Log in

Archive for January, 2011

The Fed Is Now In The Business Of Manipulating The Stock Market.

January 30th, 2011 by


Jim Grant: " The Fed Is Now In The Business Of Manipulating The Stock Market…Should Confess It Has Sinned Grievously"

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 01/28/2011 16:03 -0500


Jim Grant, who will never be accused of being a fan of the Criminal Reserve, and whose views on what will happen to asset prices in a printer-happy world are gradually being validated, appeared on Bloomberg TV, telling Margaret Brennan upfront that Bernanke owes the world an apology.

 Alas, after various revolutions around the world have been catalyzed by Bernanke's policies, we have a feeling that ever more oppressed people will soon see the Printer in Chief as a patron saint of violent revolution, alas against crony regimes fully supported by the US (and hopefully the US will view it the same way when its time comes).

That aside, Grant's criticism of the Fed should really start to grate on the Chaircreature: "I think what would be very good for the Fed if there would be a confession, the Fed should confess that it has sinned grievously, and is in violation of every single precept of its founders and every single convention of classical central banking. Quantitative Easing is a symptom of the difficulties that the Fed has created for itself. The Fed is running a balance sheet which if it were the balance sheet attached to a bank in the private sector would probably move the FDIC to shut it down. The New York Branch of the Fed is leveraged more than 80 to 1. Meaning, that a loss of asset value of less than 1.5% would send it into receivership if it were a different kind of institution…The Fed is now in the business of manipulating the stock market."

Jim also has some very critical discussions on how the Fed never settles up on the $3.4 trillion in custodial debt on its books. As always, we can't get enough as more and more mainstream figures turn to bashing that biggest abortion of modern capital markets.



If you think the above is bad, watch this video


Then go to his site at:


By all rights you should read every word this man has to say, because then you will

be on your way to proving our government is the lowest form of vultures




January 29th, 2011 by



By James P. Harvey

Somewhere in the modern evolution of social morals, boredom became an epidemic and spread over the world like a light blocking dust storm and humanity became obsessed with stability destroying diversity. No longer content with ten laws to adhere too, humanity deserted into the abyss of freewill and pursued their own authority.

With this one irrational act, humanity cut their anchor to the only safe way to sail through the storms of life, and now risk not only redemption, but a life devoid of any stability or control. With their anchor gone it was not long until they lost their rudder and either crashed on the rocks, or wandered the endless sea and consumed all of their life sustaining provisions, then lost faith in a merciful God.

Suddenly, on the horizon there appeared a fleet of Global Bankers, and like sheep to the slaughter, the survivors climbed aboard and worshiped the sheep-skinned wolves for saving them from disaster.

Fast forward to the present, and we now have a government, and a society that is so full of contradictions that no one can live their life without breaking some unknown law, or know how to communicate with a stranger for fear of offending them. Common sense and logic is irrationally contradicted at home, in the family, at church, work, and especially in our government and academia. Let me itemize just a few that defy logic.


Preparing children to become intellectually developed adults, and responsible citizens.


Starting with the family, a child is born helpless and dependent on parents for their physical nourishment, intellectual and spiritual development, and personal safety. So what do the parents do? They drop the child off at a day care center with no idea of how and what these people are going to do or say that will impact the child for life. I call this a contradiction in parental responsibility and love for child. No one knows what this child will be exposed to from the staff, or the other children, and it is not yet capable of a rational discussion with it’s parents when it is disciplined for something considered normal in day school and taboo at home, so contradiction impedes the child’s intellectual development. The reverse situation may just as easily be the reason for the child’s confusion, as it knows not who is right. All kinds of confusing contradictions in the child’s early years will not contribute anything but apathy or rebellion toward learning. Space is not here available to make this a dissertation on how to prepare a child for more advanced learning, self discipline, and a hungry mind, but one thing is clear, and that is, most parents who have been lured into a two worker debt cycle are not qualified to assist in a child’s intellectual development. To win a race, one needs to get a good start!


A family that pray’s together, stay’s together.


How many times have you heard that and witnessed the opposite?  If a Church teaches that God loves everyone, so it does not matter what church you attend, and your neighbor say’s that God is a tyrant for allowing evil to exist, what do you expect a child will think of his God? Government controlled schools are actively preventing Christianity from even being mentioned on school property, while some of your child’s most respected teachers bring a prayer rug with them. Yet, everyone is supposed to love one another and treat each other as an equal. I beg to differ with this contradicting policy, not just because I am a Christian, but because it flies in the face of rational thought and is tearing families apart, which is the glue that binds society together. I can be a good neighbor to a Mormon, or any other denomination, but I will not allow their religion to affect my family. Once again it is irrational and contradictory to teach that red is also black, simply because both are colors. Theological contradictions destroy a family.


Contradictions abound in the work place and destroy productivity.


Whoever told you that two men could walk together, and not be agreed was probably kissing you on the back of your neck at the same time and for two to try and work together without being agreed, is non productive. A perfect example is for two ironworkers erecting a high-rise office building and one man thinks it is perfectly alright to sleep with the other mans wife. Do I need to tell you one will go in the hole? That’s an ironworkers expression for falling, not having sex. Diversity, no matter where or how you find it, creates contradictions that can, and does, get people murdered. It is not productive for two people to work together when something unacceptable is between them, or for the employer to deny a person their constitutional rights. If your employer fires you for not working over-time because your wife is giving birth, he has violated your right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, because your wife will kill you for losing your job. All joking aside, the contradictions in the work place are obscene, and it’s not always the employer, or the employee who is to blame. Consider the contradiction of the government imposing laws that take away a company’s ability to make a profit, and they go bankrupt.

Dear readers this subject of government contradictions is so far beyond anything rational it’s a waste of my time to write it and yours’ to read it. Surely, you can think of a thousand contradictions that both State and Federal Government impose on businesses, both large and small.


The results of socio-political contradictions in America.


In the beginning we were lied to about what kind of government we were given, and from repeating the lie generation after generation we came to accept it as truth and supported it with our lives and heart. Now, we must step back and compare what we have become, to the principals we were willing to die for. America, when judged by those principals is no different than a family who enjoyed prosperity so much, they became addicted to drugs and lost everything they loved.

A government that lies to its people is an intentional contradiction.

A government that robs from its people and gives to the elite bankers is an intentional contradiction. A government that organizes attacks on its people to gain support for killing other nation’s people is the most putrid of all contradictions. A government that intentionally puts its soldiers in harms way to gain support for robbing other nations of their resources is an intentional contradiction and then, not providing for its soldiers and giving the profits to the Global Bankers is another contradiction. A government that interferes with honest attempts to correct these contradictions by controlling the election process is nothing to be proud of, and any democracy is a contradiction when way over fifty percent of the people are forced to accept a corrupt bureaucracy that makes laws without being elected. Democracy, even with honest elections is a contradiction when the minority of the people has to suffer the tyranny of the majority, which I don’t believe has ever happened. By that I mean, honest elections! That America’s strength is in our diversity is the biggest contradiction of this century, because we are not just diverse racially, we have become diverse and divisive politically to the point of fracture. Obama is just one in a string of master dividers, and he does not lead this nation, because his policy is not his, it is his masters, the global banksters, and he would be murdered in a heart beat if he disobeyed. So would everyone in the house, senate, and judiciary. If you are not aware of this you have not been paying attention, or you have been blinded by your shinning new God called diversity. By the way, what does IT look like?

You who worship this contradiction are not fellow American’s, and you do not belong here, so this is what you are going to get.


Amos: 3, 3

James P. Harvey


January 27th, 2011 by


http://anationbeguiled.com/has served us well,

but the new site is going to be less fragmented subject

wise. We thank our many readers, and encourage all

of you to visit our new sister site at



This site will continue as before, and offer up a

wide variety of subjects and laughs for the folks

who like it that way.


James Olddog Harvey



An open Letter to the President of the United States

January 25th, 2011 by


25 January 2011

By James P. Harvey


Mr. Obama,

After seven years of studying the past and present activities of the United States government, international bankers, and easily frightened citizens who are always ready to support any and all unconstitutional preemptive wars, covert government coups, and saddle our future with enormous debt, I have a few questions only you can answer.

Now please don’t take this personally, because after all you are a human being and have the same depraved human nature as the rest of us, but as our Dear Leader don’t you have an obligation to be moral, trustworthy, and honest?

So, considering you and your predecessors have been more than willing to murder millions of people in wars that we both know are illegal, and the majority of our ignorant citizens have forgotten that government is not a deity or exempt from human morality and supported your decisions, why not consider being a man that will be loved and admired on a global level and call for a covert action on the Global Bankers and their satellite affiliates?

The C.I.A. spooks would love it, and consistent with your past executive orders it’s something you already approve of. Just fire up your executive power again, then capture and permanently detain them all and confiscate their assets! Consider for a moment what the personal assets of these people could do for America and the rest of the world. Hey bro, we’re talking great big bucks here!

Just think of what the world would be willing to do for you and your family. If one considers their past actions, they might be willing to make you a king. You could have a one world government and own it to boot!

Of course there are some concessions you would have to accept: such as never having authority over any nations’ militaries, judiciaries, or any kind of law enforcement. Other than that, you could receive all the pleasures and admiration the world has to offer, and there’s no telling what the sisters you allowed in the military would be happy and willing to do for you.

I know this sounds a little radical, but just think about it for a minute. Is a banker worth more than a little child, or how about all the young soldiers who died or came home with disabilities that destroyed their lives? Think of all the lost productivity and ingenuity these poor souls could have contributed to our country. Think about all the grief you have caused, and the money that you wasted.

Is being a slave to your money masters better than being a king? Hell fire bro, with considerable effort even I would love you!

Now I know your time is short what with Daley in charge now, so you don’t have to answer me right away, and I want you to give it your personal consideration anyway, maybe even talk it over with your family because I’m sure they would want to be Queens and Princesses, and since you are going to go down in history, why not do something good for a change? Then, I will proudly call you Mr. President!


Have a good day!

James P. Harvey  


If anyone objects to this letter, read the post below about China and do a little research on your own! If you can spend thirty minutes reading on America.gov without puking, you must be stone cold stupid, or a confirmed communist.

U S China Launch Public Private Partnership on Health Care

January 25th, 2011 by




U.S. Department of Health & Human Services
News Release
January 19, 2011

United States and China Launch Public-Private Partnership on Healthcare

Increasing collaboration in the healthcare sector

Washington, D.C. — Today, on the occasion of the State Visit of President Hu Jintao to the United States, the U.S. Trade and Development Agency (USTDA), the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) joined with China’s Ministries of Health (MoH) and Commerce (MOFCOM) to announce their support for the establishment a new public-private partnership in the healthcare sector.

Initially, twelve U.S. companies and six supporting organizations will participate in this partnership, alongside the supporting U.S. and Chinese Government agencies. The partnership will be organized around U.S. healthcare industry strengths and government capabilities in order to foster long-term cooperation with China in the areas of research, training, regulation and the adoption of an environment that will increase accessibility to healthcare services in China. Participating U.S. companies initially include 3M, Abbott, Chindex, Cisco, General Electric, IBM, Intel, Johnson & Johnson, Medtronic, Microsoft, Motorola, and Pfizer. Supporting organizations include AdvaMed, the Alliance for Healthcare Competitiveness, the American Chamber of Commerce in China, the American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai, PhRMA and the U.S.-China Business Council.

“The economic and social development of any nation depends on the health and productivity of its people,” said HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. “This partnership builds on a strong foundation of bilateral cooperation in this critical sector of our economies.”

USTDA Director Leocadia Zak stated, “This public-private partnership provides China an important private sector resource to draw from to help with key development issues, while also identifying for U.S. companies projects that have been designated priority development projects by China.”

Through programs supported by the initiative, Chinese participants will gain greater access to U.S. private sector expertise and ingenuity and better awareness of new technologies and results-oriented regulatory processes. Initially, these goals will be advanced through a USTDA-funded Healthcare Professional Personnel Exchange Program that will include a series of visits by Chinese healthcare officials to the United States to share best practices and witness new and innovative technologies that will be important to long-term healthcare delivery.

“The partnership will draw its strength from U.S. companies strategically working together to help China achieve its development goals that will open new export markets for U.S. goods and services,” noted Commerce Secretary Gary Locke.

Over time, the partnership will enhance cooperation in areas such as rural healthcare, emergency response, personnel training, medical information technology, and management systems; while also exploring ways to support other fields such as integrative and traditional Chinese medicine. These programs will enhance both sides’ knowledge of best practices, management, technological developments, and other healthcare-related topics

The U.S. Trade and Development Agency helps companies create U.S. jobs through the export of U.S. goods and services for priority development projects in emerging economies. USTDA links U.S. businesses to export opportunities by funding project planning activities, pilot projects, and reverse trade missions while creating sustainable infrastructure and economic growth in partner countries.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is the United States government’s principal agency for protecting the health of all Americans and providing essential human services, especially for those who are least able to help themselves.

The U.S. Department of Commerce has a broad mandate to advance economic growth and jobs and opportunities for the American people. It has cross-cutting responsibilities in the areas of trade, technology, entrepreneurship, economic development, environmental stewardship and statistical research and analysis. The Department also leads the President’s National Export Initiative, which aims to double U.S. exports by 2015 in support of several million American jobs.

(Distributed by the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://www.america.gov)

Read more: http://www.america.gov/st/texttrans-english/2011/January/20110120160303su0.2723767.html#ixzz1C72MNsfm

Lawless America

January 24th, 2011 by

Lawless America





Supreme Court to issue Landmark Decision

on the Constitution

The United States Supreme Court will soon issue a landmark decision on the validity of the Constitution of the United States.


The Supreme Court will consider three petitions filed by William M. Windsor, a retired Atlanta, Georgia grandfather.


"The Questions Presented to The Supreme Court are:


1.Will The Supreme Court declare that the Constitution and its amendments may be voided by the federal judges in Atlanta, Georgia?


2.Should federal judges be stopped from committing illegal and corrupt acts to obstruct justice and inflict bias on litigants?


3.Will The Supreme Court be afraid to disclose the corruption in the federal courts?


Windsor has been involved in a legal action in the federal courts in Atlanta since 2006. Windsor was named as a defendant in a lawsuit in which the President of the Plaintiffs, Christopher Glynn of Maid of the Mist in Niagara Falls, swore under oath that Windsor did a variety of things including the crimes of theft and bribery.  Windsor stated under oath that Christopher Glynn made it all up and lied about absolutely everything that he said.  Windsor then obtained deposition testimony from Christopher Glynn and the other managers of the Maid of the Mist boat ride in Niagara Falls, Timothy P. Ruddy, and Robert J. Schul. Glynn, Ruddy, and Schul admitted, under oath, that the charges against grandfather Windsor were not true.


Despite this undeniable proof, federal Judge Orinda D. Evans declared that Grandfather Windsor should not have fought the lawsuit, and she forced him to pay over $400,000 in the legal fees of the admitted liars of Maid of the Mist.  Grandfather Windsor appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, and federal judges Joel F. Dubina, Frank M. Hull, and Peter T. Fay rubber-stamped Judge Orinda D. Evans' ruling.  Grandfather Windsor then took his appeal to The United States Supreme Court where The Supreme Court said the appeal was not worthy of their consideration.


William M. Windsor filed a lawsuit against Judge Orina D. Evans and others in Atlanta federal court to have the actions of the courts set aside due to fraud upon the courts.  In an assortment of orders and appeals, Windsor charges that the federal courts and nine federal judges violated the Constitution, the Due Process Clause, and the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States.


Grandfather Windsor has discovered that, at least in Atlanta, Georgia, the federal courts operate like a police state in which the judges are all-powerful, committing criminal acts from their benches high above the courtrooms and violating the Constitutional rights of tens of thousands of parties who have the misfortune of appearing in their courts. The dishonesty and corruption seems to be especially bad with those who represent themselves in court, a percentage estimated at over 35%.


After finding nothing but corruption at the federal district courts and the court of appeals, the grandfather of three has tossed the hot potato right square in the laps of the justices of The United States Supreme Court. By filing Petitions for Writs of Mandamus rather than an appeal, The Supreme Court is forced to deal with the issue. And the fundamental issue is whether the corruption extends all the way to the top. Is The United States Supreme Court corrupt, too?


Grandfather Windsor hopes for the best but fears for the worst: "I hope The Supreme Court is decent, honest, and cares about the Constitution and the citizens of the United States. However, I am sorry to say that at this point, I suspect the corruption goes all the way to the top. My charges have been totally ignored by the United States Attorney's Office, the FBI, and Congress. I have said to The Supreme Court that the issues I have presented take up a lot of paper, but it can all be boiled down to one question:


'Is The United States Supreme Court prepared to stop federal judges from functioning like common criminals? If they care about decency, honesty, the law, the Constitution, and due process, they will act to stop it. If they aren’t prepared to expose the corruption, they will deny the Application.'"


Windsor says, "If the Supreme Court fails to act against these federal judges, the citizens of the United States need to know that there is not a shred of decency, honesty, or Constitutional rights in our federal courts. Corruption has consumed the federal court system, and we now live in a police state. Judges are free to do absolutely anything they want. Our laws are meaningless. Your life savings can be stolen by a federal judge, and they have no risk in violating every law in the books."


The Supreme Court should render its decision before the end of the year. It's one retired grandpa against the United States government. May the best MAN win!



The U S Constitution is VOID

FORWARDED 01 20 11 – contact: becworks@gmail.com

NOTE:  Okay, now the cat is out of the bag .. . we actually have a CON-Institution. . and judges know the truth.  I suggest that before anyone "rises up" as is suggested in the article, that you do a lot of homework.  You need technical legal sources, and not history books.  I can get you started, but The Informer must carry you all the way to the end .. he did his homework.

READ the article below, and the Interrogatories here:
Part 1 – http://webpages.charter.net/jlgates/iatcaal-part1.html
Part 2 – http://webpages.charter.net/jlgates/iatcaal-part2.html
Part 3 – http://webpages.charter.net/jlgates/iatcaal-part3.html
Part 4 – http://webpages.charter.net/jlgates/iatcaal-part4.html
Part 5 – http://webpages.charter.net/jlgates/iatcaal-part5.html
Part 6 – http://webpages.charter.net/jlgates/iatcaal-part6.html

U.S. Supreme Court Issues Landmark Decision: Constitution is Void

ATLANTA,Jan. 18, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ The U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark decision that serves to allow judges to void the Constitution in their courtrooms. The decision was issued on January 18, 2011, and the Court did not even explain the decision (Docket No. 10-632, 10-633, and 10-690) One word decisions: DENIED.

Presented with this information and massive proof that was not contested in any manner by the accused judges, at least six of the justices voted to deny the petitions:

"There is no legal or factual basis whatsoever for the decisions of the lower courts in this matter.  These rulings were issued for corrupt reasons.  Many of the judges in the Northern District of Georgia and the Eleventh Circuit are corrupt and violate laws and rules, as they have done in this case.  The Supreme Court must recognize this Petition as one of the most serious matters ever presented to this Court."

The key questions answered negatively by the U.S. Supreme Court was:

"Whether federal courts must be stopped from operating corruptly and ignoring all laws, rules, and facts."

By denying the petitions, SCOTUS has chosen to sanction corruption by federal judges and to allow federal judges to void sections of the Constitutional at will.

William M. Windsor has been involved in legal action in the federal courts in Atlanta since 2006 Windsor was named a defendant in a civil lawsuit (1:06-CV-0714-ODE) in which Christopher Glynn of Maid of the Mist in Niagara Falls, swore under oath that Windsor did a variety of things including the crimes of theft and bribery. Windsor stated under oath that Christopher Glynn made it up and lied about absolutely everything that he swore. Windsor then obtained deposition testimony from Glynn and the other managers of the Maid of the Mist boat ride, and they admitted, under oath, that charges against Windsor were not true.

Despite this undeniable proof, 32-year federal Judge Orinda D. Evans declared that the grandfather of three should not have fought the lawsuit, and she forced him to pay a fortune in legal fees of Maid of the Mist. Windsor appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, but federal judges Dubina, Hull, and Fay rubber-stamped Judge Evans' ruling. Windsor then took his appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court where the justices said the appeal was not worthy of their consideration (cert denied).

