolls, crooked insiders, and establishment
apologists, claims that in its warped version of reality, the “new world
order” as a sinister concept is still a nebulous conspiracy theory.
New World Order: So-called “conspiracy theorists” had to endure decades
of ridicule for daring to claim such a political agenda existed - now it’s
openly discussed in every major news outlet.
But according to Wikipedia, it’s still a “conspiracy theory”.
Wikipedia attempts to make the differentiation by claiming that
the new world order in the context of a sinister, undemocratic, and ultimately
totalitarian political agenda, is a characterization embraced only by paranoid
conspiracy theorists.
Presumably, Wikipedia is only willing to accept the fact that an
agenda to create a new world order exists if that new world order equates to a
happy, loving, positive move, where world bankers and global elitists really
have the best interests of all of us at heart. Forgive us for being somewhat
skeptical of that conclusion.
In reality, as we have exhaustively documented, the new world
order has nothing to do with saving the world and everything to do with
centralizing power and control into the hands of a gaggle of criminal globalists
who are concerned about nothing other than increasing their domination over the
planet - at the expense of the rest of the population.
The new world order is totalitarian by its very nature -
shifting power away from sovereign countries to global institutions which have
no accountability to the general public whatsoever, and through which the public
has no voice or influence. That cannot be defined as anything else but
undemocratic. There is no such thing as a “benign” new world order.
This very agenda was again enunciated this week by World Bank President and and
Bilderberg elitist Robert Zoellick, who openly admitted the plan to eliminate
national sovereignty and impose a global government during a speech on the eve
of the G20 summit.
Speaking about the agenda to increase not just funding but power
for international organizations on the back of the financial crisis, Zoellick
stated, “If leaders are serious about creating new global responsibilities
or governance, let them start by modernising multilateralism to empower
the WTO, the IMF, and the World Bank Group to monitor national policies.”
Proponents of a new world order have always disguised their
rhetoric with flowery notions of achieving some kind of global utopia, but behind
the scenes the real agenda has always been sinister, nepotistic and anathema
to any reasonable notion of democratic freedom.
It’s about time the establishment media stopped parroting the
words of globalists and blithely repeating the term “new world order” like
it was going out of fashion, and actually started asking real questions about
what it really means.
By Paul Reynolds World affairs correspondent, BBC News website
President Obama signalled a shift in the US approach to the international
stage
Slowly the shape of the world after the financial flood is beginning to
emerge.
The first thing to be said is that everyone is in the same boat. And they
have to bail together. This contrasts to the old days when capitalists and
communists exchanged insults as their ships passed in the night.
The worst threat at this G20 summit was a remark by French President Nicolas
Sarkozy that he would walk out if there was not better regulation of banks and
financial markets, not exactly the kind of casus belli that plunged Europe into
war nearly 100 years ago. We have moved on. Nor did he walk out. Indeed, he was
pleased, he said, at the result.
The Franco-German analysis might well have been right. But being right about
the past does not mean that you alone can put right the future. The European
Union as a whole, normally so free in its advice to all and sundry, was a bit
chastened, with many newer and some older members on the verge of or in
financial crisis.
We have moved on too from the 1930s, when depression helped fuel the rise of
dictatorships. Whether the world solves its financial crisis this time has yet
to be determined, but the players at least seem to have learned some lessons.
United States
Stronger relationships mean better chances of dealing with problems
The second thing is that the position of the United States has changed.
President Obama came and conquered, with little gestures like shaking hands
with a black policeman guarding 10 Downing Street to the larger "listen and
lead" attitude he showed at the conference itself.
There was no longer the sense of American particularity that there was under
George W Bush.
President Obama spoke of an "era of responsibility" - meaning no
more wild financial dealings and a willingness to take joint corrective action
with others.
He accepted that America could not solve the crisis by itself (though its
critics would say that it managed to cause it largely by itself). This was a
return to multilateralism - and a recognition that American ways were not
necessarily the best ways.
It extended beyond economics. Mr Obama had a productive meeting with Russian
President Dmitry Medvedev at which they agreed to start negotiations on new
nuclear weapons reductions and complete them by December.
They managed not to allow their differences - over missile defence or Georgia
to name but two - to prevent the reset button from being pressed.
This does not mean that all will be well in their relationship. But it does
mean that there are better prospects for overcoming problems.
New diplomacy
Leaders of less developed countries such as Brazil can no longer be
ignored
Then there was China. Chinese President Hu Jintao did not make much of a
public impact, beyond that in his own media, but China's influence was felt
everywhere. They and the Americans agreed on a "strategic and economic
dialogue" to start in Washington this summer.
The workshop of the modern world cannot be ignored. One sign is that China is
likely to get much larger voting rights in the IMF to match its much larger
contributions.
Can the day be long delayed when China enters the trading world fully, with a
convertible currency?
This is the new super power diplomacy - not East versus West, nor a return to
the disastrous manoeuvring of the late 19th Century or the 1930s, but the
management of relationships within better agreed rules.
And do not forget the presence of leaders from places like India and Brazil.
They cannot be ignored either.
It makes one wonder how much longer the old G8 style of meeting, another of
which is planned in Italy this summer, can stagger on.
There can be no rich man's club if the members are no longer so rich and have
caused so much disaster.
Rich Miller and Simon Kennedy Bloomberg
April 3, 2009
Global leaders took their biggest steps yet toward a new
world order that’s less U.S.-centric with a more heavily regulated financial
industry and a greater role for international institutions and emerging markets.
At the end of a summit in London, policy makers from the Group of 20 yesterday
delivered a regulatory blueprint that French President Nicholas Sarkozy said
turned the page on the Anglo-Saxon model of free markets by placing stricter
limits on hedge funds and other financiers. The leaders also pledged to triple
the resources of the International Monetary Fund and to hand China and other
developing economies a greater say in the management of the world economy.
“It’s the passing of an era,” said Robert Hormats, vice chairman of
Goldman Sachs International, who helped prepare summits for presidents Gerald R.
Ford, Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan. “The U.S. is becoming less dominant
while other nations are gaining influence.”
For the Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, it is
a “new Bretton Woods”, as important as the 1944 convention that established
the modern financial world order. For Nicolas Sarkozy, President of France, it
is a once-in-a-lifetime chance to remake the global financial architecture and
usher in an era of “regulated capitalism”. But beware the headlines that
these leaders try to manufacture when they assemble for their credit crisis
summit in Washington this weekend.
What we have is a summit without an agenda, on a crisis without an agreed
cause, in a country without a functioning government. The US – whose outgoing
President agreed to hold the meeting under French pressure, and whose
President-elect, keen to stress that the US has “only one president at a
time”, won’t even be there – has already bristled at European talk of a
creating new supra-national regulators and international rules.
So little wonder everyone else is scrambling to downplay expectations for
what might emerge, and to lengthen the timetable for achieving results. As one
person from the UK delegation put it, “Bretton Woods took two years”.
Anderson Cooper and co. hail the ‘progress’ made by the G20 towards a
“New World Order” under Gordon Brown and Barack Obama. They have come to an
agreement on a new financial regulation/stability board, but not as advanced as
some have hoped.
Anderson begs the question, ‘does this mean a new world order?’
In a press conference after the plenary session the British PM Gordon Brown read
the communique of the G-20 leaders where the heads of the states have agreed to
make six pledges to improve the world economy and emerge a “new world
order.”
Brown says that the world leaders have pledged to take global actions
together and that a consensus is reached. One trillion dollars will be made
available through the International Monetary Fund to boost the world economy.
G-20 will take essential actions to rebuild confidence and trust in the
financial system. There are no quick fixes, but the leaders pledge to act
together to work things out.
The leaders will regulate credit rating agencies so they provide better pictures
of economies and companies around the world helping investors to make wiser
decisions. The leaders will end tax heavens and will bring end to banking
secrecy.
Prime Minister Gordon Brown says leaders at the G-20 summit have agreed to give
$1 trillion to the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank to help
struggling nations around the world.
Brown also says the 20 countries at the summit will enact common policies to
crack down on tax havens, regulate hedge funds, and rebuild trust in the
financial system to “prevent a crisis such as this from happening again.”
He says the G-20 nations will also give emerging powers a greater say in the
world economy.
Brown did not outline any new fiscal measures but says that the stimulus
packages already announced by major nations have already been the biggest in
history.
World Bank President and Bilderberg elitist
Robert Zoellick openly admitted the plan to eliminate national sovereignty and
impose a global government during a speech on the eve of the G20 summit.
Speaking about the agenda to increase not just
funding but power for international organizations on the back of the financial
crisis,
Zoellick stated, “If leaders are serious about creating new global
responsibilities or governance, let them start by
modernising multilateralism to empower the WTO, the IMF, and the World Bank
Group to monitor national policies.”
In other words, give global institutions the
power to regulate national policy as part of the creation of global government.
What Zoellick is outlining is essentially the
end of national sovereignty and the reclassification of national governments as
mere subordinates to a global authority that is completely unaccountable to the
voting public of any country.
The more cynical amongst us would call this a
global dictatorship. Zoellick couches the plan in flowery rhetoric of helping
the poor and alleviating poverty, but as we have documented for years, the
global elite’s goal of world government has little to do with saving the
planet and everything to do with creating a global fascist state.
Zoellick, former Executive Vice President of
Fannie Mae and advisor to Goldman Sachs, is a top elitist who was intimately
involved in the Enron scandal and the 2000 presidential election debacle. He was
also a signatory to the Project For A New American century document that called
for invading Iraq as part of implementing a brutal world empire in 1998. He was
later a foreign policy advisor to George W. Bush.
As to be expected, Zoellick is a member of the
Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission. He also attended the
annual invitation-only conferences of the Bilderberg Group in 1991, 2003, 2006
and 2007.
Meanwhile, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown
will use the G20 summit in London to extend an olive branch to China, offering
them a central role in the construction of a new world order and a global
government, according to reports.
“Brown will hold talks with Hu Jintao,
China’s president, following discussions with Barack Obama, amid signs that
developing countries see the G20 summit as a chance to impose a new world order
and end the era of Anglo-European dominance,” reports
the Guardian.
Under the proposal, China will vastly increase
its IMF funding in return for more voting rights.
A central focus of the G20 summit will be the
proposal to supplant the dollar with a new global currency. Both the IMF and the
United Nations threw their weight behind the implementation of a new global
reserve currency system to replace the dollar, in the same week that Treasury
Secretary Timothy Geithner told CFR globalists that he was “open” to the
idea.
China and Russia brought the issue to the
forefront of this week’s G20 when they jointly called for a new global reserve
currency a week ago.
Brown has consistently called for global
regulation of the financial system as a means towards global governance. In a
speech at St Paul’s Cathedral in London yesterday he again called
for a new “global society”.
LONDON: World leaders agreed a huge raft of spending yesterday to combat the
economic crisis, pledging to lay out $5 trillion by the end of next year as
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown hailed a "new world order".
The measures, agreed at a one-day summit in London, would see tax havens
named and shamed, new rules on corporate pay, major reforms to the International
Monetary Fund and World Bank, a new push to pass free trade rules and the sale
of huge gold reserves to help poor countries.
"A new world order is emerging, and with it we are entering into a new
era of international co-operation," Brown said after hosting a summit which
brought together US President Barack Obama and leaders of the established and
emerging powers from around the world.
Obama, who is expected to make the biggest contribution to the initiative,
said the summit would come to be seen as a "turning point" in the
fight against the crisis.
"Earlier today, we finished a very productive summit that will be, I
believe, a turning point in our pursuit of global economic recovery," he
said.
"By any measure, the London summit was historic. It was historic because
of the size and scope of the challenges we face, and because of the timeliness
and magnitude of our response."
Brown said the issues that people thought divided us did not divide us at
all.
"There was substantial agreement to do whatever is necessary to return
to growth," Brown said, while warning there are "no quick fixes".
Even French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who had threatened to walk out of the
summit, said the results were "more than we could have hoped for".
G20 leaders will meet again in New York in September, around the time of the
United Nations General Assembly, Sarkozy said after the London summit.
"We have decided... that the third G20 summit will take place during or
after the United Nations General Assembly in September in New York,"
Sarkozy said.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel said a "historic compromise" had
been made.
Before the summit, the United States and Britain had pushed for bigger
stimulus spending while France and Germany had called for the focus to be put on
greater regulation of the financial sector.
But Brown trumpeted an agreement that he said benefited every country.
The G20 agreed to provide an extra $1trn for the IMF and other global finance
bodies, new rules on corporate bonuses to discourage bankers who take short term
risks, and an extra $250 billion to revive global trade.
They also ordered the IMF to sell billions of dollars of gold reserves to
help the world's poor countries, Brown said.
Brown said the IMF would undergo major reforms to reflect changes in the
power structure of the world economy.
The IMF's resources are to be tripled to about $750bn to help nations through
the crisis, Brown said.
Brown struck a note of caution, however.
"Today's decisions, of course, will not immediately solve the crisis.
But we have begun the process by which it will be solved," he said.
"Today the largest countries of the world have agreed a global plan for
recovery and reform. We have resolved that from today we will together manage
the process of globalisation."
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon welcomed a commitment by world leaders to
provide $1.1trn in financing to help the world economy but said it was vital
that the poorest countries benefit.
Ban said he was pleased by the package, which will be mainly channeled
through the International Monetary Fund.
"But it will be critical that the share of this going to the poorer
countries is delivered," he said.
Ban said a commitment of $300bn in aid to the poorest countries over the next
two years would be crucial.
"The world will be watching," he said.
"I also welcome the commitment from G20 leaders to resist protectionism
and to monitor compliance," Ban said.
He also praised the recognition of the need to address food security and
climate change in addressing the economic crisis.
International Monetary Fund chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn hailed what he
called "the most coordinated stimulus ever," agreed by world leaders.
Strauss-Kahn said a pledge by G20 to help needy countries fight the crisis
was unprecedented.
"It's a global stimulus we asked for and we have been followed. This is
the most co-ordinated stimulus ever."
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev hailed a G20 accord on how to fix the
global economy as a "step forward" yesterday, but cautioned that it
was not necessarily a "turning point".
"This is a step forward, this is a step in the right direction.
"Of course we could not solve all the issues, but such a goal wasn't on
the agenda," Medvedev said after the summit.
l Saudi Arabia did not contribute to the $500bn of extra funds pledged to the
International Monetary Fund at a G20 summit of world leaders, its finance
minister said.
"There has been discussion recently on getting support of $250bn ... We
did not participate in this," Finance Minister Ibrahim Al Assaf said. Al
Assaf said Saudi Arabia was "studying possibilities" of providing
other forms of support.
On Thursday, Dr. Paul sat down with legislative assistant Paul-Martin Foss
to give his thoughts on the budget, global economic regulation, and the gold
standard.
THE economy became finally and truly global overnight
when the governments of the world admitted it could only be managed by joint
action.
No more, they agreed at the meeting of G20 leaders in London, could a single
nation act in isolation. The interconnectedness of national economies and the
ever-increasing mobility of capital meant there was only one economy _ that of
the globe.
This is why UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown emerged from the summit declaring
the birth of a new world order.
“We have resolved that from today we will together manage the process of
globalisation,” Mr Brown said.
“We have agreed that in doing so we will build a more sustainable and more
open and fairer global society.”
It was an inevitable conclusion for 20 world leaders struggling with the
sudden collapse of global growth sparked by the collapse of sub-prime lending
markets in the US last year.
Each came to London burdened by stunted economic growth, and public anger
about how lax economic regulation in the US has caused a crisis that has
reverberated around the world and, according to the OECD, will leave one in 10
people jobless within a year.
The G20's short-term response of more than $1.1 trillion in new funding to
protect developing nations from the worst of the crisis and boost
international trade represents an attempt to prevent the recession becoming a
depression.
But it is the long-term action _ a massive regulatory crackdown on banks and
other financial institutions _ that marks the beginning of something new and
an attempt by governments to find a way to keep pace with the pace of global
change.
Kevin Rudd will return to Australia satisfied with his performance in London.
The Prime Minister was clearly across the issues and achieved his aim of being
seen as an activist leader of a middle power nation with the ambition to punch
above its diplomatic weight.
While Mr Rudd is not the father of the new global order, he was in the room
when it was delivered.
He also looks to have been proven correct in his ambition to help elevate the
G20 to the world's major international decision-making body, supplanting the
less-representative G7 _ of which Australia is not a member.
The other big highlight of the meeting was the stunning diplomatic debut of
Barack Obama.
The President seemed calm and assured in his public comments before and after
the meeting after having arrived saying he wanted to listen, not lecture.
He will leave with his standing enhanced.
===============================================================================
G-20:
China is clearly looking for a new world order
I don’t want to beat a dead horse here, but the Chinese have been making a
lot of muscular moves diplomatically. While shifts in balance of power often
take decades, it is increasingly apparent that China is making a strategic move
in that direction right now.
We have been chronicling these moves here in a series of posts at Credit
Writedowns:
It is hard not to get the impression from this lead-in to the G20 conference
that China is making a strategic move of huge consequence here.
Let’s be clear: the U.S. has overspent. It is a debtor nation, dependent on
the kindness of foreigners. Somehow it believes it can still lead the world and
is trying to strong-arm the rest of the G-20 into believing that stimulus must
be the order of the day when the Europeans clearly want regulation.
Yes, stimulus is important, but outside of the United
States and the U.K., most see this depression as one caused by
Anglo-American-style laissez-faire capitalism and the need now is for more
regulation. French President Nicholas
Sarkozy has threatened to walk out of part of the summit unless the U.S.
abandons its calls for reflating the unbalanced old world order.
China on the other hand wants a new world order. The latest story leads me to
believe that China is not bluffing. They are deadly serious about knocking the
U.S. down a peg. This comes from the French daily Figaro:
Beijing wants to challenge U.S. leadership
A few days before the G20, China has mounted an offensive on the role
of the dollar and the reform of the IMF.
Even if they like subtle strategic concepts, the Chinese also know that
sometimes the best defense is offense. Tired of constantly being attacked on
the yuan and trade policy, Beijing has mounted a frontal assault by attacking
the power of the dollar a few days before the G20. The offensive comes in the
form of a proposal to establish a new international reserve currency which
could be organized around the “special drawing rights” of the IMF.
The Governor of the Central Bank of China, Zhou Xiaochuan, called twice in
one week, for a necessary reform of the world monetary system, without which
“fiscal and monetary measures are useless.” In just a few months, the
change in posture is spectacular. “In November, the Chinese went to the G20
in Washington with a rather low profile, using passive cooperation, playing
their role as one of many,” points out a Pekingese observer. And what’s
more, all this despite a natural role as challenger to U.S. leadership.
Obama meeting Hu Jintao The proposal, moreover, seems to
have been long prepared and coordinated with a number of other countries,
including Russia. That said, even if it is legitimate, Beijing is under no
illusions about its feasibility in the short term. The monetary issue is not
at the heart of the G20. Regardless, China has made it an item of interest.
And the presidents Hu Jintao and Barack
Obama are to speak at their first meeting tomorrow on the sidelines of the
summit.
On the issue of reform for voting rights in the IMF, Beijing is once again
strong enough. In a long article published in the Times of London Friday, the
Vice-Premier Wang Qishan has clearly explained the situation. China wants more
weight in the IMF, but has no desire to engage its huge reserves in the Fund
as it has been invited to do. Again, officially, the discreet Chinese have
still not confirmed their position. Beijing would require profound reforms
before making any further efforts. Meanwhile, the contribution would continue
to be “defined by the present allotment.” China will not become a
bilateral creditor of the IMF. It will not be the “banker of the world” as
some hoped.
These things don’t happen overnight, but we are certainly now witnessing
the end of American hegemony.
Experts are digesting the G20's "historic" trillion-dollar bid to
pull the world out of recession after Gordon Brown hailed the creation of a
"new world order".
