Free - Beyond Collapse

Monday, December 20, 2010

From Bad To Worse: The Economy Today, And Tomorrow


At first, we were told the American economy was a freight train; invincible. After the derivatives and mortgage crisis began in 2007-2008, we were told the problem was a mere blip in our financial timeline; nothing to be concerned about. In 2009, we were told that the recession was over, and that “green shoots” were on the way. Later, they said we were “turning the corner”, whatever that means. In 2010, we were told it was time to get used to the “new normal”, which of course has yet to be clearly defined. Now, at the cusp of 2011, the year which many establishment economists originally claimed would bring a bright new era in U.S. employment and finance, it has become clear to much of the public that we are being deliberately herded with empty words and false promises towards a very dangerous and uncertain future.


We have discovered that there is no “new normal”. The word “normal” denotes a certain consistency, a set of rules to the system which are generally understood, yet we have seen nothing consistent except the continued downward freefall of our fiscal infrastructure and the end of anything remotely resembling stability.


I feel quite a bit of empathy and maybe even a little remorse for those who blindly believed the mainstream nonsense of the past few years. I can’t imagine being so lost and so utterly disappointed on such a regular basis. The only good to come out of this dashing of false hopes is that it has caused many to begin questioning what the hell is really happening. Why have things only become worse? What about all the government legislation and stimulus? When is it finally going to produce the effects that were once guaranteed? In fact, what are the benefits of ANY action the government or the private Federal Reserve has taken so far?


Let’s look at financial conditions across the globe and here at home, and perhaps we can gain a true understanding of the situation before us, and find answers for some of these questions…


Europe: American Instability With An Accent?


How many times over this summer did we hear about the bailout that “saved” the EU? About as much as we heard about the bailouts that supposedly saved America.


In spring, the MSM was warning of complete disintegration of the European Union. After the Greek bailout, all was suddenly well. The turnaround in rhetoric was enough to give me whiplash. I’m curious now as to where all that candy-coated bubbly adoration for European bonds and the Euro went. When I warned during the “summer of bailout love” that nothing had changed in the EU accept the media’s coverage of the problem, this is what I was talking about…


As we have been pointing out for the past two years, the debt default problems in the EU are not going away, nor are they likely to go away for quite some time. Greece, for instance, is now under review for yet another ratings downgrade by the S&P:


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-12-03/greece-s-credit-rating-may-be-cut-by-s-p-as-eu-rules-threaten-bondholders.html



All the exuberance over the IMF/EU bailout of Greece this spring was for naught, as the country continues to falter with no end to their debt woes in sight. The bailout changed nothing (because bailouts never do). This lesson in Greece has apparently made no impression on mainstream media analysts and international investors, who now applaud a similar bailout of Ireland, and who will probably applaud the bailouts of Portugal, Spain, and Italy, once it finally becomes evident to the public that those countries are in equally terrible financial conditions.


Credit-default swaps for Portugal and Spain have risen to record levels as their debt exposure, which has been ignored by the MSM until this past month, is slowly revealed:


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-29/corporate-bond-risk-falls-in-europe-credit-default-swaps-show.html


This means that the cost of insuring Portuguese or Spanish debt securities is becoming untenable. Like a couple of convicted drunk drivers, the risk of insuring them is tremendous. The likelihood of a crash is simply too high.


Italian bank refinancing costs are also exploding due to the unsustainable debt of the government, meaning an expanded credit crisis is looming for Italians (could this signal a coming bank holiday?):


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-12-02/italian-banks-refinancing-costs-soar-on-contagion-concern-nation-s-debts.html


Ireland and every other EU nation’s response to this disaster will, obviously, be the implementation of austerity measures in order to pay off their IMF creditors. Ireland has already announced a possible 20% cut in overall spending and the simultaneous raising of taxes; a double whammy for Irish citizens who will now lose many government aid programs while at the same time losing valuable income out of their pocket:


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-24/ireland-plans-to-reduce-spending-20-raise-taxes-as-rescue-talks-climax.html


Countries that find themselves this indebted to the IMF rarely if ever actually improve conditions enough to pay off their liabilities, and that is not an accident. Global bankers have no intention of ever releasing EU nations from their clutches. The debt cycle must go on forever…


The debt crisis across the Atlantic is culminating in a massive destabilization of jobs markets, which is something we rarely hear about in terms of Europe. Eurozone nations have hit an overall record high “official” unemployment rate of 10.1% (double that for the REAL unemployment rate):


http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90777/90853/7216710.html


The point? Just under the surface Europe is in a shambles, the Euro is in almost as much danger as the Dollar, and this development will come to a head very soon. Already, the EU is moving to enact a “European Stability Mechanism”, which will effectively divide core EU nations like Germany and France from ‘peripheral’ countries like Greece or Portugal:


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101203/ap_on_bi_ge/eu_europe_debt_rules


More fiscally stable nations such as Germany will no longer be required to foot the bill for those members of the EU that show signs of default. Even now, Germany is refusing to boost aid to EU bailout funds:


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-12-06/eu-officials-debate-larger-bailout-fund-to-stem-sovereign-crisis-contagion.html


This is something we talked about with great concern at the beginning of this year, as richer European countries tie their economies to China and let the rest of the West rot. On one hand, it seems practical for sovereign countries to protect themselves and refuse to pay for the mistakes of others. However, the primary point of all of this has been ignored by the MSM, which is the fact that the EU should never have been formed in the first place. So far it has resulted in nothing but calamity for most participating countries. Surely, the IMF will drop by to pick up the pieces and “save” the union that was never wanted or needed, after the people are sufficiently desperate.


What this shows is that nearly all of the crises we are confronted with daily here in the U.S. are also striking Europe; there’s just much less talk about the EU disaster from local economic analysts. Regardless of what the MSM claims, Europe as we know it is about to change dramatically. In the U.S., the metamorphosis could be even more shocking…



The Recession That Ate America!


The jobs report from the Labor Department last week underlined the breadth of the collapse in America. Establishment economists were heralding the Christmas season as a turning point (yet again) in the U.S. economy, for jobs, and for sales. Predictions for job creation ranged from around 150,000 to 400,000 openings. Traditionally, they would be correct in expecting such a spike in employment, but we are not living in typical times. The jobs report revealed only 39,000 newly employed, and being that Labor Department numbers are generally manipulated, we could safely suggest that almost no jobs were added. All in the midst of the Holidays, when temporary hiring is supposed to boom:


http://money.cnn.com/2010/12/03/news/economy/november_jobs_report/index.htm


Now, some analysts are beginning to suggest that the U.S. is heading “back” into a recession. The problem is that in order to go into a second recession, we would have to actually exit the first recession before hand:


http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6B52NK20101206


Whether or not you believe that we are facing a double dip, or that we are caught in one long economic death spiral, one must ask the question: where did all that bailout money go that was supposed to stop this? Recently, we received a pittance of a glimpse at the Federal Reserve balance sheet for part of the stimulus program. What little data was made public was not comforting…


If you thought that stimulus packages from the Fed would actually go into the U.S. economy, you were greatly mistaken. The largest recipients of bailout dollars from the Federal Reserve (paid for with your tax dollars) were FOREIGN BANKS. That’s right, the liquidity injections that have put the very health of the dollar at risk and stoked a growing trade and currency war across the planet did not even go towards the economy in which you live! Overseas banks such as UBS and Barclays received the largest portion of the $3.3 trillion in emergency stimulus that was outlined in documentation the Fed was forced to release due to lawsuit:


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-12-02/federal-reserve-may-be-central-bank-of-the-world-after-ubs-barclays-aid.html


Remember, this $3.3 trillion is just what the central bankers openly admit to. We haven’t even scratched the surface of Fed accounts or Fed secrecy yet. One factor in stimulus injections that often goes under the radar is overnight lending. It has been revealed that the Fed has created at least $9 trillion which was then pumped into major banks over the course of the past two years. Merrill Lynch alone snapped up $2.1 trillion:


http://money.cnn.com/2010/12/01/news/economy/fed_reserve_data_release/index.htm?source=ft



This brings up another important question: if the major banks have been privy to so much capital, why aren’t they lending to the public? Maybe because they are still broke, even after all that Fed liquidity! Currently, top U.S. banks still face a $100 billion to $150 billion shortfall according to Basel III rules (again, this is just the amount that has been admitted):


http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6AL0A220101122


This amount of capital retention would suggest a ‘deflationary’ crisis, but instead, we have so far witnessed a falling dollar and rising prices on most goods and commodities. Gold is hovering near $1420 an ounce as I write this. Silver has broken the $30 an ounce mark. Oil is flirting with $90 a barrel, and is firmly entrenched above $3 a gallon, very close to where we predicted during the summer (we still have three weeks to hit $100 a barrel). Other base goods are spiking much faster…


The most recent and disingenuous talking point used by the MSM to explain away rising prices is that it is a result of “demand” by growing developing nations like China. Below are a couple examples, including an article which blames rising cotton prices on demand from China, and rising oil prices on “economic recovery”, which is an unbearable load of media manure:


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-12-02/cotton-soars-as-growers-can-t-ship-fast-enough-to-meet-chinese-demand.html


http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLDE6AA0XV20101206


Anything to avoid the word “inflation”, and most especially the word “hyperinflation”. The problem with the demand argument is that while there is growing need for materials in places like China, this is certainly not at all the driving force behind the explosion in prices. A good way to gage this is by examining the BDI (Baltic Dry Index).


The BDI measures the cost of shipping raw materials across the ocean as well as the amount of goods being shipped. It is one of the few economic indicators that cannot be manipulated by international banks or governments. A dramatic drop in the BDI shows a sharp decrease in demand for global shipping and thus reveals a slowdown in the overall economy. This is exactly what occurred at the beginning of the credit crisis in 2007-2008. However, the BDI can also be measured in comparison with the values of stocks and commodities. Under normal conditions of supply and demand, if the BDI were to drop (or deflate), then the value of most stocks and goods should also drop. This has not been the case, as the below graphs illustrate:


BDI vs. S&P 500


BDI vs. CRB Index


BDI vs. Crude Oil


BDI vs. Gold


BDI vs. Copper


BDI vs. Soy


Now, there have been small deviations in the past between stocks and commodities versus the BDI, but usually it is the BDI which leads the deviation, and not the commodities. As the final year of every graph shows, there has been a significant decoupling of the price of stocks and goods when compared with the amount of shipping of those goods. To put it simply; demand is low, all over the world, yet prices continue to climb skyward at an incredible pace. This suggests to me that we are seeing the beginning of hyperinflation, mostly in the U.S., and in no way a recovery.


