From: Richard Eastman <richardeastmanyakima@q.com>
Date: Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 12:36 PM
Subject: [bangla-vision] the decision to support Israel has been made for you
To: bangla-vision@yahoogroups.com, frameup@yahoogroups.com
http://www.physorg.com/news199079260.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDrMTif-2gk&feature=player_embedded
EVIDENCE MOUNTS - BP chemicals HARMFUL and will kill humans - Government cover up as Storm brews
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9P57WIMh7g
Bonnie Drops Toxic BP Rain - More Plants Dying
http://www.rense.com/general91/bonnide.htm
In the time since the well was fitted with a temporary cap last week, allowing pressure to build up within the pipe, Prof. Bea says it is likely that the underground gas bubble, instead of running up the pipe, or staying put where it was in the ground, has been pushing its way along cracks and faults that lead to the surface.
http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/node/148
http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/scientist-investigating-oil-disaster-when-it-rains-a-lot-of-junk-comes-down-from-the-particulate
Zionist-rule of the world’s central banks confers leverage over governments by international Judaism.
http://www.realzionistnews.com/?p=525
AFP recently interviewed the prolific author Greg Felton about his book, The Host and the Parasite, which documents the unhealthy relationship between the United States and Israel. For more on Felton, see his web site here.
Why fix a system designed to destroy individual thought?
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig11/gatto6.1.1.html
Proof That The Swine Flu Epidemic Was Man Made and Intentional
http://healthwyze.org/index.php/proof-that-the-swine-flu-epidemic-was-man-made-and-intentional.html
Many consumers struggling with job loss
http://www.patriotledger.com/business/consumer/x1070618189/Bankruptcy-filings-up-25-over-last-year
==================================
| Dear Mr. Eastman, Thank you for sending me this. We are thinking in the same way at the same time. Perhaps you have seen this old Campaigner from 1978: http://wlym.com/campaigner/7812.pdf The LaRouche people get pretty close to the truth, but they always seem to ascribe ultimate control to some nebulous entity in the City of London that is higher than the Rothschild gang. Former PM David Lloyd George said in the 1930s that Britain was enslaved by the financiers - i.e. the Rothschilds. But the articles about the Rothschilds running Israel are spot on. The Israeli people are as deceived as any about what Zionism is all about. They are just the pawns in the Rothschild game for control of the Middle East oil and riches. Best wishes, Christopher Bollyn |
It's important too to mock these would-be "masters of the universe", and to rejoice in the downfall of Hot Air Al and every other twit and scam (such as Swine Fluitis: wasn't that supposed to be the End of the World, just like Corexit? how many Ends of the World are you expecting, eh?) that's thrown under the bus. You can BET there's infighting going on among the parasite ranks... so there needs to be celebration of all our victories too.
It's not a "red" conspiracy any more than a "blue" conspiracy. The US and Soviet Union served as British Empire puppets during WW2 (and throughout the course of the "Cold War" and the "Iron Curtain" – a phrase coined by imperial propagandist Churchill, a butcher of Dresden). Hitler was a British agent – like the Trojan horse anti-populist Karl Marx – who ended up screwing over the German people. Israel and Saudi Arabia are puppet states directed out of... well, you ought to know where by now.
Jeffersonian populism and Douglas's social credit are effective responses to merchant monopolism (which includes "capitalism" and "communism", the red-vs.-blue dialectical manipulation). And truth, presented simply and powerfully, has a way of cutting through all the Machiavellian deceptions of those degenerates who would enslave the people of good will.
"Sir Humphrey Appleby" tells the agenda, and who's behind it: ignore at your peril.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9dyReKv7hI
–Elmer Lane
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jK0Ousbp1hg
Public Health Issue blackout -- listen to this reporter
Poison Spreads: Gulf air turns toxic after oil spill 'relief effort'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uled9TFmXMY
Obama Bankster Bill Has US Over Barrel Again
China Banks Face Default Risk On 23% Of $1 Trillion Loans
$1.5 Trillion US Deficit - Borrowing Reaches 40%
Enormous Sub Sea Gulf Oil Plumes From BP Wel
Globe Publishes Obama's African Birth Certificate
It is impossible for a man who violates the Constitution with a major deception about his true identity in order to become president to be thinking about Americans and their well-being at the hands of government restrained by law and the constitution.
This is not an "executive order"; it's a full blown dictatorial decree, written by a cabal of sustainable development lawyers, taking control of things the federal government has NO right to control, instituting MORE regional government, and creating ANOTHER huge federal bureaucracy in the process.
Here it is:
Executive Order 13547--Stewardship of the Ocean, Our Coasts, and the
Great Lakes
Memorandum of July 19, 2010--The Presidential POWER Initiative:
Protecting Our Workers and Ensuring Reemployment
Presidential Documents
Title 3--
The President
Executive Order 13547 of July 19, 2010
Stewardship of the Ocean, Our Coasts, and the Great Lakes
By the authority vested in me as President by the
Constitution and the laws of the United States of
America, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Purpose. The ocean, our coasts, and the
Great Lakes provide jobs, food, energy resources,
ecological services, recreation, and tourism
opportunities, and play critical roles in our Nation's
transportation, economy, and trade, as well as the
global mobility of our Armed Forces and the maintenance
of international peace and security. The Deepwater
Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and resulting
environmental crisis is a stark reminder of how
vulnerable our marine environments are, and how much
communities and the Nation rely on healthy and
resilient ocean and coastal ecosystems. America's
stewardship of the ocean, our coasts, and the Great
Lakes is intrinsically linked to environmental
sustainability, human health and well-being, national
prosperity, adaptation to climate and other
environmental changes, social justice, international
diplomacy, and national and homeland security.
This order adopts the recommendations of the
Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force, except where
otherwise provided in this order, and directs executive
agencies to implement those recommendations under the
guidance of a National Ocean Council. Based on those
recommendations, this order establishes a national
policy to ensure the protection, maintenance, and
restoration of the health of ocean, coastal, and Great
Lakes ecosystems and resources, enhance the
sustainability of ocean and coastal economies, preserve
our maritime heritage, support sustainable uses and
access, provide for adaptive management to enhance our
understanding of and capacity to respond to climate
change and ocean acidification, and coordinate with our
national security and foreign policy interests.
This order also provides for the development of coastal
and marine spatial plans that build upon and improve
existing Federal, State, tribal, local, and regional
decisionmaking and planning processes. These regional
plans will enable a more integrated, comprehensive,
ecosystem-based, flexible, and proactive approach to
planning and managing sustainable multiple uses across
sectors and improve the conservation of the ocean, our
coasts, and the Great Lakes.
Sec. 2. Policy. (a) To achieve an America whose
stewardship ensures that the ocean, our coasts, and the
Great Lakes are healthy and resilient, safe and
productive, and understood and treasured so as to
promote the well-being, prosperity, and security of
present and future generations, it is the policy of the
United States to:
(i) protect, maintain, and restore the health and biological diversity of
ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems and resources;
(ii) improve the resiliency of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems,
communities, and economies;
(iii) bolster the conservation and sustainable uses of land in ways that
will improve the health of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems;
(iv) use the best available science and knowledge to inform decisions
affecting the ocean, our coasts, and the Great Lakes, and enhance
humanity's capacity to understand, respond, and adapt to a changing global
environment;
(v) support sustainable, safe, secure, and productive access to, and uses
of the ocean, our coasts, and the Great Lakes;
(vi) respect and preserve our Nation's maritime heritage, including our
social, cultural, recreational, and historical values;
(vii) exercise rights and jurisdiction and perform duties in accordance
with applicable international law, including respect for and preservation
of navigational rights and freedoms, which are essential for the global
economy and international peace and security;
(viii) increase scientific understanding of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes
ecosystems as part of the global interconnected systems of air, land, ice,
and water, including their relationships to humans and their activities;
(ix) improve our understanding and awareness of changing environmental
conditions, trends, and their causes, and of human activities taking place
in ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes waters; and
(x) foster a public understanding of the value of the ocean, our coasts,
and the Great Lakes to build a foundation for improved stewardship.
