Friday, May 31, 2013

VIDEO: Mike Adams IRS Tyranny News And Frankenfood News



VIDEO: Adam Kokesh Calls For The Orderly And Peaceful Disillusion Of The Federal Government



Obama to Sign U.N. Firearms Treaty Rejected by Senate

Kit Daniels
Prison Planet.com
May 31, 2013

President Barack Obama will soon sign an international arms trade treaty previously rejected by the United States Senate.
The United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) establishes regulations for international arms sales. Categories of firearms listed in the treaty includes tanks, artillery, and small arms such as handguns. The U.N. General Assembly passed the treaty on April 2nd with a vote of 153-4, with the United States voting in favor. Obama intends to sign the treaty on June 3rd.
On March 23rd, Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.) introduced an amendment to prevent the U.S. from entering into the treaty. It passed by a vote of 53 to 46.
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) introduced another amendment to ensure “that the United States will not negotiate or support treaties that violate Americans’ Second Amendment rights under the Constitution of the United States.” This amendment passed in the Senate by a voice vote.
Signatories of the treaty are encouraged to keep records on the recipients of imported arms and to introduce domestic legislation to support the treaty’s requirements, according to the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action.
Due to the Senate’s response to the treaty, Obama’s signature will be symbolic at best. According to Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution, the President “shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur.”

Wednesday, May 29, 2013

Basel III: How The Bank For International Settlements Is Going To Help Bring Down The Global Economy

Michael Snyder
Economic Collapse
May 29, 2013

A new set of regulations that most people have never even heard of that was developed by an immensely powerful central banking organization that most people do not even know exists is going to have a dramatic effect on the global financial system over the next several years.  The new set of regulations is known as “Basel III”, and it was developed by the Bank for International Settlements.  The Bank for International Settlements has been called “the central bank for central banks”, and it is headquartered in Basel, Switzerland.  58 major central banks (including the Federal Reserve) belong to the Bank for International Settlements, and the decisions made in Basel often have more of an impact on the direction of the global economy than anything the president of the United States or the U.S. Congress are doing.  All you have to do is to look back at the last financial crisis to see an example of this.  Basel II and Basel 2.5 played a major role in precipitating the subprime mortgage meltdown.  Now a new set of regulations known as “Basel III” are being rolled out.  The implementation of these new regulations is beginning this year, and they will be completely phased in by 2019.  These new regulations dramatically increase capital requirements and significantly restrict the use of leverage.  Those certainly sound like good goals, the problem is that the entire global financial system is based on credit at this point, and these new regulations are going to substantially reduce the flow of credit.  The only way that the giant debt bubble that we are all living in can continue to persist is if it continues to expand.  By restricting the flow of credit, these new regulations threaten to burst the debt bubble and bring down the entire global economy.
Not that the current global financial system is sustainable by any means.  Anyone with half a brain can see that the global financial system is a pyramid scheme that is destined to collapse.  But Basel III may cause it to collapse faster than it might otherwise have.
So precisely what is Basel III?  The following is a definition from the official website of the Bank for International Settlements…
“Basel III” is a comprehensive set of reform measures, developed by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, to strengthen the regulation, supervision and risk management of the banking sector. These measures aim to:
  • improve the banking sector’s ability to absorb shocks arising from financial and economic stress, whatever the source
  • improve risk management and governance
  • strengthen banks’ transparency and disclosures.
All of that looks good at first glance.  But when you start looking into the details you start realizing what it is going to mean for the global financial system.  Banks are going to be required to have higher reserve ratios and use less leverage.  Banks are going to have to be more careful with their money, which is a good thing, but it is also going to mean that credit will not flow as freely.  Unfortunately, the only way for a debt bubble to survive is if it keeps expanding.  Anything that restricts the flow of easy money threatens to bring a debt bubble to an end.
These new regulations are going to be phased in between 2013 and 2019.  You can see a chart which shows the implementation schedule for the Basel III regulations right here.
So why is bringing the debt bubble to an end a bad thing?
Well, because it will cause the false prosperity that we have been enjoying to disappear, and that will be an exceedingly painful adjustment.
Sadly, most people have no idea what is happening.  Most people have never even heard of “Basel III” or “the Bank for International Settlements”.  Most people just assume that the people they voted into office know what they are doing and have everything under control.
Unfortunately, that is not the case at all.  The truth is that an unelected, unaccountable body of central bankers is making decisions which deeply affect us all, and there is not much that we can do about it.
This unelected, unaccountable body of central bankers played a major role in bringing about the last financial crisis.  The following is a brief excerpt from a recent article posted on Before It’s News
If you have any questions about the power of these Basel Banking Regulations you can also see the effects that Basel II and 2.5, mark to market accounting, had on the Housing Markets in the United States of America in 2008. There were many causes for that housing bubble, then housing crisis, but Basel II and 2.5 was most assuredly the pin that popped the housing bubble that led to the financial crisis of 2008-09.
But do most people know about this?
Of course not.  Most people want to blame the Republicans or the Democrats or Bush or Obama, and they have no idea about the financial strings that are being pulled at the highest levels.
It is so important that we get people educated about how the global financial system actually works.  The following is a summary of how the Bank for International Settlements works from one of my previous articles entitled “Who Controls The Money? An Unelected, Unaccountable Central Bank Of The World Secretly Does“…
An immensely powerful international organization that most people have never even heard of secretly controls the money supply of the entire globe.  It is called the Bank for International Settlements, and it is the central bank of central banks.  It is located in Basel, Switzerland, but it also has branches in Hong Kong and Mexico City.  It is essentially an unelected, unaccountable central bank of the world that has complete immunity from taxation and from national laws.  Even Wikipedia admits that “it is not accountable to any single national government.“  The Bank for International Settlements was used to launder money for the Nazis during World War II, but these days the main purpose of the BIS is to guide and direct the centrally-planned global financial system.  Today, 58 global central banks belong to the BIS, and it has far more power over how the U.S. economy (or any other economy for that matter) will perform over the course of the next year than any politician does.  Every two months, the central bankers of the world gather in Basel for another “Global Economy Meeting”.  During those meetings, decisions are made which affect every man, woman and child on the planet, and yet none of us have any say in what goes on.  The Bank for International Settlements is an organization that was founded by the global elite and it operates for the benefit of the global elite, and it is intended to be one of the key cornerstones of the emerging one world economic system.
Even though most people have never even heard of the BIS, the truth is that the global elite have had big plans for it for a very long time.  Inanother article I included a quote from a book that Georgetown University history professor Carroll Quigley wrote many years ago entitled “Tragedy & Hope”…

[T]he powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations.
Today we have such a system, and most of the public does not even know that it exists.
And when the next great financial crisis strikes, there will probably be very little ever said about the Bank for International Settlements in the mainstream media.
But right now the BIS is helping set the stage for the great credit crunch that is coming.
Get prepared while you still can, because time is running out.

Extensive List of Politicians Paid Off By Monsanto

Anthony Gucciardi
Prison Planet.com
May 28, 2013

Democrat, Republican, it doesn’t matter. As long as you can help Monsanto slide its icy tentacles into the food chain, then there’s some financial tip available to you. Thankfully, many such ties can be exposed through some data digging, and thanks to diligent readers who send comprehensive news tips and other researchers out there, we now have an extensive list of politicians getting paid cold hard cash from GMO juggernaut Monsanto.
Keep in mind these are the figures we know, which means that behind the scenes expect these numbers to multiply extensively. But what is most amazing is that these politicians just don’t care that you know they’re receiving thousands of dollars from Monsanto! They sweep it under the carpet, but they are openly taking money from this corporation that has been caught running ‘slave-like’ rings and disregarding public health. We’re talking about a corporation that primarily aided in the creation of Agent Orange — the Vietnam-era chemical weapon that killed over 400,000 people and led to 500,000 plus birth defects.
Looking at these figures, over $260,000 was openly pumped into the House, and $122,000 was pumped into the Senate. And again, this is openly. I’m speculating, but I would imagine the real number to easily be in the millions. Can you imagine how much they must pay these politicians to shoot down GMO labeling bills that 90 plus percent of the entire country wants?
Or how about the nice chunk of cash that Monsanto paid Senator Roy Blunt to ‘help write’ the Monsanto Protection Act that grants Monsanto immunity from federal courts? Roy’s cash payment is not included in this list, however RT reports he received $64,250 towards his campaign from the company. Surely they expected nothing in return.