The main culprit in creating the inflation millstone is, as you probably guessed, the Federal Reserve. Being that much of the fiat the Fed throws out is going into foreign entities, we have not seen effects as pronounced as they would be if all that cash was flowing into our local markets. This has not, though, stopped devaluation of the dollar itself, which is the true cause of inflation beyond money supply.


Foreign central banks are all too aware that the Greenback will soon be history. Treasury auctions are producing dismal results for anything other than very short term T-bonds, and the Fed is quickly becoming the ONLY buyer of U.S. government debt:


http://www.zerohedge.com/article/weak-29-billion-7-year-auction-prices-225-bid-cover-drops


And, the biggest news of the year, the news that almost no mainstream outlet in America covered: China and Russia have announced that they will stop using the dollar for trade between the two countries:


http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90778/90859/7208907.html


“Wen said Beijing is willing to boost cooperation with Moscow in Northeast Asia, Central Asia and the Asia-Pacific region, as well as in major international organizations and on mechanisms in pursuit of a “fair and reasonable new order” in international politics and the economy.”


“Sun Zhuangzhi, a senior researcher in Central Asian studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, said the new mode of trade settlement between China and Russia follows a global trend after the financial crisis exposed the faults of a dollar-dominated world financial system.”


Skeptics and disinformation campaigns will likely argue that Russia is barely in the top ten trading partners of China, and the announcement is not a threat to the dollar’s world reserve status. What they will neglect to mention is that China and Russia’s political influence internationally goes far beyond trade decisions. How long before the other BRIC nations, India and Brazil, follow suit and drop the dollar when trading with China? How long before European countries, or even OPEC nations, join this trend? What you are witnessing today is the median step before the final collapse of our currency, and when the history books are written, it will probably be this period that is singled out as the trigger point for the event.


Get Ready For Weapons Of Mass Distraction




Get your Ammo Here


Lowest Price, Best Service...Door to Door Delivery




As we have written about many times and qualified in great detail with page after page of supported evidence, the shell shocked state of the economy is no accident. The financial implosion is itself a distraction from the centralization policies of corporate cartels through organizations like the IMF or the Federal Reserve. But as the breakdown progresses (and I think we have shown succinctly that it will), the masses will eventually look for the antagonist of this story. The elites will have no other choice but to conjure villains from the ether to divert attention away from themselves and their detrimental policies. Not to mention, the number of us who understand the criminal nature of central banks is becoming precariously threatening to the continuance of those policies.


The Liberty Movement has hit a point of critical mass. The alternative media is dominating over mainstream corporate news sources. Our fight for transparency in information is reaching every corner of the world. Our membership is growing beyond what many of us had ever imagined possible. Projects such as the ‘Buy Silver: Crash JP Morgan’ campaign have gone effectively viral. Ideas like the popular purchasing of physical precious metals to counter the COMEX manipulations and short positions of big banks have been around for a long time, but in the past couple of years, we finally have the support base and cultural clout to make them a reality with the fantastic media reach of men like Max Keiser, Alex Jones, websites like Zero Hedge, and many others.


The more prominent our movement becomes, the more dangerous we are to global banks, and the more likely we are to see the enactment of engineered events designed to fog the battlefield and confuse the public. The goal of globalists will be to fabricate threats which appear to be more immediate or more frightening than the power grabbing schemes of the elites themselves. Imagine you have cancer, but are then suddenly confronted with a live grenade in your lap. Which problem is going to receive your full attention at that moment; the grenade, or the cancer? The dilemma is that both eventually end the same way. This is how elitists operate; deny people the chance to deal with the long term threat by diverting them with short term catastrophes.


A new ‘Gulf of Tonkin’ off the shores of North Korea, the release of a weaponized computer virus into Wall Street trading networks, yet another attempted or successful terrorist attack with highly questionable players and suspicious results, or maybe a Treasury dump by China resulting in a trade or even shooting war. I can’t say where the punches will come from, but I do know that the hits are on their way. The state of our economy and of public opinion is reaching a crescendo and something has to give. The global banks will do anything to ensure that they are not set in the crosshairs of those people who are forced to suffer, even if it means throwing numerous innocents into the path of the oncoming bullets (figurative or otherwise).


At bottom, to fully comprehend the events that are taking place, and that are about to take place in our economic and cultural environment, we have to focus on the ignition source. If your house is set on fire, do you blame the house for burning? Do you blame the fire? Or do you blame the people that started the fire? I have a feeling the coming months will be crucial in this regard, and how tomorrow unfolds will depend greatly on our ability to lock hold of the influential financial arsonists of today, and never let them go.



Original Article

Constitutional Judo


In all things, there exists a ‘point of balance’; a line that, if crossed, results in the sudden and expedient loss of our self-determinism and makes us subservient to the fickle whims of social, political, and physical gravity. We are “thrown” into the air, as it were, and the landing is rarely ever pleasant. The U.S. Constitution and the civil liberties it outlines is itself one of these historic points of balance. Its original purpose was to temper the most epic of grappling matches ever ignited; between the relentless constructs of government, and the individual freedoms of the common man. The ultimate problem inherent in this struggle is one of consistency, vigilance, and labor…


While the concept of the Democratic Republic and the Constitution was meant to remove suffocating class warfare from our political life and free us from the numerous dangers of elitism, invariably, those men who thirst for power over others find a way to insinuate themselves into any system, regardless of checks and balances, especially when the populace does not fulfill its necessary role as watchdog and tireless sentinel. Many Americans often assume that ‘the people’ derive their power from the Constitution, but the reality is actually reverse; the Constitution, in fact, derives its power from the people. Our duty (which some have forgotten) has always been to protect the rights and liberties inscribed on those pages of parchment. Not just to know those rights, or recite them, but to implement and defend them in our day-to-day existence. Without the constant nurturing cultural pulse of sound minds and courageous hearts, the Constitution dies.


Many in our society, instead of taking on the responsibility of preserving their freedoms, have instead handed it over to the trappings of government. The fatal error here is obvious; the corporatized and over-centralized political landscape of America’s government today does not hold the same values as the people it is determined to lord over. We have witnessed the parasitic possession of our system, know it to be corrupt, yet still seem to expect this bureaucratic monstrosity to cradle our liberties in good faith!


Government is a tool; a mechanical apparatus that can be used to either preserve freedom, or annihilate it. Its use depends upon those men who wield it, and the men who wield our government today certainly do not have the expansion of freedom in mind. In this article, we will examine the many points of contention (balancing points) brewing as our exceedingly globalist leaning political leaders overstep their bounds. Any one of these points, if allowed to falter by Americans, could throw the whole of our heritage into disarray…


Death By A Thousand Cuts


If you’ve been living at the center of the Earth for the past decade, or playing online games till daybreak battling for dominion of Castle Grayskull, then you may have missed out on the numerous attempts by our Government (under both major parties) to erode our freedoms one precious layer at a time. Some of these attempts have so far fallen flat, while others have been frighteningly successful. Here is just a sample of various recent actions and legislation designed specifically to swindle away your rights, if not the shirt right off your back:


Patriot Acts I & II: The Patriot Act is what I call “chameleon legislation”; it’s designed to be “open to interpretation” by officials and to be modified for whatever purpose they happen to deem fit at the moment. Ultimately, both Patriot Acts opened a terrible gateway to a world where any freedom is expendable, especially if it means stopping terrorists and “evil doers”. Of course, the manner in which terrorism is defined by proponents of the Patriot Act is wildly general. ANYONE could be defined as a terrorist, and any threat could be construed as a matter of national security. The true goal of this legislation was not to protect the public, but to untie the hands of the establishment when implementing further destructive actions, as well as to plant the fog of doubt into the minds of Americans as to the continued validity of the Constitution itself.


The Enemy Belligerents Act: The Enemy Belligerents Act is a perfect example of how the leadership caste of the Democrats and Republicans (who are neo-cons, not true conservatives) work in tandem to institute globalist policy. In this case, the act was introduced by the dastardly duo of John McCain and Joe Lieberman. To put it simply, this legislation, if fully imposed, would allow the government to label any person they choose, even an American citizen, as an enemy combatant. This means you could be arrested without being officially charged, imprisoned without a trial or legal council for an unspecified length of time, and no one, not even your family, would be told where you were. They should just re-name it the ‘Shanghai Act’, because it basically legalizes government piracy. The only problem is that this shanghai is less likely to end with tropical island adventure and more likely to end with you being tossed in a dark stinky hole in the middle of another Abu Ghraib surrounded by Blackwater mongoloids with a penchant for naked man dog-piles. Again, this is the kind of poison your government thinks up on a regular basis…


http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-645


The John Warner Defense Authorization Act: A bill passed by George W. Bush in 2007 with very little initial media coverage. Allows the Federal Government at the direction of the president to subvert Posse Comitatus and use the military within the borders of the U.S. as a police force without any consent from state governments. Also gives the office of the president unprecedented powers over the National Guard. Just add any real or engineered national disaster and what you get is a perfect recipe for Hurricane Katrina deluxe. Martial Law, here we come…


http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h109-5122


Establishment Of Northcom: Northcom (United States Northern Command) is, at bottom, the teeth behind legislation like the John Warner Defense Act. If martial law is declared in the U.S., it will be Northcom and its assigned military units that will stand at the forefront. Northcom’s stated mission is to “defend the homeland”, supposedly against terrorism, however, much of Northcom’s focus in annual exercises like ‘Vigilant Shield’ has been to prepare for civil unrest and continuity of government. Meaning, they train under the assumption that YOU will be the enemy. The first person posted to command Northcom was General Ralph Eberhart, the same man who was in charge of NORAD on 9/11. Apparently, if you ignore available intelligence and fail completely in your assigned duties, you get a promotion in the upper echelons of the military today, unless I missed something, and he didn’t fail…