After two days of intense talks with his fellow leaders, the PM claimed
victory, saying: "This is the day the world came together to fight back
against the global recession, not with words but a plan for global recovery and
reform.
"The decisions, of course, will not immediately solve the crisis, but we
have begun the process by which it will be solved."
US President Barack Obama was effusive in his praise for Mr Brown's
chairmanship, and branded the outcome "a turning point in our pursuit of
global economic recovery".
There had been fears of tensions with French president Nicolas Sarkozy and
German chancellor Angela Merkel. In the event, both proclaimed themselves
satisfied, having secured tough curbs on tax havens and hedge funds.
Mr Sarkozy said "a page has been turned" on the "Anglo
Saxon" financial model, while Mrs Merkel said it represented "a very,
very good, almost historic compromise". But there were no firm commitments
to a new fiscal stimulus - which many believed Mr Brown and Mr Obama were hoping
for.
The key plank of the deal is an injection of 1.1 trillion dollars of
additional resources for the International Monetary Fund and other international
institutions - the biggest increase in their history, according to Mr Brown.
Mr Brown said new rules on bankers' remuneration - establishing
"sustainable compensation schemes" - would mean "no more rewards
for failure".
Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman Vince Cable said the summit "stopped
the rot" in the global economy but more had to be done to boost trade and
tackle tax havens.
He told BBC Breakfast that world leaders had realised they needed to act
together to deal with the worldwide recession.
Following is the text of the statement from the Summit on Financial Markets
and the World Economy, as released on Saturday:
1. We, the Leaders of the Group of Twenty, held an initial meeting in
Washington on November 15, 2008, amid serious challenges to the world economy
and financial markets. We are determined to enhance our cooperation and work
together to restore global growth and achieve needed reforms in the world’s
financial systems.
2. Over the past months our countries have taken urgent and exceptional
measures to support the global economy and stabilize financial markets. These
efforts must continue. At the same time, we must lay the foundation for reform
to help to ensure that a global crisis, such as this one, does not happen again.
Our work will be guided by a shared belief that market principles, open trade
and investment regimes, and effectively regulated financial markets foster the
dynamism, innovation, and entrepreneurship that are essential for economic
growth, employment, and poverty reduction.
Root Causes of the Current Crisis
3. During a period of strong global growth, growing capital flows, and
prolonged stability earlier this decade, market participants sought higher
yields without an adequate appreciation of the risks and failed to exercise
proper due diligence. At the same time, weak underwriting standards, unsound
risk management practices, increasingly complex and opaque financial products,
and consequent excessive leverage combined to create vulnerabilities in the
system. Policy-makers, regulators and supervisors, in some advanced countries,
did not adequately appreciate and address the risks building up in financial
markets, keep pace with financial innovation, or take into account the systemic
ramifications of domestic regulatory actions.
4. Major underlying factors to the current situation were, among others,
inconsistent and insufficiently coordinated macroeconomic policies, inadequate
structural reforms, which led to unsustainable global macroeconomic outcomes.
These developments, together, contributed to excesses and ultimately resulted in
severe market disruption.
Actions Taken and to Be Taken
5. We have taken strong and significant actions to date to stimulate our
economies, provide liquidity, strengthen the capital of financial institutions,
protect savings and deposits, address regulatory deficiencies, unfreeze credit
markets, and are working to ensure that international financial institutions (IFIs)
can provide critical support for the global economy.
6. But more needs to be done to stabilize financial markets and support
economic growth. Economic momentum is slowing substantially in major economies
and the global outlook has weakened. Many emerging market economies, which
helped sustain
the world economy this decade, are still experiencing good growth but
increasingly are being adversely impacted by the worldwide slowdown.
7. Against this background of deteriorating economic conditions worldwide, we
agreed that a broader policy response is needed, based on closer macroeconomic
cooperation, to restore growth, avoid negative spillovers and support emerging
market economies and developing countries. As immediate steps to achieve these
objectives, as well as to address longer-term challenges, we will:
•
Continue our vigorous efforts and take whatever further actions are necessary
to stabilize the financial system.
•
Recognize the importance of monetary policy support, as deemed appropriate to
domestic conditions.
•
Use fiscal measures to stimulate domestic demand to rapid effect, as
appropriate, while maintaining a policy framework conducive to fiscal
sustainability.
•
Help emerging and developing economies gain access to finance in current
difficult financial conditions, including through liquidity facilities and
program support. We stress the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) important
role in crisis response, welcome its new short-term liquidity facility, and urge
the ongoing review of its instruments and facilities to ensure flexibility.
•
Encourage the World Bank and other multilateral development banks (MDBs) to
use their full capacity in support of their development agenda, and we welcome
the recent introduction of new facilities by the World Bank in the areas of
infrastructure and trade finance.
•
Ensure that the IMF, World Bank and other MDBs have sufficient resources to
continue playing their role in overcoming the crisis.
Common Principles for Reform of Financial Markets
8. In addition to the actions taken above, we will implement reforms that
will strengthen financial markets and regulatory regimes so as to avoid future
crises. Regulation is first and foremost the responsibility of national
regulators who constitute the first line of defense against market instability.
However, our financial markets are global in scope, therefore, intensified
international cooperation among regulators and strengthening of international
standards, where necessary, and their consistent implementation is necessary to
protect against adverse cross-border, regional and global developments affecting
international financial stability. Regulators must ensure that their actions
support market discipline, avoid potentially adverse impacts on other countries,
including regulatory arbitrage, and support competition, dynamism and innovation
in the marketplace. Financial institutions must also bear their responsibility
for the turmoil and should do their part to overcome it including by recognizing
losses, improving disclosure and strengthening their governance and risk
management practices.
9. We commit to implementing policies consistent with the following common
principles for reform.
•
Strengthening Transparency and Accountability: We will strengthen financial
market transparency, including by enhancing required disclosure on complex
financial products and ensuring complete and accurate disclosure by firms of
their financial conditions. Incentives should be aligned to avoid excessive
risk-taking.
•
Enhancing Sound Regulation: We pledge to strengthen our regulatory regimes,
prudential oversight, and risk management, and ensure that all financial
markets, products and participants are regulated or subject to oversight, as
appropriate to their circumstances. We will exercise strong oversight over
credit rating agencies, consistent with the agreed and strengthened
international code of conduct. We will also make regulatory regimes more
effective over the economic cycle, while ensuring that regulation is efficient,
does not stifle innovation, and encourages expanded trade in financial products
and services. We commit to transparent assessments of our national regulatory
systems.
•
Promoting Integrity in Financial Markets: We commit to protect the integrity
of the world’s financial markets by bolstering investor and consumer
protection, avoiding conflicts of interest, preventing illegal market
manipulation, fraudulent activities and abuse, and protecting against illicit
finance risks arising from non-cooperative jurisdictions. We will also promote
information sharing, including with respect to jurisdictions that have yet to
commit to international standards with respect to bank secrecy and transparency.
•
Reinforcing International Cooperation: We call upon our national and regional
regulators to formulate their regulations and other measures in a consistent
manner. Regulators should enhance their coordination and cooperation across all
segments of financial markets, including with respect to cross-border capital
flows. Regulators and other relevant authorities as a matter of priority should
strengthen cooperation on crisis prevention, management, and resolution.
•
Reforming International Financial Institutions: We are committed to advancing
the reform of the Bretton Woods Institutions so that they can more adequately
reflect changing economic weights in the world economy in order to increase
their legitimacy and effectiveness. In this respect, emerging and developing
economies, including the poorest countries, should have greater voice and
representation. The Financial Stability Forum (FSF) must expand urgently to a
broader membership of emerging economies, and other major standard setting
bodies should promptly review their membership. The IMF, in collaboration with
the expanded FSF and other bodies, should work to better identify
vulnerabilities, anticipate potential stresses, and act swiftly to play a key
role in crisis response.
Tasking of Ministers and Experts
10. We are committed to taking rapid action to implement these principles. We
instruct our Finance Ministers, as coordinated by their 2009 G-20 leadership
(Brazil, UK, Republic of Korea), to initiate processes and a timeline to do so.
An initial list of specific measures is set forth in the attached Action Plan,
including high priority actions to be completed prior to March 31, 2009.
In consultation with other economies and existing bodies, drawing upon the
recommendations of such eminent independent experts as they may appoint, we
request our Finance Ministers to formulate additional recommendations, including
in the following specific areas:
•
Mitigating against pro-cyclicality in regulatory policy;
•
Reviewing and aligning global accounting standards, particularly for complex
securities in times of stress;
•
Strengthening the resilience and transparency of credit derivatives markets
and reducing their systemic risks, including by improving the infrastructure of
over-the-counter markets;
•
Reviewing compensation practices as they relate to incentives for risk taking
and innovation;
•
Reviewing the mandates, governance, and resource requirements of the IFIs;
and
•
Defining the scope of systemically important institutions and determining
their appropriate regulation or oversight.
11. In view of the role of the G-20 in financial systems reform, we will meet
again by April 30, 2009, to review the implementation of the principles and
decisions agreed today.
Commitment to an Open Global Economy
12. We recognize that these reforms will only be successful if grounded in a
commitment to free market principles, including the rule of law, respect for
private property, open trade and investment, competitive markets, and efficient,
effectively regulated financial systems. These principles are essential to
economic growth and prosperity and have lifted millions out of poverty, and have
significantly raised the global standard of living. Recognizing the necessity to
improve financial sector regulation, we must avoid over-regulation that would
hamper economic growth and exacerbate the contraction of capital flows,
including to developing countries.
13. We underscore the critical importance of rejecting protectionism and not
turning inward in times of financial uncertainty. In this regard, within the
next 12 months, we will refrain from raising new barriers to investment or to
trade in goods and services, imposing new export restrictions, or implementing
World Trade Organization (WTO) inconsistent measures to stimulate exports.
Further, we shall strive to reach agreement this year on modalities that leads
to a successful conclusion to the WTO’s Doha Development Agenda with an
ambitious and balanced outcome. We instruct our Trade Ministers to achieve this
objective and stand ready to assist directly, as necessary. We also agree that
our countries have the largest stake in the global trading system and therefore
each must make the positive contributions necessary to achieve such an outcome.
14. We are mindful of the impact of the current crisis on developing
countries, particularly the most vulnerable. We reaffirm the importance of the
Millennium Development Goals, the development assistance commitments we have
made, and urge both developed and emerging economies to undertake commitments
consistent with their capacities and roles in the global economy. In this
regard, we reaffirm the development principles agreed at the 2002 United Nations
Conference on Financing for Development in Monterrey, Mexico, which emphasized
country ownership and mobilizing all sources of financing for development.
15. We remain committed to addressing other critical challenges such as
energy security and climate change, food security, the rule of law, and the
fight against terrorism, poverty and disease.
16. As we move forward, we are confident that through continued partnership,
cooperation, and multilateralism, we will overcome the challenges before us and
restore stability and prosperity to the world economy.
Action Plan to Implement Principles for Reform
This Action Plan sets forth a comprehensive work plan to implement the five
agreed principles for reform. Our finance ministers will work to ensure that the
taskings set forth in this Action Plan are fully and vigorously implemented.
They are responsible for the development and implementation of these
recommendations drawing on the ongoing work of relevant bodies, including the
International Monetary Fund (IMF), an expanded Financial Stability Forum (FSF),
and standard setting bodies.
Strengthening Transparency and Accountability
Immediate Actions by March 31, 2009
•
The key global accounting standards bodies should work to enhance guidance
for valuation of securities, also taking into account the valuation of complex,
illiquid products, especially during times of stress.
•
Accounting standard setters should significantly advance their work to
address weaknesses in accounting and disclosure standards for off-balance sheet
vehicles.
•
Regulators and accounting standard setters should enhance the required
disclosure of complex financial instruments by firms to market participants.
With a view toward promoting financial stability, the governance of the
international accounting standard setting body should be further enhanced,
including by undertaking a review of its membership, in particular in order to
ensure transparency, accountability, and an appropriate relationship between
this independent body and the relevant authorities.
•
Private sector bodies that have already developed best practices for private
pools of capital and/or hedge funds should bring forward proposals for a set of
unified best practices. Finance Ministers should assess the adequacy of these
proposals, drawing upon the analysis of regulators, the expanded FSF, and other
relevant bodies.
Medium-term actions
•
The key global accounting standards bodies should work intensively toward the
objective of creating a single high-quality global standard.
•
Regulators, supervisors, and accounting standard setters, as appropriate,
should work with each other and the private sector on an ongoing basis to ensure
consistent application and enforcement of high-quality accounting standards.
•
Financial institutions should provide enhanced risk disclosures in their
reporting and disclose all losses on an ongoing basis, consistent with
international best practice, as appropriate. Regulators should work to ensure
that a financial institution’ financial statements include a complete,
accurate, and timely picture of the firm’s activities (including off-balance
sheet activities) and are reported on a consistent and regular basis.
Enhancing Sound Regulation
Regulatory Regimes
Immediate Actions by March 31, 2009
•
The IMF, expanded FSF, and other regulators and bodies should develop
recommendations to mitigate pro-cyclicality, including the review of how
valuation and leverage, bank capital, executive compensation, and provisioning
practices may exacerbate cyclical trends.
Medium-term actions
•
To the extent countries or regions have not already done so, each country or
region pledges to review and report on the structure and principles of its
regulatory system to ensure it is compatible with a modern and increasingly
globalized financial system. To this end, all G-20 members commit to undertake a
Financial Sector Assessment Program (FSAP) report and support the transparent
assessments of countries’ national regulatory systems.
•
The appropriate bodies should review the differentiated nature of regulation
in the banking, securities, and insurance sectors and provide a report outlining
the issue and making recommendations on needed improvements. A review of the
scope of financial regulation, with a special emphasis on institutions,
instruments, and markets that are currently unregulated, along with ensuring
that all systemically-important institutions are appropriately regulated, should
also be undertaken.
•
National and regional authorities should review resolution regimes and
bankruptcy laws in light of recent experience to ensure that they permit an
orderly wind-down of large complex cross-border financial institutions.
•
Definitions of capital should be harmonized in order to achieve consistent
measures of capital and capital adequacy.
Prudential Oversight
Immediate Actions by March 31, 2009
•
Regulators should take steps to ensure that credit rating agencies meet the
highest standards of the international organization of securities regulators and
that they avoid conflicts of interest, provide greater disclosure to investors
and to issuers, and differentiate ratings for complex products. This will help
ensure that credit rating agencies have the right incentives and appropriate
oversight to enable them to perform their important role in providing unbiased
information and assessments to markets.
•
The international organization of securities regulators should review credit
rating agencies’ adoption of the standards and mechanisms for monitoring
compliance.
•
Authorities should ensure that financial institutions maintain adequate
capital in amounts necessary to sustain confidence. International standard
setters should set out strengthened capital requirements for banks’ structured
credit and securitization activities.
•
Supervisors and regulators, building on the imminent launch of central
counterparty services for credit default swaps (CDS) in some countries, should:
speed efforts to reduce the systemic risks of CDS and over-the-counter (OTC)
derivatives transactions; insist that market participants support exchange
traded or electronic trading platforms for CDS contracts; expand OTC derivatives
market transparency; and ensure that the infrastructure for OTC derivatives can
support growing volumes.
Medium-term actions
•
Credit Ratings Agencies that provide public ratings should be registered.
•
Supervisors and central banks should develop robust and internationally
consistent approaches for liquidity supervision of, and central bank liquidity
operations for, cross-border banks.
Risk Management
Immediate Actions by March 31, 2009
•
Regulators should develop enhanced guidance to strengthen banks’ risk
management practices, in line with international best practices, and should
encourage financial firms to reexamine their internal controls and implement
strengthened policies for sound risk management.
•
Regulators should develop and implement procedures to ensure that financial
firms implement policies to better manage liquidity risk, including by creating
strong liquidity cushions.
•
Supervisors should ensure that financial firms develop processes that provide
for timely and comprehensive measurement of risk concentrations and large
counterparty risk positions across products and geographies.
•
Firms should reassess their risk management models to guard against stress
and report to supervisors on their efforts.
•
The Basel Committee should study the need for and help develop firms’ new
stress testing models, as appropriate.
•
Financial institutions should have clear internal incentives to promote
stability, and action needs to be taken, through voluntary effort or regulatory
action, to avoid compensation schemes which reward excessive short-term returns
or risk taking.
•
Banks should exercise effective risk management and due diligence over
structured products and securitization.
Medium-term actions
•
International standard setting bodies, working with a broad range of
economies and other appropriate bodies, should ensure that regulatory policy
makers are aware and able to respond rapidly to evolution and innovation in
financial markets and products.
•
Authorities should monitor substantial changes in asset prices and their
implications for the macroeconomy and the financial system.
Promoting Integrity in Financial Markets
Immediate Actions by March 31, 2009
•
Our national and regional authorities should work together to enhance
regulatory cooperation between jurisdictions on a regional and international
level.
•
National and regional authorities should work to promote information sharing
about domestic and cross-border threats to market stability and ensure that
national (or regional, where applicable) legal provisions are adequate to
address these threats.
•
National and regional authorities should also review business conduct rules
to protect markets and investors, especially against market manipulation and
fraud and strengthen their cross-border cooperation to protect the international
financial system from illicit actors. In case of misconduct, there should be an
appropriate sanctions regime.
Medium-term actions
•
National and regional authorities should implement national and international
measures that protect the global financial system from uncooperative and
non-transparent jurisdictions that pose risks of illicit financial activity.
•
The Financial Action Task Force should continue its important work against
money laundering and terrorist financing, and we support the efforts of the
World Bank - UN Stolen Asset Recovery (StAR) Initiative.
•
Tax authorities, drawing upon the work of relevant bodies such as the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), should continue
efforts to promote tax information exchange. Lack of transparency and a failure
to exchange tax information should be vigorously addressed.
Reinforcing International Cooperation
Immediate Actions by March 31, 2009
•
Supervisors should collaborate to establish supervisory colleges for all
major cross-border financial institutions, as part of efforts to strengthen the
surveillance of cross-border firms. Major global banks should meet regularly
with their supervisory college for comprehensive discussions of the firm’s
activities and assessment of the risks it faces.
•
Regulators should take all steps necessary to strengthen cross-border crisis
management arrangements, including on cooperation and communication with each
other and with appropriate authorities, and develop comprehensive contact lists
and conduct simulation exercises, as appropriate.
Medium-term actions
•
Authorities, drawing especially on the work of regulators, should collect
information on areas where convergence in regulatory practices such as
accounting standards, auditing, and deposit insurance is making progress, is in
need of accelerated progress, or where there may be potential for progress.
•
Authorities should ensure that temporary measures to restore stability and
confidence have minimal distortions and are unwound in a timely, well-sequenced
and coordinated manner.
Reforming International Financial Institutions
Immediate Actions by March 31, 2009
•
The FSF should expand to a broader membership of emerging economies.
•
The IMF, with its focus on surveillance, and the expanded FSF, with its focus
on standard setting, should strengthen their collaboration, enhancing efforts to
better integrate regulatory and supervisory responses into the macro-prudential
policy framework and conduct early warning exercises.
•
The IMF, given its universal membership and core macro-financial expertise,
should, in close coordination with the FSF and others, take a leading role in
drawing lessons from the current crisis, consistent with its mandate.
•
We should review the adequacy of the resources of the IMF, the World Bank
Group and other multilateral development banks and stand ready to increase them
where necessary. The IFIs should also continue to review and adapt their lending
instruments to adequately meet their members’ needs and revise their lending
role in the light of the ongoing financial crisis.
•
We should explore ways to restore emerging and developing countries’ access
to credit and resume private capital flows which are critical for sustainable
growth and development, including ongoing infrastructure investment.
•
In cases where severe market disruptions have limited access to the necessary
financing for counter-cyclical fiscal policies, multilateral development banks
must ensure arrangements are in place to support, as needed, those countries
with a good track record and sound policies.
