Hitler Youth Speech
Hitler Nuremberg Speech
Obama Youth Ball Speech
nuermburg:
Obama on Election Night
First Off, Hitler speaks to the youth saying they know no class distinction. The youth know no religion. They are obedient, peace loving and courageous. Germany follows the youth. Just as Obama says the new generation spoke against the apathy of the old generation. Obama says the American youth want peace, end hunger, and provide public health.
In the Nuremberg speech Hitler speaks against those who sin against the party, and how they hurt themselves. Just as Obama, in his victory speech said division will halt progress. Obama believes partisanship is "immature" and we all share the same goal. Obama also doesn't want Republicans listening to Rush Limbaugh and Lou Dobbs.
Everyone in America is hopelessly trusting of Obama, just as the Germans hopelessly trusted Hitler. Both want the same for everyone--Main Street cannot suffer while Wall Street prospers--this school of thought will destroy capitalism. Obama and Hitler both felt everyone needs a piece of the American/German Dream. This way of thinking makes every citizen dependent on the government for jobs, health care, and energy.
The government that feeds you cannot free you. This is America!! If you want a piece of the American pie--BAKE MORE PIE. DO NOT LOOK TO THE GOVERNMENT FOR HELP, GOVERNMENT REGULATES BUSINESSES OUT OF BUSINESS. Take for example life insurance. Life insurance costs about 1-5 dollars a month for 10,000 dollars worth of coverage, and is not regulated by the government. Yet, government regulated health insurance costs anywhere between 60 and 100 dollars a month for bullcrap coverage.
Just look at education. In 1985, America was #1 in the world, not we're down to #10. The Department of Education ruined the American education system with mandated curriculums. It has destroyed the American family. American families no longer have a choice in how/where their kids get educated. They must pass these tests, as mandated by the government, even if the kids are home schooled.
Another aspect of family destroying government: marriage and divorce. Marriage should be kept out of the government, since marriage is a religious union, the government should not make it a legal requirement. However, the law is written by lawyers, and divorce lawyers make a lot of money dissolving legal marriages. Not to mention, in the 1940s, women had a gender role change, by getting involved in the workforce as a result of World War II. Men are conditioned to be "bread winners" and when that role is challenged by women working, divorce increases. Plus, there are so many support programs for divorce, it has become socially acceptable to divorce.
Why do women work? TO PAY THE BILLS. In America, it is IMPOSSIBLE to survive on one income, when only 50 years ago, a family could survive on one income. This is because 50 years ago, the price of housing, electricity, taxes, etc. were less, because there was less inflation. Inflation adds to the demise of the family, by removing the woman from the household, and threatening the traditional man's role in the family.
What we are experiencing in America, is price propping. The "stimulus" packages, and the 700 billion dollar bailout of Wall Street, and all the other bailouts, are doing nothing but price fixing housing, food, and energy. The free market dictates that in a recession, the prices FALL, and with a decrease in demand for housing, food, and energy, prices FALL. However, bailing out industry, allows the prices to remain fixed at inflated rates, against free market (capitalism) rules. While millions of Americans are now losing their jobs, the prices of goods they want, will remain high, thanks to the government.
Big business and banks love government funding. Just look at energy. Why the hell does the Federal Government have to spend billions on alternative energy, when Exon, Shell, and Duke Energy could spend their own money? Don't you think these companies would WANT to find other fuels? Guess not, especially when the government is going to foot the bill, that means these big oil and electric companies get to keep more of their profits, and use taxpayer money to develop alternative energy.
The government wants to destroy every bit of individualism we have. From education, to business, to families. You will have to go to the government for help. Instead of relying on yourself. Who knows best? You or the government?
The Germans believed Hitler knew best. Just as we Americans feel Obama knows best. CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN--YES WE CAN!!! The Obama supporters chant, like a bunch of sheep being led to the slaughter house. Go ahead, give Obama and the government all the power. We will live to regret this, just as the Germans did.
World War III here we come! Bolivia, Columbia, Cuba, Guatemala, Ecuador, and Venezuela are teaming up with the Russians, and kicking US officials out of their countries. NOW THAT'S CHANGE TO BELIEVE IN!
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Economic Recovery Bill = Bailout for All
So I've taken the time the read thru some of the awesomely ridiculous expenditures of the Economic Recovery Bill of 2009. Everyone, except those facing foreclosure, will receive money.
There is money allocated for farmers who are victims of disasters, money for reduced lunch programs at schools, and money to develop broadband internet in rural areas. Lots of money for "aquaculture" (fish farming), because these farmers didn't make a profit in 2007 and 2008, therefore this "stimulus" bill will give them money.
300 million will go to the Federal Communications Commission to "create a national broadband service, or other FCC responsibility".
The Indians only receive 5,000 for food programs. While 90 million will go to educate the poor, minorities on the national digital conversion. (For those not aware America is getting rid of analog service and converting to digital).
180 million for Science research buildings and services. 230 million for National Oceanic Research.
The kicker: 225 million to fight violence against women, 50 million of which will be used for "transitional housing" for women victims of domestic violence, stalking, and sexual assault.
2 BILLION will be used for the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Association Grant which
has the following authorized Purpose Areas:
Law enforcement programs
Prosecution and court programs
Prevention and education programs
Corrections and community corrections programs
Drug treatment programs
Planning, evaluation, and technology improvement programs
Many critics of this Grant state the "stimulus" money will be used to racially profile drug offenders, and lead to more marijuana and other low-level drug arrests. Not to mention, Obama believes that America cannot continue to rely on the military and law enforcement for security, he supports a civilian national security force, just as strong and funded as the military. More Gestapo: a secret police force employing underhanded and terrorist methods against those suspected of disloyalty.
Only 40 million was given to law enforcement on the southern border w/Mexico to combat narcotics--but 2 BILLION was given to Edward Byrne?? 10 million was given to increase Alcohol Tobacco and Firearm (ATF) salaries.
1 BILLION was given to Community Oriented Policing (COPS). This program is nothing but neighborhood spying. Members of the community turn suspected "criminals" in to the police, and might even become police themselves. Sounds like the making of the Gestapo to me.
1,474,525,000 went to the Army to improve facilities--additionally a lot of money went to the Navy, Marines, Air Force and Reserves for the same "modernization" of buildings goal. An additional 75 million went to each branch of the Armed Forces to research, develop, test, and evaluate weapons...and another 75 million for "defense wide" research and development. That's a lot of dough for weapons!!
100 million was given to the Army to reprogram "formerly utilized sites remedial action program." This program "cleans up" radiation and other damage caused by nuclear weapons testing during the Cold War. The Cold War ended in 1989, this program already has an operating budget of 2 BILLION a year--why does it need 100 million more? I think it's to create concentration camps on former military bases, or maybe the government is telling the truth....haha. Especially when an added 390 million of this "stimulus" money is going to Uranium Decomposition and Decommission, seems like they are spending extra money to do the same thing. Not to mention 5,127,000,000 has been awarded for Defense Environmental Cleanup in Western areas of the country--again more money for the same thing.
Don't believe me that martial law/concentration camps could very well be underway in America? Take a look at these MTV Think commercials:
16.8 BILLION will go to states Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. 2 BILLION of this money will go to states to award grants to American lithium battery manufacturers and software designers, however, if no American owned company exists, the Department of Energy may use the money to recruit American workers.
4.5 BILLION will be used for Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, which will mainly pay for security, research, and development.
6 BILLION will used for better fuel economy cars.
The Bonneville Power Administration Borrowing Authority will get 3,250,000,000 more federal money under the Federal Columbia River Transmission Act. This money can remain outstanding at ANY TIME. The Federal Columbia River Transmission Act of 1974 is a Federal law that provided for operation, maintenance, and continued construction of the Federal transmission system in the Pacific Northwest by using revenues from the Federal Columbia River Power System; formed the Federal Columbia River Transmission System; and made Bonneville Power Administration responsible for the power system and the transmission system. Translation: FEDERAL APPROVED MONOPOLY OF POWER!!
Additionally, the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) may borrow up to 3,250,000,000 from the Treasury, but no more than 1,750,000,000 at one time to upgrade and deliver renewable energy. Other companies may participate in the financing, construction, and OWNERSHIP projects financed with this money. The sweetest part of this deal, is "if at the end of the useful life of a project financed under this bill, the REMAINING BALANCE owed to the Treasury shall be FORGIVEN." This includes UNCONSTRUCTED projects. The WAPA will tell the Treasury the amounts to be forgiven. How damn sweet is this? This is the equivalent of someone financing the construction of a building with a bank, telling the bank "I only used this building for 5 years, so you have to forgive the remaining balance"--What the hell?? Not to mention, WE THE TAXPAYERS ARE GETTING SCREWED!! WE WON'T SEE GET THIS MONEY BACK!! Why doesn't the Treasury have the authority under this "stimulus" package to dictate how much of TAXPAYER money is to be forgiven? I'll tell you why, because under this bill other businesses HAVE TO BE SOLICITED...MEANING BIG CORPORATIONS CAN PROFIT OFF OF THE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT OF THIS TAXPAYER FUNDED RESEARCH, YET THE TAXPAYERS GET STUCK WITH THE BILL.
However, the average taxpayer can get up to 6,500 back from the government for making their home energy efficient, such as insulating your attic.
As if the Federal government hasn't already destroyed enough of Native American traditions, this stimulus bill provides another avenue to force Natives to comply with the American way of life: 8 million dollars of "stimulus" money has been allocated to fund LENDING BANKS for Native Americans. This means, the Natives will get a federally funded taste of consumerism...and will be enticed to borrow money, at interest, from banks, and the banks get more money!! Another 450 million will go toward Indian schools, 40 million for Indian Housing, and an extra 10 million for Indian loans. Not to mention an extra 85 million for Indian health care--which will be used to build hospitals.
OH YES--and 300 million of "stimulus" money will go to buy better fuel economy federal cars. That means we the taxpayers are buying a brand new fleet of Federal cars.
Another great rip-off of this "stimulus": the Small Business Destruction. The Small Business Administration grants 504 loans that provides growing businesses with long-term, fixed-rate financing for major fixed assets, such as land and buildings. Under this "stimulus" bill, businesses can apply for more loans, in addition to 504 loans, but the 504 loan MUST be sold to third party investors--that means small businesses will lose ownership of their buildings and land. Great!
200 million will build a Department of Homeland Security Headquarters. 160 million will be used for salaries. 100 million will be for border security technology. 420 million for port security. 20 million for improved communication equipment.
The only part of the "stimulus" that will create jobs:
Only 500 million will train adults to work. Yet, 1.2 BILLION will fund youth activities, like summer camps, on top of 50 million for YouthBuild activities. YouthBuilds helps low income, minorities, ages 16-24 get their GED and build housing for their communities. This program is vastly funded by non-profit organizations: so why does the government want to fund this? For what purpose? Nazi Youth equivalent. Do you research! Hitler wanted the German youth to provide "national" security as well. This is absurd!
1.25 BILLION will help dislocated workers. 750 million will fund workers who want to work in energy efficiency and renewable energy sectors (this is on top of money already allocated to Department of Energy to recruit American workers).
Last, but not least, 120 million for community service employment for Older Americans. Guess you old folks can't retire, you must get employment!!
There is nothing economically stimulating in this bill. We the American people just got royally screwed by Obama.