Presidential Directive 51: A presidential action shrouded in secrecy and general cloak and dagger spookiness. When ignorant yuppies accuse the Liberty Movement of “paranoia”, I always point out PDD 51, and ask them if they are at least intelligent enough to be concerned. This order was initiated by George W. Bush and continued by Barack Obama, and is designed to give the president virtual dictatorial powers during a state of “national emergency”. It dissolves all states rights and places the entire country under the purview of Northcom, and Homeland Security. The guise of “continuity of government” is used as a rationale. Also allows the president to declare a state of emergency for almost any reason. Members of Congress and even some members of Homeland Security who have requested to read the entire directive have been denied. The bill is apparently so disturbing that Obama doesn’t even want those with security clearance to view the full document. Though I’m sure there is some grey area that can be exploited where classified materials are concerned, as far as I can tell from my research, Obama’s withholding of information on a directive such as PDD 51 from Congress is wholly illegal.


http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/nspd/nspd-51.htm


Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA): Supported by both Bush and Obama. The word “foreign” is highly misleading. FISA allows telecom companies to supply the personal data and communications of anyone, including Americans, to the government without threat of civil retribution (lawsuit). Under Constitutional law, any invasion of privacy by government authorities must first be approved through an individualized warrant. The person or premises to be monitored must be specified, and the reason behind the surveillance must be clearly explained. FISA does away with all of these protections to your privacy and gives free reign to government to spy on whoever they choose without any oversight whatsoever. It even allows for mass surveillance, or data collation, on entire subsections of the populace. What I find most interesting about FISA is the way in which it brazenly breaks the barrier between government and corporate power. We all know about the revolving door in Washington, but in the past, the idea of the barrier was at least somewhat maintained for appearances, if nothing else. The trick to FISA is that “technically”, it is the telecoms that are doing the actual surveillance, and not government. This is, I’m sure, the argument that will be used by the Feds if FISA is ever taken to the Supreme Court under the Fourth Amendment. The reality, though, is that the telecoms and the government are one in the same, and to treat them as two separate legal entities is to blind one’s self to the facts. Now, Mussolini’s definition of fascism (the melding of government and corporate infrastructure into a single entity with a single purpose) absolutely seems to apply to the U.S.


Big Brother Technotronic Super Villain-esqe Surveillance Grid: Ever feel like you are being watched? Get used to it, says Homeland Security! CCTV cameras have doubled in most U.S. cities over the past two years, while New York has tripled theirs in only six months. The TSA has been given invincible IRS-like goon squad status and now fondles and x-rays airport travelers at will, storing biometric data without consent and generally treating people worse than cattle. Don’t care because you don’t fly? Don’t worry! Naked body scanners are coming to bus and train stations near you! Hell, if we don’t put a stop to this horror soon, the TSA may roll scanners out on street corners.


A friend of mine was recently on a trip to Boston and went to see the U.S.S. Constitution, the oldest commissioned American war vessel still afloat. He related to me that his excitement was soon smothered when he realized visitors had to pass through metal detectors and security just to see the boat. I’m sure that the government is merely trying to prevent Al Qaeda from sneaking on board with box cutters, hijacking the ship, and sailing it into the Sears tower, causing the building to implode at near freefall speed.


The reason he was disenchanted with the experience was because he knew the metal detectors and security served little purpose, except to condition people into accepting that this was the norm. Everywhere you go, there DHS is.


Next of course would be easily tracked national ID cards, which were attempted a couple of years ago with little success under the Real ID Act. State compliance for the Real ID was postponed until May 2011, which is right around the corner. We’ll see if the states cave, or stand their ground. Finally, no surveillance society would be complete without citizen spies. Homeland Security is establishing its new “If You See Something, Say Something” campaign in your local Walmart. Yes, imagine the ghoulish face of cave troll Janet Napolitano leering down at aisle five as you attempt to save a dollar on frozen buffalo wings. She slobbers rhetoric about how you are surrounded by terrorists while you try to find that economy sized box of Count Chocula. Wouldn’t we all just feel safer?


Bailout Bills (All Variations): I find that a lot of people like to blame our current economic doomfest on one political party or the other, stumbling about in the dark in a sad attempt to trace the roots of the credit and mortgage collapse back to Obama, Bush II, Clinton, Bush I, etc. Everyone is desperate to play cheerleader for their team, not realizing that both teams are fake and almost every president since the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913 is to blame for selling out the American people to global banks. Let’s not forget, both Obama and Bush supported bailout legislation which is now widely considered to be an abject failure. The majority of Americans according to most polls opposed these bills, and yet they were still passed. What do the bailouts have to do with the loss of Constitutional rights? When the entirety of your country’s financial future is poured into the coffers of international banking elites and your currency is subsequently debased if not destroyed, leaving you with nothing but debt and supranational centralization, it is a certainty that a total loss of your rights will soon follow.


FDA Food Safety Modernization Act S. 510: Currently being considered for passage in the House. Yet another bill written in such a way as to make it wide open for interpretation by the authorities. First of all, the FDA has never been synonymous with “safety”, considering half the products they approve end up causing cancer or shrinking your testes. They would approve rat urine for mass consumption if a company like Monsanto wanted to market it. The FDA’s true roll has been to let major corporations violate safety regulations unobstructed while ruthlessly bringing the hammer down on smaller businesses. Now, the FDA has set its aim upon not just small farms, but personal gardens!


http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s111-510


The bill gives the FDA far reaching powers over what it terms “food production facilities”, which are defined as “any farm, ranch, orchard, vineyard, aquaculture facility, or confined animal-feeding operation”. It also places all food production under the control of Homeland Security in the event of a “national emergency” (there’s that poorly defined phrase again). I have heard some organic growers and ranchers shrug off the bill, believing that the FDA would never take advantage of the broad interpretation and bring pressure on private gardens or food trade. This kind of naivety is always astonishing to me. When has a society ever opened a door to power that its government has not taken quick advantage of? In fact, the FDA has already begun harassing the Amish, of all people, for private farm trade, even without S. 510:


http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com/2010/02/08/fda-agents-invade-amish-farm-in-pa/


http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/brooklyn/2008/05/01/2008-05-01_raw_milk_lovers_upset_over_amish_arrest.html


These are non-commercial farms, yet the FDA believes it has the authority to dictate their food production activities. If the government is willing to set its laser guided sites on a pacifist group that still rides around in horse and buggy, then they’ll definitely have no qualms going after the rest of us.


Anti-Constitutional Arguments For Dummies


Most people enjoy the advantages of freedom and are naturally conservative towards government, whether they realize it or not. Because of the rather unsavory past actions of the neo-cons (globalists), the word “conservative” has been sullied, and is now associated with corporatism and big government. However, real conservatism has always been quite revolutionary. True conservatives believe in the principle of limited government, and individualism above collectivism, which means they usually find themselves the target of establishment fury. True conservatives are almost always in rebellion against the system, because the system is almost always operated by those who are anti-freedom. Show me a self proclaimed conservative who supports proliferation of government with a smile and I’ll show you a very confused man.


The label “Conservative” should really be interchangeable with “Constitutionalist”, and once this is understood, anti-Constitutional arguments can be viewed without the blurred distractions of the false left/right paradigm. We begin to understand that the conflict is not between Democrat and Republican, Liberal or Conservative, because those terms have been warped and their meaning eroded. The conflict we face is instead between individualists (Constitutionalists), and collectivists (globalists).


We’ve all heard the gamut of anti-Constitutional arguments in the past, but almost always through the left/right filter. Let’s set that filter aside for a moment and consider a few of them once again more objectively…


Argument 1 – The Constitution is an outdated document and is no longer practical for the modern world:


I’ve heard this argument from both sides of the aisle once again indicating that left vs. right is all fantasy. Does a good idea ever become outdated? What about inborn instincts? Can the desire for freedom ever be impractical?


The suggestion that the Constitution is “too old” is ludicrous for many reasons. First, the idea of an independent republic is painfully new compared to the long wash of human empires filled with vast stretches of feudalism and tyranny. Globalism is often touted as the next step in the cultural evolution of man, but it is really a giant leap backwards compared to Constitutionalism, representing yet another old centralist autocracy marketed in a modern way. A global feudal state is still a feudal state.


Second, the guidelines of the Constitution are built upon social necessities that have never and will never disappear. The right to speak openly one’s opinions or observations without fear of government reprisal is not a right that we will ever find ourselves too modern to appreciate. The right to bear arms and defend oneself will always be essential to a culture that wishes to prevent despotism in its various forms. The right to privacy from all people, including the government, will never be programmed out of the public entirely. Every man has an innate need to live without being examined and judged as though he were under constant suspicion. Every aspect of the Constitution is archetypal, and therefore, as much a part of us our own eyes and ears. These things do not lose their usefulness, no matter what era we live in.


Third, I have yet to see a political dynamic that is more sincere and honorable than the U.S. Constitution. I have yet to see a social concept presented as an alternative to the Constitution that does not have an ulterior motive attached. If someone, anyone, can present a new system that improves upon the Constitution while retaining the liberties described in the Constitution, I would love to see it. I hear a lot of criticism of the Constitution by globalists, but I have never seen any of them present a workable replacement that the public would respect, or willingly accept.


Argument 2 – Some rights must be given up for the greater good:


I’ll tell you a little secret; there is no “greater good”, unless you are talking about personal conscience. If your version of the “greater good” demands that you supplant your personal conscience, then it is not “greater”, and it is not “good”.


Safety is usually the catalyzing issue that leads to relinquished liberties, but safety itself is an illusion. No government can promise you true safety. Life is dangerous, and filled with the unexpected. Get over it and stop projecting your fears on the rest of us. If someone really feels that they are in immediate danger of a terrorist attack, then they should build a concrete bunker for themselves and stay in it, instead of trying to impose a collective bunker made out of unconstitutional laws and government surveillance around all of us.


