Had an investigation been done into the crime of failing to file the “currency transaction reports” in August 2001, then we would know who made the cash withdrawals in $100 bills amounting to the $5 billion surge.
When reviewing the record of July and August of 2001, Bill Bergman noticed a $5 billion surge in the currency component of the M1 money supply—the third largest such increase since 1947. Bergman asked about this anomaly—and was removed from his investigative duties.
It’s been over six years since 9/11, but U.S. regulatory entities have been slow to follow through with reports about the complex financial transactions that occurred just prior to and following the attacks. Such research could shed light on such questions as who was behind them—and who benefited—and could help lay to rest the rumors that have been festering.
Warning bells about anomalies in the fiscal sector were sounded in the summer of 2001, but not heeded.
Among those who has since raised questions was Bill Bergman. As a financial market analyst for the Federal Reserve, he was assigned in 2003 to review the record of July and August of 2001. He noticed an unusual surge in the currency component of the M1 money supply (cash circulating outside of banks) during that period. The surge totaled over $5 billion above the norm for a two-month increase.
The increase in August alone was the third largest single monthly increase since 1947, even after a significantly above-average month in July.
The feared recession in the US economy has already arrived, according to a report from Merrill Lynch. It said that Friday’s employment report, which sent shares tumbling worldwide, confirmed that the US is in the first month of a recession.
Its view is controversial, with banks such as Lehman Brothers disagreeing.
But a reserve member of the committee that sets US rates warned that it could do little about the below-trend growth expected in the next six months.
“I am concerned that developments on the inflation front will make the Fed’s policy decisions more difficult in 2008,” Charles Plosser, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia said.
He was referring to the problems faced by the US Federal Reserve, which might want to cut interest rates to avoid a recession, but is worried about inflationary factors such as $100-a-barrel oil.
Crude oil prices hit an all-time high this week, closing above $98 a barrel for the first time in history.
According to the AAA, many drivers in my home state of California are already paying more than $4 a gallon for regular unleaded gas. And in one town south of Big Sur, unleaded gas topped $5 a gallon.
The U.S. dollar is at an all-time low, even when compared against the hapless Canadian loonie. Five years ago, a loonie was worth 60 cents. Today, it’s worth $1.12 and climbing.
Yesterday, WorldNetDaily reported that the Chinese are considering abandoning the U.S. dollar as their national reserve currency. WND quoted Craig Smith’s assessment of the consequences of such a move by Beijing on our economy: “If that were to happen, all bets are off, and we will be in a depression that makes 1929 look like child’s play, or we will experience Weimar Republic inflation as the dollar makes extreme moves toward devaluations.”
On Tuesday, the U.S. national debt topped $9 trillion for the first time in history, according to the U.S. Treasury Department’s daily accounting of the national debt. Nine trillion dollars! The number is so staggeringly high that it exceeds our ability to comprehend it in monetary units.
Million, billion, trillion – in financial terms, for most of us, it means a lot of money, really a lot of money, but that is about as specific a picture as most ordinary people can grasp.
Meet Hillary Clinton, the new puppet for the New World Order.
Vetted by Murdoch, the Bilderberg group and member of the council for foreign relations, funded by big capital and the coporate media she has already anounced that she will not end the war in Iraq for at least a year into her precidency “if elected”. (travellerev)
By JAKE TAPPER
Oct. 5, 2007 —
In a scathing attack, Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards went after front-runner Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., Friday, calling her a “corporate Democrat,” comparing top Clinton campaign strategist Mark Penn to former Bush aide Karl Rove and assailing Penn’s ties to Blackwater USA, the embattled private firm of military contractors accused by the Iraqi government of firing upon and killing 11 unarmed Iraqi civilians last month.
“Bush has been a perfect example of cronyism because Blackwater has given hundreds of thousands of dollars to Republicans and to President Bush,” Edwards said in an interview with the Associated Press while campaigning in Iowa. “I also saw this morning that Sen. Clinton’s primary adviser, Mark Penn, who is like her Karl Rove — his firm is representing Blackwater.”