O One
B Big
A Ass
M Mistake
A America
There is money allocated for farmers who are victims of disasters, money for reduced lunch programs at schools, and money to develop broadband internet in rural areas. Lots of money for "aquaculture" (fish farming), because these farmers didn't make a profit in 2007 and 2008, therefore this "stimulus" bill will give them money.
300 million will go to the Federal Communications Commission to "create a national broadband service, or other FCC responsibility".
The Indians only receive 5,000 for food programs. While 90 million will go to educate the poor, minorities on the national digital conversion. (For those not aware America is getting rid of analog service and converting to digital).
180 million for Science research buildings and services. 230 million for National Oceanic Research.
The kicker: 225 million to fight violence against women, 50 million of which will be used for "transitional housing" for women victims of domestic violence, stalking, and sexual assault.
2 BILLION will be used for the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Association Grant which
has the following authorized Purpose Areas:
Law enforcement programs
Prosecution and court programs
Prevention and education programs
Corrections and community corrections programs
Drug treatment programs
Planning, evaluation, and technology improvement programs
Many critics of this Grant state the "stimulus" money will be used to racially profile drug offenders, and lead to more marijuana and other low-level drug arrests. Not to mention, Obama believes that America cannot continue to rely on the military and law enforcement for security, he supports a civilian national security force, just as strong and funded as the military. More Gestapo: a secret police force employing underhanded and terrorist methods against those suspected of disloyalty.
Only 40 million was given to law enforcement on the southern border w/Mexico to combat narcotics--but 2 BILLION was given to Edward Byrne?? 10 million was given to increase Alcohol Tobacco and Firearm (ATF) salaries.
1 BILLION was given to Community Oriented Policing (COPS). This program is nothing but neighborhood spying. Members of the community turn suspected "criminals" in to the police, and might even become police themselves. Sounds like the making of the Gestapo to me.
1,474,525,000 went to the Army to improve facilities--additionally a lot of money went to the Navy, Marines, Air Force and Reserves for the same "modernization" of buildings goal. An additional 75 million went to each branch of the Armed Forces to research, develop, test, and evaluate weapons...and another 75 million for "defense wide" research and development. That's a lot of dough for weapons!!
100 million was given to the Army to reprogram "formerly utilized sites remedial action program." This program "cleans up" radiation and other damage caused by nuclear weapons testing during the Cold War. The Cold War ended in 1989, this program already has an operating budget of 2 BILLION a year--why does it need 100 million more? I think it's to create concentration camps on former military bases, or maybe the government is telling the truth....haha. Especially when an added 390 million of this "stimulus" money is going to Uranium Decomposition and Decommission, seems like they are spending extra money to do the same thing. Not to mention 5,127,000,000 has been awarded for Defense Environmental Cleanup in Western areas of the country--again more money for the same thing.
Don't believe me that martial law/concentration camps could very well be underway in America? Take a look at these MTV Think commercials:
16.8 BILLION will go to states Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. 2 BILLION of this money will go to states to award grants to American lithium battery manufacturers and software designers, however, if no American owned company exists, the Department of Energy may use the money to recruit American workers.
4.5 BILLION will be used for Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, which will mainly pay for security, research, and development.
6 BILLION will used for better fuel economy cars.
The Bonneville Power Administration Borrowing Authority will get 3,250,000,000 more federal money under the Federal Columbia River Transmission Act. This money can remain outstanding at ANY TIME. The Federal Columbia River Transmission Act of 1974 is a Federal law that provided for operation, maintenance, and continued construction of the Federal transmission system in the Pacific Northwest by using revenues from the Federal Columbia River Power System; formed the Federal Columbia River Transmission System; and made Bonneville Power Administration responsible for the power system and the transmission system. Translation: FEDERAL APPROVED MONOPOLY OF POWER!!
Additionally, the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) may borrow up to 3,250,000,000 from the Treasury, but no more than 1,750,000,000 at one time to upgrade and deliver renewable energy. Other companies may participate in the financing, construction, and OWNERSHIP projects financed with this money. The sweetest part of this deal, is "if at the end of the useful life of a project financed under this bill, the REMAINING BALANCE owed to the Treasury shall be FORGIVEN." This includes UNCONSTRUCTED projects. The WAPA will tell the Treasury the amounts to be forgiven. How damn sweet is this? This is the equivalent of someone financing the construction of a building with a bank, telling the bank "I only used this building for 5 years, so you have to forgive the remaining balance"--What the hell?? Not to mention, WE THE TAXPAYERS ARE GETTING SCREWED!! WE WON'T SEE GET THIS MONEY BACK!! Why doesn't the Treasury have the authority under this "stimulus" package to dictate how much of TAXPAYER money is to be forgiven? I'll tell you why, because under this bill other businesses HAVE TO BE SOLICITED...MEANING BIG CORPORATIONS CAN PROFIT OFF OF THE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT OF THIS TAXPAYER FUNDED RESEARCH, YET THE TAXPAYERS GET STUCK WITH THE BILL.
However, the average taxpayer can get up to 6,500 back from the government for making their home energy efficient, such as insulating your attic.
As if the Federal government hasn't already destroyed enough of Native American traditions, this stimulus bill provides another avenue to force Natives to comply with the American way of life: 8 million dollars of "stimulus" money has been allocated to fund LENDING BANKS for Native Americans. This means, the Natives will get a federally funded taste of consumerism...and will be enticed to borrow money, at interest, from banks, and the banks get more money!! Another 450 million will go toward Indian schools, 40 million for Indian Housing, and an extra 10 million for Indian loans. Not to mention an extra 85 million for Indian health care--which will be used to build hospitals.
OH YES--and 300 million of "stimulus" money will go to buy better fuel economy federal cars. That means we the taxpayers are buying a brand new fleet of Federal cars.
Another great rip-off of this "stimulus": the Small Business Destruction. The Small Business Administration grants 504 loans that provides growing businesses with long-term, fixed-rate financing for major fixed assets, such as land and buildings. Under this "stimulus" bill, businesses can apply for more loans, in addition to 504 loans, but the 504 loan MUST be sold to third party investors--that means small businesses will lose ownership of their buildings and land. Great!
200 million will build a Department of Homeland Security Headquarters. 160 million will be used for salaries. 100 million will be for border security technology. 420 million for port security. 20 million for improved communication equipment.
The only part of the "stimulus" that will create jobs:
Only 500 million will train adults to work. Yet, 1.2 BILLION will fund youth activities, like summer camps, on top of 50 million for YouthBuild activities. YouthBuilds helps low income, minorities, ages 16-24 get their GED and build housing for their communities. This program is vastly funded by non-profit organizations: so why does the government want to fund this? For what purpose? Nazi Youth equivalent. Do you research! Hitler wanted the German youth to provide "national" security as well. This is absurd!
1.25 BILLION will help dislocated workers. 750 million will fund workers who want to work in energy efficiency and renewable energy sectors (this is on top of money already allocated to Department of Energy to recruit American workers).
Last, but not least, 120 million for community service employment for Older Americans. Guess you old folks can't retire, you must get employment!!
There is nothing economically stimulating in this bill. We the American people just got royally screwed by Obama.
O One
B Big
A Ass
M Mistake
A America
Monday, February 9, 2009
America: Where At Least I Think I'm Free
WARNING: READING OF THIS POST IS NOT RECOMMENDED TO THOSE WHO DO NOT HAVE AN OPEN MIND, OR TO THOSE WHO WANT TO CONTINUE LIVING IN A VIRTUAL REALITY.
History of the Federal Reserve a.k.a. Central Bank:
The Panic of 1907, also known as the 1907 Bankers' Panic, was a financial crisis that occurred in the United States when the New York Stock Exchange fell close to 50% from its peak the previous year. Many believe this panic began with false rumors spread by J.P. Morgan. The 1907 panic eventually spread throughout the nation when many state and local banks and businesses entered into bankruptcy causing Americans to withdraw all their cash from banks. Primary causes of the run include a retraction of market liquidity by a number of New York City banks, loss of confidence among depositors, and the absence of a statutory lender (or central bank). Interestingly enough, J.P. Morgan "saved" the economy by loaning large sums of his own money, and convinced other New York bankers to do the same, to save up the banking system. The following year, Senator Nelson W. Aldrich established and chaired a commission to investigate the crisis and propose future solutions, leading to the creation of the Federal Reserve System. The Fed prints money for US government to use, at interest. Meaning for every $1.00 that is printed for America, America has to pay back the $1.00, plus interest. It is debt slavery to the big banks.
The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 created the US's central bank, which main responsibilities include printing money and controlling the prices of goods to avoid another financial panic. President Woodrow Wilson signed the Act of 1913, and was quoted as saying:
"I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men."
More Financial Panics After Federal Reserve Was Created to Avoid Panics:
The Panic of 1919: Can't find much on the subject on the internet. However, in 1919 the Edge Act was passed, which gave power to international banks to own American banks. The three largest Edge Act, or foreign owned banks in the US are Citibank, HSBC International and Banco Santander International.
Panic of 1929: The Roaring Twenties, which was a precursor to the Crash, was a time of prosperity and excess, and despite warnings against speculation, many believed that the market could sustain high price levels. The euphoria and financial gains of the great bull market were shattered on Black Thursday, when share prices on the NYSE collapsed. Stock prices fell on that day and they continued to fall, at an unprecedented rate, for a full month.
In the days leading up to Black Tuesday, the market was severely unstable. Periods of selling and high volumes of trading were interspersed with brief periods of rising prices and recovery. Economist and author Jude Wanniski later correlated these swings with the prospects for passage of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which was then being debated in Congress. After the crash, the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) recovered early in 1930, only to reverse and crash again, reaching a low point of the great bear market in 1932. The Dow did not return to pre-1929 levels until late 1954, and on July 8, 1932 reached its lowest level of the 20th century.
Another argument for the Crash of 1929, was the calling in of "marginal loans" by big banks. A margin loan was one made with a stock broker; the stock buyer would pay only 10% of the stock's price, yet receive 100% ownership. This meant with $100 one could own a $1,000 stock. In 1929 the brokers called in these loans, which lead to a mass sell-off of stocks, because the loans had to repaid. Add this to the fact the Federal Reserve increased the money supply of the United States by 65% during the 1920s, which led to over speculation over speculation of the real estate market in the 1920s.
Criticize and Die:
Louis McFadden, a Republican Congressman in the 1930s, hated the Federal Reserve. He believed the Fed was created by European banking interests, and even wanted to impeach President Hoover and brought conspiracy charges against the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, because he believed the Fed caused the Great Depression. Both proceedings were voted down in Congress. There were 2 assassination attempts on McFadden, and in 1936, he was finally killed by food poisoning.
Gold Bouillon Act of 1933:
This Act essentially took what little wealth Americans had at the time by taking their gold and silver. President Franklin Roosevelt, called in all gold and silver owned by Americans. The executive order was not meant to be permanent, but it became permanent. The act also gave more power to the Federal Reserve, because now it could control interest rates--when before, because American money was on the gold standard--interest was controlled by gold. Ever since, American money has been "legal tender". The definition of tender: soft, not strong; easily distressed; painfully sensitive. American money is only accepted as payment, because the government says so.
Could FDR have other motives? In a biography, by Henry F. Pringle, it is recognized that FDR's uncle James A. Roosevelt, was a prominent banker. How sure are we the Roosevelt's didn't make off like bandits during the Great Depression? The Great Depression caused massive sell offs and companies like J.P. Morgan and Lehman Brothers bought businesses for pennies on the dollar. It was the biggest theft in American History.