(b) The United States shall promote this policy by:
(i) ensuring a comprehensive and collaborative framework for the
stewardship of the ocean, our coasts, and the Great Lakes that facilitates
cohesive actions across the Federal Government, as well as participation of
State, tribal, and local authorities, regional governance structures,
nongovernmental organizations, the public, and the private sector;
(ii) cooperating and exercising leadership at the international level;
(iii) pursuing the United States' accession to the Law of the Sea
Convention; and
(iv) supporting ocean stewardship in a fiscally responsible manner.
Sec. 3. Definitions. As used in this order:
(a) ``Final Recommendations'' means the Final
Recommendations of the Interagency Ocean Policy Task
Force that shall be made publicly available and for
which a notice of public availability shall be
published in the Federal Register.
(b) The term ``coastal and marine spatial
planning'' means a comprehensive, adaptive, integrated,
ecosystem-based, and transparent spatial planning
process, based on sound science, for analyzing current
and anticipated uses of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes
areas. Coastal and marine spatial planning identifies
areas most suitable for various types or classes of
activities in order to reduce conflicts among uses,
reduce environmental impacts, facilitate compatible
uses, and preserve critical ecosystem services to meet
economic, environmental, security, and social
objectives. In practical terms, coastal and marine
spatial planning provides a public policy process for
society to better determine how the ocean, our coasts,
and Great Lakes are sustainably used and protected--now
and for future generations.
(c) The term ``coastal and marine spatial plans''
means the plans that are certified by the National
Ocean Council as developed in accordance with the
definition, goals, principles, and process described in
the Final Recommendations.
Sec. 4. Establishment of National Ocean Council. (a)
There is hereby established the National Ocean Council
(Council).
(b) The Council shall consist of the following:
(i) the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality and the Director of
the Office of Science and Technology Policy, who shall be the Co-Chairs of
the Council;
(ii) the Secretaries of State, Defense, the Interior, Agriculture, Health
and Human Services, Commerce, Labor, Transportation, Energy, and Homeland
Security, the Attorney General, the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget,
the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere (Administrator of
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), the Administrator of
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Director of National
Intelligence, the Director of the National Science Foundation, and the
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff;
(iii) the National Security Advisor and the Assistants to the President for
Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, Domestic Policy, Energy and Climate
Change, and Economic Policy;
(iv) an employee of the Federal Government designated by the Vice
President; and
(v) such other officers or employees of the Federal Government as the Co-
Chairs of the Council may from time to time designate.
(c) The Co-Chairs shall invite the participation of
the Chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, to the extent consistent with the
Commission's statutory authorities and legal
obligations, and may invite the participation of such
other independent agencies as the Council deems
appropriate.
(d) The Co-Chairs of the Council, in consultation
with the National Security Advisor and the Assistant to
the President for Homeland Security and
Counterterrorism, shall regularly convene and preside
at meetings of the Council, determine its agenda,
direct its work, and, as appropriate to address
particular subject matters, establish and direct
committees of the Council that shall consist
exclusively of members of the Council.
(e) A member of the Council may designate, to
perform committee functions of the member, any person
who is within such member's department, agency, or
office and who is (i) an officer of the United States
appointed by the President, (ii) a member of the Senior
Executive Service or the Senior Intelligence Service,
(iii) a general officer or flag officer, or (iv) an
employee of the Vice President.
(f) Consistent with applicable law and subject to
the availability of appropriations, the Office of
Science and Technology Policy and the Council on
Environmental Quality shall provide the Council with
funding, including through the National Science and
Technology Council or the Office of Environmental
Quality. The Council on Environmental Quality shall, to
the extent permitted by law and subject to the
availability of appropriations, provide administrative
support necessary to implement this order.
(g) The day-to-day operations of the Council shall
be administered by a Director and a Deputy Director,
who shall supervise a full-time staff to assist the Co-
Chairs in their implementation of this order.
Sec. 5. Functions of the Council. (a) The Council shall
have the structure and function and operate as defined
in the Final Recommendations. The Council is
authorized, after the Council's first year of
operation, to make modifications to its structure,
function, and operations to improve its effectiveness
and efficiency in furthering the policy set forth in
section 2 of this order.
(b) To implement the policy set forth in section 2
of this order, the Council shall provide appropriate
direction to ensure that executive departments',
agencies', or offices' decisions and actions affecting
the ocean, our coasts, and the Great Lakes will be
guided by the stewardship principles and national
priority objectives set forth in the Final
Recommendations, to the extent consistent with
applicable law. The Council shall base its decisions on
the consensus of its members. With respect to those
matters in which consensus cannot be reached, the
National Security Advisor shall coordinate with the Co-
Chairs and, as appropriate, the Assistants to the
President for Energy and Climate Change, and Economic
Policy, and the employee of the United States
designated by the Vice President, subject to the
limitations set forth in section 9 of this order, to
present the disputed issue or issues for decision by
the President.
Sec. 6. Agency Responsibilities. (a) All executive
departments, agencies, and offices that are members of
the Council and any other executive department, agency,
or office whose actions affect the ocean, our coasts,
and the Great Lakes shall, to the fullest extent
consistent with applicable law:
(i) take such action as necessary to implement the policy set forth in
section 2 of this order and the stewardship principles and national
priority objectives as set forth in the Final Recommendations and
subsequent guidance from the Council; and
(ii) participate in the process for coastal and marine spatial planning and
comply with Council certified coastal and marine spatial plans, as
described in the Final Recommendations and subsequent guidance from the
Council.
(b) Each executive department, agency, and office
that is required to take actions under this order shall
prepare and make publicly available an annual report
including a concise description of actions taken by the
agency in the previous calendar year to implement the
order, a description of written comments by persons or
organizations regarding the agency's compliance with
this order, and the agency's response to such comments.
(c) Each executive department, agency, and office
that is required to take actions under this order shall
coordinate and contribute resources, as appropriate, to
assist in establishing a common information management
system as defined in the Final Recommendations and
shall be held accountable for managing its own
information assets by keeping them current, easily
accessible, and consistent with Federal standards.
(d) To the extent permitted by law, executive
departments, agencies, and offices shall provide the
Council such information, support, and assistance as
the Council, through the Co-Chairs, may request.
Sec. 7. Governance Coordinating Committee. The Council
shall establish a Governance Coordinating Committee
that shall consist of 18 officials from State, tribal,
and local governments in accordance with the Final
Recommendations. The Committee may establish
subcommittees chaired by representatives of the
Governance Coordinating Committee. These subcommittees
may include additional representatives from State,
tribal, and local governments, as appropriate to
provide for greater collaboration and diversity of
views.
Sec. 8. Regional Advisory Committees. The lead Federal
department, agency, or office for each regional
planning body established for the development of
regional coastal and marine spatial plans, in
consultation with their nonfederal co-lead agencies and
membership of their regional planning body, shall
establish such advisory committees under the Federal
Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App., as they deem
necessary to provide information and to advise the
regional planning body on the development of regional
coastal and marine spatial plans to promote the policy
established in section 2 of this order.
Sec. 9. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order,
the establishment of the Council, and the Final
Recommendations shall be construed to impair or
otherwise affect:
(i) authority granted by law to an executive department or agency or the
head thereof; or
(ii) functions assigned by the President to the National Security Council
or Homeland Security Council (including subordinate bodies) relating to
matters affecting foreign affairs, national security, homeland security, or
intelligence.
(b) Nothing in this order shall be construed to
impair or otherwise affect the functions of the
Director of the Office of Management and Budget
relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative
proposals.
(c) In carrying out the provisions of this order
and implementing the Final Recommendations, all actions
of the Council and the executive departments, agencies,
and offices that constitute it shall be consistent with
applicable international law, including customary
international law, such as that reflected in the Law of
the Sea Convention.
(d) This order is not intended to, and does not,
create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural,
enforceable at law or in equity by any party against
the United States, its departments, agencies, or
entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any
other person.
Sec. 10. Revocation. Executive Order 13366 of December
17, 2004, is hereby revoked.
(Presidential Sig.)
THE WHITE HOUSE,
July 19, 2010.
Date: Jul 24, 2010 2:13 PM
A letter to white racists
Scumbags come in all colors,
but our overlords incite
one against the other
By John Kaminski
pseudoskylax@gmail.com
http://johnkaminski.info/
This has been bothering me for years. I’ve seen many manifestations
and variations of it, some of it is truth but much of it is lies, and
above all, this distraction we all participate in at one time or
another — no matter what color we are — is an absolute waste of time
that misses the point and hurts people needlessly.
