Archive for Globalizare
IMF Head Calls For Huge Global Warming Slush Fund
International Monetary Fund head Dominique Strauss-Kahn today called for a huge global warming slush fund to be established as an interim measure before carbon taxes are implemented in the name of preventing weather disasters related to alleged man-made climate change.
Speaking in Nairobi Kenya today, “Strauss-Kahn said the Fund is concerned about the huge amount of funding needed and the effect that will have on the global economy,” reports the Associated Press.
The IMF chief said that an outline paper would be published later this week which would detail how countries would adopt a quota system “which could bring in money faster than proposals to increase carbon taxes or other fundraising methods”.
Strauss-Kahn said that the measure was merely a stop-gap in anticipation of the longer term implementation of carbon taxes, that is a global levy on the very substance we exhale.
“We all know that (carbon taxes and other fundraising methods) will take time and we don’t have this time. So we need something which looks like an interim solution, which will bridge the gap between now and the time when those carbon taxes will be big enough to solve the problem,” Strauss-Kahn said. “And that is exactly what the IMF proposal is dealing with.”
Strauss-Kahn cited the failed Copenhagen “agreement” in claiming that $100 billion dollars a year would be needed to help poorer countries fight the effects of climate change, which as the Climategate scandal exposed, have been completely exaggerated and even fabricated by the IPCC in pursuit of a predetermined consensus.
However, one of the primary reasons behind the failure of Copenhagen was put down to the leak of the “Danish text,” which revealed how the IMF and the World Bank were using climate change as a smokescreen with which to hide their neo-colonial agenda.
As we reported at the time, the leaked text exposed how funds from climate financing, originally allocated to go to the UN and then be doled out piecemeal to third world nations, would instead be paid directly into the coffers of the World Bank and IMF, organizations that have made a habit out of looting poorer countries with crippling debts that cannot be paid back, forcing such countries to hand over their entire infrastructure to globalist loan sharks.
Leaders of third world countries were horrified to discover that developed nations would take on less of a burden than anticipated and that more would be demanded of poorer countries despite the fact that any further cuts in CO2 emissions would further cripple their flimsy economies and poverty-stricken people.
Billionaire elitist George Soros subsequently told Copenhagen delegates how poorer nations would be forced to take on what he described as “green loans” in the name of combating climate change, a policy that would land the already financially devastated third world with even more debt, payable to globalist institutions such as the IMF.
The creation of revenue streams to bankroll the structure of global governance that will oversee the implementation a “green world order” will again be up for discussion at a series of new Copenhagen process negotiations set to take place in April, May and June.
As we highlighted last month, leaked policy documents reveal that the United Nations plans to create a “green world order” by 2012 which will be enforced by a structure of global governance and funded by a gargantuan $45 trillion transfer of wealth from richer countries, as the globalists’ insidious plan to centralize power, crush sovereignty while devastating the economy is exposed once again.
Paul Joseph Watson
sursa: PrisonPlanet.com
trimite unui prieten
Declinul Imperiului American si aparitia Noii Ordini Mondiale
“Declinul Imperiului American, un rezultat inevitabil al modului in care si-a exercitat timp de jumatate de secol hegemonia politica si militara, nu este un eveniment izolat. Pierderea de viteza a SUA vine conjugat cu conturarea a ceea ce se cheama “Noua Ordine Mondiala”. America a fost utilizata de puternicele banci occidentale si interese corporatiste ca un mechanism pentru raspandirea si exercitarea influentei in intreaga lume. Bancile nu au armate, asa ca trebuie sa controleze natiuni, bancile nu produc bunuri, asa ca trebuie sa controleze industrii, bancile au doar bani si dobanzi de incasat in contul lor. Asa ca bancherii trebuie sa se asigure ca industriile si guvernele respective se vor imprumuta masiv pana in punctul in care nu-si vor mai plati niciodata integral datoriile, urmand doar sa le rostogoleasca. In consecinta, guvernele si industriile diferite devin maleabile in fata intereselor bancare.
Bancile au reusit sa duca la bun sfarsit acest obiectiv construindu-si un sistem global. Industria bancara a reusit sa controleze mai intai Marea Britanie, prin Banca Angliei, contribuind la dezvoltarea imperiului britanic si alcatuind noi banci centrale in majoritatea imperiilor europene. In secolul 20, cartelul bancherilor a reusit sa acapareze SUA prin consfintirea aparitiei Federal Reserve, in 1913, inainte de inceperea primului razboi mondial. Dupa incheierea acestuia, restructurarea vechii ordinii mondiale a inceput. Marea Depresiune care a debuteaza in 1929 a fost rezultatul speculatiilor in care s-a angajat sectorul bancar, speculatii incurajate activ si finantate cand a fost cazul chiar de Fed si celelalte banci centrale. Ca rezultat al Marii Depresiuni, o noua institutie a fost formata-Banca pentru Reglementari Internationale (Bank for International Settlements-BIS) cu sediul in Elvetia. Istoricul Caroll Quigley explica: “BIS a luat fiinta pentru a remedia declinul Londrei ca centru financiar furnizand un mechanism cu trei centri financiari de putere care sa opereze din Londra, New York si Paris, ca unul singur”.
Acesta subliniaza: “Exista un singur scop: sa se creeze un sistem in care controlul financiar sa fie concentrat in cateva maini private, capabil sa domine sistemele politice din fiecare tara in parte, si economia globala ca intreg. Sistemul urma sa fie controlat in mod aproape feudal de Bancile Centrale care sa actioneze concertat, cordonatele actiunilor lor urmand sa fie stabilite si trasate prin conferinte si intalniri private frecvente. Varful icebergului urma sa fie BIS, o banca privata detinuta si controlata de celelalte banci centrale, ele insele corporatii private (vezi Fed, care nu este banca de stat!.n.n.)”.
Noua Ordine Mondiala care este construita acum nu prespune o super-putere dominanta, cum sugereaza unii comentatori ca ar putea deveni China, ci o lume multipolara, in care politica economica globala este restructurata insa intr-o structura de guvernanta globala, aparitia unui Guvern global fiind insa o prioritate in agenda. Acesta este contextul in care criza economica a fost implementata. In aprilie 2009, G20 a schitat planurile pentru a forma o moneda globala, care se presupune ca ar trebui sa inlocuiasca dolarul ca moneda pentru rezervele bancilor centrale. Aceasta noua moneda ar urma sa fie operata atat de FMI cat si de BIS iar valoarea sa va fi determinata prin raportare la un cos valutar (dolar, yen, euro, etc). In 1998, un articol din The Economist vorbea despre aparitia unei monede globale pana in 2018, caz in care autorul era de parere ca statele ar trebui sa renunte la suveranitatea lor politica si economica.
Pentru a crea o moneda globala si un sistem mondial de guvernare economica, lumea ar trebui sa se confrunte cu crize monetare si economice profunde, care sa determine (sau justifice) Guvernele sa ia deciziile necesare in aceasta directie. Din 1998 pana acum au existat de altfel mai multe apeluri pentru crearea unei banci centrale mondiale, apeluri reinnoite in timul crizei din 2008, reprezentanti ai G20 vorbind de infiintarea unui “Fed si a unei valute globale”. Aparitia unei Banci Centrale globale este furnizata ca solutie pentru a preveni aparitia unor noi crize de magnitudinea celei pe care o traversam.
In februarie 2009, The Times, editia on-line, arata ca “o noua ordine mondiala a sistemelor bancare este necesara” si ca “este din ce in ce mai evident ca lumea are nevoie de un nou sistem bancar” construit evident tot de bancheri. Acest proces merge mana in mana cu formarea unei noi ordini in ceea ce priveste structurile politice globale, cu incurajarea structurilor regionale. Europa a luat prima aceasta initiativa, formand blocuri comerciale, care sa devina mai apoi uniuni economice si monetare, si mai apoi, prin cadrul generat de Tratatul de la Lisabona, uniuni politice. Noua Ordine Mondiala presupune formarea unor structuri de guvernare regionala, care sa fie apoi coodonate de un guvern global”.
Puteti citi analiza completa aici:
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article17404.html
Cristian Dogaru
sursa: baniinostrii.ro
trimite unui prieten
Towards a New World Social Order
Historical background – the establishment of capitalist supremacy
When the Industrial Revolution began in Britain, in the late 1700s, there was lots of money to be made by investing in factories and mills, by opening up new markets, and by gaining control of sources of raw materials. The folks who had the most money to invest, however, were not so much in Britain but more in Holland. Holland was the leading Western power in the 1600s, and its bankers were the leading capitalists. In pursuit of profit, Dutch capital flowed to the British stock market, and thus the Dutch funded the rise of Britain, who subsequently eclipsed Holland both economically and geopolitically.
In this way British industrialism came to be dominated by wealthy investors, and capitalism became the dominant economic system. This led to a major social transformation. Britain had been essentially an aristocratic society, dominated by landholding families. As capitalism became dominant economically, capitalists became dominant politically. Tax structures and import-export policies were gradually changed to favor investors over landowners.
It was no longer economically viable to simply maintain an estate in the countryside: one needed to develop it, turn it to more productive use. Victorian dramas are filled with stories of aristocratic families who fall on hard times, and are forced to sell off their properties. For dramatic purposes, this decline is typically attributed to a failure in some character, a weak eldest son perhaps. But in fact the decline of aristocracy was part of a larger social transformation brought on by the rise of capitalism.
The business of the capitalist is the management of capital, and this management is generally handled through the mediation of banks and brokerage houses. It should not be surprising that investment bankers came to occupy the top of the hierarchy of capitalist wealth and power. And in fact, there are a handful of banking families, including the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers, who have come to dominate economic and political affairs in the Western world.
Unlike aristocrats, capitalists are not tied to a place, or to the maintenance of a place. Capital is disloyal and mobile – it flows to where the most growth can be found, as it flowed from Holland to Britain, then from Britain to the USA, and most recently from everywhere to China. Just as a copper mine might be exploited and then abandoned, so under capitalism a whole nation can be exploited and then abandoned, as we see in the rusting industrial areas of America and Britain.
This detachment from place leads to a different kind of geopolitics under capitalism, as compared to aristocracy. A king goes to war when he sees an advantage to his nation in doing so. Historians can ‘explain’ the wars of pre-capitalist days, in terms of the aggrandizement of monarchs and nations.
A capitalist stirs up a war in order to make profits, and in fact our elite banking families have financed both sides of most military conflicts since at least World War 1. Hence historians have a hard time ‘explaining’ World War 1 in terms of national motivations and objectives.
In pre-capitalist days warfare was like chess, each side trying to win. Under capitalism warfare is more like a casino, where the players battle it out as long as they can get credit for more chips, and the real winner always turns out to be the house – the bankers who finance the war and decide who will be the last man standing. Not only are wars the most profitable of all capitalist ventures, but by choosing the winners, and managing the reconstruction, the elite banking families are able, over time, to tune the geopolitical configuration to suit their own interests.
