UM coach “thought it was odd” bomb sniffing dogs were at start and finish lines
Paul Joseph Watson
April 15, 2013
An eyewitness to the two explosions at the Boston Marathon today said that a “drill” was repeatedly announced before the bombs exploded and that he “thought it was odd” bomb sniffing dogs were in place before the blast.
University of Mobile’s Cross Country Coach Ali Stevenson told Local 15 News, “They kept making announcements on the loud speaker that it was just a drill and there was nothing to worry about. “It seemed like there was some sort of threat, but they kept telling us it was just a drill.”
The news station also reports that Stevenson “thought it was odd there were bomb sniffing dogs at the start and finish lines.”
Stevenson then describes hearing the explosions as he ran away from the scene, having just completed the marathon.
If this report is accurate, it clearly suggests there could have been some degree of prior knowledge of the bombing, which killed two people and injured at least 23.
The fact that the explosions were preceded and overlapped by a”drill” of an almost identical nature mirrors other major terror attacks, such as the 7/7 bombings in London.
It is important to emphasize that the New York Times recently reported that most of the recent domestic terror plots in the United States “were facilitated by the F.B.I.,” suggesting that today’s incident in Boston may have been part of such an operation.
It remains to be seen how the media and the Obama administration will exploit this incident depending who gets the blame, but Rahm Emanuel’s “never let a serious crisis go to waste” advisory is sure to be in play.
The federal government has entrusted the security of the nation’s airports to the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). Yet according to a recent report from the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Inspector General (OIG), the agency’s bungling of an airport security badge vetting program allowed at least 11 individuals with criminal backgrounds to obtain access to secured airport areas. What’s more, says the OIG, because of the TSA’s lack of oversight, some individuals with criminal records may retain such access to this day.
According to the OIG, the TSA initially selected a single vendor, the American Association of Airport Executives’ (AAAE) Transportation Security Clearinghouse, to relay background check information to the TSA, which then submits the data for a Criminal History Records Check and a Security Threat Assessment. Only individuals who pass both screenings are to be given badges granting them unescorted access to secured airport areas.
Responding to requests from airports, the TSA created the Aviation Channeling Services Provider (ASCP) program in 2010 to offer them a choice of vendors for the badge vetting process. The next year it selected three vendors to participate in the program: AAAE, Telos ID, and L1 Identity Solutions (now MorphoTrust Enrollment Solutions).
This being a government project, it comes as no surprise that the OIG found that the TSA “did not properly plan, manage, and implement” it. In fact, the “project is still not completely implemented and continues to face challenges to accomplish its mission.” As of July 1, 2012, only a single airport had switched vendors (from AAAE to Telos ID), and MorphoTrust Enrollment Solutions was just beginning the testing phase of the project.
From the beginning, the project was doomed. “TSA did not have a written comprehensive plan for the ASCP project design and implementation,” noted the report. The agency has very little documentation on the project at all, and none about who made or approved project decisions. The project team supposedly made decisions, but no one can prove what they were because “TSA did not maintain team meeting minutes but relied on agendas as evidence of actions assigned to each responsible member of the team.”
The TSA also has no idea how much the project has cost thus far. Writes the OIG, “TSA did not track and report all project costs related to implementing the ASCP project.” As a result, it cannot say whether more than three vendors could have been acquired, and it “cannot be sure that it has not incurred unplanned additional costs.”
“TSA did not establish standard testing requirements,” says the report, “nor did the agency require that all vendors test system functionality with at least one airport.” When the time came for testing, the TSA was ready, but none of its vendors was; one had not completed testing nearly a year later. “Since TSA did not establish testing timeframe requirements, the agency could not hold the vendors accountable for delaying the ASCP project schedule.”
All of this ensured that the deployment of the project would be fraught with difficulties. Sure enough, when ASCP was finally deployed in April 2012, “airports began to experience significant problems with the new … system,” according to the OIG. “Airport operations were hindered because of aviation workers’ inability to access secured areas without proper badge authority.”
At this point the TSA, in its wisdom, decided that if airports couldn’t operate without security badges and the badges were being held up because background checks were delayed, the solution was not to fix the problems with the project (or even to revert to the old system) but simply to allow airports to issue badges without background checks. Thus, from April 20 to June 1, 2012, airports could issue badges to those whose background checks were in limbo, with the proviso that these badges would be revoked if the checks were not completed within 14 days.
Predictably, “TSA did not track which airports used the alternate measures and the number of badges that were issued under those measures,” the report observes. Only after the OIG inquired about these important data did the TSA even bother to look into the matter, and then it merely initiated a survey in which airports were asked to self-report on the matter.
Of the 446 airports in the country, 290 responded to the survey; and of those, 168 said that they had adopted the alternate measures. “Five of the airports identified a total of 11 individuals with criminal backgrounds, who received badges during the alternate measures period and would not have received badges if they had been properly vetted. Five of those individuals held their badge for more than 14 days, and therefore those airports were not in compliance with the alternate measure.” The TSA has absolutely no knowledge of how many people with criminal backgrounds may have received security badges at the remaining 156 airports, nor does it know how many may still have them. Moreover, even the airports that responded to the survey had an incentive to make themselves look good, so it is possible that they underreported the number of shady characters who obtained or still possess badges. “Therefore,” declares the OIG, “individuals with criminal records may currently have access to secured areas in our Nation’s airports.”
The report goes on to offer recommendations for improving future projects. These are the sorts of commonsense things any private company or organization would naturally do, such as developing a “lessons learned report” from ASCP so that they don’t repeat their mistakes, documenting every step of a project, and holding vendors accountable for meeting their objectives. The TSA concurred with these recommendations, but who really believes the agency will implement them? It simply has no incentive to do so given that it is in no danger of going under no matter how horribly its projects are mismanaged. As Ronald Reagan memorably quipped, “A government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth.”
The OIG also recommended that the TSA “conduct a comprehensive review of badges issued” without background checks, which the TSA also agreed to do. But if that review is managed in a similar fashion as the project itself — and there is little reason to expect otherwise — it is likely to take years and still not end up with a full accounting of individuals with criminal records who possess security badges.
Anyone who thinks the TSA makes flying safer just isn’t paying attention.
Soon after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, rumors began to circulate challenging the official narrative that it was an unprovoked surprise attack. The cumulative evidence gathered over the last seventy years by scholars, journalists, and investigators vindicates those suspicious of treachery from the top; for it comprises a solid circumstantial case that Franklin D. Roosevelt and his top advisors deliberately provoked the attack and deliberately looked the other way before it came.
What was the reason for their treachery?
Roosevelt wanted to plunge the United States into the European war on the side of Great Britain but was unsuccessful in provoking Germany in the North Atlantic. So he decided that provoking a Japanese attack upon U.S. military bases in the Pacific would be the best way to achieve that objective. Since Japan was allied with Germany under the Tripartite Pact, Roosevelt calculated a war with Japan would sooner or later bring the United States into the war against Germany.
Most historians when pressed on the matter now grudgingly concede that Roosevelt lied when he told the American people that he would never send their boys to fight into foreign wars, but they excuse his treachery as a “noble lie,” a deception perpetrated against the public by the political elite to achieve a supposed greater good.
The Pearl Harbor noble-lie argument usually goes something like this: “Given the evil of Nazism and the threat that Hitler posed to the world, Roosevelt was justified in maneuvering the United States into a war with Germany.”
Robert Stinnett adopts this view in his book Day of Deceit, where he writes, “I sympathize with the agonizing dilemma faced by President Roosevelt. He was forced to find circuitous means to persuade an isolationist America to join in a fight for freedom.”
The standard justification for U.S. entry into the war is that otherwise Hitler would have defeated Britain and Russia and completed his conquest of Europe. With all the resources of the continent at his disposal, Hitler then would have been able to move against North America to achieve his dream of world domination.
There are several problems with this analysis. First, it greatly underestimates the difficulties of a trans-Atlantic invasion and grossly exaggerates Germany’s military capabilities even when she was at the apex of her power. It also confuses the conditions of December 1941 with those of June 1940. By the time of the Pearl Harbor attack, the fortunes of war were already beginning to turn against Hitler.
Moreover, there is no evidence that Hitler ever entertained plans for world domination. His primary objective was the abrogation of the Treaty of Versailles, which had disarmed Germany and led to her territorial dismemberment. Hitler was determined to reclaim these territories, and although negotiations were his preferred method, he was willing to wage war if necessary. His only overt plans for war involved an anticipated confrontation with Communism and the reacquisition of the “living space” that Russia had ceded to Germany in the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk in 1918.
The outbreak of a general war in Europe was not a part of Hitler’s game plan but a consequence of Britain and France’s declaration of war against Germany after her invasion of Poland on September 1, 1939.
Furthermore, although Hitler’s armies had overrun France in the spring of 1940, total victory was denied to them when the British Expeditionary Force escaped capture at Dunkirk. The defeat of the Luftwaffe in the Battle of Britain forced Hitler to cancel his cross-channel invasion plans. Britain had made it through the darkest hour, and as 1940 drew to a close her survival was essentially assured. As for Hitler, his hopes for a quick end to the war in the West were lost.
Germany’s June 1941 invasion of Russia, Operation Barbarossa, though remarkably successful in its initial stages, had failed by the end of the summer to achieve its primary objective: the destruction of the Red Army. Even as early as August 1941, the failure of the blitzkrieg was apparent, as Roosevelt began receiving reports indicating that Russia would, indeed, hold out. The onset of the Russian winter, the inability of German forces to take Moscow, and a major Russian counteroffensive on December 6 had dashed Hitler’s hopes for victory in 1941 and raised the specter of a mutually exhausting war that was unlikely to end in Germany’s favor.
While the ebb tide against Hitler was greatly assisted by the American Lend-Lease program, the crucial point is that both the British and Russians were able to blunt major German offensives and deliver severe blows to the Nazi war machine without direct U.S. military intervention.