I’m talking about racism, and, in particular, white racism. What I
want to say is this — anybody who plays this game is playing the game
set up for us by the behind-the-scenes manipulators who rule the
world, because blacks and whites and people of all other colors in
between are all members of the same brotherhood — victims of the
people who make a loud living pretending that THEY are the victims,
when in fact they are really the victors in the neverending
psychological war for control of the world. And you know by now who
I’m talking about. That name of that group is something, since the
time of Jesus and probably before, that we all are afraid to say out
loud for the negative consequences it invariably brings. Our fear of
smaller paychecks, or no paycheck at all, makes cowards of us all.
After all, who is the biggest scumbag? A pathological white scumbag
named George W. Bush? A jet black scumbag named Robert Mugabe? A tan
scumbag named Barack Obama? All of these have betrayed their own
people as well as everybody else. But actually, the still comatose
Ariel Sharon may be the biggest scumbag of them all, although he
didn’t betray his own people, if you could call them people.
All of this came flooding back into my mind with the recent episode of
a writer named Edgar J. Steele, a notorious racist and Jew hater who
still languishes in jail after being charged by our corrupt federal
government with a bizarre plot to kill his wife. The actual legal bind
Steele has gotten himself into is another matter. The attitude that
Steele has championed over the years is, in itself, a confused
distraction from the real issues we need to focus on.
Steele, groups like the National Alliance, and more recently, Radio
Free Mississippi, have done all the peoples of the world a grave
disservice by directing their somewhat justified but xenophobic
vengefulness at Blacks and Jews together, as if they were, like
different species of snakes, both poisonous.
As much as I respect Edgar Steele for his incisive comments about the
pervasive Jewish cooptation of reality, I resent him for his
unshielded loathing of people of colors other than lily white. Sure,
there are plenty of examples of idiot blacks preying on feckless
whites, and for sure, this is covered up by the press in the interest
of inculcating the Jewish version of racial harmony throughout the
world.
The sanctimonious hatemongering against black people by white racists
always struck me as the height of ridiculous foolishness. All it
actually accomplishes is to further the aims of the sinister group
that works to destabilize all the countries of the world, so it can
steal everyone’s money, no matter what color they happen to be.
The American white racist argument is ridiculous on its face. White
racists in America argue that only whites should be here, because it
was the organized European ethic that brought many of the good things
in life to the shores of America. Be we stole our country from the red
race, in a very nasty way. We stole it from “savages,” much like the
way Jewish Israel has stolen that land from the Palestinian “savages”,
and the Angles and Saxons long ago stole their land from the brutish
Picts and unlettered Irish, who were of course called savages.
White racists fail to see the illogic of their own argument. For them,
it’s OK that they stole America from the red man, but not OK for
anyone else to steal it from them.
To carry the American white racist argument to its logical extreme is
to admit that all whites must leave America, because the red man owns
it, and always cared for it much better than the whites have ever
done.
In your heart, you must admit this is true. The American continent was
much better off under the Indians, who lived close to the land in
their pre-technological state, than the white man, with all his
convenient inventions, could ever hope to equal. Whites, by the way,
even got their Constitution from the Indians, specifically the
Iroquois.
But, as always, there is another side to this question.
All of the successful civilizations of history, in particular the
first democracy, Greece — rose to the heights they achieved on the
backs of their slaves. So in a sense, they were not really
democracies. They were democracies only in name, not in actuality,
because their economic productivity was based on the free forced labor
of slaves.
This was also true of the early United States, where not everyone was
allowed to vote, and some of those who were, were only given two
fifths of a vote, because of their devalued and demeaned social
status.
The United States became an economic powerhouse initially due to the
exportation of cotton, and we know the labor force that produced this
economic miracle, don’t we? Black, cotton picking slaves!
The slave trade, always ultimately controlled by the men who
controlled the major industry of whatever time they lived in, is the
ugly dark side of all these apparent historical successes. Today, the
situation is essentially the same, only slaves now get something
called minimum wage while the slaveholders control all the industries.
Modern day CEOs reach salaries up to 1600 times of the slaves they
control, often for doing none or little of the work that makes these
so-called economic miracles successful.
We call this American system democracy, but it really isn’t, nor were
any of those other so-called democracies. They were, and are,
slaveholding plutocracies.
From the get-go, Americans held slaves, even many of our founding
fathers, who remain justly revered because of other achievements. But
the inequality bred only contempt and abuse, even as it brought
economic prosperity.
To all those righteous white racists, most of whom are definitely
economic slaves themselves, this is a message that badly needs to be
digested and integrated into their world views. Because in their
hatred for blacks, there are essentially hating themselves. In hating
the blacks, they’re hating the very people who could be their best
allies against that one treacherous group that is responsible for most
of the remaining slavery in the world today, because blacks are a lot
hipper than whites in understanding the role Jews play in diminishing
everybody’s lives, no matter what color they are.
But in their blind fear, white supremacists are actually doing the
work of the Jews in destabilizing every country on Earth. And some of
these white supremacists are actually funded secretly by Jews, so Jews
will have a sufficient number of so-called anti-Semites by which to
spread fear among their own brethren for the purpose of raising money,
of course. Jews are not shy about fleecing their own brethren, as
Bernie Madoff and others have demonstrated so convincingly. Surely
this is one philosophy that, like Israel, needs to be wiped off the
face of the earth.
And in this process, by their bribery, blackmail and social coercion,
they have disintegrated the most important element necessary to peace
in the world, which is to trust the person you’re dealing with.
It’s also important to remember that there is a third side to this
question, best elicited from black people by asking them the question,
“Where would blacks be today if there had never been slavery?”
I’ve never had the opportunity to ask a black person this question,
but in a world where people of every color have been betrayed and
exploited by their Jewish overlords, the flip white supremacist answer
would be, “They’d still be practicing witchcraft and hunting animals
with spears in the wilds of Africa instead of selling drugs and
stealing cars on the streets of Jersey City.”
I won’t presume to know what the black answer to this would be, but
I’m guessing it would be similar, but less harsh.
And this all leads us to the role blacks are playing in America today.
Of course, they’re being used to destabilize the country, to dumb it
down, so as to be more easily controlled, manipulated and exploited by
our Jewish overlords. And yes, it’s very disturbing that most whites
follow right along, led by their noses, their mouths, their zippers
and their wallets.
As blacks are pulled up on the economic and educational ladders, so
are whites pulled down to the black level. This is exactly the Jewish
plan, to diminish America by using experienced slaves to pretend to be
functioning citizens. This is what the avalanche of legal and illegal
immigration is all about.
This is exactly what they want, producing the right combination of
grateful slaves and dumbed down whites to create a population of
totally manipulatable house niggers of all colors, so they can
accelerate their poisonous policies of heartless exploitation of
everyone.
Our Jewish overlords have done this everywhere in the world,
particularly throughout Europe and in Russia.
This is exactly what supremacists of any color fail to see, that they
are aiding the perpetrators who are trying to destroy their country by
creating divisions between victimized people where none need really
exist if people would just understand how our Jewish overlords are
undermining every principle that would lead us to productive, peaceful
and honest lives.
Just as whites — particularly the British and the Americans — have
been used by their Jewish overlords to conquer and enslave all the
colored peoples of the world, now blacks and other shades of skin
color — through Jewish control of television and other media — are
being used to enslave whites in a one-color coma which our Jewish
overlords will administer for their everlasting profit.
I’m not advocating so-called miscegenation, whites and blacks living
together, or interracial marriage by these remarks. I’m only
advocating that each person according to his talents rise as high as
he can to attain the things that the original U.S. Constitution
espoused — namely liberty and the pursuit of happiness, without some
evil third party limiting and manipulating the choices that should be
available to all, not just the Jewish financial elite and their
conscienceless stooges, who definitely come in all colors, just as the
truly beautiful people of the world come in all colors.
This is exactly why Edgar Steele and all his other white racist
brethren are exactly wrong to lump blacks and Jews together in their
hateful focus, and why they are really sabotaging their own objective
by doing so.