Now readers, put two and two together. Many of these big companies, J.P. Morgan, Merrill Lynch, AIG, those that were created out of the Great Depression now received federal bailout money in 2008. By the way, J.P. Morgan, is now called J.P. Morgan Chase, because it merged with the Rockefeller's Chase Bank. Coincidence?
For those not familiar with the Rockefeller's, their family has owned Standard & Oil Company, which later was sold off to create Exxon, Shell, and other gas companies. Rockefellers then got in the business of banking, with Chase Bank.
Role of Bankers in Globalisation:
Trilateral Commission, Founded by David Rockefeller: In July 1972, Rockefeller called his first meeting, which was held at Rockefeller's Pocantico compound in New York's Hudson Valley. It was attended by about 250 individuals who were carefully selected and screened by Rockefeller and represented the very elite of finance and industry.
A Trilateral Commission Task Force Report, presented at the 1975 meeting in Kyoto, Japan, called An Outline for Remaking World Trade and Finance, said: "Close Trilateral cooperation in keeping the peace, in managing the world economy, and in fostering economic development and in alleviating world poverty, will improve the chances of a smooth and peaceful evolution of the global system."
Another Commission document read:
"The overriding goal is to make the world safe for interdependence by protecting the benefits which it provides for each country against external and internal threats which will constantly emerge from those willing to pay a price for more national autonomy. This may sometimes require slowing the pace at which interdependence proceeds, and checking some aspects of it. More frequently however, it will call for checking the intrusion of national government into the international exchange of both economic and non-economic goods."
Translation: Get rid of countries, a.k.a. autonomy, and make each country dependent on other countries, a.k.a. interdependence, and limit the power of national government into the global economy, a.k.a. "free trade".
In his 2008 book "Making Government Work," former South Carolina Senator Ernest Hollings cited the Trilateral Commission as a negative influence on President Carter in his pro free trade and U.S. textile job killing policies.
Bilderberg Group: The original Bilderberg conference was held at the Hotel de Bilderberg, near Arnhem in The Netherlands, from May 29 to May 31, 1954. The meeting was initiated by several people, including Joseph Retinger, concerned about the growth of anti-Americanism in Western Europe, who proposed an international conference at which leaders from European countries and the United States would be brought together with the aim of promoting understanding between the cultures of United States of America and Western Europe.
Heads of state have attended meetings, including Juan Carlos I of Spain and Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands. While serving members of government do not usually attend, prominent politicians from North America and Europe are past attendees. In recent years, board members from many large publicly-traded corporations have attended, including IBM, Xerox, Royal Dutch Shell, Nokia and Daimler.
Jonathan Duffy, writing in BBC News Online Magazine states "No reporters are invited in and while confidential minutes of meetings are taken, names are not noted." However, some news reports are recently beginning to pop up in the media.
Council on Foreign Relations: The Council's mission is promoting understanding of foreign policy and the United States' role in the world. Meetings are convened at which government officials, global leaders and prominent members debate major foreign-policy issues. It has a think tank that employs prominent scholars in international affairs and it commissions subsequent books and reports. A central aim of the Council, it states, is to "find and nurture the next generation of foreign policy leaders."
Consequently, J.P. Morgan and Rockefeller have made considerable donations to the CFR, along with 26 other American corporations, making the CFR an arm of corporate interests.
Never Heard of It?
That's just what these organizations want. Here's a quote from David Rockefeller, made in 1991 at a Bilderberg Meeting:
"We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years."
He went on to explain:
"It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty (global) of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination (national interests) practiced in past centuries."
-- David Rockefeller, Speaking at the June, 1991 Bilderberger meeting in Baden, Germany (a meeting also attended by then-Governor Bill Clinton and by Dan Quayle)
The quote comes from www.fdrs.org on several sites, however you have to have a login in order to access this site in order to verify the quote. Coincidence?
Not to mention, major media elite has attended several of these "top secret" meetings. Like, Katherine Gram, owner of the Washington Post, and Conrad Black, major media mongol in Canada and Europe.
Add that together with the fact the American Media is owned by merely six companies. Sure, you have hundreds and hundreds of channels to chose from, but what you watch on all those channels are put out by only six companies. Yea, there are 30 magazines and hundreds of newspapers, but you only read what six media companies want you to read:
1. News Corporation
2. NBC Universal
3. CBS Corporation
4. Time Warner
5. Walt Disney Company
6. Cox Enterprises
Infiltration Into Education System:
In 1985, the United States ranked first in the world in education. In a 2005 study, it was found American students achieved lower scores than Japan, China, and India counterparts, as well as other countries. Why is this? First of all, you have the creation of the US Department of Education in 1979. Past presidential candidates Ronald Reagan, Bob Dole, and Ron Paul all wanted to abolish the US Department of Education.
The Republican Party's platform in the 1990s read: The Federal government has no constitutional authority to be involved in school curricula or to control jobs in the market place. This is why we will abolish the Department of Education, end federal meddling in our schools, and promote family choice at all levels of learning. However, George W. Bush failed to push this idea through.
From the creation of the Dept. of Education, you have federal laws that dictate to schools how students need to be taught. The curriculum is born from the National Education Association, which was/is funded by the Rockfellers, Caragenies, and Morgans.
In summary, Rockefeller and company fund the NEA, which in turn spit out American education curriculum, that makes American students dumber compared to other countries. Coincidence?
Let's look at why big banking elitists like the Rockefellers want dumb Americans.
In our dreams, people yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hands. The present education conventions of intellectual and character education fade from their minds, and, unhampered by tradition, we work our own good will upon a grateful and responsive folk. We shall not try to make these people, or any of their children, into philosophers, or men of science. We have not to raise up from them authors, educators, poets or men of letters. We shall not search for great artists, painters, musicians nor lawyers, doctors, preachers, politicians, statesmen – of whom we have an ample supply. The task is simple. We will organize children and teach them in a perfect way the things their fathers and mothers are doing in an imperfect way.
– John D. Rockefeller General Education Board (1906)
Translation: The aim of education is to form a perfect labor force, that does not critically think, but merely does a simple task well. Look around you, children all over the US are going to school wearing uniforms; just like they would go to work wearing uniforms. The best children are labeled "academically gifted", the parents cheer at such an achievement! YEA, my kid is smart. But, as a former AG student myself, let me tell you, I was not exposed to higher levels of math, science, or reading. My AG class merely went on field trips and played computer games like Oregon Trail.
Put all this together folks. A small group of bankers has owned this country for the last 100 years. In the last 100 years, our economy has weakened (Americans do not have gold), jobs have went overseas, and the education system is failing. Seems to me this handful of controlling elitists want to transform America into the land of workers, slaves to the banker and corporations, which will run the world. Unless we stop them.
History of the Federal Reserve a.k.a. Central Bank:
The Panic of 1907, also known as the 1907 Bankers' Panic, was a financial crisis that occurred in the United States when the New York Stock Exchange fell close to 50% from its peak the previous year. Many believe this panic began with false rumors spread by J.P. Morgan. The 1907 panic eventually spread throughout the nation when many state and local banks and businesses entered into bankruptcy causing Americans to withdraw all their cash from banks. Primary causes of the run include a retraction of market liquidity by a number of New York City banks, loss of confidence among depositors, and the absence of a statutory lender (or central bank). Interestingly enough, J.P. Morgan "saved" the economy by loaning large sums of his own money, and convinced other New York bankers to do the same, to save up the banking system. The following year, Senator Nelson W. Aldrich established and chaired a commission to investigate the crisis and propose future solutions, leading to the creation of the Federal Reserve System. The Fed prints money for US government to use, at interest. Meaning for every $1.00 that is printed for America, America has to pay back the $1.00, plus interest. It is debt slavery to the big banks.
The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 created the US's central bank, which main responsibilities include printing money and controlling the prices of goods to avoid another financial panic. President Woodrow Wilson signed the Act of 1913, and was quoted as saying:
"I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men."
More Financial Panics After Federal Reserve Was Created to Avoid Panics:
The Panic of 1919: Can't find much on the subject on the internet. However, in 1919 the Edge Act was passed, which gave power to international banks to own American banks. The three largest Edge Act, or foreign owned banks in the US are Citibank, HSBC International and Banco Santander International.
Panic of 1929: The Roaring Twenties, which was a precursor to the Crash, was a time of prosperity and excess, and despite warnings against speculation, many believed that the market could sustain high price levels. The euphoria and financial gains of the great bull market were shattered on Black Thursday, when share prices on the NYSE collapsed. Stock prices fell on that day and they continued to fall, at an unprecedented rate, for a full month.
In the days leading up to Black Tuesday, the market was severely unstable. Periods of selling and high volumes of trading were interspersed with brief periods of rising prices and recovery. Economist and author Jude Wanniski later correlated these swings with the prospects for passage of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which was then being debated in Congress. After the crash, the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) recovered early in 1930, only to reverse and crash again, reaching a low point of the great bear market in 1932. The Dow did not return to pre-1929 levels until late 1954, and on July 8, 1932 reached its lowest level of the 20th century.
Another argument for the Crash of 1929, was the calling in of "marginal loans" by big banks. A margin loan was one made with a stock broker; the stock buyer would pay only 10% of the stock's price, yet receive 100% ownership. This meant with $100 one could own a $1,000 stock. In 1929 the brokers called in these loans, which lead to a mass sell-off of stocks, because the loans had to repaid. Add this to the fact the Federal Reserve increased the money supply of the United States by 65% during the 1920s, which led to over speculation over speculation of the real estate market in the 1920s.
Criticize and Die:
Louis McFadden, a Republican Congressman in the 1930s, hated the Federal Reserve. He believed the Fed was created by European banking interests, and even wanted to impeach President Hoover and brought conspiracy charges against the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, because he believed the Fed caused the Great Depression. Both proceedings were voted down in Congress. There were 2 assassination attempts on McFadden, and in 1936, he was finally killed by food poisoning.
Gold Bouillon Act of 1933:
This Act essentially took what little wealth Americans had at the time by taking their gold and silver. President Franklin Roosevelt, called in all gold and silver owned by Americans. The executive order was not meant to be permanent, but it became permanent. The act also gave more power to the Federal Reserve, because now it could control interest rates--when before, because American money was on the gold standard--interest was controlled by gold. Ever since, American money has been "legal tender". The definition of tender: soft, not strong; easily distressed; painfully sensitive. American money is only accepted as payment, because the government says so.
Could FDR have other motives? In a biography, by Henry F. Pringle, it is recognized that FDR's uncle James A. Roosevelt, was a prominent banker. How sure are we the Roosevelt's didn't make off like bandits during the Great Depression? The Great Depression caused massive sell offs and companies like J.P. Morgan and Lehman Brothers bought businesses for pennies on the dollar. It was the biggest theft in American History.
Now readers, put two and two together. Many of these big companies, J.P. Morgan, Merrill Lynch, AIG, those that were created out of the Great Depression now received federal bailout money in 2008. By the way, J.P. Morgan, is now called J.P. Morgan Chase, because it merged with the Rockefeller's Chase Bank. Coincidence?
For those not familiar with the Rockefeller's, their family has owned Standard & Oil Company, which later was sold off to create Exxon, Shell, and other gas companies. Rockefellers then got in the business of banking, with Chase Bank.