So if U.S. entry into the war was unnecessary to prevent a victory by Nazi Germany in Europe, what remains of the case for Roosevelt’s “noble lie” regarding Pearl Harbor?
Imperial Japan was indeed on the move in East Asia, but it was unclear how that threatened the United States. Roosevelt never explained to the American people why they should be concerned with protecting European colonies in Asia from the Japanese. Moreover, Japan’s desire for a “Co-Prosperity Sphere” of economic and political predominance was hardly unique in a world where France, Britain, and the United States had all carved out spheres of influence. Japan’s crime in the eyes of the Western powers was being a latecomer to the colonial banquet. As one Japanese diplomat wryly remarked, “Just when we learn how to play poker, they change the game to bridge.”
True, Japan could be a cruel colonial master, especially in China. But it should be noted that while Roosevelt was quick to call out the Japanese for their atrocities, the United States had not flinched from resorting to brutal methods to pacify populations in her own colonies (See Alfred W. McCoy’sPolicing America’s Empire).
Some have argued the danger to the United States did not come from Germany or Japan but from the possibility that the two powers, along with Italy, would combine to encircle the western hemisphere. But this view greatly exaggerates the military capacity of the Axis Powers and misrepresents theTripartite Pact, which was a defensive alliance primarily intended to deter U.S. entry into the then-separate conflicts in Asia and Europe. Moreover, Germany and Japan never developed a coordinated military strategy.
Japanese ambitions were viewed by some geostrategists as a threat to U.S. naval operations in the Pacific and contrary to America’s long-term economic interests in the region. Such concerns are telling; for they betray a presumption of imperial entitlement that casts the Pacific war in a very different light than the standard historical account. Rather than being the crusade for freedom, the war begins to resemble a realpolitik clash of two mercantilist empires. Some have also suggested that American sentimentalism towards China and the hope for a restoration of the Open Door Policy were important in determining Roosevelt’s policies towards Japan.
But these were only contributing factors that facilitated Roosevelt’s drive to war. The lodestar of U.S. foreign policy in 1941 was entry into the European war against Germany. Frustrated by Hitler’s forbearance in the North Atlantic in the face of repeated provocation by U.S. warships, Roosevelt looked to the Pacific as the back door to war in Europe.
The standard history treats U.S. entry into World War II as moral and strategic imperative. But as demonstrated above, that assessment does not bear careful scrutiny. Nazi Germany was not about to conquer the world, nor was she in any position to threaten the United States. Indeed, Hitler’s bid for continental supremacy had been thwarted by Britain and Russia long before the United States entered the war. Imperial Japan was bogged down on the Asian mainland, hungry for raw materials, and anxious for a modus vivendi with the United States.
This history also ignores the enormous costs and horrifying consequences of direct American intervention. The Anglo-American bombings of German and Japanese cities killed more than a million civilians, most of whom were women and children. Most of the destruction in Western Europe occurred during the period of Allied liberation in 1944–1945 (See William Hitchcock’s The Bitter Road to Freedom: A New History of the Liberation of Europe). And the decision by President Truman to drop atomic bombs on a prostrate Japan in August 1945 accelerated a nuclear-arms race that still threatens the incineration of the world.
On the eve of the Pearl Harbor attack, most Americans believed that there should be no large standing armies and that their government should heed George Washington’s admonition to steer clear of foreign entanglements. They ruefully remembered President Wilson’s “war to end all wars” and were in no mood for another crusade to “make the world safe for democracy.” That is why on December 6, 1941, the vast majority of Americans still opposed entering the war.
Pearl Harbor transformed the nation. The American people were outraged over Japan’s diabolical “sneak attack” and marched off to fight “the Good War.” A vast military-industrial complex was developed to stock the “arsenal of democracy.” After the war, more noble lies were told to justify a permanent national-security state, and the United States became the globe-girdling empire it is today; corrupt, bankrupt, bellicose, and shrouded in secrecy.
In his introduction to the Pentagon Papers, Mike Gravel quoted the British novelist and historian H.G. Wells:
The true strength of rulers and empires lies not in armies or emotions, but in the belief of men that they are inflexibly open and truthful and legal. As soon as government departs from that standard, it ceases to be anything more than “the gang in possession,” and its days are numbered.
Remember that quote when you come across Roosevelt apologists excusing his treachery as a “noble lie” and praising him for his foresight and statesmanship. Deceit is neither praiseworthy nor noble.
This article was first published by the Future of Freedom Foundation.
Israel’s plan to attack Iran has been postponed until spring 2013 following a war simulation that showed Iran could kill 200 Americans with a single missile strike, according to a report by senior Haaretz correspondent Amir Oren.
“At 8:58 P.M. on Tuesday, Israel’s 2012 war against Iran came to a quiet end. The capricious plans for a huge aerial attack were returned to the deep recesses of safes and hearts. The war may not have been canceled but it has certainly been postponed. For a while, at least, we can sound the all clear: It won’t happen this year. Until further notice, Israel Air Force Flight 007 will not be taking off,” writes Oren.
According to the report, a war simulation conducted by the U.S. Central Command found that an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities would immediately be followed by an Iranian missile launch that would kill 200 Americans, a price deemed not worth paying by U.S. generals.
During the same meeting, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak also acknowledged that Israel would not act alone in striking Iran before the U.S. presidential elections in November, according to Oren, meaning that, “For all intents and purposes, it was an announcement that this war was being postponed until at least the spring of 2013.”
A delay in launching the attack until next spring would scupper expectations that the military assault was set to take place before the end of this year, a time frame that Russia understood the Israelis were working to. Last month, Chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces Nikolai Makarov stated that an Israeli decision on whether or not to attack would be made before the summer.
Earlier this month it was also reported that Israel had “agreed to hold off a strike on Iran’s nuclear sites this year in exchange for receiving U.S. military equipment,” including bunker-busting bombs and refueling planes. The deal was seen as a tacit admission that the Obama administration would support Israel in launching the attack but only after the election in November.
If a decision has been made to postpone the attack, expect the United States to withdraw at least some of its naval might from the Persian Gulf. The U.S. currently has the USS Carl Vinson and the USS Abraham aircraft carriers patrolling the Strait of Hormuz, along with the USS Makin Island, a Wasp-class amphibious assault ship. Earlier this month it was announced that four additional mine countermeasure ships were also heading for the region.
As the Stratfor Naval Update map below illustrates, the USS Enterprise, which many speculated was also heading to the Strait of Hormuz in preparation for a strike on Iran, is now scheduled to visit Piraeus, Greece instead, suggesting a cooling of tensions could be taking place – at least for the time being.
In an exclusive report, Jerusalem-based DEBKAfile reports that both Israel and the United States are on the same page in regard to launching an attack on Iran.
“American and Israeli intelligence evaluations of the state of Iran’s program are in accord – contrary to the impression gained from Obama administration officials,” DEBKA-Net-Weekly reported on March 22. “Both are of one mind on the imperative to paralyze that program even by force if Iran refuses to give up its pursuit of a nuclear weapon.”
On Friday, it was reported that the United States, European allies and Israel agree that Iran does not have a nuclear weapons program. “Tehran does not have a bomb, has not decided to build one, and is probably years away from having a deliverable nuclear warhead,” the National Post reported. Despite this evidence, the Israeli government has decided to attack Iran.
According to DEBKAfile, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said in a radio interview on Thursday that if Israel is resolved to attack Iran, it will have to do so within three months. In February, it was reported that Israel would carry out an attack in June and would use Saudi Arabia as its base.
DEBKAfile claims Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has convinced a majority of his Security and Diplomatic Cabinet of the urgency of an attack. “He is now backed by the two deputy prime ministers, the defense, foreign affairs, interior and finance ministers, while Intelligence Minister Dan Meridor and Minister without Portfolio Benny Begin are unconvinced. Netanyahu can therefore go ahead and safely put the military option to the vote in the cabinet for the first time,” DEBKAfile reports.
With this consensus, Barak sent IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz to Washington to meet Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Martin E. Dempsey. Gantz told Dempsey Israel would “be happy if the US halts Iran’s nuclear program in its tracks, no matter whether this is done by economic sanctions, an oil embargo, negotiations between Tehran and the world powers, or secret US-Iranian diplomacy.” The effort, however, would need to fit within the three month timeline.
Israeli officials then met “discretely” with leading members of Congress and told them about the three month timeline.
DEBKAfile states, however, that Israel “may have to part ways with the United States on the Iranian issue the first time in its short history” and attack Iran “before it is too late.”
Israel is now committed to an attack on Iran that will occur during the height of campaigning for the 2012 U.S. presidential election. The Republican national convention will be held on August 27-30 in Tampa, Florida, and the Democrat convention will be held on September 3-6 in Charlotte, North Carolina. If Israel attacks Iran in June, it will undoubtedly be the dominant issue during the convention and the election in November.
Events over the last several days reveal that the United States and Israel plan to conduct a false flag terror event to be blamed on Iran. The event will likely occur within the next six months and will result in an attack on Iran prior to the November election.
Obama’s intelligence chief, James Clapper (center), warned of Iranian terror attacks inside the United States.
Intelligence in U.S. and Israel Warn of Domestic Terror Attack
Officialdom in the United States and Israel have issued a warning about an Iranian “threat stream” against Israeli “soft targets” in America.
The warning arrives several days after Obama’s intelligence boss James Clapper said Iran may strike inside the United States,
“We predict that the threat on our sites around the world will increase… on both our guarded sites and ‘soft’ sites,” states a letter sent out by the head of security for the Israeli Consul General for the Mid-Atlantic States.
Guarded sites are Israeli government facilities like embassies while soft sites are Jewish synagogues, schools, and community centers.
Yoram Cohen, the head of Israel’s security service Shin Bet, said recently that Iran’s Revolutionary Guard will attack Israeli and Jewish targets abroad in response to the assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists.