Ultimately, what IS the greater good in this situation? Is it an unaccountable globalist nanny state and the dissolution of all individual and national sovereignty for the sake of a few people’s delusions of security? Maybe I’m just reckless, but I’m not buying it…


Argument 3 – National sovereignty must be removed if we are to achieve world peace:


World peace sounds very nice, I admit, but anyone who thinks removing Constitutional boundaries and bowing to globalism is the cure for war is smoking something laced with a serious amount of something. Almost every war of the past century alone has been funded, facilitated, or outright ignited by the same types of global elitists who now demand that we centralize world economic and political power into their hands to end war. This isn’t irony, it’s actually very well thought out Hegelian gaming; a sort of anti-Karma that rewards evil and punishes the respectable.


We have been led to believe that peace requires some kind of Faustian trade; freedom for harmony. But, legitimate freedom is a harbinger of peace, and nothing, not even the promise of harmony, is worth trading it away.


Argument 4 – The government could never undo Constitutional liberties because we would just vote them out:


This argument shows a serious lack of insight into how our government actually functions. As I have pointed out, most of the anti-Constitutional legislation described in this article was supported by both major parties. Therefore, it would be logical to then consider that voting out one party and replacing them with the other makes little difference as to the policies the government pursues. Unless you are voting for third party or liberty based candidates, your stop at the ballot box was a big waste of time. Sorry, that’s just reality. The people who write in Mickey Mouse have more sense than most of the voting public. The point? Elections change very little on a federal level.


The argument is also sometimes reversed by nihilists, who claim that the American public is to blame for government corruption because they voted for said politicians in the first place. Again, how the public votes has little bearing on most major elections because they have not been given a real choice. I get more excitement when deciding between Coke or Pepsi.


Argument 5 – The Founding Fathers couldn’t live up to their Constitutional ideals:


Yes, Thomas Jefferson owned slaves, and he also tried to implement a gradual emancipation for all slaves. It’s a contradiction. Jefferson, like all the Founding Fathers, was living in the midst of a revolutionary age filled with contradictions and conflict. The fact that they were able to sort through much of this and form a nation that at least aspired towards equal rights and independence is nothing short of a miracle. Washington made many mistakes, and so did Adams. In the context of the era in which they lived, they still did extraordinarily well, and this world is immensely better off because of their contributions.


This argument is perhaps the most dishonest of those I’ve heard, because it seeks to dismantle the very tangible and beneficial accomplishments of the revolutionary period by defaming men who cannot defend themselves because they are long since dead. It is successful when used to target people who know only historical events or dates but do not know more about the characters of the figures involved. That is not to say we should blindly idolize the Founding Fathers, on the contrary, we should endeavor to see them as real human beings with strengths, as well as flaws. Those flaws do not discredit what they built. What men are able to achieve in spite of their flaws is often far more meaningful and valuable than what they lose because of them.


Moral Ambiguity In Times Of Crisis


Liberty is most threatened in moments of great duress. Desperation breeds reckless abandon, and such an atmosphere is suffocating to wisdom. Each point of balance in the struggle for freedom requires considerable focus, and that focus can be twisted, flipped, and wrenched by the shock of disaster. The preservation of Constitutional rights depends greatly on our ability to maintain a sense of integrity and discipline as a culture, even when all the world seems to crumble around us.


Fear makes the insane seem reasonable. Financial collapse, war, civil unrest, all of these calamities can tempt us to silence our dissent, to do things we would not normally do, or to concede that which is precious to us. Even now, that kind of fear has led to many unfortunate compromises. The good news is, there is no freedom taken, that cannot be taken back.


The question is, how much are we willing to endure to see that our ideals survive? How hard are we willing to work? How much of our time, effort, and energy are we willing to expend? If the answer is not “all of it”, then we have failed already. What we have covered so far is the present situation, and by no means does it have to continue. When drawing a line in the sand, that line must first be drawn within. We must promise ourselves that it is here we will not bend, we will not lose balance, we will not be thrown. All liberty depends most on this.






Original Article

Monday, December 13, 2010

The Wall Street Pentagon Papers: The Biggest Scam in History Exposed


What if the greatest scam ever perpetrated was blatantly exposed, and the US media didn’t cover it? Does that mean the scam could keep going? That’s what we are about to find out.



I understand the importance of the new WikiLeaks documents. However, we must not let them distract us from the new information the Federal Reserve was forced to release. Even if WikiLeaks reveals documents from inside a large American bank, as huge as that could be, it will most likely pale in comparison to what we just found out from the one-time peek we got into the inner-workings of the Federal Reserve. This is the Wall Street equivalent of the Pentagon Papers.



I’ve written many reports detailing the crimes of Wall Street during this crisis. The level of fraud, from top to bottom, has been staggering. The lack of accountability and the complete disregard for the rule of law have made me and many of my colleagues extremely cynical and jaded when it comes to new evidence to pile on top of the mountain that we have already gathered. But we must not let our cynicism cloud our vision on the details within this new information.



Just when I thought the banksters couldn’t possibly shock me anymore… they did.



We were finally granted the honor and privilege of finding out the specifics, a limited one-time Federal Reserve view, of a secret taxpayer funded “backdoor bailout” by a small group of unelected bankers. This data release reveals “emergency lending programs” that doled out $12.3 TRILLION in taxpayer money – $3.3 trillion in liquidity, $9 trillion in “other financial arrangements.”



Wait, what? Did you say $12.3 TRILLION tax dollars were thrown around in secrecy by unelected bankers… and Congress didn’t know any of the details?



Yes. The Founding Fathers are rolling over in their graves. The original copy of the Constitution spontaneously burst into flames. The ghost of Tom Paine went running, stark raving mad screaming through the halls of Congress.



The Federal Reserve was secretly throwing around our money in unprecedented fashion, and it wasn’t just to the usual suspects like Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Citigroup, Bank of America, etc.; it was to the entire Global Banking Cartel. To central banks throughout the world: Australia, Denmark, Japan, Mexico, Norway, South Korea, Sweden, Switzerland, England… To the Fed’s foreign primary dealers like Credit Suisse (Switzerland), Deutsche Bank (Germany), Royal Bank of Scotland (U.K.), Barclays (U.K.), BNP Paribas (France)… All their Ponzi players were “gifted.” All the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations got their cut.



Talk about the ransacking and burning of Rome! Sayonara American middle class…



If you still had any question as to whether or not the United States is now the world’s preeminent banana republic, the final verdict was just delivered and the decision was unanimous. The ayes have it.



Any fairytale notions that we are living in a nation built on the rule of law and of the global economy being based on free market principles has now been exposed as just that, a fairytale. This moment is equivalent to everyone in Vatican City being told, by the Pope, that God is dead.



I’ve been arguing for years that the market is rigged and that the major Wall Street firms are elaborate Ponzi schemes, as have many other people who built their beliefs on rational thought, reasoned logic and evidence. We already came to this conclusion by doing the research and connecting the dots. But now, even our strongest skeptics and the most ardent Wall Street supporters have it all laid out in front of them, on FEDERAL RESERVE SPREADSHEETS.



Even the Financial Times, which named Lloyd Blankfein its 2009 person of the year, reacted by reporting this: “The initial reactions were shock at the breadth of lending, particularly to foreign firms. But the details paint a bleaker and even more disturbing picture.”



Yes, the emperor doesn’t have any clothes. God is, indeed, dead. But, for the moment at least, the illusion continues to hold power. How is this possible?



To start with, as always, the US television “news” media (propaganda) networks just glossed over the whole thing – nothing to see here, just move along, back after a message from our sponsors… Other than that obvious reason, I’ve come to the realization that the Federal Reserve’s crimes are so big, so huge in scale, it is very hard for people to even wrap their head around it and comprehend what has happened here.



Think about it. In just this one peek we got at its operations, we learned that the Fed doled out $12.3 trillion in near-zero interest loans, without Congressional input.



The audacity and absurdity of it all is mind boggling…



Based on many conversations I’ve had with people, it seems that the average person doesn’t comprehend how much a trillion dollars is, let alone 12.3 trillion. You might as well just say 12.3 gazillion, because people don’t grasp a number that large, nor do they understand what would be possible if that money was used in other ways.



Can you imagine what we could do to restructure society with $12.3 trillion? Think about that…



People also can’t grasp the colossal crime committed because they keep hearing the word “loans.” People think of the loans they get. You borrow money, you pay it back with interest, no big deal.



That’s not what happened here. The Fed doled out $12.3 trillion in near-zero interest loans, using the American people as collateral, demanding nothing in return, other than a bunch of toxic assets in some cases. They only gave this money to a select group of insiders, at a time when very few had any money because all these same insiders and speculators crashed the system.



Do you get that? The very people most responsible for crashing the system, were then rewarded with trillions of our dollars. This gave that select group of insiders unlimited power to seize control of assets and have unprecedented leverage over almost everything within their economies – crony capitalism on steroids.



This was a hostile world takeover orchestrated through economic attacks by a very small group of unelected global bankers. They paralyzed the system, then were given the power to recreate it according to their own desires. No free market, no democracy of any kind. All done in secrecy. In the process, they gave themselves all-time record-breaking bonuses and impoverished tens of millions of people – they have put into motion a system that will inevitably collapse again and utterly destroy the very existence of what is left of an economic middle class.



That is not hyperbole. That is what happened.



We are talking about trillions of dollars secretly pumped into global banks, handpicked by a small select group of bankers themselves. All for the benefit of those bankers, and at the expense of everyone else. People can’t even comprehend what that means and the severe consequences that it entails, which we have only just begun to experience.



Let me sum it up for you: The American Dream is O-V-E-R.



Welcome to the neo-feudal-fascist state.



People throughout the world who keep using the dollar are either A) Part of the scam; B) Oblivious to reality; C) Believe that US military power will be able to maintain the value of an otherwise worthless currency; D) All of the above.



No matter which way you look at it, we are all in serious trouble!



If you are an elected official, (I know at least 17 of you subscribe to my newsletter) and you believe in the oath you took upon taking office, you must immediately demand a full audit of the Federal Reserve and have Ben Bernanke and the entire Federal Reserve Board detained. If you are not going to do that, you deserve to have the words “Irrelevant Puppet” tattooed across your forehead.