Role of Bankers in Globalisation:
Trilateral Commission, Founded by David Rockefeller: In July 1972, Rockefeller called his first meeting, which was held at Rockefeller's Pocantico compound in New York's Hudson Valley. It was attended by about 250 individuals who were carefully selected and screened by Rockefeller and represented the very elite of finance and industry.
A Trilateral Commission Task Force Report, presented at the 1975 meeting in Kyoto, Japan, called An Outline for Remaking World Trade and Finance, said: "Close Trilateral cooperation in keeping the peace, in managing the world economy, and in fostering economic development and in alleviating world poverty, will improve the chances of a smooth and peaceful evolution of the global system."
Another Commission document read:
"The overriding goal is to make the world safe for interdependence by protecting the benefits which it provides for each country against external and internal threats which will constantly emerge from those willing to pay a price for more national autonomy. This may sometimes require slowing the pace at which interdependence proceeds, and checking some aspects of it. More frequently however, it will call for checking the intrusion of national government into the international exchange of both economic and non-economic goods."
Translation: Get rid of countries, a.k.a. autonomy, and make each country dependent on other countries, a.k.a. interdependence, and limit the power of national government into the global economy, a.k.a. "free trade".
In his 2008 book "Making Government Work," former South Carolina Senator Ernest Hollings cited the Trilateral Commission as a negative influence on President Carter in his pro free trade and U.S. textile job killing policies.
Bilderberg Group: The original Bilderberg conference was held at the Hotel de Bilderberg, near Arnhem in The Netherlands, from May 29 to May 31, 1954. The meeting was initiated by several people, including Joseph Retinger, concerned about the growth of anti-Americanism in Western Europe, who proposed an international conference at which leaders from European countries and the United States would be brought together with the aim of promoting understanding between the cultures of United States of America and Western Europe.
Heads of state have attended meetings, including Juan Carlos I of Spain and Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands. While serving members of government do not usually attend, prominent politicians from North America and Europe are past attendees. In recent years, board members from many large publicly-traded corporations have attended, including IBM, Xerox, Royal Dutch Shell, Nokia and Daimler.
Jonathan Duffy, writing in BBC News Online Magazine states "No reporters are invited in and while confidential minutes of meetings are taken, names are not noted." However, some news reports are recently beginning to pop up in the media.
Council on Foreign Relations: The Council's mission is promoting understanding of foreign policy and the United States' role in the world. Meetings are convened at which government officials, global leaders and prominent members debate major foreign-policy issues. It has a think tank that employs prominent scholars in international affairs and it commissions subsequent books and reports. A central aim of the Council, it states, is to "find and nurture the next generation of foreign policy leaders."
Consequently, J.P. Morgan and Rockefeller have made considerable donations to the CFR, along with 26 other American corporations, making the CFR an arm of corporate interests.
Never Heard of It?
That's just what these organizations want. Here's a quote from David Rockefeller, made in 1991 at a Bilderberg Meeting:
"We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years."
He went on to explain:
"It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty (global) of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination (national interests) practiced in past centuries."
-- David Rockefeller, Speaking at the June, 1991 Bilderberger meeting in Baden, Germany (a meeting also attended by then-Governor Bill Clinton and by Dan Quayle)
The quote comes from www.fdrs.org on several sites, however you have to have a login in order to access this site in order to verify the quote. Coincidence?
Not to mention, major media elite has attended several of these "top secret" meetings. Like, Katherine Gram, owner of the Washington Post, and Conrad Black, major media mongol in Canada and Europe.
Add that together with the fact the American Media is owned by merely six companies. Sure, you have hundreds and hundreds of channels to chose from, but what you watch on all those channels are put out by only six companies. Yea, there are 30 magazines and hundreds of newspapers, but you only read what six media companies want you to read:
1. News Corporation
2. NBC Universal
3. CBS Corporation
4. Time Warner
5. Walt Disney Company
6. Cox Enterprises
Infiltration Into Education System:
In 1985, the United States ranked first in the world in education. In a 2005 study, it was found American students achieved lower scores than Japan, China, and India counterparts, as well as other countries. Why is this? First of all, you have the creation of the US Department of Education in 1979. Past presidential candidates Ronald Reagan, Bob Dole, and Ron Paul all wanted to abolish the US Department of Education.
The Republican Party's platform in the 1990s read: The Federal government has no constitutional authority to be involved in school curricula or to control jobs in the market place. This is why we will abolish the Department of Education, end federal meddling in our schools, and promote family choice at all levels of learning. However, George W. Bush failed to push this idea through.
From the creation of the Dept. of Education, you have federal laws that dictate to schools how students need to be taught. The curriculum is born from the National Education Association, which was/is funded by the Rockfellers, Caragenies, and Morgans.
In summary, Rockefeller and company fund the NEA, which in turn spit out American education curriculum, that makes American students dumber compared to other countries. Coincidence?
Let's look at why big banking elitists like the Rockefellers want dumb Americans.
In our dreams, people yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hands. The present education conventions of intellectual and character education fade from their minds, and, unhampered by tradition, we work our own good will upon a grateful and responsive folk. We shall not try to make these people, or any of their children, into philosophers, or men of science. We have not to raise up from them authors, educators, poets or men of letters. We shall not search for great artists, painters, musicians nor lawyers, doctors, preachers, politicians, statesmen – of whom we have an ample supply. The task is simple. We will organize children and teach them in a perfect way the things their fathers and mothers are doing in an imperfect way.
– John D. Rockefeller General Education Board (1906)
Translation: The aim of education is to form a perfect labor force, that does not critically think, but merely does a simple task well. Look around you, children all over the US are going to school wearing uniforms; just like they would go to work wearing uniforms. The best children are labeled "academically gifted", the parents cheer at such an achievement! YEA, my kid is smart. But, as a former AG student myself, let me tell you, I was not exposed to higher levels of math, science, or reading. My AG class merely went on field trips and played computer games like Oregon Trail.
Put all this together folks. A small group of bankers has owned this country for the last 100 years. In the last 100 years, our economy has weakened (Americans do not have gold), jobs have went overseas, and the education system is failing. Seems to me this handful of controlling elitists want to transform America into the land of workers, slaves to the banker and corporations, which will run the world. Unless we stop them.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
In Media We Trust
In America, our media only provides us with half of the story. That half of the story is spun so well, we Americans believe what the news tells us, and take it for the God's honest truth. Little do we know, there is another side to our news stories, that deserve some coverage.
Take fluoridation of our water supply. We are told by dentists that fluoride is great for our teeth, and prevents cavities. What we are not told, is fluoride has been shown to cause cancer and lower IQs in animal studies. These studies were not extended to humans, simply because the government said it was not needed. Too much fluoride can cause tooth damage and poisoning. Read your toothpaste, the label clearly states: if more than what is used for brushing is swallowed, contact poison control. Plus, swallowing fluoride can cause brown stains on your teeth and tooth decay.
Not to mention fluoxetine hydrochloride is the active ingredient in many antidepressants, like Prozac. Fluoxetine is a derivative of fluoride and hydrochloride comes from chlorine, which is also in America's water supply.
The economic motive behind putting fluoride in your water is endless. Farmers need somewhere to put fluorine run off from pesticides, big industries need a place for fluoride pollution, and oil companies need a place to put its fluorine poison. So, the public is told fluoride is good for your teeth. But, tooth decay is on the rise in the United States--compare that to the United Kingdom, in which only 10% of the water supply is fluorinated--and their rates of tooth decay are DECLINING.
Another popular, but half-truth, we Americans hear, is that washing with soap and shampoo is good hygiene. Most people, unless you work on a farm, or get excessively dirty, do not need to use soap or shampoo everyday. The main ingriendent in these products is sodium lauryl sulfate. It is potentially harmful to skin and hair because it cleans by corrosion, dries skin by stripping the protective lipids from the surface so it can't effectively regulate moisture.
Sodium Lauryl Sulfate in itself, is not that bad. However, when you mix it with nitrates, it can cause cancer. Nitrates are found in EVERYONE'S water supply. Nitrates are used as fertilizers, and run off gets in your water supply. Plus, sodium lauryl sulfate contains sulfuric acid. According the US MSDS safety sheet on sulfric acid, it causes cancers, is highly corrosive, and can cause tissue necrosis. In layman's terms, necrosis is TISSUE DEATH, that's right, you're killing your skin while washing with soap and scrubbing your hair.
Another skin destroying product: sunscreen. The recognized toxic ingridients in sunscreen include: benzophenone, PABA, and octyl salicylate. Read about these chemicals, they are not good for you, and conveniently enough, the government's MSDS sheet on octyl salicylate, has no information regarding skin cancer--that means no government study has been done, however the ingredient does cause cancer in animals.
The most disturbing health threat to Americans are food additives, or preservatives. We Americans love fast food, prepared meals like Hamburger Helper, soups, etc. However, many of these packaged and prepared meals contain awful toxins. Such as, MSG, which can cause nerve damage. Yellow #5 which can cause tumors. Potassium Bromate, which is banned everywhere in the world except the United States and Japan. The Codex Alimentarius commission approves of these additives, plus many more known dangerous additives.
Codex is bad, bad. It is an arm of the World Trade Organization and the World Health Organization, and the United States must comply with Codex by December 31, 2009. Codex approves of many dangerous chemicals not meant for human consumption, however it labels vitamins and nutrients as "toxins" that must be controlled. One stipulation of Codex, is getting rid of food labels, because Codex requires all food to be Genetically Modified. The FDA has already approved of meat and milk from cloned animals--without any labeling because agency regulators cannot require cloned products be labeled as such if -- as they assert -- there is no material difference between them and food produced by conventional methods.
Most importantly, the Food and Drug Administration is bad. The FDA restricts natural remedies, but promotes drugs like ephedra and celebrex, which were later recalled for killing people. Interestingly enough, former deputy commission Dr. Scott Gottlieb of the FDA joined CombiMatirx Corporation after leaving the FDA. CombiMatrix is in the business of drug development, genetic analysis, molecular diagnostics, nanotechnology research, defense and homeland security markets.
Another one, Dr. Kaiser J. Aziz, former FDA Director, joined ARV Excellence, which helps clients get FDA approval for their products.
One more, Former FDA Science Branch Director James Farley Joined InfoStrength as Advisor, this is a company that exclusively serves biotechnology, pharmaceutical and medical device companies with internationally recognized regulatory expertise.
No, one last one: Former FDA Director Susan Alpert Joined C.R. Bard, a medical device company.
Do you see the pattern here? Most, if not all, past FDA directors and scientists have gone on to work at pharmaceutical companies, or companies that work with the FDA to get approval. This is unethical. These folks get in these companies, tell companies what the FDA looks for in approving drugs/medical devices, and they get approved. Or worse, perhaps these folks have their friends, who are still in the FDA give instant approval to drugs. Former FDA employees should not work for pharmaceutical companies! It is not in the best interest of Americans for them to share insider knowledge of how to get approval with drug companies.
What's even more disturbing, is the possible "marriage" of several government agencies with the FDA. "The peanut recall offers a prime opportunity to merge all federal food safety oversight into one agency," Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said Friday.
This means the food oversight the Dept. of Agriculture, Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, and Environmental Protection Agency would all become arms of the FDA.
Don't let this happen.