In January it was reported Mossad was behind the assassination of Iranian nuclear scientist Mostafa Ahmadi-Roshan.
“The thwarted assassination plot of a Saudi official in Washington, D.C., a couple of months ago was an important data point,” a nameless official told ABC News, “in that it showed at least parts of the Iranian establishment were aware of the intended event and were not concerned about inevitable collateral damage to U.S. citizens had they carried out an assassination plot on American soil.”
Cohen linked the alleged threat to the discredited plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in October. A court document in the case revealed that the FBI and the DEA concocted the plot as a sting operation and used failed used car salesman and alcoholic Mansour Arbabsiar as a patsy. Arbabsiar, who is from Iran, thought he was participating in a drug deal.
Despite the fallacious nature of the plot, intelligence officials used it to hype the specter of Iranian terrorism that will likely result in a false flag operation used as a pretext to invade Iran.
“In the past few weeks, there has been an escalation in threats against Israeli and Jewish targets around the world,” an intelligence document cited by ABC News states. It warns that demonstrations against Israel “could potentially turn violent at local synagogues, restaurants, the Israeli Embassy and other Israeli sites.”
The Israeli bulletin also provides an excuse for the TSA to step-up intrusive pat-downs and demand travelers be subjected to dangerous naked body scanners at airports across the United States.
“According to our evaluation there is a possibility that the forged passports will be used in order to pass as Israeli citizens at the security checks in Israel and around the world. Israeli security authorities may consider an Israeli citizenship as a [criterion] to proceed with a more lenient security check in secure sites such as airports, etc.,” the bulletin explains.
The latest warning arrives two weeks after the Turkish newspaper Zaman reported that a cell of the Quds Unit of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard planned to attack U.S. embassy in Ankara and other targets across Turkey.
Fast Moving Timeline for War
The latest development follows a number of events over the past few weeks that point toward a concerted attack by Israel and then the United States on Iran:
• DEBKAfile reported earlier in the week that the United States will have 100,000 troops in the region by March. “Pentagon has been quietly massing troops and armaments on two islands located just south of the Strait of Hormuz, and within easy striking distance of Iran,” Mac Slavo wrote on January 31.
• On Friday, the establishment media reported that Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said “there is a strong likelihood that Israel will strike Iran in April, May or June,” according to the Washington Post. The timeline is predicated on Iran entering an Israeli contrived “zone of immunity” in its unsubstantiated effort to build a nuclear bomb.
• Iran has issued a number of threats in response to punitive oil and economic sanctions devised by the United States and Europe. On Friday, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said in a nationally televised speech that his country will retaliate if Western nations impose crippling oil sanctions. In January, in response to European Union foreign ministers deciding to impose an oil embargo on the country, Iran vowed to shut down the Strait of Hormuz.
• Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman General Martin Dempsey admitted on January 9 that Iran has the ability to close off the strategic shipping lane linking the Gulf of Oman with the Persian Gulf. He said doing so would constitute a “red line.”
• In December, in response to Sec. Def. Panetta’s not ruling out an attack, Iran announced it would hold a military exercise in the Persian Gulf. The 10 day exercise, dubbed “Velayat-e 90,” demonstrated that Iran has the ability to shut down the Strait of Hormuz. The U.S. further exacerbated the situation by sending the aircraft carrier USS John C. Stennis through the Strait of Hormuz while Iran was conducting its war game.
• Russia and China have indicated that an attack on Iran would constitute an attack on their national security. “Iran is our close neighbor, just south of the Caucasus. Should anything happen to Iran, should Iran get drawn into any political or military hardships, this will be a direct threat to our national security,” said Dmitry Rogozin, Russia’s deputy prime minister and former envoy to NATO, in mid-January.
War President: Re-electing Obama
In November, DEBKAfile said Obama will use war as a re-election tool. “President Barack Obama went on line to America’s senior allies, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Israel and Saudi Arabia, with notice of his plan to attack Iran no later than September-October 2012 – unless Tehran halted its nuclear weaponization programs,” the neocon-connected subscriber-only publication predicted.
“Obama’s announcement was not perceived as a general directive to US allies, but a guideline to blow the dust off the contingency plans for a strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities which stayed locked in bottom drawers for three years,” states the report, adding that “Obama’s announcement spurred Germany, France, Britain, Italy and Israel into girding their navies, air forces, ballistic units and anti-missile defense systems for the challenges ahead.”
Britain’s foreign secretary William Hague said in January his country has not ruled out military action against Iran. Britain had dispatched its “most formidable warship HMS Daring” to the Persian Gulf region prior to Hague’s remarks.
“The bottom line here is that Americans don’t believe in President Obama’s leadership,” said Shapiro, writing for the Financial Times. “He has to find some way between now and November of demonstrating that he is a leader who can command confidence and, short of a 9/11 event or an Oklahoma City bombing, I can’t think of how he could do that.”
The late Washington Post columnist David Broder was more succinct. “With strong Republican support in Congress for challenging Iran’s ambition to become a nuclear power, he can spend much of 2011 and 2012 orchestrating a showdown with the mullahs. This will help him politically because the opposition party will be urging him on. And as tensions rise and we accelerate preparations for war, the economy will improve,” he wrote in late 2010.
Tensions will undoubtedly rise if there is a terror attack inside the United States, either against an Israeli target or American one.
It would provide an airtight excuse to unleash the awesome power of the U.S. military against Iran and cast Obama in the adulatory light all “war presidents” receive as the masses fall in line and wave their flags and cheer on “our boys” as they decimate another country and engage in yet another bloody massacre of innocents.
DUBAI: Iran has not converted the low-grade uranium that it has produced into weapon-grade uranium, inspectors belonging to the International Atomic Energy Agency have said.
The Austrian Press Agency quoted an IAEA expert as saying that the uranium substances that Iran has produced at its Natanz enrichment facility have been carefully recorded and remote cameras have been installed to supervise part of the stockpile.
“If the Iranians intend to transport these uranium substances to a secret location for further processing, agency’s inspectors will find out,” he said.
The expert added that “so far, Iran has carried out good cooperation with us in relevant verifications”.
IAEA head Mohamed ElBaradei has said that Iran has slowed down its uranium enrichment programme. He made this observation while submitting a report to the U.N. Security Council on Thursday. Iran has reportedly added only 164 centrifuges (which are used for enrichment) since December last, a comparatively slower rate than in the past.
The IAEA report said that Iran had so far produced around 1,000 kg. of low-enriched uranium.
Iran has denied accusations by the United States and its allies that it has been engaged in a clandestine nuclear weapons programme.
The United Nation’s International Atomic Energy Agency is preparing to release a document that will link Iran’s nuclear program to weapons development, according the French newspaper Le Figaro (English translation here). The report will be released next month.
IAEA boss Yukiya Amano.
The newspaper characterizes the release as a “race against time” to head off Iran’s nuclear weapons program. The move would ensure an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, Isabelle Lasserre writes.
IAEA boss Yukiya Amano said last month the agency would release more information on Iran’s program. At that time, Amano said Iran had demonstrated "greater transparency" than usual when it allowed a senior IAEA official to tour previously restricted nuclear sites in August.
In February, 2010, the agency said Iran was working to develop a nuclear-armed missile. “In unusually blunt language, an International Atomic Energy Agency report for the first time suggested Iran was actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability, throwing independent weight behind similar Western suspicions,” Reuters reported.
According to Wikileaks documents, Amano has described himself as being in line with the United States and Israel on key strategic issues. Israel assumes that Iran will develop a nuclear weapon that represents an “existential threat” to the Jewish nation. It has threatened to take out Iran’s nuclear facilities on a number of occasions.
IAEA “inspectors have expressed frustration with Iran’s level of cooperation, but have been unable to find any evidence suggesting that enriched uranium has been diverted to an illicit weapons program,” Seymour Hersh wrote in June.
“There’s a large body of evidence, however, including some of America’s most highly classified intelligence assessments, suggesting that the U.S. could be in danger of repeating a mistake similar to the one made with Saddam Hussein’s Iraq eight years ago — allowing anxieties about the policies of a tyrannical regime to distort our estimates of the state’s military capacities and intentions,” he continues. “The two most recent National Intelligence Estimates (N.I.E.s) on Iranian nuclear progress have stated that there is no conclusive evidence that Iran has made any effort to build the bomb since 2003.”
The highly dubious Iran terror plot now gaining momentum, despite a growing number of skeptics, appears to be pushing the United States into backing either an Israeli strike on Iran or providing a pretext for an outright attack by the United States.
The IAEA report either coincides with the move in the direction of war or was designed to appear at precisely the right time as the U.S. repeats the same “mistake” it made when it attacked Iraq in March of 2003.
Iran says the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) can completely supervise Tehran’s nuclear activities for five years if the sanctions imposed against the Islamic Republic are lifted.
In an interview with ISNA on Monday, Head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) Fereydoun Abbasi said he had made the offer to Director-General of the IAEA Yukia Amano.
“By lifting the sanctions and meeting mutual obligations, the agency can completely supervise Iran’s nuclear activities without broaching [such topics as] military aspects and alleged studies,” Abbasi further elaborated.
Referring to the recent visit of Deputy Head of the IAEA Safeguards Department Herman Nackaerts to Iran, Abbasi said Tehran’s objectives of taking such measures are to prove that the country has no problem with the agency.
Nackaerts earlier visited Iran’s Bushehr nuclear power plant, the enrichment facilities in Natanz and Fordo, the nuclear fuel rods production factory in Isfahan, as well as the heavy water research reactor in Arak and the city’s heavy water production plant.
The US and its allies accuse Iran of pursuing a military nuclear program, and used this pretext to pressure the UN Security Council into imposing a fourth round of sanctions against Iran.
Iran, a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and a member of the IAEA, insists on its legal right to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.