Politicians Paid By Monsanto

House of Representatives:

Total paid by Monsanto to Democrats: $72,000
Total paid by Monsanto to Republicans: $190,500
 
Barrow, John (D-GA) $2,500
Bishop, Sanford (D-GA) $5,000
Boehner, John (R-OH) $10,000
Braley, Bruce (D-IA) $5,000
Camp, Dave (R-MI) $5,000
Cantor, Eric (R-VA) $10,000
Clay, William L Jr (D-MO)$10,000
Cleaver, Emanuel (D-MO) $5,000
Conaway, Mike (R-TX) $2,000
Courtney, Joe (D-CT) $4,500
Crawford, Rick (R-AR) $2,500
Fincher, Steve (R-TN) $8,000
Gardner, Cory (R-CO) $7,500
Goodlatte, Bob (R-VA) $4,500
Graves, Sam (R-MO) $5,000
Griffin, Tim (R-AR) $1,000
Guthrie, Brett (R-KY) $1,000
Hanabusa, Colleen (D-HI)$5,000
Hannemann, Mufi (D-HI) $1,000
Hartzler, Vicky (R-MO) $3,000
Holden, Tim (D-PA) $1,000
Huelskamp, Tim (R-KS) $2,500
Hultgren, Randy (R-IL) $2,500
Jenkins, Lynn (R-KS) $2,500
Johnson, Timothy (R-IL) $3,000
King, Steven A (R-IA) $2,500
Kingston, Jack (R-GA) $7,000
Kinzinger, Adam (R-IL) $3,500
Kissell, Larry (D-NC) $5,000
Labrador, Raul (R-ID) $2,000
LaMalfa, Doug (R-CA) $1,000
Landry, Jeff (R-LA) $1,000
Latham, Tom (R-IA) $10,000
Loebsack, David (D-IA) $5,000
Long, Billy (R-MO) $2,500
Lucas, Frank D (R-OK) $10,000
Luetkemeyer, Blaine (R-MO)$5,000
Lungren, Dan (R-CA) $1,000
McIntyre, Mike (D-NC) $1,000
Neugebauer, Randy (R-TX)$1,000
Noem, Kristi (R-SD) $1,000
Nunes, Devin (R-CA) $3,500
Owens, Bill (D-NY) $2,000
Peterson, Collin (D-MN) $10,000
Rogers, Hal (R-KY) $7,500
Rokita, Todd (R-IN) $5,000
Roskam, Peter (R-IL) $1,000
Schilling, Bobby (R-IL) $3,000
Schock, Aaron (R-IL) $5,000
Shimkus, John M (R-IL) $5,000
Simpson, Mike (R-ID) $10,000
Smith, Adrian (R-NE) $5,000
Stutzman, Marlin (R-IN) $5,000
Thompson, Bennie G (D-MS)$10,000
Thompson, Glenn (R-PA) $1,000
Upton, Fred (R-MI) $5,000
Valadao, David (R-CA) $2,500
Wagner, Ann L (R-MO) $10,000
Walden, Greg (R-OR) $1,000
Walorski, Jackie (R-IN) $2,500
Womack, Steve (R-AR) $1,000

Senate

Total paid by Monsanto to Democrats: $37,500
Total  paid by Monsanto to Republicans: $85,000
Akin, Todd (R-MO) $3,500
Baucus, Max (D-MT) $1,000
Berg, Rick (R-ND) $10,000
Blunt, Roy (R-MO) $10,000
Boozman, John (R-AR) $5,000
Casey, Bob (D-PA) $2,500
Chambliss, Saxby (R-GA) $5,000
Fischer, Deb (R-NE) $5,000
Gillibrand, Kirsten (D-NY)$1,000
Grassley, Chuck (R-IA) $2,000
Hirono, Mazie K (D-HI) $1,000
Johanns, Mike (R-NE) $1,000
Klobuchar, Amy (D-MN) $5,000
Landrieu, Mary L (D-LA) $1,000
McCaskill, Claire (D-MO)$5,000
McConnell, Mitch (R-KY) $10,000
Moran, Jerry (R-KS) $2,500
Nelson, Ben (D-NE) $13,000
Rehberg, Denny (R-MT) $2,000
Risch, James E (R-ID) $3,500
Roberts, Pat (R-KS) $9,000
Stabenow, Debbie (D-MI) $8,000
Thompson, Tommy G (R-WI)$5,000
Wicker, Roger (R-MS) $1,000
Wilson, Heather A (R-NM)$2,500

This post originally appeared at Natural Society

VIDEO: World Bank Whistleblower Attacked By DOJ



Feds raid Liberty Reserve and indict founders on money laundering charges… is Bitcoin next?

Mike Adams
Natural News
May 29, 2013

If there’s one thing monopolists hate, it’s competition. That’s probably why the U.S. government shut down Liberty Reserve yesterday, charging seven men with laundering $6 billion for over one million clients. Calling Liberty Reserve a “bank of choice for criminals,” the feds won’t be satisfied until they destroy every currency that competes with the U.S. dollar.
That’s because the Federal Reserve is actually the largest money laundering operation of all. It routinely creates trillions of dollars in counterfeit currency for it’s favorite mob banksters like Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan. Disguised with labels like “banker bailouts” or “economic stimulus programs,” these handouts of fiat currency debase all the other dollars held by everyone else. It’s the greatest financial swindle in history, making Bernie Madoff look like an amateur.

OMG, the currency was used by criminals? Say it isn’t so!

Maintaining monopoly control over the money supply, however, means destroying the competition. Liberty Reserve was starting to look like competition, so it had to be taken out. The investigation involved 17 countries, and the P.R. propaganda campaign has the entire mainstream media characterizing Liberty Reserve as some sort of money laundering scheme when, in reality, it was just a private electronic currency.
For example, the Washington Post said that Liberty Reserve catered to “…drug traffickers, child pornographers and others in the criminal underworld…”
Um, you mean similar to the way CASH is used by drug traffickers, child pornographers and the criminal underworld? If a currency is to be blamed for all its uses by criminal elements, then no currency is more covered in blood, cocaine, sex slavery and evil deeds than the U.S. dollar — simply because it’s the most-used currency on the planet. Is the Washington Post surprised that criminals use currencies or something?
Blaming Liberty Reserve for the actions of criminals is sort of like blaming the manufacturers of duct tape for all the kidnappings that take place around the world. Gee, duct tape is used by evil people to bind the hands of kidnapping victims? Raid the company! Shut down the duct tape! Duct tape is bad!
What’s clear from this shutting down of Liberty Reserve, by the way, is that the world’s financial monopolists aren’t going to tolerate competition. Their goal is to shut down all competing currencies, and the next target on their list may be bitcoin.

The problem with bringing down bitcoin is figuring out whose doors to kick in

There’s just one problem with that whole plan: Whose doors do you kick in? Bitcoin isn’t run by one company. It’s a decentralized currency, and there’s no one company that handles the transactions.
Transactions are calculated by a distributed network of “miners” who trade computing power for bitcoins in order to keep the electronic ledger of the entire system humming. What this means for the feds is that even if they have unlimited manpower to conduct raids on bitcoin, there’s no way to figure out who to raid at gunpoint.
That’s what government does best, of course: Shove guns in people’s faces in order to protect the monopoly interests of powerful corporations or industries… the banking industry, in this case. But the prerequisite to shoving guns in people’s faces is knowing whose faces to shove them into. On that point, bitcoin provides no easy targets.
Fortunately for the feds, bitcoin has largely discredited itself. In fact, I have been personally blamed for crashing bitcoin and causing $1 billion valuation losses in one day for publicly predicting a looming bitcoin crash. The very next day after my prediction that bitcoin would crash in value, bitcoin lost over 50% of its value. Even since then, bitcoin’s volatility remains so outrageously high that the currency has almost no chance of ever being widely used by online merchants.
If no one in the mainstream really accepts bitcoin (like Amazon.com), then the currency is relegated to little more than the dark alleys of the internet: black market deals, porn, video game credits and so on. It might ultimately make a great currency exchange for things like MMORPG in-game currencies, but bitcoin is unlikely to gain any real traction in the real world.
After all, the world’s most popular bitcoin exchange — MT GOX — was originally named based on the game, “Magic the Gathering Online Xchange.” (Most people don’t know that and are shocked to learn it.)

Could a better decentralized currency be created?

However, none of this means another decentralized currency couldn’t someday be created that offers both price stability and peer-to-peer decentralization. Thanks to the laws of economics, however, currency prices will never be stable unless the supply of the currency is allowed to grow.
A finite supply of any given currency sounds great on paper, but in the real world a currency needs to gradually expand along with the overall size of the economy it serves. Bitcoin can never do that because it is mathematically limited to a predetermined supply, but a future electronic currency might somehow be adaptable enough to smooth the peaks and valleys.
Many other currency experiments are already floating around the ‘net: Litecoin, Ripple, SolidCoin, PPcoin and so on. Most of these alternative currencies have centralized clearinghouses, meaning they will eventually be raided at gunpoint and shut down. Only peer-to-peer currencies have any hope of surviving the mob raids of monopolistic governments.

Your best currency? Ammo

For the record, after observing world events over the last few years, I’ve come to the conclusion that there is no better currency than ammo. I’m not kidding: .223, 22LR, .308 and 7.62×39 can always be traded for almost anything else of value. Of course, you can’t go lugging ammo around in your pockets all day long, which is why government fiat currencies become the convenient standard for exchanging goods and services in society.
But when those currencies fail — and a global financial failure is now inevitable — you’ll want to make sure you own something else that holds practical value. Ammunition seems to be unbeatable in this realm, proving itself to be even more valuable than gold. (You can’t defend your gold by throwing gold at approaching enemies, after all…)
And the worse the situation gets in the world, the more valuable ammo becomes. Maybe that’s why Americans are right now buying up every scrap of ammo they can lay their hands on. The average shelf life of a case of 9mm pistol ammo in the United States is about five minutes.
In terms of other currencies, gold and silver are always a solid back-up plan, and they’re relatively easy to buy and sell. But in a harsh collapse, gold is worthless. You’ll have much better luck trading Bic lighters, cigarettes and coffee than gold coins. Stock up now while you can. Amazon.com sells cases of Bic lighters that are dirt cheap today, yet invaluable in a market crash economy. (Don’t buy cheap Bic knock-offs. They LEAK out all their fuel and become worthless pieces of plastic. I know this from firsthand experience. Only Bic lighters hold their fuel.)