Edwards said that he thinks “it is important for Iowa caucus-goers to understand the choices they have in this election. And it is the reason I continue to say we don’t want to replace a group of corporate Republicans with a group of corporate Democrats. I think it is important for caucus-goers to see this choice.”
Eight years of Biofuels (ethanol) policy and legislation has cemented in place the first world wide food cabal, which promises a humanitarian disaster, a famine more serious than those caused by any tsunami, earthquake or drought. This crisis is not in the dim future, it is here.
Congress has, in a series of acts passed in this millennium, handed the perfect monopoly to what appears to be few giant agribusiness companies that already have enormous economic power, but which may be a much broader cabal.
If you can afford $6.00 a gallon for milk, $4.00 for a loaf of bread and still have money left over for a $50.00 steak at Outback, you may be prepared for 2008, but what about the future? Even if you and I may think we are prepared financially to buy food, whatever the cost, we must have concern for the billion souls who are not and who are condemned to starvation by the corn-to-alcohol conversion scheme.
Subsidies do not make the giant agribusiness firms criminals, only opportunists. Their Public Relations distortion about the value of grain alcohol as fuel is criminal. Congressmen are the real cheats, for they could acknowledge this if they wanted to, but they do not, so they share in the crimes-grand theft and murder by starvation. This being a “Christian” society, it falls to those who heed Jesus Christ’s repeated admonitions to feed the needy and protect those who cannot protect themselves to stop corn-to-alcohol conversion. Make no mistake this is a moral issue.
Sep. 26, 2007 (Thomson Financial delivered by Newstex) –
WASHINGTON (AP) – Defense stocks on Wednesday hit new highs as Defense Secretary Robert Gates requested an extra $42 billion in funding from Congress to cover military costs in Iraq and Afghanistan in 2008.
The AMEX Defense Index, which tracks 14 major defense company stocks, rose 14.25 to a high of 1,686.72 in afternoon trading. Since last year, the index has risen roughly 47 percent, outperforming the broader S&P 500 index, which has climbed nearly 15 percent over the same period.
Although the anticipated request for more funding does not come as a surprise to Wall Street, the Pentagon’s message nevertheless reinforces the idea that defense spending will remain high in the near-term, said Myles Walton, a CIBC World Market Corp. analyst.
Gates and Peter Pace, the soon-to-retire chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said in prepared testimony before the Senate’s appropriations committee that additional funding will include $11 billion to buy another 7,000 mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicles on top of the 8,000 vehicles already on order, and $9 billion to provide new equipment and technology.
Among the defense companies likely to benefit from additional wartime spending are: Force Protection Industries Inc., General Dynamics Corp. (NYSE:GD) , Ceradyne Inc. (NASDAQ:CRDN) and Oshkosh Truck Corp. (NYSE:OSK)
Questions loom whether China is behind recent dollar sales—if it is, America’s way of life is about to change. The only question is how badly and how fast. By Robert MorleyThe U.S. dollar is standing at the edge of a cliff, and most people don’t even know it.
Data released by the New York Federal Reserve shows that foreign central banks have been net sellers of U.S. treasuries over the past five weeks, with $48 billion having been sold since late July, and $32 billion in just the last two weeks.
The U.S. runs budget deficits each year. If foreigners stop buying treasuries—or worse, start selling them—the dollar could be in big trouble.
What is money, who creates it? The government? Well, no. American money is created by the Federal bank of America, lovingly refered to as the Feds. The problem is that the Feds are not federal at all. It is a privatly owned financial institution awed only by a very small group of very powerful individuals. How do they do it, and why is an privatly owned instituut allowed to control the money flow around the world? Watch the video money is debt and learn.
Recent years have seen a substantial change in US power projection capability. For decades this capability was based on the use of aircraft carriers; now the US possesses the unique capability of executing an extensive, intercontinental attack without the need to operate from foreign territory. An American attack on Iran, if executed, could possibly be the first significant demonstration of this capability. The next stage will be the ability to carry out such an operation within a shorter response time than is currently possible.