Take fluoridation of our water supply. We are told by dentists that fluoride is great for our teeth, and prevents cavities. What we are not told, is fluoride has been shown to cause cancer and lower IQs in animal studies. These studies were not extended to humans, simply because the government said it was not needed. Too much fluoride can cause tooth damage and poisoning. Read your toothpaste, the label clearly states: if more than what is used for brushing is swallowed, contact poison control. Plus, swallowing fluoride can cause brown stains on your teeth and tooth decay.
Not to mention fluoxetine hydrochloride is the active ingredient in many antidepressants, like Prozac. Fluoxetine is a derivative of fluoride and hydrochloride comes from chlorine, which is also in America's water supply.
The economic motive behind putting fluoride in your water is endless. Farmers need somewhere to put fluorine run off from pesticides, big industries need a place for fluoride pollution, and oil companies need a place to put its fluorine poison. So, the public is told fluoride is good for your teeth. But, tooth decay is on the rise in the United States--compare that to the United Kingdom, in which only 10% of the water supply is fluorinated--and their rates of tooth decay are DECLINING.
Another popular, but half-truth, we Americans hear, is that washing with soap and shampoo is good hygiene. Most people, unless you work on a farm, or get excessively dirty, do not need to use soap or shampoo everyday. The main ingriendent in these products is sodium lauryl sulfate. It is potentially harmful to skin and hair because it cleans by corrosion, dries skin by stripping the protective lipids from the surface so it can't effectively regulate moisture.
Sodium Lauryl Sulfate in itself, is not that bad. However, when you mix it with nitrates, it can cause cancer. Nitrates are found in EVERYONE'S water supply. Nitrates are used as fertilizers, and run off gets in your water supply. Plus, sodium lauryl sulfate contains sulfuric acid. According the US MSDS safety sheet on sulfric acid, it causes cancers, is highly corrosive, and can cause tissue necrosis. In layman's terms, necrosis is TISSUE DEATH, that's right, you're killing your skin while washing with soap and scrubbing your hair.
Another skin destroying product: sunscreen. The recognized toxic ingridients in sunscreen include: benzophenone, PABA, and octyl salicylate. Read about these chemicals, they are not good for you, and conveniently enough, the government's MSDS sheet on octyl salicylate, has no information regarding skin cancer--that means no government study has been done, however the ingredient does cause cancer in animals.
The most disturbing health threat to Americans are food additives, or preservatives. We Americans love fast food, prepared meals like Hamburger Helper, soups, etc. However, many of these packaged and prepared meals contain awful toxins. Such as, MSG, which can cause nerve damage. Yellow #5 which can cause tumors. Potassium Bromate, which is banned everywhere in the world except the United States and Japan. The Codex Alimentarius commission approves of these additives, plus many more known dangerous additives.
Codex is bad, bad. It is an arm of the World Trade Organization and the World Health Organization, and the United States must comply with Codex by December 31, 2009. Codex approves of many dangerous chemicals not meant for human consumption, however it labels vitamins and nutrients as "toxins" that must be controlled. One stipulation of Codex, is getting rid of food labels, because Codex requires all food to be Genetically Modified. The FDA has already approved of meat and milk from cloned animals--without any labeling because agency regulators cannot require cloned products be labeled as such if -- as they assert -- there is no material difference between them and food produced by conventional methods.
Most importantly, the Food and Drug Administration is bad. The FDA restricts natural remedies, but promotes drugs like ephedra and celebrex, which were later recalled for killing people. Interestingly enough, former deputy commission Dr. Scott Gottlieb of the FDA joined CombiMatirx Corporation after leaving the FDA. CombiMatrix is in the business of drug development, genetic analysis, molecular diagnostics, nanotechnology research, defense and homeland security markets.
Another one, Dr. Kaiser J. Aziz, former FDA Director, joined ARV Excellence, which helps clients get FDA approval for their products.
One more, Former FDA Science Branch Director James Farley Joined InfoStrength as Advisor, this is a company that exclusively serves biotechnology, pharmaceutical and medical device companies with internationally recognized regulatory expertise.
No, one last one: Former FDA Director Susan Alpert Joined C.R. Bard, a medical device company.
Do you see the pattern here? Most, if not all, past FDA directors and scientists have gone on to work at pharmaceutical companies, or companies that work with the FDA to get approval. This is unethical. These folks get in these companies, tell companies what the FDA looks for in approving drugs/medical devices, and they get approved. Or worse, perhaps these folks have their friends, who are still in the FDA give instant approval to drugs. Former FDA employees should not work for pharmaceutical companies! It is not in the best interest of Americans for them to share insider knowledge of how to get approval with drug companies.
What's even more disturbing, is the possible "marriage" of several government agencies with the FDA. "The peanut recall offers a prime opportunity to merge all federal food safety oversight into one agency," Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said Friday.
This means the food oversight the Dept. of Agriculture, Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, and Environmental Protection Agency would all become arms of the FDA.
Don't let this happen.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Sleep Tight 'Amerika'
All across the world, citizens are protesting. Well, protesting is a mild term, they are rioting as the world economic crisis affects them. In countries like Greece, Latvia, Russia, and most notably 1+ million in France.
Why aren't Americans? One view is that we Americans look to reform policies, not protest, strike, or riot. This is pure bologna to me. My fellow Americans-WAKE UP-do you not see what is around us? Do you not see the need to express public discontent? Where is the fury?? I know I'm mad as hell, here's why:
1. The Obama stimulus package, a.k.a. Obama debt plan for my children and grandkids, started at $800 billion, and now, as of today, it is around $920 billion. If this stimulus were a country, it would be the 6th LARGEST economy in the WORLD. This is on top of the 8.2 trillion dollars the Washington bureaucrats have already spent on "saving" the economy. The $8.5 trillion includes the $700 billion bank and Wall Street bailout; federal takeovers of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; bailouts for Citigroup and American International Group; and various cash infusions into financial and lending markets by the Federal Reserve.
8.2 trillion dollars is 60% of our country's Gross Domestic Product, our GDP is only 14 trillion dollars. Not only that, but our congressmen and women (or John Stossel) can't even get a straight answer about exactly WHERE and HOW this 8,200,000,000,000 is being spent. There is NO WAY on God's green Earth can American taxpayers pay this back. There are 303,824,640 people in America--divide by 8.2 trillion-Congratulations my fellow American, you now owe 26,000 to the Federal Government.
Lest us not forget the UN Crime Chief stating that drug money was used to save banks. Of course, he didn't name any names or give any details, but my speculation is this: The banks were in trouble about January 2008, they borrow money from drug cartels, the bill came due in October, and the banks didn't have the cash, so the banks got bailouts from the government to pay back the cartels, now the banks still need money, so we give them more, and we will keep giving them more until America wakes up.
Now Obama wants to put a cap on executive salaries for the companies that received bailout money. In essence, this is taking away a CEO's drive to succeed--he/she will only make X amount of dollars--so why would the CEO want to work harder? This will DESTROY capitalism!! Which is exactly what big banks (like the World Bank) want. No capitalism equals socialism--everyone will be treated the same--there will be no reward for hard work or ingenuity. Humanity will suffer.
2. Department of Defense Directive 1404.10 enacted on January 23, 2009. This directive orders all civilian DOD employees to serve as an "expeditionary" force to support the military's objectives of peace keeping and fighting the war on terror. The DOD is tricky and states this force is voluntary, however, upon having getting hired, or if you are hired, you must sign this agreement, because it is "Position based". These civilians can be deployed for up to 2 years, and have a 90 day rest between deployments.
Webster's dictionary defines Mercenary: 1.working or acting merely for money or other reward; venal.
2. hired to serve in a foreign army, guerrilla organization, etc.
–noun
3. a professional soldier hired to serve in a foreign army.
Definition of Expeditionary: (pertaining to expedition) 1. an excursion, journey, or voyage made for some specific purpose, as of war or exploration.
These civilians are going to be mercenaries, because, they did not WILLINGLY sign up for combat or to go on military expedition, they willingly signed up to support the Department of Defense, if they wanted to go on international "expeditions" for 2 years, I think they would have joined the armed forces. This is important because it brings our country one step closer to a DRAFT, or INVOLUNTARY military service.
3. Remember those empty "prison" camps I wrote about earlier? Well, they are in fact renovated closed military posts, that will be used to house victims of natural disasters as the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and Homeland Security deems necessary.
The bill is called HR 645 and was introduced to Congress by Alcee Hastings of Florida. The official purpose is to direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish national emergency centers on military installations, preferably closed military establishments. There is a total of 360 million dollars that will be used to renovate, prepare, and equip at least 6 emergency centers in 2009 & 2010. All of the money has to be spent. Each center will have 2 state of the art monitoring systems, one that will run 24/7 and the other will be used for daily training.
We'll see if the bill is passed, keep track, but I guarantee you it will pass. The renovations have occurred. There is no need for these "emergency" centers. Our country has weathered thru several hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, and even 9/11 WITHOUT these emergency centers.
Sure, I remember Hurricane Katrina. Thousands of people were kept at the SuperDome, and not allowed to leave for about 2 weeks. What we forget, is those victims of Hurricane Katrina are babes to the proverbial breast of the USA. Meaning, those in New Orleans were spoon fed government assistance and welfare their entire lives, and had no clue how to survive on their own, because the government was feeding them, and they expected help from the government. They were incapable of helping themselves, and as we know, FEMA dropped the ball. They couldn't sufficiently help the hurricane victims either.
The same will happen at these emergency centers, however, the media will not be allowed to report on the deplorable conditions of said centers, and therefore the American public will not get any information aside from what the government will report at these centers, and if FEMA does the same as it did during Hurricane Katrina, the emergency centers will be concentration camps.
Lesson: THE GOVERNMENT THAT FEEDS YOU CANNOT FREE YOU.
Will Americans take to the streets? I doubt it, there is such a slave mentality in this country, it is safe to say we are not a free country. Americans don't want to be brutalized like the civil rights protesters, or the World Health Organization protesters in Seattle in 1999. Americans want to work for their money and pay their bills. The majority of us do not care where 8.2 trillion dollars of our money is going, nor will we raise a fuss. We can't handle raising a fuss. We don't want to be sprayed with tear gas, fire hoses, or have attack dogs on us. Fighting for freedom is something the majority of us don't want to do, because we might get hurt, and we're a fearful nation.
Not only are we fearful, we are divided. We Americans cannot and will not put aside religious or racial issues to come together and fight for human freedom. No, we Americans are bigots. We have our own agendas, that are enforced upon us by the media--the Black Agenda, the Blue-Collar White Agenda, and the Immigrant Hispanic Agenda. We refuse to put these issues aside and realize they are just diversions from the issue: worldwide enslavement.
Sleep Tight Amerika, we are no different than the NAZIS.
Why aren't Americans? One view is that we Americans look to reform policies, not protest, strike, or riot. This is pure bologna to me. My fellow Americans-WAKE UP-do you not see what is around us? Do you not see the need to express public discontent? Where is the fury?? I know I'm mad as hell, here's why:
1. The Obama stimulus package, a.k.a. Obama debt plan for my children and grandkids, started at $800 billion, and now, as of today, it is around $920 billion. If this stimulus were a country, it would be the 6th LARGEST economy in the WORLD. This is on top of the 8.2 trillion dollars the Washington bureaucrats have already spent on "saving" the economy. The $8.5 trillion includes the $700 billion bank and Wall Street bailout; federal takeovers of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; bailouts for Citigroup and American International Group; and various cash infusions into financial and lending markets by the Federal Reserve.