Sources for this story include:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/28/net-us-cybercrime-libertyre…

VIDEO: Kissinger Calls For U.S. and China to Collaborate on Globalist “World Order”

Kurt Nimmo
PrisonPlanet.com
May 29, 2013

In the video below, Rockefeller protégé and operative Henry Kissinger calls for the United States and the authoritarian government of China to work together to create a globalist totalitarian government.



“The challenge is,” Kissinger told the Asia Society last week, “how to build a world order for the first time in history on a global basis. We talk a lot about world community but the fact is there has never been a world community before” and he then suggested China and the U.S. collaborate on such an effort.
David Rockefeller has paid homage to the communist Chairman Mao, the most prolific mass murderer of the 20th century (responsible for the liquidation of between 49-78,000,000 Chinese).
Rockefeller regards Mao as an ideal leader and the communist revolution and its murderous political purges as a template for world government.
“Whatever the price of the Chinese revolution [an indirect reference to millions killed] , it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also in fostering high morale and community of purpose… The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao’s leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history,” Rockefeller wrote for the New York Times on August 10, 1973.
Rockefeller lavished praise on Mao and the communists three years before the end of the Cultural Revolution in China. Conservative estimates of the death toll exacted by Mao’s cultural purge exceed 30 million people.
Rockefeller’s trusted minion, Henry Kissinger, believes now is the time to export what Mao did in China to the entire world.

Monday, May 27, 2013

The 3 Reasons Why Stocks Have Skyrocketed Over the Past Couple of Years


Washington’s Blog
May 25, 2013

Stocks have soared since 2009 because the Fed’s quantitative easing has – intentionallypumped them up.
They’ve also skyrocketed because central banks are directly buying stocks.
NBC News reports on a third major reason that stocks took off … corporate buybacks:
It’s the narcissist rally.
***
You may want to spare a thought, and a healthy dose of worry, for what is one of the biggest, and least appreciated, reasons for the rally: buybacks.
Flush with cash and a world of opportunity at their doorstep, companies have decided there’s nothing more attractive than themselves. So, they’re offering big money to buy back their own stock. This year, big U.S. companies have given the go-ahead for $286 billion of buybacks, up 88 percent from the same period last year, according to Birinyi Associates, a market research firm. If the pace continues for the rest of the year, the tally will exceed the record set in 2007.
Every manner of company is caught up in the buying binge, including home-improvement chains, makers of farm equipment and jet engines, airlines, sellers of soft drinks and of hard liquor alike. Not one to miss a hot trend, Apple recently authorized as much as $50 billion of buybacks.
Investors like buybacks because they suggest companies think their stock is cheap. They also help reduce the number of shares outstanding, which automatically increases earnings per share. And higher earnings per share often, though not always, lead to rising stock prices.
But buybacks are also crucial to the rally for a reason that’s not widely known. Companies are one of the few big stock purchasers nowadays. Nearly every other big player in the stock market has been selling more than they’ve been buying.
Pension funds have been selling. Local and state governments have been selling. Investment brokerages have been selling. And, yes, until recently, even Main Street investors.
You can see this in the data released by the Federal Reserve each quarter, and it’s a sea of red — save for corporate buying, that is, buybacks plus purchases of other companies. In total, U.S. companies, not counting banks and other financial firms, have bought more than $1 trillion of stock in the five years through 2012, net of stocks they’ve issued.
***
However much they spend, each dollar of buybacks appears to be having a greater effect on raising the prices of certain stocks. That’s because fewer shares are changing hands each day. On Wall Street, it’s referred to as a “drying up” of liquidity. And like in any market, a purchase or sale when fewer people are trading can push prices up and down much more.
DirecTV bought $1.4 billion of its own shares in the first quarter, or 7.8 percent of all trades in the company’s stock, according to data from Birinyi Associates. DirecTV rose 12.8 percent in the same period, two points more than the Standard and Poor’s 500. IBM bought $2.6 billion of its shares in the first quarter, or 5.6 percent of what was traded. It rose 11.8 percent.
***
Companies that do buy back their own stock are seeing prices soar, and almost immediately.
On Friday, Northrup Grumman jumped 4 percent after announcing it had authorized $4 billion of buybacks. The military contractor said it expects buybacks will cut its shares outstanding by 25 percent by the end of 2015.
Another big share buyer, Home Depot, rose 5.7 percent on Feb. 26 after it announced a $17 billion buyback program. The S&P 500 rose 0.6 percent that day. If the retailer spends all the authorized in its plan, it will remove 18 percent of the shares outstanding at current prices, which will make the impact of a next round of purchases even more powerful.
Stocks of companies that have authorized the 10 biggest buybacks so far this year have risen 2.2 points more than the S&P 500 in the week after their announcements….
Gregory Milano, CEO of consultancy Fortuna Advisors, has run studies showing that companies that spend the most on buying back their own stock tend to underperform because they don’t spend enough on opening new factories, research or otherwise building their business for the long term.
Andrew Smithers, who runs a London-based investment consultancy, thinks buybacks have pushed stocks more than 40 percent higher than they’re worth. In his book “The Great Deformation,” former U.S. budget director David Stockman says Corporate America is drunk on buybacks and that they’ve helped push stocks up too far, too.
***
Forty percent of the increase in the earnings per share of S&P 500 companies in the past 12 months came from reducing the number of shares through buybacks, estimates Barry Knapp, chief U.S. stock strategist at Barclays Capital.
Postscript: Max Keiser points out that quantitative easing and corporate buybacks are related.
Specifically, the Fed’s easy monetary policy means that big corporations can borrow cheaply … and then use the money to buy back their own stock.
The bailouts and easy money aren’t going into helping Main Street or stabilizing the economy.
Of course, most of the trading is done by high frequency computers these days.

VIDEO: OE4 News - Federal Reserve Creating More Inflation And Blowing More Bubbles




VIDEO: ‘Common Core’ Nationalizes and Dumbs Down Public School Curriculum



Ron Paul
Prison Planet.com
May 27, 2013

In addition to shredding civil liberties, launching a utopian global war for democracy, and going on a spending spree that would make LBJ blush, the so-called “conservative” Bush administration dramatically increased federal control over education via the “No Child Left Behind” act. During my time in Congress I heard nothing but complaints about this law from teachers, administrators, and, most importantly, students and parents. Most of the complaints concerned No Child Left Behind’s testing requirements, which encouraged educators to “teach to the test.”

Sadly, but not surprisingly, instead of improving education by repealing No Child Left Behind’s testing and other mandates, the Obama administration is increasing national control over schools via the “Common Core” initiative. Common Core is a new curriculum developed by a panel of so-called education experts. The administration is trying to turn Common Core into a national curriculum by offering states increased federal education funding if they impose Common Core’s curriculum on their public schools. This is yet another example of the government using money stolen from the people to bribe states into obeying federal dictates.

Critics of Common Core say it “dumbs down” education by replacing traditional English literature with “informational texts”. So students will read such inspiring materials as studies by the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, the EPA’s “Recommended Levels of Insulation,” and “Invasive Plant Inventory” by California’s Invasive Plant Council. It is doubtful that reading federal reports will teach students the habits of critical thinking and skepticism of government that the Founders considered essential to maintaining a free republic.

Like Obamacare, Common Core (now dubbed “ObamaCore” by some) has sparked a backlash in the states, leading some to propose legislation forbidding state participation in the scheme. I hope these efforts lead to states not just opting out of Common Core, but out of No Child Left Behind and all other federal education programs as well.

Parents can also effectively “opt out” of programs like Common Core by seeking alternatives to government education. It is no coincidence that, as federal control over education increases, the quality of public education has declined and more parents have chosen to homeschool.

To support these parents, I have established my own homeschool curriculum. Unlike Common Core, we do not dumb down any of our offerings. Instead, the goal is to provide students with a rigorous education in history, math, English, foreign languages, and other core subjects necessary to a well-rounded education. Unlike the top-down model of nationalized education, the homeschool curriculum is deigned to encourage maximum input from parents and students. While the curriculum will reflect my belief, and interest, in Austrian economics, libertarian political theory, and the history of the struggle against state power, the curriculum is being carefully designed to not show bias toward any one religion. I hope all parents of any faith—or no religious belief at all—will feel comfortable using the curriculum.

I believe it is important for those of us concerned with education and liberty to fight our battles locally. We must oppose further encroachment on the autonomy of local public schools and work to roll-back existing interference, while encouraging and supporting the growth of homeschooling and other alternative education movements. The key to restoring quality education is to replace the bureaucratic control of education with a free-market in education. Parents should have the freedom to select the type of education that best suits their child’s unique needs.