Medium-term actions
•
We underscored that the Bretton Woods Institutions must be comprehensively
reformed so that they can more adequately reflect changing economic weights in
the world economy and be more responsive to future challenges. Emerging and
developing economies should have greater voice and representation in these
institutions.
•
The IMF should conduct vigorous and even-handed surveillance reviews of all
countries, as well as giving greater attention to their financial sectors and
better integrating the reviews with the joint IMF/World Bank financial sector
assessment programs. On this basis, the role of the IMF in providing
macro-financial policy advice would be strengthened.
•
Advanced economies, the IMF, and other international organizations should
provide capacity-building programs for emerging market economies and developing
countries on the formulation and the implementation of new major regulations,
consistent with international standards.
The Editor of Expresso in Portugal wanted my take on the recent
G-20 communique. Here is my “translation” of the official statement:
1. Now that the growth of debt and derivatives bubbles has
stalled, we are committed to using governmental-central bank mechanisms to cover
the positions of any of the large private financial institutions whose profits
are at risk due to their management of these bubbles and who can use this
opportunity to squeeze and acquire smaller rivals at low cost.
Inflation
is a tool used by the bankers.
2. Our commitment to use derivatives and market
interventions to shift investment from the real economy and commodities into a
paper economy is firm. We will continue to use centralized governmental
mechanisms to subsidize and manage this process.
3. All of the organizations and players who reaped a fortune
engineering the debt and derivatives bubbles will be allowed to keep their
winnings.
4. We will use this period of consolidation to further
centralize the global financial system by enforcing greater centralization of
the standards, practices and control of enforcement and regulatory
bureaucracies. This increased governmental centralization will be presented as
the “fix” for our “problems.”
5. We will continue the move toward one world government and
one world currency.
6. We are prepared to use coordinated inflation of global
money supplies and fiscal stimulus to protect our control and positions.
8. This process will continue to be managed to protect large
insurance and risk positions.
9. The net result will be to continue to exercise growing
control over the real economy by a handful of private families and institutions
designed to protect and grow intergenerational wealth.
G-20 are silent on the military and covert action that will be required to
make this stick. They are also silent on how they are going to manage this much
inflation. For example, the most recent figures from the St. Louis Fed indicate
that the aggregate monetary base is growing
at an annualized rate of almost 800%.
Watch for a new focus on “green investing” as the trick in all of this
will be how to create new productivity when the absence of real prices mean
there is no market to provide the necessary signals and financial incentives.
This text by Catherine Austin Fitts is a response to an
article entitled “The Fed Didn’t Cause the Housing Bubble” by Alan
Greenspan, former Chairman of the Federal Reserve, published in the Wall Street
Journal
Alan Greenspan is a liar. The Federal Reserve
and its long standing partner, the US Treasury, engineered the housing
bubble, including the fraudulent inducement of America as part of a
financial coup d’etat.
In his article on your opinion page, “The
Fed Didn’t Cause the Housing Bubble,” Alan Greenspan attributes the
housing bubble to lower interest rates between 2002 and 2005. That’s amazing
to me.
My company served as lead financial advisor to the Federal Housing
Administration between 1994 and 1997. I watched both the Administration
and the Federal Reserve aggressively implement the policies that engineered the
housing bubble. These are described at my website and in my on-line book,Dillon
Read & the Aristocracy of Stock Profits (http://www.dunwalke.com).
One story, for example, is the following:
“In 1995, a senior Clinton Administration official shared with me the
Administration’s targets for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac mortgage volumes in
low- and moderate-income communities. We had recently reviewed the
Administration’s plans to increase government mortgage guarantees — most of
these mortgages would also be pooled and sold as securities to investors. Even
in 1995, I could see that these plans would create unserviceable debt loads in
communities struggling with the falling incomes expected from globalization.
Homeowners would default on mortgages while losses on mortgage-backed securities
would drain retirement savings from 401(k)s and pension plans. Taxpayers would
ultimately be hit with a large bill . . . but insiders would make a bundle. I
looked at the official and said that the Administration was planning on issuing
more mortgages than there were houses or residents. “Shut up, this is none of
your business,” the official snapped back.”
One of the dirty little secrets behind the housing bubble is the long standing
partnership of narcotics trafficking and mortgage fraud and the use of the two
in combination to target and destroy minority and poor communities with highly
profitable economic warfare. This model is global. It is operating in counties
throughout the world as well as in US communities.
Of all the actions that the Federal Reserve took to engineer this housing
bubble, the one that I would note is Mr. Greenspan’s efforts to pacify
Congresswoman Waters regarding allegations of government sponsored narcotics
trafficking at a time when open Congressional hearings would have contributed to
an important discussion of the operations engaging in mortgage fraud in minority
communities. See, “Financial
Coup d’Etat,” Chapter 16, Dillon
Read & the Aristocracy of Stock Profits which was written in 2005 and
published in April 2006, drawing from an article I first published in May 1999.
“On December 18, 1997, the CIA Inspector General delivered Volume I of
their report to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence regarding charges
that the CIA was complicit in narcotics trafficking in South Central Los
Angeles. Washington, D.C. ’s response was compatible with attracting the
continued flow of an estimated $500 billion–$1 trillion a year of money
laundering into the U.S. financial system. Federal Reserve Chairman Alan
Greenspan in January 1998 visited Los Angeles with Congresswoman Maxine Waters
— who had been a vocal critic of the government’s involvement in narcotics
trafficking — with news reports that he had pledged billions to come to her
district. In February Al Gore announced that Water’s district in Los Angeles
had been awarded Empowerment Zone status by HUD (under Secretary Cuomo’s
leadership) and made eligible for $300 million in federal grants and tax
benefits.”
Alan Greenspan is a liar. The Federal Reserve and its long standing partner,
the US Treasury, engineered the housing bubble, including the fraudulent
inducement of America as part of a financial coup d’etat. Our bankruptcy was
not an accident. It was engineered at the highest levels.
Your publication of Greenspan’s breezy and bogus history of the housing
bubble insults your readership.
Documents show Geithner's failures to foresee financial crisis at New York
Fed
Raw Story
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner failed to see many of the major
structural problems with the US financial system while at the New York Federal
Reserve because of his apparent closeness with industry executives, according
to documents reviewed by The Washington Post and ProPublica. Full
story here. Highlights:
As Geithner and the New York Fed worked to solve narrow mechanical
issues in the derivatives market, they missed clear signs of a catastrophe
in the making. When the housing market collapsed, derivatives stoked the
fires that ignited inside some of the biggest banking companies. The
firms' failure to assess an array of risks they were taking has emerged as
a key element in the multitrillion-dollar meltdown of the global financial
system.
The documents show that his reliance on industry assureances that the
system was "safe and sound" played a key role in his failure to
assess the mounting crisis.
Although Geithner repeatedly raised concerns about the failure of banks
to understand their risks, including those taken through derivatives, he
and the Federal Reserve system did not act with enough force to blunt the
troubles that ensued. That was largely because he and other regulators
relied too much on assurances from senior banking executives that their
firms were safe and sound, according to interviews and a review of
documents by The Washington Post and the nonprofit journalism organization
ProPublica.
A confidential review ordered by Geithner in 2006 found that banking
companies could not properly assess their exposure to a severe economic
downturn and were relying on the "intuition" of banking
executives rather than hard quantitative analysis, according to interviews
with Fed officials and a little-noticed audit by the Government
Accountability Office. The Fed did not use key enforcement tools until
later, after the credit crisis erupted, according to its records and
interviews.
His lack of foresight on the dangerous "derivatives market"
also soured his chances at preventing the disaster-in-waiting.
When he arrived at the New York Fed in fall 2003, the derivatives
market had begun to soar. One type of derivative known as a credit-default
swap is a contract that operates much like insurance for complex financial
transactions. They greatly enhanced Wall Street's ability to package
mortgages into exotic securities that could be resold to investors. That,
in turn, fueled the housing bubble by expanding the supply of money for
home loans.
But by 2005 the paperwork for derivatives contracts was swamping the
back offices of big financial firms. Stacks of documents sat unattended.
The archaic system was not only bad for business, it impeded the market
from properly pricing deals. "They didn't know what their positions
were," Geithner said in the interview. "This was a huge
collective-action problem."
Plus:
Records and interviews show that Geithner and his colleagues did not
employ some of the harsher tools at their disposal to bring the banks into
line. From 2006 through the start of the credit crisis in the summer of
2007, they brought no formal enforcement actions against any large
institution for substandard risk-management practices. The Fed also did
not use its confidential process during that period to downgrade any large
bank company's risk rating, according to two people familiar with the
process, a step that could have triggered costly consequences for the
firms.
-John Byrne
This entry was posted on Friday, April
3rd, 2009 at 7:51 am and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS
2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback
from your own site.
8 Responses to “Documents show Geithner's failures to
foresee financial crisis at New York Fed”
Please !! We're not all the gullible idiots you hope. Geithner was one of
the key players in pulling-off this fraud. As the President of The New York
Federal Reserve Bank, Geithner was calling for a Global Money Authority to
deal with the world's financial crisis. He was involved with the structuring
of the TARP bailout with Bernanke and Paulson. He KNEW of the TARP provision
for the Federal Reserve Bank to pay interest on deposits - a move that has
made it more 'financially attractive' for Banks to put their bailout funds
'on deposit' rather than releasing them as much needed loans to jump-start
the economy. As a Federal Reserve (Rothschild) pawn, Geithner is pushing the
Basel II regulations that mandated capital requirements for all Banks - the
main reason for the crisis in the first place. The B.I.S. (Rothschild Bank)
has the ability to loosen the accounting rules and re-start the global
economy but it is not in their interests to do so. THEY WANT COLLAPSE SO
THAT THEY CAN RECEIVE A MANDATE FOR GLOBAL FINANCIAL CONTROLS AND A SINGLE
GLOBAL CURRENCY. After all, why have numerous Central Banks and currencies
when you can consolidate into one (B.I.S.) and still maintain control ? Why
don't you report the truth ?
He was appointed because Obama's first choice Summers would would have
faced a lot of flack . Little Timmy is both Summers and Rubins flunky , you
can bet that Summers is the one making decisions behind the scenes , thats
why he's there . Both little Timmy Geithner and Larry Summers desperately
need to go .
Obama knew exactly what he was doing when he appointed him. Obama's the
darling of the bankers. Feel free to wag your finger at me while you give me
trillions too.
I hate to admit it but the first commenter is right on the money. The
down cycles enable the central bankers (and their controllers, the top
investment banks) to consolidate their power, eliminate competitors (e.g.
Bear Stearns, lehman, wamu, wachovia) while subsidizing themselves even
though they are the worst offenders and the most insolvent of all the
institutions. Of course the controllers of the system are always too big to
fail. Back in 1975 Citi (at the time known as National City Bank) was bailed
out during the real estate crisis. Of course they were much smaller in 1975,
but obviously too big too fail still.
Read the G-20 Communique from april 2nd. You will find their plans for a
global currency, global central bank with greater powers, global trade
regulator, global financial regulator, one set of global accounting
standards. Their solution is always more regulation, more power/control to
the culprits of the crisis (why listen to them? They were the ones who cread
this monster), and more international in nature. This system will serve only
their interests. It will be bad for americans. Bad for europe. Bad for the
true capitalists. The large corporations and international bankers are
really fraudsters, they pose as capitalists during the good times, but are
really all about big government (corporate socialism). This prevents
competition. Grants them monopoly powers.
Ever since the creation of the federal reserve we have not had free
market capitalism. The fed controls the quantity of money, the interest
rates, controls the government indirectly through its facilitation of
treasury financing (he who controls the purse strings, controls the person).
Seems to me that Geithner would be pissed off at having to deal with the
"authority" of having been assured, and then it turning out to
have been wrong. I wonder if he lost money. I'm also wondering, in this war
of the multi-millionaires, if some of them, perhaps this one, are ready to
"defect,?" They must be moving in and out of many phases of
distrust of each other, with everyone watching their own pocketbook. (I'm
searching around for a ray of hope.)
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and other G20 leaders have delivered a vital
pick-me-up for poor countries struggling to survive the economic crisis, but
much more is needed to ensure their long-term recovery, international aid
agency Oxfam said today.
Oxfam Australia Executive Director Andrew Hewett said the $1.4 trillion
pledged for global economic recovery was a welcome outcome, but that world
leaders must ensure that poor countries get their fair share.
"The $70 billion rescue package for the world's poorest countries will
provide a much needed lifeline to help them weather the economic storm.
However, it needs to be delivered quickly and it must come with no harmful
conditions attached. Poor people need to start seeing the benefits now,"
Mr Hewett said.
"We also welcome the reaffirmation of commitments to aid, but it's
vital that rich countries keep their promises.
"The Australian Government has previously committed to increasing its
aid budget from 0.3 per cent of national income to 0.5 per cent of national
income by 2015. The impact the global financial crisis is having on people in
developing countries means we need to see a concrete commitment to this aid
increase in the forthcoming May budget," he said.
Oxfam is concerned about how the G20 has placed the IMF at the centre of
this crisis. The fund has been given a blank cheque but its reform, to include
more representation from developing countries, remains no more than a promise.
"We hope that the old world of G8 meetings where developing countries
were just invited for a photo opportunity is dead. The G20's new world order
must be one that works for 192 countries not just eight or 20," Mr Hewett
said.
"Most disappointingly, the G20 failed to take concrete action to
tackle climate change. The current crisis provides perhaps the best
opportunity we will have to move to a global low carbon economy on the back of
recovery spending in rich countries, and so avoid catastrophic global warming.
But the G20 postponed the difficult decisions and missed a golden
opportunity," Mr Hewett said.
Oxfam has also welcomed the G20's promise to provide at least $350 billion
to reverse the dramatic decline in world trade. However, it's likely that only
$16 billion of this will be given to the poorest countries, who are feeling
the sharpest effect of the economic crisis.
"Oxfam is already seeing the devastating effect of the financial
crisis in developing countries. In Cambodia alone, 30 thousand garment workers
have been laid off and are returning to rural areas. The G20 meeting provided
a good start towards helping those who need it most. But it's clear there's
still a long way to go," Mr Hewett said.
For more information or to interview Andrew Hewett call Kate
Thwaites on 0407 515 55
Published: April 3 2009 03:00 | Last updated: April 3 2009 03:00
Some useful progress, but still a way to go. That must be the conclusion
of the Group of 20 summit in London. Gordon Brown, UK prime minister and
chairman of the meeting, set out a six-point plan to save the world. This
reflected some real achievements: a generous increase in funding for the
International Monetary Fund, a new issuance of special drawing rights and a
boost for trade finance. He sounded disappointingly thin on other key areas
- notably cleaning up banks and future fiscal stimulus. More detail would
have been reassuring.
Mr Brown cast the G20 meeting as part of a co-ordinated "fight back
against the global recession" and said the "global crisis requires
a global solution". We may doubt aspects of the solution, but the
crisis is undeniable. World growth is expected to decline this year for the
first time since the second world war. The World Trade Organisation expects
that trade will fall by 9 per cent - a worrying prospect.
It has also become clear that this crisis will not simply burn itself
out. Part of the genius of John Maynard Keynes was his explanation of how
economies could be caught in low growth traps. The longer the recession, the
greater the destruction of happiness. An extended downturn will also
increase the risk of the crisis expanding and deepening far beyond its
current spread. In new democracies, whether in Africa or central and eastern
Europe, this is a moment of genuine peril. In some poorer countries, it
could even lead to war and famine.
One particular risk is a potential financial crisis in emerging markets,
which could spread rapidly through a region. The prospect of this is
stronger the longer recovery is delayed. Hungary and Romania have already
sought help from the IMF. More could follow. It is essential that the Fund
has the resources to prevent local problems becoming international. A
financial crisis in eastern Europe, for example, would be miserable enough.
But it would transmit losses through banks across Europe. The world does not
need another subprime crisis.
The G20 pledge to increase the IMF's resources by $500bn is extremely
cheering. Some of the money had been allocated already. Nonetheless, it is
an important achievement and a welcome sign that national governments see
the role that such international institutions can play.
The proposed new issuance of $250bn of special drawing rights by the IMF
would increase the world's pool of reserve assets, freeing the hands of
emerging and developing economies. It, too, is an excellent idea which will
increase global liquidity.
The plan for $250bn over the next two years for trade finance is also
welcome. The proposal is larger than expected, but is mostly drawing
together existing programmes. It will be delivered through export credit
agencies, investment agencies and development banks.
There is little to report on fiscal policy. No one country's stimulus can
rescue the world from the mire; the US is not in a position to revive world
demand on its own - again. While deficit countries, such as the US and UK,
must expand demand, the surplus countries must do their part and expand
domestic consumption by more. The world needs to increase demand without
increasing its imbalances.
The communiqué offers little credible commitment to this end. Perhaps it
was unrealistic to expect much more. Arguments about stimulus generate much
more heat than light; even apparently miserly Germany has committed to a
large stimulus programme. The IMF has been invited to "assess regularly
. . . the global actions required" to "accelerate the return to
growth". If the IMF is robust, this might prove a useful mechanism for
asserting accountability.
The weakest part of the package is the financial element. Banks are still
gravely wounded. The financial crisis lit the fuse for this recession. It
may also prolong the fire; the crisis will last much longer if major
countries refuse to clean up their banks. Given the range of countries at
the G20, a one-size-fits-all bank rescue policy was never feasible. But the
absence of detail about a common approach to cleansing the banks of their
toxic assets is extremely disconcerting. Stating vague commitments only
serves to create fears that little substance lies behind the words.
The world is better for having held this summit. The possibility of
dangerous contagion is lower and useful progress has been made across a
range of issues, from greater transparency to SDR allocation. But leaders
must remember that the crisis, which started in the banking system, will not
be resolved until the banking system itself is fixed. That is where they
must turn their attention now.
The international act of posturing was pointless; because despite having
caused the problem, the political class had none of the requisite skills to
sort it out, says Simon Heffer.
By Simon Heffer
Last Updated: 6:26PM BST 03 Apr 2009
Barack Obama and Gordon Brown: Don't trust these
guys with your trillionsPhoto: PA
Those who thought that Dr Goebbels came to an end on a stretch of waste
ground in Berlin in 1945 have been forced to think again. The piece of
theatre that concluded
in London on Thursday was one of the great confidence tricks of our
lifetimes. Just getting the 20 most important heads of government on the
planet together in one place and not being unpleasant about each other was,
we must concede, something of an achievement. But it won't make a blind bit
of difference to the world's economy.
Nor, I imagine, will it have any effect on the result of the next general
election. In the months ahead, as thousands more people go on to the dole
every week, more businesses go under and confidence continues to seep out of
a system wrecked by politicians, few will link in their minds the words
"Gordon Brown" and "triumph". I have long thought that
our Prime Minister was around elevenpence ha'penny to the shilling. His
fantasy press conference at the end of the G20, with his grandiloquent (and
preposterous) claim to have founded a "new world order", confirmed
it.
As I wrote here a few weeks ago, this international act of posturing was
pointless; because despite having caused the problem, the political class
had none of the requisite skills to sort it out. It also seems that some
great issues have been fudged. Is the New World Order in favour of a new
fiscal stimulus or not? It pains me to say so, but I have been impressed by
the Germans (with the French hanging on to their coat-tails) holding out
against recklessly pumping money into the economy as Mr Obama and, to a
lesser extent, our own Government have done. Perhaps it is as well for them
that this summit was not held a couple of months later, for when the rioting
starts on mainland Europe with the advent of warm weather, and no
devaluation of the euro is possible to stop the haemorrhage of jobs, such
firm principles might be harder to maintain.
And what is this nonsense about an "agreement" to curb the
salaries of bankers? No one has yet satisfactorily explained to me how the
salaries of bankers, other than causing justifiable offence to shareholders
in failed banks, have anything to do with an economic crisis caused by a
conscious decision on behalf of several big governments to expand the supply
of money, and to stop proper regulation of banks. Of course, when a bunch of
politicians turns up for a party, none of them is going to suggest that
there is any political fault behind it, but the G20 took scapegoating
indecently far.