The U.N. nuclear watchdog on Tuesday rejected Western suggestions it is being soft on Iran, denying that its chief was declaring questions about Tehran’s atomic work resolved despite doubts of his inspectors.
A senior official close to International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) director Mohamed ElBaradei accused unnamed Western powers of using the same “hype” tactics employed against Iraq before the 2003 U.S.-led invasion to justify imposing further sanctions on Iran over its nuclear program.
The IAEA is due to issue a report next week before world powers meet to finalize a U.N. Security Council resolution on more sanctions. The West accuses Iran of secretly seeking the means to make nuclear bombs, a charge Tehran denies.Ahead of the IAEA report, some Western diplomats said the agency’s inspectors were unhappy with top level decisions to declare issues clarified without what they deemed to be sufficiently credible explanations from Iran.
A French media report said on Monday differences between ElBaradei and technical staff could delay the latest report on whether Iran illicitly tried to enrich uranium for arms, not just electricity as it maintains.
Departing from normal IAEA silence ahead of its politically sensitive reports, a senior agency official telephoned Reuters on Tuesday to deny reports of internal dissent. “Reports about disagreements within the agency over the forthcoming Iran report are nonsense,” said the official, who asked not to be further identified. “Work on the first draft of the report has not even started.”
“Some people do not want to see the Iran issue resolved because that would contradict their hidden agendas, he said, adding that “people should have learned from their mistakes in the past, when all the hype over alleged weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq turned out to be just that — hype”.
Iran agreed in January to answer remaining questions about its past covert nuclear activities within a month. Major progress has been made since and the inquiry is now in its final stages, IAEA sources say.
BIGGEST ISSUE STILL OUTSTANDING
The senior official said Iran had still not clarified the final and most important question on a list delving into its covert nuclear history — suspected attempts under military supervision to “weaponize” nuclear materials. “Our inspectors are still working on clarifying the facts about the alleged weaponization activities in Iran,” he said.
The official said that the Vienna-based IAEA’s central role was to collect information impartially and place it before the agency’s 35-nation board of governors. “If the facts are at odds with the policy objectives of some people who are keen to impose further sanctions on Iran, that’s too bad,” the official added.
Before it invaded Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein in 2003, the United States disregarded IAEA testimony to the Security Council that there was no proof Iraq was still seeking nuclear bombs. No such evidence to back a major U.S. justification for what turned into a chaotic occupation of Iraq has surfaced since.
“Not a single question has ever been raised by member states about the objectivity and professionalism of our reports,” the IAEA official said. “This next one will be no different.” He criticized what he called similar hype about an ongoing nuclear arms drive in Iran until Washington’s own intelligence agencies said in December that this had been shelved in 2003.
ElBaradei has said Iran’s enrichment program poses no imminent threat to international peace. But he has urged Iran to lift restrictions on inspector movements and comply with suspension demands to defuse mistrust in its intentions.
Russia’s foreign minister warned on Monday that any military strike against Iran would be a grave mistake with unpredictable consequences, ahead of a report expected to be released this week by the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog agency showing that Tehran has mastered the critical steps needed to build a nuclear weapon.
According to intelligence provided to the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog agency, the IAEA, Iran appears to have received crucial technical assistance from foreign experts, the Washington Post reported, citing Western diplomats and nuclear experts briefed on the findings by the IAEA.
The Israeli media has been rife with speculation that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is working to secure cabinet consensus for an attack on Iranian nuclear installations.
The Palestinian Authority’s recent announcement that it would seek UN recognition as an independent state dominated the news and the political debate in the United States last week, though in truth it should mean very little to us. Only a political class harboring the illusion it can run the world obsesses over the aspirations of a tiny population on a tiny piece of land thousands of miles away. Remember, the UN initiated this persistent conflict with its 1947 Partition Plan.
Unfortunately the debate is dominated by those who either support the Israeli side in the conflict, or those who support the Palestinian desire for statehood. We rarely seem to hear the view of those who support the US side and US interests. I am on that side. I believe that we can no longer police the world. We can no longer bribe the Israelis and Palestinians to continue an endless “peace process” that goes nowhere. It is not in our interest to hector the Palestinians or the Israelis, or to “export” democracy to the region but reject it when people vote the “wrong” way.
I have reservations about the Palestinian drive for UN recognition. Personally I wish the United States would de-recognize the United Nations. As most readers already know, in every Congress I introduce legislation to end our membership in that organization. The UN is a threat to our sovereignty– and as we are the main source of its income, it is a threat to our economic well-being. Increasingly over the past several years, we see the United Nations providing political and legal cover for the military aspirations of interventionists rather than serving as an international forum to preserve peace. Neoconservatives in the US have grown to love the United Nations as they co-opt the organization under the guise of endless “reform.” Under the sovereignty-destroying doctrine of “Responsibility to Protect,” adopted at the 2005 World Summit, the UN takes it upon itself to intervene in internal conflicts of its member states whenever it believes that human rights are being violated. Thus under “Responsibility to Protect,” the UN provides the green light for a kind of global no-knock raid on any sovereign country.
If asked, I would personally counsel the Palestinians to avoid the United Nations. UN membership and participation is no guarantee that sovereignty will be respected. We see what happens to UN members such as Iraq and Libya when those countries’ leaders fall out of favor with US administrations: under US and allied pressure a fig leaf resolution is adopted in the UN to facilitate devastating military intervention. When the UN gave NATO the green light to bomb Libya there was no genocide taking place. It was a purely preventative war. The result? Thousands dead, a destroyed country, and extremely dubious new leaders.
While I do not see UN membership as a particularly productive move for the Palestinian leadership, I do not believe the US should use its position in the UN Security Council to block their membership. I believe in self-determination of peoples and I recognize that peoples may wish to pursue statehood by different means. As we saw after the Cold War, numerous new states were born out of the ruins of the USSR as the various old Soviet Republics decided that smaller states were preferable to an enormous and oppressive multi-national conglomerate.
The real, pro-US solution to the problems in the Middle East is for us to end all foreign aid, stop arming foreign countries, encourage peaceful diplomatic resolutions to conflicts, and disengage militarily. In others words, follow Jefferson’s admonition: “Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none.”
1861: President Abraham Lincoln (16th President of the United States from 1860 till his assassination in 1865) approaches the Rothschilds to try to obtain loans to support the ongoing American civil war.
The Rothschilds agree provided Lincoln allows them a Charter for another United States central bank and are prepared to pay 24% to 36% interest on all monies loaned.
Lincoln was very angry about this high level of interest and so he printed his own debt free money and informed the public that this was now legal tender for both public and private debts.
1876: Otto von Bismarck states,
“The division of the United States into two federations of equal force was decided long before the civil war by the high financial power of Europe. These bankers were afraid that the United States, if they remained in one block and as one nation, would attain economical and financial independence, which would upset their financial domination over the world.
The voice of the Rothschilds predominated. They foresaw the tremendous booty if they could substitute two feeble democracies, indebted to the financiers, to the vigorous Republic, confident and self-providing. Therefore they started their emissaries in order to exploit the question of slavery and thus dig an abyss between the two parts of the Republic.”
1881: President James A. Garfield (The 20th President of the United States who lasted only 100 Days) states two weeks before he was assassinated,
“Whoever controls the volume of money in our country is absolute master of all industry and commerce…and when you realize that the entire system is very easily controlled, one way or another, by a few powerful men at the top, you will not have to be told how periods of inflation and depression originate.”
Edmond James de Rothschild has a son Maurice de Rothschild.
1891: The British Labour Leader makes the following statement on the subject of the Rothschilds,
“This blood-sucking crew has been the cause of untold mischief and misery in Europe during the present century, and has piled up its prodigious wealth chiefly through fomenting wars between States which ought never to have quarrelled.
Whenever there is trouble in Europe, wherever rumours of war circulate and men’s minds are distraught with fear of change and calamity you may be sure that a hook-nosed Rothschild is at his games somewhere near the region of the disturbance.”
Comments like this worry the Rothschilds and towards the end of the 1800’s they purchase Reuters news agency so they can have some control of the media.
1913: The Rothschilds set up the Anti Defamation League (ADL) in the United States designed to brand as, “anti-Semitic,” anyone who questions or challenges the Global Elite.
Strangely enough, the same year that they do this they also set up their last and current central bank in America, the Federal Reserve. Congressman Charles Lindbergh stated following the passing of the Federal Reserve Act on December 23,
“The Act establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President signs this Bill, the invisible government of the monetary power will be legalized.......The greatest crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking and currency bill.”
It is important to note that the Federal Reserve is a private company, it is neither Federal nor does it have any Reserve. It is conservatively estimated that profits exceed $150 billion per year and the Federal Reserve has never once in its history published accounts.
1914: The Rothschilds have control of the three European news agencies, Wolff (est. 1849) in Germany, Reuters (est. 1851) in England, and Havas (est. 1835) in France.
The Rothschilds use Wolff to manipulate the German people into a fervour for war. From now on the Rothschilds are rarely reported in the media, because they own the media.
1918: The Rothschilds order the execution by the Bolsheviks they control, of Tsar Nicholas II and his entire family in Russia. This is the Rothschilds revenge for Tsar Alexander II siding with President Abraham Lincoln in 1864.
It is extremely important for them to slaughter the entire family including women and children in order to show the world, this is what happens if you ever attempt to cross the Rothschilds.
1919: N. M. Rothschild & Sons’ are given a permanent role to fix the world’s daily gold price. This takes place in the City of London offices, daily at 1100 hours, in the same room until 2004.
1934: Swiss banking secrecy laws are reformed and it becomes an offence resulting in imprisonment for any bank employee to violate bank secrecy. This is all in preparation for the Rothschild engineered Second World War in which as usual they will fund both sides.
1963: On June 4th President John F. Kennedy (the 35th President of the United States 1961 – 1963) signs Executive Order 11110 which returned to the U.S. government the power to issue currency, without going through the Rosthchilds owned Federal Reserve.