8.2 trillion dollars is 60% of our country's Gross Domestic Product, our GDP is only 14 trillion dollars. Not only that, but our congressmen and women (or John Stossel) can't even get a straight answer about exactly WHERE and HOW this 8,200,000,000,000 is being spent. There is NO WAY on God's green Earth can American taxpayers pay this back. There are 303,824,640 people in America--divide by 8.2 trillion-Congratulations my fellow American, you now owe 26,000 to the Federal Government.
Lest us not forget the UN Crime Chief stating that drug money was used to save banks. Of course, he didn't name any names or give any details, but my speculation is this: The banks were in trouble about January 2008, they borrow money from drug cartels, the bill came due in October, and the banks didn't have the cash, so the banks got bailouts from the government to pay back the cartels, now the banks still need money, so we give them more, and we will keep giving them more until America wakes up.
Now Obama wants to put a cap on executive salaries for the companies that received bailout money. In essence, this is taking away a CEO's drive to succeed--he/she will only make X amount of dollars--so why would the CEO want to work harder? This will DESTROY capitalism!! Which is exactly what big banks (like the World Bank) want. No capitalism equals socialism--everyone will be treated the same--there will be no reward for hard work or ingenuity. Humanity will suffer.
2. Department of Defense Directive 1404.10 enacted on January 23, 2009. This directive orders all civilian DOD employees to serve as an "expeditionary" force to support the military's objectives of peace keeping and fighting the war on terror. The DOD is tricky and states this force is voluntary, however, upon having getting hired, or if you are hired, you must sign this agreement, because it is "Position based". These civilians can be deployed for up to 2 years, and have a 90 day rest between deployments.
Webster's dictionary defines Mercenary: 1.working or acting merely for money or other reward; venal.
2. hired to serve in a foreign army, guerrilla organization, etc.
–noun
3. a professional soldier hired to serve in a foreign army.
Definition of Expeditionary: (pertaining to expedition) 1. an excursion, journey, or voyage made for some specific purpose, as of war or exploration.
These civilians are going to be mercenaries, because, they did not WILLINGLY sign up for combat or to go on military expedition, they willingly signed up to support the Department of Defense, if they wanted to go on international "expeditions" for 2 years, I think they would have joined the armed forces. This is important because it brings our country one step closer to a DRAFT, or INVOLUNTARY military service.
3. Remember those empty "prison" camps I wrote about earlier? Well, they are in fact renovated closed military posts, that will be used to house victims of natural disasters as the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and Homeland Security deems necessary.
The bill is called HR 645 and was introduced to Congress by Alcee Hastings of Florida. The official purpose is to direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish national emergency centers on military installations, preferably closed military establishments. There is a total of 360 million dollars that will be used to renovate, prepare, and equip at least 6 emergency centers in 2009 & 2010. All of the money has to be spent. Each center will have 2 state of the art monitoring systems, one that will run 24/7 and the other will be used for daily training.
We'll see if the bill is passed, keep track, but I guarantee you it will pass. The renovations have occurred. There is no need for these "emergency" centers. Our country has weathered thru several hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, and even 9/11 WITHOUT these emergency centers.
Sure, I remember Hurricane Katrina. Thousands of people were kept at the SuperDome, and not allowed to leave for about 2 weeks. What we forget, is those victims of Hurricane Katrina are babes to the proverbial breast of the USA. Meaning, those in New Orleans were spoon fed government assistance and welfare their entire lives, and had no clue how to survive on their own, because the government was feeding them, and they expected help from the government. They were incapable of helping themselves, and as we know, FEMA dropped the ball. They couldn't sufficiently help the hurricane victims either.
The same will happen at these emergency centers, however, the media will not be allowed to report on the deplorable conditions of said centers, and therefore the American public will not get any information aside from what the government will report at these centers, and if FEMA does the same as it did during Hurricane Katrina, the emergency centers will be concentration camps.
Lesson: THE GOVERNMENT THAT FEEDS YOU CANNOT FREE YOU.
Will Americans take to the streets? I doubt it, there is such a slave mentality in this country, it is safe to say we are not a free country. Americans don't want to be brutalized like the civil rights protesters, or the World Health Organization protesters in Seattle in 1999. Americans want to work for their money and pay their bills. The majority of us do not care where 8.2 trillion dollars of our money is going, nor will we raise a fuss. We can't handle raising a fuss. We don't want to be sprayed with tear gas, fire hoses, or have attack dogs on us. Fighting for freedom is something the majority of us don't want to do, because we might get hurt, and we're a fearful nation.
Not only are we fearful, we are divided. We Americans cannot and will not put aside religious or racial issues to come together and fight for human freedom. No, we Americans are bigots. We have our own agendas, that are enforced upon us by the media--the Black Agenda, the Blue-Collar White Agenda, and the Immigrant Hispanic Agenda. We refuse to put these issues aside and realize they are just diversions from the issue: worldwide enslavement.
Sleep Tight Amerika, we are no different than the NAZIS.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
World Crisis: Bankster Approved
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and The World Bank are two of the biggest culprits of poverty in the world. Their sites suggest that they want to fight global poverty and stabilize the global economy. However, if one takes a closer look at countries who are battling poverty and ravaged by war, one will find that the IMF and World Bank are NOT helping these countries simply because they are delinquent in paying back the loans.
Zimbabwe: Over the past year, Zimbabwe has battled a 100,000% inflation rate, as of April 2008, as well as a cholera outbreak that killed 3,000 people. More over the European Union has frozen the assets of 203 people and 40 organizations, in an attempt to pressure the current president Mugabe to step down. Interestingly enough, no aid will be coming to Zimbabwe in the future. The EU and United Nations claim it's because Mugabe is President. However, Mugabe was supported by the several Western nations and the UN for about 10 years (1979-1990). The University of Michigan even gave Mugabe an honorary degree. But, since 1990, all of Mugabe's honors have been taken away, because of his "racist" policies against Whites in Zimbabwe.
Mugabe is a controversial figure. Zimbabwe used to be the bread basket of Africa. Western nations claim widespread famine in the country is a result of Mugabe. Mugabe asserts the droughts are caused by British chemical weapons. Mugabe does not support imperialism and has even had a policy of taking white-minority owned land and re-distributing it to the poor Zimbabweans. This move cited a lot of criticism from the IMF and World Bank. Not to mention, Zimbabwe is over-due in paying its 150.8 million dollar loan from the IMF. The World Bank has approved 1.6 BILLION for Zimbabwe, but because of "arrears", the country will see no money. So thousands of people must die, starve, and suffer all because of delinquency. Was the current situation in Zimbabwe caused by the IMF and World Bank? Many Zimbabweans believe this, in 1991 the World Bank pressured the country to cut spending in order to pay back the Bank. That meant social programs for the poor were cut, and had limited access to natural, technical and financial resources, due to the contraction of many public services for smallholder agriculture. In short, the poor suffer to pay back the rich.
Somalia: A country without a government since 1990, when the recognized, and United Nations approved, government was over thrown. In the 1980s, the IMF loaned Somalia 112 million, with interest the amount totals over $242 million, but the country is overdue, and cannot pay. Since 1990 Somalia has had several wars, within its country, and with Ethiopia, Kenya and Djibouti. Somalians assert such wars are to liberate ethnic Somalians in those respective countries, who want to be a part of Somalia. Of course, the United States, thru the CIA, funds warlords, such as Ethiopia, fighting the Islamic fighters who want to take over Somalia. Recently Ethiopian troops have withdrawn from Somalia, and the Islamic Courts have taken over, with NOT ONE CIVILIAN DEATH. Somalia is predominantly Muslim, and resistance to Islamic Court rule is only within the leaders the United States put in power.
I would love to see the Islamic Courts succeed, but with the country being 242 million in debt to the IMF, it looks like war will continue. Not to mention, according to the World Bank, Somalia is one of the poorest countries in the world, but only have a little over 500 million (as opposed to Zimbabwe's 1.6 BILLION), why doesn't the World Bank give more to this country, it asserts is the poorest? Not to mention, Somalia has one of the LOWEST HIV rates in Africa (0.5%), but the World Bank and the United Nations want to "address HIV/AIDS issues"--this makes no sense. Many assert because of the country's Islamic morals, HIV/AIDS is low, another good thing about the Islamic Courts taking over.
We shall see in the coming months how bad the situation will get in Somalia, because I guarantee you that the Islamic Court rule is not Bankster nor United Nations approved.
I thoroughly researched all countries that have a major conflict and their relation to their financial status within the IMF and World Bank, and only found Somalia and Zimbabwe were overdue, therefore had the most civil unrest and instability.
Now for the Bankster's perspective on the world economic crisis.
The IMF Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn, claims that more than just a stimulus needs to be done to fix the global economy. He asserts Restructuring the banking system would involve fully recognizing losses, segregating bad assets held by banks, preferably through a public institution that can take them over, and downsizing the sector "which means that it has in some way to shrink, that some part of it has to disappear." To do this would need strong public intervention.
What this translates to folks is taxpayer/citizen holding of BAD assets, which Strauss-Kahn admits is NOT profitable to citizens: The Managing Director said that Sweden provided a good example of how to tackle a banking crisis. In the 1990s, Sweden had set up a special public company to take over the toxic assets and remove them from the banking system. Later, after the system had recovered the assets were sold off and the company had ended up recovering some public money.
Read: SOME PUBLIC MONEY, NOT ALL. Not good, not good. Of course, this type of thinking is good for banks. They collect interest, which makes loans and restructuring profitable for banks. Bad assets are transferred out of the banks, to the public, and the PUBLIC, not the banks, loses money. Sucks if you're a tax-paying citizen.
Then the World Bank's take on things. Justin Lin, Senior VP and Chief Economist of the World Bank, wrote a looong paper on the subject. In short, he claims the world economic crisis is in fact the United States' fault. The housing market failed, and the rest of the world lost money--my problem with this is--no one was complaining when they were MAKING MONEY off the US housing market, but NOW, they lost money, and SOMETHING must be done to "share the burden" of all lost money. No, I don't think so, you play the Wall Street game, you take a chance of winning and losing, don't like it, don't play. Period.
Well, Lin from the World Bank, the US should begin regulating price inflation of assets. Meaning, the government should mandate how much profit an individual can make off an investment. This is absurd socialism.
Moreover, he argues that MORE regulation should be added to the financial sector--since we are a global world now, one mistake in America, affects EVERYONE--so we must inject more government supervision. Not just one government, but a coordinated effort on supervising the banks and investments. This means, the US could be governed by China, UK, and France regulations. I don't like this idea. We are American, we make our own rules, if you don't like it, don't invest in our country.
All banks are controlled by the World Bank, which works closely with the International Monetary Fund. In the US, we have been plagued with booms and busts due to our Federal Reserve, and because this is the way capitalism works. We, as capitalist Americans, cannot bow to the World Bank and IMF and "save the world" as the New York Times wants us to in their article. Nor can we bow to these banksters and allow them to dictate to us how much regulation we need, regulation that would be dictated by the WORLD. Keep in mind, THE WORLD, hate Americans, we caused everyone to lose money, therefore we must pay.
And we will. One way or the other. Remember Zimbabwe and Somalia? Yea, they got delinquent on their IMF payments, and now they are countries ravaged by war. If the US does NOT follow these recommendations, we too will be ravaged by war. Resistance is futile. It shall be interesting how the American public will react to global financial control.
Zimbabwe: Over the past year, Zimbabwe has battled a 100,000% inflation rate, as of April 2008, as well as a cholera outbreak that killed 3,000 people. More over the European Union has frozen the assets of 203 people and 40 organizations, in an attempt to pressure the current president Mugabe to step down. Interestingly enough, no aid will be coming to Zimbabwe in the future. The EU and United Nations claim it's because Mugabe is President. However, Mugabe was supported by the several Western nations and the UN for about 10 years (1979-1990). The University of Michigan even gave Mugabe an honorary degree. But, since 1990, all of Mugabe's honors have been taken away, because of his "racist" policies against Whites in Zimbabwe.
Mugabe is a controversial figure. Zimbabwe used to be the bread basket of Africa. Western nations claim widespread famine in the country is a result of Mugabe. Mugabe asserts the droughts are caused by British chemical weapons. Mugabe does not support imperialism and has even had a policy of taking white-minority owned land and re-distributing it to the poor Zimbabweans. This move cited a lot of criticism from the IMF and World Bank. Not to mention, Zimbabwe is over-due in paying its 150.8 million dollar loan from the IMF. The World Bank has approved 1.6 BILLION for Zimbabwe, but because of "arrears", the country will see no money. So thousands of people must die, starve, and suffer all because of delinquency. Was the current situation in Zimbabwe caused by the IMF and World Bank? Many Zimbabweans believe this, in 1991 the World Bank pressured the country to cut spending in order to pay back the Bank. That meant social programs for the poor were cut, and had limited access to natural, technical and financial resources, due to the contraction of many public services for smallholder agriculture. In short, the poor suffer to pay back the rich.
Somalia: A country without a government since 1990, when the recognized, and United Nations approved, government was over thrown. In the 1980s, the IMF loaned Somalia 112 million, with interest the amount totals over $242 million, but the country is overdue, and cannot pay. Since 1990 Somalia has had several wars, within its country, and with Ethiopia, Kenya and Djibouti. Somalians assert such wars are to liberate ethnic Somalians in those respective countries, who want to be a part of Somalia. Of course, the United States, thru the CIA, funds warlords, such as Ethiopia, fighting the Islamic fighters who want to take over Somalia. Recently Ethiopian troops have withdrawn from Somalia, and the Islamic Courts have taken over, with NOT ONE CIVILIAN DEATH. Somalia is predominantly Muslim, and resistance to Islamic Court rule is only within the leaders the United States put in power.
I would love to see the Islamic Courts succeed, but with the country being 242 million in debt to the IMF, it looks like war will continue. Not to mention, according to the World Bank, Somalia is one of the poorest countries in the world, but only have a little over 500 million (as opposed to Zimbabwe's 1.6 BILLION), why doesn't the World Bank give more to this country, it asserts is the poorest? Not to mention, Somalia has one of the LOWEST HIV rates in Africa (0.5%), but the World Bank and the United Nations want to "address HIV/AIDS issues"--this makes no sense. Many assert because of the country's Islamic morals, HIV/AIDS is low, another good thing about the Islamic Courts taking over.
We shall see in the coming months how bad the situation will get in Somalia, because I guarantee you that the Islamic Court rule is not Bankster nor United Nations approved.
I thoroughly researched all countries that have a major conflict and their relation to their financial status within the IMF and World Bank, and only found Somalia and Zimbabwe were overdue, therefore had the most civil unrest and instability.
Now for the Bankster's perspective on the world economic crisis.
The IMF Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn, claims that more than just a stimulus needs to be done to fix the global economy. He asserts Restructuring the banking system would involve fully recognizing losses, segregating bad assets held by banks, preferably through a public institution that can take them over, and downsizing the sector "which means that it has in some way to shrink, that some part of it has to disappear." To do this would need strong public intervention.
What this translates to folks is taxpayer/citizen holding of BAD assets, which Strauss-Kahn admits is NOT profitable to citizens: The Managing Director said that Sweden provided a good example of how to tackle a banking crisis. In the 1990s, Sweden had set up a special public company to take over the toxic assets and remove them from the banking system. Later, after the system had recovered the assets were sold off and the company had ended up recovering some public money.
Read: SOME PUBLIC MONEY, NOT ALL. Not good, not good. Of course, this type of thinking is good for banks. They collect interest, which makes loans and restructuring profitable for banks. Bad assets are transferred out of the banks, to the public, and the PUBLIC, not the banks, loses money. Sucks if you're a tax-paying citizen.
Then the World Bank's take on things. Justin Lin, Senior VP and Chief Economist of the World Bank, wrote a looong paper on the subject. In short, he claims the world economic crisis is in fact the United States' fault. The housing market failed, and the rest of the world lost money--my problem with this is--no one was complaining when they were MAKING MONEY off the US housing market, but NOW, they lost money, and SOMETHING must be done to "share the burden" of all lost money. No, I don't think so, you play the Wall Street game, you take a chance of winning and losing, don't like it, don't play. Period.
Well, Lin from the World Bank, the US should begin regulating price inflation of assets. Meaning, the government should mandate how much profit an individual can make off an investment. This is absurd socialism.
Moreover, he argues that MORE regulation should be added to the financial sector--since we are a global world now, one mistake in America, affects EVERYONE--so we must inject more government supervision. Not just one government, but a coordinated effort on supervising the banks and investments. This means, the US could be governed by China, UK, and France regulations. I don't like this idea. We are American, we make our own rules, if you don't like it, don't invest in our country.
All banks are controlled by the World Bank, which works closely with the International Monetary Fund. In the US, we have been plagued with booms and busts due to our Federal Reserve, and because this is the way capitalism works. We, as capitalist Americans, cannot bow to the World Bank and IMF and "save the world" as the New York Times wants us to in their article. Nor can we bow to these banksters and allow them to dictate to us how much regulation we need, regulation that would be dictated by the WORLD. Keep in mind, THE WORLD, hate Americans, we caused everyone to lose money, therefore we must pay.
And we will. One way or the other. Remember Zimbabwe and Somalia? Yea, they got delinquent on their IMF payments, and now they are countries ravaged by war. If the US does NOT follow these recommendations, we too will be ravaged by war. Resistance is futile. It shall be interesting how the American public will react to global financial control.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Change We Can't Afford
On Tuesday, January 20, the world witnessed the Immaculate Inauguration of Barack Obama. With him as President, the country will get the change we need, in health care, economics, and the war on terror. But I'm not so sure it's change for the better.
Obama wants to see universal health care in the US. His appointed health czar, Tom Daschle, wrote a book describing a plan to create a Federal Health Board, much like the Federal Reserve, to oversee American health care. That means, like the Federal Reserve, this board would consist of private health care workers (insurance companies, doctors, etc.) with no government control. Not to mention, Daschle wants to merge employers' plans, Medicaid and Medicare with an expanded FEHBP (Federal Employee Health Benefits Program) that would cover everyone.
Universal health care is BAD.
#1. There isn't a single government agency or division that runs efficiently; do we really want an organization that developed the U.S. Tax Code handling something as complex as health care?
#2. "Free" health care isn't really free since we must pay for it with taxes; expenses for health care would have to be paid for with higher taxes or spending cuts in other areas such as defense, education, etc.
#3. Profit motives, competition, and individual ingenuity have always led to greater cost control and effectiveness, as well as better technology. Without it, the health care technological advances will diminish.
#4. Government-controlled health care would lead to a decrease in patient flexibility--ONLY if the government says you can receive care, will you get care.
#5. Patients aren't likely to curb their drug costs and doctor visits if health care is free; thus, total costs will be several times what they are now, making health care more expensive.
#6. Just because Americans are uninsured doesn't mean they can't receive health care; nonprofits and government-run hospitals provide services to those who don't have insurance, and it is illegal to refuse emergency medical service because of a lack of insurance.
#7. Government-mandated procedures will likely reduce doctor flexibility and lead to poor patient care. Kind of like what the government did to teachers: the government takes away their expertise and makes them follow rules, and pass tests, instead of allowing them to act as the professionals that they are, in other words: the dumbing down of America.
#8. Healthy people who take care of themselves will have to pay for the burden of those who smoke, are obese, have STDs, have more kids than they need, etc.
#9. A long, painful transition will have to take place involving lost insurance industry jobs, business closures, and new patient record creation.
#10. Loss of private practice options and possible reduced pay may dissuade many would-be doctors from pursuing the profession.
#11. Malpractice lawsuit costs, which are already sky-high, could further explode since universal care may expose the government to legal liability, and the possibility to sue someone with deep pockets usually invites more lawsuits.
#12. Government is more likely to pass additional restrictions or increase taxes on smoking, fast food, drinking soft drinks, eating candy, etc., leading to a further loss of personal freedoms.
#13. Like social security, any government benefit eventually is taken as a "right" by the public, meaning that it's politically near impossible to remove or curtail it later on when costs get out of control.
Lest us not forget the economy. Obama loves to harp on the "disappearance" of the working middle class, and openly states that only the wealthy have it good in America. Really? According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, average hourly earnings of production and non-supervisory workers, adjusted for inflation, fell by 4 percent between 1975 and 2005. But those figures deceive because they omit fringe benefits like health insurance, pensions and paid leave, which make up a bigger share of total compensation than before. The numbers also rely on a mismeasure of inflation.
When those flaws are corrected, a very different trend leaps off the page. Median wages, says Fitzgerald, rose 28 percent between 1975 and 2005. Nor were the gains restricted to Bill Gates and Hannah Montana: Significant gains occurred in the middle as well.
The figures that suggest families are struggling to stay even overlook some types of income, and they don't account for the fact that households have gotten smaller on average. After accounting for such things, Fitzgerald found that "inflation-adjusted median household income for most household types increased by roughly 44 percent to 62 percent from 1976 to 2006."
Once again, kudos to American capitalism (the drive to make profits) for making life easier for Americans. The School of Gloom doesn't want you to know this, because then you wouldn't support things like an $800 BILLION dollar "stimulus package", which will nothing but create problems:
The $800 billion economic "stimulus" bill may be more appropriately called the "Obama debt plan." It will, after all, dump $6,700 per household of new debt into the laps of our children and grandchildren.
Whether it will actually stimulate the economy is another matter. So perhaps politicians can first answer a few questions from the back of the classroom:
1) President-elect Obama claims that spending approximately $800 billion will create 3.675 million new jobs. That comes to $217,000 per job. This doesn't sound like a very good value, especially with the national average salary around $40,000. Wouldn't it be cheaper to just mail each of these workers a $40,000 check?
2) Politicians say deficit spending will expand the economy (as if President Bush's $300 billion budget deficits brought economic nirvana). If that were true, then the current $1.2 trillion deficit — the largest in history — would already be rescuing the economy. It's obviously not. So why would $800 billion more of the same suddenly end the recession?
3) We're told that government spending will add new spending power to the economy. But Congress doesn't have a vault of money waiting to be distributed: Every dollar lawmakers "inject" into the economy must first be taxed or borrowed out of the economy. If government borrows the money from American investors, investment spending drops accordingly. If it's borrowed from foreigners, net exports drop accordingly. How does borrowing $800 billion from one group of people and giving that $800 billion to another group of people make us wealthier?