Capitalism is not too important to be left to capitalists. It has to be
left to them. Politicians simply do not understand. They are contaminated by
a desire to redistribute, and to regulate, to keep large constituencies of
non-productive voters happy. No politician has been more ruined by this, or
caused more ruin, than Mr Brown: and this week he was still at it. In his
drivelling speech on "morality" on Tuesday (the absurdity of which
would have been exceeded only by Lord Rumba of Rio delivering it) he
castigated people for taking risks. Capitalism is based on risk. The reward
for risk is profit. The punishment for bad risk should be bankruptcy. Mr
Brown wishes to avoid all such extremes, which is why he rails against
capitalists, and bails out pointless banks with our money. Let him bask in
his "triumph" while he can, for he is very near the end of the
plank.
Roosevelt's New Deal failed because it hindered people from helping
themselves. This welfarist event this week risks making the same mistake on
an international scale, with its £1 trillion slush fund for wrecked
economies. The politicians have left the stage, thank God. Now let us hope
they stay off it for as long as possible, and let the people who can sort
out this mess get on with doing so – whatever the risk entailed.
Why don't the anarchists get a dressing down?
Had I met anybody who admitted to “dressing down” this week to avoid
being targeted by “anarchists” in central London, I should have had them
court-martialled for cowardice in the face of the enemy. The order did
appear to have been obeyed by BBC reporters, for whenever I saw them yelling
into their microphones from the midst of the demonstrations they looked as
though they were about to start repairing their cars, or (in one
particularly unfortunate case) like a child molester on a day-release
scheme.
As for the “anarchists”, I do hope that the police and security
services will share all the pictures they have of them with the benefits
agencies. Who pays for these people to engage in psychopathic violence? We
do. Aren’t they supposed to be “available for work”? Of course. Are
they going to be summoned in for a chat with their job centre to discuss
what efforts they have made to relieve the taxpayer of this burden? I doubt
it.
Save the white suit to unseat Mr Brown
They are still in office, the Smiths, McNultys and the others who rule us
and who feel no compunction about leeching off the taxpayer, on the grounds
that their salaries do not reflect their importance.
Well, if you don’t like the pay, go and get a proper job instead. I
hear that Martin Bell is considering standing against Miss Smith at the next
election, but I think that would be unfortunate. She has a majority of only
2,716 and her next career as a lollipop lady looks to be on course without
any help from him.
I think Mr Bell, whose brand of sanctimony can be a little tiresome,
would be better deployed helping to split the vote in a seat with a slightly
harder target in it. This sleaze continues because Gordon Brown refuses to
sack the ministers who engage in it. Let Mr Bell take his white suit up to
Kirkcaldy instead.
G20 analysis: A new world order – built on shaky
foundations
The Scotsman
Published Date: 03 April 2009
By Gerri Peev
THERE was hype and hyperbole surrounding the "historic" agreement
reached at yesterday's G20 Summit in London.
But it is only when the fireworks fizzle out that the scorched earth beneath
them can truly be assessed.
Talk of "green shoots" was already sweeping through the venue in
east London.
However, early foliage has a habit of being wiped out by late frosts. World
markets rallied amid the largely positive coverage of the summit. But this was
before the ink had dried, let alone before the appendices to the communiqué
had been released.
Yesterday's deal did have some substance – but not enough on the key issues
that threaten to continue to undermine world markets.
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev was right when he declared that Prime
Minister Gordon Brown "dedicated all his heart" to the declaration.
But it was always going to be impossible to get 20 world leaders to agree all
their cash for the deal really to make an immediate impact.
Overall, it was a public relations triumph for Mr Brown. He was praised by
world leaders, including man-of-the-moment Barack Obama, and none of the
threatened strops by the French came to fruition.
There was also hope offered for struggling eastern and central European
economies. The complicated-sounding "Special Drawing Rights" for the
International Monetary Fund will inject desperately needed funds into fledging
countries.
More importantly, it will also mean that the burden does not immediately fall
on the "big" economies, such as America and the UK. Stabilising
smaller countries now will save more money in the long run.
China will be a much more significant contributor to the IMF, but for this
Beijing will expect to flex more muscle in the organisation.
This perhaps underscores the changing nature of the "new world
order", with America and the West losing influence to their eastern
counterparts.
There was also progress on getting international agreement about tax havens,
with the list of "rogue" states refusing to cough up their details
halved from six to three in just one day. But a much larger "grey"
list of tax havens still exists, with countries such as Switzerland continuing
to employ stalling tactics.
Nations that refuse to exchange tax information could in the future supposedly
face "tough" sanctions, including the withdrawal of financing by the
World Bank or International Monetary Fund.
But there was not a penny of fresh fiscal stimulus pledged, despite this
initially being top of the priority list for the US and Britain. The term is
mentioned only once in the final communiqué.
There was also little substance on world trade and reducing protectionism.
Progress on this will be impossible without America's consent.
The $250 billion announced for world trade is not actual money being pumped in
by governments. It is a finance package, with just 40 per cent directly from
governments and the rest being raised from the private sector – although who
the investors will be has yet to be clarified. It is also split over two
years. But the former chancellor turned prime minister is famed for
double-counting money.
There was some modest progress on regulation, such as finally looking at
reining in hedge funds.
But the missing ingredient for a healthy economy was a plan for how to clear
up banks' dodgy toxic assets. And no economic powerhouse can be rebuilt
without first underpinning its shaky foundations: its banks.
The six key accords in summit's communiqué – and how they scored
FINANCIAL RESOLUTION
THERE were many soothing words about regulation, but few details.
The crunch issue of persuading banks to lend again will remain unresolved if
financial institutions do not have rules on how to ditch toxic assets – and
how to avoid another banking crisis.
For the first time, some hedge fund activities will be regulated. There was
support for more candid surveillance of economies and financial sectors and
credit agencies.
And there was a pledge to crack down on bankers' pay.
Effectiveness: 2/5
TAX HAVENS
GORDON Brown, the Prime Minister, has predicted the end of tax havens.
He had reason for confidence, as leaders pledged that countries that would not
co-operate with signing up to agreements on information-sharing would be named
and shamed.
By yesterday evening, the OECD had published a "blacklist" of
countries that were unwilling to sign up to the transparency code.
Initially, there were six countries on the list, but by last night just three
were left as Brunei, Guatemala and Malaysia hastily agreed to fall into line.
That left Costa Rica, the Philippines and Uruguay as "rogue" tax
states.
Effectiveness: 4/5
INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND
RESOURCES to the International Monetary Fund have been trebled to allow
emerging economies to draw on its cash to inject liquidity into their own
economies. Its funds have soared from $250 billion to $750 billion thanks to
the agreement at the summit.
An injection of $500 billion has been given to the fund to help developing
countries.
Meanwhile, an additional $250 billion will be made available in "Special
Drawing Rights", which is effectively an overdraft facility.
Officials privately say they are not expecting the IMF to need all the
resources, but the plan is designed to reassure struggling nations it will be
able to bail out any country in fear of going bust.
If smaller eastern and central European economies can be saved, it will save
bigger countries such as the UK and the US from having to bail them out.
The IMF will also sell some of its gold reserves, and give the money to the
poorest companies. The sale of gold will be done gradually rather than all at
once, to avoid depressing the boom in gold markets. In uncertain times, the
price of gold rockets as investors take their money out of "riskier"
vehicles.
Effectiveness: 3/5
Verdict: 3/5
FINANCIAL STIMULUS
FISCAL stimulus was what could perhaps be described as the "elephant in
the room".
This was what Britain and America had been pushing for, despite the best
efforts of their leaders to play down expectations on this front.
The communiqué promised that there would be an "unprecedented"
global fiscal expansion of $5 trillion, which it said would save or create
millions of jobs that would otherwise have been destroyed. Crucially, it is
not new money – but an aggregation of the additional spending programmes and
tax cuts already announced around the world for this year and next.
France and Germany had argued that the fiscal programmes already announced
should be given time to work before pumping more large sums into the world
economy.
However, Gordon Brown is trying to dress up the $1.1 trillion as evidence of
fiscal stimulus.
In fact, these are funds being made available to the International Monetary
Fund, rather than being injected immediately into world economies. China will
be a bigger contributor and will want greater voting rights for the privilege.
Effectiveness: 2/5
Rating: 2/5
WORLD TRADE
A PACKAGE worth $250 billion was agreed to boost world trade.
The communiqué pledges that world leaders "will ensure
availability" of this amount for the next two years, so the money will
not all be available immediately. There was also a commitment to working
towards the completion of the Doha trade round, which seeks to reach a deal on
protectionism, but crucially no timetable for this.
Countries also pledged not to devalue their own currencies to give themselves
an unfair advantage, while anti-protectionist measures were also condemned.
Effectiveness: 2/5
Rating: 2/5
ENVIRONMENT
THERE was disappointment last night about the lack of progress on the
environment. The communiqué agreed by world leaders tacked this on to the end
of their statement, and environmental campaigners said it smacked of an
afterthought.
No money was pledged for "green" initiatives, although this was one
of the areas of economic growth potential trumpeted by Barack Obama and Gordon
Brown. There are vague promises to "transition" more quickly to a
green economy and to "build a resilient, sustainable, and green
recovery", but no detail on how this would be done.
Green energy advocates called on “rich,” industrialized countries to pony
up the money to make the world less dependent on carbon and to subsidize the
efforts of underdeveloped countries to reduce emissions in a G-20 publication
distributed at a global economic summit Saturday.
Real action “relies on the rich, industrial countries demonstrating that
they are ready to take the lead on cutting greenhouse emissions and to invest in
building a low carbon economy,” wrote Camilla Toulmin, director of the
International Institute for Environmental Development.
“So far, this commitment has been more evident in rhetoric in practice,”
Toulmin continued. “Yet delivering this shift in investment, technology and
behavior change is not rocket science. Much of it depends on known
technology.”
It is hard to believe, but a majority of Americans
(including Christians and conservatives) seem oblivious to the fact that there
is a very real, very legitimate New World Order (NWO) unfolding. In the face of
overwhelming evidence, most Americans not only seem totally unaware of this
reality, they seem unwilling to even remotely entertain the notion.
On one hand, it is understandable that so many Americans would be ignorant of
the emerging New World Order. After all, the mainstream media refuses to report,
or even acknowledge, the NWO. Even “conservative” commentators and talk show
hosts such as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, or Joe Scarborough
refuse to discuss it. And when listeners call these respective programs, these
“conservative” hosts usually resort to insulting the caller as being some
kind of “conspiracy kook.” One host even railed that if anyone questions the
government line on 9/11, we should “lock them up and throw away the key.” So
much for freedom of speech!
This is an area–perhaps the central area–where liberals and conservatives
agree: they both show no patience or tolerance for anyone who believes that
global government (in any form) is evolving. One has to wonder how otherwise
intelligent and thoughtful people can be so brain dead when it comes to this
issue. It makes one wonder who is really pulling their strings, doesn’t it?
The list of notable personalities who have openly referenced or called for
some kind of global government or New World Order is extremely lengthy. Are all
these people “kooks” or “conspiracy nuts”? Why would world
leaders–including presidents, secretaries of state, and high government
officials; including the media, financial, and political elite–constantly
refer to something that doesn’t exist? Why would they write about, talk about,
or openly promote a New World Order, if there is no such thing?
Veritas-Pax Publishing unveils a bold plan to transform the United
Nations into a world body whose very structure is designed to foster the
global co-operation seen in the run-up to the G20 London Summit -- but
with one major difference. Under this plan, world leaders will unite for
regular face-to-face meetings to chart a better tomorrow before the
socio-economic challenges facing mankind erupt into the next crisis.
Huntington Station, New York (PRWeb UK) April 1, 2009 -- Kofi Annan
called for it. Now Ban Ki-moon, his successor as Secretary General of the
United Nations, has made UN reform his top priority. So far, not much has
happened.
'We at Veritas-Pax Publishing believe that after almost 20 years of
bickering, it's time to take action. The gathering of world leaders for
the G20 London Summit on April 2 provides the perfect opportunity to get
the ball rolling on the creation of the New Era of peace envisioned in The
7th Sense.' In the book, which offers insights into creating a kinder,
gentler world, Rev. Magnus details a plan to restructure the UN as the
United Nations Executive Council.
Under the new three-tiered body, the Security Council that has been at
the centre of so much division will be reined in -- and its veto rights
removed -- as an important step in fostering the spirit of co-operation
needed to create a better world for the common good. Under this plan, the
Security Council will report to the United Nations Executive Council,
which, as its name suggests, will have the executive powers necessary to
deliver, in the words of Mr. Ban, the "concrete results in making
people's lives safer, healthier, more prosperous and free from fear and
injustice."
'Our model for UN reform places emphasis on the "United" in
United Nations through regular face-to-face meetings. The Executive
Council membership is divided into three tiers':
First tier: Manned by a handful of people, mostly elder statesmen
with name and track-record recognition, who will run the ongoing
affairs of the council and meet on a weekly or bi-weekly basis.
Second Tier: Leaders of the G20 countries, who will meet monthly --
in person at least six times a year.
Third Tier: Leaders of the remaining member states of the UN, who
will meet in person at least four times a year.
'Under our model, no longer will the United Nations provide a forum for
the ideological quarrels and the grandstanding that have sometimes
crippled the current world body. If we are to have peace in this world, we
need a group whose members are united, one that exists to pursue common
goals and ideals for the betterment of all.'
'For more information on the United Nations Executive Council, we invite
you to visit our website at http://www.theunitednationsexecutivecouncil.org/
The public is invited to write to members of the G20 and let them know
that the Executive Council is what's needed to take mankind forward into
the New Era where peace is the order of the day.'
Media contact:
Rev. Magnus
Phone number: 1-516-795-0606
International power broker Henry Kissinger -- who also happens to be Tim Geithner's first employer out of college -- said in a 2007 interview with Charlie Rose that "we're at a moment when the international system is in a period of change like we haven't seen for several hundred years."
And what's changing? Former President of the World Bank James Wolfensohn is more specific:
You will have a 22 times growth [in developing countries like Brazil, Russia, India, China, and Mexico] between now and the year 2050. And the current rich countries will grow maybe two-and-a half times. This is not just ... a modest statistical change. This is a change in terms of quantum and in terms of importance.
A new world order is emerging. What will be changing?
The current world order
The Group of Seven (G-7) -- a meeting of finance ministers from the United States, Japan, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, Canada, and France -- has been at the center of power in international affairs for more than three decades. The Brookings Institute calls their semi-annual meetings ''the preeminent forum of the global governance system for the world economy.''
From 1965 to 2002, G-7 countries were responsible for approximately two-thirds of global economic output. Their majority economic might, along with the military supremacy of the NATO alliance, allows the G-7 to dominate international institutions such as the International Monetary Fund, World Bank, Bank of International Settlements, Financial Stability Forum, and others.
These institutions craft policies that set the standards and practices for international finance -- in effect, the rules of the game. These are rules that any country, company, or bank must follow if they want to do business with the biggest game in town.
But alas ...
The G-7 is quickly losing its grip on power and its ability to effectively govern the world financial system. Soon, it will no longer the biggest game in town.
Emerging-market economies have now caught up with G-7 nations, and they are growing at such a rapid rate that by 2050, Wolfensohn estimates the current G-7 countries will account for only 25% of all world output. With this in mind, the G7 invited the finance ministers of developing economies to a summit in 1999.
This forum became known as the G-20. All the usual emerging-market suspects were present, including China, India, Brazil, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, and Indonesia. The first-ever G-20 heads of state summit was held last November in Washington, D.C., with the goal of formulating a new international financial regulatory regime in order to stabilize the financial system. Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh called the summit "a clear indication that the balance of power is shifting in favor of the emerging economies."
The G-20 meets again in London on April 2, and negotiations are currently under way discussing issues such as corporate governance, regulatory standards, capital ratio requirements -- in short, the rules of the new world order. With such massive geopolitical power shift under way, it's easy to understand part of the reason why volatility is at record levels all over the world. Many investors are not sure how this period of change will shake out.
The only thing we have to fear...
But savvy American investors do not need to fear this global power shift, nor the dawn of the Chinese century. Many U.S. companies will benefit by expanding their international market share, and U.S. investors will profit by directly owning stocks in foreign companies. By positioning your portfolio, you can profit alongside them.
For example, the technology to tackle some of China's pressing environmental problems will come from American companies like General Electric (NYSE: GE) and Fuel Tech (Nasdaq: FTEK). Health-care product makers such as Johnson & Johnson (NYSE: JNJ) will see their sales increase as the purchasing power of the world's most populous countries rise rapidly, creating more demand for household items. Both Apple and Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) currently derive more than 40% of their revenue from outside the United States.
And while American companies with an expanding international presence can be attractive investments, the companies headquartered in emerging economies offer an even bigger potential for way bigger growth. Widely followed stocks such as Chinese Internet search engine Baidu.com (Nasdaq: BIDU), Brazilian oil producer Petrobras (NYSE: PBR), and Indian automaker Tata Motors (NYSE: TTM) are benefitting tremendously from the rise of their respective economies.
And the upside potential is even bigger for international stocks that aren't widely followed. At Motley Fool Global Gains, we are always finding new, under the radar international companies poised to grow. Our team travels the world to talk with some of the most innovate entrepreneurs, business leaders, and managers operating in emerging markets. You can see our top international picks for new money with a 30-day free trial.
Editor’s note: Is there something the City of London and the lords of
the G20 don’t want recorded?
The security operation at this week’s G20 summit was thrown into chaos last
night when it emerged that the entire network of central London’s wireless
CCTV cameras will have to be turned off because of a legal ruling.
The Department for Transport (DfT) has ruled that Westminster council’s mobile
road cameras - a third of the authority’s CCTV network - “do not fully meet
the resolution standards required” and must be switched off by midnight
tomorrow.
The blackout begins on the eve of the summit, when world leaders arrive in
the capital and protesters take to the streets.
The council only discovered last week that images from its newly installed £15m
traffic cameras do not meet the quality required under the Traffic Management
Act, which comes into force on 1 April.
Yesterday's reports of a foiled "terrorist plot" in
relation to the G20 protests in London have been scaled back after it was
revealed that the house raided by police contained only plastic guns and
fireworks.
"The three men, aged 25, 19 and 16, and two women, both 20,
all live in Plymouth and the surrounding area," reported
The Guardian.
"They are political activists unaffiliated to any terrorist
organisation, and were arrested at addresses in Plymouth. They are being held
under terrorism legislation. The explosive devices were made from simple
fireworks, police said."
The police have also said that they recovered "allegedly
extremist materials", without further expanding on what they might be.
"At a press conference at Crownhill police station in
Plymouth, Assistant Chief Constable Paul Netherton said the investigation was
sparked when a 25-year-old man was arrested for spray-painting on a wall in
Plymouth city centre - but would not comment on the nature of the
graffiti," reported
the Press Association.
It has since come to light that the graffiti read 'Antifa',
which is the name of an anti-racist movement that advocates the use of violence
against extreme right-wing groups.
The youths, who were initially arrested on drug charges, are now
being held under the terrorism act.
Meanwhile, fresh reports have emerged alleging that anarchists
are planning to pose as peaceful protesters as a cover to seed chaos in the
capital.
Hundreds of activists are hoping to fool police by pretending to
be part of legitimate demonstrations, before breaking off and storming city
banks, according to the London
Evening Standard which says it infiltrated an anarchist leaders
meeting yesterday.
Rather bizarrely, it has also been revealed an entire network of
central London's wireless CCTV
cameras will be turned off during the protests because they have
been deemed to be illegal.
Gilbert Reilhac and Lucien Libert Reuters
Friday, April 3, 2009
Riot police clashed with hundreds of protesters on Thursday ahead of a NATO
summit of world leaders, firing repeated rounds of tear gas and rubber bullets
to try to disperse the crowds.