Sunday, May 26, 2013

German Firms Flee to U.S. to Avoid Staggering “Green” Energy Costs

William F. Jasper
The New American
May 24, 2013

Chancellor Angela Merkel’s “renewable energy revolution” is killing the German economy, but Obama and Greens keep pointing to Germany’s debacle as the model we should follow.
“HIGH ENERGY COSTS DRIVE GERMAN FIRMS TO US.”That is the headline for an article that appeared May 22 inDuetsche Welle, or DW, Germany’s international broadcasting giant.
“Soaring German energy costs in the wake of the country’s transition to renewable energy have seen more and more firms thinking about relocating their operations,” the DW story reported. “The US looks like a sound alternative, associations claim.”
The DW story continued:
German industry lobby associations on Wednesday sent a warning shot towards the government in Berlin, saying that rising energy costs in the country would drive away more and more German companies.
“If we don’t get on top of the country’s energy transition to renewables and are not able to rein in energy costs in the process, German industry’s competitiveness stands to suffer,” the chief of the Federation of German Industry (BDI), Ulrich Grillo, told the business newspaper “Handelsblatt.”
 
President Obama has pleasantly surprised many — and angered many of his allies in the Big Green lobby, i.e., the Sierra Club, the Environmental Defense Fund, et al — by his recent common-sense actions to allow hydraulic fracturing on federal public lands and approval of a Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) terminal in Freeport, Texas. However, based on the administration’s history of antipathy to all fossil fuels, its use of the EPA to quash energy production, and its commitment to vastly expanding our nation’s reliance on renewable energy, the recent natural gas concessions could prove to be a temporary political move. If that proves to be the case, the German companies that are moving to America to escape Merkel’s unsustainable “renewable revolution” could find themselves facing the same predicament down the road here.

$110 billion for solar may postpone global warming by 37 hours this century!

According to Danish professor and best-selling environmental author Bjorn Lomborg, the German and Danish experiments that are being so highly touted as successful showpieces are instead unmitigated disasters. Lomborg stated on John Stossel’s television show on March 29, 2012 that Germany’s colossal expenditure on solar energy, for instance, will have virtually zero impact on global warming, the ostensible reason for which the country is “investing” huge sums. “The Germans are spending about $110 billion on subsidies for these solar panels,” Lomborg noted. “The net effect of all those investments will be to postpone global warming by 37 hours by the end of the century.”
New Zealand climate blogger Jo Nova has provided extensive analysis of the German energy debacle in this posting: The Chaos of German ‘Renewable’ Energy.
Concerns over Germany’s radical energy policies have been building for months, as the costs have become more and more evident. In an article last July entitled, “Doubts Rising over German Switch to Renewables,” Der Spiegel, one of Germany’s largest publications, reported on the growing alarm:
Chancellor Angela Merkel outlined a grand vision for an energy revolution a year ago, shortly after her government had decided to shut down all nuclear reactors by 2022 in a spectacular about-face following the Fukushima accident. Germany was to put itself at the forefront of the fight against global warming by radically expanding the use of renewable energy to 35 percent of total power consumption by 2020, rising to 80 percent by 2050. Currently, it represents 20 percent of the country’s energy mix.
But now two ministers, Environment Minister Peter Altmaier and Economy Minister Philipp Rösler, have cast doubt whether the targets are reachable and said their priority is to make sure that electricity prices don’t rise too much….
The similarity between the two ministers’ comments is noteworthy, as is the fact that two of Merkel’s top ministers are calling one of her government’s central projects into question a mere year after it was launched.
The business daily Handelsblatt wrote:
If one looks at the key points of the energy revolution decided a year ago, one quickly notices that very ambitious targets were set while the path to reaching them was only outlined sketchily. Many players in the affected industries don’t know what to do. They have been told to take action and invest billions, but the conditions remain unclear.
Germany may be leading the way to disaster, but it is not traveling alone. According to the International Energy Agency’s chief economist Fatih Birol, annual government subsidies designed to promote renewable energy currently amount to around $70 billion globally.
And if the Big Green lobby has its way, that subsidy will grow exponentially. Which is why, even as Germany staggers under the renewables burden, one of the designers of that fiasco was in the United States recently to promote the same policies here. On May 14, Rainer Baake, former deputy minister at the German Federal Environment Ministry and a key architect of Germany’s energy transition, was the honored guest for the interview program On Point of the Environment & Energy Television network (E&ETV).
Baake then received a much bigger boost from Bloomberg News on May 15, with the publication of his essay “U.S. Energy Policy Should Take a Lesson From Germany’s Energiewende,” co-authored with Jennifer Morgan, director of the Climate and Energy Program at the World Resources Institute (WRI), one of the globalist mega-think tanks with mega-funding from governments and leftist foundations, as well as from politically connected corporations that benefit from subsidies and state-monopoly policies.
In their Bloomberg piece, Baake and Morgan lecture us on the failure of the United States to get in step with the renewables zeitgeist that is sweeping the world:
At least 118 countries have renewable energy targets, and 65 offer predictable feed-in tariffs. About half of new electric capacity worldwide in 2011 came from renewable sources.
The United States stands in sharp contrast with this picture. It’s true that 29 states currently have renewable energy policies, but the country lacks a national energy policy framework and corresponding targets.
For U.S. policymakers looking to expedite a clean energy transition, the Energiewende should be a welcome addition to the conversation. It’s economically and ecologically responsible, and it’s proven to be politically popular. It’s certainly worth taking a closer look.
Yes, we should be taking a much closer look — before our government goes any further in this direction. A good place to start is“The Renewable Energy Disaster” by Christopher Calder, which provides copious research on the horrendous economic, social, and environmental costs associated with the global push for government-mandated transition to renewable energy. (A caveat: While providing a devastating critique of renewable energy policies, Calder’s “solution,” the National Food Security Act, is a misguided remedy that would unconstitutionally inject federal controls into all areas of agriculture and food production.) The articles by The New American’s Ed Hiserodt and James Heiser listed below also provide critically important information on the problems and limits of renewable energy and the renewable energy policy proposals.

Are Covert Operations Underway In The Global Currency Wars?

Zero Hedge
May 24, 2013
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-05-23/are-covert-operations-underway-global-currency-wars

In an age of economic policy activism, including widespread quantitative easing and associated purchases of bonds and other assets, Amphora’s John Butler reminds us that it is perhaps easy to forget that foreign exchange intervention has always been and remains an important economic policy tool. Recently, for example, Japan, Switzerland and New Zealand have openly intervened to weaken their currencies and several other countries have expressed a desire for some degree of currency weakness. In this report, Butler summarizes the goals and methods of foreign exchange intervention and places today’s policies in their historical context; but moreover he discusses the evidence of where covert intervention – quite common historically – might possibly be taking place: perhaps where you would least expect it… And if the currency wars continue to escalate as they have of late, it seems reasonable to expect that covert interventions will grow in size, scope and frequency.

Via John Butler’s The Amphora Report:

Back in 2001, some prominent economists wrote a paper, published in the American Economic Association’s prestigious Journal of Economic Literature, titled “Official Intervention in the Foreign Exchange Market.” In this paper, the authors discuss the efficacy of foreign exchange intervention and, perhaps surprisingly, they include a brief section on covert intervention specifically, of which the following is an excerpt:

Most actual intervention operations in the foreign exchange market have been—and still are—largely secret, not publicly announced by monetary authorities…

Continue reading here: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-05-23/are-covert-operations-underway-global-currency-wars

VIDEO: Rigged Gold Sell Off Deepens And The Global Plundering Of America's Natural Gas Reserves



How the bubble destroyed the middle class

Sluggish growth is no mystery: No one has any money

MarketWatch
By Rex Nutting
July 8, 2011
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-the-bubble-destroyed-the-middle-class-2011-07-08?pagenumber=1

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — A lot of people say they are deeply puzzled by the slow recovery in the U.S. economy. They look at the 9+% unemployment rate and the mediocre growth in national output, and they scratch their heads and wonder: Where is the boom that inevitably follows a deep bust, such as we experienced in 2008 and 2009?

But there is no mystery. What other result would you expect from the financial ruin of the once-great American middle class?

And make no mistake, the middle class has been ruined: Its wealth has been decimated, its income isn’t even keeping pace with inflation, and its faith in the American economy has been shattered. Once, the middle class grew richer each year, grew more comfortable, enjoyed a higher living standard. It was real progress in material terms.

But that progress has been halted and even reversed. In some respects, the middle class has made no progress in a generation, or two.

This isn’t just a sad story about a few losers. The prosperity of the middle class has been the chief engine of growth in the economy for a century or more. But now our mass market is no longer growing. How could it? The middle class doesn’t have any money.

There are a hundred different ways of looking at the economy, and a million different statistics. But if you wanted to focus on just one number that explains why the economy can’t really recover, this is the one: $7.38 trillion.

That’s the amount of wealth that’s been lost from the bursting of housing bubble, according to the Federal Reserve’s comprehensive Flow of Funds report. It’s how much homeowners lost when housing prices plunged 30% nationwide. The loss for these homeowners was much greater than 30%, however, because they were heavily leveraged.

Leverage is an amazing thing: When prices go up, the borrower gets all the gains. And when prices go down, the borrower takes all the losses. Some families lost everything when the bubble collapsed, others lost very little. But, on average, American homeowners lost 55% of the wealth in their home.

Most middle-class families didn’t have much wealth to begin with — about $100,000. For the 22 million families right in the middle of the income distribution (those making between $39,000 and $62,000 before taxes), about 90% of their assets was in the house. Now half of their wealth is gone and it will never come back as long as they live.