Less than 6 months later on November 22nd, president Kennedy is assassinated by the Rothschilds for the same reason as they assassinated President Abraham Lincoln in 1865, he wanted to print American money for the American people, as oppose to for the benefit of a money grabbing war mongering foreign elite. This Executive Order 11110, is rescinded by President Lyndon Baines Johnson (the 36th President of the United States 1963 to 1969) on Air Force One from Dallas to Washington, the same day as President Kennedy was assassinated.
Edmond de Rothschild establishes La Compagnie Financière Edmond de Rothschild (LCF), in Switzerland as a venture capital house. This later develops into an investment bank and asset management company with many affiliates. He also marries his wife Nadine and they have a son, Benjamin de Rothschild.
1973: In his book, None Dare Call It Conspiracy, Gary Allen states,
“One major reason for the historical blackout on the role of the international bankers in political history is the Rothschilds were Jewish…
….The Jewish members of the conspiracy have used an organisation called The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) as an instrument to try and convince everyone that any mention of the Rothschilds and their allies is an attack on all Jews.
In this way they have stifled almost all honest scholarship on international bankers and made the subject taboo within universities. Any individual or book exploring this subject is immediately attacked by hundreds of ADL communities all over the country. The ADL has never let the truth or logic interfere with its highly professional smear jobs…
….Actually, nobody has a right to be more angry at the Rothschild clique than their fellow Jews…
….The Rothschild empire helped finance Adolf Hitler.”
N. M. Rothschild & Sons British Newfoundland Corporation, Churchill Falls project in Newfoundland, Canada, is completed. N. M. Rothschild & Sons also create a new asset management part of the company which traded worldwide. This eventually became, Rothschild Private Management Limited.
Edmond de Rothschild, a great-grandson of Jacob (James) Mayer Rothschild, bought the cru bourgeois estate of Château Clarke in Bordeaux.
1980: The global phenomenon of privatisation starts. The Rothschilds are behind this from the very beginning in order to seize control of all publicly owned assets worldwide.
2001: On September 11th the attack on the World Trade Center is orchestrated by Britain, America and Israel under the orders of the Rothschilds as a pretext for removing the liberty of people worldwide in exchange for security, just as they did with the Reichstag fire in Germany where the citizens were lied to in order to give up liberty for security.
They also will use the attacks to gain control of the few nations in the world who don’t allow Rothschild central banks and so less than one month after these attacks, US forces attack Afghanistan, one of only 7 nations in the world who don’t have a Rothschild controlled central bank.
One week prior to the WTC attack, the Zim Shipping Company moves out of its offices in the WTC, breaking its lease and costing the company $50,000. No reason has ever been given, but Zim Shipping Company is half owned by the State of Israel (The Rothschilds).
2003: The United States invade Iraq which is now one of six nations left in the world who don’t have a Rothschild controlled central bank.
2005: On 7 July the London Underground Network is bombed. Israel’s Finance Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu is in London on the morning of the attacks in order to attend an economic conference in a hotel over the underground station where one of the blasts occurred, but stayed in his hotel room instead after he had been informed by Israeli intelligence officials attacks were expected. There are now only 5 nations on the world left without a Rothschild controlled central bank: Iran; North Korea; Sudan; Cuba; and Libya.
Despite a report from the World Gold Council showing that demand for the precious metal has subsided, gold soared to a new record high today on the back of another stock market plunge and an announcement from Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez that the country’s gold mining industry would be nationalized.
Gold touched a new record high of around $1827 dollars an ounce as the Dow Jones plunged by 500 points in early trading.
However, the report noted that there was “increasing acceptance of higher price levels” globally, which explained a modest 3% fall in recycling gold on the supply side.
Although today’s new high for gold is obviously being driven by a flight to safety as the stock market crumbles, Hugo Chavez’s announcement last night that he was to nationalize the country’s gold mining industry undoubtedly has had an impact on today’s trading.
Chavez likened the people that control the gold industry to “the mafia,” stating, “We can’t keep allowing them to take it away,” as he made public plans to withdraw $11B in gold reserves from U.S. and European banks, including 99 tonnes held with the Bank of England and other reserves held by J.P. Morgan Chase, Barclays, HSBC and Standard Chartered, France’s BNP Paribas and Canada’s Bank of Nova Scotia.
Of the country’s 365.8 tonnes of gold, 211 tonnes is believed to be held abroad.
“At the time of these disturbances, it’s preferable to recover our assets, in this case the gold, and have it here in the vaults,” Venezuelan Central Bank president Nelson Merentes said, adding that it would be re-invested in more stable economies like China, Russia and Brazil.
Chavez’ decision to pull gold reserves out of the United States and Europe is only going to increase concerns about lack of mine supply, which is already set to fall by around 5.1 per cent this year. This will ensure gold sails through the $2000 barrier sooner rather than later.
As the George Washington Blog notes, “Nationalizing Venezuela’s gold means less gold available in the free market, and the scramble for physical gold to make good on Venezuela’s recall demand could challenge the 100-to-1 leverage levels of paper gold derivatives to physical gold.”
Simon Maughn, co-head of European equities at MF Global, has told CNBC that a third round of so-called quantitative easing is in the works. The private Federal Reserve will again become the marginal buyer of bonds.
The latest effort by the Fed to finance the government’s staggering deficit will end in June.
If the private Federal Reserve owned by offshore banksters stops this lending scheme, interest rates will rise significantly which in turn will exert tremendous pressure on the American public. If interest rates surge anytime soon, millions of indebted Americans may default on their debt, thereby bankrupting the American financial institutions, as Puru Saxena, founder of Puru Saxena Wealth Management, notes.
“The bond market is going in one direction which is up-falling yields which is telling you quite clearly the direction of economic travel is downwards. Downgrades. QE3 (a third round of quantitative easing) is coming,” Maughn told the business news network. “The bond markets are all smarter than us, and that’s exactly what the bond markets are telling me.”
“What’s interesting in the bond markets over the last couple of sessions is, you’ve seen human traders trying to step in and call this turn in the market the same way that equities have done … and they have just been mowed down by the quant funds which are all about leverage, all about momentum and are betting on bond prices going up,” Maughn said.
“One more big injection of cash into the bond market should take you through at least the summer season into the beginning of the fourth quarter.”
“That cash injection will have the normal inflationary knock-on impact, driving back up commodities, supporting industrial stocks, dragging the financials up with them… I think it’s all about the monetary injection trade,” Maughn told CNBC.
We hope all of our appearances on Greek TV, radio and in the press have helped the educational process and to allow the Greeks to identify who the real culprits are, and what to do about it. It has just been over a year since this tragedy became reality, but we reported on Greece and Italy ten years ago. They both bent the rules to enter the euro zone. We knew then that Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase were assisting them by creating credit default swaps. There were a few Europeon journalist who reported on the issue, but the elitists control the media and few noticed that Greece and Italy were beyond bogus. The events of the past year remind us of the onslaught of the credit crisis, which unfortunately is still with us. What finally brought about trouble for Greece and other euro zone countries was the zero interest rate policy of the Fed and slightly higher rates by the EC. These policies encouraged speculation and caused problems that would have never happened otherwise. In addition, the stimulus measures by both banks were embarked upon to save the financial sectors and in that process promote speculation by the people who caused thee problems in the first place. That began with QE1 and stimulus 1, which we now recognize as our inflation drivers. Wait until QE2 and stimulus 2 appear next year. It will be very shocking.
Just to show you what a loser lower rates are just look at economic progress. There has been no recovery under either QE1 or QE2. Even 4.60% 30-year fixed rate mortgages have not encouraged people to buy homes. They are either broke or they don’t know whether they will be employed five-months or even one year from now, so how can they buy a house? Consumer spending is falling along with wages. The small gains you see are for the most part the result of higher inflation.
Growth moved from the fourth quarter of 2010 of 3.1% to 1.8% in the first quarter of 2011. We had forecast 2% to 2-1/2% growth for 2011. That is little to show for a minimum of $1.8 trillion spent in QE2 and stimulus 2. Without that we probably would have been at a minus 2%. Just think about that. Trillions of dollars spent with little results. Obviously such programs do not work very well. You would have thought the Fed would have found a better way after two such failures. They know what the solution is, but they won‘t put it into motion and that is to purge the system and face deflationary depression. That will happen whether they like it or not, but in the meantime the flipside is 10% inflation headed to 14% by yearend and another greater wave next year, and another in 2013. Unimpressive results is not the word for it. It has been a disaster and the Fed keeps right on doing it. As a result of the discounting of QE3 we wonder what the stock market has in store for us? We would think that a correction would be in the future. If that is so could that negatively affect the economy? Of course it could. All the good news coming, further stimulus by the Fed, will have been discounted. What does the Fed do for an encore? Create more money and credit – probably? Does that mean hyperinflation, of course it does. If the Fed stops the game is over. We are also seeing fewer results from additional stimulus. It is called the law of diminishing returns. In the meantime the dollar goes ever lower versus other currencies, but more importantly versus gold and silver.
If you can believe it, even though the Fed has provided financial flows and assisting speculative flows so Wall Street, banking and hedge funds can glean mega-profits, it still has not provided enough liquidity for additional GDP growth. The small and medium sized businesses have been shut out. The latter participants do not play those games, it is the propriety trading desks, hedge funds and the remainder of the leveraged speculating community that takes advantage of the excess liquidity and the Bernanke put of keeping bonds and stocks up artificially. The Fed and the others are sustaining this process. There are negatives for the Fed and their friends, higher commodity and gold and silver prices. The Fed and banks temporarily took care of that and haven’t quite finished their latest short-term foray in that sector. There are still fears as well regarding Greek debt fears and their CDS, Credit Default Swaps, and those of other euro zone members. They could still blow up in everyone’s faces in a partial if not total default, which is very likely. Banks are on the wrong side of this trade as well as the bond trade, not only with Greece, but with five other nations as well.