John Kaminski is a writer who used to live on the Gulf Coast of
Florida who may actually do so again one day, but it won’t be soon
enough. http://johnkaminski.info/
Twenty years ago Oprah Winfrey recorded a shocking interview of a 29 year old Jewish woman
who stated that her family, and many other Jewish families throughout the USA, routinely practiced
Satanic rituals in which incest, human sacrifice and cannibalism occur.
The interview on May 1, 1989 also revealed that these practices were a common occurrence since
the 18th century and that they were practiced by certain Jewish cults. The Jewish woman that made
these revelations was "incognito" during the interview and was identified only as "Rachel." Today she
has been identified as Vicki Polin and she now runs a center to rehabilitate Jewish children who have
been sexually victimized by Jewish Satanists.
============
| Richard, this is an interesting page talking about huge over-issuance of U.S. bonds. It also mentions the "household" sector as a buyer. This is something that most ignore. It mentions alternative world currencies. It has something to say about bankers; "Talk will be about nothing fixed by the financial syndicate in power. Let's hope by then, the Interpol arrest warrants for many US & UK bankers and some EU bankers are delivered. The warrants already exist and await timing to be served, seen by a friend of a contact. The Jackass proposes the arrest warrants be served at the next Davos Economic Summit." http://news.goldseek.com/GoldenJackass/1279742400.php Dan =============== |
Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KScmvZ-lVBo
Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WqOxfRepqU
Israelis dump toxic waste over vital water supply for the region
http://www.paltelegraph.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=6780:israelis-dump-toxic-waste-over-vital-water-supply-for-the-region&catid=103:peter-eyre&Itemid=123
Pentagon high security clearance workers tied to child pornography
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2010/07/23/pentagon_workers_tied_to_child_porn/
From: David Pidcock <david_pidcock@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 11:07:36 +0100
To: Ken Palmerton <kenpalm@live.co.uk>
Cc: david pidcock pidcock <governmentfraud@hotmail.co.uk>
Subject: HOUSE OF LORDS - DEFICIT SOLUTIONS ADDRESS - COMMITTEE ROOM 2A - DATE 20-07-2010
HOUSE OF LORDS 20-07-2010
NOVAE TABULAE & THE LOST BATTLES OF BRITAIN
My Lords, Ladies and Gentlemen, honoured guest and friends Salaam Alaikum, Shalom Alaiku, Peace Be With you, Namaste NeHow – and good evening
http://www.monetary.org/2010conference.html <http://www.monetary.org/2010conference.html>
I am informed that the Finance Ministry of a third world Kingdom was called by Doctor John Edwards, an official acting on behalf of the Debt Rescheduling Department of the IMF/ World Bank. On returning his call, some days later, the Finance Minister was informed that, unfortunately, Doctor Edwards had died and that someone else would be in touch after his funeral which was taking place as they spoke. An hour later, the Minister called again, asking to speak to Doctor Edwards, only to be informed again that Doctor Edwards had died and his replacement would be in touch ASAP, again, every hour for the next 4 hours the Minister called requesting to speak to Dr Edwards - by which time the exasperated official screamed down the phone demanding to know why he kept on phoning – when he had already been informed several times that Doctor Edwards was dead and now buried?! To which he replied – Well, we just love hearing about it!
For more, about “Stupendous Loans to Foreign Thrones” listen to Gilbert & Sullivan’s Utopia Limited
Which brings me to the reason why we are all gathered here today which is directly related to a meeting, in 1688, which took place 154 miles north of here at the old Cock & Pynott (Magpie) coaching house, in Old Whittington, a small village very close to Chesterfield – subsequently referred to as REVOLUTION HOUSE or CONSPIRACY COTTAGE. At that meeting were four conspirators responsible for bringing William of Orange to England on November the 5th in that same year, and with him the founding of the Bank of England and with that the founding of our National Debt – based on a loan of £1.2million (1.4 Million Gilders) to William, from the Wissel Bank, in Holland, now standing at some £1 trillion pounds with a cancerous deficit and annual interest payments running at close to £70 billion per annum – all of which, with the political will, and the backing of an informed public - could be resolved painlessly and speedily within 24-72 hours – as happened in August 1914 with the issue of £500,000,000 Treasury Notes in order to stop a run on the pound and the Bank of England following the outbreak of World War I – commonly referred to as Bradbury’s – named after John Bradbury who’s signature appears on them, and of whom, more later.
CAMPAIGN FOR MONETARY REFORM: 25/01/1993
Dear Prime Minister,
Whilst the Government's declared economic objectives include "keeping control of inflation and public spending" the following option appears to have been overlooked.
Government spending regularly outstrips its revenues and the deficiency is covered by the Public Sector Borrowing Requirement, the PSBR.
This adds up to a Public Sector Debt of £190,209,000,000 as at 31.03.1991. Source: Bank of England Quarterly Bulletin Nov.1992
The amount of interest payable on the Central Government Debt alone is £17,820,000,000 for 1991-1992
This amount exceeds the combined amounts allocated to Housing@ £7,729,000,000 and to Education @ £6,342,000,000 Source: The Financial Times 13.11.1992.
The Government does not finance its expenditure by printing money itself but licences banks to create credit i.e. to "print money" which the government borrows and has to pay interest on. This is the nub of the matter.
The option is for the banks to be credit brokers, rather than credit creators. Her Majesty's Government could then itself print any necessary increase in money supply thereby retaining to itself the seignorage and be free from paying interest charges. We look forward to receiving your comments. We are also circulating this letter as widely as possible in order to encourage discussion and seeking active support.
Yours sincerely.
C.M.R.
London. SW1W8TS.
Treasury Chambers
47a/2 est.vd/docs/hamon
Parliament Street.
SW1P 3AG
Miss Martine Hamon
Campaign for Monetary Reform
Eaton Terrace
London SW1W 8TS
22 February 1993
Dear Miss Hamon,
Thank you for your letter of 25 January to the Prime Minister (John Major), who has asked me to respond on his behalf.
The Government can and does finance itself to a small extent by the issue of non-interest bearing money: this is the aggregate known as M0, the stock of which is currently some £19.5 billion. The size of the stock of M0 is limited by the demand for this form of money.
If the Government tried to increase the amount of this type of finance beyond current demand for it, it would loose any control of interest rates in the economy, sterling would collapse, and inflation would take off.
The money that banks create is either interest bearing or renders some sort of service that costs banks money to provide.
I hope this is helpful
Yours sincerely
Anthony Nelson
This was yet another bogus, misleading answer, from an agent of Scare-City Finance – Nelson along with Norman Lamont – was also retained by N.M.Rothschild who were both embedded in H.M. Treasury Department, making sure that all challenges to their monopoly of lending money to all governments (Lib/Lab or Con) are headed off or nipped firmly in the bud.
The recent revelations about George Osborne and Peter Mandelson’s links to Nathaniel Rothschild demonstrate how and why after 300 years that “there is (still) limited demand for this form of [debt-free, interest and tax-free] money” adding strength to adage that: ‘no matter which party you vote for a man from Rothschild’s always gets in”. From this it is clear where the problem still resides and why there has been no permanent correction of the situation since records began.
"Can anything be more absurd than that a nation should apply to an individual (such as me) to maintain its credit, and with its credit, its existence as a state and its comfort as a people?” Lionel Rothschild on the subject of banking as quoted by Lord Beaconsfield (Benjamin D'israeli) in 1844 – the year of Peel’s Bank Charter Act.
It is clear from three centuries of written evidence and sworn testimony that once you start looking – in the right places - for the actual causes of this and earlier “recessions” you eventually find that these too were inevitable, predictable and avoidable – avoidable for reasons given by Vincent Cartwright Vickers in his excellent book ECONOMIC TRIBULATION which was published just prior to his death in 1939.
Vickers was a former director and deputy governor of the Bank of England between 1910 to 1919, following which he became President of the Economic Reform Club and Institute.
He also served as the Deputy Lieutenant of the City of London, and was a director of Vickers (Armaments) Limited, for twenty-two years, and then as a director of London Assurance from which he resigned in January 1939.
The evidence contained in his expose about how and why crashes occur and how the “City of London” and “Wall Street collude with one another in their creation and control of crises - for their own financial advantage” will come as a great surprise to those who always thought that the City of London was dedicated to clean commerce and five star financial rectitude – they must now think again.