Of course, rich folk lost lots of wealth during the panic as well. Their wealth is mostly in paper not bricks -– stocks, bonds, mutual funds, life insurance. The market value of those assets fell further than home prices did during the crash, but they’ve mostly recovered their value now. The S&P 500 SPX -0.06% lost 56% of its value when it crashed, but it’s doubled since then. Stocks are down about 13% from peak.

The rich recovered; the rest of us didn’t.

If losing half your meager life savings weren’t bad enough, the middle class has also been falling behind in terms of income for decades. Families in the middle make most of their money the old-fashioned way: Working their fingers to the bone for 40 years for wages and a modest pension.

Their wages have been flat after adjusting for inflation. In the late 1960s, the 20% of families right in the middle were earning almost their full share of the pie: they had 17.5% of total income. Their share has been falling steadily ever since. Now, that 20% is earning just 14.6% of all income. Meanwhile, the top 5% captured a growing share, going from 17% in the late 1960s to 22% today.

The housing bubble was the last chance most middle-class families saw for grasping the brass ring. Working hard didn’t pay off. Investing in the stock market was a sucker’s bet. But the housing bubble allowed middle-class families to dream again and more importantly to keep spending as if they were getting a big fat raise every year.

I don’t think we’ve quite grasped how much the bubble distorted the economy in the Oughts, and how much it continues to distort it today. We’re still paying the bills from that binge

During the last expansion from 2003 to 2007, according to an analysis by Fed economists, American homeowners took $2.3 trillion in equity out of their homes through cash-out refinancing and home-equity loans, and they spent about $1.3 trillion of it on cars, boats, vacations, flat-screen televisions and shoes for the kids.

All that spending circulated through the economy, creating millions of jobs here and in China, where they make those TVs and shoes.

During that period, the economy grew at an annual average rate of 2.7%, which is about typical for our economy. But growth would have been closer to 2% if we hadn’t had a housing bubble; if we hadn’t had the extra consumption financed by the bubble and if we hadn’t built millions of surplus homes. That’s a huge difference. At 2.7%, the economy can create a significant number of jobs. But 2% is stagnation, not even keeping pace with population growth and productivity improvements.

Now that the bubble has burst, homeowners are putting money INTO their homes, not taking it out. The impulse to pay down the mortgage and the credit card is reducing the amount of money we’re spending on other things. Since 2007, instead of taking $2 trillion out of their house, homeowners have put $1.3 trillion into them.

You think that might be having an impact on consumer spending?

Even with trillions in debt being paid off or written off, very little progress has been made in deleveraging. The debt-to-disposable income ratio has slipped from 130% at the height of the bubble to 115%, but that’s still far more than the 90% recorded in 2000 or the 80% of 1989 or the 60% of 1976. No one knows how far it needs to fall before American families are comfortable with how much they owe.

The slow growth in the economy is no mystery: Most families don’t have any extra money to spend. It will take a long time for the middle class to rebuild its wealth, especially if we don’t find some work.

The crazy thing is that our leaders aren’t even talking about this crisis. With the upper classes prospering and global markets booming, they don’t need the U.S. middle class any more. The market is up, profits are soaring, and the corporate jet is fueled and ready for takeoff.

And if the middle class can’t buy bread? Let them eat cake.

Rex Nutting is a columnist and MarketWatch's international commentary editor, based in Washington.

Bernanke out by August, QE ends, rates up: Crash!

Prepare now because easy money will dry up

MarketWatch
By Paul B. Farrell
May 24, 2013
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/bernanke-out-by-august-qe-ends-rates-up-crash-2013-05-22

SAN LUIS OBISPO, Calif. (MarketWatch) — The “Dr. Boom” scenario: America is about to “unleash a spending spree. Years of self-denial give way to pent-up demand,” predicts UBS economist Maury Harris in USA Today’s bold lead story.

His clue? Consumer sentiment: “Harris estimates that in the next five years, catch-up consumption will boost annual consumer spending growth by a half point to above 3% from about 2%

Reassuring? No, wishful thinking. Be very skeptical. As Robert Kuttner, author of the new “Debtors’ Prison: The Politics of Austerity Versus Prosperity” once wrote in BusinessWeek, “What do you call an economist with a prediction? Wrong.”

Harris is bucking the headwinds of history. As Jeremy Grantham, chief strategist of the $100 billion GMO money managers, recently told InvestmentNews, the newspaper of record for America’s 90,000 professional investment advisers, “3% annual GDP growth is history.”

Here’s why you better be preparing today for a crash dead ahead. As Pimco’s Bill Gross warned in his recent newsletter: “You’re going to lose money investing ... because the central banks say so.” That’s right, this is a Fed-driven rally. Soon the Fed will be forced to stop printing cheap money.

No spending spree; Obama’s new Fed Chair has to raise rates

Here’s the alternative “Dr. Doom’s August scenario:” Aging bull market. Fifth year. Markets at risk. Down soon. August. Will Obama reappoint Bernanke again? No way. But who? New blood? Shake things up with Wall Street mastermind Mayor Michael Bloomberg? After more than two decades of Greenspan/Bernanke’s misguided, destructive monetary policies, America could use a guy like him at this crucial turning point.

But expect a safe bet. Obama favors a woman. The high rollers are already betting on Janet Yellen, vice chairman of the Fed, long-time monetary insider. Former San Francisco Federal Reserve Bank CEO. Also chairman of Clinton’s Council of Economic Advisers.

But watch out, even a sure bet can misjudge hidden dangers lurking ahead of a Titanic like the $15 trillion U.S. economy. As the Wall Street Journal’s Matt Wirz wrote in March:

The Fed “won’t be able to keep a lid on interest rates forever.” So “large money managers such as BlackRock, TCW Group and Pimco are getting ready for the day when rates take their first turn higher. It isn’t coming anytime soon, these investors say. But when it does, they worry, the ascent will be swift and steep.”

Get defensive now, start preparing for a crash ... later is too late

Get it? Rates will go up. Way up. Very fast. And America’s 95 million Main Street investors will be unprepared. Markets will crash. Like 1994’s 24% bond crash after Fed rate increases, notes Wirz.

The big players say the crash “won’t happen soon.” Don’t believe them. They’re betting with trillions. And they are hedging their bets, already preparing for “when rates take their first turn higher,” because rates will soar “swift and steep,” and when that happens it will be too late to prepare.

“Dr. Doom,” the economist Nouriel Roubini is also hedging his bet, misleading investors, telling us to expect a “huge rally in risky assets” the next couple years “setting markets up for a major sell-off.”

Warning, a crash is more likely to happen in August 2013 than in 2015 when the next presidential election campaign is kicking into high gear. So start preparing for a crash when the new Fed chairman ends cheap money.

Why target August for rate increases ... and a crash?


Why an August trigger? Here’s the logic: Obama reappointed Bernanke in August 2009. He’s predictable. August is quiet. Earnings season over. Congress on vacation, not that they haven’t been on vacation for a while. Wall Street will be sunning on Fire Island and Nantucket.

So August is a good time to sneak in an appointment. True, Bush first appointed Bernanke in October back in 2005, but that was a different time zone.

More important than the timing is what happens after Obama broadcasts his choice of a new Fed chairman. We got a big clue: A couple years ago the New York Times noted that Yellen had a major role at the Fed to provide “forward guidance” about monetary policy, several years ahead, while “persuading investors that it is safe to accept lower interest rates.”

Yet when asked, Yellen was clear: “When the time has come, am I going to support raising interest rates? You bet.” Well, the times are a-coming.

After years of GOP Fed chairmen, new chairman will be forced to raise rates

So what’s even more predictable, after a Yellen announcement pundits will flood the news media with dire predictions of rate increases dampening the economic recovery. Why? For one thing, everyone knows they can’t stay at rock-bottom, dirt-cheap, give-away prices that help banks but are killing the rest of America.

As hedge fund manager Daniel Arbess put it succinctly in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed piece: “Monetary impotence plus fiscal paralysis equals an inadequate recovery ... Stock markets have recovered all of the $10 trillion lost in the recession, but homeowners are still $5 trillion underwater.”

Arbess cites “the Pew Research Center, the highest-earning 7% of the population saw their net worth grow by 28% between 2009 and 2011, while overall the net worth of the remaining 93% of Americans dropped by 4%.” The Super Rich won big. Main Street suffered most.

More proof? In another Journal op-ed, Martin Feldstein, former chairman of Ronald Reagan’s Council of Economic Advisor, said Bernanke’s QE policies are a “dead end ... the program has done little to raise economic growth while saddling the Fed with an enormous balance sheet.”

So Bernanke knows rates must rise “swift and steep.” But most likely he’s hoping America’s weak recovery will hang on till his term ends, preserving his legacy till he gets an $11 million book deal, topping Greenspan.

Three endings: Short bull ends, Bernanke ends, 30-year bond bull ends

In March 2009 my column headline read: “6 reasons I’m calling a bottom and a new bull.” The Dow crashed from 14,164. Hit rock bottom at 6,547. Wall Street lost over $10 trillion of America’s retirement money. Your money. And the stock market did recover more than 100% since. But now the long-term trend’s reversing: Now I’m calling a top to this Fed-driven bull.

So America’s facing three historical endings: The bull that started March 2009, the Fed’s cheap-money policies and the 30-year bull market in bonds.