In the final analysis papering over the problem never works. The problems also reemerge with new additional problems. The combination of excessive speculation and liquidity and too big to fail is going to end badly, as it always has. De-leveraging will eventually rear its ugly head.
As we said, Greece and others could cause extensive bond and CDS problems and that is not only being reflected in a lower euro, but in higher Greek bond yields of 16-3/8% in their 10-year notes and 24-3/4% in two-year yields, and Portugal, Ireland and Spain are not far behind. The socialists just lost the latest election in Spain in a big way showing the public is fed up with the lies of government and the bankers. The euro is attempting to break $1.40 to the downside as a result of those election results and the Greek impasse. It is obvious that Greece cannot service its debt and reduce its deficit and the other deficient nations are in the same boat. The CDS marketplace would be severely disrupted if there were a sovereign debt default. That fear, of contagion, could be seen in higher rates in Spain, some .30%, the highest upward move this year. Greece, Ireland and Portugal have problems that can never be resolved and Spain, Italy and Belgium are not far behind.
Spain is implementing austerity, but that means like in recent weeks millions have demonstrated in 72 Spanish cities. The 17 autonomous regions have doubled their debt in the last 2-1/2 years. The socialists just did not know when to stop, now they are out of office. Spain is going down. There is no way they can sustain. That should bring the CDS situation front and center. It will also increase unemployment for those 18 to 35 to 40% or more. It is not surprising that half of the protestors were in that age group.
Greek PM George Papandreou, who secretly promised Europe’s elitists bankers that he would sell-off and or pledge Greek state assets, wants to sell stakes in Hellenic Telecommunications, Public Power Corp., Postbank, the ports of Piraeus and Thessaloniki and their local water company. All supposedly worth $70 billion. The bankers, of course, say they are worth far less. They want to buy them for 10% to 20% of what they are worth – so what else is new. The Cabinet went along with the giveaway, as expected, and without a whimper. The EU is demanding all the assets be sold off immediately, so the bankers can buy them as cheaply as possible. The threat by the bankers is if you do not sell and sell fast for a pittance, then we won’t fund loans of $42 billion over the next 2-1/2 to 3 years. If not funded it would be “re-profiled” another new euphemism for default and debt restructuring, or perhaps debt extension.
Then there is the threat that the bankers, the ECB-European Central Bank for the Euro Zone, would refuse to supply the Greek banking system with any further liquidity. They would then admit their new word refilling would mean default. This would end with Greece leaving the euro zone and the euro and total default, the issuance of a new drachma at 50% of the value of the euro and perhaps even leaving the EU, the European Union. Jens Weidmann, the Bundesbank’s new president said no compromise on monetary stability and a correction back to normality and a full separation between monetary and fiscal policy. It is obvious to us that in spite of debt of $620 billion that Germany wants to cut Greece loose. The German voters said that in last month’s elections. The Germans should have accepted default for $0.50 on the dollar offered by the Greeks a year ago. Even if the Greeks sold $50 billion in assets it would be a drop in the bucket, when they cannot possibly pay off the remainder of the debt ever. This shows you how derelict the bankers and sovereign countries were in allowing this debt to be accumulated. In addition Goldman Sacks and JPMorgan Chase hid their problems, via credit default swaps and now these same banks and others want to loot the country.
Tuesday Jean-Claude Junker, chair of the euro zone finance ministers committee had to admit he lied about the secret meeting the bankers had concerning Greece. He is another who says Greece cannot pay its debt under its current debt burden. Both he, and Lorenzo Bini Smaghi, Member of the Executive Board of the European Central Bank, said that any partial or total default would put all of Europe and the euro in jeopardy. In fact, some of these apologists for banks, especially the Germans, have entertained having Germany control Greek budgets and collect taxes. That means you would have a financial SS running things not only in Greece, but also in Ireland and Portugal and eventually in Belgium, Spain and Italy.
It should be noted the ECB paid in capital $14 billion and they hold $183 billion in Greek debt. We would say the ECB is already insolvent. It could be the Ponzi scheme, much like that of the Fed’s will soon come to an end. Some believe that a 50% markdown is in store for Greek debt. That could have worked a year ago, but not low. It is 2/3’s or more of a write down. We can just imagine Greece, Portugal, Ireland, Belgium, Spain and Italy recapitalizing the ECB – forget it. This is why partial or full debt default are out of the question. Just to buy time the ECB will kick the can down the road as long as they can. Those six nations in trouble should all go back to their currencies, default by at least 2/3’s and leave the euro zone.
European bondholders with a 50% debt write off are offside $1.2 trillion for Greek, Portuguese and Irish debt. If we include Spain, Italy and Belgium the 50% write off is $846 billion. That should easily destroy the ECB and the euro zone. We predict that by October changes will have to be made not only in the EU and euro zone, but in the UK and US as well. The battle rages in the euro zone, EU, UK and in the US over overwhelming debt. The debts are all unpayable. This dance of debt could go on for 4 or 5 months. Even a temporary solution is not going to work. The debts are unpayable. Once the lending stops the bottom falls out. The same is true in the US. They cannot raise interest rates and neither can the UK and euro zone, and the issuance of money and credit can only lead to inflation and hyperinflation. The bankers and the politicians in the debtor countries have so enraged the public, and the public now knows what they are up too because of talk radio and the Internet, that we don’t believe there can be settlements. We’ll see by the end of October and perhaps much sooner. All one party or group has to say is forget it we are out of here, and the entire system blows up.
We have seen the extensive damage, as we predicted, that has been caused by one interest rate fits all, which led to a major misallocation of funds and malinvestment. Due to such low interest rates massive debt was accumulated. The EU’s answer is to usurp sovereignty and turn the entire mess over to technocrats, who will most certainly make matters worse.
Political currencies like the euro do not work. It is an unnatural cultural instrument designed to bring people of differing cultures together as one. The order envisioned by European elitists is total amalgamation of all nations at every level. What the professionals not included with the elitists don’t understand is that these Illuminists want world government, at any cost.
The insiders in Europe have realized their plan did not work and that the six countries involved have to be cut loose and the remainder has to stay with the euro. Whether this can be accomplished remains to be seen and we personally believe it is a lost cause. In this withdrawal process bankers and others are going to be exposed and the outcome will be jail time and forfeiture of ill-begotten gains.
Over the past 1-1/2 years we have witnessed a degenerative process in Greece and in other nations as well. The Greek president and his party does not have the votes to give away Greece’s assets to European bankers even though they promised to do so.
Antonis Samaras, opposition leader, is not going to allow that to happen. The standoff could last 4 to 5 months. No Greek property collateralization and severe austerity are not acceptable. Opposition support will not be forthcoming. The formula proposed by the bankers is the same one used by the IMF to loot countries and keep them in perpetual servitude and poverty.
Probably on orders from the bankers the present government has made no effort to restart the economy. Mr. Samaras has called for renegotiation of the bailout deal before anything meaningful can get underway or proceed. He also knows 62% of the voting public is behind what he recommends, and that only 15% are against. That is why a referendum would solidify his position. If PM Papandreou promised the bankers he would sell off Greek assets he should not have done that, because he doesn’t have the power to do so. Worse yet, now Alexis Tsipras of the Left Coalition is calling for Mr. Papandreou’s resignation. Tsipras said what Mr. Papandreou is doing is a crime against the Greek people.
Professors and experts are pushing for a referendum because they say what the PM is trying to do is illegal. Polls already show that 62% of the electorate is against using Greek national assets as collateral. Fifteen percent are for, which means 23% is undecided. The PM does not have a majority in Congress and he cannot win a referendum for the terrorist bankers. These problems could last for months. In the final analysis they will be a partial bankruptcy that could last a year or two. Ultimately such an arrangement won’t work.
We are very proud of Mrs. Theodorakis and Samaras as they save Greece from the tyranny of the bankers.
As an addendum Italy has public debt of 120% of GDP and compromise 17% of the euros total GDP, Spain is 12% and Greece, Ireland and Portugal 6%. If Italy or Spain goes bankrupt the euro is dead. Italy has had a slow economy for ten years.
The top 91 European banks carry $144 billion in Italian debt, or quadruple their holdings of Spanish debt, and 22 times the holdings of Irish debt. This number will give you an idea of the enormity of European bank debt. If the euro fails there will be in a heap of trouble.
We haven’t commented too much regarding the Fed’s secret advance of $30 billion to Goldman Sachs, Credit Suisse and the Royal Bank of Scotland, which is controlled by the Queen of England. This just shows you the Fed is a tool of major banks and in particular European Illuminists banks. There is no transparency unless it is demanded by court order. The Fed is supposed to be an agency of government, when in fact they are agents of the banks who own them. The Fed handed out free cash to their owners. The horror story goes on and the one and the only solution is the termination of the Fed.
Another feature this Friday was that Fitch cut its outlook for Japan to negative from stable, which was not unexpected due to the earthquake.
According to Goldman Sachs 2011 growth is not going to be 4.8% but 4.3%. UBS has cut their estimates from 3.9% to 3.6%. They also believe the market will remain stagnant.
Central banks are raising interest rates, China, India, the Philippines, Chile, Poland, Peru and Malaysia. Others like us are looking for worldwide growth this year of 3.5%.
Small gold and silver coins of one-ounce or less are becoming scarce in Europe. That condition is also moving up to bars.
The IRS, moving aggressively to collect more taxes from small businesses, is telling companies being audited to turn over exact copies of the electronic records kept in their business-software programs, according to a letter from an agency official to the American Institute of CPAs.
The accounting group fears this will force small businesses to turn over customer lists, personnel data, confidential client information and other unrelated information often contained in the off-the-shelf software programs many businesses use to manage all aspects of their finances.