BOGEY PUT OPTIONS – In spite of the Open – this is not a golfing term: They must certainly think again particularly in 2010/11 in light of the insurance investigation that must take place into the allegations that Halliburton officials admitted to knowing that their cementation job was likely to explode just when it did, according to Congressional testimony. And that Goldman Sachs (GS) officials, likewise, knew the rig was likely to explode when it did. They bet millions of dollars on this event only days before it happened! (Lloyd Blankfein, CEO of GS, directed 44% (4.6 million shares) of BP stock to be dumped three weeks before the explosion.
10) Not surprisingly, Transocean was merged into its current corporate state by Goldman-Sachs (a.k.a., "Government Sachs") in 2007.
11) David Sidwell, Risk Committee Chairman of UBS, the wealthiest Swiss bank (in the Rothschild League or alliance of so-called "competing" banks) and the world's largest wealth manager, also dumped BP stocks massively (i.e., 99% of the banks holdings, or 2.1 million shares,) as did Wachovia/Wells Fargo.
12) BP Oil CEO Tony Hayward sold 1/3 of his BP stock (223,288 shares) on March 17--a month before the explosion.
13) Just prior to 9/11, you may recall, Goldman Sachs did the same with airline stocks; and before the Gulf catastrophe, GS shorted mortgage company stocks, fuelling the real estate collapse in America.
Which brings me to call on evidence from Vincent Vickers: Vincent Vickers
was born on 16th January 1879, educated at Eton and Magdalen College, Oxford and died on November 3rd 1939, after a long illness. He was neither a “conspiracy theorist” nor a “loony lefty” and wrote authoritatively on the subject of monetary reform giving detailed, firsthand information, from within London’s Citadel of Banking and the Board Room of Vickers Industries – Britain’s pre-eminent manufacturer of armaments.
He introduces himself and lays out his credentials as follows: “I who write this, need no proof of the importance of the money system upon the very lives of the people and even to the future existence of the British people, so long as that system (of banking) fills the position which it now holds in our National Economy.
There are many thousands of well-educated men and women who, believe, endorse my views in their entirety. But even for the most zealous of money reformers to attempt to write upon so vast and momentous a subject as our monetary system and the management of our national finances, such attempts would appear doomed to failure unless it were supported by great financial experts whose names were a by-word in the country.
The next best alternative was that the author should himself be (QBPE) qualified by past experiences to express an opinion worth reading.
I therefore decided to take the unprecedented course of offering to my readers my own qualifications for putting down before the British people the very precarious condition of our monetary system as it exists in this country to-day (in the late 1930’s); that this our money system forms the most important part of our, economic system, and that the nation’s economic system forms part of our social system.
Ever since that day in 1926, when, not in arrogance but with humility, I felt it my duty to explain to the Governor of the Bank of England, Mr. Montagu Norman, that ‘henceforth I was going to fight him and the Gold Standard and the Bank of England policy until I died’ – and well I remember the words of his reply – (“The Dogs may bark but the caravan rolls on”) I have been an ardent money reformer.
Some few years afterwards I resigned my long directorship of Vickers Limited, since when I have spent much time and money in advocating the necessity for a reform of the monetary system. This has naturally brought me into contact with most sections of the community; with Communists and those with axes to grind, with malcontents and debtors, and, in addition, with men and women who are honest and disinterested patriots.
Not more than a tenth of my income is earned; the rest comes from investments in Banks, Bank of England stocks, American and Canadian securities, etc., and, mainly, from British industrial securities. I am therefore a ‘capitalist’ – one who has seen better times – and content to remain in my present financial position, but most unwilling to have my present standard of living further reduced.
I bear no ill-feeling towards my own class or any other class. I seek neither notoriety nor kudos. If someone can change my convictions I shall be only too ready to alter them. But in fifteen years nothing whatever has occurred to make me alter my views.
I still believe that the existing system is actively harmful to the state, creates poverty and unemployment, and is the root cause of war.
This personal Confession is merely to demonstrate that I have seen both sides of the picture. My opinions are based upon my own experience and knowledge. I am to-day in the unique position of being absolutely and entirely devoid of animosity and wholly disinterested. I feel myself no longer under any restrictions whatsoever, except to guard against doing harm to my country or giving offence to anyone.
In August 1914, when the public very foolishly thought that gold money was preferable to paper money and actually did demand gold for notes in considerable numbers, the Joint Stock Banks, like Brer Rabbit, lay low, and referred clients demanding gold to the Bank of England.
A run on the Bank of England followed; and when a paltry ten millions or so of golden sovereigns had been handed over the counter to the waiting crowds, in exchange for notes, the whole money system collapsed and there followed a double Bank Holiday and a moratorium; we went off the Gold Standard, and we were not even permitted to draw our own money from our own bank unless we could ‘satisfy’ the bank officials.
These ‘Bradbury’ Treasury Notes Solved the 1914 Run on The Bank of England and remained in circulation until 1928 without adding 1 penny to the National Debt.
Therefore the British public should be warned to regard with suspicion those who glibly talk of the advantages of gold convertibility; for it is a technical term which is grossly deceptive and misleading, and should carry about the same weight as the expression ‘sound finance’.
Every new invention, almost every phase in our progress, tends to produce a new nomenclature and new expressions. Some years ago we heard a great deal about ‘rationalisation of industry’, which in plain English meant ‘drastic cuts of wages and schemes - of amalgamation’ so that the price level of production should make the restored Gold Standard look respectable by still leaving a margin of profit for the producer….
It involves stout adherence to a customary ratio as between deposits and loans; it entails the principle of giving the lowest possible interest to the depositor and obtaining the highest possible return from the borrower; it favours, quite naturally, the rich, as against the poor borrower, and gives a preferred credit to saleable collateral in the form of Stock Exchange securities rather than, to any other security.
Similarly, Inflation and Deflation of the currency: We have been taught that Deflation which benefits the lenders of money (such as banks), is at times an unavoidable and necessary action in-order to preserve ‘sound finance’; whilst Inflation, benefiting the debtor (such as farmers, shopkeepers, and traders), entails action which is so disgraceful that it should never be mentioned in any respectable bank parlour.
When things changed, so that it had to be mentioned, the word ‘Reflation’ was coined – in order that orthodox economists should not have their delicate digestions upset by being made to eat their own words.
And ‘sound finance’ means nothing at all. It is merely a sort of bankers’ slogan adopted to disguise the injustices of a credit system; so that whatever the form of financial jugglery in question might be, it should, in the ears of the public, give the true ring of the genuine coin or, at any rate, have a comforting sound about it. Whether we like it or not, we must realise that the opinion of the City of London very often does not represent the opinion of the Country; that ‘sound finance’ is essentially an expression invented by the, banker and the dealers in credit
But, above all, it entails that there should exist at all times a demand for credit and currency which, normally, exceeds the supply; and it prescribes that there should be no reform and no legislation which might deprive the money industry of the natural and interested advantage of its monopoly or of its existing policy...
It permits and often encourages the taking of risks on the part of Industry and Commerce - but must avoid participation in that risk. It favours Deflation; but abhors Inflation even when it is re-christened Reflation; and, in an emergency, is always the first into the lifeboat, the first to leave the sinking ship, and the last to man the pumps.
It refuses to understand that money should be only a means of facilitating an equitable barter economy, and that there can be in reality no such thing as ‘sound finance’ so long as the country is unsound.
It fails to believe or to understand that the welfare of the country’s productive industries are of far greater national importance than the non-productive business of withholding, managing, and distributing a credit founded upon bank deposits which are the property of the bank’s customers and are based upon the unlikelihood that depositors will all withdraw their credits at the same time.
Under the immense advantages of the cheque system, hundreds of millions of pounds change hands every week between the bank’s individual customers. This cheque system is dependent upon the integrity of the people as a whole, and mainly constitutes a series of book-entries involving the movement of an extremely small percentage of actual currency.
Another of the great features of the present monetary system is that extraordinary economic propensity known as the Trade Cycle – a phenomenon which is regarded by the majority of our banking and finance experts, and many an orthodox economist of the old school, as an unavoidable and unaccountable economic reaction, comparable with the to-and-fro swing of a pendulum but having, nevertheless, no definite frequency of vibration; whereby a boom must inevitably be followed by a slump, and a slump be the precursor of a boom.