And Pimco’s Bill Gross also agrees with Grantham’s long-term macro prediction over on InvestmentNews: “Bond investors should be expecting 2% to 3% returns over the future years ... lower than expected, but ... still better than cash and will provide positive returns.” Moreover, “a big spike in interest rates ... wouldn’t be friendly for stocks, either.” Yes, big drop for both.

Yes, 3% annual GDP growth is gone forever. Are you prepared?

Grantham warns that from the late 1900s until the early 1980s “the trend for U.S. GDP growth was up ... remarkable ... 3.4% a year for a full hundred years,” powering the American Dream. But after 1980, under Reaganomics and the new conservative capitalism, “the trend began to slip,” warns Grantham.

Yes, after a century of high-growth prosperity, our GDP growth dropped “by over 1.5% from its peak in the 1960s and nearly 1% from the average of the last 30 years.”

And looking ahead at long-term macro-trends: “The U.S. GDP growth rate that we have become accustomed to for over a hundred years” is “not going back to the glory days of the U.S. GDP growth,” no matter how much wishful thinking the media quotes from in-house economists at UBS and Wall Street banks, “it is gone forever.”

Bottom line: America is deep in denial. And it’s killing our GDP. A new blinding “irrational enthusiasm” times 10. We are again in denial about our accelerating GDP decline. Grantham put it this way: “Most business people (and the Fed) assume that economic growth will recover to its old rates,” as do bank economists like UBS’s Harris.

But looking ahead to 2050, Grantham warns: “GDP growth (conventionally measured) for the U.S. is likely to be about only 1.4% a year, and adjusted growth about 0.9%.” Get it? The American economy is on a long-term decline.

But as InvestmentNews warned in their earlier in its “Special Report: Tick, Tick ... Boom!” millions of investors have “no idea what’s about to happen to them.” We’re in denial, clueless and as Gross puts it, “You’re going to lose.”

Paul B. Farrell is a MarketWatch columnist based in San Luis Obispo, Calif. Follow him on Twitter @MKTWFarrell.

VIDEO: Pat Buchanan on the Death of Western Civilization





VIDEO: The History Of Political Correctness

The origins of "political correctness" or "cultural Marxism" can be found in the early parts of the 20th century from the Frankfurt School, which was the headquarters for the Communists scheming in Germany. Max Horkheimer, T.W. Adorno, Herbert Marcuse, Leo Lowenthal, and Erich Fromm were all there.

"The role of the Frankfurt School is creating the victim groups that constitutes the politically correct coalition."

Made by the Free Congress Foundation and narrated by William Lind.



VIDEO: Feminism Was Created To Destabilize Society - Smash Cultural Marxism



VIDEO: Men not marrying? How deep does "the problem" go?


Saturday, May 25, 2013

The Pot Calling The Kettle Black! Bernanke to Congress: You’re killing us......

Market Watch
By Darrell Delamaide
May 23, 2013
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/bernanke-to-congress-youre-killing-us-2013-05-23?link=MW_story_insert

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — Investors understandably paid more attention to Ben Bernanke’s views on monetary policy when he testified in Congress this week than to his thoughts on fiscal policy.

On balance, the Federal Reserve chairman had little new to say about the central bank’s accommodative monetary policy in testimony before the Joint Economic Committee, though his nuances caused some gyration in the markets.

But Bernanke didn’t hesitate to take advantage once again of his own “bully pulpit” to lecture Congress on some basic economics and the threat to the economy posed by misguided fiscal policies.

His diplomatic but nonetheless pointed remarks castigating Congress for undercutting economic recovery with its focus on short-term deficits and failing to address the fundamental problem of unemployment also were not new.

On both monetary and fiscal fronts, what counts is the timing of his remarks as the economy reaches a crossroads where it can continue on the path of recovery or turn again down the road of recession and deflation. Read Bernanke says ‘step down’ in QE could come soon.

Recent strengthening in the economy has eased the fiscal strain somewhat, particularly in state and local budgets, but Bernanke was clear about what he sees as the biggest threat to continued recovery.

“Fiscal policy at the federal level has become significantly more restrictive,” he said. “In particular, the expiration of the payroll tax cut, the enactment of tax increases, the effects of the budget caps on discretionary spending, the onset of the sequestration, and the declines in defense spending for overseas military operations are expected, collectively, to exert a substantial drag on the economy this year.”

The Fed chairman once again called on Congress to re-prioritize its deficit-cutting efforts to allow some fiscal stimulus in the short term and a more sustainable balance in the long term.

“The objectives of effectively addressing longer-term fiscal imbalances and of minimizing the near-term fiscal headwinds facing the economic recovery are not incompatible,” he said.

Let’s keep in mind that Bernanke is not a Democrat, liberal or otherwise. The former Princeton professor, who was appointed to the Fed by George W. Bush and briefly served as Bush’s chief economic adviser, has always been considered a Republican.

But he is first and foremost an economist, and for him the economics of our current situation are clear: High unemployment is our biggest problem and must be the primary target of policy.

“High rates of unemployment and underemployment are extraordinarily costly: Not only do they impose hardships on the affected individuals and their families, they also damage the productive potential of the economy,” Bernanke lectured lawmakers this week.

The best way to reduce the deficit, this economist made clear, is to put people back to work.

“The loss of output and earnings associated with high unemployment also reduces government revenues and increases spending on income-support programs, thereby leading to larger budget deficits and higher levels of public debt than would otherwise occur,” Bernanke said, not for the first time.

The Fed chairman’s admonitions to Congress came as lawmakers continued their chicanery over the federal budget.

After berating Senate Democrats for years for disrupting the “regular order” by failing to pass a budget resolution, Republicans are now blocking this year’s duly passed Senate budget from going to conference committee with the House.

This is exasperating even some Republicans.

“We have called repeatedly for a return to regular order in this body,” Sen. Susan Collins of Maine said this week. “Well, regular order is going to conference.”

And Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the party’s presidential nominee in 2008, asked plaintively, “What are we on my side of the aisle doing?”

Democratic majority leader Harry Reid of Nevada has an answer for McCain: “The longer Republicans delay, the more transparent their partisan, political tactics become. Republicans hope to put off a fiscal compromise until our backs are up against yet another manufactured crisis — a catastrophic default on this country’s financial obligations,” Reid said on the floor.

It must seem to Bernanke that he is wasting his breath trying to bring some enlightenment to politicians hopelessly embroiled in a bitter partisan struggle.

And perhaps he is. But someone’s got to say it, and the Fed chairman, generally considered the second most powerful official in the country after the president, mounted his bully pulpit to try one more time.

Darrell Delamaide is a political columnist for MarketWatch in Washington. Follow him on Twitter @MKTWDelamaide.

VIDEO: Welfare State Burning 5/23/13. Muslim Freeloaders Torch Stockholm! Yet Again, The Rotton Fruits Of "Multiculturalism" Rears It's Ugly Head!

RT
May 24, 2013
http://rt.com/news/stockholm-violence-outbreak-fires-671/



Youth gang riots in the Swedish capital Stockholm have entered fifth straight night. Hundreds of mostly immigrant teenagers tore through the suburbs, smashing windows and burning cars in the country’s worst outbreak of violence in years.

At least six vehicles were torched throughout the city late on Thursday while the police called for reinforcements from other Swedish cities bracing for further unrest.

Firefighters were putting out flames that engulfed several cars and a school in immigrant-dominated areas of Stockholm.

The night before, the fire brigades were called to some 90 different blazes. On the fourth night of violence, youths torched over 30 cars in 15 neighborhoods along with a restaurant in Skogas, south of Stockholm. Three law enforcement officers were injured, police spokesperson Kjell Lindgren reported.

Stockholm firefighters were busy throughout the night, saying they had “never before seen so many fires raging at the same time.” Some 90 blazes were reported in total, most of them reportedly caused by the rioters. Still, the fourth night of violence was relatively quiet compared to the previous three, RT’s Peter Oliver reported from Stockholm.

Leaders of immigrant communities were out on the streets in a bid to stop young people from rioting. Despite their efforts, as soon as the night fell, groups of arsonists took to the streets to set cars on fire. RT’s Peter Oliver witnessed rioters throwing stones at police and journalists alike.

Civil disorder in Stockholm started on Sunday, when police shot and killed a 69-old-man in his apartment after he confronted officers with a machete; the unrest has since continued throughout week.

Community leaders insist that a main reason for the violence is the high rate of unemployment in immigrant communities, particularly in the suburb of Husby near central Stockholm, one of the worst affected by the nighttime violence, Peter Oliver reported.

Although Sweden’s unemployment rate is below the EU average, joblessness among those under 25 has reached nearly 25 percent. The RT crew in Stockholm noted that a majority of those taking part in the violence are young.

“In Sweden you’ve got welfare, access to the educational system – up to university level, you got access to public transport, libraries, healthcare – to everything. And still they feel that they [immigrants] need to riot through stones and Molotov cocktails. It’s ridiculous and a bad excuse,” Swedish Democrats MP Kent Ekeroth told RT.

“Police can put down these riots in five minutes – if the politicians were to allow them,” Ekeroth added.

Parents of the rampaging teenagers and community religious leaders are now spending sleepless nights on the street in an effort to prevent their children from wreaking havoc.