Small-business groups are beginning to push back, saying the agency shouldn’t treat small firms like bigger businesses, which usually have elaborate accounting systems and are able to give the IRS only the data the agency seeks. Small businesses, defined by the IRS as those with assets of less than $10 million, often use one off-the-shelf software program such as QuickBooks or Peachtree. A spokesman for Intuit said the Mountain View, Calif., company “was aware that the IRS has purchased copies of small-business accounting software to use in its tax audits.” The IRS declined to comment.
“Many accountants are worried this could lead to fishing expeditions” to find problems beyond the scope of the requested information, said Danny Snow, a certified public accountant in Memphis who is active in the American Institute of CPAs, or AICPA. “It’s not like what the IRS asks of large companies.”
Orders for U.S. durable goods dropped more than forecast in April, reflecting less demand for aircraft and disruptions in supplies of auto parts stemming from the earthquake in Japan.
Bookings for goods meant to last at least three years fell 3.6 percent, the most since October, after a 4.4 percent jump in March, a Commerce Department report showed today in Washington. Economists projected a 2.5 percent drop in April, according to the median forecast in a Bloomberg News survey. A measure of demand for business equipment declined by the most this year.
Bookings for Boeing Co. aircraft slumped last month and vehicle makers slowed production due to a components shortage that may be short-lived as Japanese manufacturers recover. At the same time, rising overseas sales at Deere & Co. and General Electric Co. indicate factories will keep expanding.
There is “a slowing, but not a dramatic slowing in manufacturing,” Bricklin Dwyer, an economist at BNP Paribas in New York, said before the report. “The inventory rebuilding cycle has tapered off and now we have a normalization. Manufacturing will still be an important component of growth going forward.”
Orders excluding the volatile transportation equipment category decreased 1.5 percent in April after a 2.5 percent gain. The median projection in the Bloomberg survey was for a 0.5 percent rise.
Estimates of total durable goods orders in the Bloomberg survey of 81 economists ranged from a drop of 5.7 percent to a gain of 2 percent. Economists’ forecasts for orders excluding transportation ranged from a decline of 1.2 percent to an increase of 1.8 percent.
New orders for manufactured durable goods in April decreased $7.1 billion or 3.6% to $189.9 billion. Excluding transportation, new orders decreased 1.5%. Excluding defense, new orders decreased 3.6%. Transportation equipment, also down two of the last three months, had the largest decrease, $4.9 billion or 9.5% to $46.7 billion.
Inventories of manufactured durable goods in April, up sixteen consecutive months, increased $3.2 billion or 0.9% to $350.5 billion. This was at the highest level since the series was first published on a NAICS basis in 1992. Transportation equipment, also up sixteen consecutive months, had the largest increase, $1.0 billion or 1.0% to $106.1 billion. This was also at the highest level since the series was first published on a NAICS basis in 1992.
Slower economic activity drove rates on fixed-rate mortgages down for the sixth week in a row, Freddie Mac’s chief economist said on Thursday.
The 30-year fixed rate hasn’t been lower since early December. The loan averaged 4.6% for the week ending May 26, down from 4.61% last week and 4.84% a year ago.
Fifteen-year fixed-rate mortgages averaged 3.78% this week, down from 3.8% last week and 4.21% a year ago. That loan’s rate hasn’t been lower since late November.
Rates on adjustable-rate mortgages also fell this week, with the 5-year Treasury-indexed hybrid adjustable-rate mortgage averaging 3.41% this week, down from 3.48% last week. The ARM averaged 3.97% a year ago.
And 1-year Treasury-indexed ARMs averaged 3.11% this week, down from 3.15% last week and 3.95% a year ago.
To obtain the rates, the fixed-rate mortgages required payment of an average 0.7 point, while the ARMs required payment of an average 0.5 point. A point is 1% of the mortgage amount, charged as prepaid interest.
“Fixed mortgage rates eased slightly for the sixth consecutive week amid reports of slower economic activity. The index of leading indicators fell 0.3% in April and represented the first monthly decline since June 2010,” said Frank Nothaft, vice president and chief economist of Freddie Mac, in a news release. “In addition, the Federal Reserve banks reported less business and manufacturing activity in Philadelphia, Chicago and Richmond.”
However, Nothaft said that house-price indexes may be nearing a bottom.
“On a national basis, prices fell 0.3% between February and March, which was the smallest decline since November 2009, according to the Federal Housing Finance Agency. In addition, four of the nine Census Regions exhibited positive growth, compared to none in February.
“Separately, the Mortgage Bankers Association reported a further reduction in the serious delinquency rate (90 or more days plus foreclosures) in the first quarter, which stood at the lowest reading since the second quarter of 2009.”
Sales of homes in some stage of foreclosure declined in the first three months of the year, but they still accounted for 28 percent of all home sales a share nearly six times higher than what it would be in a healthy housing market.
Foreclosure sales, which include homes purchased after they received a notice of default or were repossessed by lenders, hit the highest share of overall sales in a year during the first quarter, foreclosure listing firm RealtyTrac Inc. said Thursday.
“It’s an astronomically high number,” said Rick Sharga, a senior vice president at RealtyTrac. “In a normal market, you’re looking at the percentage of homes sold in foreclosure to be below 5 percent.”
In all, 158,434 homes in some stage of foreclosure were sold in the first quarter, down 16 percent from the last three months of 2010 and down 36 percent versus a year ago. Sales of all other types of homes also declined sharply, according to RealtyTrac’s figures, which differ from other home-sales estimates.
While the number of bank-owned properties sold declined, they grew as a share of all home sales. Bank-owned homes accounted for nearly 19 percent of all sales, up from 17 percent in the fourth quarter and up from 18 percent a year ago, the firm said.
Ron Paul is set to officially launch his presidential campaign Friday morning, a Paul source told POLITICO.
The Texas congressman will make his announcement from New Hampshire during the 7:00 a.m. hour of ABC’s “Good Morning America.” Paul is then scheduled to speak at 10:00 a.m. in Exeter, part of a two-day swing through New Hampshire following a stop in Iowa. Paul will also be keynoting the Grafton County Republican Memorial dinner on Friday night.
Paul has already taken several incremental steps toward a full-fledged campaign, most recently opening an Iowa campaign office north of Des Moines earlier this week. He also recently raked in more than $1 million during a one-day online “money bomb” ahead of the first GOP presidential debate, demonstrating the continued strength of the grassroots fundraising machine that turned heads during his 2008 campaign.
“Tomorrow I’ll be on Good Morning America around 7AM. I’ll also be making an important announcement at the historic Exeter town hall in New Hampshire at 10AM. If you are in the area, please stop by, or tune into the live stream of the announcement at http://www.ronpaul2012.com”
Do you know people that still believe that America is a free country? Do you have friends or family that are proud to live in “the land of the free and the home of the brave”? If you do, just show them this article. The things that you are about to read are enough to make the blood of any red-blooded American boil. We don’t live in a free country anymore. Instead, we live in a “Big Brother” police state control grid that is becoming more restrictive every single day. Most of our politicians seem to be control freaks that are obsessed with running every single little detail of our lives. These days there has to be a “rule” or a “regulation” for everything. The radical social engineers in the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany and communist China never even dared to try some of the things that are going on in America today. We are all being treated little better than cattle and we are all being taught that it is best to just sit in our homes and absorb all of the television “programming” that is being provided for us. Meanwhile, our public schools have become little more than prison grids. Our children are being taught to enjoy living as docile slaves in a world where imagination, liberty, freedom and adventure are all greatly discouraged.
Unfortunately, none of this is an exaggeration. Our politicians love to give speeches about “liberty” and “freedom”, but they always seem to have excuses to justify the endless parade of liberty-killing laws that they are imposing on all the rest of us.
Almost all of the freedoms listed in the Bill of Rights have been severely eroded. In fact, a number of them are almost totally gone at this point.
The things that you are about to read should make you mad. In fact, if none of these things make you mad there is a problem. Sadly, millions of Americans have actually embraced tyranny, and if you are not outraged by any of the items listed below than you are likely one of them.
The following are 10 examples that show that we no longer live in the land of the free and the home of the brave….
#1According to the ACLU, state police in Michigan are using “extraction devices” to download data from the cellphones of motorists that they pull over. This is taking place even if those pulled over are not accused of doing anything wrong.
The following is how an article on CNET News describes the capabilities of these “extraction devices”….
The devices, sold by a company called Cellebrite, can download text messages, photos, video, and even GPS data from most brands of cell phones. The handheld machines have various interfaces to work with different models and can even bypass security passwords and access some information.
#2 In the state of New York, the Department of Health has designated wiffle ball, dodge ball, kick ball, freeze tag, red rover, frisbee tossing and tug of war as “risky recreational activities“. Any organization or program that allows kids to enjoy these games during the summer will now be subject to strict government regulation according to the New York Daily News….
Under the new rules, any program that offers two or more organized recreational activities – with at least one of them on the risky list – is deemed a summer camp and subject to state regulation.
#3 At one public school in the Chicago area, children have been banned from bringing their lunches from home. Yes, you read that correctly. Students at that particular school are absolutely prohibited from bringing lunches from home. Instead, it is mandatory that they eat the food that the school cafeteria serves.
#4 Would you like to have your face scanned and your ID recorded every time you attend a public event? Don’t laugh. The San Francisco Entertainment Commission is actually proposing a new rule which “would require all venues with an occupancy of over 100 people to record the faces of all patrons and employees and scan their ID’s for storage in a database which they must hand over to law enforcement on request.”
#5 In Delaware, police and state government officials recently tore a basketball hoop right out of a family’s front yard and carted it away because it was “too close” to the street. They even extracted the pole for the basketball hoop out of the ground and took that away too.
#6 In Missouri of all places, two young girls named Abigail and Caitlin Mills were recently taught a lesson on how to be good citizens in the emerging totalitarian control grid going up all over the United States. After a complaint from a neighbor, the city of Hazelwood cracked down on the two girls and told them that they must stop selling girl scout cookies in their own front yard.