This ‘unaccountable phenomenon’ is of course a very objectionable feature; for it destroys the confidence of the optimist whilst at the same time confounding the pessimist - and therefore induces a get-rich-quick-or-the-tide-will-turn mentality which tends to convert the most sober trader into a quick-change artist, destroys permanent confidence, fills us with the spirit of gambling and speculation, and turns us all, so to speak, into Trade-cyclists.
The finance industry, the exchange bankers and the Stock Exchange grow rich upon the ups and downs of trade, and are largely dependent on variations and changes of the price levels of commodities.
But productive industry grows rich upon stable markets, a constant price level, and the Absence of violent economic fluctuations.
There are not a few in the City of London who have (legitimately) converted their annual incomes into annual repayments of capital, in order to escape the over-burden of British income-tax and super-tax. And yet it is the financiers of the City of London who are the great conscientious objectors to any ‘premature’ or ‘emergency’ reduction in this heavy burden of income-tax. How can one justly blame the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he budgets for the ultimate benefits of ‘sound finance’ rather than for the immediate necessities of producer (Capitalists) and consumer?
Under such general conditions the Communist is naturally content to abide his time; for he observes that the trend of affairs is slowly converging towards the very conditions which he most desires to see – a growing discontent with finance and the money system, an increasing weariness of the present form of Party government, and an increasing poverty and loss of influence among those who have so recently been the mainstay and backbone of the country. Unless the great producing industries of this country hold together, consult together, and support one another, there is no safe anchorage for the nation in the storm that is already on the horizon.
In a national emergency it is essential that the nation should be able to rely implicitly upon an adequate supply of credit and currency to meet all possible contingencies.
We cannot risk a repetition of the financial fiasco of August 1914, nor permit any unregulated flight of capital such as occurred at the time of the Munich crisis.
We do not want once more a sudden inflation of the currency, followed eventually by a still more ruinous policy of long-term deflation.
We know how we stand with regard to our Navy, Army, and Air Force, and that Fourth Arm, our Civil Defence.
In addition we have the assurance that in time of war the nation can rely upon an adequate food supply.
And yet, in spite of these defences, each one of which adds its quota to national confidence and spurs us to further efforts, we have heard little of encouragement concerning our money preparations for this emergency. The nation cannot be expected to have full confidence in the future whilst this vital Fifth Arm remains a more or less unknown quantity, obscured from the public eye and wrapped in mystery.
Cheap money and the exchange equalisation fund have well fulfilled their peacetime objectives, and the nation has thrown off forever the restrictions of the Gold Standard; but such steps are not in themselves enough.
The supply and issue of money and the creation of credit still remain almost entirely outside the control of the Government, and are still managed by Banking and Finance and by the Bank of England with its intimate associations with the Bank for International Settlements; whilst, until our actual declaration of war, Foreign Exchange speculators were permitted at all times to gamble with the nation’s credit, untrammelled by any sense of patriotic duty and thinking only of their own profit.
Although an Act of Parliament was designed to enable the police to give the citizens of this country greater protection against the bomb-dropping propaganda of the I.R.A., these misguided terrorists have not done half as much harm to the nation as that consortium of Foreign Exchange speculators who were left free to initiate a national financial crisis whenever a profitable opportunity presented itself.
Until these financial Gangsters are permanently exterminated there can be no complete confidence in the economic welfare of the country.
Just as the greatest advocates of a better agricultural policy for the nation are the agriculturists themselves, so the greatest opponents to a change of monetary policy are those who are themselves satisfied with the present order of things.
Although there have always been grounds for the assertion that the Bank of England considers the profits of its stockholders as coming second in importance to the interests of the nation, the money industry, in all its branches, is not a charitable organisation, but a non-productive industry working for profit.
That part of our invisible exports which is profit to ‘the money market of the world’ is obviously a national advantage of great importance. But in so far as this profit may accrue to the City of London at the expense of the nation, by promoting the importation of goods which can be better produced at home, so this profit becomes of infinitely less value than profit derived from home productive industries which carries, in the cost of production, 70 per cent to 80 per cent of wages.
The moment we realise that, under the existing system, the main inducement to work is one of profit, it follows that the practices and rules and regulations governing the money industry must be mainly based upon its controllers’ own desire for their own profit. It is therefore important to understand where the interests of banking and finance clash with those of the producer (of real wealth) and consumer – that is, the community.
Three great deterrents to progress in productive industry are:
1.Indebtedness and the fear of indebtedness.
2.Lack of capital.
3.Lack of adequate purchasing power in the markets.
Therefore the nation, the community, requires: -
1. Freedom from indebtedness where that hinders trade;
2. Easy credit facilities at low rates of interest with adequate and just terms as to time of repayment;
3. And an ample purchasing power available to the public.
Vincent Cartwright Vickers - October 1939.
Our next witness is Robert Boothby, in his book – The New Economy[1] <http://sn112w.snt112.mail.live.com/mail/RteFrame_15.1.3059.0405.html?pf=pf#_ftn1> (1943) writing of the period between the wars, condemned the insistence by the authorities for a policy of deflation, which forced firms into a policy of restriction, which, in turn, was adopted by the trade unions. This inevitably led not only to a vast reduction in the production of real wealth, but, also, to the deliberate destruction of raw materials. As Boothby, later Lord Boothby, observed:
"Not scarcity but glut became the bogey. Therefore, by 1939, the strength of the capitalist system was undermined...From the moment the profit motive took the form of restriction, the system was doomed. For all this the bankers - and especially the Bank of England - were greatly responsible".
Vincent Vickers was, as Boothby declared, "a notable exception" and quotes Vincent Vickers condemnation of what he saw as disastrous for the nation.
"We have to remember that the value, that is to say the purchasing-power of money, and consequently the price of goods, can be and has been, varied intentionally and deliberately not by the will or action of the State, but by those individuals who themselves manage and control the money, though they constantly aver that they act fair and on behalf of the community".
As Mr Swan pointed out elsewhere in The Other Road To Serfdom, Robert Boothby's 1943 book - The New Economy, stands today, in our view, as one of the most scathing indictments of that which passed between the wars and continues to pass for sound economic and monetary policy today.
In his first section of his book - Retrospective, Boothby describes the political and economic events from the Great War to the commencement of the Second World War and says - "It was the bankers who, in order to maintain the exchange value of their money, plunged this country and ultimately the whole world into the miseries of depression and unemployment, who denied a subsistence living to those (who through no wish of their own) were out of work, who burned wheat, cotton, coffee and cocoa rather than 'sell at a loss' - while millions of human beings suffered from want, and often starvation, in idleness”.
"To every out-worn economic shibboleth of the 19th.century, they stuck like glue. Finally - with the aid of six million German unemployed - they produced Hitler. Both they, and the system to which they clung, stand condemned".
Therefore, in the light of Boothby's assessment of that which passed as "sound economics", I would urge my reader to make every effort to read, and judge for themselves as to whether history is repeating itself. Robert Boothby was one of the small group of members of Parliament, which included P.C.Loftus, to whom this book is dedicated, who saw the damage that the policy of inflation would bring that was being forced upon the nation in the early 1930's. As Boothby said, "It was a terrible thing to have to watch this country savaging herself, year after year, in the grip of an economic theory and system which had ceased to have any validity". As to those who tried to alert the public, "for their efforts they were dismissed as monetary cranks."
NOTE: But Cranks are mechanical devices which cause revolutions to take place.
Lord Boothby to. The Editor of The Times.
20/5/1968.
Sir, -- Your admirable leading article (Business News, May 17) puts Lord Cromer properly in his place. By demanding, in Stockholm, that the control of monetary and financial policy should be taken out of the hands of politicians and confided to those of the Central Bankers he taken us back to the grim world of Lords Cunliffe and Norman.
We now have on record the pregnant questionnaire addressed to the Treasury and the Bank of England by Churchill when he became Chancellor of the Exchequer on the advisability or otherwise, of our return to the gold standard at the pre-war parity of exchange in 1925; and the puerile replies of Norman and Sir Otto Niemeyer. Norman and Niemeyer won the battle. With what result? A General Strike in 1926, followed by a prolonged and disastrous coal stoppage; and massive unemployment for the next 15 years.