Meanwhile, the Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt blamed the violence on “hooligans” and said they did not represent the majority in the rioting neighborhoods.

“I think it’s dangerous to draw a picture of Sweden with a capital separated from its suburbs. I don’t think that’s true. I think the dividing line runs straight through Husby, with a majority population and then a small group of troublemakers,” Reinfeldt said.

But the Husby youth taking part in riots told Reuters they are indeed divided from the rest of Stockholm, struggling to find a full-time job with their Husby address. Most of the interviewed rioters were reportedly unemployed.

The claims of social exclusion in immigrant-dominated suburbs have been partly conceded by Sweden’s Integration Minister Erik Ullenhag, who said the ministry is aware of

“discrimination in these areas.” But the riots

“don’t improve the image of these areas, where there is a lot of positive stuff going on,” he added.

For years, Sweden – one of Europe’s most tranquil countries, famous for its attractive immigration policies and generous welfare system – has been accepting an influx of immigrants, which now make up about 15 per cent of its population. These migrants have failed to integrate into Swedish society, and are only in the country to enjoy the country’s social benefits system, Swedish journalist Ingrid Carlqvist told RT.

“The problem is not from the Swedish government or from the Swedish people,” the editor in chief of Dispatch International said. “The last 20 years or so, we have seen so many immigrants coming to Sweden that really don’t like Sweden. They do not want to integrate, they do not want to live in [Swedish] society: Working, paying taxes and so on.”

“The people come here now because they know that Sweden will give them money for nothing. They don’t have to work, they don’t have to pay taxes – they can just stay here and get a lot of money. That is really a problem,” Carlqvist added.

“The police could do so much, [instead] they have told the public that they mean to do as little as possible. But they could go there and use water cannons, they could not let people out onto the streets at night. There are so many things they could do within the law – but they don’t do it,” she said.

Young Muslims who enjoy tolerance, social institutions and welfare while living in Sweden nevertheless refuse to integrate into the West, Gerolf Annemans told RT. Annemans is the parliamentary leader of Vlaams Belang (‘Flemish Interest’), a Belgian far-right nationalist political party.

“They [Muslim youths] have always sought excuse to show that they are not agreeing with the basic values of Western society,” Annemans said, pointing to the recent cases of the Boston Marathon bombing in the US and yesterday’s beheading of a British soldier in the UK.

“It’s always the same problem. There is a massive refusal by Muslim youngsters of the basics of Western society… and they take any excuse whatsoever to show that with violence – that is where the problem is,”he said.

As rioting continues to rip through Stockholm, some claim the violence has clearly been orchestrated for ulterior motives, Lars Hedegaard, Editor-in-Chief of Swedish newspaper Dispatch International said to RT.

“Some people would like to gain recognition as stakeholder in society. In other words, there are people who would like to be in a negotiating position… that they can make things happen and go away. That they have power in local communities and should be reckoned with,” he explained.

“These riots in the country that are spreading and continuing for a long time that the [multiculturalism] success was a fiction, they never succeeded,” Hedegaard said.

Thursday, May 23, 2013

World Bank Insider Blows Whistle on Corruption, Federal Reserve

Alex Newman
New American
May 23, 2013

A former insider at the World Bank, ex-Senior Counsel Karen Hudes, says the global financial system is dominated by a small group of corrupt, power-hungry figures centered around the privately owned U.S. Federal Reserve. The network has seized control of the media to cover up its crimes, too, she explained. In an interview withThe New American, Hudes said that when she tried to blow the whistle on multiple problems at the World Bank, she was fired for her efforts. Now, along with a network of fellow whistleblowers, Hudes is determined to expose and end the corruption. And she is confident of success.
Citing an explosive 2011 Swiss study published in the PLOS ONE journal on the “network of global corporate control,” Hudes pointed out that a small group of entities — mostly financial institutions and especially central banks — exert a massive amount of influence over the international economy from behind the scenes. “What is really going on is that the world’s resources are being dominated by this group,” she explained, adding that the “corrupt power grabbers” have managed to dominate the media as well. “They’re being allowed to do it.”
According to the peer-reviewed paper, which presented the first global investigation of ownership architecture in the international economy, transnational corporations form a “giant bow-tie structure.” A large portion of control, meanwhile, “flows to a small tightly-knit core of financial institutions.” The researchers described the core as an “economic ‘super-entity’” that raises important issues for policymakers and researchers. Of course, the implications are enormous for citizens as well.
Hudes, an attorney who spent some two decades working in the World Bank’s legal department, has observed the machinations of the network up close. “I realized we were now dealing with something known as state capture, which is where the institutions of government are co-opted by the group that’s corrupt,” she told The New American in a phone interview. “The pillars of the U.S. government — some of them — are dysfunctional because of state capture; this is a big story, this is a big cover up.”
At the heart of the network, Hudes said, are 147 financial institutions and central banks — especially the Federal Reserve, which was created by Congress but is owned by essentially a cartel of private banks. “This is a story about how the international financial system was secretly gamed, mostly by central banks — they’re the ones we are talking about,” she explained. “The central bankers have been gaming the system. I would say that this is a power grab.”
The Fed in particular is at the very center of the network and the coverup, Hudes continued, citing a policy and oversight body that includes top government and Fed officials. Central bankers have also been manipulating gold prices, she added, echoing widespread concerns that The New American has documented extensively. Indeed, even the inaccurate World Bank financial statements that Hudes has been trying to expose are linked to the U.S. central bank, she said.
“The group that we’re talking about from the Zurich study — that’s the Federal Reserve; it has some other pieces to it, but that’s the Federal Reserve,” Hudes explained. “So the Federal Reserve secretly dominated the world economy using secret, interlocking corporate directorates, and terrorizing anybody who managed to figure out that they were having any kind of role, and putting people in very important positions so that they could get a free pass.”

The shadowy but immensely powerful Bank for International Settlements serves as “the club of these private central bankers,” Hudes continued. “Now, are people going to want interest on their country’s debts to continue to be paid to that group when they find out the secret tricks that that group has been doing? Don’t forget how they’ve enriched themselves extraordinarily and how they’ve taken taxpayer money for the bailout.”
As far as intervening in the gold price, Hudes said it was an effort by the powerful network and its central banks to “hold onto its paper currency” — a suspicion shared by many analysts and even senior government officials. The World Bank whistleblower also said that contrary to official claims, she did not believe there was any gold being held in Fort Knox. Even congressmen and foreign governments have tried to find out if the precious metals were still there, but they met with little success. Hudes, however, believes the scam will eventually come undone.
“This is like crooks trying to figure out where they can go hide. It’s a mafia,” she said. “These culprits that have grabbed all this economic power have succeeded in infiltrating both sides of the issue, so you will find people who are supposedly trying to fight corruption who are just there to spread disinformation and as a placeholder to trip up anybody who manages to get their act together.… Those thugs think that if they can keep the world ignorant, they can bleed it longer.”
Of course, the major corruption at the highest levels of government and business is not a new phenomenon. Georgetown University historian and Professor Carroll Quigley, who served as President Bill Clinton’s mentor, for example, wrote about the scheme in his 1966 book Tragedy And Hope: A History Of The World In Our Time. The heavyweight academic, who was allowed to review documents belonging to the top echelons of the global establishment, even explained how the corrupt system would work — remarkably similar to what Hudes describes.
“The powers of financial capitalism had a far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole,” wrote Prof. Quigley, who agreed with the goals but not the secrecy. “This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations.”
But it is not going to happen, Hudes said — at least not if she has something do to with it. While the media are dominated by the “power grabber” network, Hudes has been working with foreign governments, reporters, U.S. officials, state governments, and a broad coalition of fellow whistleblowers to blow the entire scam wide open. There has been quite a bit of interest, too, particularly among foreign governments and state officials in the United States.
Citing the wisdom of America’s Founding Fathers in creating a federal system of government with multiple layers of checks and balances, Hudes said she was confident that the network would eventually be exposed and subjected to the rule of law, stopping the secret corruption. If and when that happens — even if it may be disorderly — Hudes says precious metals will once again play a role in imposing discipline on the monetary system. The rule of law would also be restored, she said, and the public will demand a proper press to stay informed.
“We’re going to have a cleaned-up financial system, that’s where it is going, but in the meantime, people who didn’t know how the system was gamed are going to find out,” she said. “We’re going to have a different kind of international financial system…. It’ll be a new kind of world where people know what’s going on — no more backroom deals; that’s not going to keep happening. We’re going to have a different kind of media if people don’t want to be dominated and controlled, which I don’t think they do.”
While Hudes sounded upbeat, she recognizes that the world is facing serious danger right now — there are even plans in place to impose martial law in the United States, she said. The next steps will be critical for humanity. As such, Hudes argues, it is crucial that the people of the world find out about the lawlessness, corruption, and thievery that are going on at the highest levels — and put a stop to it once and for all. The consequences of inaction would be disastrous.

Greek Prostitution Soars By 150% As Youth Unempoyment Hits 75% In Some Areas

Zero Hedge
May 23, 2013

With Greece suffering the biggest economic depression in decades, all so a few rich men can preserve their wealth and not have their EUR-denominated savings wiped out (even if the alternative means finally being able to rebalance externally using the Drachma instead of forcing internal rebalancing via unemployment and plunging wages), it was only a matter of time before we found out just how humiliating the conversion of the entire economy to a “gray”, non-tax paying one would be for the citizens of Greece.
As the NYT reports, in just the past two years, the numbers of Greeks engaging in prostitution as a last course source of income has more than doubled: according to the National Center for Social Research, the number of people selling sex has surged 150 percent in the last two years.