Yes, those are obviously strong words, but they are the truth.



The Global Banking Cartel has now been so blatantly exposed, you cannot possibly get away with pretending that we live in a nation of law based on the Constitution. The jig is up.



It’s been over two years now; does anyone still seriously not understand why we are in this crisis? Our economy has been looted and burnt to the ground due to the strategic, deliberate decisions made by a small group of unelected global bankers at the Federal Reserve. Do people really not get the connection here? I mean, H.E.L.L.O. Our country is run by an unelected Global Banking Cartel.



I am constantly haunted by a quote from Harry Overstreet, who wrote the following in his 1925 groundbreaking study Influencing Human Behavior: “Giving people the facts as a strategy of influence” has been a failure, “an enterprise fraught with a surprising amount of disappointment.”



This crisis overwhelmingly proves Overstreet’s thesis to be true. Nonetheless, we solider on…



Here’s a roundup of reports on this BernankeLeaks:



Prepare to enter the theater of the absurd…



I’ll start with Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont). He was the senator who Bernanke blew off when he was asked for information on this heist during a congressional hearing. Sanders fought to get the amendment written into the financial “reform” bill that gave us this one-time peek into the Fed’s secret operations. (Remember, remember the 6th of May, HFT, flash crash and terrorism. “Hey, David, Homeland Security is on the phone! They want to ask you questions about some NYSE SLP program.”)



In an article entitled, “A Real Jaw-Dropper at the Federal Reserve,” Senator Sanders reveals some of the details:





At a Senate Budget Committee hearing in 2009, I asked Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke to tell the American people the names of the financial institutions that received an unprecedented backdoor bailout from the Federal Reserve, how much they received, and the exact terms of this assistance. He refused. A year and a half later… we have begun to lift the veil of secrecy at the Fed…



After years of stonewalling by the Fed, the American people are finally learning the incredible and jaw-dropping details of the Fed’s multi-trillion-dollar bailout of Wall Street and corporate America….



We have learned that the $700 billion Wall Street bailout… turned out to be pocket change compared to the trillions and trillions of dollars in near-zero interest loans and other financial arrangements the Federal Reserve doled out to every major financial institution in this country.…



Perhaps most surprising is the huge sum that went to bail out foreign private banks and corporations including two European megabanks — Deutsche Bank and Credit Suisse — which were the largest beneficiaries of the Fed’s purchase of mortgage-backed securities….



Has the Federal Reserve of the United States become the central bank of the world?… [read Global Banking Cartel]



What this disclosure tells us, among many other things, is that despite this huge taxpayer bailout, the Fed did not make the appropriate demands on these institutions necessary to rebuild our economy and protect the needs of ordinary Americans….



What we are seeing is the incredible power of a small number of people who have incredible conflicts of interest getting incredible help from the taxpayers of this country while ignoring the needs of the people. [read more]




In an article entitled, “The Fed Lied About Wall Street,” Zach Carter sums it up this way:





The Federal Reserve audit is full of frightening revelations about U.S. economic policy and those who implement it… By denying the solvency crisis, major bank executives who had run their companies into the ground were allowed to keep their jobs, and shareholders who had placed bad bets on their firms were allowed to collect government largesse, as bloated bonuses began paying out soon after.



But the banks themselves still faced a capital shortage, and were only kept above those critical capital thresholds because federal regulators were willing to look the other way, letting banks account for obvious losses as if they were profitable assets.



So based on the Fed audit data, it’s hard to conclude that Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke was telling the truth when he told Congress on March 3, 2009, that there were no zombie banks in the United States.



“I don’t think that any major U.S. bank is currently a zombie institution,” Bernanke said.



As Bernanke spoke those words banks had been pledging junk bonds as collateral under Fed facilities for several months…



This is the heart of today’s foreclosure fraud crisis. Banks are foreclosing on untold numbers of families who have never missed a payment, because rushing to foreclosure generates lucrative fees for the banks, whatever the costs to families and investors. This is, in fact, far worse than what Paul Krugman predicted. Not only are zombie banks failing to support the economy, they are actively sabotaging it with fraud in order to make up for their capital shortages. Meanwhile, regulators are aggressively looking the other way.



The Fed had to fix liquidity in 2008. That was its job. But as major banks went insolvent, the Fed and Treasury had a responsibility to fix that solvency issue—even though that meant requiring shareholders and executives to live up to losses. Instead, as the Fed audit tells us, policymakers knowingly ignored the real problem, pushing losses onto the American middle class in the process.” [read more]




Even the Financial Times is jumping ship:





Sunlight Shows Cracks in Fed’s Rescue Story



It took two years, a hard-fought lawsuit, and an act of Congress, but finally… the Federal Reserve disclosed the details of its financial crisis lending programs. The initial reactions were shock at the breadth of lending, particularly to foreign firms. But the details paint a bleaker, earlier, and even more disturbing picture…. An even more troubling conclusion from the data is that… it is now apparent that the Fed took on far more risk, on less favorable terms, than most people have realized. [read more]




In true Fed fashion, they didn’t even fully comply with Congress. In a report entitled, “Fed Withholds Collateral Data for $885 Billion in Financial-Crisis Loans,” Bloomberg puts some icing on the cake:





For three of the Fed’s six emergency facilities, the central bank released information on groups of collateral it accepted by asset type and rating, without specifying individual securities. Among them was the Primary Dealer Credit Facility, created in March 2008 to provide loans to brokers as Bear Stearns Cos. collapsed.



“This is a half-step,” said former Atlanta Fed research director Robert Eisenbeis, chief monetary economist at Cumberland Advisors Inc. in Sarasota, Florida. “If you were going to audit the facilities, then would this enable you to do an audit? The answer is ‘No,’ you would have to go in and look at the individual amounts of collateral and how it was broken down to do that. And that is the spirit of what the requirements were in Dodd-Frank.” [read more]




See also:





Here’s the only person on US TV “news” who actually covers and understands any of this, enter Dylan Ratigan, with his guest Chris Whalen from Institutional Risk Analytics. This quote from Whalen sums it up well: “The folks at the Fed have become so corrupt, so captured by the banking industry… the Fed is there to support the speculators and they let the real economy go to hell.”







The Progressive’s Matthew Rothschild has a good quote: “The financial bailout was a giant boondoggle, undemocratic and kleptocratic to its core.”



Matt Stoller on NewDeal 2.0:





End This Fed



The Fed, and specifically the people who run it, are responsible for declining wages, for de-industrialization, for bubbles, and for the systemic corruption of American capital markets. The new financial blogosphere destroyed the Fed’s mythic stature…. With a loss of legitimacy comes a lack of public trust and a vulnerability to any form of critic. The Fed is now less respected than the IRS…. Liberals should stop their love affair with conservative technocratic myths of monetary independence, and cease seeing this Federal Reserve as a legitimate actor. At the very least, we need to begin noticing that these people do in fact run the country, and should not. [read more]




In case anyone is confused into believing that this is just another right vs. left partisan issue, enter Fox Business host Judge Andrew Napolitano with his guest Republican Congressman Ron Paul, who is, of course, a longtime leading Fed critic. Paul hopes to see some Wikileaks on the Federal Reserve:







The Sunlight Foundation shines a light on Bank of America and the Federal Reserve’s brother money manager BlackRock:





Federal Reserve Loan Program Allowed Bank of America to Benefit Twice



Bank of America was one of several banks that was able to play both sides of a Federal Reserve program launched during the 2008 financial crisis. While Bank of America was selling its assets to firms obtaining loans through the Fed program, the investment firm BlackRock—partially owned by Bank of America—was potentially turning a profit by using those loans to buy assets similar to those sold by Bank of America. [read more]




Gretchen Morgenson at the New York Times jumps into the act:





So That’s Where the Money Went



How the truth shines through when you shed a little light on a subject….



All of the emergency lending data released by the Fed are highly revealing, but why weren’t they made public much earlier? That’s a question that Walker F. Todd, a research fellow at the American Institute for Economic Research, is asking.



Mr. Todd, a former assistant general counsel and research officer at the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, said details about the Fed’s vast and various programs should have been available before the Dodd-Frank regulatory reform law was even written.



“The Fed’s current set of powers and the shape of the Dodd-Frank bill over all might have looked quite different if this information had been made public during the debate on the bill,” he said. “Had these tables been out there, I think Congress would have either said no to emergency lending authority or if you get it, it’s going to be a much lower number — half a trillion dollars in the aggregate.” [read more]




Welcome to the “global pawnshop:”





The Fed Operates as a “global pawnshop:” $9 trillion to 18 financial institutions



What the report shows is that the Fed operated as a global pawnshop taking in practically anything the banks had for collateral. What is even more disturbing is that the Federal Reserve did not enact any punitive charges to these borrowers so you had banks like Goldman Sachs utilizing the crisis to siphon off cheap collateral. The Fed is quick to point out that “taxpayers were fully protected” but mention little of the destruction they have caused to the US dollar. This is a hidden cost to Americans and it also didn’t help that they were the fuel that set off the biggest global housing bubble ever witnessed by humanity. [read more]




“No strings attached.” Financial reporter Barry Grey unleashes the truth:





Fed report lifts lid on Great Bank Heist of 2008-2009



The banks and corporations that benefited were not even obliged to provide an account of what they did with the money. The entire purpose of the operation was to use public funds to cover the gambling losses of the American financial aristocracy, and create the conditions for the financiers and speculators to make even more money.



All of the 21,000 transactions cited in the Fed documents?released under a provision included, over the Fed’s objections, in this year’s financial regulatory overhaul bill?were carried out in secret. The unelected central bank operated without any congressional mandate or oversight.



The documents shed light on the greatest plundering of social resources in history. It was carried out under both the Republican Bush and Democratic Obama administrations. Those who organized the looting of the public treasury were long-time Wall Street insiders: men like Bush’s treasury secretary and former Goldman Sachs CEO Henry Paulson and the then-president of the New York Federal Reserve, Timothy Geithner….