4) Some answer the previous question by saying that transferring income from savers to spenders keeps more money circulating through the economy. That made some sense in the 1930s when people hid their savings in mattresses because they didn't trust the banks. But today, people use their savings to pay down debt, invest, or put it in banks — in each case, making the purchasing power available to others wishing to borrow. Thus, savings circulate through the investment spending side of the economy. How does transferring money out of investment help?
5) Policymakers are basing the "stimulus" bill on economic models that wrongly assume every $1 of government spending increases the economy by approximately $1.60. Is it really that simple? By that logic, debt-ridden, big-government countries like Italy, France, and Germany should be wealthier than America. And why stop at $800 billion? Such logic suggests unlimited prosperity could be guaranteed by the government borrowing and spending $800 trillion. Should America be basing such costly decisions on these types of economic models?
6) Lawmakers tell us every $1 billion in highway "stimulus" can be spent creating 34,779 new construction jobs. But Congress must first borrow that $1 billion out of the private economy. Won't the private sector then lose the same number of jobs?
7) During the 1930s, New Deal lawmakers doubled federal spending — and unemployment remained above 20 percent until World War II. More recently, Japan responded to a 1990 recession by passing 10 "stimulus" bills over 8 years (building the largest national debt in the industrialized world) — and their economy remained stagnant. Why do lawmakers believe the same failed approach will succeed for the U.S. today?
8) The economy sank because people over-borrowed for houses they couldn't afford, and financial institutions over-borrowed for investments they badly misjudged. Washington's solution is to borrow $800 billion that it cannot afford. How will adding $800 billion to the national debt (which will also raise interest rates) solve a recession created by imprudent borrowing? And who will bail out the American taxpayer when the bill comes due?
9) Temporary tax rebates were implemented in 1975, 2001, and 2008, and most economists agree they failed to help the economy. Long-term marginal tax rate reductions implemented in 1982 and 2003 both substantially increased economic growth. So why are lawmakers planning another round of temporary tax rebates, followed by an increase in tax rates?
10) Mayors have pledged to spend stimulus funds on items such as a mob museum in Nevada, a polar bear exhibit in Rhode Island, and curbing prostitution in Dayton, Ohio. As National Review asked, how come one Bridge to Nowhere is a national embarrassment and 1,000 Bridges to Nowhere are a "stimulus?" Given the 11,000 annual earmarks, why should taxpayers trust politicians to spend this money better than they would spend it themselves?
Now the War on Terror. Obama has pledged to close Guantanamo, leave Iraq, and forge peace in Afghanistan. Closing Guantanamo, means finding other countries to take in released prisoners, who are dangerous to the US. This translates to American involvement/surveillance of any country that takes in a released Guantanamo prisoner. No country wants to do that, not to mention, these prisoners have been held for almost 8 years, without a trial. There is no evidence against these "terrorists", therefore we should let them go without any further ado.
Leaving Iraq sounds noble, but I guarantee you by July, we will send in more troops. Or Iran might act up, and we'll send in troops there. Same with Afghanistan, I bet Pakistan is where we send in troops. Point being: the War on Terror will never end, and there will always be a reason why our troops and bases must be sent and maintained overseas. The reasons being: oil, cheap labor, and drug trade--but of course the American public will hear the noble "we need to spread democracy" argument because the "extremists want all Christians dead". It's an historical repeat of the Crusades.
Obama wants to see universal health care in the US. His appointed health czar, Tom Daschle, wrote a book describing a plan to create a Federal Health Board, much like the Federal Reserve, to oversee American health care. That means, like the Federal Reserve, this board would consist of private health care workers (insurance companies, doctors, etc.) with no government control. Not to mention, Daschle wants to merge employers' plans, Medicaid and Medicare with an expanded FEHBP (Federal Employee Health Benefits Program) that would cover everyone.
Universal health care is BAD.
#1. There isn't a single government agency or division that runs efficiently; do we really want an organization that developed the U.S. Tax Code handling something as complex as health care?
#2. "Free" health care isn't really free since we must pay for it with taxes; expenses for health care would have to be paid for with higher taxes or spending cuts in other areas such as defense, education, etc.
#3. Profit motives, competition, and individual ingenuity have always led to greater cost control and effectiveness, as well as better technology. Without it, the health care technological advances will diminish.
#4. Government-controlled health care would lead to a decrease in patient flexibility--ONLY if the government says you can receive care, will you get care.
#5. Patients aren't likely to curb their drug costs and doctor visits if health care is free; thus, total costs will be several times what they are now, making health care more expensive.
#6. Just because Americans are uninsured doesn't mean they can't receive health care; nonprofits and government-run hospitals provide services to those who don't have insurance, and it is illegal to refuse emergency medical service because of a lack of insurance.
#7. Government-mandated procedures will likely reduce doctor flexibility and lead to poor patient care. Kind of like what the government did to teachers: the government takes away their expertise and makes them follow rules, and pass tests, instead of allowing them to act as the professionals that they are, in other words: the dumbing down of America.
#8. Healthy people who take care of themselves will have to pay for the burden of those who smoke, are obese, have STDs, have more kids than they need, etc.
#9. A long, painful transition will have to take place involving lost insurance industry jobs, business closures, and new patient record creation.
#10. Loss of private practice options and possible reduced pay may dissuade many would-be doctors from pursuing the profession.
#11. Malpractice lawsuit costs, which are already sky-high, could further explode since universal care may expose the government to legal liability, and the possibility to sue someone with deep pockets usually invites more lawsuits.
#12. Government is more likely to pass additional restrictions or increase taxes on smoking, fast food, drinking soft drinks, eating candy, etc., leading to a further loss of personal freedoms.
#13. Like social security, any government benefit eventually is taken as a "right" by the public, meaning that it's politically near impossible to remove or curtail it later on when costs get out of control.
Lest us not forget the economy. Obama loves to harp on the "disappearance" of the working middle class, and openly states that only the wealthy have it good in America. Really? According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, average hourly earnings of production and non-supervisory workers, adjusted for inflation, fell by 4 percent between 1975 and 2005. But those figures deceive because they omit fringe benefits like health insurance, pensions and paid leave, which make up a bigger share of total compensation than before. The numbers also rely on a mismeasure of inflation.
When those flaws are corrected, a very different trend leaps off the page. Median wages, says Fitzgerald, rose 28 percent between 1975 and 2005. Nor were the gains restricted to Bill Gates and Hannah Montana: Significant gains occurred in the middle as well.
The figures that suggest families are struggling to stay even overlook some types of income, and they don't account for the fact that households have gotten smaller on average. After accounting for such things, Fitzgerald found that "inflation-adjusted median household income for most household types increased by roughly 44 percent to 62 percent from 1976 to 2006."
Once again, kudos to American capitalism (the drive to make profits) for making life easier for Americans. The School of Gloom doesn't want you to know this, because then you wouldn't support things like an $800 BILLION dollar "stimulus package", which will nothing but create problems:
The $800 billion economic "stimulus" bill may be more appropriately called the "Obama debt plan." It will, after all, dump $6,700 per household of new debt into the laps of our children and grandchildren.
Whether it will actually stimulate the economy is another matter. So perhaps politicians can first answer a few questions from the back of the classroom:
1) President-elect Obama claims that spending approximately $800 billion will create 3.675 million new jobs. That comes to $217,000 per job. This doesn't sound like a very good value, especially with the national average salary around $40,000. Wouldn't it be cheaper to just mail each of these workers a $40,000 check?
2) Politicians say deficit spending will expand the economy (as if President Bush's $300 billion budget deficits brought economic nirvana). If that were true, then the current $1.2 trillion deficit — the largest in history — would already be rescuing the economy. It's obviously not. So why would $800 billion more of the same suddenly end the recession?
3) We're told that government spending will add new spending power to the economy. But Congress doesn't have a vault of money waiting to be distributed: Every dollar lawmakers "inject" into the economy must first be taxed or borrowed out of the economy. If government borrows the money from American investors, investment spending drops accordingly. If it's borrowed from foreigners, net exports drop accordingly. How does borrowing $800 billion from one group of people and giving that $800 billion to another group of people make us wealthier?
4) Some answer the previous question by saying that transferring income from savers to spenders keeps more money circulating through the economy. That made some sense in the 1930s when people hid their savings in mattresses because they didn't trust the banks. But today, people use their savings to pay down debt, invest, or put it in banks — in each case, making the purchasing power available to others wishing to borrow. Thus, savings circulate through the investment spending side of the economy. How does transferring money out of investment help?
5) Policymakers are basing the "stimulus" bill on economic models that wrongly assume every $1 of government spending increases the economy by approximately $1.60. Is it really that simple? By that logic, debt-ridden, big-government countries like Italy, France, and Germany should be wealthier than America. And why stop at $800 billion? Such logic suggests unlimited prosperity could be guaranteed by the government borrowing and spending $800 trillion. Should America be basing such costly decisions on these types of economic models?
6) Lawmakers tell us every $1 billion in highway "stimulus" can be spent creating 34,779 new construction jobs. But Congress must first borrow that $1 billion out of the private economy. Won't the private sector then lose the same number of jobs?
7) During the 1930s, New Deal lawmakers doubled federal spending — and unemployment remained above 20 percent until World War II. More recently, Japan responded to a 1990 recession by passing 10 "stimulus" bills over 8 years (building the largest national debt in the industrialized world) — and their economy remained stagnant. Why do lawmakers believe the same failed approach will succeed for the U.S. today?
8) The economy sank because people over-borrowed for houses they couldn't afford, and financial institutions over-borrowed for investments they badly misjudged. Washington's solution is to borrow $800 billion that it cannot afford. How will adding $800 billion to the national debt (which will also raise interest rates) solve a recession created by imprudent borrowing? And who will bail out the American taxpayer when the bill comes due?
9) Temporary tax rebates were implemented in 1975, 2001, and 2008, and most economists agree they failed to help the economy. Long-term marginal tax rate reductions implemented in 1982 and 2003 both substantially increased economic growth. So why are lawmakers planning another round of temporary tax rebates, followed by an increase in tax rates?
10) Mayors have pledged to spend stimulus funds on items such as a mob museum in Nevada, a polar bear exhibit in Rhode Island, and curbing prostitution in Dayton, Ohio. As National Review asked, how come one Bridge to Nowhere is a national embarrassment and 1,000 Bridges to Nowhere are a "stimulus?" Given the 11,000 annual earmarks, why should taxpayers trust politicians to spend this money better than they would spend it themselves?
Now the War on Terror. Obama has pledged to close Guantanamo, leave Iraq, and forge peace in Afghanistan. Closing Guantanamo, means finding other countries to take in released prisoners, who are dangerous to the US. This translates to American involvement/surveillance of any country that takes in a released Guantanamo prisoner. No country wants to do that, not to mention, these prisoners have been held for almost 8 years, without a trial. There is no evidence against these "terrorists", therefore we should let them go without any further ado.
Leaving Iraq sounds noble, but I guarantee you by July, we will send in more troops. Or Iran might act up, and we'll send in troops there. Same with Afghanistan, I bet Pakistan is where we send in troops. Point being: the War on Terror will never end, and there will always be a reason why our troops and bases must be sent and maintained overseas. The reasons being: oil, cheap labor, and drug trade--but of course the American public will hear the noble "we need to spread democracy" argument because the "extremists want all Christians dead". It's an historical repeat of the Crusades.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)