Aircraft carriers and their escort ships have been a dominant component in almost every American military action since the end of the Second World War. To many observers, the aircraft carrier, perhaps more than anything else, has been a symbol of US military might. Even today, when voices are heard speculating over a possible US military action against Iran, the natural tendency is to check how many aircraft carriers are situated in the Persian Gulf. Modifications in the deployment and numbers of aircraft carriers are perceived as essential data with regard to US preparedness for launching a military action.
However in recent years the US has been involved in an ongoing process that will change the current state of affairs. In fact, already today aircraft carrier deployment is not necessarily a key indicator of US operational preparedness. Instead, a possible American military move against Iran is likely to rely on forces stationed in the US itself and on weapons whose locations would be disclosed only after opening fire. These capabilities have been employed in the past, but they are gradually playing an increasingly central role in US combat plans. At this stage advanced US power projection capability is still being developed; however, if all goes according to plan, within a decade – and perhaps sooner – the US is expected to undergo a revolutionary change on this level.
Sarah Baxter, Washington THE Pentagon has drawn up plans for massive airstrikes against 1,200 targets in Iran, designed to annihilate the Iranians’ military capability in three days, according to a national security expert.
Alexis Debat, director of terrorism and national security at the Nixon Center, said last week that US military planners were not preparing for “pinprick strikes” against Iran’s nuclear facilities. “They’re about taking out the entire Iranian military,” he said.
By Benjamin Dangl, AlterNet. Posted August 31, 2007.Signs are emerging of a new wave of U.S.-backed militarism in Latin America.
Two soldiers in Paraguay stand in front of a camera. One of them holds an automatic weapon. John Lennon’s “Imagine” plays in the background. This Orwellian juxtaposition of war and peace is from a new video posted online by U.S. soldiers stationed in Paraguay. The video footage and other military activity in this heart of the continent represent a new wave of U.S.-backed militarism in Latin America.
It’s a reprise of a familiar tune. In the 1970s and 1980s, Paraguay’s longtime dictator, Gen. Alfredo Stroessner, collaborated with the region’s other dictators through Operation Condor, which used kidnapping, torture and murder to squash dissent and political opponents. Stroessner’s human rights record was so bad that even Ronald Reagan distanced himself from the leader. Carrying on this infamous legacy, Paraguay now illustrates four new characteristics of Latin America’s right-wing militarism: joint exercises with the U.S. military in counterinsurgency training, monitoring potential dissidents and social organizations, the use of private mercenaries for security and the criminalization of social protest through “anti-terrorism” tactics and legislation.
By Steve Negus, Iraq Correspondent
Published: August 29 2007 22:39 | Last updated: August 29 2007 22:39
Iraq’s ministry of industry and minerals would open up all 65 of its state-owned enterprises to joint ventures with international investors by the end of the year, the minister said on Wednesday.
“We have 65 facilities under our banner and all of them will be made available for joint ventures,” Fawzi Hariri told the Financial Times on Wednesday. He was speaking at a conference in Dubai on investment opportunities in Iraq.
Attracting foreign investment is seen as vital to the reconstruction of the economy, to creating employment and, the government hopes, to reducing sectarian violence.
Mr Hariri said that the ministry was already involved in discussions on investing in cement companies in the southern provinces of Karbala and Muthanna, in the northern governorate of Kirkuk and in the far-western district of al-Qaem on the Syrian border.
It has spoken to the French-owned Lafarge group and Egypt’s Orascom. Mr Hariri said on Wednesday that he also hoped to attract Mitsubishi from Japan, Dow Chemicals from the US and other companies to the ministry’s portfolio of petrochemical and heavy industry interests.
By Ray McGovern Not another warning about war with Iran! Well, suck it up. President George W. Bush’s speech Tuesday makes clear his plan to attack Iran, and how the intelligence, as was the case before the attack on Iraq, is being “fixed around the policy.