#7 As I have written about previously, federal bureaucrats have outlawed the incandescent light bulbs that we all grew up with and will be forcing us to switch over to new CFL (compact fluorescent lamp) light bulbs that are more expensive and that are actually worse for the environment. One new study conducted by scientists in Germany has shown that the new CFL light bulbs that we are being forced to use contain poisonous carcinogens that are likely cause cancer. In fact, the German scientists say that these CFL bulbs should be “kept as far away as possible from the human environment”.
#8 Many states are aggressively seizing “unclaimed” safe deposit boxes and are selling off the contents and using the money to pay state government bills. In the state of California, they are now going after safe deposit boxes if the owners have had “no contact” with the bank for just 3 years. Other states are being nearly as aggressive. If you have a safe deposit box that you have not opened in a while you need to go check on it right away.
#9 One Mississippi state judge recently issued an order for state officials to gather and deliver to him the names of every single child that is being homeschooled in the state. The frightening thing is that the judge did this all on his own. Nobody requested this information and there is no case pending for which this information would be required.
#10 The TSA had promised that they were going to stop groping little children at airports, but apparently that is not the case. For example, one 6 year old little girl made headlines recently when a TSA worker touched all of her private areas before allowing her to get on an airplane. Her parents were forced to stand aside and watch this outrage take place.
So what do all of you think about this list?
Does anyone out there still believe that we live in the land of the free and the home of the brave?
Radiation from Japan has been detected in drinking water in 13 more American cities, and cesium-137 has been found in American milk—in Montpelier, Vermont—for the first time since the Japan nuclear disaster began, according to data released by the Environmental Protection Agency late Friday.
Milk samples from Phoenix and Los Angeles contained iodine-131 at levels roughly equal to the maximum contaminant level permitted by EPA, the data shows. The Phoenix sample contained 3.2 picoCuries per liter of iodine-131. The Los Angeles sample contained 2.9. The EPA maximum contaminant level is 3.0, but this is a conservative standard designed to minimize exposure over a lifetime, so EPA does not consider these levels to pose a health threat.
The cesium-137 found in milk in Vermont is the first cesium detected in milk since the Fukushima-Daichi nuclear accident occurred last month. The sample contained 1.9 picoCuries per liter of cesium-137, which falls under the same 3.0 standard.
Radioactive isotopes accumulate in milk after they spread through the atmosphere, fall to earth in rain or dust, and settle on vegetation, where they are ingested by grazing cattle. Iodine-131 is known to accumulate in the thyroid gland, where it can cause cancer and other thyroid diseases. Cesium-137 accumulates in the body’s soft tissues, where it increases risk of cancer, according to EPA.
The world’s media reacted with a collective shrug of the shoulders today as Defense Secretary Robert Gates admitted that US troops are likely to stay in Iraq beyond 2011, making another scheduled withdrawal date nothing more than an empty meaningless promise.
There will be no withdrawal, because a permanent military occupation was agreed long ago.
The date for the final pullout of U.S. troops from Iraq keeps being pushed back further and further. Obama campaigned in 2008 on the promise that he would “immediately” withdraw troops from Iraq, then that was put back to June 2009, then it became August 2010, and now the date has been pushed back to the end of 2011. Every time a deadline gets close, the Obama administration simply insists that the situation is too unstable for withdrawal and the date is pushed back again.
Nevertheless, last August, with much sickening fanfare, the corporate media announced the “official” end to the occupation of Iraq.
“The last American combat troops left Iraq today, seven-and-a-half years after the US-led invasion, and two weeks ahead of President Barack Obama’s 31 August deadline for withdrawal from the country,” the London Guardian reported on August 19.
Buried in the recesses of such coverage was the fact that over 50,000 troops would remain behind to make up a “transition force”.
Even that number was misleading, however, given that the US still has over 100,00 contractors in Iraq.
In reality there is no plan to withdraw the military from Iraq, far from it, the plan is to stay there… forever.
In 2008 details of that agenda leaked to the media. It was revealed that the globalist neocon cabal in control of the government was actively seeking permanent occupation of the country, along with the construction of over 50 permanent bases and the right to launch pre-emptive military strikes on any country from inside Iraq.
The terms of the impending deal, details of which have been leaked to The Independent, are likely to have an explosive political effect in Iraq. Iraqi officials fear that the accord, under which US troops would occupy permanent bases, conduct military operations, arrest Iraqis and enjoy immunity from Iraqi law, will destabilise Iraq’s position in the Middle East and lay the basis for unending conflict in their country. [...]
Under the terms of the new treaty, the Americans would retain the long-term use of more than 50 bases in Iraq. American negotiators are also demanding immunity from Iraqi law for US troops and contractors, and a free hand to carry out arrests and conduct military activities in Iraq without consulting the Baghdad government.
Further details of the plot then emerged from senior Iraqi military sources who detailed the wish on behalf of the White House to control Iraqi airspace below 29,000ft and secure the right to launch military campaigns against other countries from inside Iraq:
The military source added, “According to this agreement, the American forces will keep permanent military bases on Iraqi territory, and these will include Al Asad Military base in the Baghdadi area close to the Syrian border, Balad military base in northern Baghdad close to Iran, Habbaniyah base close to the town of Fallujah and the Ali Bin Abi Talib military base in the southern province of Nasiriyah close to the Iranian border.”
The military and both the Bush and Obama administrations have consistently denied any plans for permanent bases in Iraq, yet the Pentagon continues to spend billions on the construction of permanent bases. Of course, they are not referred to as “permanent”, rather they are “enduring” bases.
The push to permanently occupy Iraq did not subside with the election of Obama, who sent a special envoy last September to meet with senior Iraqi military and civilian officials to carve out a secret deal to keep troops in Iraq beyond 2011.
The U.S. has around 1,000 bases and military installations in 156 countries scattered around the world. The Pentagon does not plan to “drawdown” its presence in these countries anytime soon. In fact, it is continually looking for excuses to expand its presence, as we have seen with the recent incursion into Libya.
Obama’s two-faced con in announcing that there will be a full withdrawal from Iraq while in reality tens of thousands of troops and contractors will remain as an occupying force for years if not decades strikes at the root of Obama’s hypocrisy and the fact that, while posturing as a peace advocate, he is firmly in the pocket of the military-industrial complex.
Following sovereign debt crises in Greece and Ireland, the Prime Minister of Portugal asked the European Union for a bailout on Wednesday. With the United States’ deficit causing coast-to-coast panic, can we learn from what’s happening overseas? The Market Ticker’s Karl Denniger says that the story is far from over.
When faced with dept you dont owe, just say NO!
Federal officials have still not published any official data on nuclear fallout from Japan disaster
… Radiation from Japan rained on Berkeley during recent storms at levels that exceeded drinking water standards by 181 times and has been detected in multiple milk samples…
Radiation falling with rain can cover grass that is eaten by cows and other animals. It can also fall on food crops or accumulate in reservoirs that are used for irrigation or drinking water. Seafood can also be affected. …
A rooftop water monitoring program managed by UC Berkeley’s Department of Nuclear Engineering detected substantial spikes in rain-borne iodine-131 during torrential downpours a week ago. …
The levels exceeded federal drinking water thresholds, known as maximum contaminant levels, or MCL, by as much as 181 times. …
Patty Lovera, assistant director at the nonprofit Food and Water Watch:
“The official mantra from a lot of folks in government is, ‘Oh, it’s OK in low levels.’”
“But low levels add up. We would like to see a more coherent strategy for monitoring air and water in agricultural areas and then using that data to come up with a plan, if you need one, to go look at the food system.”
Liberty Dollars grundare Bernard von NotHaus fälldes häromdagen för falskmyntning och konspiration mot USA:s regering. Det von NotHaus gjort är att han startat ett företag som givit ut konstitutionella pengar. USA:s konstitution stipulerar nämligen att endast guld och silver kan vara pengar.
Kongressen har istället för att följa konstitutionen delegerat makten att skapa pengar till den privata centralbanken Federal Reserve. Federal Reserve använder denna tveksamma makt till att skapa pengar i en omfattning som aldrig tidigare skådats.
Men i vår värld går centralbankscheferna och bankirerna, som skapar pengar ur tomma intet och berikar sig själva, fria medan de som försöker skapa en värdebevarande sund valuta kallas för terrorister.
Att ädelmetall skulle vara falskmyntning måste vara inofficiellt rekord i begreppsförvridning. Brukar inte falskmyntning innebära ett försök att efterlikna en valuta med värde? I detta fall påstås alltså von NotHaus ha falskmyntat genom att med värdefull ädelmetall efterliknat värdelösa papperspengar.
Åklagaren kallar detta för "en unik form av inhemsk terrorism". Det är en besynnerlig och skrämmande tid vi lever i.
-Vi tänker inte lämna vårt land och vi tänker befria det, säger Gaddafi till statlig libysk tv och kallar västmakternas flygräder för terrorism.
Inte ofta jag håller med någon men Gaddafi har faktiskt rätt här.
Först fick dem muslimska extremistiska rebellerna fonder av: USA, EU och England.
När rebellerna hade kört fast så skickade britterna in sina sas trupper.
När dem misslyckades så förklarade FN krig mot lybien i namnet av lybiens folk.
Vad FN säkert glömde tänka på var: All senapsgas och alla andra kemiska vapen Gaddafi har.
Vad tror ni sker om man släpper ut stora mängder senapsgas? Jo det åker med vinden, vart når vinden?
Men jag tror vi kan strunta i dem kemiska vapnen eftersom att vi bor i Sverige, eller?
Oljan kommer gå upp till 200$+ sedan kommer usa att rasa. Usa kommer sedan öppna en olje reserv under ett berg som jag inte mins namnet på men där har dem olja för ~40 år frammåt. Då kommer landet USA resa sig som en phoenix ur ruinerna...