Continue reading here:  http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-05-22/greek-prostitution-soars-150-youth-unempoyment-hits-75-some-areas

VIDEO: Maximum Evil Over America! Western Civilization Is Being Converted To Poverty.....





VIDEO: Former IRS Head Admits, “I Can’t Recite the Constitution, Sir”

Prison Planet.com
May 23, 2013

“You went to law school. Did you study the Constitution?”

“I believe I took Constitutional law, but I’m not prepared to take an exam at this time,” Shulman said with a chuckle. “Meaning I’ll answer any of your question but I can’t promise that I’m an expert.”




Why Disinformation Works

Paul Craig Roberts
Prison Planet.com
May 23, 2013

Have you ever wondered how the government’s misinformation gains traction?
What I have noticed is that whenever a stunning episode occurs, such as 9/11 or the Boston Marathon bombing, most everyone whether on the right or left goes along with the government’s explanation, because they can hook their agenda to the government’s account.
The leftwing likes the official stories of Muslims creating terrorist mayhem in America, because it proves their blowback theory and satisfies them that the dispossessed and oppressed can fight back against imperialism.
The patriotic rightwing likes the official story, because it proves America is attacked for its goodness or because terrorists were allowed in by immigration authorities and nurtured by welfare, or because the government, which can’t do anything right, ignored plentiful warnings.
Whatever the government says, no matter how problematical, the official story gets its traction from its compatibility with existing predispositions and agendas.
In such a country, truth has no relevance. Only agendas are important.
A person can see this everywhere. I could write volumes illustrating how agenda-driven writers across the spectrum will support the most improbable government stories despite the absence of any evidence simply because the government’s line can be used to support their agenda 
For example, a conservative writer in the June issue of Chronicles uses the government’s story about the alleged Boston Marathon bombers, Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev, to argue against immigration, amnesty for illegals, and political asylum for Muslims. He writes: “Even the most high-tech security systems imaginable will inevitably fail as they are overwhelmed by a flood of often hostile and dangerous immigrants.”
The writer accepts all of the improbable government statements as proof that the brothers were guilty. The wounded brother who was unable to respond to the boat owner who discovered him and had to be put on life support somehow managed to write a confession on the inside of the boat.
As soon as the authorities have the brother locked up in a hospital on life support, “unnamed officials” and “authorities who remain anonymous” are planting the story in the media that the suspect is signing written confessions of his guilt while on life support. No one has seen any of these written confessions. But we know that they exist, because the government and media say so.
The conservative writer knows that Dzhokhar is guilty because he is Muslim and a Chechen. Therefore, it does not occur to the writer to wonder about the agenda of the unnamed sources who are busy at work creating belief in the brothers’ guilt. This insures that no juror would dare vote for acquittal and have to explain it to family and friends. Innocent until proven guilty in a court has been thrown out the window. This should disturb the conservative writer, but doesn’t.
The conservative writer sees Chechen ethnicity as an indication of guilt even though the brothers grew up in the US as normal Americans, because Chechens are “engaged in anti-Russian jihad.” But Chechens have no reason for hostility against the US. As evidence indicates, Washington supports the Chechens in their conflict with Russia. By supporting Chechen terrorism, Washington violates all of the laws that it ruthlessly applies to compassionate Americans who give donations to Palestinian charities that Washington alleges are run by Hamas, a Washington-declared terrorist organization.
It doesn’t occur to the conservative writer that something is amiss when marshall law
is established over one of America’s main cities and its metropolitan area, 10,000 heavily armed troops are put on the streets with tanks, and citizens are ordered out of their homes with their hands over their heads, all of this just to search for one wounded 19-year old suspect. Instead the writer blames the “surveillance state” on “the inevitable consequences of suicidal liberalism” which has embraced “the oldest sin in the world: rebellion against authority.” The writer is so pleased to use the government’s story line as a way of indulging the conservative’s romance with authority and striking a blow at liberalism that he does not notice that he has lined up against the Founding Fathers who signed the Declaration of Independence and rebelled against authority.
I could just as easily have used a left-wing writer to illustrate the point that improbable explanations are acceptable if they fit with predispositions and can be employed in behalf of an agenda.
Think about it. Do you not think that it is extraordinary that the only investigations we have of such events as 9/11 and the Boston Marathon bombing are private investigations, such as this investigation of the backpacks: http://whowhatwhy.com/2013/05/20/official-story-has-odd-wrinkles-a-pack-of-questions-about-the-boston-bombing-backpacks/
There was no investigation of 9/11. Indeed, the White House resisted any inquiry at all for one year despite the insistent demands from the 9/11 families. NIST did not investigate anything. NIST simply constructed a computer model that was consistent with the government’s story. The 9/11 Commission simply sat and listened to the government’s explanation and wrote it down. These are not investigations.
The only investigations have come from a physicist who proved that WTC 7 came down at free fall and was thus the result of controlled demolition, from a team of scientists who examined dust from the WTC towers and found nano-thermite, from high-rise architects and structural engineers with decades of experience, and from first responders and firefighters who were in the towers and experienced explosions throughout the towers, even in the sub-basements.
We have reached the point where evidence is no longer required. The government’s statements suffice. Only conspiracy kooks produce real evidence.
In America, government statements have a unique authority. This authority comes from the white hat that the US wore in World War II and in the subsequent Cold War. It was easy to demonize Nazi Germany, Soviet Communism and Maoist China. Even today when Russian publications interview me about the perilous state of civil liberty in the US and Washington’s endless illegal military attacks abroad, I sometimes receive reports that some Russians believe that it was an impostor who was interviewed, not the real Paul Craig Roberts. There are Russians who believe that it was President Reagan who brought freedom to Russia, and as I served in the Reagan administration these Russians associate me with their vision of America as a light unto the world. Some Russians actually believe that Washington’s wars are truly wars of liberation.
The same illusions reign among Chinese dissidents. Chen Guangcheng is the Chinese dissident who sought refuge in the US Embassy in China. Recently he was interviewed by the BBC World Service. Chen Guangcheng believes that the US protects human rights while China suppresses human rights. He complained to the BBC that in China police can arrest citizens and detain them for as long as six months without accounting for their detainment. He thought that the US and UK should publicly protest this violation of due process, a human right. Apparently, Chen Guangcheng is unaware that US citizens are subject to indefinite detention without due process and even to assassination without due process.
The Chinese government allowed Chen Guangcheng safe passage to leave China and live in the US. Chen Guangcheng is so dazzled by his illusions of America as a human rights beacon that it has never occurred to him that the oppressive, human rights-violating Chinese government gave him safe passage, but that Julian Assange, after being given political asylum by Ecuador is still confined to the Ecuadoran embassy in London, because Washington will not allow its UK puppet state to permit his safe passage to Ecuador.
Perhaps Chen Guangcheng and the Chinese and Russian dissidents who are so enamored of the US could gain some needed perspective if they were to read US soldier Terry Holdbrooks’ book about the treatment given to the Guantanamo prisoners. Holdbrooks was there on the scene, part of the process, and this is what he told RT: “The torture and information extraction methods that we used certainly created a great deal of doubt and questions in my mind to whether or not this was my America. But when I thought about what we were doing there and how we go about doing it, it did not seem like the America I signed up to defend. It did not seem like the America I grew up in. And that in itself was a very disillusioning experience.” http://rt.com/news/guantanamo-guard-islam-torture-608/
In a May 17 Wall Street Journal.com article, Peggy Noonan wrote that President Obama has lost his patina of high-mindedness. What did Obama do that brought this loss upon himself? Is it because he sits in the Oval Office approving lists of US citizens to be assassinated without due process of law? Is it because he detains US citizens indefinitely in violation of habeas corpus? Is it because he has kept open the torture prison at Guantanamo? Is it because he continued the war that the neoconservatives started, despite his promise to end it, and started new wars?
Is it because he attacks with drones people in their homes, medical centers, and work places in countries with which the US is not at war? Is it because his corrupt administration spies on American citizens without warrants and without cause?
No. It is none of these reasons. In Noonan’s view these are not offenses for which presidents, even Democratic ones, lose their high-minded patina. Obama can no longer be trusted, because the IRS hassled some conservative political activists.
Noonan is a Republican, and what Obama did wrong was to use the IRS against some Republicans. Apparently, it has not occurred to Noonan that if Obama–or any president–can use the IRS against opponents, he can use Homeland Security and the police state against them. He can use indefinite detention against them. He can use drones against them.
All of these are much more drastic measures. Why isn’t Peggy Noonan concerned?
Because she thinks these measures will only be used against terrorists, just as the IRS is only supposed to be used against tax evaders.
When a public and the commentators who inform it accept the collapse of the Constitution’s authority and the demise of their civil liberties, to complain about the IRS is pointless.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts is the father of Reaganomics and the former head of policy at the Department of Treasury. He is a columnist and was previously the editor of the Wall Street Journal. His latest book, “How the Economy Was Lost: The War of the Worlds,” details why America is disintegrating.