The Fed documents show that the US central bank enabled banks and corporations to offload their bad debts onto the Fed’s balance sheet. Now, in order to prevent a collapse of the dollar and a default by the US government, the American people are being told they must sacrifice to reduce the national debt and budget deficit.



But as the vast sums make clear, the “sacrifice” being demanded of working people means their impoverishment?wage-cutting, mass unemployment, cuts in health care, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc.



The very scale of the Fed bailout points to the scale of the financial crash and the criminality that fostered it…. The entire US capitalist economy rested on a huge Ponzi scheme that was bound to collapse…



The banks were able to take the cheap cash from the Fed and lend it back to the government at double and quadruple the interest rates they were initially charged?pocketing many billions in the process….



The ongoing saga of the looting of the economy by the financial elite puts the lie to the endless claims that “there is no money” for jobs, housing, education or health care. The ruling class is awash in money. [read more]




Here’s an old Jim Rogers interview from two years ago when this whole thing was originally going down:







Here are two videos that I made last year, with an assist from Alan Grayson and Dylan Ratigan:



The Wall Street Economic Death Squad – Part I









The Greatest Theft in History – Wall Street Economic Death Squad – Part II











And on a final note, you may as well rock out to this new song while Rome burns…



WORLD PREMIERE ~ Ben Bernanke: Public Enemy #1 – Mr. Big Shot (((Music Video)))







Ben Shalom Bernanke is wanted for violating the United States Constitution, committing acts of financial terrorism and crimes against humanity. As a leading member of the Global Banking Cartel, he is considered a highly dangerous enemy combatant. Citizens of the United States hereby demand that he be properly detained under the laws and customs of war.



Original Article

Thursday, December 9, 2010

11 Reasons Why The Threat From Al-Qaeda is Not Real


The United States government has repeatedly stated that the treat from Al-Qaeda against America is very real, and that all action is being taken to eliminate that threat. Nobody in their right mind would question such a serious assessment about a sensitive national security matter from the world's leading democracy. But the truth is that over the past fifty years America's democratic institutions like the press have been weakened, and an elitist National Security State has risen, and taken control over all aspects of government.

Since World War II U.S. leaders have consistently lied to the American people about foreign threats in order to feed the military machine's appetite for war. All of these wars are unjust and unwarranted but that does not stop the self-interested criminals who control U.S. foreign policy. A recent example of a lie they told was their assertion that Saddam Hussein was in possession of weapons of mass destruction. That episode revealed to many people the true nature of the American government. Simply put, it does not care about the truth, or the American people, or the members of the military. U.S. leaders like former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and current Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, to name but a few, tell lies at will. Dishonesty means nothing to them. They deceive the American people, the American military, and the world about their motives and methods - and they lie to themselves about their own powers and abilities.

Next to the hundreds of thousands of innocent people who were slaughtered by the American war machine in its numerous criminal wars, U.S. soldiers have suffered the most - way more than the rest of the population in America. It can't be said enough that the U.S. government's treatment of its soldiers is scandalous and shameful. It is so out of whack that in America today dogs are treated better than military vets. Some dogs are even treated to luxurious spas while military vets are denied the proper health care that they deserve. Instead, they're left to rot, and commit suicide. And for what? To defend America? To defeat Al-Qaeda? Or to keep the war machine and its benefactors rich and powerful? As you will see by the end of this post, it is the latter.

I. Setting The Historical Scene: The United States Government And The American Mainstream Media Are Anti-Democracy, Anti-Freedom, Anti-Peace

"All governments lie." said American journalist I. F. Stone. You can add to that great quote "and all newspapers lie, too."

By joining forces together, the CIA and American newspapers sold two criminal wars to the people - a manufactured and destructive "War on Terror," and the Iraq war. Most journalists were not consciously part of the propaganda campaign, they just bought the hype, but, without a doubt, a lot of journalists who work for the CIA knowingly injected false information into their columns and helped spread nationalist fever across America to boost public support for the wars.

Government spies posing as independent journalists is one of the CIA's least kept secrets. Former CIA director William Colby famously said "The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." Carl Bernstein revealed the relationship between the CIA and the media in his 1977 Rolling Stone article "The CIA and the Media." An excerpt:

"Some of these journalists' relationships with the Agency were tacit; some were explicit. There was cooperation, accommodation and overlap. Journalists provided a full range of clandestine services -- from simple intelligence gathering to serving as go-betweens with spies in Communist countries. Reporters shared their notebooks with the CIA. Editors shared their staffs. Some of the journalists were Pulitzer Prize winners, distinguished reporters who considered themselves ambassadors-without-portfolio for their country. Most were less exalted: foreign correspondents who found that their association with the Agency helped their work; stringers and freelancers who were as interested it the derring-do of the spy business as in filing articles, and, the smallest category, full-time CIA employees masquerading as journalists abroad. In many instances, CIA documents show, journalists were engaged to perform tasks for the CIA with the consent of the managements America's leading news organizations."
The media's relationship with the CIA began well before the Vietnam war, but it was after that disastrous war ended when the Pentagon and the CIA took their clandestine media operations to another level. They wanted to completely gut the free press in America, which contributed to the anti-war sentiment in the late 60s and early 70s. Government officials secretly established deep ties to journalists to make sure that the American people would be less informed about America's foreign policy, and future conflicts, and hence, less combative against the government and less anti-war.

The Pentagon has been interested in information warfare for many decades, and the fruits of their studies are applied to the American people, and to foreign enemies. "PSYOP," shorthand for "Psychological Operations," is a propaganda and disinformation Pentagon program that is used in the foreign battlefield to break the will of enemy forces, and make the ensuing battle a little less bloody. It worked wonderfully in the Gulf war. Retired Col. Jim Noll said that PSYOPs was a life-saving military technique. From a 2001 article called "Persian Gulf War 10 years later: Winning the war by convincing the enemy to go home" by Al Zdon:



"The psychological warfare in the end saved many lives, on both sides. "I know many American lives were saved because so many Iraqis had deserted or chose not to fight when we arrived. Many of them were holding up our leaflets to surrender with."

The leaflets were based on the intelligence the Psyops battalion had gained from prisoners. Some showed large bombers dropping their payloads. Others showed tank units how to surrender. Others showed Americans landing from the sea (a military ploy to divert Iraqi defenses. The U.S. never did land from the sea.) Others were printed on fake Iraqi money so the soldiers could conceal them in their wallets."
Wired magazine reported in June that the Pentagon may change the name PSYOP to Military Information Support and/to Operations (MISO). I wrote an article about the proposed name change back in July called "MISO: Making Intelligence Sound Obscure."

The threat by PSYOPS to democracy, and freedom in America cannot be overstated. It is a fact that the Pentagon and the CIA routinely use PSYOPS against the American people to make them support illegal and unnecessary wars. Indeed, it is not a stretch to say that today the United States is a PSYOPS state, not a democratic state.

It should concern all Americans, and all citizens around the world that the CIA and Pentagon are using psychological military techniques inside the United States against the American people. The CIA was created to keep tabs on foreign enemies, not the American people. Former Governor Jesse Ventura has confirmed that the CIA is working within America's borders a number of times in his many television interviews. He says that a cadre of CIA officials questioned him shortly after he won the election in Minnesota as an independent candidate about how he won. Ventura guesses that the CIA questioned him because they were surprised that a political maverick like him succeeded and wanted to know his political strategy in order to prevent a similar candidate from advancing to such a high political position in the future.

Former President Harry Truman criticized the CIA for intervening in domestic affairs in a Washington Post op-ed in 1963: "For some time I have been disturbed by the way the CIA has been diverted from its original assignment. It has become an operational and at times a policy-making arm of the government.... I never had any thought that when I set up the CIA that it would be injected into peacetime cloak and dagger operations."

Philip Agee, who served in the CIA from 1957 to 1968, left the Agency because it failed to uphold the beliefs and values of the American people. He remained a leading critic of CIA policies until his death on January 7, 2008. In his 1975 book "Inside the Company: CIA Diary," Agee warned that the murderous methods used by the CIA and the American empire in foreign lands would be used against the American people. "The killings at Kent State and Jackson State," he wrote, "show clearly enough that sooner or later our counter-insurgency methods would be applied at home." The rise of FEMA, TSA, and the overall police state proves that Agee's prediction was accurate. In fact, the threat of martial law is so severe that it can be declared by the White House in the very near future.

II. Flashback: The Threat From Iraq Was Not Real

Knowing the truth matters in a democracy because without the truth citizens can't make informed decisions about government policies that impact their lives. It is not possible to consciously answer fundamental societal questions like "should we go to war?" without a firm grasp of all the facts at hand. When independent journalists fail to provide the simple and straightforward facts to the public, they become complicit in government murder and fraud, and deserve even more ridicule than dishonest government officials and government-owned journalists.

Had the truth emerged that Saddam Hussein was not in possession of weapons of mass destruction before America invaded Iraq in March of 2003, there would not have been any public support for the war. True, hundreds of thousands of people around the world protested the invasion of Iraq before it was launched, but many people didn't because they believed the lie that Saddam was a dangerous threat and would use WMDs against America if he wasn't taken out. Leaders in the Bush administration used the oldest trick in the book of war to get the people to support a war that was not in their interest: they created a justification. Basically, they lied.

Since a government's justification for war, whether real or contrived, carries weight with a significant amount of people because they accept the word of authority over science and critical thinking, it is crucial to know, especially in societies based on the consent of the people, if a justification given by the government for war is true, or false. In the case of Iraq, as we now know, it was false.

It is a tragedy that the world did not learn the fact that Saddam did not have weapons of mass destruction a lot sooner. Hundreds of thousands of innocent people died in Iraq who could have lived a long and fulfilling life, and the country itself was destroyed in a deliberate and systematic fashion. Dirk Adriaensens, a member of the Executive Committee of the BRussells Tribunal, which is a group that was part of the World Tribunal on Iraq, describes exactly how Iraq was demolished by the sick and murderous U.S. and U.K. governments in his article "Iraq: The Age of Darkness."