In February, 1932 Churchill was moved to write to me from New York: "I have gone the whole hog against gold. To hell with it! It has been used as a vile trap to destroy us ....Surely it will become a public necessity to get rid of Montagu Norman. No man has ever stultified as he has in his 14 years' policy"
Alas, it was too late. Norman continued to encourage the City to pour money into German municipal bonds (subsequently repudiated by Hitler and his [Norman's] pal Schacht) money, which was denied to British Industry the purpose of economic growth, which Lord Cromer now derides "as completely discredited"
At the same time the virus of deflation continued to be assiduously spread by the Central Bankers of New York, London and Berlin. (until they were smashed by Roosevelt in summer of 1932)
Bruning fell a willing victim to it under the deplorable influence the Dr. Sprague, emissary of the Bank of England; and the result was six million unemployed in Germany upon whose back Hitler climbed to power.
We want no more of this. We want no new "European Monetary Board" to follow monetary and financial policies in the teeth of governments.
Nor do we want "free capital movements". What we need is the purposeful direction of capital investment, here and overseas.
Fortunately…Lord Cromer, and the Central Bankers are at long last learning how to cooperate with each other, and the governments to which, in the final analysis, they owe allegiance, not disloyalty. (Hopefully) They are beginning to discover their proper role in the monetary system of the modern world, which is now gradually emerging. And they had better stick to it because, when all is said and done they were primarily responsible for the Second World War.
Your obedient servant,
BOOTHBY. House of Lords
=================
The following is an extract from my corespondence with Eddie George in 1999
To: Mr. E.A.V. George.
The Governor
Bank of England,
London EC2R 8AH June 27th 1999
Dear Mr. George,
Thank you very much for your letter of May the 25th, in response to my correspondence of May 10th, which I read with considerable interest and appreciation. Seeing that the historical problems referred to still remain unresolved, I would like to open with a reminder from your opening address to the assembled guests attending the Churchill Memorial Lecture at the Foundation J.P. Prescatore, in Luxembourg, on February 21st 1995:
“Prime Minister, Ministers, Your Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen. Sir Winston Churchill - whose memory we celebrate this evening - was a great Englishman and a great European…It is a very great honour to have been invited to deliver this 21st Churchill Memorial Lecture to such a distinguished audience here in Luxembourg…I am delighted to be here - delighted but also, frankly, somewhat nervous. I am nervous because deep in the consciousness of the Bank of England is an awareness that it was one of my predecessors as Governor, Montagu Norman, who, in 1925, advised Winston Churchill to return to the gold standard. That was - I hasten to point out - well before I was born…But our experience of fixing sterling’s exchange rate parity, in the conditions of that time, was deeply unfortunate. And shortly before we were forced off gold again in 1931 Winston Churchill wrote to Edward Marsh, his Private Secretary: “Everybody I meet seems vaguely alarmed that something terrible is going to happen financially. I hope we shall hang the Governor of the Bank of England if it does. I will certainly turn King’s Evidence against him!”
A year later, in Churchill’s Budget Proposal (or “HIDEOUS OPPRESSION” speech) to the House of Commons, he disclosed the full extent of that “deeply unfortunate” but equally avoidable state of affairs. Which he correctly blamed on Britain’s convoluted monetary system - which still remains in force - and for uncritically accepting the advice of people like Montagu Norman, Treasury experts, and other comptrollers and representatives of private central banks like Bernard Baruch in the United States who had a vested interest in [2] <http://sn112w.snt112.mail.live.com/mail/RteFrame_15.1.3059.0405.html?pf=pf#_ftn2> inter-est and in seeing the discredited gold standard restored. Churchill lamented:
“When I was moved by many arguments and forces in 1925 to return to the gold standard I was assured by the highest experts, and our experts are men of great ability and of indisputable integrity and sincerity…that we were anchoring ourselves to reality and stability; and I accepted their advice. I take for myself and my colleagues of other days whatever degree of blame and burden there may be for having accepted their advice. But what has happened? We have had no reality, no stability. The price of gold has risen since then by 70 per cent. That is as if a 12-inch foot rule had suddenly been - stretched to 19 or 20 inches, as if the pound avoirdupois had suddenly become 23 or 24 ounces instead of - how much is it? – 16? Look at what this has meant to everybody who has been compelled to execute their contracts on this irrationally enhanced scale. Look at the gross unfairness of such distortions to all producers of new wealth, and to all that labour and science enterprise can give us. Look at the enormously increased volume of commodities which have to be created in order to pay off the same mortgage debt or loan. Minor fluctuations might well be ignored, but I say quite seriously that this monetary convolution has now reached (such) a pitch where I am convinced that the producers of new wealth will not tolerate indefinitely so hideous an oppression…” (Source. HANSARD Vol. 264, Date 21ST of April 1932).
Unfortunately, F.G. Hawtry did not figure among the Treasury officials advising Churchill in 1925; if he were his words would seem to have fallen on stony ground. Hawtry, an Assistant Secretary to the Treasury admits where these problems reside: "Banks” he said “create money and trade depression arises from faults in the banking system in the discharge of that vital function."
I will return to Montagu Norman’s, stultifying reign in due course. But, before proceeding any further, I would like to reiterate that we, as individuals, and as a group dedicated to monetary reform, are not against banks or banking, for if we did not have them we would need to invent something the same or very similar. Neither are we against lending, borrowing or earning healthy legitimate profits. Our campaign is against inter-est and the other ‘penalties’ associated with private, unregulated, FIAT credit, which, like the “notes and coins” you make mention of, similarly “represents a claim on real goods and services.” Most, if not all our criticisms of the Bank of England relate to events, which were set in train long before your term in office and long before either you or I were born. Therefore, nothing in this document is either a direct or indirect personal criticism of you. Our criticisms are of the rules (or lack of rules) under which the Bank of England and the rest of the City are allowed to operate. First and foremost among our concerns are the destructive defects and consequences with the existing monetary system, described by Winston Churchill and F.G.Hawtrey.
In response to the first of your points, where you say: “…war appears to have been a feature of human existence in all places and at virtually all times in history, since well before the modern nation state or economic trading systems came into being.” I would respectfully suggest that this is because every nation or civilisation, in its own particular time, imagines itself to be either “modern” or “unique” and, as such, above and beyond the need to comply with such seemingly “old-fashioned” and ‘outmoded’ prohibitions as the ones forbidding adultery, fraud, inter-est and compound inter-est or, to use its proper name - usury. Prohibitions which, when viewed dispassionately and objectively, are clearly based on wisdom and wide experience and which, prior to Calvin, periodically helped to protect people - both rich and poor - from anarchy, desolation, revolution, oppression, overwhelming debt, rotting boroughs and their inhabitants and the other less obvious, but equally destructive, consequences of inter-est, with an emphasis on the periodically.
War, as the hard impartial evidence clearly shows, is not merely a consequence but an inevitable, unremitting consequence, of permitting a defective, stultifying monetary system to exert total power over all economic activities. One which permits an unaccountable, private monopoly, the unlimited, unregulated power to “monetise the credit of a creditworthy nation and hand it back as a debt plus inter-est”.
Bank of England…/p3
Most people, however, who are in the know (and those who should be) refuse to admit let alone consider the possible existence of this ruinous cabal fearing that if brought to the public’s attention it would bring about what Keynes referred to as: “The euthanasia of the rentier, and consequently, the euthanasia of the cumulative oppressive power of the capitalist to exploit the scarcity value of capital”
The religious argument has it that not only is the charging of inter-est a declaration of war against God and His Commandments, but that it constitutes a physical act of war against the individuals, governments and communities being charged therewith. Lord Stamp a former director of the Bank of England said as much when he admitted that the banking systems of today’s “modern nation” are unjust and oppressive. “Banking,” he said, “was conceived in iniquity and born in sin. Bankers own the earth, take it away from them, but leave them with the power to create money, and with a flick of a pen they will create enough to buy it all back again…(therefore) if you wish to remain the slaves of bankers and continue to pay for the cost of your own slavery then allow bankers to continue to create money and control credit.”