Nations and populations are but pawns in their games. Millions die in wars, infrastructures are destroyed, and while the world mourns, the bankers are counting their winnings and making plans for their postwar reconstruction investments.
From their position of power, as the financiers of governments, the banking elite have over time perfected their methods of control. Staying always behind the scenes, they pull the strings controlling the media, the political parties, the intelligence agencies, the stock markets, and the offices of government. And perhaps their greatest lever of power is their control over currencies. By means of their central-bank scam, they engineer boom and bust cycles, and they print money from nothing and then loan it at interest to governments. The power of the banking elites is both absolute and subtle…
“Some of the biggest men in the United
States are afraid of something. They
know there is a power somewhere, so
organised, so subtle, so watchful, so
interlocked, so complete, so pervasive
that they had better not speak above
their breath when they speak in
condemnation of it.”
— President Woodrow Wilson
The end of growth – capitalists vs. capitalism
It was always inevitable, on a finite planet, that there would be a limit to economic growth. Industrialization has enabled us to rush headlong toward that limit over the past two centuries. Production has become ever more efficient, markets have become ever more global, and finally we have reached the point where the paradigm of perpetual growth can no longer be maintained.
Indeed, that point was actually reached by about 1970. Since then capital has not so much sought growth through increased production, but rather by extracting greater returns from relatively flat production levels. Hence globalization, which moved production to low-waged areas, providing greater profit margins. Hence privatization, which transfers revenue streams to investors that formerly went to national treasuries. Hence derivative and currency markets, which create the electronic illusion of economic growth, without actually producing anything in the real world.
If one studies the collapse of civilizations, one learns that failure-to-adapt is fatal. Continuing on the path of pursuing growth would be such a failure to adapt. And if one reads the financial pages these days, one finds that it is full of doomsayers. We read that the Eurozone is doomed, and Greece is just the first casualty. We read that stimulus packages are not working, unemployment is increasing, the dollar is in deep trouble, growth continues to stagnate, business real estate will be the next bubble to burst, etc. It is easy to get the impression that capitalism is failing to adapt, and that our societies are in danger of collapsing into chaos.
Such an impression would be partly right and partly wrong. In order to understand the real situation we need to make a clear distinction between the capitalist elite and capitalism itself. Capitalism is an economic system driven by growth; the capitalist elite are the folks who have managed to gain control of the Western world while capitalism has operated over the past two centuries. The capitalist system is past its sell-by date, the banking elite are well aware of that fact – and they are adapting.
Capitalism is a vehicle that helped bring the bankers to absolute power, but they have no more loyalty to that system than they have to place, or to anything or anyone else. As mentioned earlier, they think on a global scale, with nations and populations as pawns. They define what money is and they issue it, just like the banker in a game of Monopoly. They can also make up a new game with a new kind of money. They have long outgrown any need to rely on any particular economic system in order to maintain their power. Capitalism was handy in an era of rapid growth. For an era of non-growth, a different game is being prepared.
Thus, capitalism has not been allowed to die a natural death. First it was put on a life-support system, as mentioned above, with globalization, privatization, derivative markets, etc. Then it was injected with a euthanasia death-drug, in the form of toxic derivatives. And when the planned collapse occurred, rather than industrial capitalism being bailed out, the elite bankers were bailed out. It’s not that the banks were too big to fail, rather the bankers were too politically powerful to fail. They made governments an offer they couldn’t refuse.
The outcome of the trillion-dollar bailouts was easily predictable, although you wouldn’t know that from reading the financial pages. National budgets were already stretched, and they certainly did not have reserves available to service the bailouts. Thus the bailouts amounted to nothing more than the taking on of immense new debts by governments. In order to fulfill the bailout commitments, the money would need to be borrowed from the same financial institutions that were being bailed out.
With the bailouts, Western governments delivered their nations in hock to the bankers. The governments are now in perpetual debt bondage to the bankers. Rather than the banks going into receivership, governments are now in receivership. Obama’s cabinet and advisors are nearly all from Wall Street; they are in the White House so they can keep close watch over their new acquisition, the once sovereign USA. Perhaps they will soon be presiding over its liquidation.
The bankers are now in control of national budgets. They say what can be funded and what can’t. When it comes to financing their wars and weapons production, no limits are set. When it comes to public services, then we are told deficits must be held in check. The situation was expressed very well by Brian Cowan, Ireland’s government chief. In the very same week that Ireland pledged 200 billion Euro to bailout the banks, he was being asked why he was cutting a few million Euro off of critical service budgets. He replied, “I’m sorry, but the funds just aren’t there”. Of course they’re not there! The treasury was given away. The cupboard is bare.
As we might expect, the highest priority for budgets is servicing the debt to the banks. Just as most of the third world is in debt slavery to the IMF, so the whole West is now in debt slavery to its own central banks. Greece is the harbinger of what is to happen everywhere.
The carbon economy – controlling consumption
In a non-growth economy, the mechanisms of production will become relatively static. Instead of corporations competing to innovate, we’ll have production bureaucracies. They’ll be semi-state, semi-private bureaucracies, concerned about budgets and quotas rather than growth, somewhat along the lines of the Soviet model. Such an environment is not driven by a need for growth capital, and it does not enable a profitable game of Monopoly.
We can already see steps being taken to shift the corporate model towards the bureaucratic model, through increased government intervention in economic affairs. With the Wall Street bailouts, the forced restructuring of General Motors, the call for centralized micromanagement of banking and industry, and the mandating of health insurance coverage, the government is saying that the market is to superseded by government directives. Not that we should bemoan the demise of exploitive capitalism, but before celebrating we need to understand what it is being replaced with.
In an era of capitalism and growth, the focus of the game has been on the production side of the economy. The game was aimed at controlling the means of growth: access to capital. The growth-engine of capitalism created the demand for capital; the bankers controlled the supply. Taxes were mostly based on income, again related to the production side of the economy.
In an era of non-growth, the focus of the game will be on the consumption side of the economy. The game will be aimed at controlling the necessities of life: access to food and energy. Population creates the demand for the necessities of life; the bankers intend to control the supply. Taxes will be mostly based on consumption, particularly of energy. That’s what the global warming scare is all about, with its carbon taxes and carbon credits.
Already in Britain there is talk of carbon quotas, like gasoline rationing in wartime. It’s not just that you’ll pay taxes on energy, but the amount of energy you can consume will be determined by government directive. Carbon credits will be issued to you, which you can use for driving, for heating, or on rare occasions for air travel. Also in Britain, the highways are being wired so that they can track how many miles you drive, tax you accordingly, and penalize you if you travel over your limit. We can expect these kinds of things to spread throughout the West, as it’s the same international bankers who are in charge everywhere.
In terms of propaganda, this control over consumption is being sold as a solution to global warming and peak oil. The propaganda campaign has been very successful, and the whole environmental movement has been captured by it. In Copenhagen, demonstrators confronted the police, carrying signs in support of carbon taxes and carbon credits. But in fact the carbon regime has nothing to do with climate or with sustainability. It is all about micromanaging every aspect of our lives, as well as every aspect of the economy.
If the folks who are running things actually cared about sustainability, they’d be investing in efficient mass transit, and they’d be shifting agriculture from petroleum-intensive, water-intensive methods to sustainable methods. Instead they are mandating biofuels and selling us electric cars, which are no more sustainable or carbon-efficient than standard cars. Indeed, the real purpose behind biofuels is genocide. With food prices linked to energy prices, and agriculture land being converted from food production to fuel production, the result can only be a massive increase in third-world starvation. Depopulation has long been a stated goal in elite circles, and the Rockefeller dynasty has frequently been involved in eugenics projects of various kinds.
‘The War on Terrorism’ – preparing the way for the transition
The so-called War on Terrorism has two parts. The first part is a pretext for arbitrary abuse of citizen’s rights, whenever Homeland Security claims the action is necessary for security reasons. The second part is a pretext for US military aggression anywhere in the world, whenever the White House claims that Al Qaeda is active there.
I emphasized the word ‘claims’ above, because the terrorism pretext is being used to justify arbitrary powers, both domestically and globally. No hard evidence need be presented to Congress, the UN, or anyone else, before some nation is invaded, someone is kidnapped and tortured as a ‘terrorist suspect’, or some new invasive security measure is implemented. When powers are arbitrary, then we are no longer living under the rule of law, neither domestically nor internationally. We are living under the rule of men, as you would expect in a dictatorship, or in an old-fashioned kingdom or empire.
Part 1: Preparing the way for a new social order
In a very real sense, the terrorism pretext is being used to undo everything that The Enlightenment and the republication revolutions achieved two centuries ago. The very heart of the Bill of Rights – due process – has been abandoned. The gulag, the concentration camp, and the secret arrest in the night – these we have always associated with fascist and communist dictatorships – and now they are not only functioning under US jurisdiction, but being justified publicly by the President himself.
Is there really a terrorist threat to the homeland, and would these measures be a sensible response to such a threat? People sre strongly divided in their answers to these questions. Quite a bit of hard forensic evidence has come to light, including links to intelligence agencies, and my own view is that most of the dramatic ‘terrorist’ events in the US, UK, and Europe have been covert false-flag operations.
From an historical perspective this would not be at all surprising. Such operations have been standard practice – modus operandi – in many nations, though we usually don’t get proof until years later. For example, every war the US has been involved in has had its own phony Gulf of Tonkin Incident, or its Weapons of Mass Destruction scam, in one form or another. It’s a formula that works. Instant mobilization of public opinion, prompt passage without debate of enabling resolutions and legislation. Why would the War on Terrorism be any different?
As regards motive: while Muslims have only suffered as a result of these dramatic events, our elite bankers have been able to create a police-state infrastructure that can be used to deal with any foreseeable popular resistance or civic chaos that might emerge as they prepare the way for their post-capitalist future.
With the collapse, the bailouts, and the total failure to pursue any kind of effective recovery strategy, the signals are very clear: the system will be allowed to collapse totally, thus clearing the ground for a pre-architected ’solution’. Ground Zero can be seen as a metaphor, with the capitalist economy as the Twin Towers. And the toxic derivatives illustrate the fact that the collapse is actually a controlled demolition.
It seems to me inevitable, given the many signals, that martial law will be part of the transition process, allegedly to deal with the problems of economic collapse. Perhaps a collapse in the food-supply chain, due to a collapse in the energy-supply chain. The US emergency responses in New Orleans and again in Haiti give us more signals, actual test trials, of what kind of ‘emergency response’ we can expect.
First and foremost comes the security of the occupation forces. Those suffering in the emergency are treated more like insurgents than victims in need of help. In the case of Haiti, the US response can only be described as an intentional genocide project. When people are pinned under rubble in an earthquake, the first 48 hours, and 72 hours, are absolutely critical points, as regards survival rates. When the US military systematically blocked incoming aid for those critical hours, turning back doctors and emergency teams, they sealed the fate of many thousands who could have been saved.
One can imagine many nightmare scenarios, given these various signals, these ominous signs. World Wars 1 and 2 were nightmares that really happened, with millions dying, and these same banking dynasties orchestrated those scenarios and then covered their tracks. We must also keep in mind the Shock Doctrine, where catastrophe is seen as opportunity – when ‘things can be done that otherwise could not be accomplished’. We are still being impacted by the shock waves that were sent out on 9/11, and again when the financial system collapsed. And the the really big shock, the general collapse of society, is yet to come. The ultimate version of the Shock Doctrine: ‘If the collapse is total, we can accomplish any damned thing we want to accomplish’.
I won’t venture a guess about how this transition process will play out, but I do expect that it will be a nightmare of one description or another. Already the growing homeless population is suffering a nightmare, by any civilized standards. One day you’re living in a home whose value is going up, commuting to a good job, and the next thing you know your family is out on the streets. That’s a nightmare. The transition time will be a difficult time, but it will be a transition, it will be temporary, like a war. And like a war, it will enable social and economic reconstruction in the aftermath.
Consider how Japan and Germany were socially and politically transformed by the postwar reconstruction process. Those were exercises in social engineering, as were the preceding transformations under Mussolini and Hitler. Although the outcomes were quite different, in each case a total collapse / defeat was the preamble to reconstruction. A total collapse of the capitalist economy is simply the application of a proven formula. The second part of the formula will be some new social order, or perhaps some old social order, or some mixture. Something appropriate to a non-growth, command economy.
That’s part 1 of the War on Terrorism: it has enabled the creation of the police-state infrastructures required to to deal with the collapse of society, and to provide security for the reconstruction process.
Part 2: Preparing the way for global domination
Part 2 of the War on Terrorism is about the geopolitical dimensions of a non-growth-based global economy. Earlier I suggested that geopolitics was different under capitalism, than it was under sovereign monarchs. The whole dynamic was different, and outcomes were weighed on a different scale. Similarly, many things will change in a shift from chaotic, growth-oriented capitalism, to a centralized, micromanaged, economic regime.
Consider, for example, the significance of control over oil reserves. In a growth economy, profits were the prize, and controlling the markets and the distribution channels amounted to holding a winning hand in the game. The local dictators could manage things as they pleased, and take their cut of oil revenues, as long as they honored their contracts with the oil majors, who were happy to sell to the highest bidders.
In a non-growth economy, where the focus is on direct control over the supply and distributions of resources, it becomes necessary to secure, in the military sense, the sources of petroleum, and the routes for its distribution. It is no longer sufficient to merely profit from unbridled operations. Securing of the sources, and directly allocating the distribution, is the foundation for micromanaging the non-growth economy. This applies to other critical resources as well, such as uranium, and the rare minerals needed by the ‘defense’ and electronics industries.
In fact we are in the midst of a resource-grab war, with China and Russia making long-term energy deals with Iran and Venezuela, China buying up agricultural land in Africa, Washington making long-term deals for Brazilian biofuels, and there are many other examples. In many ways imperialism is reverting to colonial days, when direct administration was the model, rather than the capitalist model: profiting from corporate investments under dictators who suppress their populations.
There is a natural reversion to the dynamics of the ‘good old days of empire’ when the Great Powers of Europe focused their economic activity within their individual spheres of influence. Everyone knows that global resource limits are being reached, partly from population pressures, and partly from resource-exploitation practices. For this reason alone, we have the peaceful part of the resource-grab war.
In Iraq, Afghanistan, and now in Pakistan and Yemen, the US, with NATO support, is playing a very non-peaceful hand in the resource-grab game. It’s the hand of a bully, ‘I have the biggest gun, so I’ll take what I want’. These aggressive actions are very provocative to Russia and China, and threatening to their vital economic interests. An attack on Iran would be more than a provocation, it would be a direct slap in the face, a challenge: ‘Fight now or resign yourself to being subdued piecemeal’.
In addition to all this petroleum grabbing, the US has been surrounding Russia and China with military bases, and has recently accelerated the installations of anti-missile systems on their borders, over the strong objections of Russia and China. The US is being intentionally provocative, and it is threatening vital interests of these potential adversaries.
Alliances are being formed in response, on a bilateral basis, and in the form of the SCO. China and Russia are very close in their military cooperation, and technology sharing. Their strategic planning is based on the expectation of a US attack, and their strategic response is based on the principle of asymmetric warfare. For example, a million dollar missile capable of taking out a multi-billion dollar aircraft carrier. Or perhaps a handful of missiles capable of disabling the Pentagon’s command-and-control satellite systems.
Meanwhile the US is spending astronomical sums developing a first-strike capability, with space-based weapons systems, control-of-theater capability, forward-based ‘tactical’ nukes, etc. The new anti-missile systems are an important part of a first-strike strategy, reducing the ability of Russia or China to retaliate. These systems are more than just provocative. They are the modern equivalent of marching your armies up to your adversary’s border.
If there is a nuclear exchange between the major powers, historians will cite all of these things I’ve mentioned as ‘obvious signs’ that war was coming. Parallels would be drawn to the pre-World War 1 scenario, when Germany was eclipsing Britain economically, as China is eclipsing the US now. In both cases a ‘desperate attempt to maintain hegemony’ would be seen as the cause of the war.
There may or may not be a World War 3, but all of these preparations make it clear that our banking elite intend to preside over a global system, by hook or by crook. If they wanted a peaceful arrangement, a splitting of the third-world pie, so to speak, it could be easily arranged at any time, along with substantial nuclear disarmament. China and Russia would like to see a stable, multi-polar world; it is only our elite bankers who are obsessed with world domination.
It is possible that nuclear war is a ‘desired outcome’, accomplishing depopulation, and making the collapse even more total. Or perhaps China and Russia will be given an offer they can’t refuse: ‘Surrender your economic sovereignty to our global system, or face the consequences’.
One way or another, the elite bankers, the masters of the universe, intend to preside over a micromanaged global system. The collapse project is now well underway, and the ’surround your enemy’ project seems to be more or less completed. From a strategic perspective, there will be some trigger point, some stage in the economic collapse scenario, when geopolitical confrontation is judged to be most advantageous. It’s a multi-dimensional chess board, and with the stakes so high, you can rest assured that the timing of the various moves will be carefully coordinated. And from the overall shape of the board, we seem to be nearing the endgame.
Prognosis 2012 – a Neo Dark Age
2012 might not be the exact year, but it’s difficult to see the endgame lasting much beyond that, and the masters of the universe love symbolism, as with 911 (both in Chile and in Manhattan), KLA 007, and others. 2012 is loaded with symbolism, eg. the Mayan Calendar, and the Internet is buzzing with various 2012-related prophecies, survival strategies, anticipated alien interventions, alignments with galactic radiation fields, etc. And then there is the Hollywood film, 2012, which explicitly portrays the demise of most of humanity, and the pre-planned salvation of a select few. One never knows with Hollywood productions, what is escapist fantasy, and what is aimed at preparing the public mind symbolically for what is to come.
Whatever the exact date, all the threads will come together, geopolitically and domestically, and the world will change. It will be a new era, just as capitalism was a new era after aristocracy, and the Dark Ages followed the era of the Roman Empire. Each era has its own structure, its own economics, its own social forms, and its own mythology. These things must relate to one another coherently, and their nature follows from the fundamental power relationships and economic circumstances of the system.
In our post-2012 world, we have for the first time one centralized global government, and one ruling elite clique, a kind of extended royal family, the lords of finance. As we can see with the IMF, WHO, and the WTO, and the other pieces of the embryonic world government, the institutions of governance will make no pretensions about popular representation or democratic responsiveness. Rule will be by means of autocratic global bureaucracies, who take their marching orders from the royal family. This model has already been operating for some time, within its various spheres of influence, as with the restructuring programs forced on the third world, as a condition for getting financing.
Whenever there is a change of era, the previous era is always demonized in mythology. In the Garden of Eden story the serpent is demonized – a revered symbol in paganism, the predecessor to Christianity. When republics came along, the demonization of monarchs was an important part of the process. In the post-2012 world, democracy and national sovereignty will be demonized. This will be very important, in getting people to accept totalitarian rule, and the mythology will contain much that is true…
In those terrible dark days, before the blessed unification of humanity, anarchy reigned in the world. One nation would attack another, no better than predators in the wild. Nations had no coherent policies; voters would swing from one party to another, keeping governments always in transition and confusion. How did they ever think that masses of semi-educated people could govern themselves, and run a complex society? Democracy was an ill-conceived experiment that led only to corruption and chaotic governance. How lucky we are to be in this well-ordered world, where humanity has finally grown up, and those with the best expertise make the decisions.
The economics of non-growth are radically different than capitalist economics. The unit of exchange is likely to be a carbon credit, entitling you to consume the equivalent of one kilogram of fuel. Everything will have a carbon value, allegedly based on how much energy it took to produce it and transport it to market. ‘Green consciousness’ will be a primary ethic, conditioned early into children. Getting by with less is a virtue; using energy is anti-social; austerity is a responsible and necessary condition.
As with every currency, the bankers will want to manage the scarcity of carbon credits, and that’s where global warming alarmism becomes important. Regardless of the availability of resources, carbon credits can be kept arbitrarily scarce simply by setting carbon budgets, based on directives from the IPCC, another of our emerging units of global bureaucratic governance. Such IPCC directives will be the equivalent of the Federal Reserve announcing a change in interest rates. Those budgets set the scale of economic activity.
Presumably nations will continue to exist, as official units of governance. However security and policing will be largely centralized and privatized. Like the Roman Legions, the security apparatus will be loyal to the center of empire, not to the place where someone happens to be stationed. We have seen this trend already in the US, as mercenaries have become big business, and police forces are increasingly federalized, militarized, and alienated from the general public.
Just as airports have now been federalized, all transport systems will be under the jurisdiction of the security apparatus. Terrorism will continue as an ongoing bogey-man, justifying whatever security procedures are deemed desirable for social-control purposes. The whole security apparatus will have a monolithic quality to it, a similarity of character regardless of the specific security tasks or location. Everyone dressed in the same Evil Empire black outfits, with big florescent letters on the back of their flack jackets. In essence, the security apparatus will be an occupying army, the emperor’s garrison in the provinces.
On a daily basis, you will need to go through checkpoints of various kinds, with varying levels of security requirements. This is where biometrics becomes important. If people can be implanted with chips, then much of the security can be automated, and everyone can be tracked at at all times, and their past activity retrieved. The chip links into your credit balance, so you’ve got all your currency always with you, along with your medical records and lots else that you don’t know about.
There is very little left as regards national sovereignty. Nothing much in the way of foreign policy will have any meaning. With security marching to its own law and its distant drummer, the main role of so-called ‘government’ will be to allocate and administer the carbon-credit budget that it receives from the IPCC. The IPCC decides how much wealth a nation will receive in a given year, and the government then decides how to distribute that wealth in the form of public services and entitlements. Wealth being measured by the entitlement to expend energy.
In a fundamental sense, this is how things already are, following the collapse and the bailouts. Because governments are so deeply in debt, the bankers are able to dictate the terms of national budgets, as a condition of keeping credit lines open. The carbon economy, with its centrally determined budgets, provides a much simpler and more direct way of micromanaging economic activity and resource distribution throughout the globe.
In order to clear the way for the carbon-credit economy, it will be necessary for Western currencies to collapse, to become worthless, as nations become increasingly insolvent, and the global financial system continues to be systematically dismantled. The carbon currency will be introduced as an enlightened, progressive ’solution’ to the crisis, a currency linked to something real, and to sustainability. The old monetary system will be demonized, and again the mythology will contain much that is true…
The pursuit of money is the root of all evil, and the capitalist system was inherently evil. It encouraged greed, and consumption, and it cared nothing about wasting resources. People thought the more money they had, the better off they were. How much wiser we are now, to live within our means, and to understand that a credit is a token of stewardship.
Culturally, the post-capitalist era will be a bit like the medieval era, with aristocrats and lords on top, and the rest peasants and serfs. A definite upper class and lower class. Just as only the old upper class had horses and carriages, only the new upper class will be entitled to access substantial carbon credits. Wealth will be measured by entitlements, more than by acquisitions or earnings. Those outside the bureaucratic hierarchies are the serfs, with subsistence entitlements. Within the bureaucracies, entitlements are related to rank in the hierarchy. Those who operate in the central global institutions are lords of empire, with unlimited access to credits.
But there is no sequestering of wealth, or building of economic empires, outside the structures of the designated bureaucracies. Entitlements are about access to resources and facilities, to be used or not used, but not to be saved and used as capital. The flow of entitlements comes downward, micromanaged from the top. It’s a dole economy, at all levels, for people and governments alike – the global regimentation of consumption. As regards regimentation, the post-capitalist culture will also be a bit like the Soviet system. Here’s your entitlement card, here’s your job assignment, and here’s where you’ll be living.
With the pervasive security apparatus, and the micromanagement of economic activity, the scenario is clearly about fine-grained social control, according to centralized guidelines and directives. Presumably media will be carefully programmed, with escapist trivia, and a sophisticated version of 1984-style groupthink propaganda pseudo-news, which is pretty much what we already have today. The non-commercial Internet, if there is one, will be limited to monitored, officially-designated chat sites, and other kinds of sanitized forums.
With such a focus on social micromanagement, I do not expect the family unit to survive in the new era, and I expect child-abuse alarmism will be the lever used to destabilize the family. The stage has been set with all the revelations about church and institutional child sexual abuse. Such revelations could have been uncovered any time in the past century, but they came out at a certain time, just as all these other transitional things have been happening. People are now aware that widespread child abuse happens, and they have been conditioned to support strong measures to prevent it.
Whenever I turn on the TV, I see at least one public-service ad, with shocking images, about children who are physically or sexually abused, or criminally neglected, in their homes, and there’s a hotline phone number that children can call. It is easy to see how the category of abuse can be expanded, to include parents who don’t follow vaccination schedules, whose purchase records don’t indicate healthy diets, who have dubious psychological profiles, etc. The state of poverty could be deemed abusive neglect.
With the right media presentation, abuse alarmism would be easy to stir up. Ultimately, a ‘child rights’ movement becomes an anti-family movement. The state must directly protect the child from birth. The family is demonized…
How scary were the old days, when unlicensed, untrained couples had total control over vulnerable children, behind closed doors, with whatever neuroses, addictions, or perversions the parents happened to possess. How did this vestige of patriarchal slavery, this safe-house den of abuse, continue so long to exist, and not be recognized for what it was? How much better off we are now, with children being raised scientifically, by trained staff, where they are taught healthy values.
Ever since public education was introduced, the state and the family have competed to control childhood conditioning. In religious families, the church has made its own contribution to conditioning. In the micromanaged post-capitalist future, with its Shock Doctrine birth scenario, it would make good sense to take that opportunity to implement the ‘final solution’ of social control, which is for the state to monopolize child raising. This would eliminate from society the parent-child bond, and hence family-related bonds in general. No longer is there a concept of relatives. There’s just worker bees, security bees, and queen bees, who dole out the honey.
Postscript
This has been an extensive and somewhat detailed prognosis, regarding the architecture of the post-capitalist regime, and the transition process required to bring it about. The term ‘new world order’ is too weak a term to characterize the radical nature of the social transformation anticipated in the prognosis. A more apt characterization would be a ‘quantum leap in the domestication of the human species’. Micromanaged lives and microprogrammed beliefs and thoughts. A once wild primate species transformed into something resembling more a bee or ant culture. Needless to say, regular use of psychotropic drugs would be mandated, so that people could cope emotionally with such a sterile, inhuman environment.
For such a profound transformation to be possible, it is easy to see that a very great shock is required, on the scale of collapse and social chaos, and possibly on the scale of a nuclear exchange. There needs to be an implicit mandate to ‘do whatever is necessary to get society running again’. The shock needs to leave people in a condition of total helplessness comparable to the survivors in the bombed-out rubble of Germany and Japan after World War 2. Nothing less will do.
The accuracy of the prognosis, as prediction, is of course impossible to know in advance. However each part of the prognosis has been based on precedents that have been set, modus operandi that has been observed, trends that have been initiated, sentiments that have been expressed, signals that have been given, and actions that have been taken whose consequences can be confidently predicted.
In addition, in looking at all of these indicators together, one sees a certain mindset, an absolutist determination to implement the ‘ideal solution’, without compromise, using extreme means, and with unbridled audacity. World wars have been rehearsals for this historic moment. The police state infrastructure is in place and has been tested. The economy is in the process of collapse. The enemy is surrounded with missiles. Arbitrary powers have been assumed. If not now, the ultimate prize, then when will there be a better opportunity?
Our elite planners are backed up by competent think tanks, and they know that the new society must have coherence of various kinds. They’ve had quite a bit of experience with social engineering, nurturing the rise of fascism, and then engineering the postwar regimes. They understand the importance of mythology.
For example there is the mythology of the holocaust, where the story is all about extermination per se, and the story is not told of the primary mission of the concentration camps, which was to provide slave labor for war production. And some of the companies using the slave labor were American owned, and were supplying the German war machine. Thus does mythology, though containing truth, succeed in hiding the tracks and the crimes of elite perps, leaving others to carry the whole burden of historical demonization.
So I think there is a sound basis for anticipating the kinds of mythology that would be designed for leaving behind and rejecting the old ways, and seeing the new as a salvation. There is a long historical precedent of era changes linked with mythology changes, often expressed in religious terms. There will be a familiar ring to the new mythology, a remixing and re-prioritizing of familiar values and assumptions, so as to resonate with the dynamics of the new regime.
The nature of the carbon economy has been somewhat clearly signaled. Carbon budgets, and carbon credits, are clearly destined to become primary components of the economy. As we’ve seen with the elite and grassroots supported global warming movement, the arbitrary scarcity of carbon credits can be easily regulated on the pretext of environmentalism. And peak oil alarmism is always available as a backup. As elite spokespeople have often expressed, when the time comes, the masses will demand the new world order.
The focus on control over consumption, resources, and distribution is implicit in the emphasis on energy limits, is latent in the geopolitical situation, as regards depletion of global resources, and is indicated by the need for a new unifying paradigm, as the growth paradigm is no longer viable.
The nature of the security apparatus has been clearly signaled by the responses to demonstrations ever since 1998 in Seattle, by the increased use of hardened-killer mercenaries at home and abroad, by excessive and abusive police behavior, by airport security procedures, by Guantanamo and renditions, by the creation of a domestic branch of the army, dedicated to responding to civil emergencies, and by the way Katrina and Haiti have been handled.
It would be a major mistake to think of those last two as bungled operations. They were exercises in collapse management of a certain kind, to be applied to certain populations, where the training and equipment appropriate for combat in Afghanistan is seen as being appropriate for administering aid to civilian disaster victims. These selected disaster victims will be seen primarily as threats to civil order, or perhaps undesirables to be incarcerated or eliminated. They will be demonized as rioters and looters. Assistance will comes later, if at all. And it can all be broadcast on TV, and somehow be seen as the way things have to be. These two exercises were not bungled at all. They were alarmingly successful, most notably in the case of the realtime PR mythology.
The limited role of national governments, being primarily allocators of mandated budgets, has been clearly signaled by long-standing IMF policies in the third world, and by the way the bankers have been dictating to governments, in the wake of the over-extended bailout commitments. The carbon entitlement budgeting paradigm accomplishes the same micromanagement in a much more direct way, and is the natural outcome of the push toward hard carbon limits.
Richard K. Moore
sursa: globalresearch.ca
trimite unui prieten
I.M.F. Chief Suggests Look at New Reserve Currency
WASHINGTON — The chief of the International Monetary Fund said Friday that the organization should reorient itself to better detect systemic risks to the global economy and quickly step in with emergency loans when financial crises emerge.
The I.M.F. leader, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, also floated the idea of creating a global reserve currency that could serve as an alternative to the dollar.
After a speech at the I.M.F. headquarters, Mr. Strauss-Kahn said in response to a question about the fiscal crisis in Greece that the fund would be “happy to help if asked” but that the European Union appeared able to resolve the crisis on its own.
“The Europeans, especially the members of the euro zone, want to try to deal with the problems themselves,” Mr. Strauss-Kahn, a former French finance minister, said. “I perfectly respect this.”
The I.M.F. has collaborated with the European Union and the European Central Bank in recent days, sending experts to Athens, but the Europeans have taken the lead on demanding that the Greek government impose cuts in public spending and other austerity measures.
In his speech, Mr. Strauss-Kahn called for a “renewed vision” for the I.M.F., which was part of the global financial architecture created in Bretton Woods, N.H., in 1944, but which faced grave questions about its relevance and survival by the time Mr. Strauss-Kahn took over in 2007.
The global financial crisis quickly turned things around. Coffers at the fund, which has 186 member nations, grew to $850 billion in the last year, an amount that Mr. Strauss-Kahn described as “sufficient to meet demand in the coming period.”
He called for the fund to improve its tools for financial surveillance and to “construct a global risk map” of nascent systemic risks. And while noting that the Federal Reserve and other central banks provided liquidity swaps during the worst of the crisis, he said that the I.M.F. should explore options like short-term credit lines for extending emergency lending in future crises.
He said the fund planned to triple its lending in low-income countries and to waive interest on loans to poor countries until 2012.
Mr. Strauss-Kahn also said it would be “intellectually healthy to explore” the creation of a new global reserve currency.
The governor of China’s central bank made a similar proposal in March 2009, arguing that “special drawing rights” — baskets of currencies issued by the I.M.F. and made up of the euro, yen, pound and dollar that have served as reserve assets — would be more stable and viable than the dollar. China’s huge holdings of dollar reserves in the form of Treasury securities have become a concern for officials on both sides of the Pacific.
Mr. Strauss-Kahn said that a new reserve currency could limit dependence on the policies and conditions of a single, though dominant, country.Few economists say they believe that the dollar’s status as the dominant foreign exchange reserve will change anytime soon. Mr. Strauss-Kahn said that while the fund might be called upon to provide a globally issued reserve asset some day, “that day has not yet come.”
Kenneth S. Rogoff, a Harvard professor and a former chief economist at the I.M.F., said the idea had been a “perennial big-think question” for decades but remained mostly hypothetical. “At the end of the day, you can’t have a currency without a fiscal policy underlying it,” he said in an interview.
Asked for a response to the remarks, the Treasury Department pointed to its most recent semiannual foreign exchange report, released in October. That report said that “as long as the United States maintains sound macroeconomic policies and deep, liquid, and open financial markets, the dollar will continue to be the major reserve currency.”
SEWELL CHAN
sursa: nytimes.com
trimite unui prieten
Filantropul Soros prabuseste euro
Directorii unora dintre cele mai importante fonduri de investitii din lume, printre care Soros Fund Management, Greenlight Capital si SAC Capital Advisors, incearca sa destabilizeze moneda unica europeana, pentru a obtine castiguri enorme. Cotidianul The Wall Street Journal sustine ca, in cadrul unei intalniri desfasurate la inceputul lunii, in Manhattan, acestia au convenit sa grabesaca prabusirea euro, pentru ca, in paralel sa poata castiga miliarde de dolari, printr-o serie de speculatii pe piata financiara.
Se pare ca obiectivul “elitelor” de pe piata finaciara, care profita si de situatia din Grecia, este ca euro sa ajunga la valoarea dolarului, sau chiar sub acesta. Astfel, daca in luna decembrie, euro era cotat la 1,51 de dolari, in luna februarie acesta a ajuns la 1,35. Scenariul a fost confirmat si de Hans Hufschmit, directorul fondului de investitii GlobeOp Financial Service, care a declarat ca aceasta “este o oportunitate … de a face foarte multi bani”.
Intamplator sau nu, saptamana trecuta, George Soros declara ca, in cazul in care Uniunea Europeana “nu va face ordine pe propria piata finanaciara, euro s-ar putea prabusi”. Daca ministerul de finante din Grecia a refuzat sa comenteze informatia, un purtator de cuvant al Comisiei Europene a declatrat ca institutia pe care o reprezinta nu comenteaza zvonurile aparute pe piata finaciara. El a adugat totusi ca, responsabilii Uniunii Europene depun eforturi in vederea consolidarii legislatiei si reducerii riscurilor din acest domeniu. Interesant este si faptul ca, ataturi de George Soros, la intalnirea din Manhattan ar fi participat si presedintele Greenlight Capital, David Einhorn, care a jucat un rol important in accelerarea procesului de falimentare a holdingului Lehman Brothers. Wall Street Journal aminteste si de scandalul din anul 1992, cand lira sterlina s-a prabusit in urma speculatiilor facute pe piata finaciara de George Soros. Atunci, omul de afaceri de origine maghiara ar fi obtinut un profit de peste 1 miliard de dolari.
George Damian
sursa: ziuaveche.ro
trimite unui prieten
Unplug the Signal: The Truth Will Not Be Televised
A flow of information is constantly streaming from the television set; a bombardment of words and pictures. The speed at which this information is communicated makes it easy for the signal to take control, switching the viewer’s brain to stand-by as information is absorbed without analysis or question. Today the television’s constant signal shapes the conclusions of the masses and produces the collective norm. The signal prescribes what is news and what is truth through the words of so-called experts and authorities, gelding the consciousness and independent thoughts of those subjected to it. Through television, the masses can be made to accept the most monstrous distortions of reality. The signal is a chill wind of continuous oppression over the minds of the masses. It controls the management of society and culture, creating uniformity across all subjects.
The fuel for this vehicle of mass deception is a technique known as perception management where an array of psychological techniques are used to alter the truth, leading the viewer to a desired conclusion. Some call this spin or propaganda while others know it as lying. According to Joseph Goebbels, Propaganda Minister for Adolph Hitler, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it… It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” Most of what can be found on the nightly news is nothing but advertisements selling more government and a false reality that benefits only those in control. Television is the dictator of information; newspaper and radio are the whisper campaign of the television’s message.
It is expected that Americans will consistently prescribe to the doctrine of the television. It is subtly communicated that one should stay within the collective and never challenge the message, for doing so may be considered an aggression towards culture. The message is, “Be a good consumer; always obey authority; you know nothing; listen only to experts; be content and never question or express new ideas.” This signal is being broadcast across millions of screens, indoctrinating the unconscious minds of those who choose this as their only reality. Self-censorship occurs when these individuals become so deeply indoctrinated that they are afraid to discuss any information outside the paradigm of television-created culture; they police their thoughts to ensure they won’t conflict with this culture. Sadly, many people’s reality today does not allow any outside information to process, instead it is written off as conspiracy or blatant lies. Our consciousness has been destroyed so much that fiction has become reality. An entire lifestyle of poisonous foods, pharmaceuticals, and fluoridated water are accepted as safe and sold to us at the cost of our health and well being.
Those of the establishment are using the incredibly powerful weapon of mass psychology as a method of controlling the minds of the masses and altering the behavior of individuals. Edward Bernays, a pioneer in the field of public relations in the 20th century, applied Sigmund Freud’s theory of psychoanalysis to manipulate the masses by engineering consent. According to Bernays, “If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind, it is now possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without them knowing it.” Advertisers and psychologists of the billion dollar culture creation industry manufacture trends through the proliferation of insecurities; and manipulating desires and emotions. These concepts are also employed to control how individuals think about politics, as well as the possibilities and limitations within society. Those welding power within our streams of mass communication market their plans into each generation as individuals adopt specific ways of thinking and never suspect that all the major events and trends within their lifetime are actually planned by an elite few before they are even born. In our society today, culture is created from the top down. Virtually all forms of culture are created by the ruling class to build a false sense of reality, ensure social compliance, and control the future course of cultural evolution.
Predictive programming is a tool used by the establishment to acclimate the public to new ideas, trends, beliefs, and threats. It is used through television by including certain situations or ideas within the plots of many fictional shows, familiarizing the viewer with these concepts no matter what they may be watching. When similar situations occur or like ideas are circulated in the world we think that these particular things are quite natural for we have unknowingly been made familiar with them through television. By viewing nearly any popular show on television, one can see the same propaganda that will be aired on the nightly news. Propaganda on a wide array of subjects has been interwoven into a great number of television shows. Just a few of these subjects include global warming, vaccinations, torture, terrorism, national security, the militarization of police, and the degradation of the family unit. Through predictive programming, television shapes culture and prevents individuals from asking questions.
Crisis’ are created on a daily basis and broadcast across the airwaves to keep individuals in a state of panic and fear. Whether it be the threat of a pandemic or terrorism, the constant state of crisis has created a form of mental illness as we are slowly acclimated into an age of crisis. By using Hegelian dialectic, the television promotes the problem, guides our reaction, and presents the solution. The problem of terrorism was exclaimed, a strong emotional response was evoked, and it was stated that our rights need be sacrificed in order to protect us from the threat. We’ve lost personal sovereignty under the guise of terrorism; we’re stopped and searched; we’re watched by cameras as we go about our lives; and we’re encouraged to spy on our neighbors. We have been trained to accept the life of a prisoner.
America is in a state of enlightened despotism where most individuals live only to satisfy selfish inner desires and remain ignorant of the state of the world around them. In most public places one can find a television transmitting propaganda around the clock ensuring the masses remain focused on trivial matters. From birth we take the world as it’s presented on television. We don’t question it and any serious criticism of TV is becoming psychologically impossible in society. Who would suspect getting born into a world where everything around you is a continuous lie? The youth of today are convinced that the experts and personalities on television are the authority of credible information while parents and older generations are foolish with dated ideas. Children are conditioned to disconnect from what is truly important to their well being and instead focus on mindless trivia, sports, celebrity gossip, and buying an array of material things. They invest their psychological worth in fantasy characters on television while ignoring or even scorning individuals contributing to the betterment of humanity. They are discouraged from getting involved in their local community and often lack the ability to think independently or to resist corruption. As their children’s minds are molded by television, there is barely a murmur from the public.
For over half a century, our society has lived under this signal of mental programming and conditioning. The message is clear: don’t be a leader, don’t engage in critical thinking, and don’t care about the people in your life. Until individuals become aware of the current information war, our standard of living and our liberties will continue to be degraded and we will continue to lose communities and meaningful relationships between people. Currently, pockets of resistance are beginning to spring up everywhere as some unplug the signal and regain control of their own thoughts. Informed individuals are canceling their cable and satellite subscriptions and instead spending time with their families and children while participating in meaningful experiences. They are seeking alternative news sources. They are reading about those who weld incredible influence over culture like Edward Bernays, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Charles Galton Darwin, Plato, Bertrand Russell, and Aldous Huxley. However, it is a continuous battle to educate the masses for the television remains our greatest threat to individual sovereignty and the largest obstacle to becoming a truly informed individual. Fortunately, unplugging from the signal is easy. The television can simply be turned off. Through doing so, you may realize nearly our entire world is now a hoax; things once known as truth are fake. We have been trained like dogs to be obedient to our television; our master has had our minds on a tight leash. Let us never forget the truth will not be televised.
Nathan Janes
sursa: Pupaganda
trimite unui prieten
Bill Gates Calls for Population Reduction
In a recent TED Talk, Bill Gates has put forward the theory that mankind can reach zero carbon emissions by reducing our population, services, energy and carbon output. And yes, he’s even suggested a trendy, yet totally absurd, equation to legitimatize his eugenicist viewpoint. All I can say is, “What a crackpot!” Maybe it’s because he hasn’t noticed the systematic fraud exposed in the climate-gate debacle or maybe it’s because the mathematics of his equation are so blatantly imbecilic but I can’t help myself from truncated laughter. This guy is a genius? Really?
First and foremost, the summation equation is immeasurably misleading. No one, and especially not a world renowned computer programmer, should make the mistake of multiplying the variables of a summation. And even if you could overlook that magnitude of an inaccuracy, the number of variables that lead to a reasonable projection of a true change in any chaotic system are far more varied and complex than the four presented by Mr. Gates’ second grade presentation. Yet in typical fashion one TED attendee, Laura Trice, stated, “Bills Gates reduced the environmental CO2 issue to a simple math equation I could understand.”
So, assuming you are among the lemurs that have bought into the CO2 bogeyman storyline (during a carbon starved period of history); you still must concede that anything times zero is zero and therefore Bill Gates, even if inadvertently, called for zero human population. And though one could try to fool themselves into believing that he wouldn’t call for the expansion of the depopulation agenda, you didn’t need to wait very long to hear that directly from his own mouth. Soon into his talk he states that the world’s population is rapidly heading toward a staggering 9 billion and that, “if we do a good job on new vaccines, healthcare, and reproductive health services we could lower that by 10-15%.” Yes, you guessed it; Bill Gates is suggesting tried and tested Malthusian population manipulation to achieve the new world order’s nominal depopulation agenda.
He later states that if they can’t achieve the kind of carbon reduction necessary by their standards; then they will consider using current “geo-engineering” methods to change weather patterns and extend their timeline. But the ultimate fumble of the speech came when Gates was asked what he would say to “climate deniers”. After clumsily attempting to make a point for what seems like an eternity, Gates exclaims, “if we can make the alternatives cheaper then they won’t care anymore.” Well I for one disagree with Mr. Gates’ assertations. For one, reproductive health services is an obvious code phrase for sterilization and abortion services, as so cunningly detailed by Obama Science Czar John Holdren in his government eugenics handbook “Ecoscience”. And secondly, I refuse to take anyone serious that still considers CO2 emission standardization to be anything less than the introduction of a new highly mercenary financial exchange instrument.
However, in the typical fashion of a seasoned professional pitchman, Bill Gates does deliver one singular great point that struggles to lend credibility to all of the previously presented non-sense. The productive use of depleted uranium in a newly designed slow-burn reactor is an idea that has been long overdue. After the egregious use of DU on the battle fields of Iraq, it almost sounds like a fairytale to have the potential to steer the toxic psychosis permeated elite war mongers towards a use for DU that may actually benefit mankind. And once the perpetrators of similar War and State crimes (illegal wiretaps, illegal preemptive war, torture, etc) have been tried and sentenced; DU reactors are surly at the top of the to-do-list.
Stephen P. Fuller
sursa: Infowars.com
trimite unui prieten
Dolarul ucigaș
Dacă am reuși să convingem restul lumii să renunțe la dependența de bancnotele noastre verzi, ne‑ar fi tuturor mai bine. Atunci, de ce nu se vorbește în SUA despre acest plan?
Ați cunoscut vreodată pe cineva care să aibă un obicei autodistructiv, cum ar fi fumatul sau drogurile? Deseori, acești oameni înțeleg că‑și fac rău, dar indiferent de argumentele cu care încerci să‑i convingi – oricâte statistici cumplite le reciți –, e degeaba. Nu se lasă. Cam la fel se întâmplă cu sistemul valutar mondial din zilele noastre. Guvernat de dolar, el este osândit să fie instabil, defectuos pentru toată lumea, inclusiv pentru Statele Unite. Și nimeni nu discută în mod serios vreo alternativă.
ARTIFICIU DEVASTATOR. Dimpotrivă, părem să ne adâncim în această rutină mai mult ca oricând. Cu zona euro în criză din cauza unor membri slăbiți, cum e Grecia, și cu chinezii ce continuă să‑și devalorizeze moneda față de dolar, bancnota verde devine din nou un fel de zonă de siguranță. Oficialii americani spun că n‑au nimic împotrivă.
Secretarul Trezoreriei, Tim Geithner, a afirmat la o recentă audiere în Senatul SUA că susține, „bineînțeles“, în continuare un dolar puternic și s‑a arătat destul de mândru că investitorii globali încă mizează pe această valută. Geithner s‑a lăudat chiar cu faptul că declarația, de acum rituală, prin care SUA își arată sprijinul pentru un dolar puternic „a fost primul lucru care s‑a redactat în biroul meu de la Departamentul Trezoreriei, în 1995“, pe când devenise asistentul ministrului.
Bineînțeles că Geithner trebuie să repete aceste declarații simbolice.Piețele au ajuns să aibă nevoie de ele, mai ales acum, când dimensiunea deficitului federal a ridicat întrebări pe tema monedei americane. Dar asemenea cuvinte ocolesc o problemă cronică mai importantă în ce privește puterea dolarului.
Să începem cu efectele pe care le are acasă, în SUA. Ceea ce era îndeobște cunoscută drept clasa americană de mijloc a intrat într‑un proces de pauperizare în ultimele decenii, din cauza migrației locurilor de muncă avantajoase peste hotare. Decidenții politici de la Washington au reușit să le distragă atenția americanilor de la această realitate, determinându‑i să se îndatoreze până peste cap și menținând astfel iluzia avuției în rândul clasei de mijloc.
Acum, de când cu criza, și această iluzie a dispărut. Începutul acestui secol poate fi socotit un deceniu pierdut, în care, practic, nu au fost create locuri de muncă. Clasa mijlocie – consumatorul mediu – a fost devastată și nu‑și poate reveni fără o economie competitivă la nivel global. Dar cât timp dolarul este ținut puternic în mod artificial, va fi foarte dificil să dezvolți o economie competitivă.
INDUSTRIE ȘI INSTABILITATE. S‑au făcut puține lucruri pentru a rezolva situația. Chiar dimpotrivă: după ce sistemul financiar mondial a trecut prin repetate crize – mai mult de 100 în ultimele trei decenii, după unele evaluări –, țările lumii se așază cloșcă peste rezerve de dolari din ce în ce mai mari. Acest fenomen și‑a dezvăluit dramatic fața în ultimul deceniu, când rezervele strânse de statele din zonă după criza asiatică din ’97‑’98 au fost investite masiv în instrumente denominate în dolar, în special obligațiuni ale Trezoreriei SUA. Această tendință a exacerbat creditarea facilă, ce a contribuit la bubble‑ul subprimelor, și a înfrânat economia globală. Rezerve în creștere înseamnă că din ce în ce mai mulți bani sunt puși deoparte pentru zile negre, în loc să genereze, pretutindeni în lume, creștere economică.
Ca să obțină dolarii pentru pușculița lor, aceste țări trebuie să exporte mărfuri și servicii pe care să le cumpere locuitorii SUA. Dar singurul mod în care America își poate asuma acest rol – de ultimă instanță a consumului mondial – este să continue să se înglodeze în datorii, cum a făcut‑o și înainte. Chiar doresc americanii și restul lumii să pună în mișcare, iar și iar, acest ciclu? Dacă lucrurile nu se schimbă, economia se îndreaptă inexorabil în această direcție; asta e rețeta.
Toți dolarii pe care îi exportăm peste mări și oceane – și reprezintă de fapt cel mai important export al SUA – trebuie să se întoarcă cumva la noi; o vor face iarăși sub formă de credite facile și investiții nefundamentate, așa cum am văzut că s‑a întâmplat în ultima criză globală. Oficialii americani au apărat neclintiți rolul dolarului ca principală valută internațională, fericiți că Statele Unite pot beneficia de finanțare ieftină din partea celorlalte state ce dețin dolari.
Dar în prezent acest avantaj cântărește mai puțin decât costul supraevaluat al dolarului în baza noastră industrială decimată – cost dovedit de așa‑numita redresare economică fără creare de locuri de muncă – și decât instabilitatea globală pe care o provoacă permanent.
O IDEE ȘI MAI MULȚI PARTIZANI. Să continui să apelezi la acest sistem – o lume a dolarului susținută doar de noi valuri de îndatorare a americanilor – înseamnă să perpetuezi conștient o situație patologică. Una din căile de ieșire presupune crearea unui nou fond comun de „drepturi speciale de tragere“, supravegheat de Fondul Monetar Internațional. Extrem de improbabil să fie aleasă, deoarece Casa Albă nu este genul care să cedeze controlul dolarului către o surioară mai mică, ca și restul statelor avansate economic, de altfel, ce consideră că FMI este o soluție doar pentru economiile în curs de dezvoltare. Priviți la rezistența față de ajutorul Fondului în criza actuală ce a cuprins Grecia și euro.
Economistul Joseph Stiglitz, ce conduce o comisie ONU de reformă financiar‑monetară, sugerează o cale mai potrivită: crearea unei valute internaționale pe care el o numește „bancnotă verde globală“ („global greenback“). Conceptul este destul de simplu: în fiecare an, țările ce fac parte din noul sistem monetar vor contribui cu o anumită sumă la un fond de rezervă global; în schimb, acest fond va emite bancnote globale de o valoare echivalentă către aceste țări. În acest fel, nici una dintre ele nu va trebui – ca Statele Unite – să se îndatoreze excesiv. Un dolar cronic supraevaluat nu va fi o problemă. Renașterea clasei mijlocii americane va putea fi luată serios în considerare.
Este o măsură radicală, dar mai puțin decât credeți: John Maynard Keynes a pledat în favoarea unei soluții similare la Bretton Woods; el își denumise moneda internațională „bancor“. Șeful delegației americane la acea conferință economică postbelică, Harry Dexter White, a propus și el o valută internațională globală – „unitas“ –, dar Statele Unite au renunțat apoi la idee. Din păcate, spunea mai târziu laureatul Nobel pentru Economie Robert Mundell, ideea ar fi putut preveni eșecul sistemului Bretton Woods, bazat pe dolar.
Beneficiind de această perspectivă, pare evident că avem nevoie de ceva nou și poate că asta este direcția. Alte state, în special China, au început să susțină cu prudență ideea (Beijingul trebuie să fie prudent ca să nu i se devalorizeze deținerile de mii de miliarde de dolari). Dar administrația Obama pare să se opună cu dârzenie. Puterea obișnuinței, cred, indiferent cât de distructivă ar putea fi.
Michael Hirsh
sursa: moneyexpress.money.ro
trimite unui prieten
O nouă ordine mondială?
Puterea economica a Chinei s-a vazut si la Davos. Din cei 2.500 de participanti, aproape 10% au fost chinezi.
Rethink, Redesign, Rebuild. Aceasta a fost deviza celei de-a 40-a editii a Forumului Economic Mondial. Acesta a fost si mesajul pe care presedintele Frantei, Nicolas Sarkozy, invitat de onoare anul acesta Davos, l-a transmis in discursul sau inaugural. Reformarea sistemului financiar mondial e mai mult decat o necesitate! Capitalismul salbatic trebuie sa dispara! Fara indoiala, criza a fixat capacul cosciugului unui sistem in care regulile lipsesc, iar rezultatele pe termen scurt sunt cele care conteaza.
Reglementarea internationala a sistemului bancar, prima si cea mai importanta masura care ar putea evita noi crize, nu este o tema noua in discursul lui Sarkozy. Insa inedita este pozitia presedintelui american Barack Obama. In urma cu nici doua saptamani, el a anuntat ca va propune Congresului noi legi care sa limiteze businessurile bancilor. Aceasta intentie nu poate decat sa faca furori. Daca pana si Statele Unite, tara care subventioneaza cu nerusinare institutiile financiare, anunta reforma, e clar ca ceva urmeaza sa se intample. Bineinteles, intrebarea este cand…
Timothy Geithner, secretarul de stat al Trezoreriei Statelor Unite, sustinea ca nici macar una dintre bancile de pe Wall Street nu ar fi supravietuit crizei fara ajutorul statului. Dar criza, spun multi economisti, nu a trecut, iar institutiile financiare vor trebui refinantate. W, U - aceste doua litere descriu bine de tot forma pe care o poate lua dezastrul economic. Mai multe tari au anuntat cresteri economice, dar acesta poate fi doar inceputul unei noi etape a crizei. Una mai profunda, mai dureroasa.
Daca americanii nu aplica repede reformele, risca enorm. Risca sa-si piarda titlul de cea mai mare putere a lumii. La panda sta China, tara comunista care a dezvoltat un sistem economic capitalist cu totul original. Un sistem in a carui buna functionare nu a aparut, pana acum, nicio bresa. Chinezii produc orice si exporta oriunde. Strategia e simpla: cat mai ieftin si cat mai mult. Reusesc asta si pentru ca au cea mai competitiva piata a fortei de munca si o legislatie ce a favorizat din plin investitiile straine. Aproape 9% a fost anul trecut cresterea economica a Chinei, un procentaj care sfideaza toate guvernele statelor puternice ale lumii. Mai mult, cand toti cautau noi surse de finantare, statul comunist a intrat in luna decembrie cu un excedent bugetar de aproape 300 de miliarde de dolari. Si asta nu e tot.
Puterea economica a Chinei s-a vazut si la Davos. Din cei 2.500 de participanti, aproape 10% au fost chinezi. Acestia nu au ajuns insa in celebra localitate elvetiana cu elicopterele, la fel ca omologii lor occidendali, ci au ales cel mai ieftin mijloc de transport, trenul. O filosofie ce le permite chinezilor sa reuseasca, dar care are si rolul de a speria. Nu de alta, dar salvarea poate veni de la tara in care pedeapsa cu moartea e inca la moda, iar, pana nu de mult, familiile condamnatilor erau puse sa plateasca glontul. Nimic nu se pierde, totul se plateste!
Oliviu Anton
Sursa: Capital.ro
trimite unui prieten
Go Back To Sleep, There’s No New World Order
A major Newsweek hit piece against the Tea Party movement and Alex Jones claims that the move towards a global government and the fact that governments commit acts of false flag terrorism is all an invention of “conspiracist kooks” who wear “tin foil hats”. Like we’ve never heard that one before.
Self-described “conservative” Jonathan Kay invokes Obama regulation czar Cass Sunstein in railing against ideas he describes as “dangerously detached from reality” by labeling vehemently proven facts as “conspiracy theories” and thereby exposing himself as the only person dangerously detached from reality in his article, Black Helicopters Over Nashville.
In the hit piece, Kay smears Alex Jones as a “modern day prophet” of the Tea Party movement that he goes on to relentlessly attack as progenitors of “toxic fantasies”.
Kay contacted Alex Jones’ office nearly a year ago seeking an interview about 9/11 truth. Of course, he spewed the usual baloney about “wanting to understand our perspective” while all along preparing to unleash a vitriolic hit piece without one iota of the “balance” establishment journalists always claim that they adhere to.
When we explained to him that in order to understand the 9/11 attacks in context, a brief exploration of the documented and manifestly provable examples in history where western governments have staged attacks in order to advance their agenda was necessary, Kay wasn’t interested.
We’re talking about events such as Operation Northwoods, a plan signed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the Pentagon to to “kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war”.
We’re talking about Operation Ajax, where the CIA instituted a program of false flag terror to crush Iran’s first democratic government in the 1950’s, killing around 300 people. Far from being a “conspiracy theory,” the CIA admits to the program on their own website.
We’re talking about Operation Gladio, a “decades-long covert campaign of terrorism and deceit directed by the intelligence services of the West — against their own populations” run by NATO in collusion with the CIA, a campaign which included the 1980 bombing of the Bologna train station which killed 85 people.
Kay wasn’t having any of it, he merely wanted to hang around Alex Jones for days on end and try and catch him out by seizing upon ambiguous one-liners that could be spun out of context to make us look like mentally unstable extremists, which is precisely the tactic he uses against several other people in his Newsweek article.
According to Kay, a one world government run by the United Nations that will implement greenhouse gas taxes is another “toxic fantasy” of those crazy Tea Party lunatics. In that case, I guess we must have all just imagined UN Secretary general Ban Ki-moon’s December 16 2009 Los Angeles Times interview during the Copenhagen summit in which he stated, “We will establish a global governance structure to monitor and manage the implementation of this.”
Ban Ki-moon’s October 2009 New York Times editorial in which he wrote that efforts to impose restrictions on CO2 emissions “Must include an equitable global governance structure” is also a figment of the imagination if you subscribe to Kay’s world view.
Yes – shocking as it is – top globalists like Herman Van Rompuy, Gordon Brown, Al Gore and others have all publicly and repeatedly called for a new world order and a global government. This is why even Bloomberg writers like David Reilly and former Democratic advisors like Dick Morris are finally admitting that those tin foil hat wearing kooks Kay derides in his article were right after all – a secret cabal of bankers and industrialists really does run the world.
Of course, if you still believe Kay’s fairytale make-believe world in which there is no “new world order” and no march towards a “global government” which would include a “global currency,” then the following You Tube compilation of top power brokers saying those very things since the 1950’s doesn’t exist either.
Of course, Kay’s dismissive scorn for so-called conspiracy theorists hasn’t stopped him from leeching off their increasing prominence by authoring a book about them to be published by HarperCollins.
We’ve witnessed a noticeable drop in the amount of hit pieces against us over the last 12 months as everything we said about the global government takeover and the financial meltdown comes to pass and our credibility soars while that of the mainstream plummets yet further.
However, there are still establishment lackeys precariously perched on their peanut gallery howling the same tired old clichés about “kooks” wearing “tin foil hats” seeing “black helicopters,” completely oblivious to the fact that the rest of the world has come to accept the fact that yes – shocking as it is – powerful men do actually get together and conspire about how to increase their power over humanity.
Our message to Kay and his ilk is a simple one – dudes, it’s over for you!
The mainstream media has lost all credibility. Acting as apologists and liars for decades in service of the military-industrial complex that has you bought and paid for comes at a cost. You no longer dictate to the rest of us what construes reality when every single indicator screams from every single direction that you are wrong. 2 plus 2 will never equal 5, no matter how many times you insist that people who say it equals 4 are “dangerously detached from reality”.
The manifestly provable and universally acknowledged fact that the invasion of Iraq came as a result of a conspiracy to manufacture a phony pretext for war remains a fact no matter how many times people like Tony Blair claim it is nothing more than a conspiracy theory.
Governments do commit acts of terror to further their political agendas, and globalists have openly stated that they are centralizing power in order to create a system of global governance.
By continuing to deny and label those who talk about such brazenly obvious facts as conspiracy kooks only makes you look ridiculous, Mr. Kay.
Claiming that the idea of a global government run by the UN which controls greenhouse gas taxes is a creation of “militant oddballs” while the United Nations’ own Secretary General writes editorials and gives interviews saying those very things only confirms that the distance from which you are detached from reality renders your inane hackery completely irrelevant.
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
trimite unui prieten
Politica financiară şi războaiele ideologice
Ne aflăm în momente destul de dubioase pentru moneda europeană. PIGS, cei patru purceluşi, prin circul financiar iresponsabil pe care l-au făcut au pus o presiune enormă pe cursul euro.
Presiune care, bineînţeles, e pusă pe seama speculatorilor. Nu pe iresponsabilitatea statelor în cauză, guvernanţilor mai precis. Ei sunt, ca de obicei, lipsiţi de responsabilitate.
Presiune care, bineînţeles, nu a rămas fără urmări, cât a scăzut euro faţă de dolar? Peste 8 procente. E puţin? Nu.
Ce au hotărât statele europene? Să-i salveze pe purceluşi pe banii contribuabililor. Să plătească neamţul pentru iresponsabilitatea şi corupţia grecului.
Unde ne duce fenomenul? Oamenii nu sunt imbecili, văd că situaţia e violetă, albastrul nu e la modă, şi încep să strângă bani negrii pentru zile albe. Şi creşte rata economisirii. Se petrece în toată Europa, se petrece şi în România. Asta normal duce la scăderea preţurilor (deflaţie), dacă nu creştea preţul ţigărilor aveam o inflaţie de 3 procente. Creşterea accizelor a condus la ratarea ţintei de inflaţie.
Deci, să revenim, oamenii strâng bani. Consumul scade, producţia scade din lipsa cererii. Ca măsură învăţată de la Keynes băncile centrale produc monedă de hârtie şi o bagă în sistem şi scad dobânda de referinţă, poporul tezaurizează banii. Şi la un moment dat se prinde că de fapt tezaurizează hârtie. Şi începe să cumpere orice, preţurile cresc fulgerător, din cauza producţiei mici inflaţia face explozie.
Şi acum să ne uităm la noi. Leul se apreciază în raport cu euro. Dar în raport cu dolarul ? Nu. Să ţinem banii în dolari? Şi americanii fac la fel dar ei au moneda de referinţă şi-i au pe chinezi care cumpără tot. Tot o gogoaşă, dar bazată pe producţia fantasmagorică din China. Cât or mai avea şi chinezii răbdare şi chef. Un stat nu se comportă ca un om. Chinezii sunt prinşi în capcana movilei de titluri ale FED pe care o deţin. Dacă nu mai susţin dolarul se prăbuşesc şi ei.
Şi atunci în ce monedă să-ţi păstrezi economiile? În altceva. Sau măcar în toate monedele simultan. Dacă se prăbuşesc toate, asta e. Sau poţi să cumperi aur sau argint, sau teren agricol. Sau în ce vă trece prin cap, uşor tranzacţionabil.
În vremea asta în blogosferă au loc războaie ideologice care depăşesc intelectual cu mult orice dispută politică. Subiectul este influenţa Statului în economie sau chiar existenţa lui. Când o să aud pe un post serios, nu generalist, o asemenea discuţie purtată între politicieni o să consider că există partide cu ideologie. Până atunci mă distrez copios privind “reformarea clasei politice”.
Războaiele se duc între comentatori aici, aici şi aici şi aici. Sunt dovada vie că printre români există oameni cu principii, cu ştiinţă şi cu talent, şi care susţin o părere politică cu credinţă în ea. Care nu se dau cum bate vântul şi care nici n-au funcţii publice.
trimite unui prieten
Globalization Is Killing The Globe: Return to Local Economies
Globalization is killing Europe, just as it’s already wiped out much of the American middle class.
Spain and Greece are facing immediate crises that many other European nations see on the near horizon: aging boomer workers are retiring with healthy benefit packages, but the younger workers who are paying for those benefits aren’t making anything close to the income (or, therefore, paying the taxes) that their parents did.
Globalists/corporatists/conservative “free market” and “flat earth” advocates say this is a great opportunity to cut benefits for the old folks (and for the young folks in the future), thus bringing the countries budgets back into balance, and this story is the main corporate media storyline.
But it overlooks the real issue (and the real solution): how globalization is killing these nations’ economies and what can be done about it.
From the days of Adam Smith, classical economics pointed out that manufacturing and extraction are the only two ways to “create wealth.”
“Wealth” is different from “income.” Wealth is value, which endures at least for some time. Income is simply compensation for work. If you wash my car for $10 and I mow your lawn for $10, we have a GDP of $20 and it looks like we both have income and economic activity. But no wealth has been created, just income.
On the other hand, if I build your car, I’m creating something of value. And if you turn my lawn into a small farm that produces food we can all eat, you’re creating something of value. Not only do we have an “economy” with a “GDP,” we also have created wealth.
A stick on the ground has no commercial value, but if you add labor to it by carving it into an axe handle — a thing of commercial value — you have “created wealth.” Similarly, metals in the ground have no commercial value, but when you add labor to them by extracting, refining, and forming them into products, you “create wealth.” Even turning seeds and dirt and cows into hamburgers is a form of manufacturing and creates wealth.
This is the “Wealth of Nations” that titled Adam Smith’s famous 1776 book.
On the other hand, when a trader at Goldman Sachs makes a “profit” trading stocks, bonds, or currencies, no wealth whatsoever is created. In fact, to the extent that that trader takes millions in commissions, pay, and bonuses, he’s actually depleting the wealth of the nation (particularly to the extent that he moves his money offshore to save or invest, as many do).
To use the United States as an example, in the late 1940s and early 1950s manufacturing accounted for a high of 28 percent of our total gross domestic product (and much of the rest of the economy like agriculture that, in a classical sense is “manufacturing” wasn’t even included in those numbers), and when Reagan came into office it was at a strong 20 percent. Today it’s about ten percent of our GDP.
What this means is that we’re creating less wealth here, because we’re not making much anymore. (And the biggest growth in American manufacturing has been in the military sector, where goods are made that are then destroyed when they explode over foreign cities, causing even more of our wealth to vanish.)
The main effect of the globalism fad of the past 30 yearrs — lowering the protective barriers to trade that countries for centuries have used to make sure their own local economies are self-sufficient — has been to ship manufacturing (the creation of wealth) from developed nations to developing nations. Transnational corporations love this, because in countries with lower labor costs and few environmental and safety regulations, it’s more profitable to manufacture products. They then sell those products in the “mature” countries — the places that used to manufacture — and people burn through the wealth they’d accumulated in the earlier manufacturing days (home equity, principally, along with savings and lines of credit) to buy these foreign-manufactured goods.
At first, it looks like a good deal to consumers in developed nations. Goods are cheaper! But over a decade or two or three, as the creation of real wealth is reduced and the residue of the old wealth is spent, the developed nations become progressively poorer and poorer. At the same time, the “developing” nations become wealthier — because those are the places that are producing real wealth.
Which brings us to Spain and Greece — and the problem of all developed nations including the USA. So long as globalism continues apace, the transnational corporations and their CEOs will continue to become fabulously wealthy. But, more importantly, they also acquire the political power that comes with that control of economies.
So they tell us that instead of putting back into place tariffs, domestic content laws, and other “protectionist” policies that built America from the time the were first proposed by Alexander Hamilton in 1791 (and largely adopted by Congress in 1793) until they were dismantled by Reagan/Bush/Clinton/Bush, we should instead simple “accept the reality” that we’re “living beyond our means” and we have to “cut back our wages and social programs.”
In other words, they get richer, our nations become poorer, and national sovereignty is reduced.
Nations — and in large countries like the USA, even states — must again rebuild their manufacturing base and become locally self-sufficient, so their own consumers are buying products manufactured by their own workers.
“But won’t that make Wal-Mart’s stuff more expensive?” whine the flat-earthers.
Yes, it will. But most Americans (and Greeks and Spaniards) would gladly pay 10 percent more for the goods in their stores if their paychecks were 20 percent higher. And manufacturing paychecks have always been higher, because manufacturing is where “true wealth” is generated (thus the basis for most union movements, which further guarantee healthy worker income and benefits).
The transnational corporations benefiting from globalization are also, in most cases, the transnational corporations that own our media, so even the word globalization is rarely heard in reports on economic crises around the world.
But globalization is the villain here, and one that needs to be taken in hand and brought under control quickly if we don’t want to see virtually the nations of the world end up subservient to corporate control, a new form of an ancient economic system known as feudalism.
Thom Hartmann
sursa: opednews.com
trimite unui prieten
Think Government Is Corrupt? You May Face 10 Years In Jail
Subversives who think government is corrupt and should be controlled by the people face 10 years in prison and a $25,000 dollar fine if they fail to register with authorities in South Carolina, in another chilling example of how free speech and dissent is being criminalized in America.
The state’s “Subversive Activities Registration Act” is now officially on the books and mandates that “Every member of a subversive organization, or an organization subject to foreign control, every foreign agent and every person who advocates, teaches, advises or practices the duty, necessity or propriety of controlling, conducting, seizing or overthrowing the government of the United States … shall register with the Secretary of State.”
Of course, the right to overthrow a government that has become corrupt, abusive and completely unrepresentative of its electorate is enshrined in the Declaration of Independence – that’s how America came to be a Republic in the first place – advocating or teaching that the people should “control” the government via their elected representatives is a basic function of a democratic society, but this law effectively makes it a terrorist offense.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness,” states the Declaration of Independence.
Under the sweeping terms of the law, members of tax protest organizations, the Tea Party movement and the States’ Rights movement based in South Carolina are all domestic terrorists if they fail to register their dissent with the authorities.
It is important to stress that the notion this law somehow only applies to “Islamic terrorists” is completely at odds with the fact that federal and state authorities now consider the main terror threat to be from informed American citizens exercising their constitutional rights in opposition to the big government agenda they are being subjected to.
As we saw with the MIAC report and a plethora of similar training manuals which were leaked over the last decade, police are being trained that libertarians, gun owners, Ron Paul supporters and anyone who is mildly political is a domestic extremist and a potential terrorist – these people are the real target of the subversives list in South Carolina.
The infamous Phoenix Federal Bureau of Investigation manual (page one, page two) produced in association with the Joint Terrorism Task Force listed “defenders of the U.S. constitution” and “lone individuals” as terrorists. Will anyone in South Carolina who defends the Constitution, the very bedrock of what America stands for, have to register with the authorities unless they want to be locked up for a decade?
Of course, since nobody is going to register as a “subversive” with South Carolina authorities, their failure to “comply” with the regulation will later be used against them as a means of eliciting criminal charges, in what represents a clear end run around the First Amendment.
The government isn’t going to just come out all guns blazing and ban free speech, they are simply going to make anyone who refuses to register for permission a criminal for failing to adhere to a separate mandate.
Just like people in places such as New York and Chicago were told that they had to get a license to purchase a gun – at first the process was a mere inconvenience but now the licensing process means they have to jump through 200 flaming hoops and the second amendment has effectively been outlawed in these cities.
They won’t hesitate to pull the same tricks with the First Amendment, and it’s already happening with calls to license Internet users and force them to get government permission to run a website.
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
trimite unui prieten
No Genitalia Measurement, No Fly
Naked body scanning will now be compulsory at two of Britain’s biggest airports after the government announced people who refuse to let security thugs ogle their genitalia will be treated like terrorists and barred from flying.
“It is now compulsory for people selected for a scan to take part, or they will not be allowed to fly,” reports the BBC.
That ’s right – no optional pat down as we were told, if you think that having strangers leer over your naked body is an invasion of privacy and refuse, you’ll be treated the same way as a suspected terrorist.
Manchester Airport’s head of customer experience, Sarah Barrett, told the BBC that the scanners do not allow security staff to see passengers naked. This of course is a complete lie. The images produced by the scanners provide high resolution crisp images of your genitalia. This was confirmed by London Guardian writer Helen Carter who investigated trials of the scanners at Manchester Airport and said genitals were “eerily visible” in the images.
Indeed, as we have previously highlighted, when the scanners were first introduced at Australian airports in 2008 it was admitted that the X-ray backscatter devices don’t work properly unless the genitals of people going through them are visible. “It will show the private parts of people, but what we’ve decided is that we’re not going to blur those out, because it severely limits the detection capabilities,” said Melbourne Airport’s Office of Transport Security manager Cheryl Johnson.
Despite objections on the grounds that the images produced violate child porn laws, the UK government has simply gone ahead anyway and overturned a previous ban on under 18’s being forced to use the scanners. This will now give free reign to the kind of control freak thugs who like to sexually harass 13-year-old girls to ogle your naked daughter’s breasts while sitting alone in a back room enjoying themselves.
“A rule which meant under 18s were not allowed to participate in the body scanner trial has been overturned by the government,” according to the BBC report.
This now sets the precedent for every other UK and US airport to follow the same guidelines, meaning that if you want to escape from Airstrip One or the United States of Amerika, you must submit to a virtual strip search. There seems little doubt that the naked scanners will eventually be rolled out at other transport hubs and after another staged terror attack, on the streets, in shopping malls, at sporting events and any other places of public congregation, as has already been proposed.
Three years ago, leaked documents out of the Home Office revealed that authorities in the UK were working on proposals to fit lamp posts with CCTV cameras that would X-ray scan passers-by and “undress them” in order to “trap terror suspects”.
Dutch authorities have also announced their intention to use mobile body scanners in “high risk areas” and “mass scans on crowds at events such as football matches.”
Experts agree that naked body scanners would not even have stopped accused underwear bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab from boarding Delta Flight 253. Maybe the fact that he was on a terror watch list, had no passport, and was accompanied by a suspicious well-dressed man should have provided some kind of warning.
The blatantly staged Christmas Day incident has been ravenously exploited to the full by the same mouthpieces for the military-industrial complex that own a stake in the body scanners, and now we the browbeaten public are being forced to suffer yet another disgusting indignity as we move one step further to a society that outstrips George Orwell’s worst nightmare.
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
trimite unui prieten

Establishment mouthpiece calls for web ID system that would outstrip Communist Chinese style net censorship.
Primeste articolele direct in mail. Aboneaza-te acum!