Leaders in the Bush administration knew all along that Saddam did not have WMDs and was not a threat, but they wanted to go to war so bad that they made stuff up and presented it as the truth to the whole world. Ellen Knickmeyer, a former Washington Post bureau chief in Baghdad and Cairo, said this much and more in an article she wrote in October after WikiLeaks published hundreds of thousands of Iraq war logs. "Recent revelations by WikiLeaks," Knickmeyer said, "show how top American leaders lied, knowingly, to the American public, to American troops, and to the world."

Some defenders of the Iraq war insist that it was noble and good because a tyrant was removed from power. This is a poisonous and dangerous half-truth. Indeed, it is true that Saddam was a vicious tyrant, and a godforsaken man, but his removal from power didn't require a huge ground invasion and subsequent military occupation since he had no real support from his people and military. But that's beside the point because removing tyrants from power is not an objective of U.S. foreign policy. And it should not be. Tyrants are always removed from below, never from above.

If American leaders truly cared about the rule of law and democracy in Iraq they would have presented their case to the United Nations that Saddam was a war criminal for gassing the Kurds, which would have been met with agreement, and from there a variety of peaceful and legal means would have been recommended by the international community to bring Saddam to justice. If he then resisted international arrest, there would be a legal justification for using force to capture him and bring him to trial. But that course was not taken by American leaders because justice was only on their lips, not on their minds. American leaders and the CIA, unfortunately, are destroyers - not defenders - of democracy and the rule of a law. The same is true for Israeli leaders and Mossad. They are counterfeiters and war criminals who deserve to be hanged, not defended and praised.

Noam Chomsky said on Democracy Now last week that the political leadership in both the United States and Israel share a "profound hatred for democracy." This statement gets at the truth of the current political reality in Washington and Tel Aviv, but U.S. and Israeli don't just hate democracy, they also hate the American people, humanity, truth, honor, peace, and all that is good and righteous in the world.

Just as Iraq was destroyed by design by U.S. leaders, America is being destroyed by design by U.S. leaders. The American people are coming to this realization reluctantly, but they're coming to it at last. They are beginning to discover that their country is in ruins not by accident but from other causes, namely, that their top leaders are traitors who desire the destruction of America and the advancement of a new world order in which their illegally acquired power and wealth grows evermore.

Both Herodotus and Socrates said "The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance." Knowledge of the cause for war brings good into the world, ignorance of the causes of war brings evil into the world. Despite what we have been taught, war is not natural. War exists when ruling before the Second World War began, and when it ended, after millions of people died, historian Howard Zinn learned the same truth the hard way and then taught it to people for decades, up to the start of the Iraq war. In 2006 he wrote, "war itself is the enemy of the human race."

To defeat war, humanity's collective enemy, we must learn the truth for why there is war in our time. When asked why America is at war American leaders always point to the attacks on September 11, 2001, but the official account of what happened on that day is not true. New scientific evidence gathered by a collection of physicists, scientists, architects, and engineers, among them Steven E. Jones, Niels Harrit, and Richard Gage, proves unequivocally that the towers, including the rarely mentioned building 7, collapsed due to controlled demolition using explosives.

American leaders told one of the greatest lies in human history when they said that Al-Qaeda was responsible for the 9/11 attacks. That lie spawned an immediate and criminal invasion of Afghanistan, and a much larger, and more consequential global war on terrorism that is still being waged in numerous countries more than nine years after the attacks. Former President George W. Bush also used the 9/11 lie to paint Saddam Hussein as a supporter of terrorism. In his State of the Union Address on January 28, 2003, Bush said: "Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaida." This statement later was proven to be a complete lie. Saddam had no connections to Al-Qaeda.

President Barack Obama has frequently relied on the 9/11 lie to support his administration's war in Afghanistan. After the Christmas Day airliner bombing attempt last December, which also remains a dubious event because the bomber was boarded onto the plane with help from an unmentioned person who is presumed to be an intelligence official, Obama said: "We are at war against al Qaeda, a far-reaching network of violence and hatred that attacked us on 9/11, that killed nearly 3,000 innocent people and that is plotting to strike us again. And we will do whatever it takes to defeat them."

Obama was blatantly lying when he said that Al-Qaeda is a "far-reaching network of violence and hatred." Once you research the origins of Al-Qaeda, which in Arabic simply means "the base," you can't help but view American leaders like Bush and Obama as devilish tricksters who are trying to pull the wool over our eyes.

III. 11 Reasons Why The Threat From Al-Qaeda is Not Real

Al-Qaeda is either one of these things, or it is a combination of them: a) a completely fake threat; the organization does not exist, b) an organization that exists in small numbers but was created by the CIA to serve a corrupt U.S. foreign policy, and remains a U.S. intelligence asset in the manufactured global war on terrorism, or c) a small organization that exists independently of the U.S. government but its strength and influence in the Middle East is exaggerated by radical policymakers and officials in Washington. Out of all three statements the first and second deserve the most serious attention because they are supported by the evidence listed below.

#1. Radical American cleric Anwar Al-Awlaki, who was ordered to be assassinated by President Obama, met with top military officials at the Pentagon months after the 9/11 attacks. Were Pentagon officials sincerely interested in reaching out to members of the Muslim community, or were they recruiting radical Muslim clerics to spread the message of radical Islam in order to validate and sustain the Bush administration's war on terror? It is not outrageous or crazy to raise the question if the U.S. government aims to inflame radical Islam, even by funding and supporting undercover intelligence agents that front as terrorists, in order to make the American people perceive that they are in danger of violent Islamic extremism, and cause them to give up their liberties for permanent security.

An alarming piece of news is that follows an undeniable pattern of government-induced terrorist activity is of an FBI informant, Craig Monteilh, who infiltrated a Mosque in California, and shouted violent rhetoric with the intention to entrap potential terrorists, and then sell it to the public that "Hey, the FBI arrested someone at a Mosque who wanted to blow a building up," without mentioning the fact that the FBI agent was the one who got the ball rolling in the first place. In this case, however, the government's plan to attract and create terrorists didn't work. The Washington Post reported: "In the Irvine case, Monteilh's mission as an informant backfired. Muslims were so alarmed by his talk of violent jihad that they obtained a restraining order against him."

#2. CIA Director Leon Panetta revealed in June 2010 on ABC's This Week that there are less than 100 Al-Qaeda members in the Afghanistan-Pakistan region. "I think the estimate on the number of Al Qaeda," said Panetta, "is actually relatively small. At most, we're looking at 50 to 100, maybe less. It's in that vicinity." By contrast, there are more than 100,000 American soldiers and military contractors in the region. You can't call it a fair fight. You can't even say "it's not a fair fight," because, in reality, it is not a fight at all. It is not a fight. 50,000 Al-Qaeda members would make it a fight. It still wouldn't be a fair fight, but it would be a fight.

#3. The International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), one of the world's leading security think tanks, published a report this year which said that the threat of Al-Qaeda and the Taliban is exaggerated by Western policymakers. The report warned that the war in Afghanistan will become a "long, drawn-out disaster" if troops are not withdrawn. Nigel Inkster, a former deputy chief of Britain's Secret Intelligence Service who is a member of the think tank, also said that the threat from Al-Qaeda in Pakistan is minimal, and almost absent in Yemen, and Somalia.

Commenting on the report by the IISS, journalist and author Eric Margolis said:



"The IISS’s findings are a direct challenge to Obama, Britain’s new prime minister, David Cameron, and other US allies with troops in Afghanistan. This report undermines their rational used to sustain the increasingly unpopular conflict. It will certainly convince sceptics that the real reason for occupation of Afghanistan has to do with oil, excluding China from the region, and keeping watch on nuclear-armed Pakistan."
#4. Former US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said in an interview to the Los Angeles Times's Patt Morrison in October 2010 that Al-Qaeda doesn't exist. "The organization that did 9/11 — that Al Qaeda — I don't think really exists," said Rice. The statement is shocking, to say the least, and contradicts the official 9/11 story which is built on the premise that Al-Qaeda, regarded as an Islamic terrorist group by the United States, England, Canada, Israel, Saudi Arabia and many other governments, was large and sophisticated enough to plan and execute the biggest terrorist attack in the United States. Apparently, Rice doesn't agree with President Obama that Al-Qaeda is a "far-reaching network of violence."

#5. The U.S. government created, and funded Islamic fundamentalism in the 1980s to be used to draw the Soviet Union into Afghanistan, and bleed it to death in a costly and unwinnable war. This was no doubt a smart move when you have a strategic hat on, when you are sitting comfortably on the seat of power, but when you are confronting issues of peace and war, life and death, coexistence and annihilation, on a very small planet, it was a very cynical and dangerous error. Zbigniew Brzezinski, who is considered a realist in foreign policy circles and a critic of Israel, was one of the leaders behind the operation as President Jimmy Carter's National Security Advisor. In an interview he gave to a weekly French magazine called "Le Nouvel Observateur" in January 1998 he discussed how and why the U.S. funded Muslim terrorists (or freedom fighters, depending on your outlook). Excerpt from the interview:



Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn't believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don't regret anything today?

Brzezinski: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam War. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the break-up of the Soviet empire.
The fact that America trained and funded a terrorist network in Central Asia less than two decades before the September 11, 2001 attacks is a relevant historical fact. It raises the strong possibility that after the Soviet Union collapsed the CIA used their terrorist network to promote U.S. foreign policy by covert means, including in the United States on September 11, 2001.

#6. Robin Cook, who served as a British MP for 22 years and as Foreign Secretary from 1997 to 2001, wrote an article for the Guardian in July 2005, a month before his death, called "The struggle against terrorism cannot be won by military means." Throughout the article Cook makes many devastating critiques of the West's war on terror, but here is a quote that requires our greatest attention:



"Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by western security agencies. Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. Al-Qaida, literally "the database", was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians."
Cook's analysis is dead on in certain respects, but, like others, including author Chalmers Johnson (RIP), he made the mistake of contextualizing terrorism against the West as the result of a blowback against American foreign policy that is orchestrated chiefly by a mad and independent Osama Bin Laden and his hardcore followers. In reality, the problem of terrorism originates directly from within Western governments, mainly the United States, England, and Israel - governments that are not democratic, but authoritarian, and rely on secrecy, misinformation, and deception to promote policies that enrich a few well-connected individuals who are powerful and immoral enough to negatively influence government legislation and government policy.