About 200 youths were arrested and police say they fear there could be much
more violence over the next two days both in France and nearby Germany, which
are co-hosting 60th anniversary celebrations for the military alliance.
More than 500 demonstrators tried to converge on the center of the French
city of Strasbourg in a spontaneous protest during the afternoon, their numbers
swelled by disaffected youths from the surrounding suburbs.
They smashed windows, vandalized cars and barricaded a street before being
pushed back out of the city by police.
At one point, rioters charged a military vehicle that happened to cross
their path, with a masked youth hurling a pole through the windshield.
One of the occupants, who was in uniform, drew his gun and pointed it
toward the sky, giving the driver time to speed off.
Organizers of the anti-NATO movement, which has set up camp just outside
Strasbourg, condemned the violence.
While the police stood off the hardcore anarchists smashing up the windows
of the Royal Bank of Scotland, riot squads were ordered to wade into the
“climate camp” protesters, a few streets away, and “kettle” them into
a very confined space.
The police use this tactic to effectively wear down peaceful demonstrators,
thus significantly halting the protest. These scenes were not shown on the
major news networks.
Government Decides Who Protests At G20: Violent anarchists allowed to smash
up buildings despite announcing target in advance, yet anti-poverty group barred
from protesting
The British authorities seemed to have little
problem with allowing a group of violent black bloc anarchists smash up the RBS
building while provoking police yesterday, despite the group announcing their
target in advance, yet a legitimate anti-poverty organization has had its
“accreditation” to protest at the G20 removed on the orders of Downing
Street.
This once again underscores the completely
undemocratic power of the government to decide who is allowed to protest against
them and who is not. When you have to get permission from the government to
exercise a God-given right, as in China or Russia, then we know we are already
living in a police state. The freedom to protest is not one that has to be
“accredited” by the state, a license to protest as it were, it is an innate
human right.
Apparently, if you wear black hoods and
scarves, smash up private property and provoke police, then that’s absolutely
fine and you’ll be left largely untouched. But God forbid if you’re a middle
of the road anti-poverty group that just wants to peaceably march down the
street.
“An anti-poverty group expressed
“outrage” after its accreditation to attend Thursday’s G20 summit was
suddenly withdrawn on Wednesday,” reports
the Telegraph.
“The World Development Movement said it had
no idea why the decision was taken but claimed it was on the orders of 10
Downing Street.”
“The group, which was part of last weekend’s huge (and
peaceful - ed) Put People First Alliance which held a rally in London, said the
Foreign Office received a note from 10 Downing Street telling it to revoke the
accreditation.”
Benedict Southworth, the group’s director, said that the
decision was part of the government’s plan to “stage-manage events and
prevent voices of dissent and disagreement being heard.”
The black bloc anarchist assault on the Royal Bank of
Scotland building yesterday certainly had an air of being stage-managed. The
target was announced in advance, the authorities knew that the building was a
prime target, and yet it was the only one in the street not boarded up. A cafe
across the street was boarded up and yet the RBS building was left completely
vulnerable to attack.
Stage-managed? Press photographers outnumber anarchists as the RBS siege is
perfectly “produced” for a live television audience.
Cue a relatively small gaggle of black-bloc anarchists,
followed by an similarly sized press corps to photograph every angle of every
smashed window, and you have the makings of a stage-managed event to instantly
be consumed by the watching middle classes thus enlisting their support for a
police state crackdown. In this instance, the police stood back and let them do
pretty much whatever they liked, which is highly suspicious within itself, but
the week is far from over and a wider crackdown could ensue now that public
acquiescence has been garnered through repeated footage showing the hostility of
the anarchists.
We’re not saying for a minute that every anarchist group
is working at the behest of the authorities as provocateurs, nor that the
majority are not legitimate protesters expressing their right to free speech,
but as we have documented, this particular black bloc sect are at best
completely infiltrated by provocateurs who can routinely be relied upon to
provide the media with violent footage with which to demonize legitimate
protesters at every major global summit stretching back nearly two decades.
To emphasize our point that a lot of these people are
merely hired thugs, whenever someone asks them what they are actually proposing
to replace the evils of capitalism, they have no idea, as the video below
highlights.
Meanwhile, people who actually have a defined cause and
merely want to exercise their right to free speech as a public platform to draw
attention to the issue, and have already proven they are a peaceable group, are
barred from doing so by the government removing their “accreditation” to
protest.
Why are the authorities so keen on stifling peaceful
protesters while giving free reign to people who dress up like terrorists,
attack buildings and provoke cops? Whose interests do the violent actions of the
black bloc benefit? The interests of the general public in using free speech as
a means of political change? Or the interests of the authorities in providing
the perfect pretext with which to crush and outlaw that free speech?
You can’t overthrow the entire system by smashing one
bank and starting a bonfire. Real political change takes generations of
struggle, decades of building respected educational platforms, and a gargantuan
grass-roots movement focused on taking power on the local level and expanding
upwards. Throwing a brick through a window isn’t going to achieve anything
other than making the vast majority of the general public despise you even more,
and support the very systems of power that you are supposedly opposing.
(ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW)
We have documented numerous different occasions where the
leadership of the black bloc anarchists were actually working with the
authorities to provide a pretext for a police state crackdown.
Following the SPP protests in Canada two years ago, Quebec
provincial authorities were forced to admit that three rock-wielding black
mask-wearing “anarchists” were in fact police infiltrators used to gather
information on protesters.
Video shows two of the provocateurs pick up rocks and try
to incite violence before they are outed as cops by legitimate demonstrators.
The two thugs then tried to slip behind police lines before their fellow
officers were forced to stage their arrest. Again, the fact that they were cops
in disguise was later admitted by authorities. Watch the video.
Alex Jones’ film Police State 2: The Takeover exposed how the black bloc
anarchists were completely infiltrated and provocateured by the authorities
during the violent 1999 WTO protests in Seattle.
The authorities declared a state of emergency, imposed curfews and resorted
to nothing short of police state tactics in response to a small minority of
hostile black bloc hooligans. Police allowed the black bloc to run riot in
downtown Seattle while they concentrated on preventing the movement of peaceful
protestors. The film presents clear evidence that the black bloc anarchist group
was actually controlled by the state and used to demonize peaceful protesters.
Watch the video below.
At the WTO protests in Genoa 2001 a protestor was killed after being shot in
the head and run over twice by a police vehicle. The Italian Carabinere also
later beat on peaceful protestors as they slept, and even tortured some, at the
Diaz School. It later emerged that the police fabricated evidence against the
protesters, claiming they were anarchist rioters, to justify their actions. Some
Carabiniere officials have since come forward to say they knew of infiltration
of the so called black bloc anarchists, and that fellow officers acted as agent
provocateurs.
At the Free Trade Area of Americas protests in Miami in late November 2003,
more provocateuring was evident. The United Steelworkers of America calling for
a congressional investigation, stated that the police intentionally caused
violence and arrested and charged hundreds of peaceful protestors. The USWA
suggested that billions of dollars supposedly slated for Iraq reconstruction
funds are actually being used to subsidize “homeland repression” in America.
The leadership of the black bloc has been completely usurped by the
authorities and anyone who still professes to be a member of the group is either
supremely naive or completely stupid. To dress up like terrorists, all in black
with ski masks and bandanas (like the police) immediately sends out a negative
message to the watching public and demonizes legitimate protesters.
More violence is expected throughout the rest of the week in London and if
the police are ordered to institute a brutal crackdown on peaceful demonstrators
then we can thank the black bloc anarchists, both the provocateurs and the
useful idiots who ape their violence, for providing them with the perfect
pretext to do so.
Peter Power, the “crisis management expert” who ran drills of the very
events of the London bombings on the morning of 7/7 as they were happening,
told the BBC that some companies used the shut down of the city on Wednesday
as a dress rehearsal for an influenza pandemic.
The State of New York Division of Cemeteries has sent out
“Mass Fatality forms” to cemeteries in that state to collect data about
their ability to deal with the high volume of casualties that would occur if
their were a flu pandemic or other disaster. The form letter that this office
received was dated April 4, 2007 [pdf],
so clearly preparation for such disasters has been ongoing for some time.
Along with other data, cemeterians were asked in this survey:
“Should a prolonged mass fatality disaster or pandemic
flu occur in your community would your cemetery be able to provide temporary
or permanent internment space for a significant number of disaster or flu
deaths in additional to your current burial services?”
Cemetery owners were also asked to detail the business structure
and capacity of their facilities, including proximity to roads, train lines and
airfields. The Division of Cemeteries requested data to calculate the number of
acres that could be made available “at 950 graves per acre.”
It is clear that emergency and disaster forces are being
mobilized at the state and federal level. There is no data to predict what
disasters could come– forces of nature, false-flag attacks, biological
attacks/ flu outbreaks, quarantines etc. However, a pattern of data including
news items, reports, photos and tips have all pointed to an incremental gearing
up for a cataclysmic situation that includes mass casualties.
Whether it is half a million plastic coffin liners videotaped at
a truck depot, or massive expansion at dozens of cemeteries across the country
or FEMA and Homeland Security agents preparing for an avian bird flu outbreak,
it is clear that government agencies are expecting something to happen and their
agencies are expanding in accordance.
As this site reported
yesterday, a number of incidents have demonstrated a federal
preoccupation with a mass casualty incident– and it started before 9/11 ever
happened.
The state of Colorado issued
an executive order in 2000 asserting its authority to bury victims
in mass graves and/or cremate bodies under emergency situations.
Jim Erickson of The Rocky Mountain News reported February 8,
2003 that:
The state of Colorado could seize antibiotics, cremate
disease-ridden corpses
and, under extreme circumstances, dig mass graves under executive orders
drafted for use in the event of a bioterrorism attack.
D.H.
Williams reported in February on an Indiana county municipal
official who received detailed requests from FEMA and the Department of Homeland
Security in regards to locations for mass graves, preparations for regional
refugees, preparations for economic collapse and budget cuts under a GM
collapse, as well as the locations of major installations, emergency assets and
more.
The official, speaking in this
recording, says that he became concerned about the intentions of the FEMA
and DHS officials after repeated meetings where scenarios were discussed that
included a bird flu outbreak as well as fires, floods and earthquakes.
The authorities that be have warned in their white papers that
United States could face rioting; financial collapse seems very possible; and
now it is clear that preparations include widespread death and emergency
conditions. What do they see coming?
A listener sent in photos of thousands of plastic coffin liners awaiting
pick-up for truck delivery somewhere in Alabama.
This unsettling site may well correspond with concerned reports
of mass graves being prepared at National
Memorial Cemetery in Phoenix, Arizona, at the Houston
National Cemetery as well as numerous other reports.
D.H.
Williams reported in February on an Indiana county municipal
official received detailed requests from FEMA and the Department of Homeland
Security in regards to locations for mass graves, preparations for regional
refugees, preparations for economic collapse and budget cuts under a GM
collapse, as well as the locations of major installations, emergency assets and
more.
The official, heard in the video below, says that he became
concerned about the intentions of of the FEMA and DHS officials, whose scenarios
apparently included a potential bird flu outbreak, alongside fires, floods and
earthquakes.
While it is certainly true that cemeteries undergo routine
expansions and utilize pre-made burial sites, concerns have grown over FEMA
preparations for large numbers of death under various crises.
We have also received reports about questionnaires, such as this
one [pdf linked] from the New York State Division of Cemeteries
issued in 2007, which solicits details about the capability of individual
cemeteries to deal with "mass fatality or pandemic situations."
"Should a prolonged mass fatality disaster or
pandemic flu occur in your community would your cemetery be able to provide
temporary or permanent internment space for a significant number of disaster
or flu deaths in additional to your current burial services?"
The state of Colorado issued
an executive order in 2000 asserting its authority to bury victims
in mass graves and/or cremate bodies under emergency situations. Jim Erickson of
The Rocky Mountain News reported February 8, 2003 that:
The state of Colorado could seize antibiotics, cremate
disease-ridden corpses
and, under extreme circumstances, dig mass graves under executive orders
drafted for use in the event of a bioterrorism attack.
-Caveat Lector-
http://www.insidedenver.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_1730732,00.html
State prepares for bioterrorism
Executive orders give governor additional powers
By Jim Erickson, Rocky Mountain News
February 8, 2003
The state of Colorado could seize antibiotics, cremate disease-ridden corpses
and, under extreme circumstances, dig mass graves under executive orders
drafted for use in the event of a bioterrorism attack.
Eight of the executive orders have been drafted since mid-2001 by the
Governor's Expert Emergency Epidemic Response Committee.
The 19-member panel advises Gov. Bill Owens on measures to prevent or reduce
the spread of disease after a bioterrorism attack. It was formed in 2000 -
well before the Sept. 11 attacks and the anthrax scares - as part of a law that
laid out the Colorado governor's powers during emergencies.Owens hasn't signed
any of the draft executive orders yet, and there's a good chance they'll never
be needed, said Mark Estock, bioterrorism program coordinator at the state
health department."We hope and pray that these cataclysmic events never come,"
Estock said.
The nightmare scenarios include planes flying over a stadium and releasing an
aerosolized germ, such as smallpox or plague, that infects thousands of people.
"But should they come, we're going to be able to say to the citizens of Colorado,
'We're ready, and this is what we're going to do.' "Other states have requested
copies of Colorado's orders to use as models, Estock said.
"They contacted us because they've heard we have a good statute in place, so I
think it's fair to say that Colorado is looked to as a leader in bioterrorism
preparedness," said Lt. Gov. Jane Norton. The former executive director of the
state health department chaired the epidemic-response committee until she took
over as lieutenant governor in January. Most of the eight draft executive
orders would temporarily suspend various state regulatory statutes so emergency
workers and health officials can act quickly after a bioterrorism event.
One draft order empowers the state to commandeer pharmaceuticals from
drugstores and warehouses after an attack.
The federal government would immediately send in antibiotics and other
medicines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National
Pharmaceutical Stockpile, but until that shipment arrived, Colorado health
workers would be forced to rely on local supplies.
"If it was the crop-duster-over-Coors Field scenario, we might want to get the
stuff right into the hands of the people going out to work with those patients,"
Estock said.
Three of the orders suspend licensing and pharmacy laws to allow emergency
responders to dispense drugs and immunize victims.
Another would allow hospital emergency rooms to close their doors to
bioterrorism victims when they reach capacity. Currently, federal law requires
hospitals to evaluate every patient who shows up at their emergency rooms.
After a bioterrorism or chemical attack, field decontamination and triage areas
might be set up near ground zero.
Victims would processed, sorted, then sent to assigned hospitals.
"In the event of an emergency, we may have to triage patients so they don't
overwhelm the hospitals," Estock said.
Under another draft executive order, mental health patients could be removed
from treatment facilities so their beds could be used by bioterrorism victims.
Another order would suspend statutes pertaining to death certificates and
burial practices.
"The funeral codes say that a dead body is to be handled by a funeral home and
that you must notify the next of kin and give preference to the religious
practices of the next of kin," said Deputy Attorney General Renny Fagan, a
member of the governor's advisory committee.
"But in a biological event or in a mass-casualty event, it may not be practical
to follow that law," Fagan said.
Infected corpses might have to be isolated at temporary morgues to prevent the
spread of disease, Estock said. In certain situations, mass cremations or
burials might be required.
"I don't want to come across as saying the state's going to make this decision
to do mass cremations and ruin the lives of families. That's certainly not the
intent," Estock said. "But it (the executive order) just gives us maximum
flexibility."
A ninth executive order, pertaining to quarantines, is being prepared.
State and local health officials already have statutory authority to quarantine
people with contagious diseases.
The draft executive order would extend those powers so they could be applied
"on a broader basis than usually occurs in public health," Fagan said. Colorado
health officials will test their ability to respond to a bioterrorist event
this summer in a statewide exercise, Estock said.
http://www.insidedenver.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_1730732,00.html
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/%22;>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
An Indiana county municipal official in the vicinity of Chicago reveals the
contents of his meetings with FEMA and the Department of Homeland Security. The
initial requests seem reasonable enough when FEMA asks the county officials to
prepare a Hazard Mitigation Plan to deal with flooding, fires, high winds and
tornadoes.
But as the required meetings and calls with FEMA and DHS continue over a two
year period their request become more unusual, raising suspicions of county
officials
Listen to the audio:
“We want to know every important thing in this county. We want to
know where police departments are. Where weapons are stored. Hazardous
material. Where can we land a helicopter. Where are the airports. How big a
plane can you land at the airport. Where are all the bridges. Where are all
the power stations. Where are all the generating stations.Where are all the
substations. They literally wanted to know where everything was. I’m sitting
there thinking man if there was ever martial law. This kind of information is
exactly the kind of stuff they are going to want. We’re just laying it all
out for them right there.”
During the legally mandated meetings held with FEMA and DHS different
disaster scenarios were reveled to county officials:
• In late December 2008 municipal officials were invited to Indianapolis
for a briefing on the state of Indiana. There were told if industry were to
collapse for example GM going bankrupt resulting in mass unemployment a
depression would soon follow and municipalities could expect to loose 40% of
their funds.
• Every county in the nation would be required to prepare a Hazard
Mitigation Plan.
• The county should prepare a plan to vaccinate the entire population within
48 hours and practice the plan several times.
• FEMA inquired to where mass graves could be placed in the county and would
they accept bodies from elsewhere.
• The sheriff’s department via the state sheriff association was told that
no .223 ammunition rounds would be available as the military would be
purchasing all stocks.
• The county was asked to make plans for “hardening” of police and fire
stations, putting in hardened bunker type buildings around town.
• The county was asked to make plans for the possibility of up to 400,000
refugees from Chicago.
A usually quiet U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Cemetery, has been
unusually active lately. The National Memorial Cemetery of Arizona is a
beautiful 225 acre facility located in Phoenix.
For the past 30-45 days in the early hours of the morning until sunset, a
massive construction operation has been underway. Major amounts of earth have
been excavated out about 9-10 feet deep and 600-1000 feet wide. There is
multiple locations on the property like this. From the satellite view there
appears to be more sections that have been covered with the concrete lids and
backfilled to look as if nothing is there. ABC rock is put in place under the
burial vaults for good drainage and solid bedding. This will help not
contaminate ground water sources from decomposition of human bodies.
The cleanliness of the heavy equipment operation and the large perfect cuts
of earth is im pressive. These Massive concrete boxes are transported from a
nearby storage yard on various privately owned flatbed semi-trucks, then
unloaded and put into place a half mile away at the actual mass grave site. They
are installed tight together side by side with no space in between.
An interview was conducted between my friend and a truck driver involved in
this operation. After beating around the bush for ten minutes, the driver
admitted “ I got paid a whole lot of money to speak good english.” Take it
for what it’s worth but that sounds suspect. The truck driver also admitted
“Each burial vault holds four caskets.”
I took note that if caskets were not used you could fit 40 bodies or more in
each one.
So if these were to hold four troops each and the truck driver did know what
he was talking about; this would mean that there are plans in advance for over
4000 U.S. soldiers deaths.
If these are not to contain caskets and only bodies are inserted there could
be room for over 40,000 civilians bodies.
Editor’s note: On February 11, 2009, D. H. Williams, writing for the
Daily Newscaster, reported on the revelations of an Indiana county municipal
official in the vicinity of Chicago who revealed how FEMA and DHS were
attempting to prepare “county officials to prepare a Hazard Mitigation Plan to
deal with flooding, fires, high winds and tornadoes.”
“FEMA inquired to where mass graves could be placed in the county and
would they accept bodies from elsewhere,” writes Williams.
For the financial crisis that has wiped out trillions in wealth, many have
felt the lash of public outrage.
Fannie and Freddie. The idiot-bankers. The AIG bonus babies. The Bush
Republicans and Barney Frank Democrats who bullied banks into making mortgages
to minorities who could not afford the houses they were moving into.
But the Big Kahuna has escaped.
The Federal Reserve.
“(T)he very people who devised the policies that produced the mess are now
posing as the wise public servants who will show us the way out,” writes
Thomas Woods in “Meltdown.”
Already in its sixth week on the New York Times best-seller list, this
eminently readable book traces the Fed’s role in every financial crisis since
this creature was spawned on Jekyl Island in 1913.
The “forgotten depression” of 1920-21 was caused by a huge increase in
the money supply for President Wilson’s war. When the Fed started to tighten
at war’s end, production fell 20 percent from mid-1920 to mid-1921, far more
than toda
Clinton
Advisor: Earth's Population Has Exceeded Limits Scientist calls for reduction in global population
Steve Watson Infowars.net
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
One of most influential scientists in the US government has said
that the Earth's population has exceeded the planet's "limits of
sustainability".
Dr Nina Fedoroff, the science and technology advisor to the US
secretary of state, currently Hillary Clinton, told the BBC's
"One Planet" program that "There are probably
already too many people on the planet."
"We need to continue to decrease the growth rate of the
global population; the planet can't support many more people," Fedoroff
said.
Fedoroff, a National Medal of Science laureate (America's
highest science award) has held the position as government advisor since 2007
and previously worked with Condoleezza Rice.
The professor of molecular biology also advocated the widespread
introduction of genetically modified foods, slamming those who have criticized
the unknown effects of GM as living in the past.
"We wouldn't think of going to our doctor and saying 'Treat me the way
doctors treated people in the 19th Century', and yet that's what we're demanding
in food production."
Fedoroff's comments echo those of other prominent scientists who
have thrown their weight behind the long term agenda to implement measures to
stem the population of the planet. This view is gaining ground with increased
pressure on governments to act over climate change as the justification.
Read more about the elite depopulation agenda in our previous
report here.
NEW YORK — The Freedom Tower is out. One World Trade Center is
in.
The agency that owns ground zero confirmed Thursday that the
signature skyscraper replacing the towers destroyed on Sept. 11 will be more
commonly known as One World Trade Center.
The building under construction at the site was named the
Freedom Tower in the first ground zero master plan. Officials at the time said
the tallest, most symbolic of five planned towers at the site would demonstrate
the country’s triumph over terrorism.
Port Authority of New York and New Jersey chairman Anthony
Coscia says the agency refers to the building as One World Trade Center. He says
it’s the building’s legal name and "the one that’s easiest for people
to identify with."
A train passes by tents at a homeless tent city
Friday in Sacramento, Calif. Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson announced
plans to shut down the tent city where about 200 homeless people are
staying.
All
Things Considered,March 27, 2009 · In
California, the city of Sacramento's desire to move scores of homeless people
out of a tent city is meeting some resistance.
Sacramento's tent city sits on the windy banks of the American River on the
northern edge of downtown. Some residents have scrounged up scrap wood to make
fences around their tents. Others, like Dave Cutch, a welder by trade, came upon
an idea he found in a Louis L'Amour novel.
"Old cowboys, when they would go out into the country to get the cows,
they would set up wind breaks like that — you know, with the
tumbleweeds," Cutch says. "But they would go around and collect the
tumbleweeds and they would stab a little stick in the ground to secure it."
Cutch came to California about seven months ago after running into a patch of
bad luck in Colorado. He is one of up to 200 homeless people camped here, in his
case for the past two months. He says it was quiet until the national media
discovered the tent city. Now you can count Crutch among those who have had
enough of the wind, the lack of sanitation and even nosey reporters.
"Tell me, what do we do?" Cutch asks. "I mean, you can go and
report all this stuff and you can go back to your house, be secure, which is
cool, you know you got a job. But the people who lost their homes like myself,
lost my job, what do we do? What do we do?"
Resistance To Plan
The sense of frustration and confusion are palpable here, especially since
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger unveiled a plan to eventually close this encampment
and shift about 150 people to the state fairgrounds across town.
"We cannot look away and pretend like this does not happen, because it
is happening and we must take action," Schwarzenegger said. "And that
is why we are doing all we can to do right by the people who are living in these
difficult circumstances in these difficult times."
Relocating the tent city's population will cost about $1 million, but it's
not clear how many residents are willing to move to the new shelter, especially
since it will remain open only through the end of June.
Tent-city resident Corvin Garlan, a former car salesman, wonders what happens
after that.
"People out here are not going to go anywhere where they are going to
lock you in," Garlan says. "Would you go anywhere where they are going
to turn the key and lock you in at night? No."
The job of convincing the skeptical tent-city residents to move is left up to
Tim Brown, director of Sacramento's homeless initiative. He has already started
the painstaking task of approaching people individually to try to persuade them
to leave.
"People get that there will be a place to keep your pet. You can store
your camping gear, not lose it. ... You and your partner can stay together in a
private space," Brown says. "People get that."
The City's Other Homeless
Homeless advocates are generally supportive of the governor's plan, but they
say there are another 1,200 homeless people on the streets of Sacramento not
living in the tent city.
"The concreteness of the tent city and the fact that you had so many
people in one spot — visibly homeless — spurred action," says Joan
Burke, spokeswoman for Loaves and Fishes, a local homeless charity. "But it
is duplicitous to say that this is going to solve the problem of homelessness in
Sacramento; 1,200 people don't fit into the 200 or so beds that are being
offered."
At the tent city, Dave Domon, a disabled house painter, says he hasn't
decided what he will do when the tent city is closed. His tent is on a wooden
foundation and he has graveled his small compound. He has a heater,
battery-powered TV and four bikes — too much stuff to take to a shelter.
"I'm not sure what's going to happen," Domon says. "I'd just
like to be left alone myself. I like it right here where I'm at. So I don't know
what's going to go on. I don't know. I'm not real happy about it."
But being left alone isn't in the cards. Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson says
the city won't sweep people out, but he has made it clear the tent city will be
closed within a month.
The sight of any U.S. president literally bowing to British
royalty is enough for many Americans to become outraged. However, the fact that
the latest to do so is America’s first black president made yesterday’s
exchange between Obama and the Queen of England even more troublesome.
Prior to meeting the Queen and her notoriously racist husband,
Prince Philip, Obama
announced that he “loves” her and that “in the imagination of people
throughout America” the queen stands for “decency” and “civility”.
How repugnantly ironic that the first black president of the so
called “free world” should refer to the most entrenched prejudiced and
elitist institution in Europe as an icon of “civility”!
How disgustingly deplorable that the president should call
“decent” a bloodline that has for centuries declared itself as God’s
appointed rulers over half of the planet, killing, torturing and maiming anyone
who crosses it in order to hold on to that mantle.
Traditional royal protocol dictates that men do a neck bow and
women do a slight curtsy — though a handshake is considered acceptable as long
as the queen offers her hand first, Politco reported.
When the President met the Queen in a room used to stage
audiences with foreign dignitaries, Obama bowed his head and quietly said to
her: “Thank you so much for having us” before turning to the Duke, bowing
once more and adding: “It’s a wonderful honour.”
Michelle Obama curtsied to the Queen, however, later on she was
treasonously caught inappropriately putting her hands on the glorious Monarch.
The London
Telegraph even issued a report on how the move was “a departure from what
is considered appropriate protocol when meeting the Queen.”
Perhaps the most revealing part of the meeting, however, came
from the mouth of Prince Philip.
Just as I had predicted 30 minutes previously on the Alex Jones
radio show, Philip could not contain his virulent xenophobia, even in front of
the cameras and the press.
In the small talk, the Queen and the Prince asked the President
and his wife about their grueling schedule since arriving late on Tuesday
evening.
“The time lag,” said the Queen
“You’re just trying to stay awake!” said Philip.
Then the President told the Royals: “I had breakfast with the Prime
Minister, I had meetings with the Chinese, the Russians, David Cameron…
“And I’m proud to say I did not nod off in one of the meetings.”
A guffawing Prince Philip then blurted out: “Can you tell the difference
between them?”
Apparently Barack Obama replied that he had no trouble telling them apart.
Then Philip, with a wave of his hand, directed the Obamas to
turn around for the camera, to which the president nervously replied “of
course”.
The Obamas and the Queen managed an astonishing set of
uncomfortable false smiles, while Philip didn’t even bother attempting it.
The foursome then joined other world leaders in sipping
champagne and devouring canapés, including mini Cornish pasties, smoked
quails’ eggs, foie gras and rolls of duck filled with melon.
Watch video of the cringe inducing exchange:
Prince Philip has made so many racist remarks in public, that
they literally fill
an entire book.
In 1984 he asked a Kenyan woman “You are a woman, aren’t
you?”.
In 1986 he told British students in China ”If you stay here
much longer, you will go home with slitty eyes.”
In 1998, during a tour of Papua New Guinea, he told another
British student, ”You managed not to get eaten then?”
While on a tour of a company near Edinburgh, Scotland, he saw a poorly wired
fuse box. “It looks as though it was put in by an Indian,” he remarked.
During a small town visit in Scotland, in a brief conversation with a driving
instructor, he asked, “How do you keep the natives off the booze long enough
to get them through the (road) test?”
In a 2002 visit to Australia, Prince Philip asked an Aborigine, “Still
throwing spears?”
Also, he once told a group of deaf children standing near a Jamaican steel
drum musician, “Deaf? If you are near there, no wonder you are deaf.”
The list goes on and on. While the media often laugh the remarks off as
“gaffes”, they take on a more serious nature when Philip’s background and
the organizations he is involved with are more carefully examined.
It is well
documented that Prince Philip’s sister, Sophia, was married to Christopher
of Hesse-Cassel, an SS colonel who named his eldest son Karl Adolf in Hitler’s
honour. Indeed, all four of Philip’s sisters married high-ranking Nazis. The
prospect of the former Nazis and Nazi sympathisers attending his 1947 wedding to
the future Queen of England meant he was allowed to invite only two guests.
Two years ago, more
revelations of Philip’s Nazi links emerged in a book that featured never
before published photographs of Philip aged 16 at the 1937 funeral of his elder
sister Cecile, flanked by relatives in SS and Brownshirt uniforms.
Another picture shows his youngest sister, Sophia, sitting
opposite Hitler at the wedding of Hermann and Emmy Goering. Philip was forced to
concede that his family found Hitler’s attempts to restore Germany’s power
and prestige ‘attractive’ and admitted they had ‘inhibitions about the
Jews’.
Philip also helped
start the World Wildlife Fund with former Nazi SS Officer Prince Bernhard of
the Netherlands, who is closely affiliated with the founders of the Bilderberg
international power group.
In the past, Philip has also attended the ultra secretive
ritualistic meeting of elites at Bohemian Grove, where he “stole the show”
with an “amusing but salty speech” in 1962, according to the Grove’s own
literature (pictured below).
Philip was also trained in the Hilter Youth. His belief in Nazi
ideology is clear when one looks at what
he has said on the subject of overpopulation.
In the foreword to his 1986 book If I Were an Animal, Prince
Philip wrote, “In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return
as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.”
Borrowing the idea from American scientists who pioneered the
field in the 1930’s, the Nazis advanced the pseudo-science of eugenics and
incorporated it into Adolf Hitler’s dream of the Aryan super-race. Bearing in
mind Philip’s Nazi connections, his views on the subject of overpopulation are
unsurprising, but shocking nonetheless.
Just last year he reiterated these views, announcing that there
are too many people in the world, and attacking
large families in a television interview, despite the fact that Prince
Philip himself has four children and eight grandchildren.
His son, Charles, the next King of England, has continued such
ideology as he tours the world in private jets lecturing about the impact of
climate change and how too many people are killing the planet.
The royals’ zeal to thin the population of undesirables has
little to do with so-called “green credentials,” as is fatuously argued by
the corporate media.
Skip to the bottom of this article for a vast selection of
similar quotations from Philip, all advocating culling the “surplus” human
population.
Racism within the Royal family is not restricted to Prince Philip, however.
In early 2005 Philip’s grandson, Prince Harry, was forced to
publicly apologise for donning
full Nazi regalia including a badge of the German Wehrmacht and a swastika
armband.
Pictures of Harry wearing the uniform were taken at a friend’s
birthday party in Wiltshire, which had the fancy dress theme “colonial and
native”.
Last year Harry was once again forced to issue an apology for
referring to an Asian army colleague as “our
little Paki friend” and joking with another that he “looks like a
raghead”, an offensive term for an Arab.
In 2004 a rather disgusting story emerged in the U.S. media
regarding Princess Michael of Kent, who is the wife of Queen Elizabeth’s first
cousin. Princess Michael’s father, Baron Gunther von Reibnitz, was also
exposed in the 1980s as a former Nazi party member and SS officer.
The Princess reportedly turned to a table of black New Yorkers
in a busy restaurant and chided them for being noisy, adding “You need to go
back to the colonies.”
When asked to explain her comments by one of the diners the
Princess reportedly said “I didn’t say go back to the colonies, I said,
Remember the colonies,” adding that “In the days of the colonies there were
rules that were very good.”
Just think about it. A German-born British aristocrat — whose
father was in the Nazi SS — in the United States telling African Americans who
have been here for centuries to “remember the colonies”? The
LA Times noted.
The late Queen mother was also said to be virulently racist by
close aids, last year Edward Stourton, the presenter of the BBC’s flagship
radio program Today, described her as “a
ghastly old bigot”.
According
to others, the Queen mother referred to black people as “nig-nogs” or
“blackamoors”, opposed all forms of immigration, and thought black Africans
incapable of running their own countries. She backed white minority rule in
Rhodesia and lamented that former apartheid leader P.W. Botha got bad press.
The Queen mother also criticised Lord Mountbatten, viceroy of India, “for
giving away the empire” and his wife because “her mother was half-Jewish”.
Despite all of this the media consistently referred to her the as
“nation’s favourite granny”.
But it gets worse…
Before the war began the Queen Mother was a supporter of making concessions
to Hitler and the Nazis, a feeling shared by a large number of British
aristocrats who admired the way Hitler was dealing with the Communists.
For some 50 years royal documents were held in vaults at Windsor Castle that
detailed the abdicated king Edward
VIII’s relations with Hitler and the Nazis. They included captured German
documents describing the Windsors’ meeting with Hitler in 1937 and plans to
restore Edward, the Duke of Windsor to the throne if the Nazis won the war. Some
of these documents still remain hidden from the public.
While many have described the Edward VIII and his wife as known
sympathisers of the Nazis and their policies, relatives of Wallis Simpson,
the American woman whom Edward had an affair with, and the reason for his
abdication, have suggested that in fact Edward was excommunicated by the rest of
the royal family because he wasn’t friendly enough with the Nazis.
Throughout the Twenties and Thirties, George V and George VI were steadfastly
opposed to conflict with their ancestral fatherland.
The modern royal family was founded in 1840 when Queen Victoria married
Albert of Saxe-Coburg, a Germany duchy, creating The House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha.
Such was the ill-feeling towards all things German during the First World War
that in 1917 Victoria’s grandson King George V - an honorary Field Marshal in
the German army - thought it prudent to renounce the German name and titles and
adopt that of Windsor, the name of a small town in the home counties of England.
Today many people in Britain suggest that all these facts are no long
relevant because the royal family has very little power. This is a huge myth.
The Queen is the head of state and as such she can simply replace the British
government at any time she chooses, should she wish to do so. The royal family
still owns vast swathes of land throughout Britain and the rest of the world,
and the Queen still presides as head of state in Canada and Australia.
******
Prince Philip, In His Own Words: We Need To ‘Cull’ The
Surplus Population
Here is a re-cap of some of the things “HIS ROYAL VIRUS”,
Prince Philip has said in public concerning “culling the population”
Reported by Deutsche Press Agentur (DPA), August, 1988.
In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly
virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.
Prince Philip, in his Foreward to If I Were an Animal; United Kingdom,
Robin Clark Ltd., 1986.
I just wonder what it would be like to be reincarnated in an animal whose
species had been so reduced in numbers than it was in danger of extinction. What
would be its feelings toward the human species whose population explosion had
denied it somewhere to exist…. I must confess that I am tempted to ask for
reincarnation as a particularly deadly virus.
Press conference at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. on the
occasion of the "Caring for Creation” conference of the North American
Conference on Religion and Ecology, May 18, 1990.
It is now apparent that the ecological pragmatism of the so-called pagan
religions, such as that of the American Indians, the Polynesians, and the
Australian Aborigines, was a great deal more realistic in terms of conservation
ethics than the more intellectual monotheistic philosophies of the revealed
religions.
Address on Receiving Honorary Degree from the University of Western Ontario,
Canada, July 1, 1983.
For example, the World Health Organization Project, designed to eradicate
malaria from Sri Lanka in the postwar years, achieved its purpose. But the
problem today is that Sri Lanka must feed three times as many mouths, find three
times as many jobs, provide three times the housing, energy, schools, hospitals
and land for settlement in order to maintain the same standards. Little wonder
the natural environment and wildlife in Sri Lanka has suffered. The fact [is]
… that the best-intentioned aid programs are at least partially responsible
for the problems.
Preface to Down to Earth by HRH Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, 1988,
p.|8.
I don’t claim to have any special interest in natural history, but as a boy
I was made aware of the annual fluctuations in the number of game animals and
the need to adjust the "cull” to the size of the surplus population.
Lecture to the European Council of International Schools. Montreaux,
Switzerland, Nov. 14, 1986.
The great difficulty about "life” is that we humans are part of it,
and it is therefore almost impossible to study objectively…. It therefore
tends to be anthropocentric and gives scant attention to the welfare of all the
other life-forms which share this planet with us.
…When the Bible says that man shall have "dominion” over God’s
creation, the choice is between understanding dominion as in "having power
over,” or dominion as "having responsibility for.”
“Conflict Between Instinct and Reason”
Fawley Foundation Lecture. Southampton University, Nov. 24, 1967.
The conflict between instinct and reason has reached a critical stage in
man’s affairs, largely because the explosion of facts has revealed the
instincts for what they are and at the same time it has undermined traditional
philosophies and ideologies. The explosion of facts has effectively altered
mankind’s physical and intellectual environment and when any environment
changes, the process of natural selection is brutal and merciless. "Adapt
or die” is as true today as it was in the beginning.
Introduction to "Exploitation of the Natural System” section of
Down to Earth by HRH Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, 1988.
It took about three and a half billion years for life on earth to reach the
state of complexity and diversity that our ancestors knew as recently as 200
years ago. It has only taken industrial and scientific man those 200 years to
put at risk the whole of the world’s natural system. It has been estimated
that by the year 2000, some 300,000 species of plants and animals will have
become extinct, and that the natural economy, upon which all life depends, will
have been seriously disrupted.
The paradox is that this will have been achieved with the best possible
intentions. The human population must be properly fed, human life must be
preserved and human existence must be made safer and more comfortable. All these
things are obviously highly desirable, but if their achievement means putting
the survival of future generations at risk, then there is a pressing obligation
on present generations to apply some measure of self-restraint.
Address to Edinburgh University Union, Nov. 24 1969.
We talk about over- and underdeveloped countries; I think a more exact
division might be between underdeveloped and overpopulated. The more people
there are, the more industry and more waste and the more sewage there is, and
therefore the more pollution.
The Fairfield Osborne Lecture, New York, Oct. 1 1980.
If the world pollution situation is not critical at the moment, it is as
certain as anything can be that the situation will become increasingly
intolerable within a very short time. The situation can be controlled, and even
reversed; but it demands cooperation on a scale and intensity beyond anything
achieved so far.
I realize that there are vital causes to be fought for, and I sympathize with
people who work up a passionate concern about the all too many examples of
inhumanity, injustice, and unfairness; but behind all this hangs a deadly cloud.
Still largely unnoticed and unrecognized, the process of destroying our natural
environment is gathering speed and momentum. If we fail to cope with the
challenge, the other problems will pale into insignificance.
Introduction to "The Population Factor” section of Down to Earth by
HRH Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, 1988.
What has been described as the "balance of nature” is simply
nature’s system of self-limitation. Fertility and breeding success create the
surpluses after allowing for the replacement of the losses. Predation, climatic
variation, disease, starvation–and in the case of the inappropriately named
Homo sapiens, wars and terrorism–are the principal means by which population
numbers are kept under some sort of control.
Viewed dispassionately, it must be obvious that the world’s human
population has grown to such a size that it is threatening its own habitat; and
it has already succeeded in causing the extinction of large numbers of wild
plant and animal species. Some have simply been killed off. Others have quietly
disappeared, as their habitats have been taken over or disturbed by human
activities.
Humans are the Greatest Threat to Survival
Interview with HRH Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, in People Dec. 21,
1981 titled "Vanishing Breeds Worry Prince Philip, But Not as Much as
Overpopulation.”
Q: What do you consider the leading threat to the environment?
A: Human population growth is probably the single most serious long-term
threat to survival. We’re in for a major disaster if it isn’t curbed–not
just for the natural world, but for the human world. The more people there are,
the more resources they’ll consume, the more pollution they’ll create, the
more fighting they will do. We have no option. If it isn’t controlled
voluntarily, it will be controlled involuntarily by an increase in disease,
starvation and war.
Address to the Joint Meeting of the All-Party Group on Population and
Development and the All-Party Conservation Committee in London, March 11, 1987.
I do believe … that human population pressure–the sheer number of people
on this planet–is the single most important cause of the degradation of the
natural environment, of the progressive extinction of wild species of plants and
animals, and of the destabilization of the world’s climatic and atmospheric
systems.
The simple fact is that the human population of the world is consuming
natural renewable resources faster than it can regenerate, and the process of
exploitation is causing even further damage. If this is already happening with a
population of 4 billion, I ask you to imagine what things will be like when the
population reaches six and then 10 billion…. All this has been made possible
by the industrial revolution and the scientific explosion and it is spread
around the world by the new economic religion of development.
Address at the Salford University Degree Ceremony, July 16, 1973.
There may be disagreements about the time scale, but in principle there can
be little doubt that the population cannot go on increasing indefinitely.
Resources presently being used will not last for ever and pollution in its
broadest sense, unless severely checked, is bound to increase with population
and industrial activity.
Address to All-Party Conservation Committee in London, Feb. 18, 1981.
I suspect that the single most important gift of progress to conservation has
been the development of human contraception techniques.
The survival of the “most important”
Interview with HRH Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, in People magazine,
Dec. 21, 1981 titled "Vanishing Breeds Worry Prince Philip, But Not as Much
as Overpopulation.
Q: Is birth control part of the solution?
A: Yes, but you can’t legislate these problems away. You’ve got to get
people to understand the need for it: the more important people, the ones who
have responsibilities have got to do it because they’re at the receiving end.
They’ve got to accept the measures.
The Chancellor’s Lecture, Salford University, June 4, 1982.
As long ago as 1798, Malthus explained what happens when the factors limiting
the increase in any population are removed. One of the factors noticed by Darwin
was that all species are capable of producing vastly greater populations than
can be sustained by existing resources; populations did not increase at the rate
at which they are capable was the basis for his theory of Evolution by Natural
Selection.
The relevance to natural selection of this capacity for overproduction is
that as each individual is slightly different to all the others it is probable
that under natural conditions those individuals which happen to be best adapted
to the prevailing circumstances have a better chance of survival. Well, so what?
Well, take a look at the figures for the human population of this world. One
hundred fifty years ago it stood at about 1,000 million or in common parlance
today, 1 billion. It then took about a 100 years to double to 2 billion. It took
30 years to add the third billion and 15 years to reach today’s total of 4.4
billion. With a present world average rate of growth of 1.8%, the total
population by the year 2000 will have increased to an estimated 6 billion and in
that and in subsequent years 100 million people will be added to the world
population each year. In fact it could be as much as 16 billion by 2045. As a
consequence the demand on resources of land alone will mean a third less farm
land available and the destruction of half of the present area of productive
tropical forest. Bearing in mind the constant reduction of non-renewable
resources, there is a strong possibility of growing scarcity and reduction of
standards. More people consume more resources. It is as simple as that; and
transferring resources and standards from the richer to the poorer countries can
only have a marginal effect in the face of this massive increase in the world
population.
Speech at the Margaret Pyke Memorial Trust Dinner in London, Dec. 14
1983.
So long as they [birth control methods] … remained taboo subjects the
chances of making any impression on the human population explosion were that
much more remote.
In the introduction to the IUCN Red Data Books which list all animals and
plants under threat of extinction, it says that virtually everywhere the major
threat to a wild species is loss of habitat to a rapidly increasing human
population requiring more space in order to build villages and cities and grow
more food. But starvation and poverty cannot be eradicated solely by increased
food and resources at the expense of what remains of the natural world. Any
increase in the provision of food and resources must be accompanied by a drastic
reduction in the rate of increase in the human population.
Address on Receiving Honorary Degree from the University of Western
Ontario, Canada, July 1, 1983.
The industrial revolution sparked the scientific revolution and brought in
its wake better public hygiene, better medical care and yet more efficient
agriculture. The consequence was a population explosion which still continues
today.
The sad fact is that, instead of the same number of people being very much
better off, more than twice as many people are just as badly off as they were
before. Unfortunately all this well-intentioned development has resulted in an
ecological disaster of immense proportions.
The Chancellor’s Lecture, Salford University, June 4, 1982.
The object of the WWF is to "conserve” the system as a whole; not to
prevent the killing of individual animals. Those who are concerned about their
conservation of nature accept that all species are prey to some other species.
They accept that most species produce a surplus that is capable of being culled
without in any way threatening the survival of the species as a whole.
A Question of Balance by HRH Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, Michael
Russel (Publishing) Ltd., 1982.
It is curious how many philosophers from Plato to Keynes’ time have
believed in and advocated the control of society by "philosopher kings.”
According to Plato, "its kings must be those who have shown the greatest
ability in philosophy,” but–realistically–he added, "and the greatest
aptitude for war.” Such people may exist in the imagination and occasionally
someone with the necessary qualities may briefly dominate the stage of history,
but it is a naive appreciation of human nature to imagine that such processed
paragons can be invested with the necessary powers and not be tempted to take
advantage of their situation.
The president of Mexico received one of the more unusual gifts given by the
Queen during an incoming state visit today - a copy of the classic dystopian
novel 1984.At Buckingham Palace, Felipe Calderon was presented with a first
edition of George Orwell’s nightmarish book, which tells of a totalitarian
regime and coined the concept Big Brother.
The Royal Household seeks guidance from the staff of incoming VIPs when
deciding what to offer during the official exchange of gifts.
A Palace spokeswoman said: “Apparently the president really admires George
Orwell.”
The 1949 book was boxed in leather by the bindery at Windsor.
Mr Calderon also received the traditional present given to guests - framed
photographs of the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh.
A collection of quotations from
elite figures, media heads, government officials, persons from history,
authors and more on the subject of the move toward a new world order under
a one world government and a reduced human population.
It is not my intention to doubt that the doctrine of the
Illuminati and the principles of Jacobinism had not spread in the United
States. On the contrary, no one is more satisfied of this fact than I am.
George Washington
"Today the path of total dictatorship in the United
States can be laid by strictly legal means, unseen and unheard by the
Congress, the President, or the people. Outwardly we have a Constitutional
government. We have operating within our government and political system,
another body representing another form of government - a bureaucratic
elite."
Senator William Jenner, 1954
"The Trilateral Commission is intended to be the
vehicle for multinational consolidation of the commercial and banking
interests by seizing control of the political government of the United
States. The Trilateral Commission represents a skillful, coordinated
effort to seize control and consolidate the four centers of power
political, monetary, intellectual and ecclesiastical. What the Trilateral
Commission intends is to create a worldwide economic power superior to the
political governments of the nationstates involved. As managers and
creators of the system, they will rule the future."
U.S. Senator Barry Goldwater in his l964 book: With No Apologies.
"The case for government by elites is
irrefutable."
Senator William Fulbright, Former chairman of the US Senate Foreign
Relations Committee, stated at a 1963 symposium entitled: The Elite and
the Electorate - Is Government by the People Possible?
"The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know,
that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the Government
ever since the days of Andrew Jackson."
A letter written by FDR to Colonel House, November 21st, l933
"The depression was the calculated 'shearing' of the
public by the World Money powers, triggered by the planned sudden shortage
of supply of call money in the New York money market....The One World
Government leaders and their ever close bankers have now acquired full
control of the money and credit machinery of the U.S. via the creation of
the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank."
Curtis Dall, FDR's son-in-law as quoted in his book, My Exploited
Father-in-Law
"The United States must stay involved in the world
and we must lead. Today there is a strange coalition at work in Washington
and across the country consisting of people on the political right and the
political left coming together to keep us from staying involved. Big labor
and liberal Democrats are joining some Republicans on the right in calling
for America to come home, (saying) we have done our part and that it's
time for others to do the heavy lifting on international leadership. And
we must not listen to that siren's call of protection and isolation.
"
Former President George Bush
Addressing Duke University Graduates May 17, 1998
USA Today May 29, 1998
"Rarely have Americans lived through so much change,
in so many ways, in so short a time. Quietly, but with gathering force,
the ground has shifted beneath our feet as we have moved into an
Information Age, a global economy, a truly new world."
President William Clinton State of the Union Address 1998
"...all of us here at the policy-making level have
had experience with directives...from the White House.... The substance of
them is that we shall use our grant-making power so as to alter our life
in the United States that we can be comfortably merged with the Soviet
Union."
H. Rowan Gaither, Jr., President - Ford Foundation (as told to Norman
Dodd, Congressional Reese Commission 1954)
"The New Deal is plainly an attempt to achieve a
working socialism and avert a social collapse in America; it is
extraordinarily parallel to the successive 'policies' and 'Plans' of the
Russian experiment. Americans shirk the word 'socialism', but what else
can one call it?"
H.G. Wells The New World Order 1939
"Ultimately, our objective is to welcome the Soviet
Union back into the world order. Perhaps the world order of the future
will truly be a family of nations."
President George Bush Texas A&M University 1989
"We will succeed in the Gulf. And when we do, the
world community will have sent an enduring warning to any dictator or
despot, present or future, who contemplates outlaw aggression. The world
can therefore seize this opportunity to fufill the long-held promise of a
new world order - where brutality will go unrewarded, and aggression will
meet collective resistance."
President George Bush State of the Union Address 1991
"Under Socialism you would not be allowed to be poor.
You would be forcibly fed, clothed, lodged, taught, and employed whether
you liked it or not. If it were discovered that you had not the character
and industry enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be
executed in a kindly manner. . . ." [This is compassionate
liberalism.]
Fabian Socialist Bernard Shaw in his Intelligent Woman's Guide to
Socialism and Capitalism, 1928.
"Since March 9, 1933, the United states has been in a
state of national emergency. A majority of the people of the United States
have their lives under emergency rule. For 40 years (now 72 years)
freedoms and governmental procedures, guaranteed by the Constitution have,
in varying degrees, been abridged by laws brought forth by states of
national emergency."
Senate Report 93-549 (1973).
"Even though it is quite true that any radical
eugenic policy will be for many years politically and psychologically
impossible, it will be important for UNESCO to see that the eugenic
problem is examined with the greatest care, and that the public mind is
informed of the issues at stake so that much that now is unthinkable may
at least become thinkable."
Sir Julian Huxley, first Director General of UNESCO, 1946-1948.
"The most merciful thing that the large family does
to one of its infant members is to kill it."
Margaret Sanger, outspoken atheist and socialist, founder of the Voluntary
Parenthood League in 1914, and responsible for opening the first birth
control clinic in the United States in New York City.
"We live in a dirty and dangerous world. There are
some things the general public does not need to know and shouldn't. I
believe democracy flourishes when the government can take legitimate steps
to keep its secrets, and when the press can decide whether to print what
it knows."
Katherine Graham, Washington Post publisher and CFR member.
"The world is governed by very different personages
from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes."
Benjamin Disraeli, first Prime Minister of England, in a novel he
published in 1844 called Coningsby, the New Generation
'They came first for the Communists...
but I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews...
but I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the Jews...
but I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the Unionists...
but I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics...
but I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me...and by that time...
there was no-one left to speak up for me.
- Rev. Martin Niemoller, commenting on events in Germany 1933-1939
"I reject the idea that humans are superior to other
life forms. . . Man is just an ape with an overly developed sense of
superiority."
-- Paul Watson, director of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society and a
founder of Greenpeace
"There is no such thing as an independent press in
America, unless it is in the country towns. You know it and I know it.
There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if
you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print.
"I am paid $150.00 a week for keeping my honest opinion out of the
paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for
doing similar things. If I should permit honest opinions to be printed in
one issue of my paper, like Othello, before twenty-four hours, my
occupation would be gone.
"The business of the New York journalist is to destroy truth; to
lie outright; to pervert; to vilify, to fawn at the feet of Mammon; to
sell his country and his race for his daily bread. We are the tools and
vessels for rich men behind the scenes. We are intellectual
prostitutes."
"We are going to impose our agenda on the coverage by dealing with
issues and subjects that we choose to deal with."
Richard M. Cohen, Senior Producer of CBS political news.
"In total, during the first eighty-eight years of this century,
almost 170 million men, women, and children have been shot, beaten,
tortured, knifed, burned, starved, frozen, crushed, or worked to death;
buried alive, drowned, hung, bombed, or killed in any other of the myriad
ways governments have inflicted death on unarmed, helpless citizens and
foreigners. The dead could conceivably be nearly 360 million people. It is
as though our species has been devastated by a modern Black Plague. And
indeed it has, but a plague of Power, not of germs."
Dr. R. J. Rummel, Death by Government.
"The people will be crushed under the burden of taxes, loan after
loan will be floated; after having drained the present, the State will
devour the future."
Fredric Bastiat
"Undersecretary of State Sumner Welles tonight called for the
early creation of an international organization of anti-Axis nations to
control the world during the period between the armistice at the end of
the present war and the setting up of a new world order on a permanent
basis."
Text of article in The Philadelphia Inquirer (June 1942)
"The statement went on to say that the spiritual teachings of
religion must become the foundation for the new world order and that
national sovereignty must be subordinate to the higher moral law of
God."
American Institute of Judaism, excerpt from article in The New York Times
(December 1942)
"There are some plain common-sense considerations applicable to
all these attempts at world planning. They can be briefly stated: 1. To
talk of blueprints for the future or building a world order is, if
properly understood, suggestive, but it is also dangerous. Societies grow
far more truly than they are built. A constitution for a new world order
is never like a blueprint for a skyscraper."
Norman Thomas, in his book What Is Our Destiny? (1944)
"The United Nations, he told an audience at Harvard University,
'has not been able--nor can it be able--to shape a new world order which
events so compellingly demand.' ... The new world order that will answer
economic, military, and political problems, he said, 'urgently requires, I
believe, that the United States take the leadership among all free peoples
to make the underlying concepts and aspirations of national sovereignty
truly meaningful through the federal approach."
Gov. Nelson Rockefeller of New York, in an article entitled
"Rockefeller Bids Free Lands Unite: Calls at Harvard for Drive to
Build New World Order" -- The New York Times (February 1962)
"He [President Nixon] spoke of the talks as a beginning, saying
nothing more about the prospects for future contacts and merely
reiterating the belief he brought to China that both nations share an
interest in peace and building 'a new world order."
Excerpt from an article in The New York Times (February 1972)
"If instant world government, Charter review, and a greatly
strengthened International Court do not provide the answers, what hope for
progress is there? The answer will not satisfy those who seek simple
solutions to complex problems, but it comes down essentially to this: The
hope for the foreseeable lies, not in building up a few ambitious central
institutions of universal membership and general jurisdiction as was
envisaged at the end of the last war, but rather in the much more
decentralized, disorderly and pragmatic process of inventing or adapting
institutions of limited jurisdiction and selected membership to deal with
specific problems on a case-by-case basis ... In short, the 'house of
world order' will have to be built from the bottom up rather than f rom
the top down. It will look like a great 'booming, buzzing confusion,' to
use William James' famous description of reality, but an end run around
national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more
than the old-fashioned frontal assault."
Richard N. Gardner, in Foreign Affairs (April 1974)
"The Final Act of the Uruguay Round, marking the conclusion of the
most ambitious trade negotiation of our century, will give birth - in
Morocco - to the World Trade Organization, the third pillar of the New
World Order, along with the United Nations and the International Monetary
Fund."
Part of full-page advertisement by the government of Morocco in The New
York Times (April 1994)
"The truth of the matter is that you do have those standby
provisions, and the statutory emergency plans are there whereby you could,
in the name of stopping terrorism, apprehend, invoke the military, and
arrest Americans and hold them in detention camps."
U.S. Representative Henry Gonzalez, August 29, 1994
"To keep global resource use within prudent limits while the poor
raise their living standards, affluent societies need to consume less.
Population, consumption, technology, development, and the environment are
linked in complex relationships that bear closely on human welfare in the
global neighbourhood. Their effective and equitable management calls for a
systemic, long-term, global approach guided by the principle of
sustainable development, which has been the central lesson from the
mounting ecological dangers of recent times. Its universal application is
a priority among the tasks of global governance."
United Nations Our Global Neighborhood 1995
"[E]ducation should aim not so much at acquisition of knowledge. .
. [today] there is less need to know the content of information. . . .
[There should be a] transformation of life in totality . . . [a] profound
commitment to social tasks. . . . Achievement of socialist countries . . .
have laid the foundation of a way of life which makes everyone understand
its [sic] individual relevance. . . [whereas capitalism] lays the
foundation of rivalry and aggression and encourages exaggerated
consumption, [making] man a slave of ambition and social status symbols. .
. [Lifelong learning promotes] equality of end result, and not merely of
opportunity . . . [and] fosters equality in terms of opinions,
aspirations, motivation, and so on. . . . There is a dilemma -- if
lifelong education were to be based on the aim of increasing the yield of
business enterprises and economic growth, it would merely serve to
establish a totalitarian, one-dimension society."
-- Foundations of Lifelong Education, a UNESCO publication in 1976.
"There does exist and has existed for a generation, an
international . . . network which operates, to some extent, in the way the
radical right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we
may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating
with the Communists, or any other groups and frequently does so. I know of
the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years
and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960s, to examine its papers
and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and
have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its
instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of
its policies . . . but in general my chief difference of opinion is that
it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is
significant enough to be known."
Professor Carroll Quigley, in his book Tragedy and Hope, 1966.
"A total world population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline
from present levels, would be ideal."
Ted Turner, in an interview with Audubon magazine.
"We in the press like to say we're honest brokers of information
and it's just not true. The press does have an agenda."
Bernard Goldberg, as quoted by Harry Stein in the June 13-19, 1992 TV
Guide.
"The real menace of our republic is this invisible government
which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy length over city, state and
nation. Like the octopus of real life, it operates under cover of a self
created screen....At the head of this octopus are the Rockefeller Standard
Oil interests and a small group of powerful banking houses generally
referred to as international bankers. The little coterie of powerful
international bankers virtually run the United States government for their
own selfish purposes. They practically control both political
parties."
New York City Mayor John F. Hylan, 1922
"Let me control a peoples currency and I care not who makes their
laws."
Meyer Nathaniel Rothschild in a speech to a gathering of world bankers
February 12, 1912. The following year, the USA subscribed to the
'services' of the newly incorporated Federal Reserve, headed by Mr.
Rothschild.
"We need a program of psychosurgery for political control of our
society. The purpose is physical control of the mind. Everyone who
deviates from the given norm can be surgically mutilated. The individual
may think that the most important reality is his own existence, but this
is only his personal point of view. . . Man does not have the right to
develop his own mind. . . . We must electronically control the brain.
Someday armies and generals will be controlled by electronic stimulation
of the brain."
Dr. Jose M.R. Delgado, Director of Neuropsychiatry, Yale University
Medical School, Congressional Record, No. 26, Vol. 118, February 24, 1974.
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution
now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major
means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the
New World Order."
From The National Educator, K.M. Heaton
"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But
under the name of "liberalism" they will adopt every fragment of
the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation,
without knowing how it happened." Norman Thomas, for many years U.S.
Socialist Presidential candidate.
"The time for absolute and exclusive sovereignty...has passed; its
theory was never matched by reality."
UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali, An Agenda for Peace, 1992.
"The world can therefore seize the opportunity [Persian Gulf
crisis] to fulfill the long-held promise of a New World Order where
diverse nations are drawn together in common cause to achieve the
universal aspirations of mankind."
George Herbert Walker Bush
"Naturally the common people don't want war: Neither in Russia,
nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But,
after all, IT IS THE LEADERS of the country who determine the policy and
it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a
democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist
dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the
bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is TELL THEM THEY
ARE BEING ATTACKED, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism
and exposing the country to danger. IT WORKS THE SAME IN ANY
COUNTRY."
Hermann Goering, President of the Reichstag, Nazi Party, and Luftwaffe
Commander in Chief
"We live in a dirty and dangerous world. There are some things the
general public does not need to know and shouldn't. I believe democracy
flourishes when the government can take legitimate steps to keep its
secrets, and when the press can decide whether to print what it
knows."
-- Katherine Graham, Washington Post publisher and Bilderberger
"In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all
states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty
wasn't such a great idea after all."
Strobe Talbot, President Clinton's Deputy Secretary of State, as quoted in
Time, July 20th, l992.
"In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a
deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve
overpopulation."
Reported by Deutsche Press Agentur (DPA), August, 1988.
"I just wonder what it would be like to be reincarnated in an
animal whose species had been so reduced in numbers than it was in danger
of extinction. What would be its feelings toward the human species whose
population explosion had denied it somewhere to exist.... I must confess
that I am tempted to ask for reincarnation as a particularly deadly
virus."
Prince Philip, in his Foreward to If I Were an Animal; United Kingdom,
Robin Clark Ltd., 1986.
"It is now apparent that the ecological pragmatism of the
so-called pagan religions, such as that of the American Indians, the
Polynesians, and the Australian Aborigines, was a great deal more
realistic in terms of conservation ethics than the more intellectual
monotheistic philosophies of the revealed religions."
Press conference at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. on the
occasion of the ``Caring for Creation'' conference of the North American
Conference on Religion and Ecology, May 18, 1990.
"I don't claim to have any special interest in natural history,
but as a boy I was made aware of the annual fluctuations in the number of
game animals and the need to adjust the 'cull' to the size of the surplus
population."
Preface to Down to Earth by HRH Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, 1988,
p.|8.
"This is a moment to seize. The kaleidoscope has been shaken, the
pieces are in flux, soon they will settle again. Before they do, let us
re-order this world around us."
Tony Blair, Tuesday, 2 October, 2001
"Other countries will not take lectures about the so-called new
world order from a British prime minister who cannot deliver basic public
services run by his own failing government."
Tony Blair, 5th January, 2002
"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time
Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our
meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty
years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the
world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those
years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march
towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an
intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national
auto-determination practiced in past centuries."
David Rockefeller, Baden-Baden, Germany 1991
"We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is
the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World
Order."
- David Rockefeller
"We have before us the opportunity to forge for ourselves and for
future generations a new world order, a world where the rule of law, not
the rule of the jungle, governs the conduct of nations. When we are
successful, and we will be, we have a real chance at this new world order,
an order in which a credible United Nations can use its peacekeeping role
to fulfill the promise and vision of the U.N.'s founders."
President George Bush, 1991
"No one will enter the New World Order unless he or she will make
a pledge to worship Lucifer. No one will enter the New Age unless he will
take a Luciferian Initiation."
David Spangler, Director of Planetary Initiative, United Nations
"Today, America would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los
Angeles to restore order. Tomorrow they will be grateful! This is
especially true if they were told that there were an outside threat from
beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence.
It is then that all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from
this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented
with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for
the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World
Government."
Dr. Henry Kissinger, Bilderberger Conference, Evians, France, 1991
President Obama is finalizing plans to move federal agents, equipment and
other resources to the border with Mexico to support Mexican President Felipe
Calderón’s campaign against violent drug cartels, according to U.S.
security officials.
In Obama’s first major domestic security initiative, administration
officials are expected to announce as early as this week a crackdown on the
supply of weapons and cash moving from the United States into Mexico that
helps sustain that country’s narco-traffickers, officials said.
The announcement sets the stage for Mexico City visits by three Cabinet
members, beginning Wednesday with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton
and followed next week by Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. and Homeland
Security Secretary Janet Napolitano.
Should President Obama have the power to shut down domestic Internet
traffic during a state of emergency?
Senators John Rockefeller (D-W. Va.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) think so.
On Wednesday they introduced a bill to establish the Office of the National
Cybersecurity Advisor—an arm of the executive branch that would have vast
power to monitor and control Internet traffic to protect against threats to
critical cyber infrastructure. That broad power is rattling some civil
libertarians.
The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 (PDF) gives the president the ability to
“declare a cybersecurity emergency” and shut down or limit Internet
traffic in any “critical” information network “in the interest of
national security.” The bill does not define a critical information network
or a cybersecurity emergency. That definition would be left to the president.
The bill does not only add to the power of the president. It also grants
the Secretary of Commerce “access to all relevant data concerning [critical]
networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy
restricting such access.” This means he or she can monitor or access any
data on private or public networks without regard to privacy laws.
Rockefeller made cybersecurity one of his key issues as a member of the
Senate intelligence committee, which he chaired until last year. He now heads
the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, which will take up this
bill.
The rebuilding of the World Trade Center site, already hobbled by years
of delays and infighting, is facing fresh problems as private developer
Larry Silverstein asks the government for crucial financial assistance,
according to people familiar with the matter.
The result would be that the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey,
the government entity that owns the site, would take on more of the risk
of the project at a time when the agency already faces budget restraints
to pursue its core transportation and infrastructure missions.
The Port Authority, eager to prevent the project from stalling, is
considering helping to finance at least one of Mr. Silverstein's planned
three office towers, according to people familiar with the matter. Mr.
Silverstein is requesting financing help on at least two of the three
towers. The Port Authority would require concessions from Mr. Silverstein,
including possibly giving up some of upside profits should the towers
succeed in the long term.
This is the same guy who wanted double his insurance policy's value after
the devastating 2001 attacks because each airplane impact, as he said, was
actually a separate act of terrorism.
And that's the Nice on some of the bad press surrounding
Silverstein ... Most know him best from his eternally
curious comment to PBS shortly after the collapse of WTC 7.
Is this a worthy use of tax dollars by the Port Authority?
Multiple people killed, hostages
taken in Binghamton, NY
The Raw Story
At 2:45 PM EST, CNN confirms reports that the gunman is dead. And early
reports indicate that he acted alone, although authorities are still checking
the building to make certan. Governor Paterson alluded to 12 or 13 killed
moments before in a press conference.
On MSNBC, a WNBF reporter claimed that a top police source says the death
toll could go as high as 15.
Conflicting media reports said either four, twelve or thirteen were killed
after a gunman disrupted a citizenship class being held at an immigration
services center in an upstate New York town.
"I speak for all of New York when I offer my prayers for the victims
and families of this tragedy," Gov. David Paterson said.
Latest
update from AFP: "A dozen or more may have died in the last two
hours," Bob Joseph, news director of local WNBF Radio in the town of
Binghamton, told CNN, quoting sources.
NBC News reports:
"NBC's Pete Williams cited city and state officials as saying that as
many [as] 13 people might have been killed. But Williams cautioned that the
information was very preliminary and may change because police were still
searching the building."
ABC News and Reuters are also reporting a dozen or thirteen dead.
"The suspect was described as an Asian male in his 20s, between 5-feet
8-inches and 6 feet tall, wearing a bright green nylon jacket and dark-rimmed
glasses," a Binghamton
newspaper reports. It also states, "Two people were taken from the
American Civic Association with their hands cuffed behind their back."
A CNN reporter observed that no has any idea if the suspects seen
handcuffed had anything to do with the shootings.
A gunman blocked the back door of an immigration services center with his
car Friday before walking through the front door firing, wounding at least
six people and taking as many as 41 hostage, officials said.
Two handguns were recovered at the scene, said a law enforcement official
who was not authorized to speak about details of an ongoing hostage response
and spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity.
At least four people were shot and dozens of others are being held
hostage by a gunman at the American Civic Center in Binghamton.
Victims were being taken to Lourdes Hospital in Binghamton and Wilson
Regional Medical Center in Johnson City, while sharp shooters from
Binghamton SWAT team were poised outside the building at 131 Front Street.
Binghamton High School, on Oak and Main streets, and a nearby nursing
home remain under lockdown. Apartments were evacuated and roads were closed.
The high school is a block and a half away.
According to police reports, about 40 hostages were in the building -- 15
in a closet and 26 in the boiler room.
A spokeswoman at Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital in Binghamton confirmed
that a student from Binghamton University was being treated at the emergency
room. Spokeswoman Linda Miller said she didn't know the nature of the
injuries.
"We're on full alert anticipating we're going to get additional
casualties," Miller said.
The American Civic Association describes itself as helping immigrants and
refugees with counseling, resettlement, citizenship, family reunification
and translators.
It also intervenes with emergencies, including fighting, hunger and
homelessness, according to information from the association's Web site.
Scanner reports say a man went into the building and started shooting.
When the shooting started, people inside escaped to the basement in search
of safety. More than a dozen people are hiding in a closet, for more than an
hour now. Emergency dispatchers are in contact with some people inside by
phone. Police have sent some people to Wilson and Lourdes Hospital, and have
requested ambulances to the scene.
Police have shut down Court Street heading west at Water Street. They
have also closed Main Street at Murray Street. Binghamton High School has
locked down the school, and will not allow students out for lunch.
Friday's carnage in New York state is the latest to rock small-town
America, which has often borne the brunt of violent gun-related outbursts
but where many inhabitants fiercely advocate the right to own and carry
firearms.
Earlier this month, a 28-year-old unemployed man killed 10 people,
including his mother and a toddler, in a shooting rampage through two
counties in Alabama, the worst in the southern state's history.
In December, a man dressed as Santa Claus opened fire at a Christmas
party being given by his ex-wife in Covina, California, killing nine people
before shooting himself.
In October, an ex-convict opened fire with an assault rifle at a man and
two children who had come to trick-or-treat at his home in Sumter, South
Carolina on Halloween. A 12-year-old boy died of his wounds in that
incident.
And in September, a mentally ill man shot eight people, killing six, in
Alger, Washington a month after being released from prison.
The spate of high-profile mass killings in the United States in the past
six months has shown the impact that the economic meltdown is having on
rising violence, experts have said.
Criminologist Jack Levin says there is a clear link between the economy
and rising body counts.
"A mass killer is someone who has almost always suffered a
catastrophic loss -- that's the link between a recession and mass
killings," he told AFP, citing the loss of a job, the loss of a lot of
money or the loss of a relationship.
Gunman barricaded back door before rampage, police say
(CNN)
-- A gunman barricaded the back door of a Binghamton, New York, immigration
services center with a car and burst through the front door on a shooting
rampage, killing 13 people and then, apparently, himself, police said Friday.
Police say the use of this car to block the back door of the
immigration center suggests premeditation.
Four more people were wounded in the attack at the American
Civic Association and taken to hospitals in critical condition, according to
authorities.
A senior law enforcement source with detailed knowledge of
the investigation identified the suspect as Jiverly Wong, who is believed to be
in his early 40s.
Authorities executed a search warrant at Wong's home in
Johnson City, near Binghamton, the source said.
Officers spoke to the suspect's mother at the home, the
source said.
The shooter, who was carrying a satchel of ammunition, was
found dead of an apparently self-inflicted gunshot to the head, police Chief
Joseph Zikuski said.
Police are still investigating motives but said the use of
the car suggested premeditation.
"It is our understanding he had ties to the civic
association," Zikuski said.
In all, law enforcement removed 14 deceased people from the
building and 37 survivors, Zikuski said, in what the city's mayor has called the
"most tragic day in Binghamton's history."
Two semi-automatic handguns -- a .45-caliber and a
9-millimeter -- were found at the center, where immigrants were believed to be
taking citizenship and language classes.
Most of those who managed to escape alive hid in a boiler
room and storage closets during the rampage.
"I heard shootings, very long time, about five minutes,
and I was thinking when it will be stopped, but it was continued. No screaming,
yelling, just shooting, silence, shooting, silence," said Zhanar
Tokhtabayeba, who was taking an English class.
One man who owns a business across the street said he didn't
realize anything was wrong until police cars came rushing to the scene.
"We were thniking that there's some sort of dispute,
some disagreement," Richard Griffis told CNN. "But then it became
obvious it was more than a disgreement, there must be some sort of gun involved
because of the way they were surrounding the building."
At 10:31 a.m., authorities received a 911 call from a
receptionist who said she'd been shot in the stomach, Zikuski said. View
a timeline of the shooting »
She told police that a man with a handgun also shot and
killed another receptionist before proceeding to a nearby classroom, where he
gunned down more victims, Zikuski said.
While the gunman continued to fire, 26 others in the center
hid in a boiler room downstairs, where law enforcement found them.
It was unclear how long before the 911 call the rampage
began, but by the time police arrived, about two minutes later, the shooting had
stopped.
Zikuski hastened to add that two people who were led from
the building in plastic handcuffs earlier in the day are not considered
suspects.
Wilson Medical Center spokeswoman Christina Boyd said the
Binghamton hospital was treating two females and one male for gunshot wounds.
"I would say these are significant injuries," she
said.
Another victim, a male Binghamton University student, was
treated and is in stable condition at Our Lady of Lourdes Memorial Hospital in
Binghamton, hospital spokeswoman Kathy Cramer said.
It took another two hours or so for officers to clear the
building. Some men were led out of the building in plastic handcuffs as a
precaution, but were later cleared, the chief said.
"Michelle and I were shocked and deeply saddened to
learn about the act of senseless violence in Binghamton, New York, today,"
he said. "Our thoughts and prayers go out to the victims, their families
and the people of Binghamton."
American Civic Association
• Founded in 1939 by group of immigrants
• Private organization funded by United Way
• Sponsors citizenship education
• Promotes racial, religious, political understanding
• Helps immigrants get visas, green cards
• Hosts everything from tenants' rights seminars to St. Patrick's dinners to
polka concerts
Vice President Joe Biden, who was in New York on unrelated
business, also condemned the acts and called on Americans to stop the cycle of
violence.
"I'd ask you to keep all those folks in your
prayers," he said. "I think it's time that, we gotta figure a way to
deal with this senseless, senseless violence." Watch
Biden call shootings 'senseless' »
Nearby apartments were evacuated, and Binghamton High School
was locked down for most of the afternoon.
The American Civic Association helps immigrants and refugees
with a number of issues, including personal counseling, resettlement,
citizenship and reunification, and provides interpreters and translators,
according to the United Way of Broome County, which is affiliated with the
association.
Rashidun Haque, who owns a nearby convenience store, said
police had him and his four customers stay inside and away from the windows.
It’s wrong to blame our warming climate on human pollution alone, says
a major analysis by U. S. climate scientists who say North America’s
warming and drying trend also has important natural causes.
Natural shifts in ocean currents have caused much of the warming in
recent decades, and almost all of the droughts, says the U. S. National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
Most climate researchers today deal exclusively with man-made
“greenhouse” gases, and often dismiss suggestions of naturally caused
warming as unscientific.
Yet NOAA says Western Canada has warmed by two degrees and Eastern Canada
hasn’t warmed at all because flows of air from naturally shifting Pacific
currents have affected the West most.
The lengthy re-analysis of climate data doesn’t dispute that greenhouse
gases from fossil fuels cause a warmer climate. But it raises questions
about the details: How much warming? How many causes? And why isn’t it the
same every-where?
It also stresses that we don’t understand climate as well as we like to
think, because scientists only have good data from about 1948 onward.
FAIR USE
NOTICE:
This site may contain copyrighted material, the use of which may not always
have been specifically Authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is
made available for educational purposes, and as such this constitutes 'fair
use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US
Copyright Act. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on
this site is available without profit to those who have expressed an interest
in the included information for research and educational purposes.
Enlarge
Please !! We're not all the gullible idiots you hope. Geithner was one of the key players in pulling-off this fraud. As the President of The New York Federal Reserve Bank, Geithner was calling for a Global Money Authority to deal with the world's financial crisis. He was involved with the structuring of the TARP bailout with Bernanke and Paulson. He KNEW of the TARP provision for the Federal Reserve Bank to pay interest on deposits - a move that has made it more 'financially attractive' for Banks to put their bailout funds 'on deposit' rather than releasing them as much needed loans to jump-start the economy. As a Federal Reserve (Rothschild) pawn, Geithner is pushing the Basel II regulations that mandated capital requirements for all Banks - the main reason for the crisis in the first place. The B.I.S. (Rothschild Bank) has the ability to loosen the accounting rules and re-start the global economy but it is not in their interests to do so. THEY WANT COLLAPSE SO THAT THEY CAN RECEIVE A MANDATE FOR GLOBAL FINANCIAL CONTROLS AND A SINGLE GLOBAL CURRENCY. After all, why have numerous Central Banks and currencies when you can consolidate into one (B.I.S.) and still maintain control ? Why don't you report the truth ?
Why he was appointed is a mystery. The fox in charge of the henhouse...great idea! for the foxes. And as time goes by it's proving true.
He was appointed because Obama's first choice Summers would would have faced a lot of flack . Little Timmy is both Summers and Rubins flunky , you can bet that Summers is the one making decisions behind the scenes , thats why he's there . Both little Timmy Geithner and Larry Summers desperately need to go .
Obama knew exactly what he was doing when he appointed him. Obama's the darling of the bankers. Feel free to wag your finger at me while you give me trillions too.
I thought, obama, shouldn't have appointed, geithner, summers, or emanuell
WHY, HASN'T SOMEONE, BEEN ASKED TO STEP DOWN, AT MERRILL LYNCH
I hate to admit it but the first commenter is right on the money. The down cycles enable the central bankers (and their controllers, the top investment banks) to consolidate their power, eliminate competitors (e.g. Bear Stearns, lehman, wamu, wachovia) while subsidizing themselves even though they are the worst offenders and the most insolvent of all the institutions. Of course the controllers of the system are always too big to fail. Back in 1975 Citi (at the time known as National City Bank) was bailed out during the real estate crisis. Of course they were much smaller in 1975, but obviously too big too fail still.
Read the G-20 Communique from april 2nd. You will find their plans for a global currency, global central bank with greater powers, global trade regulator, global financial regulator, one set of global accounting standards. Their solution is always more regulation, more power/control to the culprits of the crisis (why listen to them? They were the ones who cread this monster), and more international in nature. This system will serve only their interests. It will be bad for americans. Bad for europe. Bad for the true capitalists. The large corporations and international bankers are really fraudsters, they pose as capitalists during the good times, but are really all about big government (corporate socialism). This prevents competition. Grants them monopoly powers.
Ever since the creation of the federal reserve we have not had free market capitalism. The fed controls the quantity of money, the interest rates, controls the government indirectly through its facilitation of treasury financing (he who controls the purse strings, controls the person).
Seems to me that Geithner would be pissed off at having to deal with the "authority" of having been assured, and then it turning out to have been wrong. I wonder if he lost money. I'm also wondering, in this war of the multi-millionaires, if some of them, perhaps this one, are ready to "defect,?" They must be moving in and out of many phases of distrust of each other, with everyone watching their own pocketbook. (I'm searching around for a ray of hope.)