After attempting to get the case reopened with new evidence that proved fraud upon the courts and obstruction of justice, Judge Evans and Judge William S. Duffey committed a variety of crimes and violations of Constitutional rights, as did judges with the Eleventh Circuit All of this was detailed for the Supreme Court.

Windsor says: "I have discovered that the federal judges in Atlanta, Georgia, Washington, DC, and the justices of the United States Supreme Court function like common criminals intentionally making bogus rulings against honest people while covering up the crimes of their fellow judges. I have been contacted by people from all over the country and around the world with their stories of judicial corruption with judges all over the U.S.

"My charges have been totally ignored by the United States Attorney's Office, the FBI, and Congress. I do not believe there is a shred of decency, honesty, or Constitutional rights in our federal courts. In my opinion, we now live in a police state. Judges are free to do absolutely anything they want. Our laws are meaningless. Your life savings can be stolen by a federal judge, and they have no risk in violating every law in the books.

"In my opinion, this is the most serious issue that our country has ever faced. Our rights have been stolen. and the mainstream media refuses to cover this story because they are afraid of the judges.Heaven help us.

"I believe our only hope in America is if the masses become aware of what is taking place.. I am writing an expose, and my book will be available at Borders, Barnes & Noble, and on amazon.com soon. The publisher will decide if the title is,               Lawless America or Screwed, Glued, and Tattooed."

For more information, see www.LawlessAmerica.com.

Contact: William Windsor, +1-770-578-1094, bill@lawlessamerica.com

SOURCE William M. Windsor






Killing Politicians

January 23rd, 2011 by

Killing Politicians


By Larken Rose

A story is now circulating around about a Massachusetts blogger who, regarding the shooting of Gabrielle Giffords, said "one down, 534 to go" (referring to the total number of federal congress-critturs in the House and Senate). He also added that it is "absolutely unacceptable to shoot indiscriminately," and suggested that people "Target only politicians and their staff and leave regular citizens alone.

Of course, the average citizen, who worships the ruling class as if they're a bunch of infallible deities, will think the blogger to be the lowest scum in the world. How dare he even discuss killing the High Priests of the cult of "government"? What blasphemy! Well, I want to take issue with the guy's comments, but for a very different reason.

(As an aside, what the guy said was protected speech under the First Amendment. Not that what any "court" says is actually legitimate, but the U.S. dress-wearing, god-complex "judges" have admitted that even advocating revolution or violence is protected, unless it constitutes either an actual threat, or a direct, specific incitement for someone to commit violence. Look up the Supreme Court case of Brandenburg v. Ohio, for an example of just how nasty speech can get before it can be considered "criminal"–again, within the definitions of the control freaks. The fact that the Massachusetts jackboots decided to steal the blogger's guns because of his comments is an obvious attempt to create a "chilling effect" on his political expressions.)

Many people like the mantra, "Violence is never the answer." But they're wrong. If an armed thug breaks into your house, and tries to kill your family, violence is the answer. If you were a Jew living in 1940's Germany, and the SS came knocking, violence would be about the best answer available.

Ironically, most of those who say "violence is never the answer" nonetheless advocate constant, widespread violence via "government." They don't recognize it as such, because in their minds, when "government" uses the initiation of violence, it is inherently legitimate, and doesn't count as violence. Meanwhile, defending against such "legal" aggression is, in the eyes of the indoctrinated statist, the most horrible sin imaginable. When the superstition of "authority" is involved, the attacker with a badge is the good guy, and the defender without a badge is the bad guy.

So why do I disagree with the blogger? Let me put it this way: if killing 535 god-complex politicians would result in an end to the many thousands of casualties caused by their war-mongering, it would be just fine with me if someone killed them.

But it wouldn't.

If knocking off Congress would end the draconian, fascist, heinously evil "war on drugs," and free the millions of non-violent people now living in cages, I would be all for it.

But it wouldn't.

Every year, a whole lot more than 500 innocent people die as a direct result of what the politicians do, so I think such a trade would be well worth it. In short, if killing the tyrants du jour would lead to freedom, I'd be all for it.

But it wouldn't.

Why not? Because the gang of thieves and murderers that infests Washington is a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself. The underlying problem resides between a couple hundred million pairs of ears. If the general public desperately believes that a coercive ruling class is necessary and essential to civilization, as they have been brainwashed to believe, then knocking one narcissistic megalomaniac off the throne will only result in a new one taking his place. It's like the mythical Hydra: chopping the heads off doesn't do anything, because it will grow new ones; you need to hit the heart of the beast. And the heart of this problem is not a person, or a group of people, but a belief.

I'm not saying it's never justified to hack off a tentacle here and there, if you're being attacked. I can think of lots of situations in which "law enforcers" deserve to be shot, and "criminals" deserve to escape (when the "law," not the "criminal," is the aggressor). That might save one person now andthen, but hacking at the branches will never solve the problem; only yanking the root out can do that.

And even among many of the most ardent pro-freedom advocates, the root of the problems is still firmly planted inside their own heads. Those who continue to campaign, and vote, and petition "government" to change its evil ways, are completely missing the real problem. To get slightly mystical, let me put it this way: Chances are, you are the one feeding the horrible beast you see before you, the monster you seek to destroy; you helped bring him into being, and you are the source of his power.

Hmmm … I think rather than explaining what I mean, I'll leave people hanging, and tell them to buy my new book, "The Most Dangerous Superstition." (Yes, that was a cheap trick, but I'm not sorry.) 


During my learning curve there was a time when I would have supported Anarchism, and in my ignorance I would have supported killing a hell of a lot more people than just the politicians. However, I’m now maybe twice Larken’s age, or more, and just a little bit more knowledgeable on human nature. Due to humanity’s depraved nature, society would self destruct, and on a National level no other Nation would recognize a country without a government and we would be unable to defend ourselves. Anarchism is a utopian brain fart that would escalate the enslavement of the weak, and any organization that formed to protect itself would in fact be a government. EVIL DOES EXIST, and until it does not, humans will not be able to govern themselves. Let history be my defense!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

In order to have, or construct a compromise, we would need a group, body, or whatever, to be educated on the historical problems of humanity’s attempts to control evil and the necessity to use acceptable force in the process. There is no other way to control people absent a Godly Nature, and the Lord God is in the process of proving that. Human beings will never have peace or prosperity with or without any government other than the KING of KINGS: the LORD JESUS CHRIST. GO AHEAD AND PROVE ME WRONG!   FOOLS!

What We Must Do

January 22nd, 2011 by


Alan has been one of my favorite research commentators for years, and his web-site is a store-house of information. Its purpose is to give Americans the opportunity to examine and comment on issues affecting how we are governed.  

Go to http://www.constitutionforum.us/

This article is from the previous administration, and the only difference between it and the present one is skin color as far as I can see. Bush and Obama are both ideological brothers’ in power greed. For the uninformed, this article is a classic, and should be printed and distributed door to door.

What We Must Do

By Alan Adaschik

The thing most feared by our Founding Fathers was the gullibility of the masses whereby a demigod or group of demigods cater to and capitalize upon commonly held misconceptions and fears and lead the Nation down a path that is not in our best interest. The end result being that the actions taken are of benefit only to the ruling elite at our expense. In the United States of America today, this fear of our Founding Fathers has been realized. Our government no longer abides by the most important and key provisions of our Constitution and only pays lip service to what remains to make Joe Blow citizen think he or she is free and living a democratic society.

The problem faced by those who see through the hypocrisy is that most Americans are not aware that a problem exists. The reasons for this are that they lack the intellectual capacity to figure things our for themselves, they fail to understand that our own government can be our biggest threat and worst enemy, and because things have degenerated so far in our society that the economic well-being of far too many citizens and institutions are dependent upon government largess and subsidies. In other words, our government has deteriorated to the point where it bribes us with our own money and as a result, Americans view Uncle Sam as a benevolent sugar daddy irrespective of constitutional concerns and whatever wrongful and deplorable activities the government is up to behind our backs.

For all the above reasons, reform and change is just about impossible and if our Founding Fathers suddenly appeared on the scene today, to a man, they would be reaching for their muskets and rising up against what they would surly view as a corrupt, oppressive, and out of control government. Unfortunately, in the United States of America today, such action would be foolish, counter productive, and suicidal. Beyond this, it would also mean the useless and unconscionable slaughter of far too many innocent people. Armed rebellion or insurrection is not the answer and if the reform movement is to succeed, it must rid itself of those prone to violence or those who would urge others to violence. To be sure, any illegal action taken by those who profess to be a part of the reform movement will work against our cause and be used by those who oppress us to their advantage. 

If reform and changes of substance are just about impossible, what can we do to save ourselves? The road ahead is tough and arduous but with determination, and persistence we can succeed. The primary weapons available in our war to win the minds and hearts of the American people are education, demonstrations, and marches on Washington, passive resistance, and civil disobedience. Of these, education is the most important because it is the key to the success of the other tools. Most Americans still subscribe to the principles of governing held by the Founders and enshrined within our Constitution. The problem is that they are so brainwashed that they are not able to see our government for what it really is and even if they do, most think there is nothing that can be done to rectify the situation. Education is the key to solving these problems. We must deprogram the citizens of this Nation such that they stop being good Republicans or Democrats and start being good Americans.

 Our government no longer operates by or cares about reason, logic, common sense, truth, legalities, our Constitution, the best interests of citizens, or America itself. Therefore, the only thing that will get their attention is the force of numbers behind an aroused citizenry. The only possible way of increasing our numbers is by waking up the sleeping majority through education. Educating people will bring more citizens into our camp and this will make all the other weapons in our arsenal more effective. If enough of us are alarmed by the same concerns and act decisively to air them, the media will no longer be able to ignore us. Once we get media attention, we will have everyone else’s attention and this will herald the end of the despotism, which we now endure. Conspiracy, subterfuge, and deception cannot thrive in sunshine and with daylight illuminating the hidden agenda of our oppressors it will crumble and wither because there is nothing that supports their agenda other than the lust for power and petty self-interest. 

A true American realizes and believes that government is a necessary evil which left unchecked will become our master and not our servant. He or she also knows that a political party is nothing more than a special interest group whose primary motivation is self-perpetuation. For a political party to be successful, it takes money; lots of it. When dollars control a political party’s agenda, then that agenda will not be what is best for this Nation. Therefore, a true American never puts loyalty to a political party above governing principles and the Nation’s interests.

People who do and vote strictly along party lines are not only fools but un-American as well. It is these blindly loyal people who allow a political party to pursue its own interests at the expense of the rest of us. True Americans know that the power of government is derived from the consent of the governed and that the interests of individual citizens are far more important than the interests of those pledged to serve us, including the President. Finally, a true American believes our rights are given to us by a higher authority and that no government has a legitimate power to subvert or take them away. 

Unfortunately, in American today, while most of us still understand what it means to be an American, the majority has no clue about how our government views what we consider to be obvious and fundamental. Not one of the principles identified above is subscribed to or respected by those who lead us. They believe that they are our master and not our servant, that the interests of the Democratic and Republican parties are more important than those of any other citizen or group of citizens, that government is all powerful and should exercise that power irrespective of principle, our Constitution, the rights of citizens, or the Nation’s best interest. 

To be sure, our situation is such today that our leaders ignore the principles of sound governing which define Americanism and has relegated human rights to something, which they only allow if it is convenient. Furthermore, as incredible as it sounds, the morally and intellectually bankrupt criminals who pull the strings that our elected representatives dance to are now in the process of dissolving this nation and melding us into a new one, more to their liking, where their power and control will be pervasive, universal, and unassailable. In other words, the future that those in power have in store for us is one of servitude and slavery where we will be beholden to and dependent upon them from cradle to grave. This is not just conjecture, but irrefutable provable fact. If you believe otherwise, then you are uninformed, brainwashed, delusional, and part of the problem and not the cure.  

The time to take action is now. Those of us who can still think for ourselves must take every opportunity to communicate our dire circumstances to our fellow citizens and we must do this with a fervor that borders on fanaticism. Our best tool of communication is the internet, but many sleeping Americans, for the reasons previously enumerated, avoid and dismiss patriotic web sites as been subversive and un-American. This is why spreading the word through direct contact and networking is so important. George Bush “The Decider” is our best asset in this regard. People are fed up with his war, his incompetence, and the gross and flagrant corruption of his administration. Therefore, they are now more receptive to our message than ever before. Furthermore, it is hard to dismiss someone personally known to us as being out of touch or unwittingly working against the best interests of our Nation. 

Other important ways of reaching people are through presentations, discussion groups, and videos. Those of us with such talents and capabilities must begin to utilize these talents to the fullest. America can be saved, but it has to be accomplished at the grass roots level. The corrupt and totalitarian criminals who control our government have ensured that those sympathetic to their nefarious designs hold key positions in most institutions throughout society including the mainstream media, our colleges and universities, and the judiciary. Despite this, if we act now with determination and commitment, the ripples of discontent that are presently evident throughout our Nation will grow into a tidal wave that will eventually sweep away our oppressors including those who know better, but for a few pieces of silver, have sold their soles to the Devil and abandoned this nation and its people to the wolves of world commerce.   

All Governments rule by force, but ours is supposed to rule by the consent of the governed. The present government of the United States is a cabal of traitors and criminals, which no longer has my consent to govern me. Many Americans share these sentiments, but we can do little about our dismal state of affairs unless our numbers grow into a clear majority. When that happens, we will have the power and authority to remove from government those who serve themselves instead of us. My sincere hope is that this will be a peaceful process and those of us in the vanguard of this movement must make every effort to ensure that it is. If it is not, then all is lost and those who oppress us will have won.

Alan Adaschik

OldDog says’,

“it is good to seek peace and justice, but it is far better

to be prepared while doing so.”

The U.S. & China going in opposite directions

January 20th, 2011 by


The U.S. & China going in opposite directions

By Julian D. W. Phillips


China is in the midst of a ‘State visit’ to the U.S. but this time China will get a state banquet. This implies a changed attitude to China by the U.S. It is clear to all today that there is unlikely to be a real confrontation between the two nations anymore. If there were to be a war between the two it is most unlikely to be an economic/financial one, not a military one. China is racing to be the number one economic world power and the U.S. is retreating from that position, slowly but surely. Each day, the power of the U.S. to dominate or even influence China falls slightly. Each day the power of China to influence and eventually dominate the global economy grows. At this moment in time China owns around half of U.S. Treasuries. They are already in a position to hurt the U.S. very badly, should they want to. But it is not in the interests of China to do that. China is empire-building and doesn’t want to be distracted from that. They appear to be on a winning road already. China’s is on the rising road and will soon pass the U.S. going the other way.

The reality of China and the U.S.

Last week we published an article on the advent of the Yuan as a global reserve currency. We believe this event is the most significant event to appear on the global monetary scene. It overshadows the Eurozone debt problems because it will change the monetary world significantly. We don’t believe for one second that the euro will collapse. The euro will receive considerable investment from China overtime at a time when it is needed most. China realizes that as an alternative to the U.S. dollar, the euro is needed in the global monetary system. By investing in the world’s two most powerful trading blocs, China is gaining a foothold that may well swing the [financial] balance of power towards itself, in time. Neither of these two blocs will be able to do without China’s investments shortly. Such dependence protects China as much as it weakens the Eurozone and the U.S.

As to the threat of military action from either side, we believe that China will not even move towards a confrontation. Tacit support for South Korea and a withdrawal of support for North Korea against a considerable softening of U.S. support for Taiwan may well be discussed in the visit of China to the U.S. Any confrontational moves may well be softened by the use of the United Nations as a mediator. The battle for power will be limited to the international trade and monetary scenes, we believe.

Will the Yuan appreciate? Senior U.S. Senators are again threatening to legislate against China’s ‘management’ of the yuan. By now most of us see this as a display of testosterone and unlikely to sway China in the least. Chinese wages have to move to the same level as those of the U.S. [whether by falling wages in the U.S. or rising wages in China] before international trade is on a level playing field. A change in the exchange rate of the yuan to the dollar is not likely to dent China’s global trade competitiveness one iota. China has made it clear there will be no change in its stance. As we pointed out in our last article we expect to see a sufficient quantity of Yuan sent into world markets from China to hold it steady or weaken in a ‘free float’. It is part of a very large global strategy unfolding now. To those who doubt this, ask yourself, “If Chinese exporters price their goods in the yuan or even in the other global currencies, what will happen to the dollar?”

How will the Yuan affect Gold For a number of years now, China has been developing its gold market. Huge precious metals warehouses are now situated in Hong Kong next to its very efficient Airport there. Recently China expanded the number of gold importers permitted to import gold to China. China’s banks have developed gold distribution centers throughout the major cities of China. The Chinese public can see the benefits of owning gold by the price rises it has seen in the gold price over those years. The government itself is accumulating its own local gold production as well as encouraging its citizens to buy gold. If there was any intention of re-valuing the yuan, then the Chinese public could well see this as a betrayal of investors by the government. No, we have no doubt that we will not see a rising yuan. We have stood by this forecast for the last two years, in the face of foreign pressure on the yuan to rise. Instead, we continue to expect the gold price to perform, in the yuan, much as it does in the U.S. dollar now. For that reason and because of the ongoing development of China and the growth of a huge middle class in China, for the foreseeable future, we see a steady growth in the rise of gold investments in China.

William J. Murphy III is the Chairman of the Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee and owner of www.LeMetropoleCafe.com. A graduate of the School of Hotel Administration at Cornell University in 1968, he went to become a starting wide receiver with the Boston Patriots of the American Football League. Mr. Murphy, who now resides in Dallas, Texas, spent much of his business career in the Futures Industry with such firms as Drexel Burnham and Shearson Hayden Stone. Today, he writes gold market commentary for his financial web site that features the precious metals and contrarian economic analysis.

Copyright 1999 – 2011 LeMetropoleCafe.com
All Rights Reserved

There Is No Business Like The Bond Business

January 19th, 2011 by

There Is No Business Like Bond Business

Wednesday, January 19, 2011 – by  Dr. Antal Fekete

Dr. Antal Fekete

Front-Running the Fed in the Treasury Market

For some nine years I have been predicting that the economy is going to a recession morphing into a depression, using a purely theoretical argument. The essence of my argument is that the open market operations of the Fed cause a protracted decline in interest rates which is responsible for the hard-to-detect capital destruction affecting the financial sector no less than the productive sector. The immediate cause of the depression is the destruction of capital. The ultimate cause is the monetary policy of open market operations. The chain of causation is as follows.

(1) Open market operations (in effect, net purchases of T-bills) by the Fed are predictable. They invite bond speculators to take risk-free profits offered by this fact of predictability.

(2) Bond speculators buy the long-dated Treasurys and sell the short-dated ones, to pocket the difference in yields. These straddles represent borrowing short and lending long. As such, they are inherently risky. However, Quantitative Easing takes the risk out by making the odds, that the normal yield curve will invert, negligible.

(3) The bond speculator faces the problem of having to roll forward the fast-expiring short leg of his straddle by selling T-bills. The extraordinary funding and refunding requirements the Treasury is facing, and the extraordinary pressure on the Fed to increase the money supply combine to make it ultra-easy for the bond speculator to move both the short and the long leg of his straddles as he sees fit.

(4) The upshot is that interest rates keep falling along the entire yield curve. Regardless how many long-dated issues the Treasury offers, bond speculators snap them up even before the ink is dry on them.

Here we have the solution to the Greenspan-conundrum: the sky is the limit to the bond speculators' appetite for Treasury paper. They are all right as long as they can sell T-bills against them. But as the sky is the limit to the Fed's appetite for T-bills, both flanks of the speculators are secure.

In my other writings I have explained how a prolonged fall in interest rates along the yield curve brings about depression through the indiscriminate destruction of capital in the productive as well as financial sector.

There is a vicious spiral: the more currency the Fed creates, the more risk-free profits bond speculators will reap, contributing to a further fall of interest rates.

This outcome is the exact opposite of the one predicted by monetarism. The latter predicts that the new money created by the Fed will flow to the commodity market bidding up prices there, to nip depression in the bud. Bernanke & Co. fully expects this to happen. This is not what is happening, however. The new money refuses to flow uphill to the commodity market. It flows downhill to the bond market where the fun is. Why take risks in the commodity market, the speculators ask, when you can gamble risk free in the bond market? So grab the money, buy more bonds and sell an equal amount of bills. As a consequence of bullish bond speculation interest rates fall, prices fall, employment falls, firms fall. The squeeze is on, bankrupting the entire economy.