#7. A BBC article from July 2004 called "Al-Qaeda's origins and links" reveals that Osama Bin Laden was a CIA agent in the 1980s. The article states: "During the anti-Soviet jihad Bin Laden and his fighters received American and Saudi funding. Some analysts believe Bin Laden himself had security training from the CIA." It is highly possible that Osama Bin Laden was still an agent of the CIA on September 11, 2001. As they say of the CIA, once a member, always a member.

#8. J. Michael Springmann, a 20 year foreign service official, and a former Consulate officer in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, has publicly stated for many years that the CIA brought over Muslim radicals to the United States for secret terrorist training. Most of these radicals were brought through Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, where Springman was stationed from 1987 to 1989 before he was let go by the State Department because he raised questions about the weakly enforced VISA qualification process.

In an interview with Alex Jones in May 2002 Springmann pointed out that 15 of the 19 hijackers in the 9/11 attacks entered the United States after CIA officials in Jeddah approved their visas. "According to the Los Angeles Times," said Springmann, "fifteen of the nineteen people, the Saudis who were allegedly responsible for flying planes into the World Trade Towers and the Pentagon, they got their visas from the Consulate at Jeddah."

In an article written in February of 2003 called "Policing the Borders: Old Fears, New Realities" Springmann wrote about how U.S. foreign policy works, and to what ends:



"What very few Americans understand is the pathological Cold War mindset of those who have shaped U.S. foreign policy since the middle of the last century. It is a worldview with little interest in "security" per se. For those who exercise ultimate power, success is measured by the bottom lines on certain corporate quarterly reports. These numbers represent transcendent ends which have justified and continue to justify any and every means imaginable, from rubber-stamping illegitimate visa applications to full scale massacre."
Click here to read the transcript of Alex Jones's interview with Springmann in May 2002; click here to listen to Alex Jones's interview with Springmann in February 2010. Both interviews are very revealing, and should be required listening/reading for everyone.

#9. Germany's Der Spiegel's published an article by Siegesmund von Ilsemann called "Arming the Middle East: The Checkered History of American Weapons Deals" in June 2007. The article backed up the reporting done by the BBC, and elsewhere that the United States government "supplied Afghan freedom fighters in the 1980s with money and arms for their struggle against occupying Soviet troops. One of the best customers for the CIA back then was Saudi millionaire Osama Bin Laden." This account is only half-true. The CIA funded and trained a network of Muslim fighters not to liberate Afghanistan from corrupt Soviet influence, but to create havoc and instigate a Soviet invasion so that it would drain itself of blood and treasure. Once the objective of bringing down the Soviet Union was achieved, the stage was set for the United States and the West to invade Afghanistan and take advantage of the country's vast resources, from oil to heroin.

#10. Selig Harrison, a current member of the Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars, a former senior associate of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and an expert on South Asia, said in March 2001 at a conference called "Terrorism and Regional Security: Managing the Challenges in Asia," that the CIA and Pakistan's ISI helped create the backward and tyrannical Taliban. "The CIA made a historic mistake in encouraging Islamic groups from all over the world to come to Afghanistan," said Harrison, a quote that appears in an article in the Times of India from March 2001. According to Harrison, without the CIA and ISI's funds and guns, the Taliban wouldn't exist as a political and religious force in Afghanistan. An excerpt from the Times of India article:



The old associations between the intelligence agencies continue, Harrison said. "The CIA still has close links with the ISI (Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence)."

Today that money and those weapons have helped build up the Taliban, Harrison said. "The Taliban are not just recruits from 'madrassas' (Muslim theological schools) but are on the payroll of the ISI (Inter Services Intelligence, the intelligence wing of the Pakistani government)." The Taliban are now "making a living out of terrorism."

Harrison said the UN Security Council resolution number 1333 calls for an embargo on arms to the Taliban. "But it is a resolution without teeth because it does not provide sanctions for non-compliance," he said. "The US is not backing the Russians who want to give more teeth to the resolution."

Now it is Pakistan that "holds the key to the future of Afghanistan," Harrison said. The creation of the Taliban was central to Pakistan's "pan-Islamic vision," Harrison said.

It came after "the CIA made the historic mistake of encouraging Islamic groups from all over the world to come to Afghanistan," he said. The creation of the Taliban had been "actively encouraged by the ISI and the CIA," he said. "Pakistan has been building up Afghan collaborators who will sustain Pakistan," he said.
#11. The September 11, 2001 attacks, which serve as the basis for America's wars in the Middle East, were committed by the United States government with assistance from the government of Israel. This is an indisputable fact. Here is a list of three points that proves without a shadow of a doubt that the official 9/11 story is false, and indefensible:

* American physicist Steven E. Jones, Danish chemist Niels Harrit, and others wrote a peer-reviewed paper in 2009 called "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe," that was published in The Open Chemical Physics Journal. The authors discovered nano-thermite in samples of the WTC dust, a highly advanced explosive that is made by a small number of companies. They wrote:



"As measured using DSC, the material ignites and reacts vigorously at a temperature of approximately 430 °C, with a rather narrow exotherm, matching fairly closely an independent observation on a known super-thermite sample. The low temperature of ignition and the presence of iron oxide grains less than 120 nm show that the material is not conventional thermite (which ignites at temperatures above 900 °C) but very likely a form of super-thermite."
* The vertical collapse of Building Se7en, a building that was not struck by a plane. Steel buildings have never collapsed before because of fire alone. Common sense suggests that explosives were used to bring the building down, which rules out involvement by radical Muslims because officer workers would have noticed their activity in the building prior to 9/11.

* Firefighters said they witnessed and heard loud back-to-back explosions coming from the Towers. In this video clip, a couple of firefighters recount what they saw. One of them says, "It was as if they had detonated. . . as if they were planning to take down a building: boom boom boom boom boom."

There are so many more points, and so many more smoking guns, but it does not get any more obvious, any more in-your-face than hearing firefighters say that they heard bombs going off. All honest individuals must rethink their position on the 9/11 attacks after taking a look at the collapse of building 7, and watching firefighters say that they heard explosions. You don't have to be an expert to see the obvious. You don't even have to be smart. You just have to be honest and unafraid.

IV. Ending The Perpetual War on Terror And The Not So Great Game

Now that we know the threat from Al-Qaeda is not real, we must pressure our Western governments to end the global war on terrorism, and bring home all the troops from Afghanistan, Iraq, and everywhere else in the Middle East. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are unjust, unnecessary, and destructive to global peace, global harmony, and global stability. The U.S. and UK governments are not waging war in Iraq and Afghanistan to establish free and open democracies but to fulfill criminal goals, and emerge victorious in the 21st century's "Great Game."

The West's war on terror is all about the Great Game, not defeating "Al-Qaeda" or Islamic extremists. A small proof that this is true comes from Prince Andrew's own words. In one of the diplomatic cables published by WikiLeaks, Andrew says:



Addressing the Ambassador directly, Prince Andrew then turned to regional politics. He stated baldly that “the United Kingdom, Western Europe (and by extension you Americans too”) were now back in the thick of playing the Great Game. More animated than ever, he stated cockily: “And this time we aim to win!”
Such arrogance reflects anti-human and anti-freedom beliefs, which are shared by many members of the elite in the United States, England, and Europe, who desire war and conflict over peace and brotherhood. The Western elite have the hearts of monsters. They are more interested in winning a geopolitical game that brings death and mass destruction than in uplifting humanity, and making the world a better place for all people.

U.S. and U.K. policymakers cynically fund and assist radical Muslims, and sometimes stage terrorist attacks that are blamed on radical Muslims, to maintain the public perception in the Western world that there are thousands of nasty terrorists who wish them harm. But this is not true. And it is a dangerous perception that must be erased. As Professor Michel Chossudovsky writes in his 2008 article "Al Qaeda and the "War on Terrorism":



"U.S. foreign policy is not geared towards curbing the tide of Islamic fundamentalism. In fact, it is quite the opposite. The significant development of "radical Islam", in the wake of the Cold War in the former Soviet Union and the Middle East is consistent with Washington’s hidden agenda. The latter consists in sustaining rather than combating international terrorism, with a view to destabilizing national societies and preventing the articulation of genuine secular social movements directed against the American Empire.

Washington continues to support — through CIA covert operations — the development of Islamic fundamentalism, throughout the Middle East, in the former Soviet Union as well in China and India.

Throughout the developing world, the growth of sectarian, fundamentalist and other such organizations tends to serve U.S. interests. These various organizations and armed insurgents have been developed, particularly in countries where state institutions have collapsed under the brunt of the IMF-sponsored economic reforms.

These fundamentalist organizations contribute by destroying and displacing secular institutions.

Islamic fundamentalism creates social and ethnic divisions. It undermines the capacity of people to organize against the American Empire. These organizations or movements, such as the Taliban, often foment "opposition to Uncle Sam" in a way which does not constitute any real threat to America’s broader geopolitical and economic interests."
We must speak the full truth about the origins of the war on terror if we want to end it. Journalists need to publicize the historical facts about U.S. support for terrorism, and report the truth about the September 11, 2001 attacks. We can't let the truth about government-staged terrorism be trapped in the black hole of history. There will be change once we speak the full truth passionately and demand justice. The old tyrants will vanish under a new sun.

A different world is possible. A world with universal and permanent peace on Earth is not a Utopian dream. There are no reasons for conflict in the world today. The threat of "terrorism" is a manufactured threat. Al-Qaeda doesn't exist. And 9/11 is a big lie. In sum, the War on Terror is totally illegitimate and criminal. The governments of United States, England, Canada, Australia, and Israel represent the only obstacle to peace in the Middle East. Their leaders have committed crimes against humanity, and must be brought to justice.

"A war on world poverty may well do more for the security of the west than a war on terror," said U.K. MP Robin Cook in 2005. He was right, and then some. But it is not enough to be right. We must win. We must put an end to the War on Terror and the Great Game. We must restart the global anti-war movement. And this time we must expose the lie about 9/11 because victory against the war criminals is impossible without a firm foothold on the ground of truth.

Original Article