It’s not about putative Iranian “weapons of mass destruction” – not even ostensibly. It is about the requirement for a scapegoat for U.S. reverses in Iraq, and the felt need to create a casus belli by provoking Iran in such a way as to “justify” armed retaliation – perhaps extending to an attempt to destroy its nuclear-related facilities.
Bush’s Aug. 28 speech to the American Legion came five years after a very similar presentation by Vice President Dick Cheney. Addressing the Veterans of Foreign Wars on Aug. 26, 2002, Cheney set the meretricious terms of reference for war on Iraq.
Sitting on the same stage that evening was former CENTCOM commander Marine Gen. Anthony Zinni, who was being honored at the VFW convention. Zinni later said he was shocked to hear a depiction of intelligence (Iraq has WMD and is amassing them to use against us) that did not square with what he knew. Although Zinni had retired two years before, his role as consultant had enabled him to stay up to date on key intelligence findings.
For the better part of a year every senior government official involved with the economy, from Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke to Treasure Secretary Henry Paulson, has said that the bursting housing bubble and the sub-prime mortgage meltdown were “contained.” This, we now know, was the financial equivalent of “Mission Accomplished.” If only reality could be managed forever with sound bites.
The question now is not whether the problem is contained but how damaging will be the fallout. Not whether the contagion will infect other sectors of the economy, but how badly. Not whether other economies will be dragged into the maelstrom, but how many and how deeply. And the most important question, where’s the bottom?
The easy truth is that nobody knows the precise answer to these questions. The harder truth is that things will get a lot worse before they get better and that the bottom will be much lower than official posturing now dares reveal.
The problem with the market today has two roots. The first one is intrinsic to the market itself. The second is part of the larger economic context in which the market operates.
The North American Free Trade Agreement is the world’s most advanced example of the U.S.-led free trade model. It’s not just about economics any more. The expansion of NAFTA into the Security and Prosperity Partnership reveals the road ahead for other nations entering into free trade agreements. It is not a road most nations — or the U.S. public — would take if they knew where it led. The first problem is that very few people know about this next step of “deep integration.” In March 2005, Presidents George Bush, Vicente Fox and Prime Minister Paul Martin in Waco, Texas launched the Security and Prosperity Partnership with a splash. Although it had few visible results, the Waco meeting of the “Three Amigos” set into motion an underground process that spawned its own working groups, rules, recommendations, and agreements — all below the radar of the legislatures and the public in the three nations. These rules and trinational programs have profound effect on the environment, the daily lives of citizens, and the future of all three countries.The SPP not only further greases the wheels of corporate cooperation and potentially increases U.S. access to Mexican oil. Its security component represents a new and ominous form of integration, all in the name of counter-terrorism.
Global Research, August 29, 2007
“We are now at the year 1908, which was the year that the Carnegie Foundation began operations. And, in that year, the trustees meeting, for the first time, raised a specific question, which they discussed throughout the balance of the year, in a very learned fashion. And the question is this: Is there any means known more effective than war, assuming you wish to alter the life of an entire people? And they conclude that, no more effective means to that end is known to humanity, than war. So then, in 1909, they raise the second question, and discuss it, namely, how do we involve the United States in a war?”
-Norman Dobbs, U.S. Congressional Special Committee for the Investigate of Tax-Exempt Foundations (1982)
War is the ultimate means of attempting to change societies and reshape nations. It is through war that national economies and political structures can be forcibly restructured. War is, potentially, the ultimate economic shock therapy. The wars in the Middle East are stepping stones towards establishing a vision of global order that has been in the hearts and minds of the Anglo-American establishment for years. That vision is global ascendancy.
Towards the “New International Order” through the “Global War on Terror”
“There is a chance for the President of the United States [George W. Bush Jr.] to use this disaster [meaning the attacks of September 11, 2001] to carry out what his father…a phrase his father [George H. Bush Sr.] used I think only once, and it hasn’t been used since … and that is a new world order. Think about this. We already have the support of NATO in a remarkable historic departure.”