Official Check-Kiting

Some might object that the Fed could short-circuit the process and undercut the bond speculators' lucrative business. All it has to do is to buy the short-dated paper directly from the Treasury. Inverting the yield curve will shake off the parasites. My answer is that there is no danger of this happening. The Treasury and the Fed know that bond-vigilantes watch what they are doing like a hawk. Any hanky-panky of direct sales of T-bills by the Treasury to the Fed would make them cry "foul play!" As indeed it would be: direct sale of Treasury paper to the Fed would degrade the dollar from irredeemable currency to fiat currency. There is a subtle difference, realized only by the few.

Fiat currency is worse. Its arbitrary augmenting is decided behind closed doors. It does not need the endorsement of the open market. Fiat currencies have a short life-span as they readily succumb to the sudden-death syndrome. Irredeemable currencies are different from fiat in that they are created openly, using collateral purchased in the open market. They have a more respectable life-span. As long as the official check-kiting conspiracy between the Treasury and the Fed remains hidden from the general public, irredeemable currency may even prosper. Direct sale of T-bills by the Treasury to the Fed would tear down the curtain that hides the fact of check-kiting.

The mechanism of check-kiting is as follows. The Treasury issues debt which it has neither the intention nor the means ever to repay. This debt is used as "backing" for Federal Reserve notes and deposits, which the Fed has neither the intention nor the means ever to redeem. When the Treasury debt matures, it is paid in Federal Reserve credit issued on the collateral security of new Treasury debt. When Federal Reserve credit is presented for redemption, the Fed offers interest-bearing Treasury debt in exchange. This is a shell game and it exhausts the definition of check-kiting. Neither the Treasury debt, nor the Federal Reserve credit is issued in good faith. Neither is redeemable any more than Charles Ponzi's tickets were. They are both issued in order to mesmerize a gullible public, much the same way as Ponzi did.

Treasury and Fed officials know their history. They are familiar with the fate of the assignat, the mandat, the Reichsmark, not to mention the Continental. They know that no fiat money ever survived "the slings and arrows of an outrageous fortune". Their only hope is that the fate of the irredeemable dollar, as predicted by Friedman, would be different. They would not embark upon an adventure in monetary policy involving direct sales of T-bills by the Treasury to the Fed. If they did, surely this would be the end of their experiment. Foreigners as well as Americans would start dumping the dollar unceremoniously, and buy anything they can lay their hands on. This is variously known as flight into real goods, Flucht in die Sachwerte, crack-up boom, Katastrophenhausse. I purposely avoid using the term hyperinflation as it connotes with the Quantity Theory of Money, which is not really a theory. It is a linear model trying to explain non-linear phenomena.

Falsecarding by the Fed

There is also a second method by means of which bond speculators are making risk-free profits. They "front-run" the Fed in the bill market. This means that, through inside information or otherwise, they divine when the Fed has to answer "nature's call" and must make the next trip to the open market in order to buy the collateral without which it cannot issue more money.

Bond speculators forestall the Fed by purchasing the bills beforehand, thus driving up the price. Then they turn around and dump the paper into the lap of the Fed at the enhanced price, making a risk-free profit. This process is called "scalping", after the kindred activities of small-time speculators in tickets for the World Series and other popular sporting events.

The objection that the Fed knows how to throw bond speculators off scent by various stratagems – for example, through falsecarding, say, by selling when speculators would expect it to buy – can be safely dismissed. There is no question that every year the Fed is a big buyer of bills on a net basis. If it sells, it has to buy that much more later on. Fiddling means that the Fed may miss its target. Falsecarding may backfire.

The speculators are a smart lot, thanks to "natural selection" culling the rank and file. They risk their own capital, which they stand to lose if they place the wrong bet. Once their capital is gone they are out, and smarter guys will take over. Hired hands at the Fed are no match for them as far as brightness and adroitness is concerned. The latter work for salaries. If they make the wrong bet, losses will be replenished by dipping into the public purse. Think of the losses the Bank of England suffered at the hand of a lonely bond speculator, one George Soros. The British public was forced to swallow the loss, and Soros was allowed to run with the loot and boast in his book that he has busted the Bank of England single-handedly. Recently Soros said in Davos that he is bearish on gold. In his opinion gold is in a bubble. Of course. He knows that he couldn't bust the Bank of England again, once it is back on the gold standard!

Cheating in Las Vegas

My voice has remained a cry in the wilderness. Nobody paid attention to the mumblings of this armchair economist.

My idle theorizing got an unexpected boost from the website Jesse's Café Américain. On January 22, 2010, Jesse posted a story with the title Front-Running the Fed in the Treasury Market from which the following quotation is taken:

Attached is some information from a reader. I cannot assess its validity, not being in the bond trading business. But it does sound like someone has tapped into the Fed's buying plans to monetize the public debt and is front-running those purchases, essentially ‘stealing' money from the public. It's what they call a ‘sure thing'. To try and figure out who might be doing it, I would look for some big player who is showing extraordinary returns on their trading, with consistent profit that is not statistically ‘normal', but is consistently ‘too good'. The problem with cheaters is that they sometimes get greedy and call attention to themselves. In Las Vegas the bigger cheats at the casino were often taken to the desert for further questioning and final disposal. On Wall Street they are more arrogant and persistent, defying resolution with that ultimate defiance, "We'll just have to figure out other ways to cheat, and come back again".

Time for a trip to the desert?

Here are my reader's observations from the bond market.

"I used to work for a BB on a prop desk until the financial crisis took hold and they fired the less senior guys. I now trade US Treasurys for a small prop firm in xxxxx, to scalp basis trades in most on-the-run securities. Occasionally, I will also take position in the repo markets for off-the-runs if I see something ‘mispriced'. Your recent article piqued my interest because we, too, have noticed ‘shenanigans' of a sort in the Quantitative Easing program involving US Treasurys.

"What we have noticed, especially in smaller issues like the 7 Year Cash, is that before a Fed buy-back would be announced, the price would pop significantly as if buyers would run through all the offers on the two major electronic exchanges (BGC Espeed and ICAP Broker Tec). This has occurred more than several times as the 7 Year Cash would be overvalued both by its BNOC, by as much as 20-30 ticks, as well as by its value relative to similar off-the-runs. These buyers would lift every offer they could, driving the price substantially above its ‘value', sometimes for as long as a week at a time. After this buying occurred, the Fed would announce the purchase of that security, sometimes a handle above its approximate value. This ‘luck' has occurred not just in the on-the-run 7 Year sector, but also in the 30 Year Cash, 3 Year Cash, and in several other off-the-runs. Again, it was especially prevalent in the less liquid Treasury products. Often the ‘appetite' for these securities would begin two weeks before the official Fed announcement. The buying was well-orchestrated and done in such a way as to throw it out of kilter with the like cash Treasurys and the CME Ten Year Contract. If you examine the charts of some of the selected buy-backs before the official announcement, you will see a similar occurrence.

"While I haven't broken this down into a paper to prove it (and I see nothing positive coming out of contacting the ESS-EEE-SFE about this issue), I can assure you that it was occurring on a consistent basis across the entire curve. A certain issue would be bid up substantially above market value (as determined by several metrics), only to be gobbled up later by the Fed at an unreasonably high price. These players must have substantial pockets as we, the small guys (but with a decent capital base) would take the other side of what seemed to be an obvious fade. While this did not occur in every issue of the Quantitative Easing program, it occurred often enough to be obvious to any knowledgeable observer.

While I am not sure that this can be attributed to a purposeful Fed policy or someone at the Fed talking to his pals, I am certain that it transpired."

Congenital Disease of the Monetary System

The anonymous correspondent of Jesse is looking for an answer in the wrong direction. Cheating is not necessarily involved. What he has observed need not be a purposeful, if veiled, Fed policy, nor is it necessarily someone at the Fed tipping off his brother-in-law at a brokerage house (however valuable the tip may be).

What we face here is a congenital disease of the irredeemable dollar. Open-market operations is the tool for the purpose of increasing the money supply through monetizing government debt as needed. It should be recalled that open-market operations by the Fed were illegal according to the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. The original Act looked at the monetization of government debt as ananathema. Illegal open-market operations started in the early 1920's. They were legalized ex post facto in 1935 by an amendment to the Act, after the gold standard was destroyed by the proclamation of president Roosevelt in 1933. Those who sponsored the amendment were ignorant of what effect open market operations would have on bond speculation. Economists in and out of government and academia were equally ignorant. The financial press also failed to criticize the hare-brained scheme of open market operations making, as it did, profits from bond speculation risk free.

There is no need to look for a conspiracy in the bond market. It is quite possible that a large number of smart speculators, acting spontaneously and independently of one another, have come to realize that there is a bonanza, perfectly legal, in ripping off the public purse. Of course, they kept their own counsel.

If anybody is responsible for this colossal blunder of economics releasing the genie of risk-free speculation out of the bottle, the names that come to mind are those of Keynes and Friedman, resp. They invented, resp., ‘improved', the system of floating exchange rates assuming a goldless currency that has to be arbitrarily augmented from time-to-time through the monetization of government debt (that, incidentally, proliferated profusely after the politicians deliberately unbalanced the budget upon the explicit advice of Keynes). The rest, as they say, is history.

As long as budget deficits were ‘modest', the activity of speculators making risk-free profits in the bond market escaped public attention. With the advent of ‘Quantitative Easing' and mega-deficits, everybody sitting at a bond-trading desk can see it. The figures literally jump off the screen, as explained by Jesse's blog.

Recruiting a Corps of Shills

To be fair to Jesse's anonymous correspondent I must admit that his conjecture, that in risk-free bond speculation we may be looking at deliberate Fed policy, is plausible. It is not impossible that the rot in the U.S. monetary system has already spread so far that in a truly free and unrigged bond market no bidders would turn up. Time is long since past when Treasurys were eagerly sought after by the most conservative segment of the investing public, such as guardians of widows and orphans, trust funds, eleemosynary institutions. Typically, they held the bonds to maturity. Treasurys, second only to gold, were the most trusted instruments of wealth-preservation.

Under the regime of the irredeemable dollar no investor in his right mind would buy a Treasury bond and hold it till maturity. Treasurys lose value as ice melts in the sunshine. They have become a plaything in the hands of speculators for their value in turning a fast buck. Under the gold standard there was no bond speculation, just as there was no foreign exchange speculation. Interest rates were stable and so were bond prices. Speculators would shun bonds. Of course, all this changed when president Nixon defaulted on the short-term gold obligation of the Treasury to foreigners in 1971, and gold was finally removed from the international monetary system at the behest of the U.S. government.

For a decade speculators were happy with the trading profits they could make in the bond market. But as the monetary system kept deteriorating, they started abandoning bonds, transferring their activities to the commodity market. By 1981 demand for bonds practically evaporated. As this spelled the end of the regime of the irredeemable dollar, the Fed had to do something to prop up the bond market by enticing bond speculators back.

Thus, then, it is quite possible that a decision was made at the highest level to offer the enticement of risk-free profits to bond speculators. It certainly cannot be denied that bond speculators have been making obscene profits in the course of the 30-year bull market in bonds that is still ongoing. These profits are unprecedented in the history of speculation, both on account of their magnitude and their regularity. They were made at the expense of productive enterprise, the capital of which has been surreptitiously siphoned off by the falling interest-rate structure.

Another way of describing this scenario (assuming it is correct) is that in 1981 the Fed, unknown to the public, decided to recruit a corps of shills to prop up a moribund bond market. The shills hired by the casinos of Las Vegas bet big and win big at the gaming tables in full view of the gamblers who are unaware that they are being treated to a show. The sight of these big payoffs will then perk up the gambling spirit of a lethargic clientele.

The shills recruited by the Fed are the bond speculators, and their remuneration is in the form of risk-free profits they are allowed to make (and keep). The scheme was a roaring success. Not only did it save the bond market from extinction; it also saved the dollar from ignominy, and was instrumental in making possible a whole string of bubbles, each bigger than the previous one.

The Road to Hell Is Paved with Good Intentions

The problem is far more serious than it may at first appear. Risk-free speculation is like a computer-virus that has no antidote and threatens to wipe out the Internet. It short-circuits normal economic processes and gobbles up the world economy.

I would welcome a public debate of my thesis that risk-free bond speculation suppresses the rate of interest and destroys capital in the process. I have challenged neo-classical economists who still consider the open-market operations of the Fed as a ‘refined tool to manage the national economy'. I want them, instead, to see in open-market operations the cancer of the economy responsible for the withering of the world's prosperity. So far my challenge has fallen upon deaf ears.

Here is the problem. The prevailing orthodoxy is the unholy alliance between Keynesianism and monetarism inspired by Friedman (defying the pretence that these two are antagonistic theories). The idea that an artificial increase in the money supply must raise commodity prices dies hard. But as my theory suggests, and as events have repeatedly shown (first during the Great Depression of the 1930's, and again, during the present crisis), the presence of risk-free speculation renders the increase in the money supply counter-productive. It causes prices to fall rather than rise.

Giving them the toy of risk-free profits makes speculators vacate the commodity market where risks are too high. They will then congregate in the bond market where risks are non-existent. The speculator who in the absence of risk-free profits might resist falling prices in the commodity market, will decline the honor of pushing the Keynesian agenda if given the choice of risk-free profits in bonds. This is basic human reaction that cannot be criticized, still less rectified, by official brow-beating. Keynesians should have thought about the consequences of their master-plan more thoroughly before they put open-market operations into effect.

The intentions of policy-makers at the Fed are praiseworthy. They want to prevent prices and employment from collapsing. But they are prisoners of their orthodoxy, and their good intentions make them steer the economy to the road to hell. A catastrophe is confronting the Titanic, but the captain, just confirmed in his position in spite of a most serious public challenge, will not change his course.

A head-on collision with the iceberg straight ahead, otherwise known as the debt-tower, now appears inevitable.

Calendar of Events

Seminar at the Martineum Academy, Szombathely, Hungary, March 25-29, 2010.

Is the Global Financial Crisis Over?

Sponsored by the Gold Standard Institute, with the participation of Sandeep Jaitly, Peter van Coppenolle, Rudy Fritsch, Darryl Schoon, Nathan Narusis, Professor Fekete, and others. Among other topics, there will be a presentation of the latest research on the gold basis, the world's pension woes, and an exclusive business idea turning the ridiculously undervalued "legal tender gold coins" to your advantage. For further details, see: www.professorfekete.com.


Stupid Wager or Clever Prestidigitation?

January 18th, 2011 by


The Daily Bell


Stupid Wager or Clever Prestidigitation?

Tuesday, January 18, 2011 – by  Dr. Antal Fekete

Dr. Antal Fekete

"Heads – you win; tails – I lose." Such is the message the Fed sends to bond speculators. But why would the Fed offer such a stupid wager? Read on.

The Fed is trying to bribe bond speculators with risk-free profits. That's how the Treasury/Fed check-kiting conspiracy makes sure that there will always be plenty of buyers for government debt, regardless of the size of offering.

Ten years ago I started writing about my theory that, wittingly or unwittingly, the Fed has become the quartermaster general of the coming deflation and depression. I offered a logical, closely argued reasoning for this thesis. My argument had to do with the contention that the open market operations of the Fed make bond speculation risk-free, which explains the perpetual bull market in bonds. Bond speculators, knowing that the Fed must needs buy bonds in order to keep the money supply growing, front-run (or, to use the old-fashioned term: pre-empt) the Fed's open market operations. They buy the bonds beforehand, and pocket risk-free profits when they sell them to the Fed. Speculators will allow the bond price to fall only so much. Then they show up as buyers for another ride of the escalator upstairs.

Incidentally, my theory also gives the coup-de-grâce to Keynesian and Friedmanite economics. Keynes, and later Friedman, advised governments to discard the gold standard thus destabilizing foreign exchange. That would give them free hand to pursue monetary policy — euphemism for the license to engineer unlimited depreciation of the currency. Scarcely did they consider that their scheme was to back-fire. They were shooting for inflation only to bag deflation. They wanted rising prices; instead, they got falling prices.

A falling interest-rate structure engenders a falling price-level structure. It is most destructive to the economy. It devastates existing capital and blocks the accumulation of new capital. The 30-year old regime of falling rates destroyed the once flourishing American industry forcing it to flee the country. There is no chance to accumulate new capital as long as interest rates keep falling. Continuation of this trend will cause excruciating pain to those producers who remain. They will not be able to compete with newcomers who carry a much smaller burden, thanks to their lower cost of capital. The squeeze of the old-guard producers will show up in the falling price level. The "grapes of wrath" — the seeds of which were planted by Keynes and Friedman — will come to full maturity when hoards of angry and hungry unemployed people will roam from city to city and country to country.

It is not the Fed who is in the driver's seat. It is the bond speculator. The Great Depression was not due to low demand for goods, as argued by Keynes. It was due to high demand for bonds, courtesy of speculators who understood the dynamics of the bond market better than policymakers did. The GFC is just a repeat performance.

Check-kiting is the name for the conspiracy, typically between two banks, to tap the float (the mass of checks in the process of clearing). The conspiring banks send one another third-party checks that lack any backing whatsoever. They cover the liability of one un-backed check by crediting the other, ad infinitum. It is similar to wildcat banking in Scotland in the 17th century, when the coach hired by the banks carrying gold was front-running the coach carrying bank inspectors from one bank to the next. Small wonder the inspectors found the gold reserve of every bank on their beat in good shape. Check-kiting is a crime to defraud the public dealt with by the Criminal Code. Except, that is, when practiced by the Treasury and the Fed, in which case it is called monetary policy.

Let us bypass the question on what valid grounds do the Treasury and the Fed issue liabilities which they have neither the inclination nor the means to honor. The practice boils down to clever prestidigitation: to mislead the public into believing that the Emperor does have clothes. He is cheered on by an enthusiastic crowd of bond speculators praising the garment. Until… until… a naughty little boy starts howling: "Gee whiz, Dad, the Emperor is stark naked!"

Suppose the Fed wants inflation and thinks that the best way to go about it is to keep buying bonds ad nauseam and call the practice by the acronym QE-X. The belief that pumping up the money supply through unlimited bond purchases by the central bank will bring about rising prices is a tragic mistake. A higher price level will never be achieved in this way. Bond speculators will have a field day. They would just buy the bonds in any amount. A vicious spiral of falling interest rates is engaged that, like the black hole of zero gravitation, will suck in and gobble up the world economy. Keynes and Friedman were hoping for inflation they could control; instead they got deflation they could not. They cut the tragic figure of the Sorcerer's Apprentice who stole the Master's password to turn on the spigots, but he has forgotten to steal the other password to turn them off when enough is enough.

Having been a lonely voice crying in the wilderness for ten years, I am still in a minority of one. Most economists expect Fed action to cause inflation (according to some, hyperinflation). The few who dare mention the d-words, deflation and depression, hasten to add that, of course, this would follow hyperinflation, not precede it. Same as in Zimbabwe. Reports from that unhappy country say that it has 90% unemployment after the worst hyperinflation on record.

I am the only one saying that the U.S. is not Zimbabwe, and for the U.S. the forecast is deflation first, hyperinflation afterwards — at least until the prestidigitation in the bond market is exposed.

Seldom do I get a tail-wind in the form of newspaper reports confirming that there is, after all, such a thing as front-running the Fed's open market operations, that bond speculators do indeed buy the bonds only to dump them in the lap of the Fed at a hefty premium. I have certainly never ever expected the New York Times to provide that tail-wind. Well, on January 10, 2011, that bastion of central planning published an article from the pen of Graham Bowley. It quotes Josh Frost who is in charge of buying hundreds of billions of dollars of Treasuries for the Fed: "We are looking to get the best price we can for the taxpayer". Then the article goes on to quote an authority on bond trading, Louis V. Crandall, chief economist at the research firm Wrightson ICAP, who flatly contradicts Frost: a buyer of $100 billion a month is always going to pay the worst (highest) price. "You can't be a known buyer of $100 billion a month and get a good price."

In my papers I have commiserated with traders of the Fed facing, as they are, hungry lions in the arena bare-handed. The latter are the bond speculators who, unlike the former, are not working for wages. They work for profits. (If the profits happen to be risk free, so much the better.) True, the loss the Fed's traders habitually make is not their loss. They are passed on to the taxpayers with a shrug. It is the taxpayers' blood that is spilled so valiantly.

This reminds me of the object-lesson offered by George Soros. He made mincemeat of the traders of the Bank of England some years ago who were trying to fend off his serial attacks to sell the British pound short. Soros took the traders to the cleaners and, to rub it in, he bragged about it in his book. No need to feel sorry for the forex traders of the Bag Lady of Threadneedle Street. It was not their blood anyway that was flowing so abundantly. It was the blood of the British taxpayers.

I didn't know the identity of the Fed's traders facing the hungry lions. Now I do, thanks to the New York Times. They are babes in Toyland. All three of them are in their 20's. Their only prior experience in trading comes from playing Monopoly. One of them is still a student at NYU. According to the story in the NYT, "most days" they talk to the big banks. How is that for guarding against conflict of interest? Their supervisor, Josh Frost lives in Brooklyn and every morning he takes the subway to commute to work. As one may figure, not for too long. Wonder how one gets such a rags-to-riches job at the Fed? Well, take the example of Josh Frost's boss, Bryan P. Sack, age 40. In 2004 he co-authored a paper with Ben Bernanke, the future chairman of the Fed and another economist about "unconventional measures for stimulating the economy in extraordinary times" — by buying Treasuries in batches of hundreds of billions of dollars. "We didn't know then that some day the Fed would be putting it to test" — Brian is quoted as saying.

The best part of it all is that the line between success and failure is hopelessly blurred. If the rate of interest goes down in consequence of Fed action, then: "hooray, we're dead on with targeting inflation. And that's good news". If, on the other hand, the rate of interest goes up, then: "hooray, the economy is turning around. Rates have risen for the very reason we were hoping for: investors are more optimistic about the recovery. It is a good sign."

The fact that in the meantime the economy is wiped out, gets lost in the noise of loud self-congratulation.


The Federal Reserve, the Quartermaster General of Deflation, A. E. Fekete

There Is No Business Like Bond Business, A. E. Fekete, www.professorfekete.com, January, 2010

Front/Running the Fed in the Treasurys Market
, January, 2010

The Fed`s QE2 Traders, Buying Bonds by the Billions, Graham Bowley, The New York Times, January 10, 2011

Meet the Fed's POMO Desk… by Tyler Durden, www.zerohedge.com, January 10, 2011





Snitching on your neighbor will keep us all safe!

January 18th, 2011 by

The PPJ Gazette


Snitching on your neighbor will keep us all safe!

Marti Oakley (c)copyright 2011 All Rights Reserved


This has nothing to do with security, crimes or anything else of that nature.  It is a snitch set up.  This is community training.  This is conditioning to get people comfortable with the idea of reporting on their neighbors; a concept repugnant to most free societies, but one very common to police states.


Homeland Security, that bastion of police state warriors has set up housekeeping in the once great state of Oklahoma.  Their new website “Red Dirt Ready” would be more aptly titled “Sniffin’ Dirt”.  The site, all plumped up with militant looking people, some who are, I suppose, supposed to represent first responders and medical personnel, encourages Oklahoman’s to be ready for an emergency!  Why!  You can even win yourself an emergency survival kit!  Oh!  And you can snitch on your neighbors too! 

In the upper right hand corner of the header is a “Report Activity” button.  I just had to check it out.  I quickly deduced that native Oklahomans must be somewhat dimwitted or at least Homeland Security and the FBI think they are. 

The page is brief: 


If you perceive an immediate threat to yourself or to public safety, please dial 911 immediately 

To report suspicious activity, please contact your local police department or FBI at (405) 290-7770 in Oklahoma City and (918) 664-3300 in Tulsa. 

For more information, please read the following:

How to Identify Suspicious Activity 

What to Do if You Spot Suspicious Activit 

Examples of Suspicious Activity 

Information provided in part by  NationalTerrorAlert.com


Of course I couldn’t stop here.  I just had to see how to identify suspicious activity.  I had to because, well….we are all felons in the police state and lord knows I wouldn’t want to get on one of those watch lists with those 3 million or so other people who dared to speak out and who are now targeted as a “suspected domestic terrorist” by 17 or so intelligence agencies who spend their time conducting costly and unnecessary surveillance on American citizens who refuse to tow the “party” line.  Right comrade?

Identifying Suspicious Activity

Identifying suspicious activity is not a difficult science. Rely on your judgment. Your suspicion of a threat could be confirmed with only one incident or it could take a series of incidents. Your suspicions will need to be based on: Experience, Judgment and Common Sense.  (Obviously the people of Oklahoma have been deemed not to have any of these qualities)

To assist in recognizing and reporting suspicious activity, consider the following guidelines to help make an informed decision. 

Under this subtitle was the usual know your neighbor stuff, and report crimes if you see them occurring.  What got my attention was this little ditty:

  • Controversial issues being debated.


Now what could that mean?  Why would the discussion of controversial issues be viewed as a threat by Homeland Security and the FBI and your local police department?  I believe it means if you hear anyone discussing non-government approved topics that include non-government approved ideas, information or comments that are not approved in an ideal police state…you need to report that; or you need to be reported. 

Oh yeah….in case of a flood, fire or other disaster, give them a buzz.  They’ll see if they can help.

Since our police departments have been militarized and are now all under control of Homeland Security, and since their purpose is no longer to protect and serve but rather, to assault and attack whenever the opportunity arises, this could present a clear and present danger to the public at large.  I think we should all report them, after all, this is very suspicious activity if you ask me.

I would expand on Oklahoma’s new “Dirt Sniffin’” site.  But you get the drift.  This has nothing to do with security, crimes or anything else of that nature.  It is a snitch set up.  This is community training.  This is conditioning to get people comfortable with the idea of reporting on their neighbors; a concept repugnant to most free societies, but one very common to police states.

I have no doubt these sites will appear in each and every state especially in consideration of the new kazillion square foot spy center they are building in Utah.  Believe it or not, some people actually think that center is going to be used to track terrorists from “over there”.  It is:  over there in Arizona, over there in Texas, over there in Nevada, up there in Missouri, out there in Maine…..any place American citizens reside in the geographical United States.  What most people fail to grasp is, our government is in fear of us; it is the people of the US that our own government views as a threat.   

As the noose on the police state tightens, we will see more snitch and report opportunities.  No doubt, staged “events” will occur to cement in the public’s mind that only YOU can prevent another terrorist attack.  Just pick up that phone and drop that dime!  Mad at your neighbor?  Hey! Just make up some story and call Homeland Security.  That’ll show’em. 

As a young girl, it never once occurred to me that I would ever see the day in this country when our own government would actively recruit neighborhood snitches to report on their neighbors or friends or even family members.  I honestly believe there are few among us who would not report a crime, or who would not come forward if we actually did hear something that needed to be reported to the authorities.  As a middle-aged woman, one who has watched in disbelief as everything we thought we represented is taken from us, I have no illusions.  We are being led into the police state where even our thoughts or conversations can get us killed or imprisoned for life. 

Personally, I think we should start constructing citizen surveillance centers where we can report the suspicious activity of government agents and agencies.  After all, if we are the enemy, and by all standards it appears we are, we need to know who these people are and who they work for as well as what they are doing.

We are under attack.  It isn’t someone from “over there; it isn’t some nameless, unidentifiable, untraceable and undefined enemy.  We see these people on the news, in the papers and hear them on the radio.  We elected many of them and saw many others simply appointed to some position they were most likely not qualified to hold.  These people are the faces and voices of the police state; have they now become our enemy?


Utah Spy Center

“Red Dirt Ready” Oklahoma Snitch Center



The Wanta Chronicles

January 15th, 2011 by


Although I have been collecting notes on this subject for several months now, I could not find enough to construct a comprehensible essay, as I found them in bits and pieces interspersed with emails from Mr. Wanta himself. Rather than take credit for anything I adamantlyWARN the READERthat you may soil yourself as you digest this story and suddenly thousands of events you have been aware of are now clear and comprehensible. I pray this story will be read around the world, and the scumbags  in DC start running for cover. 


Subject: The Wanta Chronicles

Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2011 12:13:53 -0600

 The Wanta Chronicles


Friday, September 4, 2009

From the January 2007 Idaho Observer:

Following the money backwards leads to President Reagan, Russian rubles and Ambassador Leo Wanta. Ambassador Leo Wanta is the lawful "principle" and "trustor" of funds stashed in accounts all over the world.

Editor’s note: The story of how Ambassador Leo Wanta was commissioned by President Reagan to make $trillions for the American people in shrewd (but legal) currency trading that concentrated on buying Russian rubles at a discount to destabilize the Soviet economy surfaced in 1992. The Wanta story was recently revived on the Investigative Journal by Greg Syzmanski through interviews with Ambassador Wanta broadcast on the Republic Broadcast Network. As it turns out, British financial news publisher Christopher Story has published the documents in evidence giving credence to what is arguably the most important story in recent memory. As you will ! see, several poorly-reported incidents during the 90s helped to bury the Wanta story as a tall-tale. As events unfold and independent researchers put the pieces together, Ambassador Wanta is emerging as a real man whose activities produced $trillions that are stashed away in real banks and invested in real properties. If this story is true—and the evidence is becoming unavoidably compelling—then it will not be long before all the world will know.

By Don Nicoloff

While many Americans argue about a variety of current scandals in federal, state, and local governments throughout the United States, the media has remained suspiciously silent about them. Contrary to the myriad of facts and evidence of government complicity or wrongdoing that independent investigators have been steadily uncovering in their analyses of the "attacks" on the World Trade Center; the "bombing" of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City; the sieges at Waco and Ruby Ridge; the facts b! ehind the shoot-out at the Rayburn Senate Office Building/parking garage in May, 2006; the virtual security collapse and mass invasion by illegal aliens along U.S. Borders; the spraying of our skies, crops, and water resources with chemtrails; the numerous bank, investment, securities frauds and sex scandals among members of the Congress, the Senate and the Roman Catholic Church; the secret formation of a "North American Union" and its NAFTA "Super Highway"; the ill-conceived "War on Terror" and the phony "War on Drugs," the mainstream media has been complicit in conspiracies of silence.

In fact, the media has aided and abetted our "elected" lawbreakers in these coverups by endlessly spewing the "talking points" designed to create dissent, confusion and to ridicule or discredit those who demonstrate courage while exposing these despicable and treasonous acts.

Never before in our history has the erosion of Constitutional rights and civil liberties been occurring at such an accelerated pace. There is no denying that the age of Big ! Brother is now upon us, but those who are naive enough to believe the propaganda they are being spoon-fed on a daily basis are in complete denial that ours is no longer the land of the free. The mind control programs to maintain the illusion of freedom in the mass American mind have been in place for many years and are being tested and modified as needed.

For those who would argue that the media is "fair and balanced," one need only to perform a Google search on the Internet to learn that "Operation Mockingbird" was the government’s official declaration that the mainstream media will be controlled — at any cost. The $64,000 question is: "Exactly how much money will it take to control the mainstream media?" The answer: "Lots — billions, at the very least."

Enter Leo Wanta

Beginning in the early-1980s, President Ronald Reagan and a small group of his closest advisors initiated a plan to destabilize the Russian ruble. Reagan recruited h! is most-trusted intelligence agent Leo Emil Wanta to perform this delicate task. Wanta had served the U.S. intelligence community as a Treasury agent, in arms dealing and in other "sensitive" matters. He was chosen for this mission, not only for his loyalty to the president, but also for his unfailing honesty. In addition to his responsibilities in carrying out this covert financial coup against the former Soviet Union, Wanta was also instrumental in thwarting an attempted assassination of President Reagan "in the White House"—yet another event that went unreported by the media.

The presidency of Ronald Reagan was tumultuous, to say the least. Reagan’s administration survived several scandals and he, personally, survived several assassination attempts. Only one of these attempts, the shooting by John W. Hinkley, Jr., would be made public. That shooting was captured live on television and posed a particular problem for the media—there would be no video coverup of the events. Even the shooting of White House Press Secretary Jim Brady w! as broadcast, along with the apprehension of Hinkley.

In hindsight, a closer look at the 1981 attempted assassination of President Reagan smacks of a conspiracy. Not of Jodie Foster, but of a Montauk-style event. Was it possible that "those in the know" had other plans for our president? The jury who heard Hinkley’s case determined he was "not guilty by reason of insanity." It is quite plausible that Hinkley was a mind-control experiment, a la MK-Ultra. After all, how does one associate the love of a teen actress with the assassination of a U.S. president? Only those familiar with the Montauk experiments would suspect such an association would be the result of mind control programming.

What remained a part of the official media coverup of this failed assassination were numerous pertinent facts. Hinkley’s father, John, Sr. was a former oil-business associate and golfing buddy of George H.W. Bush. Bush was suspiciously absent during the event and, according to! accounts of various White House staffers, was resentful of Alexander Haig’s "I’m in control" proclamations. The evening of the assassination attempt, John Hinkley’s brother and his wife were "dinner guests" at the home of the Vice-President’s son, Neil Bush, of Silverado Savings and Loan fame. Coincidence?

President Reagan’s administration began auspiciously with the release of the 63 embassy hostages being held in Iran, an event which was orchestrated to embarrass a sitting president, Jimmy Carter, thus assuring a Republican march to the White House. The failed "secret rescue attempt" which resulted in crashed military helicopters in the desert before the event was successfully launched, may have been orchestrated as well.

In November, 1986, President Reagan admitted to Americans that arms were sold to Iran in the summer of 1985, but he insisted there was no relation to the above-mentioned hostage release. Israel played a part in no fewer than three deliveries of tube-launched, optically-tracked, wire command link-guided (! TOW) missiles to Iran, which subsequently resulted in the release of another hostage, Benjamin Weir. Without the release of some 29 other hostages, Israel withdrew from its original agreement with the U.S. and Iran. The U.S. implemented a second strategy, an operation headed by Lt. Col. Oliver North, to sell the arms directly to Iran—with a considerable markup—and then send the profits to Nicaragua, to covertly fund the Contra rebels who were fighting the communist Sandanistas in power.

It was also assumed that the CIA was involved in drug trafficking as part of the Iran-Contra affair, and many have since come forward to confirm those suspicions. Much has already been written by others about the validity of the War on Drugs. As we would soon come to find out, this was the proverbial tip of the iceberg.


In 1982, Inslaw, a Washington, D.C., computer software manufacturer, developed a program called "PROMIS." The program was to be! used by the U.S. Justice Department to track cases across the country and would be useful in organizing the department’s case files. One feature of PROMIS was its command-line structure, which permitted some 700,000 instructions. Although the program was designed to be used by the bankruptcy courts, it found its way into the NSA, the DIA, the CIA, the FBI, and Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

Coincidentally, Inslaw sued for payment of the software which was stolen and then pirated. Inslaw sued the Justice Department and won a $6.8 million judgment, a verdict that remains in dispute.

When it was discovered that PROMIS could be used to track military movements and other sensitive data, the software fell into the hands of the Israeli intelligence community and the government of Iraq as well. This could explain the ban on of the sale of PC-486 processor technology to Iraq during the first Gulf War.

According to an article in The American Free Press by Mike Blair, "A Terrorist, the CIA, ‘Blue Death’ and the Inslaw Case", in 1! 986 a clandestine meeting took place at the Hilton Hotel in Sherman Oaks, California. Present were several key figures: Ted Gunderson, former Supervisory Special Agent for the Los Angeles District of the FBI; Ralph Olberg, a "prominent, American businessman who worked at the Afghan desk of the State Department"; Michael Riconosciuto, "then a long-time weapons and explosives expert linked to the CIA" and "the Inslaw case" and "Tim Osman," the alias assigned to Osama bin Laden "without his beard," according to Orlin Grabbe, the newsman who first reported the story.

At the Hilton meeting, discussions centered on "the supply of U.S. Stinger II missiles and modified Red Chinese 107 mm rockets obtained through Olberg’s Norinco contacts in China," to be used by Afghan rebels against Soviet helicopters and other aircraft. Reports were to then be forwarded to the CIA as to the missiles’ effectiveness against the Soviet aircraft.

It was known that the computer softwar! e had also "fallen into the hands of the Israeli Mossad." The article described how the software had been used as a "backdoor entry" into intelligence computers. This meeting was also a precursor to the events of 9/11, indicating the existence of covert relationships between so-called "terrorist organizations" and the U.S. government prior to Sept. 11, 2001.

Stirring the pot, thickening the plot

Enter Leo Emil Wanta, Ambassador from Somalia to Switzerland and Canada. With an initial investment of $150 billion, borrowed from the U.S. Treasury and, thus, the American people, Wanta purchased rubles from contacts in the Netherlands. According to Wanta, the ruble was valued at $1.20 on the international currency market at the time. By purchasing rubles in above-normal quantities, his company, AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc., of Vienna, Austria and other locations, was able to acquire them far below the standard exchange rates. To boot, his company was trading with U.S. dollars and other currencies.

During several live ! radio interviews on Greg Szymanski’s "Investigative Journal" radio program in early 2006 on the Republic Broadcasting Network, Wanta described purchasing rubles at various prices ranging "from 18 to 23 cents on the dollar." AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc., would then resell the rubles at higher rates to other investors in the financial markets. Dollars were converted into rubles, rubles into yen (or other currencies) and the process would be repeated, over and over again, until the Soviet banks could no longer bear the pressure of cashing in their own currency. According to Ambassador Wanta, "the accounts were distributed throughout secret offshore accounts and had doubled in value every two years."

It should be emphasized that the plan Ambassador Wanta designed was perfectly legal. The same strategy is employed everyday by investors throughout the world. Wanta’s plan differed though, in that his goal, at the bequest of President Reagan, was to cause a financial collapse o! f the Soviet Union. His repeated purchase of "discounted rubles" enabled him to profit with an advantage not available to others in the financial markets – but was and is still legal. The plan was carried out under Executive Order 12333 (EO 12333, UNITED STATES FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES is a comprehensive executive order, easily found on the Internet, that was signed by President Reagan on December 4, 1981.)

Bush fingers the Wanta cookie jar

Eventually, Wanta’s AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc., along with his other corporations, amassed a sum worth $27.5 trillion. Wanta emphasized that the initial $150 billion startup capital was repaid to the U.S. Treasury and that he intended for the profits to be returned to the American people, according to President Reagan’s orders. While in Hong Kong, Wanta and his Chinese business partner, Howe Kwong Kok, were approached by then President George H. W. Bush. According to Wanta, Bush, Sr., had demanded access to the funds that Wanta had accumulated. Wanta and his partner ref! used, citing that the funds "belonged to the U.S. Treasury and the American people." Wanta’s partner died of poisoning 10 days after this visit. Bush, former Director of the CIA and a former U.S. Ambassador to China, obviously maintained powerful connections there.

Unbeknownst to Ambassador Wanta, while he was in Switzerland, a plot was unfolding to circumvent his total authority, by presidential order, to safeguard and invest the $27.5 trillion fund he had accumulated through a series of financial maneuvers. The international financial community was well aware of the coup that had taken place, yet not a word had been reported by the worldwide mainstream media. A new president, William Jefferson Clinton, had taken office in 1992 and would soon learn about the financial coup and the efforts of his predecessor, George Herbert Walker Bush, to illegally divert the funds to offshore accounts for personal use.

Clinton fingers the Wanta cookie jar
Prior to Clinton’s arrival in Washington, D. C., it was no small secret that there were an unusually large number of people "in the know" who suddenly died of suspicious circumstances. Personal bodyguards, security personnel and even financial associates who had prior careers in the military or in law enforcement and had since worked for Clinton when he was the governor of Arkansas, had "car accidents" and committed "suicide" in ever-increasing numbers. These people knew too much about the drug deals and financial dealings at the Rose Law Firm where Hillary Clinton was a partner. Even two young boys who witnessed the Mena, Arkansas, drug shipments arriving by train were murdered, in order to protect these dark secrets. The dark secrets followed the Clintons to Washington, D.C.

Shortly after Bill Clinton took over the presidency in 1993, questions were raised by The New York Times about the Whitewater Development and Madison Guaranty loan scandals. The Clintons had invested in the project (at a "loss") and it was learned that the ! bank had used its influence to hand out political loans amounting to $3 million with deposits of only $300,000. This procedure is practiced by virtually every bank that loans money under the "authority" of the Federal Reserve System. Banks were permitted to loan up to 10 times their actual cash deposits, a practice approved by the Federal Reserve.

Note: Coincidentally, it is this "regulation" that makes it possible to "create money out of thin air." No actual exchange of money occurs between the Federal Reserve and the lending bank, though the loan transaction is recorded on paper as if there had been such an exchange. One can assume that the Fed receives its "cut" from the interest-bearing portion of the loan, as well as the principal portion, 90 percent, which has been financed from funds that actually never existed. Today, the "required" cash on hand is reported to be closer to two percent.

The Federal Reserve, a private corporation and not an actual govern! ment agency, ultimately receives interest on such loans—interest that is funneled into offshore accounts which provide profits for private, foreign banks.
When loan payments are in default or dire straits, the banks "repossess" the physical property, whether real estate, a building, house, business development, or any motor vehicle that has been financed through this illusory system. This confiscated property is resold, often at a discount, because the banks and the Fed are willing to "lose" any portion of the 90 percent which has been financed only on paper and not by any tangible means. The process is merely repeated again by the "new owner," until the banks determine that all loans have been "satisfied." The loan schemes devised under the authority of the Federal Reserve account for the false, inflationary valuation of real estate and the rapid depreciation of motor vehicles, are just two examples of our illusory economy. One can assume that all credit agencies operate under the same system.

The New York Times story had precipita! ted an investigation into Whitewater by the U.S. Justice Department—the same U.S. Justice Department which was complicit in the theft and piracy of the previously-referenced PROMIS software program created by Inslaw: The same U.S. Justice Department that had failed to pay a $6.8 million judgment in damages to Inslaw was now going to investigate a law firm, a bank that illegally loaned money to politicians, a real estate entity that was a "shell" corporation created by attorneys and a former governor of Arkansas who had become president of the United States.

To thicken the plot, former White House Deputy Counsel, Vince Foster submitted several delinquent tax returns for the Whitewater Development project in June, 1993. In July, 1993, Foster "committed suicide" in Fort Marcy Park in Virginia—so the "official" story goes. After a conflict of interest was determined in the appointment of Robert B. Fiske by Attorney General Janet Reno, Kenneth Starr was appointed by a p! anel of three judges to head the Whitewater investigation in 1994. There was even an investigation into the murder of Vince Foster, who had worked with the Rose Law Firm alongside Hillary Clinton. Although several improprieties by the Clintons were discovered, Foster’s (timely, untimely?) death was ruled a suicide and only James and Susan McDougal received jail time. James McDougal eventually succumbed to a "heart attack" while serving his prison sentence.

Contrary to the findings of the Starr investigation, one of Kenneth Starr’s lead investigators, Miguel Rodriguez, claimed there was a coverup of the forensic evidence discovered in the Foster murder. According to Rodriguez, evidence at the crime scene did not match the evidence contained in the "official report." Rodriguez is recorded on tape describing details of the coverup and his frustration with a corrupt legal system. At the conclusion of the Whitewater investigation, Rodriguez was "demoted" to a state job in California. Mr. Rodriguez, through the miracles of modern medicine, ! has recently become Miss Michelle Rodriguez.

Aside from the business association between Hillary Clinton and Vince Foster, there were numerous references to a romantic relationship—an extramarital affair. Reports from Secret Service agents and White House staffers detailed accounts of this illicit relationship and others, which were by no means a secret to Washington insiders. The public is reminded of the many dalliances of our 42nd president and the crude manner in which his accusers were handled by his staff, his attorneys and the media. At the time the First Lady was blaming reports regarding her husband’s sexual exploits as part of "a right-wing conspiracy." Numerous White House security agents then came forward with reports of her own trysts with female partners, in various rooms of the White House during nightly security checks.

What was contained in those delinquent tax filings that cost Vince Foster his life? What could have driven him to commit sui! cide? If what Miguel Rodriguez said about the Starr investigation was correct, that it was being used to coverup the murder of Vince Foster, perhaps Ambassador Leo Wanta could shed some light on a possible motive.

The Vince Foster connection

In 1993, Ambassador Leo Emil Wanta met with Vince Foster in Geneva, Switzerland. Foster had traveled there to make a special pickup of a disbursement that had been formally requested by the President of the United States, Bill Clinton. According to Wanta, he had been working on "Seal projects" and had been requested to transfer $250 million to an account that was retrievable by Foster. The account was destined for the "Children’s Defense Fund," hardly a "Seal" project. Wanta arranged for three payments, approximately $81 million dollars each, to be made and converted to U.S. Treasury notes which were given to Foster, who then gave them to Hillary Clinton.

The "Children’s Defense Fund" was a pet project of Hillary Rodham Clinton. It would be revealing to track the $25! 0 million "appropriation" from Switzerland to its final destination. Congress usually handles such appropriations, which are mandated by legislation. Congress did not authorize the briefcase pickup of $250 million from Geneva, Switzerland—by deputy White House counsel-turned-bagman. If the "Children’s Defense Fund" is actually a CIA operation, then one must also conclude that Hillary Rodham Clinton is a CIA operative.

Shortly after Vince Foster departed for his return trip to Washington (with $250 million in tow), Wanta was arrested by Swiss police. His long nightmare had just begun. He was an Ambassador with diplomatic privileges and was incarcerated in a Swiss dungeon. No one close to Wanta, other than principals within the U.S. administration and intelligence agencies, knew about his imprisonment for quite some time. Were it not for Yitzhak Rabin, the Israeli Prime Minister, he might have remained there for an eternity. Israel, along with several other European ! countries, held a financial interest in Wanta’s release. Rabin’s communication to Swiss authorities ultimately influenced Wanta’s release from Swiss detention, although he was then immediately shackled and illegally extradited to a Federal Court in New York City, and then to Wisconsin, in order to face phony tax charges.

Pardon me?

Wanta, who not only held diplomatic immunity but was also a U.S. Secret Service/Treasury, CIA, and FBI agent, had been instructed by then FBI Director William Sessions to arrest Marc Rich (Reich). Rich is a key player in arms deals, drug trafficking, oil and mineral exploration, and other big-ticket transactions and is a known CIA operative. Rich, who was operating Martwell Investments, a corporation with suspicious contacts to the United Nations, was indicted by then Prosecutor Rudolph Giuliani. According to accounts originally authored by Christopher Story, a Fellow at the British Royal Society of the Arts, and published by the "International Currency Review," "Economic Intelligence Review" and on! his associated website, www.worldreports.org, Rich was tipped off by Mossad agents and escaped arrest by Wanta. It was then that Ambassador Wanta was illegally arrested by Swiss police and incarcerated in a dungeon for 134 days, until his subsequent illegal extradition to New York. Sessions was relieved of duty shortly thereafter.

To add to the mystery, Marc Rich (Reich) was proven by Story, in the "International Currency Review," Volume 31, Numbers 3 and 4, with a mountain of irrefutable documentation, to have entered Canada in 1954 under the name, "Hans Brand," a German national born in Lelbach/Waldeck uber Korbach, Germany, and not in Antwerp, Belgium. "Marc Rich" (Reich) is merely an alias, and contrary to his exaggerated, autobiographical declarations, the facts documented by Story expose the extent to which the government will hide the truth from the public. In 1983, Rich and his partner Pincus Green were indicted by then U.S. Attorney Guiliani for tax evasion! and illegal trading with Iran. Both Rich and Green fled to Switzerland to avoid prosecution and remained on the FBI’s most wanted list until January 20, 2001—the day President Clinton gifted Rich with an 11th-hour pardon prior to leaving office. The pardon caused a shockwave of anger and disbelief among those who understood the treasonous nature of Rich’s activities.

Wanta’s troubles come home

Rich’s association with the Clintons may have some relevance to the theft of "Contract #4," a $5 trillion contract previously held between the United Nations and Ambassador Leo E. Wanta, and subsequently "stolen" by the Clintons.

Before the false charges were dismissed in New York City, the federal judge asked Wanta why he was there and why his briefcase contained "$18 billion in Treasury instruments." The judge dismissed the charges on the basis of Wanta’s diplomatic immunity, though she was interested in the large sum in Wanta’s possession. The prosecutor rushed to have all charges dismissed, in an attempt ! to prevent Wanta’s disclosure of the true facts behind his arrest and appearance in federal court.

Upon his release from the proceedings in federal court, Ambassador Wanta was arrested, now for a third time, by "two New York City policemen on the courthouse steps and without a warrant." The charge: "tax evasion in the State of Wisconsin." Again, Wanta faced trumped up charges, though he had not lived in Wisconsin for years. By this time, in 1993, it was apparent that someone was trying to permanently prevent him from accessing the funds he had amassed at the bequest of President Reagan, for the ultimate benefit of the American people.

According to Wanta, after his illegal arrest and extradition to Wisconsin, he was drugged while incarcerated in an Oklahoma prison, during which no fewer than four attempts were made to have him permanently diagnosed and admitted to a mental institution. Secretary of Defense James Forrestal suffered a similar fate in 1949, until! he was eventually "suicided." The reader is reminded that "suicide" is merely doublespeak for "homicide," especially when a government official or operative is in a position to disclose information pertaining to a crime committed by someone in government.

However, due to the enormous amount of money amassed during the financial destabilization of the former Soviet Union, Wanta would not suffer the same fate until the locations of the accounts and pass codes could be determined—accounts he had carefully established to keep the funds from being stolen by several interested parties.

Note: Wanta later described three attempts by agents to murder him while he was illegally imprisoned by Swiss authorities. On one occasion, after receiving advice from a female Chinese physician who had examined him, he refused to eat some cheese that was included with his meal. Another prisoner ate the cheese and died "almost instantly." Wanta had previously been denied medications and treatment for prior-existing medical conditions and he had also be! en beaten by Swiss intelligence operatives during his illegal incarceration. The Swiss authorities also informed Wanta that Vince Foster had "committed suicide" on the birthday of Wanta’s daughter, a veiled threat to imply that she or another family member may be "taken out" in a similar fashion.

A summary of Ambassador Leo Emil Wanta’s ordeal in the Wisconsin courts reveals "bogus," trumped-up felony income tax charges that were assessed during a time he was living in a foreign country as an ambassador with diplomatic immunity.

In June, 1992, Wanta grudgingly paid a Wisconsin tax fine of $14,129 while operating in Singapore. The payment was forwarded to his attorney in Wisconsin, but was not recorded by the authorities until late 1995. A second penalty (of the same amount) was paid under protest in July, 1992, as the first payment "had not been received." A third payment of $30,626.97 was made in July, 2005, based upon "accrued interest" of the previously "! unpaid fines." Finally, Wanta’s home was seized and sold for a reported $60,000.

On each occasion, pertinent documents and receipts were "lost," "misplaced," or "never received." The third such payment was actually made on behalf of Ambassador Wanta by Story, the above-mentioned editor, from his personal funds. Incredibly, in October of 2006, a fourth assessment of this "fine" against Wanta was again made by the authorities of the State of Wisconsin, citing similar "reasons" for the fine. Wanta, it is believed, is soon to file a $1 billion lawsuit against the state under RICO statutes and other torts.

Who is Leo Wanta?

Although Wanta’s birth records and his Social Security number indicate his given name at birth was, "Lee Emil Wanta," he is known in intelligence circles as, "Leo Emil Wanta." The fact that Wisconsin authorities levied charges against him under "Leo Emil Wanta" shows the charges to be related to his position within the scope of his intelligence duties, and not as a private individual, "Lee! Emil Wanta." The insinuation by the prosecution that "Leo Emil Wanta could not have been the Ambassador to Somalia because he is not black" is further testament of a conspiracy to discredit Wanta, while intelligence agencies and three successive presidential administrations blatantly pilfer public funds—funds that Wanta is still intending to repatriate into the U.S. Treasury.

Subsequent to Wanta’s illegal incarceration and persecution due to the bogus charges levied against him, he received an "Illuminati" 22-year prison sentence in Wisconsin. He was painted as a "liar" and a "con man" by the prosecution, though never actually proven by any evidence in court. To the contrary, fabricated statements made by Wisconsin authorities and the FBI conflicted with those made by the CIA. While Wanta was incarcerated, the CIA was raiding the various assets of AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc., New Republic/USA Financial Group, GES.m.b.H., Aneko Credit PTE, Limited, Marvelous Investment! s, Ltd., AmeriChina and his other companies, proclaiming that he was actually "dead," even though the CIA was well-informed of his "trial" and subsequent incarceration in an Oklahoma high-security prison. A 26-page handwritten letter to President Clinton at the White House persuaded him to commute Wanta’s sentence to "house arrest" in Wisconsin, but the illegal raiding of the various Wanta-owned, Title 18, Section 6 accounts then continued unabated and continues today.

After years of victimization through illegal imprisonment, torture, beatings, drugging, defamation, and assassination attempts, Ambassador Leo Emil Wanta rose from the ashes of his "death" and began to shock the rest of the world. In 2003, Virginia District Federal Judge Gerald Bruce Lee declared Ambassador Wanta to be the "Principal" and Trustor of the $27.5 trillion in funds obtained via the financial implosion of the Soviet Union. Wanta was now in a position to investigate the various means by which the last of three successive presidential administrations had been sy! stematically embezzling the very funds he was commissioned by President Reagan to accrue to revitalize the beleaguered American economy.

Violating the public trustor

Upon his "release" from prison, Wanta remained under house arrest until May, 2005. Out of the way and powerless to intervene, Wanta watched as the raiding of his corporate accounts continued. To fully understand the enormous deception and level of corruption, one must read the publication, "International Currency Review." This 480-page quarterly is a masterful piece of investigative journalism which decimates the falsehoods, deflections, inconsistencies, and conspiratorial deceptions employed by the Administration, the banks, U.S. intelligence agencies, the U.S. Treasury, the Wisconsin Department of Revenue, and the Wisconsin State / U.S. Departments of Justice. Irrefutable evidence has been revealed in this publication, including official documents, Wanta’s handwritten notes and! communications to government officials, court transcripts, public records, bank records and receipts.

The bank documents and illicit transactions that Wanta had documented are also supported, in some instances, by photographic evidence. On at least one occasion, intelligence operatives filmed Senator Hillary Clinton at the Bank of Crozier, Grenada. Wanta and others have documented no less than $742 billion in theft from U.S. Treasury accounts there, where Clinton is alleged to have presented CIA documentation in order to withdraw funds in April, 2003. The evidence was submitted to Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, who has been conducting grand jury investigations into a variety of crimes committed by career politicians and government operatives.

Add to this mountain of evidence supporting Wanta’s claims, in particular the exhaustive list of "participating banks" and elected officials "in the know," and there can be no doubt that there is a concerted effort by the mainstream media, the government and the courts to completely c! overup this most-important crisis. Recent developments in foreign countries underscore the level of deterioration of trust and confidence in the U.S. government due to the outrageous plot to conceal the facts of this case and its negative impact on the world economy and exponentially-escalating levels of U.S. debt.

By December, 2005, Ambassador, Principal and Trustor Wanta had agreed to a settlement of $4.5 trillion, in order to prevent the total implosion of the U.S. economy. This settlement would have required his silence about the remaining funds, which would have given the thieves an "out" and allowed them to continue their pillaging. The settlement would also prevent a domino effect from occurring in other world financial markets. The embezzled funds have since circuited the world several times over, being deposited, transferred, and then laundered through off-balance sheet derivatives and other illegal transactions.

The numbers are staggering
It was no coincidence that the settlement funds were "signed off" to U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson, former Chairman of Goldman Sachs. Upon instructions from Federal Judge Gerald Bruce Lee, the $4.5 trillion settlement was originally deposited into a Bank of America account in Virginia, where the case was decided in federal court by Judge Lee. The windfall tax that Ambassador Wanta intended to pay to the U.S. Treasury amounted to $1.575 trillion. Just on the accrued interest alone, that windfall tax would have earned "$96 billion per day," according to Christopher Story’s "ICR" accounting. Story estimated that the U.S. Treasury, through the duplicitous activities of Secretary Paulson, lost some $10.5 to $11 trillion in interest during the 7-month period following the original "due date" of the $4.5 trillion settlement.

The State (Commonwealth) of Virginia stood to gain a windfall tax payment of some $270 million from the settlement. Because Vice-President and Treasurer Michael C. Cottrell, M.S., of the Ameritrust! Groupe, Inc. conducts business in the State of Pennsylvania that state was due a similar windfall tax payment, though the actual amount is unknown at this time.

Other disbursements promised to foreign officials and/or governments include: "$30 billion to the Russian Federation, [and] $5 billion each to the governments of Canada, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Mexico, and Spain."

Where’s the money?

Previously, similar amounts had been promised to the governments of Israel and Palestine, though the "publicized" $15 billion dual payments to both governments were also stolen. Remember that Yitzhak Rabin had attempted to assist in the release of Ambassador Wanta from a Swiss gulag in Lausanne in 1993. Again, the media did its job by covering up the story.

In addition to the blatant refusal of the U.S. administration and the U.S. Treasury to disburse the funds to the legal trustor, the funds were transferred from bank to bank, movin! g first from the Bank of America account to Wachovia Bank in New York and onward to Goldman Sachs. Intelligence information shows that the funds still reside at Goldman Sachs, though this is denied by the firm. In fact, a Treasury agent recently confirmed that the funds are there, being held illegally and with the complicity of Secretary Paulson.

Shortly after the North Korean "nuclear missile test" scare in late-2006, it was reported by intelligence sources that President Bush had traveled to that country while Treasury Secretary Paulson went to Latvia. Some of the Wanta funds had previously been tracked through North Korea, en route to India. The reported amount was $25 trillion. Coincidentally, after the "successful" missile tests, North Korea received a secret $55 million payment from the U.S. The media assisted in the promotion of fear, yet failed to report this curiously-timed disbursement of funds.

In mid-December, 2006, both Secretary Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke traveled to China to meet with elders ! and finance ministers. Though the Chinese repeatedly urged U.S. officials to disburse the $4.5 trillion in Wanta settlement funds (and were repeatedly assured they would be dispersed), Paulson and Bernanke attempted to coerce them into "refinancing" $1 trillion in loans (the Chinese had been propping up the U.S. economy to protect its exports business in America by "purchasing" U.S. debt in the form of U.S. treasury bonds and other securities for several years) at 1 percent interest, far less than the usual 4-5 percent they previously received. To boot, the Chinese had already withdrawn $32 trillion in Clearinghouse Interbank Payment System (CHIPS) accounts ($1 trillion per day) during October and November, 2006, which nullified credit transactions above $100 million.

To add further insult to injury, the Chinese then began purchasing oil with British pound sterling, essentially "dumping" the dollar as the preferred oil currency. This fact was again covered up by the ! mainstream media, when they reported that China was "attempting to sabotage the dollar, by dumping $1 trillion in credits." The very same accusations were being made on the Congressional floor, prior to the Christmas recess.

Buoyed by frequent updates on the Wanta Plan and reports on the December 23, 2006 arrest of Treasury Secretary Paulson in Germany, the claims made by Ambassador Wanta appear, on all accounts, to be genuine. Paulson was allegedly arrested for attempting to block the settlement a second time. He arrived "late" to the funeral of President Gerald Ford, and was seen sitting behind Nancy Reagan and next to Secretary of State, Condoleeza Rice. Due to an impending visit from German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Paulson was reportedly ushered on a plane and flown to Israel. Paulson reportedly was in possession of an Israeli passport, as well. His "diplomatic documentation" in Germany was also in dispute and was not "substantiated" by the U.S. Consulate.

Pieces are falling into place

A careful exami! nation of the Internal Currency Review will reveal that former President George H.W. Bush holds "dual citizenship" with Germany, as he is the reputed "head" of the Deutsche Verteidigungs Dienst, the Dachau DVD, or the Abwehr (underground S.S.). Satellite photos confirm that Bush attended a "secret" meeting of the organization, over which he presides, since taking over its leadership from Dr. Henry Kissinger. Kissinger replaced the DVD founder, Admiral Canaris, who became ill in 1976. Canaris reestablished the DVD in Oklahoma City under the name, Samuel Randall Pittman after World War II. The DVD records were stored in the Murrah Federal Building, which was subsequently destroyed in the infamous bombing by "Timothy McVeigh." CNN also assisted in the coverup of that event, although they "accidentally" transmitted pictures of an "unexploded, stacked bomb" which was visible in the portion of the building that was left standing.

Among the many documents that have mysterio! usly surfaced on the Internet—documents that support Wanta’s claims—are a series of bank transfer records known as the "Vreeland Faxes." Delmart Edward "Mike" Vreeland, an ONI agent, posted copies of Wanta’s records on the Web which detail multi-billion dollar transactions, account numbers, and recipient information. Of interest to many were the names of the "shell" corporations. "The Francis X. Driscoll Trust" was purportedly a joint account between George H.W. Bush and the Queen of England. "Pilgrim Investments" was found to have ties, among others, to Hutchison-Whampoa Ltd., the global shipping company owned by Li Ka-Shing, a Chinese billionaire and real estate tycoon. Hutchison Port Holdings (HPH) is a subsidiary that controls ports around the world and has the exclusive rights to control the Panama Canal. Though the arrangement appeared to make no sense at all to most Americans, with the information above, we can now understand why the current administration attempted to give the "port inspection" contract to Hutchison-Whampoa in the ! Bahamas in 2006, under the pretext of "inspecting cargo for nuclear devices."

Though the media reported the Ports Dubai scandal, they failed to accurately describe the attempt to "hand over" American ports to a company from the Middle East. Despite the news that "six" ports were to be handed over to the company, 22 to 29 ports along the East Coast and the Gulf of Mexico would have been a more accurate analysis of the plan.
According to Leo Wanta, on November 1, 2001, U.S. agents secretly met in Manila, Philippines with a "lieutenant" of Osama Bin Laden, Datu Ben Abu. Wanta detailed the identity of participants of the meeting, which was reminiscent to the above-referenced Hilton Hotel meeting in 1986. In a handwritten letter to Vice-President Richard Cheney, Wanta described "Red Mercury, Stinger II missiles and boxes of cash (weapons)."

Also present at the clandestine meeting were a "Dr. Navarro" and a "Madame Teleki (Eva Teleki)." Despite Wanta’s incarcera! tion, it appeared that his expertise was still considered valuable to the perpetrators of 9/11. Cheney forwarded the letter to the head of the NSA, Condoleeza Rice, and then on to the president. Despite the rhetoric we heard leading up to the invasion of Iraq, it was apparent our government was willing to assist those who were later blamed for the WTC/Pentagon attacks — al-Queda. Of course, the media failed to report and investigate this important story as well.

End notes

Little known to the public is the imminent insolvency of several large financial institutions due to the off-balance sheet and tax-free transactions in worldwide derivatives markets. Although the media continue to sensationalize their usual bevy of trivial news stories, the greatest financial scandal in the history of the United States—and in the world—marches onward, while their treacherous conspiracy and complicity to hide the facts in this case demonstrates their willingness to honor treason, corruption, and tyranny. (Note: Readers should ! note that this article was written in January 2007, well before the financial crisis began later that year. The theft and fraud involving Ambassador Wanta’s funds was, indeed, one of the major causes of the crises that followed the loss to the American people.)

Despite the best efforts of the government and its intelligence agencies to distort the facts, misinform, or outright lie about the Wanta Plan, the Internet has been a repository of information. As the story has begun to be understood and verified by many outstanding researchers and conspiracy experts, the criminals perpetrating the fraud on the American public and the world have suddenly realized that the clock is ticking, and time is running out. Several Internet talk-show hosts (not worth mentioning by name) have determined the story to be "a hoax." Such ignorant declarations smack of the same hypocrisy that is evident among a "bribed" or "bridled" mainstream media. The citizens of the United States have w! itnessed countless assassinations of public figures, the subsequent cover-ups, and the rhetoric that ultimately follows. The problem here is that we have been lied to one too many times, and this story will not "go away," as have those of the past.

The time has come for all Americans to awaken from the mind control, the brain washing, and the dismantling of our individual sovereignty. Ambassador Leo E. Wanta, Michael C. Cottrell, M.S., and Christopher Story (a British citizen) have exhibited a determination to honor the truth, a quality severely lacking among those entrusted with our safety and well-being. These courageous men have demonstrated more loyalty to our country than those who have openly and systematically defied the very laws they, themselves, have created. The crime of the millennium is being perpetrated before our very eyes, and if left to an incompetent, compliant, and conspiratorial media, the price will be far greater than what is now an estimated $75 trillion in stolen funds.

Posted by The Wanta Chronicles at 9:12 PM 0 comments


Who is Leo Wanta?
by J. Orlin Grabbe
"Bill Clinton's Short-Term Notes"
Asian-European, the CIA, and Mochtar Riady

Meet Leo Emil Wanta. At one point Wanta had bank accounts at Metishe Bank in Moscow, Avenue Bank on the Champs-Elysee in Paris, Credito Italiano in Milan, Anker Bank in Geneva, Swiss Bank Corporation in Geneva, the Algemeine Spaar in Brussels, the Zentralsparkasse und Kommerzialbank in Vienna, Creditanstalt Bankverein in Vienna, and–the perennial favorite of money launderers–Citibank in Milan, New York, and Los Angeles.

Meet Leo Emil Wanta, a man accused of, or praised for, crashing the Russian ruble over 1990-1. There is no doubt that he was a currency trader, placing orders for 100 billion rubles at a time. Then there is the matter of gold–Russian gold.

One of the orders faxed around the world from his New Republic/USA Financial Group Ltd. (2101 North Edgewood Avenue, Appleton, WI 54914! , Tele/Fax: (414) 738-7007), dated Feb. 4, 1991, is an offer to buy/sell/effect 2000 metric tons of gold bullion, with rollovers under London good delivery. At the time of this offer, Wanta was in constant phone contact with Roberto Coppola in Rome, where Coppola served as Ambassador of the Russian Republic. Was it Russian gold Wanta was selling?

Was Wanta just another trader specializing in illiquid currencies and flight capital in the form of bullion? Was he a big time money launderer? Either would explain the 14 percent commissions at which he dealt. Or was neither the case? Let's look closer. Because something doesn't add up.

Wanta, an erstwhile traveling companion of Vernon Walters and supplier of machine guns to Bill Casey, was arrested by Swiss authorities on July 7, 1993, in Geneva, Switzerland. He was held for four months, then extradited to Wisconsin to stand trial for state taxes owed for the years 1982 and 1988. The grand total of taxes owed–$14,0! 00.

Curious that. Extradited for $14,000? In taxes? From Switzerland? The story gets weirder.

Wanta was sentenced to 22 years in prison. (Better he had killed a few people than that he owed taxes.) Afterward, on Sept. 21, 1996, Wanta wrote a mysterious letter to Hillary Rodham Clinton, referring to "U.S. President Bill Clinton's Short Term Notes and IMF Sale of Bullion." In the letter Wanta referred to his own "de-stabilization of the Soviet Union Rubles (SUR)" and noted that he "prevented the Soviet & Italian Mafiosa from the Soviet Funds in favour of our U.S. Treasury & Metals Accounts in excess of US$ 150 billion".

Wanta then threatened: "Until by legal release from the unconsitutional/false incarceration in Wisconsin–as a diplomat & non-resident – I am legally interested in the corporate placement of short-term notes & I.M.F. gold bullion/troy ounce delivery contract. Thank you for your kind assistance in this timely situation."

Wanta's letter (or letters) got results. On Jan. 10, 1997, Wanta r! eceived a reply from Erskine Bowles at the White House.
Mr. Leo E. Wanta
c/o Kettle Moraine
Correctional Institute
P.O. Box 31
Plymouth, WI 53073

Dear Mr. Wanta:

Thank you for your letter. I appreciate hearing from you.

To give your concerns the proper attention, I have forwarded your letter to the Office of Agency Liaison within the White House. You can be certain that your concerns will be carefully reviewed.

Again, thank you for writing.


Erskine B. Bowles

On February 1, 1997, after Bowles had checked with W.H. Agency Relations, Leo Wanta was released on $90,000 bail.

So here's what we know about Wanta so far: Extradited from Switzerland on a triviality. Sentenced to 22 years on the same triviality; but then sprung after references to "Bill Clinton's short-term notes" and the White House checks with Agency Liaison.

Then there's the Russian currency/gold issue. Wanta was dealing in bil! lions of dollars. Where did the financing come from? Another question comes to mind: How did Wanta get to be Ambassador from Somalia?

Claire Sterling's not-so-reliable book "Thieves' World" contains a good bit of information (and mis-information) on Leo Wanta. (Sources include a mysterious Mr. X, an "investment banker", and an unnamed FBI agent. Sterling's credits, however, may identify the latter source: she gives special mention to "Jim Moody of the FBI" – the man who headed up the FBI's organized crime division.

Wanta himself identifies Sterling's "Mr. X" as Treasury Special Agent Philip Wainwright.

Depending on your point of view, Wanta is a con artist or a hero: bilking the crumbling Soviet empire of its currency and resources, helping pushing the wounded bear over the cliff. Wanta's operation has been called the Great Ruble Scam. That is, one of the few ruble scams not engineered by the Russian central bank/Russian government itself.

Wanta presented his credentials in Moscow in October 1990. He was a member o! f Reagan's "President's Club" (meaning he had given $50,000 to the campaign). He also headed the "New Republic Financial Group" located in Appleton, WI, and registered in Vienna, Austria (New Republic/USA Financial Group, GES.m.b.H., Kartnerstrasse 28/15, Telefon: 513-4235, A-1010 Wien). New Republic had declared capital of about $17,000, according to Sterling. On this basis, Wanta wanted to swap $5 billion for 140 billion rubles, rising over five years to $50 billion for 300 billion rubles.

You never make money unless you think big, right? The proposal (one of three similar ones from seemingly disparate sources) was to be a mini-Marshall plan to import into Russia consumer goods like frozen chickens and Tampax. Or that was the story. Boris Yeltsin approved the deal, but it fell through, according to Sterling, when the State Department reported that Wanta "had major debts and some credit card problems". (Wanta denies that the State Department ever issued such a state! ment. Much of Sterling's information, in fact, seems to come from a Soviet investigator looking to smear Wanta as a common criminal.)

To Sterling's "Mr. X", who worked with Wanta, the objective was quite different: "I knew there would be a possibility of a Western privately orchestrated economic Jihad that could help crush the communist ruling powers by destroying their unstable ruble. Unilaterally and privately, I decided to play a catalytic role to crash the ruble."

During the previous year Wanta's group bought sold and traded rubles. Many of the orders/offers appear to be bogus–calculated to cause a run on the ruble.

And–coming forward to October 1990–Wanta's deal of $5 billion for 140 billion rubles, or 28 rubles to the dollar, would have been transacted at roughly double the value of the dollar relative to its black market rate which was closer to 14 rubles to the dollar. If executed, the plan would have effectively given Wanta a free 70 billion rubles with which to help himself to the natural resources of a crumbl! ing empire. Not bad. Who was Wanta representing? Himself? Or the U.S. government?

Moving forward to Jan./Feb. 1991, we find Wanta in the process of moving two thousand tons of gold–during a time period when coincidentally two thousand tons of Soviet gold mysteriously disappeared from the Central Bank.

By December 1991 Wanta and his partner Kok Howe Kwong had set up a food for petroleum joint venture in Moscow. Accounts in dollars and rubles were opened at Status Credit Bank in Singapore by the two through Asian-Europa Development Pte Ltd. Asian-Europa proceeded to export Soviet petroleum and import Western goods at an exchange rate (oil for goods) very favorable to Asian-Europa. Asian-Europa appears to be a U.S. government/CIA proprietary company set up under USCA Title 18, Sec. 6., Line 11. And it appears to have had a relationship with Mochtar Riady's Lippo Group.

Without a doubt, Wanta dealt the fading Soviet apparatus a body slam or two. Does that ! make Leo Wanta an American hero? And if so, why was he incarcerated? Was it just to keep him off the streets because of what he knew (a standard maneuver in the intelligence community)? Does that explain Wanta's bogus extradition from Switzerland? Or was Wanta just a clever con artist who could somehow come up with the contacts and billions of dollars necessary to deceive a crumbling superpower, not to mention the CIA and the U.S. Treasury? Either way, Wanta ain't your average used-car salesman. Wanta may be a victim railroaded by the government he served.

Leo Wanta was appointed Ambassador of Somalia for Switzerland and Canada in March 1993. In July, Wanta had been in Switzerland to make $250,000,000 available for the Children's Defense Fund at the request of Deputy White House Counsel Vince Foster. Children's Defense Fund? Whose idea was that? What was going on there?

Shortly after Wanta's arrest, and following his daughter's birthday on July 20, 1993, the Superintendent for the Swiss prison where Wanta was being held came by a! nd told Wanta that Wanta's friend Foster had been murdered.

Wanta used to visit FBI Director William Sessions at his office through a secret entry known as the "back of stage". There he would nearly always meet with a Mr.Gonzalez and a Mr. Jim Moody, who were the FBI enforcers for RICO and organized crime issues. Moody was the head of the FBI's organized crime section.

Can any of this shed some light on the death of Vince Foster? Clearly Foster was engaged in some major financial dealings–including the $250,000,000 for the Children's Fund that Wanta discusses. Foster's financial dealings may not explain why he was killed. But they could very well explain why there was no investigation.

What does Wanta think?

Posted by The Wanta Chronicles at 8:52 PM 2 comments


Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)


Blog Archive

 2009 (2)

 September (2)

From the January 2007 Idaho Observer: Following t…

Who is Leo Wanta? by J. Orlin Grabbe "Bill Clinton…

About Me

The Wanta Chronicles

View my complete profile


Please Reply to OldDog at wethepeople@anationbeguiled.com



The Secession Solution

January 14th, 2011 by

The Secession Solution

by Kirkpatrick Sale

Aristotle declared that there should be a limit to the size of states. But really, what did he know? He lived at a time when the entire population of the world was somewhere around 50 million—about the size of England today. Athens, where he lived, would have been under 100,000 people. He couldn’t even imagine a world (ours) of 6.8 billion, or a city (Tokyo) of 36 million. How is he going to help us?

He, at least, knew this much:

“Experience shows that a very populous city can rarely, if ever, be well governed; since all cities which have a reputation for good government have a limit of population. We may argue on grounds of reason, and the same result will follow: for law is order, and good law is good order; but a very great multitude cannot be orderly.”

So political units, Aristotle said, have to be limited. And it is with that understanding that we now may start contemplating what in today’s world would constitute the ideal, or optimum, size of a political state.

This is not some sort of idle philosopher’s quest but the foundation of a serious reordering of our political landscape, and a reordering such as the process of secession—indeed, only the process of secession—could provide. The U.S. provides abundant evidence that a state as large as 310 million people is ungovernable. One scholar recently said that we are in the fourth decade of the U.S. Congress’ inability to pass a single measure of social consequence. Bloated and corrupted beyond its ability to address any of the problems it has created as an empire, it is a blatant failure. So what could replace it, and at what size? The answer is the independent states of America.

Let us start by looking at modern nations to give us some clue as to population sizes that actually work.

Among the nations that are recognized models of statecraft, eight are below 500,000: Luxembourg, Malta, Iceland, Barbados, Andorra, Liechtenstein, Monaco, and San Marino.

Of the 14 states generally reckoned freest in the world, 9 have populations below Switzerland’s, at 7.7 million, and 11 below Sweden’s, at 9.3 million; the only sizable states are Canada, the United Kingdom, and Germany (the largest, at 81 million).There are other national rankings. Literacy: Of the 46 countries that claim a literacy rate of 99 or better, 25 are below 7.5 million. Health: Measured by the World Health Organization, 9 of the top 20 are under 7 million. In 2009 rankings of happiness and standard of living, the top countries were Norway, Iceland, Sweden, Netherlands, Australia, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Canada, Ireland, Denmark, Austria, and Finland; all but Canada and Australia have small populations.

Enough of that. The point, I trust, is well and simply made. The figures seem to suggest that there is an optimum size of a successful state, somewhere in the range of 3 million to 5 million people.

Surprisingly, a great many countries are also modest in geographic terms—underlining the point, often missed by critics of secession, that a nation does not have to be self-sufficient to operate well in the modern world. In fact, there are 85 countries out of the 195 counted by the United Nations that are under 10,000 square miles—that is to say, the size of Vermont or smaller.

And if we measure economic strength by per capita GDP, small countries prove to be decidedly advantageous. Seventy-seven percent of the most prosperous countries are small. And most of them are quite small indeed: under 10,000 square miles.

Administrative, distribution, transportation, and similar transaction costs obviously rise, perhaps exponentially, as geographic size increases. Control and communication also become more difficult to manage over long distances, often to the point where central authority and governance become nearly impossible.

I propose that, out of these figures and even more so out of the history of the world, results a Law of Government Size, and it goes like this: Economic and social misery increase in direct proportion to the size and power of the central government of a nation.

The consolidation of nations into power­ful empires leads not to shining periods of peace and prosperity and the advance of human betterment, but to increasing restriction, warfare, autocracy, crowding, immiseration, inequality, poverty, and starvation.

Small, then, is not only beautiful but also bountiful.

How does all of this apply to the United States today?

Of the 50 states, 29 have populations below 5 million people. Eight states and a colony in the 3 million to 5 million population class would be ideal secession candidates: Iowa, Connecticut, Oklahoma, Oregon, Puerto Rico, Kentucky, Louisiana, South Carolina, and Alabama. Twelve—Rhode Island, Hawaii, New Hampshire, Maine, Idaho, Nebraska, West Virginia, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah, Kansas, and Arkansas—have between 1 million and 3 million people, and seven, including Vermont, have fewer than 1 million people but more than Iceland.

The argument for secession need not focus exclusively on population or geographic size—one might factor in cultural cohesion, developed infrastructure, historical identity—but that seems to be the sensible place to start in considering viable states. And since the experience of the world has shown that populations ranging from 3 mil­lion to 5 million are optimal for governance and efficiency, that is as good a measure as any to use to begin assessing secessionist potential and chances of success as independent states.

The only hope for re-energizing American politics is to create truly sovereign states through peaceful, popular, powerful secession.

Kirkpatrick Sale is director of the Middlebury Institute and the author of Human Scale.





Are You Prepared For The Coming Economic Collapse

January 14th, 2011 by

Are You Prepared For The Coming

Economic Collapse

And The Next Great Depression?


The Economic Collapse   http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/10-things-that-would-be-different-if-the-federal-reserve-had-never-been-created


10 Things That Would Be Different If The Federal Reserve Had Never Been Created

The vast majority of Americans, including many of those who believe that they are "educated" about the Federal Reserve, do not really understand how the Federal Reserve really makes money for the international banking elite. Many of those opposed to the Federal Reserve will point to the record $80.9 billion in profits that the Federal Reserve made last year as evidence that they are robbing the American people blind. But then those defending the Federal Reserve will point out that the Fed returned $78.4 billion to the U.S. Treasury. As a result, the Fed only made a couple billion dollars last year. Pretty harmless, eh? Well, actually no. You see, the money that the Federal Reserve directly makes is not the issue. Rather, the "magic" of the Federal Reserve system is that it took the power of money creation away from the U.S. government and gave it to the bankers. Now, the only way that the U.S. government can inject more money into the economy is by going into more debt. But when new government debt is created, the amount of money to pay the interest on that debt is not also created. In this way, it was intended by the international bankers that U.S. government debt would expand indefinitely and the U.S. money supply would also expand indefinitely. In the process, the international bankers would become insanely wealthy by lending money to the U.S. government.

Every single year, hundreds of billions of dollars in profits are made lending money to the U.S. government.

But why in the world should the U.S. government be going into debt to anyone?

Why can't the U.S. government just print more money whenever it wants?

Well, that is not the way our system works. The U.S. government has given the power of money creation over to a consortium of international private bankers.

Not only is this unconstitutional, but it is also one of the greatest rip-offs in human history.

In 1922, Henry Ford wrote the following….

"The people must be helped to think naturally about money. They must be told what it is, and what makes it money, and what are the possible tricks of the present system which put nations and peoples under control of the few."

It is important to try to understand how the international banking elite became so fabulously wealthy. One of the primary ways that this was accomplished was by gaining control over the issuance of national currencies and by trapping large national governments in colossal debt spirals.

The U.S. national debt problem simply cannot be fixed under the current system. U.S. government debt has been mathematically designed to expand forever. It is a trap from which there is no escape.

Many liberals won't listen because they don't really care about ever paying off the debt, and most conservatives won't listen because they are convinced we can solve the national debt problem if we just get a bunch of "good conservatives" into positions of power, but the truth is we have such a horrific debt problem because it was designed to be this way from the beginning.

So how would America be different if we could go back to 1913 and keep the Federal Reserve Act from ever being passed? Well, the following are 10 things that would be different if the Federal Reserve had never been created….

#1If the U.S. government had been issuing debt-free money all this time, the U.S. government could conceivably have a national debt of zero dollars. Instead, we currently have a national debt that is over 14 trillion dollars.

#2If the U.S. government had been issuing debt-free money all this time, the U.S. government would likely not be spending one penny on interest payments. Instead, the U.S. government spent over 413 billion dollars on interest on the national debt during fiscal 2010. This is money that belonged to U.S. taxpayers that was transferred to the U.S. government, which in turn was transferred to wealthy international bankers and other foreign governments. It is being projected that the U.S. government will be paying 900 billion dollars just in interest on the national debt by the year 2019.

#3If the U.S. government could issue debt-free money, there would not even have to be a debate about raising "the debt ceiling", because such a debate would not even be necessary.

#4If the U.S. government could issue debt-free money, it is conceivable that we would not even need the IRS. You doubt this? Well, the truth is that the United States did just fine for well over a hundred years without a national income tax. But about the same time the Federal Reserve was created a national income tax was instituted as well. The whole idea was that the wealth of the American people would be transferred to the U.S. government by force and then transferred into the hands of the ultra-wealthy in the form of interest payments.

#5If the Federal Reserve did not exist, we would not be on the verge of national insolvency. The Congressional Budget Office is projecting that U.S. government debt held by the public will reach a staggering 716 percent of GDP by the year 2080. Remember when I used the term "debt spiral" earlier?  Well, this is what a debt spiral looks like….

#6If the Federal Reserve did not exist, the big Wall Street banks would not have such an overwhelming advantage.  Most Americans simply have no idea that over the last several years the Federal Reserve has been giving gigantic piles of nearly interest-free money to the big Wall Street banks which they turned right around and started lending to the federal government at a much higher rate of return.  I don't know about you, but if I was allowed to do that I could make a whole bunch of money very quickly.  In fact, it has come out that the Federal Reserve made over $9 trillion in overnight loans to major banks, large financial institutions and other "friends" during the financial crisis of 2008 and 2009.

#7If the Federal Reserve did not exist, it is theoretically conceivable that we would have an economy with little to no inflation.  Of course that would greatly depend on the discipline of our government officials (which is not very great at this point), but the sad truth is that our current system is always going to produce inflation.  In fact, the Federal Reserve system was originally designed to be inflationary.  Just check out the inflation chart posted below.  The U.S. never had ongoing problems with inflation before the Fed was created, but now it is just wildly out of control….


#8If the Federal Reserve had never been created, the U.S. dollar would not be a dying currency. Since the Federal Reserve was created, the U.S. dollar has lost well over 95 percent of its purchasing power. By constantly inflating the currency, it transfers financial power away from those already holding the wealth (the American people) to those that are able to create more currency and more government debt. Back in 1913, the total U.S. national debt was just under 3 billion dollars. Today, the U.S. government is spending approximately 6.85 million dollars per minute, and the U.S. national debt is increasing by over 4 billion dollars per day.

#9If the Federal Reserve did not exist, we would not have an unelected, unaccountable "fourth branch of government" running around that has gotten completely and totally out of control. Even some members of Congress are now openly complaining about how much power the Fed has. For example, Ron Paul told MSNBC last year that he believes that the Federal Reserve is now more powerful than Congress…..

"The regulations should be on the Federal Reserve. We should have transparency of the Federal Reserve. They can create trillions of dollars to bail out their friends, and we don’t even have any transparency of this. They’re more powerful than the Congress."

#10If the Federal Reserve had never been created, the American people would be much more free. We would not be enslaved to this horrific national debt. Our politicians would not have to run around the globe begging people to lend us money. Representatives that we directly elect would be the ones setting national monetary policy. Our politicians would be much less under the influence of the international banking elite. We would not be at the mercy of the financial bubbles that the Fed has constantly been creating.

There is a reason why so many of the most prominent politicians from the early years of the United States were so passionately against a central bank. The following is a February 1834 quote by President Andrew Jackson about the evils of central banking….

I too have been a close observer of the doings of the Bank of the United States. I have had men watching you for a long time, and am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the Bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the Bank and annul its charter I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves. I have determined to rout you out and, by the Eternal, (bringing his fist down on the table) I will rout you out.

But we didn't listen to men like Andrew Jackson.

We (our government) allowed the Federal Reserve to be created in 1913 and we (our government) have allowed it to develop into an absolute monstrosity over the past century.

Now we are drowning in debt and we are on the verge of national bankruptcy. Will the American people wake up before it is too late?


Over the last few years I have read many articles with the same basic story, but seldom read the comments. Today I did, and the one below hit the nail hard enough to wake me up to the most import fact in the whole story. Considering how thorough the patriot communities’ authors have been, it is worth noting that darn few names have been published as beneficiaries in this unbelievable scam. I hope many of you will join me in conducting more research on just who they are, and how much they have earned at our expense.

This is copied from the comments section below the article.


January 13th, 2011 at 3:01 am

Disappointed that everyone is listing a bunch of vague generalities. Who exactly is benefiting from all this stuff being written. Not companies and organizations, but people. How much are they specifically earning? I’ve heard and read this same stuff that’s being said in these comments for 30+ years, but no one ever seems to name names AND how much money they specifically made. Without listing people and how much money they made, everything above is completely meaningless.




January 11th, 2011 by



Last week the 112th Congress was sworn in. I am pleased that I will be chairing the Monetary Policy Subcommittee of the Financial Services Committee, which has oversight of the Federal Reserve. Obviously, this position will facilitate my efforts to ensure the Fed provides the American people with more information about what they have been doing with and to our money. Not surprisingly, since my chairmanship was announced, apologists for the Fed have been recycling the old canard about how increased transparency threatens the Fed's so-called political independence.




Year to date statistics on Airport Screening by the TSA

January 10th, 2011 by


Terrorist Plots Discovered             0
Transvestites                              133
Hernia’s                                     1,485
Hemorrhoid Cases                      3,172
Enlarged Prostates                     8,249
Breast Implants                         59,350
Natural Blondes                         3

Is Obama the secret son of Malcolm X?

January 10th, 2011 by



If Barack Hussein Obama II is Malcolm X's biological son and ideological heir, it would uniquely explain the mystery of why he was so generously helped by so many Arab and communist "friends in high places" long before he was a "somebody."

Malcolm ensured his secret son would learn the ways of Islam, of revolution, tutored by the finest socialist ideologues of his time, and the future, funded by Saudi and Syrian financiers. He would be groomed for leadership, educated and trained to organize the community called the United States of America.

Morph of Barack O to Malcolm X courtesy Polarik.

In August I received a curious email. As a magazine that covers international politics, with a focus on Mideast affairs, Israel Insider gets more from its fair share of baseless tips and phony rumors. I ignore most and delete them unread. This one was a bit different. It came from a national security lawyer with extensive credentials and intelligence connections that checked out, and a phone number.

Israel Insider had been running a series of articles exploring the vagaries of Barack Obama's birth, and his concealed documentation, and this was the jumping off point of the email, which confirmed the claim that Obama was not born in Hawaii, that "Mossad are going with Mombasa" but "Proving Mombasa is not so easy, as NSIS in Nairobi are clamming up tight, as are MI6 in London, who have the original Mombasa file and full details of the birth."

He said that "Disproving Honolulu is child's play. You've already shown that the birth certificate put forward by Obama (whose people privately are not denying Mombasa, by the way) is a fake. Why fake it? If he was born in Honolulu he could obtain a genuine one. Hawaii Dept of Health would hardly denounce a potential presidential candidate's birth certificate as fraudulent without cross-checking birth records for August 1961. No birth was registered in the name of Obama in Honolulu in August 1961."

(This last detail may explain why Hawaiian officials last Friday confirmed that a birth certificate does indeed exist but conspicuously refused to release any details or even confirm that the details conform to those on the computer-generated Certification of Live Birth. The name on the "original" certificate may in fact not be Obama nor the birthplace Honolulu. But Obama's recent visit "to his grandmother" may well have had less to do with her health than eliciting this vague and inconclusive statement from the Hawaiian Health Department.)

The source continues: "There is no evidence Ann Dunham had even met Obama Senior in or around November 1960, the alleged time of conception, indeed it is not even clear Obama was in Honolulu at that time, although he may have been. Ann Dunham was only 17 and although she might have been in Honolulu the timing is tight." "More to the point, she was in neither of the medical centers put forward by the Obama campaign (question: why do they not know in which hospital he was born?) on August 4th, nor are there medical records to back up the claimed birth, nor has an attending physician been named. I've heard of births with the father absent, births with the mother absent a bit trickier."

"There are said to be photos of Ann Dunham on Waikiki Beach taken in or about July 1961, when she is supposed to have been in her third trimester, in a bikini, taken by a fellow female student. AD is clearly not pregnant. Media have not yet talked to fellow students, but it can't be long. There are bound to be other photos of AD in existence taken during the alleged 2nd and 3rd trimesters. Obama campaign are terrified some one will press for her medical records, which have been accessed by CIA."

"Moving to Indonesia the Obama campaign are also suppressing the Indonesian immigration and passport records, which I believe show him as a Kenyan citizen, and the naturalisation records. They have not denied Internet claims he was naturalised in Indonesia. If he was a US citizen there should be a visa record to back that up."

"Obama Senior was murdered in Kenya in 1982 to silence him. Interesting story re his sister Auma as well — she appears to be a full sister, not a half-sister as he is claiming, i.e. they share the same mother. She was ordered back to Kenya in 2007 to prevent DNA testing …. CIA did a DNA test on the grandparents, using saliva from glasses, which conclusively rules out any relationship between Obama and the Dunhams."

"The source said that the Dunham family became involved because Stanley Dunham, Sr. was suspected of espionage. Boeing, he said, has "a 1944 security file on Stanley Dunham in connection with suspected sabotage of B-17G aircraft at their Wichita Kansas plant and the theft of B-29 blueprints, a full set of which were passed to the German Abwehr via Lisbon by June 1944. Ann Dunham appears to have been chosen as the surrogate mother in 1963 because of the family connection to German Intelligence. German assets in the US, including Rezko, who is connected to the Syrian Mukhabarat and the German DVD, sponsored his career.

"Effectively," the source concludes, "Obama is a German sleeper agent."

Well, this is a lot to take in, and on first reading it struck me that the source had been reading too many Le Carre novels or Bond movies. I mean, really: "The Manchurian Candidate" meets "The Boy from Mombassa"?

It seemed completely preposterous, and indeed I initially dismissed it as preposterous. Obama a "German sleeper agent"? Of course, in those days the East Germans were a Soviet satellite, and the DDR was perhaps the most feared and ideological of the communist states, with more than a sprinkling of rehabilitated Nazis uncured of their genetic fantasies and experiments. 1961-1963 were the peak years of the Cold War, with Berlin playing a central role in East-West hostilities.

But what made no sense to me was why anyone in the spy business, or anyone in East Germany for that matter, would give a damn to find a foster parent for a newborn illegitimate offspring of mixed black-white parentage. What made him so special that the Syrians and the German would go to all the trouble or see some potential value in protecting and grooming him? What could possibly make intelligence agencies cultivate from infancy a sleeper agent?

The source didn't answer this, nor could I, over the succeeding months of the campaign. We exchanged a few more emails, but the nagging question of "why" anyone would bother with this baby would not leave me. What did come out in the ensuing weeks, however, was a litany of unexplained facts in Obama's youthful history, of help from strangers in high places all along the way, benefactors who had either Arab-Muslim or Communist-Socialist connections. There was his Islamic education in Indonesia, the fact that he learned the Koran not in Indonesian but in Arabic. There was the fact that in Hawaii the boy was tutored in the ways of revolution by leading black activists, Muslim activists, and Communist activists. Influential black nationalist and Communist Frank Marshall Davis would become a huge influence in the young Obama's life.

There was his journey to the third-world, to Pakistan and East Africa, after his first year at Columbia. But things really got strange with the revelation that Khalid al-Mansour, close adviser to a Saudi billionaire and the Saudi royal family, was instrumental in helping Obama get into Harvard Law School (and reportedly Columbia before that), financing his education and advancement.

It was al-Mansour who asked Percy Sutton, a prominent black lawyer active in the civil rights movement and defending radicals in the 1950s and 1960s, to help Obama get into Harvard. In the interview with a New York news station (see video at left), Sutton described al-Mansour as "the principal adviser to one of the world's richest men. He told me about Obama and asked him to "write a letter in support of Obama's application to Harvard Law School, Sutton recalled. "And his introduction was there is a young man that has applied to Harvard. I know that you have a few friends up there because you used to go up there to speak. Would you please write a letter in support of him?" Sutton obliged: "I wrote a letter of support of him to my friends at Harvard, saying to them I thought there was a genius that was going to be available and I certainly hoped they would treat him kindly."
How in the world would Percy Sutton know that Obama, a young man he had never met, was a "genius"? Why would he say that he met all of the qualifications to be president of the law review, even before he was admitted to the school? One possible clue: It turns out that Sutton was among the lawyers for Malcolm X.

And why would a big wheel like al-Mansour take such an interest in a self-admitted drug-taking party boy ("I inhaled," he joked. "That was the whole point" he joked on the campaign trail) from a second-rate college? While helping Obama get into Harvard, the Muslim form Texas was representing top members of the Saudi Royal family, Saudi billionaires Abdul Aziz and Khalid al-Ibrahim, and Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, nephew if King Abdallah of Saudi Arabia. So there was, early on, a direct connection between Obama and Saudi royalty and an aggressive effort by a Saudi agent to make Obama's way in the world.

It was this connection to Saudi wealth that has led to Obama being dubbed the "Mansourian candidate".

Then there were the revelations about Weather Underground co-founder Bill Ayers and his wife Bernadette Dohrn — unrepentant terrorists and communists both — who helped launch Obama's political career from their home. Ayers, indeed, may well have ghost-written Obama's memoir Dreams from my Father, creating the impression that Obama was also skilled in writing as well as "community organizing."

More substantially, there was Antoin "Tony" Rezko, the Syrian born real estate wheeler-dealer and convicted racketeer, who helped Obama raise his first campaign funds and assisted him financially, and even facilitated his home purchases.

There were influential Palestinian scholars and propagandists Rashid Khalidi and Edward Said, colleagues and personal friends of Obama, despite his unconvincing efforts to distance himself from them and squelch his praise for their anti-Israel ideologies.

There was Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Obama's spiritual mentor, who conducted his marriage, baptized their children, and gave Obama's campaign manifesto "Audacity of Hope" its title before being distanced (at least for the duration of the campaign) when their close twenty year relationship came to light.

And, of course, there is neighbor Louis Farrakhan, current leader of the Nation of Islam, who recently spoke of Obama as the "Messiah" and as Ken Timmerman confirms, enjoys an "open channel" of communication with him.

Why did all of these important scholars and ideologues, fundraiser and networkers, these millionaires and billionaires – especially from the Arab and Islamic world, and extreme socialist and communist party activists — reach out to help this unknown, undereducated young man, many before Obama was anybody of known importance? Was it just that he was tall and handsome and bright, with a silver tongue?

Or was there some other factor – a genetic factor, a secret legacy of heredity — that mysteriously opened the doors and wallets and elicited the kindness of strangers?

Last week, a long and rambling post attributed to one Rudy Schultz was made to the Atlas Shrugs blog of Pamela Geller. The starting point for the post was revelation of school records that show that the supposed mother of Barack Obama enrolled in the University of Washington just a few weeks after her son was purportedly born in Hawaii. But the intention of the poster was apparently to imply that Obama's father was unlikely to have been Barack Hussein Obama, Senior (photo at left).

The post provides photos and a video of Malcolm X, with a notation that he and Obama had the same height (6'2-6'-3") and striking physical resemblances: identical hairline, jawline, and other distinctive facial features, similarities not shared by Barack Hussein Obama, Sr. or other members of the Luo tribe bloodline.

The post noted striking similarities in speaking cadence and style, not to mention a bright flashing smile and a wry sense of humor. The man born in Nebraska as Malcolm Little also was a light shade of brown, the product of a mother from Grenada who, he said, "looked like a white woman" and a black father.

See more striking similarities from insider Octaman here.

The post also traced the path of Malcolm X in the late 1950's and early 1960's, a journey that took him to Africa and the young leadership circle to which Barack Hussein Obama Sr. also belonged, including the activist Tom Mboya who was behind the program which airlifted, with US funding, young African leaders to Hawaii to study at the university, a cohort to which Obama senior belonged.

But Schultz concludes his post by pulling his punches a bit: "While Malcolm X may not be Obama’s biological father, Malcolm X is demonstrably Barack Hussein Obama’s philosophical father, and the lineage is undeniable! Obama Jr. was sired in the social soup stirred by Malcolm X."

While Schultz backed away from claiming that Obama's biological father may in fact be Malcolm X, the hereditary claim cannot be discounted. If he was indeed the illegitimate offspring of Malcolm – the closest that one can get to "royalty" in the messianic broth of black radical Islamic and Communistic politics – that would explain the otherwise inexplicable:

why this "illegitimate" baby, and later this young man – a druggie and underachiever — would have had paved for him the royal road to privilege and power, paid for his Ivy League education, got him jobs and a home, raised millions of dollars for his political career, got him selected to address the DNC in 2004, got him into the senate in 2006, and led him straight to where he is today, just two years hence, on the verge of the US presidency, powered by hundreds of millions of untraceable overseas contributions.

In the minds of the leftist and Islamic leaders, he is the heir to the throne of "freedom fighters", the revolutionary prodigal son – heir to legacy of black powers and black Islam — come home to rule.

Nothing short of a DNA test is going to prove who Obama Jr.'s father really is, or, indeed who is real mother is, or is not. His long-suppressed birth certificate, which he wrote about possessing in Dreams from my Father and which Hawaii now admits is on file, could help solve the mystery.

No one to my knowledge has explored the possibility that Stanley Ann may not be the birth-mother. That would explain the lack of hospital records in Honolulu and the fact that no one can remember seeing her pregnant. Suddenly she just appeared in Washington state with a little baby boy.

There is, too, a curious comment that Stanley Ann Dunham reportedly made after high school, remembered by a friend, that "I don't need to get married or date to have a baby." And the fact that in June 1960 her family – who were reportedly highly sympathetic with left-wing causes — suddenly left Washington state for Hawaii, where they continued to be involved with socialist-communist causes and personalities, such as Frank Marshall Davis (identified by Obama only as "Frank" in Obama's Dreams from my Father), who proved so influential in his upbringing.

There is also new information, published in Atlas Shrugs and confirmed elsewhere, from the University of Hawaii that she was only enrolled only in the fall of 1960, and that from the Fall of 1961 (weeks after Barack Jr. was reportedly born) and through the following spring, she was enrolled at the University of Washington.

There is the fact that she abandoned this baby on repeated occasions, and the fact that Obama returned the favored when he refused to visit her as she sickened and died. If she was merely his foster mother, then she was just a means to an end, to be discarded when she had outlived her usefulness.

If Barack Hussein Obama II is Malcolm X's biological son and ideological heir, it would uniquely explain the mystery of why he was so generously helped by so many Arab and communist "friends in high places" long before he was a "somebody."

Malcolm ensured his secret son would learn the ways of Islam, of revolution, tutored by the finest socialist ideologues of his time, and the future, funded by Saudi and Syrian financiers. He would be groomed for leadership, educated and trained to organize the community called the United States of America.

Malcolm broke with Elijah Muhammad in large measure because the then-leader of the Nation of Islam had conducted illicit affairs and sired illegitimate children. If Malcolm himself had sired a boy, it is not something he would have wanted to advertise, or to bring along with him in his hectic and dangerous revolutionary path. But he may well have arranged to give the boy a first-class upbringing and education, free from the burden of his own violent legacy, his history as a convicted felon, his likely fate as a martyr, to realize the legacy he never could. He knew he was "a walking dead man," marked for death — how could he perpetuate his principles beyond the grave?

Malcolm X was marginalized even from the black leadership after he said, following the assassination of John F. Kennedy, that the "chickens had come home to roost." That term would be resurrected by Rev. Jeremiah Wright, much to Obama's chagrin, in a sermon discussing the reasons for the Islamic attacks on the United States, reasons that Obama echoed in his own post-9/11 statements, in somewhat less inflammatory terms.

Malcolm himself was assassinated in 1965, reportedly by agents from the Nation of Islam.

If indeed Obama is not just Malcolm's spiritual son but his biological one as well, it would represent the realization of a lifelong preparation to seize power, not by guns but by genes, and the genius of Obama's handlers, mentors and assistants along the way who prepared his path to power.

According to this scenario, the sleeper agent is now wide awake, although it is also conceivable that Obama himself may not be fully aware of the role he was programmed to play. Nor is it clear who has supplanted his initial handlers — which my source identified as East German and Syrian — although the Saudis and their allies, including those within the US government and not just the Democratic side of the aisle, clearly seem implicated with pulling some of the strings and pouring some of the huge funding that has brought him to where he is today.

Those who have helped him reach to the threshold of power — some knowingly and some "useful idiots" — have been working in concert to fulfill the revolutionary goals of Malcolm's by putting his boy in power, using the system to destroy the system. Early voting. ACORN. Untraceable online funds. Brilliant. But that, of course, is just the means to the end.

Barack Obama wrote, in Dreams from My Father, of the huge impact this black revolutionary hero's memoir had on him, as none others did: “Only Malcolm X's autobiography seemed to offer something different. His repeated acts of self-creation spoke to me." Self-creation indeed.

If Malcolm X secretly sired Barack Obama, then the title Dreams from My Father would indeed take on a whole new meaning, with Obama Sr. revealed as a kind of paternal proxy, a stand-in for a revolutionary of a higher spiritual and political order whose identity the self-creating son could never reveal if his own ambitions, and his real father's ambitions for him, were to be realized.

In 1964, the year before his death, Malcolm gave an address, "Ballots or Bullets" (audio available here) in which he urged African Americans to turn away from violence and create revolutionary change through the US electoral system.

If the O is in fact an X, and wins the red, white and blue tic-tac-toe on Tuesday to become the President and Commander in Chief of the United States then, truly, America's chickens will have come home to roost.

Red States may soon take on a whole new meaning.

Netiquette: Please replicate up to three paragraphs from this article. Link back to: http://israelinsider.ning.com/profiles/blogs/is-obama-the-secret-so…


Now that we have a couple years of experience with big O, maybe this article makes more sense: maybe he’s big X.

I would not put anything past him, and he won’t quit till the cows come home. Money talks and B.S. walks!

Just think what we could do if a hundred million Americans had the courage to stand up and demand his deportation.

James P. Harvey

Castastropic Collaspe of America

January 9th, 2011 by


Visit the Author's Website: http://www.SHTFplan.com/


COMMENTARY by an Attorney:
    Mr. Slavo is correct, and so is Karl Denninger, but they both miss an important point.   It is true that if the debt ceiling is extended, it will only increase our already unpayable debt to the banksters, and postpone the inevitable economic disaster, i.e., collapse of the economic system or transition to a hyper inflationary economy—which will result in the same collapse, ala, Weimar Republic 1922.
   But Geithner knows that increasing the debt to the banksters is exactly what is intended.  He and his bankster cronies intend to keep this racket rolling as long as possible, so that they can suck the last ounce of life blood (in the form of interest on unpayable debt) from the economy of the USA. 

     What they are not saying is this:  The USG, through the U.S. Treasury is empowered legally by the U.S. Constitution, to issue ITS OWN currency and credit.   The reason why the country is in such a mess is the USG gave that power away in 1913 when, by act of Congress. the Federal Reserve was created.  It has been downhill ever since.  The result?  We have been paying billions in interest to this organized criminal conspiracy on money that never existed.  And yes, it is a criminal conspiracy.   As David Icke loves to say "We are up to our necks in debt, on money that has never, does not, and NEVER will exist.   The alleged debt that we owe to the banksters was literally created "out of thin air."  It is just a book keeping entry. 

        Mr. Geithner knows very well the power of the USG but would not dare to mention this alternative.  Every national leader who has ever tried to wean the U.S. from these parasites has been dealt with harshly.  John F. Kennedy comes immediately to mind.   

Confirmed: We’re Literally On the Brink of Catastrophic Collapse

Author: Mac Slavo

– January 6th, 2011

 We’ve been told a lot of things since the global economic crisis first became apparent in 2007. In March of that year Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said, “the impact on the broader economy and financial markets of the problems in the sub-prime markets seems likely to be contained.” Clearly, Mr. Bernanke’s assessment was incorrect and the sub-prime real estate issues were only part of a broader, systemic issue.

The fundamental problems within our economy became mainstream news in the latter part of 2008 when stock markets around the world were in free fall and most major financial institutions were on the cusp of insolvency. In response, our government, with the full support and confidence of Congress, took unprecedented steps to save the system by injecting, first billions, and then trillions of dollars to bailout failed companies, stabilize deflationary price collapses and stimulate the economy.

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson eventually wrote a book about the crisis, aptly titled On the Brink. But how close to the brink were we? If Representative Brad Sherman is to be believed, we were close. So close, in fact, that according to Sherman, Congressional members were told that if the bailout was not authorized by Congress the collapse would be so severe that martial law may have to be declared – basically, tanks in the streets. The following short video is Brad Sherman discussing the situation on the House floor:

Are we now to believe that the actions taken by Congress, The President, US Treasury and The Federal Reserve have resolved the fundamental problems facing our nation?

For those 17% of people who think the economy is in recovery and the other 33% who believe it will happen soon, we point you to the latest statement from current Treasury Secretary Timothy Geitherner, who outlines the severity of the problem in a January 6, 2011 letter to Congress writes:

I am writing in response to your request for an estimate by the Treasury Department of when the statutory debt limit will be reached, and for a description of the consequences of default by the United States.

Never in our history has Congress failed to increase the debt limit when necessary. Failure to raise the limit would precipitate a default by the United States. Default would effectively impose a significant and long-lasting tax on all Americans and all American businesses and could lead to the loss of millions of American jobs. Even a very short-term or limited default would have catastrophic economic consequences that would last for decades. Failure to increase the limit would be deeply irresponsible. For these reasons, I am requesting that Congress act to increase the limit early this year, well before the threat of default becomes imminent.

Treasury would prefer not to have to engage again in any of these extraordinary measures [suspension of the issuance of certain types of government debt and government investment vehicles]. If we are forced to do so again, these measures could delay the date by which the limit is reached by several weeks. Once these steps have been taken, no remaining legal and prudent measures would be available to create additional headroom under the debt limit, and the United States would begin to default on its obligations.

The Treasury Secretary of The United States of America just said that if we don’t get another $1 trillion or so dollars by March of this year then this country will begin to default on its debt obligations. These remarks are extremely serious and should be understood for what they are.

We are, literally and without mixing words, on the brink of economic catastrophe.

The scary thing is, according to Mr. Geithner and the many supporters of raising our debt ceiling, that borrowing more money is the only solution available.

In a recent commentary we pointed out the opposing view from Karl Denninger of Market Ticker, who said that raising the debt ceiling would essentially lead to the very same consequence as leaving it as is:

Let me be clear: If you extend the debt ceiling and by doing so allow deficits of this sort to continue for another year, say much less two, you will have placed a loaded shotgun in the mouth of this nation and pulled the trigger.

It will go off, and you will splatter this nations’ economic and political system all over the wall.

It’s a Catch 22 and there’s no way out.

Defaulting on or inflating away our debt are the only viable solutions. Both of these will lead to the same end – a complete and total collapse of the way of life Americans have become used to.

Just as Henry Paulson, President Bush, et. al. warned of economic collapse and depression in 2008, Mr. Geithner warns of the very same today. All of the trillions spent, all of the laws passed, and all of the manipulations of global asset markets, have done absolutely nothing to resolve the fundamental systemic problems we faced prior to the onset of the crisis.

It is, quite literally, going to be the end of the world as we know it – and it cannot be stopped.

It’s time for each individual to take steps to prepare for a national debt default and a complete debasement of the US dollar. It won’t be long before we either can’t meet our debt obligations or our creditors finally put a stop to our out of control borrowing. And when they do, the chances are high that we will experience a hyperinflationary monetary collapse, complete with disruptions to the normal flow of commerce, food shortages and out of control prices. The only refuge will be to understand what is money when the system collapses and start preparing now. The government is getting ready for it, so should you.

More Recommended Reading:

There’s an Economic Collapse Coming to This Country – Plan Now

I Want People to Be Mentally Prepared For What’s Coming Our Way

The First 12 Hours of a US Dollar Collapse *Video*

Author:Mac Slavo
Date: January 6th, 2011
Visit the Author's Website: http://www.SHTFplan.com/

Evil at work – Who Is George Soros?

January 8th, 2011 by


Evil at work – Who Is George Soros?

 We’ve all heard his name, we know of his association with Clinton and Obama. Now here’s the rest of the story…..Read about EVIL at work.

Who Is George Soros?   He brought the stock market down in 2 days.  Here is what CBS’ Steve Kroft’s research turned up.  It took 4 months to put it together. “The main obstacle to a “stable” and “just” world order, is the wealth and sovereignty of the United States” according to Mr. Soros.

 What we have in Soros, is a multi-billionaire atheist, with skewed moral values, and a sociopath’s lack of conscience.  He considers himself to be an elitist world class philosopher, despises the American Way and just loves to do social engineering (change cultures). György Schwartz, better known  as George Soros, was born August 12, 1930 in  Hungary.   Soros’ father, Tivadar, was a fervent practitioner of the Esperanto a language invented in 1887 and designed to be the first global language, free of any national identity. The Schwartz’s, who were non-practicing Jews, changed the family name to Soros in order to facilitate assimilation into the gentile population, as the Nazis spread into Hungary during the 1930s.

 When Hitler’s henchman Adolf Eichmann arrived in  Hungary , to oversee the murder of that country’s Jews, George Soros ended up with a man whose job was confiscating property from the Jewish population.  Soros went with him on his rounds. Soros has repeatedly called 1944 “the best year of his life.”  70% of Mr. Soros’s fellow Jews in Hungary , nearly a half-million human beings, were annihilated in that year, yet he gives no sign that this put any damper on his elation, either at the time or indeed in retrospect.

 During an interview with “Sixty Minutes”  Soros was asked about his “best” year.  
KROFT:  My understanding is that you went out with this protector of yours who swore that you were his adopted godson.
SOROS:  Yes.  
KROFT:  Went out, in fact, and helped in the confiscation of property from your fellow Jews, friends and neighbors.
SOROS:  Yes.  That’s right.  
KROFT:  I mean, that sounds like an experience that would send lots of people to the psychiatric couch for many, many years.  Was it difficult?
SOROS:  No, not at all.  Not at all, I rather enjoyed it.
KROFT:  No feeling of guilt?
SOROS:  No, only feelings of absolute power.

In his article, Muravchik describes how Soros has admitted to having “carried some rather potent messianic fantasies with me from childhood, which I felt I had to control, otherwise they might get me in trouble.”  Be that as it may, after WWII, Soros attended the  London  School of Economics, where he fell under the thrall of fellow atheist and Hungarian, Karl Popper, one of his professors.  Popper was a mentor to Soros until Popper’s death in 1994.

 Two of Popper’s most influential teachings concerned “the open society,” and Fallibilism. Fallibilism is the philosophical doctrine that all claims of knowledge could, in principle, be mistaken.  (Then again, I could be wrong about that.) The “open society” basically refers to a “test and evaluate” approach to social engineering. Regarding “open society” Roy Childs writes, “Since the Second World War, most of the Western democracies have followed Popper’s advice about piecemeal social engineering and democratic social reform, and it has gotten them into a grand mess.”

In 1956 Soros moved to  New York City , where he worked on Wall Street, and started amassing his fortune.  He specialized in hedge funds and currency speculation. Soros is absolutely ruthless, amoral, and clever in his business dealings, and quickly made his fortune.  By the 1980s he was well on his way to becoming the global powerhouse that he is today.

In an article Kyle-Anne Shiver wrote for “The American Thinker” she says, “Soros made his first billion in 1992 by shorting the British pound with leveraged billions in financial bets and became known as the man who broke the Bank of  England .  He broke it on the backs of hard-working British citizens who immediately saw their homes severely devalued and their life savings cut drastically, almost overnight.”

In 1994 Soros crowed in “The  New  Republic ” that “the former Soviet Empire is now called the Soros Empire.”  The Russia-gate scandal in 1999, which almost collapsed the Russian economy, was labeled by Rep. Jim Leach, then head of the House Banking Committee, to be “one of the greatest social robberies in human history.”  The “Soros Empire” indeed.  In 1997 Soros almost destroyed the economies of  Thailand and  Malaysia.   At the time,&n bsp; Malaysia ’s Prime Minister, Mahathir Mohamad, called Soros “a villain, and a moron.”

Thai activist Weng Tojirakarn said, “We regard George Soros as a kind of Dracula.  He sucks the blood from the people.” The website Greek National Pride reports, “[Soros] was part of the full court press that dismantled  Yugoslavia and caused trouble in  Georgia ,  Ukraine and  Myanmar [  Burma ].  Calling himself a philanthropist, Soros’ role is to tighten the ideological stranglehold of globalization and the  New World Order while promoting his own financial gain.  He is without conscience; a capitalist who functions with absolute amorality.”

France has upheld an earlier conviction against Soros, for felony insider trading.  Soros was fined 29 million dollars. Recently, his native  Hungary fined Soros 2.2 million dollars for “illegal market manipulation.”  Elizabeth Crum writes that “The Hungarian economy has been in a state of transition as the country seeks to become more financially stable and westernized.  [Soros'] deliberately driving down the share price of its largest bank put Hungary’s economy into a wicked tailspin, one from which it is still trying to recover.

My point here is that Soros is a planetary parasite.  His grasp, greed, and gluttony have a global reach. But what about  America?  Soros told  Australia ’s national newspaper “The Australian”  ” America , as the centre of the globalised financial markets, was sucking up the savings of the world.  This is now over.  The game is out,” he said, adding that the time has come for “a very serious adjustment” in American’s consumption habits.  He implied that he was the one with the power to bringros:  “World financial crisis was “stimulating” and “in a way, the culmination o f my life’s work .”

Obama has recently promised 10 billion of our tax dollars to Brazil, in order to give them a leg-up in expanding their offshore oil fields.  Obama’s largesse towards Brazil came shortly after his political financial backer, George Soros, invested heavily in Brazilian oil (Petrobras).  Tait Trussel writes, “The Petrobras loan may be a windfall for Soros and  Brazil, but it is a bad deal for the  U.S.   The American Petroleum Institute estimates that oil exploration in the U.S. could create 160,000 new, well-paying jobs, as well as $1.7 trillion in revenues to federal, state, and local governments, all while fostering greater energy security and independence.”

A blog you might want to keep an eye on is www www.SorosWatch.com  Their mission:  “This blog is dedicated to all who have suffered due to the ruthless financial pursuits of George Soros.  Your stories are many and varied, but the theme is the same:  the destructive power of greed without conscience.  We pledge to tirelessly watch Soros wherever he goes and to print the truth in the hope that he will one day be made to stop preying upon the world’s poor, that justice will be served.”

Back to  America.  Soros has been actively working to destroy  America from the inside out for some years now.  People have been warning us.  Two years ago news sources reported that “Soros [is] an extremist who wants open borders, a one-world foreign policy, legalized drugs, euthanasia, and on and on.  This is off-the-chart dangerous.” In 1997 Rachel Ehrenfeld wrote, “Soros uses his philanthropy to change  or more accurately deconstruct the moral values and attitudes of the Western world, and particularly of the American people.  His “open society” is not about freedom; it is about license.  His vision rejects the notion of ordered liberty, in favor of a PROGRESSIVE ideology of rights and entitlements.”

Perhaps the most important of these “whistle blowers” are David Horowitz and Richard Poe.  Their book “The Shadow Party” outlines in detail how Soros hijacked the Democratic Party and now owns it lock, stock, and barrel.  Soros has been packing the Democratic Party with radicals, and ousting moderate Democrats for years.  The Shadow Party became the Shadow Government, which became the Obama Administration. DiscoverTheNetworks.org (another good s ource) writes, “By his [Soros'] own admission, he helped engineer coups in  Slovakia ,  Croatia ,  Georgia, and  Yugoslavia . 

When Soros targets a country for “regime change,” he begins by creating a shadow government, a fully formed government-in-exile, ready to assume power when the opportunity arises.  The Shadow Party he has built in  America greatly resembles those he has created in other countries prior to instigating a coup.” November 2008 edition of the German magazine “Der Spiegel,” in which Soros gives his opinion on what the next POTUS (President of the  U.S. ) should do after taking office  “I think we need a large stimulus package.”  Soros thought that around 600 billion would be about right.

Soros also said that “I think Obama presents us a great opportunity to finally deal with global warming and energy dependence.  The  U.S. needs a cap and trade system with auctioning of licenses for emissions rights.” Although Soros doesn’t (yet) own the Republican Party, like he does the Democrats, make no mistake, his tentacles are spread throughout the Republican Party as well.

Soros is a partner in the Carlyle Group where he has invested more than 100 million dollars.  According to an article by “The Baltimore Chronicle’s” Alice Cherbonnier, the Carlye Group is run by “a veritable who’s who of former Republican leaders,” from CIA man Frank Carlucci, to CIA head [and ex-President] George Bush, Sr.  In late 2006, Soros bought about 2 million shares of Halliburton, Dick Cheney’s old stomping grounds.  When the Democrats and Republicans held their conventions in 2000, Soros held Shadow Party conventions in the same cities, at the same time.

In 2008, Soros donated $50,000,000 plus to the Democratic National Committee, DNC, to insure Obama’s win and wins for many other Alinsky trained Radical Rules Anti-American Socialist. George has been contributing almost  $1 billion plus to the DNC since Clinton came on the scene. Soros has dirtied both sides of the aisle, trust me.  And if that weren’t bad enough, he has long held connections with the CIA. 

And I mustn’t forget to mention Soros’ involvement with the MSM (Main Stream Media), the entertainment industry (e.g. he owns 2.6 million shares of Time Warner), and the various political advertising organizations he funnels millions to. In short, George Soros controls or influence most of the MSM.  Little wonder they ignore the TEA PARTY, Soro’s NEMESIS.

As Matthew Vadum writes, “The liberal billionaire-turned-philanthropist has been buying up media properties for years in order to drive home his message to the American public that they are too materialistic, too wasteful, too selfish, and too stupid to decide for themselves how to run their own lives.”

Richard Poe writes, “Soros’ private philanthropy, totaling nearly $5 billion, continues undermining America ’s traditional Western values.  His giving has provided funding of abortion rights, atheism, drug legalization, sex education, euthanasia, feminism, gun control, globalization, mass immigration, gay marriage and other radical experiments in social engineering.”

Some of the many NGOs (None Government Organizations) that Soros funds with his billions are:  MoveOn.org, the Apollo  Alliance , Media Matters for  America , the Tides Foundation, the ACLU, ACORN, PDIA (Project on Death In  America ), La Raza, and many more.

For a more complete list, with brief descriptions of the NGOs, go to DiscoverTheNetworks.org. Poe continues, “Through his global web of Open Society Institutes and Open Society Foundations, Soros has spent 25 years recruiting, training, indoctrinating and installing a network of loyal operatives in 50 countries, placing them in positions of influence and power in media, government, finance and academia.” Without Soro’s money, would the Saul Alinsky’s  Chicago machine still be rolling?  Would SEIU, ACORN, and La Raza still be pursuing their nefariou s activities?  Would Big Money and lobbyists still be corrupting government?  Would our college campuses still be retirement h omes for 1960s radicals?

America stands at the brink of an abyss, and that fact is directly attributable to Soros.   Soros has vigorously, cleverly, and insidiously planned the ruination of America and his puppet, Barak Obama is leading the way. The words of Patrick Henry are apropos:  “Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?  Forbid it, Almighty God!  I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!”

These days, Patrick Henry’s sentiment is more than just some quaint hyperbole from long ago.  It’s a slow burning, but intense, glow that fires our courage an d heart.

Dr Leonard Coldwell


Pages: 1 2 Next
SEO Powered By SEOPressor