In the United States, Stuart Chase, identified similar causes for the problems facing equally “modern” 1930’s America. Conditions, which are exactly the same as the problems, we are facing in 1999. He stated, in The New York Nation, in August 1933:
“The creation of money, (and) the allotment of purchasing power, is a social function of the first importance, and should be restored to the Federal Government, in whose hands the Constitution placed it. It is forever impossible for the private Banker, working for private ends, adequately to finance the consumer…The consumer therefore, cannot adequately consume until the private Banker, as the chief executive of the nation’s credit, is lifted gently but firmly out of the picture. It is unfortunate that Mr. Roosevelt did not seize the unparalleled opportunity to lift him out, to the applause of a grateful nation, on March 4th last.”
World War II was the result of Roosevelt not following his advice. The riots and violence in the City of London during last weeks “Carnival Against Capitalism” (1999), are just the old recurring symptoms of the unnecessary hardship people are expected to endure for no good economic or moral reason. The tip of a growing iceberg of people who instinctively know there is something wrong and who are incensed at seeing ‘poverty amid plenty,’ but who, for the most part, are kept in ignorance about its real causes and the origins of their own personal troubles and who, unfortunately as such, are more likely to throw Kapital’s legitimate baby out with the proverbial bath-water rather than to draw the correct conclusion that not all “Capitalism” is at fault only the current, dominant, rentier variety.
Macaulay, in his ‘History of England’ reported similar events to those in the London Carnival: He wrote: “But when the great instrument of exchange became thoroughly deranged, all trade, all industry, were smitten as with a palsey. The evil was felt daily and hourly in almost every place and by almost every class, in the dairy and on the threshing floor, by the anvil and by the loom, on the billows of the ocean and in the depths of the mine. Nothing could be purchased without a dispute. Over every counter there was wrangling from morning to night.
Bank of England…/p4
The workman and his employer had a quarrel as regularly as Saturday came round - On a fair day or a market day the clamours, the reproaches, the taunts, the curses, were incessant; and it was well if no booth were overturned and no head broken.”
If this is the Final Battle of Britain – which I believe it is - then it is appropriate that we confirm who the culprits are who have conned us into this appalling situation – for – to paraphrase Churchill - never in the field of human con-tricks has so much been owed by so many to so few – or Lord Myners, admitting that Bischoff – was not their finest hour.
Date: 20-07-2010
David (Daud Musa) Pidcock
BCR 103.1fm & Global Vision 2000
david_pidcock@hotmail.com <mailto:david_pidcock@hotmail.com>
0771-5678955
[1] <http://sn112w.snt112.mail.live.com/mail/RteFrame_15.1.3059.0405.html?pf=pf#_ftnref1> The New Economy. Published by Secker & Warburg in 1943.
[2] <http://sn112w.snt112.mail.live.com/mail/RteFrame_15.1.3059.0405.html?pf=pf#_ftnref2> From ‘A History of Money – >From AD 800. By John F. Chown. Routledge. New Fetter Lane EC4.
============
White House Backs Bill to Collect Employee Pay Information from Businesses
Thursday, July 22, 2010
By Penny Starr, Senior Staff Writer
Vice President Joe Biden on Tuesday said that Congress should pass the Paycheck Fairness Act, which amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964, including calling for the collection of data by the federal government about how much Americans workers are paid. (CNSNews.com/Penny Starr)
(CNSNews.com) – The Obama administration is backing legislation that includes regulations requiring U.S. businesses to provide to the government data about employee pay as it relates to the sex, race and national origin of employees.
In an orchestrated effort that included a statement by President Barack Obama and an event at the White House featuring Vice President Joe Biden, Attorney General Eric Holder and Labor Secretary Hilda Solis, the president and his cabinet endorsed the Paycheck Fairness Act.
The House approved the act in 2009, but the Senate did not approve it. In the 111th Congress, both the House and the Senate have offered legislation that covers a wide range of workplace requirements and regulations, including training girls and women to become better at negotiating pay and benefits, and the establishment of a data base of U.S. workers’ pay in both the public and private sector.
At the White House on Tuesday, Biden was the keynote speaker at a Middle Class Task Force event where he told invited guests that the Obama administration is “on the right side of history” by passing legislation to ensure women are paid the same as their male counterparts.
“Women make up nearly half of all workers on U.S. payrolls, and two-thirds of families with children are headed either by two working parents or by a single parent who works,” Biden said.
“Yet, the workplace has, for the most part, not changed to reflect these realities – and it must. Closing the gender pay gap, helping parents keep their jobs while balancing family responsibilities, and increasing workplace flexibility – these are not only women’s issues, they are issues of middle class economic security,” he said.
Biden said Congress should pass the bill, which includes language requiring employers to provide information about employee pay. In Section 8 of the bill, entitled Collection of Pay Information by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, it calls for an amendment to Section 709 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964:
"(f)(1) Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this subsection, the Commission shall--
"(A) complete a survey of the data that is currently available to the Federal Government relating to employee pay information for use in the enforcement of Federal laws prohibiting pay discrimination and, in consultation with other relevant Federal agencies, identify additional data collections that will enhance the enforcement of such laws; and
"(B) based on the results of the survey and consultations under subparagraph (A), issue regulations to provide for the collection of pay information data from employers as described by the sex, race, and national origin of employees."
Attorney General Eric Holder was at the White House event with Biden and pledged to crack down on American businesses that discriminate against employees based on sex, race or country of origin. (CNSNews.com/Penny Starr)
In a White House-issued press release, the “enhancement of enforcement” is described as “a pledge by the Department of Justice and other enforcement agencies will coordinate and collaborate through investigations, litigation, policy guidance, data analysis, and public education efforts to make meaningful progress in closing the wage gap,” the press release stated.
“Already, the Justice Department, in conjunction with the EEOC and four of its district offices, has launched a robust and intensive pilot program to coordinate the investigation and litigation of charges against state and local government employers,” it added.
But critics charge that the Paycheck Fairness Act will be harmful to small businesses and the economy. The National Association of Manufacturers issued a statement about the bill in April.
“The Paycheck Fairness Act, which purports to prevent instances of illegal gender-based discrimination, could outlaw many legitimate practices employers use to set employee pay rates, even where there is no evidence of intentional discrimination and employers act with reasonable belief that their pay policies are lawful,” the statement said.
“Manufacturers strongly oppose unlawful discrimination in any form, but the Paycheck Fairness Act would impose unparalleled government control over how employees are paid, among even the nation’s smallest businesses,” it added.
“It would drastically alter the Equal Pay Act to allow unprecedented penalties of unlimited punitive and compensatory damages in cases of alleged discrimination,” the statement said.
James Sherk, Bradley Fellow in Labor Policy in the Center for Data Analysis at conservative The Heritage Foundation, said that the law would be a boon to trial lawyers seeking damages from employers for their clients and would allow the courts to “micro-manage” American businesses.
In a statement issued on Tuesday, Obama said it was discrimination in the workplace that is harming the economy and American families.
“In America today, women make up half of the workforce, and two-thirds of American families with children rely on a woman's wages as a significant portion of their families' income,” the statement said.
“Yet, even in 2010, women make only 77 cents for every dollar that men earn. The gap is even more significant for working women of color, and it affects women across all education levels,” the statement said.
“As Vice President Biden and the Middle Class Task Force will discuss today, this is not just a question of fairness for hard-working women. Paycheck discrimination hurts families who lose out on badly needed income. And with so many families depending on women's wages, it hurts the American economy as a whole. In difficult economic times like these, we simply cannot afford this discriminatory burden.”
"Ye shall know the Truth, And the Truth shall make you angry!" —Aldous Huxley
"It is not power that corrupts but fear. The fear of losing power corrupts those who wield it, and fear of the scourge of power corrupts those who are subject to it."-- Aung San Suu Kyi
DOING ISRAEL'S Supremacist Colonial BIDDING like the obedient Servant that blackmailed Europe is.
In the West, whenever there has been a Financial Chaos, Depression, recession whatever, WARS always Follow which of course makes Trillions for the Corporatocracy Warmongering Mafia- occurred after WW1,WW2 and history once again repeating itself in order to DISTRACT the People from the Financial Hell Hole their Governments have put them in deliberately as it is all a scam, a a Chessboard GAME the Corporate Elite enjoy playing every 2-3 decades, with you as their Pawns, to bankrupt people, steal their personal wealth and destroy the Middle Classes and impoverish the World's Communities with the exception of the 2-3% Elite that is who seek world domination!
--
Palash Biswas
Pl Read:
http://nandigramunited-banga.blogspot.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment