Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Fake Truth for Our Own Good?

What is truth? One of the philosopher's oldest questions indeed. Zeno, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle - an endless list of those attempting to define this surprisingly elusive concept. Zeno presented paradoxes - most lost - which brought into question our very ability to perceive our world. He showed that contradictions exist between our observed world and the logical world. For example Zeno's "Flying Arrow" paradox states "That it is impossible for a thing to be moving during a period of time, because it is impossible for it to be moving at an indivisible instant." (From p.4 "Zeno's Paradox" by Joseph Mazur, penguin)
I visualize this paradox as a high-speed photograph of an arrow, in which, the arrow appears to be motionless. Continuing p. 5:
"The flying-arrow paradox concludes that motion is impossible. Zeno pictures an arrow in flight and considers it frozen at a single point in time. He argues that the arrow must be stationary at
that instant, and if it is stationary at that instant then it is stationary at any - and - every instant. Therefore, it does not move at all."

We can also learn from Heisenberg's uncertainty theory:
"According to quantum mechanics, the more precisely the position (momentum) of a particle is given, the less precisely can one say what its momentum (position) is." To visualize this I picture
someone blindfolded at a billiard table armed with a cue ball. On the table is an eight-ball. The blindfolded person rolls the cueball across the table, striking the eight-ball, thereby finding it, but
in the process moving it from its original location. Perhaps this is a weak analogy...wait - what am I getting at?

My point is that our world, even for science is so mysterious that we may never be able to nail down reality. In fact according to Aristotle everything we know is unscientific anyway because scientific observation is rooted in inductively derived observations, taken as givens by what he called "intuition." So what?


Modern man relies on the "SCIENTIFIC METHOD" as our definitive truth-
testing tool. Here is a nice illustration:
Flow Chart for The Scientific Method

So we use the scientific method to evaluate evidence for our best possible description of reality, or truth. So it's that simple right? Well...


In his book Public Opinion, Walter Lippmann discusses the "... insertion between man and his environment of a pseudo-environment. To that pseudo-environment his behavior is a response.
But because it is behavior, the consequences, if they are acts, operate not in the pseudo-environment where the behavior is stimulated, but in the real environment where action eventuates. ... at the level of social life, what is called the adjustment of man to his environment takes place through the medium of fictions. By fictions I do not mean lies. I mean a representation of the environment which is in lesser or greater degree made by man himself." He continues ... "For the real environment is altogether too big, too complex, and too fleeting for direct acquaintance. ...we have to reconstruct it on a simpler model before we can manage with it." Essentially, in my view, Lippmann described the dumbing down, repackaging, and presentation of a reality by an elite group to the masses. A top-down management of the masses via a controlled media. The fake reality fed to the public for its own good would be designed to produce a desired reaction from the masses to allow the elites to do what is best for the public. But isn't this just academic mumbo-jumbo? We live in a Republic, we elect our leaders. There's no conspiracy going on to manipulate the public is there? Well...


Consider (CLICK) This document examining practical considerations concerning disinformation in an adversarial environment. Or perhaps you will find (CLICK) this document and (CLICK) others here as proof that information war is a reality TODAY.

Since our Government and Military are information warfare experts would it be too much of a stretch to assume that they would employ this powerful tool? I think it is reasonable to answer "YES".


Without control of the media, information warfare can be neutralized by the free exchange of ideas - especially on the internet. THE INTERNET MUST REMAIN FREE - PERIOD. Our U.S. Constitution was designed to handle the "problems" propagandists like Lippmann saw with the seemingly stupid masses. We have three branches of government, one being a bicameral Congress. Add the electoral college. There are many "safeguards" in place, we are repeatedly told, to "protect" us from the tyranny of the masses. We have a FIRST AMENDMENT protecting freedom of speech and the press. Are we, expected, fellow citizens, to act like little children and listen to our elite "masters?" Are we to believe that our government is free from the overwhelming influence of powerful and influential Self-appointed apostles who would lead us to possible ruin?


“Well, Doctor, what have we got—a Republic or a Monarchy?”
“A Republic, if you can keep it.” Dr. Ben Franklin was one of our wisest founding fathers. Who in our federal government is qualified to feed a citizen of Franklin's genius fake information for "his own good?" Please, my fellow citizens, please get involved in your own way - let's TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK!

Euro under siege after Portugal hits panic button

The euro is facing an unprecedented crisis after another country indicated that it was at a “high risk” of requiring an international bail-out.

Angela Merkel
'If the euro fails, then Europe fails,' warned the German Chancellor Angela Merkel last night Photo: AP

Portugal became the latest European nation to suggest it was on the brink of seeking help from Brussels after Ireland confirmed it had begun preliminary talks over its debt problems.

Greece also disclosed yesterday that its economic problems are even worse than previously thought. Last night, the German Chancellor Angela Merkel raised the spectre of the euro collapsing as she warned: “If the euro fails, then Europe fails.”

European finance ministers will meet in Brussels tomorrow to begin discussions over a new European stability plan that is expected to lead to billions of pounds offered to Ireland, Portugal and possibly even Spain.

David Cameron said he was thankful that Britain had not joined the euro, but indicated his displeasure that taxpayers in this country faced a £7 billion liability in any bail-out package.

The veteran Conservative MP Peter Tapsell warned that the “potential knock-on effect” of the Irish crisis “could pose as great a threat to the world economy as did Lehman Brothers, AIG and Goldman Sachs in September 2008”.

Ireland has resisted growing international pressure to accept EU financial assistance amid concerns that this would lead to a surrender of political and economic sovereignty.

However, the German government is expected to signal today that Ireland may have to accept a £77 billion bail-out, along with a loss of economic and political independence, as the price of preserving the euro. Mrs Merkel said the single currency was “the glue that holds Europe together”.

Her words came as fellow eurozone members Portugal and Spain rounded on Ireland. They fear that international concerns over the euro will lead to so-called market contagion spreading to them.

Fernando Teixeira dos Santos, the Portuguese finance minister, said: “There is a risk of contagion. The risk is high because we are not facing only a national problem. It is the problems of Greece, Portugal and Ireland. This has to do with the eurozone and the stability of the eurozone, and that is why contagion in this framework is more likely.”

Mr Teixeira dos Santos added: “I would not want to lecture the Irish government on that. I want to believe they will decide to do what is most appropriate together for Ireland and the euro. I want to believe they have the vision to take the right decision.”

He later sought to clarify his comments, insisting that Portugal was not preparing to seek assistance.

Greece had earlier added to the growing uncertainty when it said it would breach the conditions for the bail-out it was granted by the EU earlier in the year. The Greek government said its debt problem was much worse than previous dire forecasts.

Eurostat, the EU statistics agency, said Greece’s 2009 budget deficit reached 15.4 per cent of gross domestic product, significantly above its previous figure of 13.6 per cent.

George Papandreou, the Greek prime minister, said new European-wide taxes might now be needed to fund bail-outs.

“We need a mechanism which can be funded through different forms and different ways,” he said. “My proposal is that taxes such as a financial tax or carbon dioxide taxes could be important revenues and resources for funding such a mechanism.”

Yesterday, Irish ministers continued to insist publicly that they did not require a European bail-out to help meet the cost of repaying the country’s debts. However, reports suggested that Ireland might require help to shore up its banks.

Jean-Claude Juncker, the head of the Eurogroup of finance ministers, said the eurozone was indeed ready to act “as soon as possible” if Ireland sought financial assistance. But he stressed that “Ireland has not put forward their request”.

Ireland suffered the worst recession of any major economy and has amassed government debts of more than €100 billion (£84 billion). It has an unemployment rate almost twice as high as Britain at 13.2 per cent and currently has a record deficit equivalent to 32 per cent of its gross domestic product.

Senior figures at the European Central Bank yesterday lined up to insist that the Irish accept international help to reassure investors that the euro was secure.

Miguel Angel Fernandez Ordonez, the Bank of Spain governor and a member of the ECB’s governing council, said: “The situation in the markets has been negative due in some part to the lack of a decision by Ireland. It’s not up to me to make a decision. Ireland should take the decision at the right moment.”


Click this link ......

Body Scanner Controversy Making Bang Within the Corporate Media

The body scanner controversy has become louder than ever before. Not only have we seen alternative news sites like theintelhub.com, BlacklistedNews and infowars.com covering this important topic, we are now seeing the mainstream media report on the fact that people are unhappy with the radiation emitting scanners.

This morning Fox News reported the fact that travelers were unhappy with being groped by TSA agents. In fact, one man was quoted as saying,

“If you touch my junk I will have you arrested”

Predictably, Janet Napolitano (DHS) is pushing the outdated claim that taking naked pictures of you and your family is for your own safety.

USA Today

Napolitano asks fliers for ‘patience’ on body scanners

The nation’s Homeland Security chief asked for air travelers’ “cooperation” and “patience” with full-body scanning and pat downs this holiday season amid a growing public backlash that the airport tactics are intrusive.

“Each and every one of the security measures we implement serves an important goal,” Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano writes in a column for today’s USA TODAY, which asks the public to be a partner in defending against terrorism.

There has also been reports of pilot unions refusing scanners due to the fear of the harm caused by radiation. Other large groups are also planning boycotting the scanners.

Just over two years ago, TSA officials searched a 3 year old girl as if she was part of a terror cell. Officials within the TSA have literally been taught that the Constitution is irrelevant and to be on alert for terrorists, including 3 year old girls.


Will the Dept. of Homeland Security drop the hammer on the unhappy U.S. population and go against the people’s wishes? Will we see some sort of fake terror attack to push these clearly unpopular naked body scanners?

We are living on the brink of total tyranny, engulfed in fascism by controlling tyrants that rule from behind the veil. We must speak now and speak loud for our voices to be heard.

Here is a report on screening pilots: CNN – Body Scanners

« Gold And Economic Freedom - Written By Alan Greenspan (The Gold Bug) In 1966 »

Greenspan, Volcker, Reagan and Baker...


This article originally appeared in a newsletter: The Objectivist published in 1966 and was reprinted in Ayn Rand's Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal

An almost hysterical antagonism toward the gold standard is one issue which unites statists of all persuasions. They seem to sense - perhaps more clearly and subtly than many consistent defenders of laissez-faire - that gold and economic freedom are inseparable, that the gold standard is an instrument of laissez-faire and that each implies and requires the other.

In order to understand the source of their antagonism, it is necessary first to understand the specific role of gold in a free society.

Money is the common denominator of all economic transactions. It is that commodity which serves as a medium of exchange, is universally acceptable to all participants in an exchange economy as payment for their goods or services, and can, therefore, be used as a standard of market value and as a store of value, i.e., as a means of saving.

The existence of such a commodity is a precondition of a division of labor economy. If men did not have some commodity of objective value which was generally acceptable as money, they would have to resort to primitive barter or be forced to live on self-sufficient farms and forgo the inestimable advantages of specialization. If men had no means to store value, i.e., to save, neither long-range planning nor exchange would be possible.

What medium of exchange will be acceptable to all participants in an economy is not determined arbitrarily. First, the medium of exchange should be durable. In a primitive society of meager wealth, wheat might be sufficiently durable to serve as a medium, since all exchanges would occur only during and immediately after the harvest, leaving no value-surplus to store. But where store-of-value considerations are important, as they are in richer, more civilized societies, the medium of exchange must be a durable commodity, usually a metal. A metal is generally chosen because it is homogeneous and divisible: every unit is the same as every other and it can be blended or formed in any quantity. Precious jewels, for example, are neither homogeneous nor divisible. More important, the commodity chosen as a medium must be a luxury. Human desires for luxuries are unlimited and, therefore, luxury goods are always in demand and will always be acceptable. Wheat is a luxury in underfed civilizations, but not in a prosperous society. Cigarettes ordinarily would not serve as money, but they did in post-World War II Europe where they were considered a luxury. The term "luxury good" implies scarcity and high unit value. Having a high unit value, such a good is easily portable; for instance, an ounce of gold is worth a half-ton of pig iron.

In the early stages of a developing money economy, several media of exchange might be used, since a wide variety of commodities would fulfill the foregoing conditions. However, one of the commodities will gradually displace all others, by being more widely acceptable. Preferences on what to hold as a store of value, will shift to the most widely acceptable commodity, which, in turn, will make it still more acceptable. The shift is progressive until that commodity becomes the sole medium of exchange. The use of a single medium is highly advantageous for the same reasons that a money economy is superior to a barter economy: it makes exchanges possible on an incalculably wider scale.

Whether the single medium is gold, silver, seashells, cattle, or tobacco is optional, depending on the context and development of a given economy. In fact, all have been employed, at various times, as media of exchange. Even in the present century, two major commodities, gold and silver, have been used as international media of exchange, with gold becoming the predominant one. Gold, having both artistic and functional uses and being relatively scarce, has significant advantages over all other media of exchange. Since the beginning of World War I, it has been virtually the sole international standard of exchange. If all goods and services were to be paid for in gold, large payments would be difficult to execute and this would tend to limit the extent of a society's divisions of labor and specialization. Thus a logical extension of the creation of a medium of exchange is the development of a banking system and credit instruments (bank notes and deposits) which act as a substitute for, but are convertible into, gold.

A free banking system based on gold is able to extend credit and thus to create bank notes (currency) and deposits, according to the production requirements of the economy. Individual owners of gold are induced, by payments of interest, to deposit their gold in a bank (against which they can draw checks). But since it is rarely the case that all depositors want to withdraw all their gold at the same time, the banker need keep only a fraction of his total deposits in gold as reserves. This enables the banker to loan out more than the amount of his gold deposits (which means that he holds claims to gold rather than gold as security of his deposits). But the amount of loans which he can afford to make is not arbitrary: he has to gauge it in relation to his reserves and to the status of his investments.

When banks loan money to finance productive and profitable endeavors, the loans are paid off rapidly and bank credit continues to be generally available. But when the business ventures financed by bank credit are less profitable and slow to pay off, bankers soon find that their loans outstanding are excessive relative to their gold reserves, and they begin to curtail new lending, usually by charging higher interest rates. This tends to restrict the financing of new ventures and requires the existing borrowers to improve their profitability before they can obtain credit for further expansion. Thus, under the gold standard, a free banking system stands as the protector of an economy's stability and balanced growth. When gold is accepted as the medium of exchange by most or all nations, an unhampered free international gold standard serves to foster a world-wide division of labor and the broadest international trade. Even though the units of exchange (the dollar, the pound, the franc, etc.) differ from country to country, when all are defined in terms of gold the economies of the different countries act as one-so long as there are no restraints on trade or on the movement of capital. Credit, interest rates, and prices tend to follow similar patterns in all countries. For example, if banks in one country extend credit too liberally, interest rates in that country will tend to fall, inducing depositors to shift their gold to higher-interest paying banks in other countries. This will immediately cause a shortage of bank reserves in the "easy money" country, inducing tighter credit standards and a return to competitively higher interest rates again.

A fully free banking system and fully consistent gold standard have not as yet been achieved. But prior to World War I, the banking system in the United States (and in most of the world) was based on gold and even though governments intervened occasionally, banking was more free than controlled. Periodically, as a result of overly rapid credit expansion, banks became loaned up to the limit of their gold reserves, interest rates rose sharply, new credit was cut off, and the economy went into a sharp, but short-lived recession. (Compared with the depressions of 1920 and 1932, the pre-World War I business declines were mild indeed.) It was limited gold reserves that stopped the unbalanced expansions of business activity, before they could develop into the post-World Was I type of disaster. The readjustment periods were short and the economies quickly reestablished a sound basis to resume expansion.

But the process of cure was misdiagnosed as the disease: if shortage of bank reserves was causing a business decline-argued economic interventionists-why not find a way of supplying increased reserves to the banks so they never need be short! If banks can continue to loan money indefinitely-it was claimed-there need never be any slumps in business. And so the Federal Reserve System was organized in 1913. It consisted of twelve regional Federal Reserve banks nominally owned by private bankers, but in fact government sponsored, controlled, and supported. Credit extended by these banks is in practice (though not legally) backed by the taxing power of the federal government. Technically, we remained on the gold standard; individuals were still free to own gold, and gold continued to be used as bank reserves. But now, in addition to gold, credit extended by the Federal Reserve banks ("paper reserves") could serve as legal tender to pay depositors.

When business in the United States underwent a mild contraction in 1927, the Federal Reserve created more paper reserves in the hope of forestalling any possible bank reserve shortage. More disastrous, however, was the Federal Reserve's attempt to assist Great Britain who had been losing gold to us because the Bank of England refused to allow interest rates to rise when market forces dictated (it was politically unpalatable). The reasoning of the authorities involved was as follows: if the Federal Reserve pumped excessive paper reserves into American banks, interest rates in the United States would fall to a level comparable with those in Great Britain; this would act to stop Britain's gold loss and avoid the political embarrassment of having to raise interest rates. The "Fed" succeeded; it stopped the gold loss, but it nearly destroyed the economies of the world, in the process. The excess credit which the Fed pumped into the economy spilled over into the stock market-triggering a fantastic speculative boom. Belatedly, Federal Reserve officials attempted to sop up the excess reserves and finally succeeded in braking the boom. But it was too late: by 1929 the speculative imbalances had become so overwhelming that the attempt precipitated a sharp retrenching and a consequent demoralizing of business confidence. As a result, the American economy collapsed. Great Britain fared even worse, and rather than absorb the full consequences of her previous folly, she abandoned the gold standard completely in 1931, tearing asunder what remained of the fabric of confidence and inducing a world-wide series of bank failures. The world economies plunged into the Great Depression of the 1930's.

With a logic reminiscent of a generation earlier, statists argued that the gold standard was largely to blame for the credit debacle which led to the Great Depression. If the gold standard had not existed, they argued, Britain's abandonment of gold payments in 1931 would not have caused the failure of banks all over the world. (The irony was that since 1913, we had been, not on a gold standard, but on what may be termed "a mixed gold standard"; yet it is gold that took the blame.) But the opposition to the gold standard in any form-from a growing number of welfare-state advocates-was prompted by a much subtler insight: the realization that the gold standard is incompatible with chronic deficit spending (the hallmark of the welfare state). Stripped of its academic jargon, the welfare state is nothing more than a mechanism by which governments confiscate the wealth of the productive members of a society to support a wide variety of welfare schemes. A substantial part of the confiscation is effected by taxation. But the welfare statists were quick to recognize that if they wished to retain political power, the amount of taxation had to be limited and they had to resort to programs of massive deficit spending, i.e., they had to borrow money, by issuing government bonds, to finance welfare expenditures on a large scale.

Under a gold standard, the amount of credit that an economy can support is determined by the economy's tangible assets, since every credit instrument is ultimately a claim on some tangible asset. But government bonds are not backed by tangible wealth, only by the government's promise to pay out of future tax revenues, and cannot easily be absorbed by the financial markets. A large volume of new government bonds can be sold to the public only at progressively higher interest rates. Thus, government deficit spending under a gold standard is severely limited. The abandonment of the gold standard made it possible for the welfare statists to use the banking system as a means to an unlimited expansion of credit. They have created paper reserves in the form of government bonds which-through a complex series of steps-the banks accept in place of tangible assets and treat as if they were an actual deposit, i.e., as the equivalent of what was formerly a deposit of gold. The holder of a government bond or of a bank deposit created by paper reserves believes that he has a valid claim on a real asset. But the fact is that there are now more claims outstanding than real assets. The law of supply and demand is not to be conned. As the supply of money (of claims) increases relative to the supply of tangible assets in the economy, prices must eventually rise. Thus the earnings saved by the productive members of the society lose value in terms of goods. When the economy's books are finally balanced, one finds that this loss in value represents the goods purchased by the government for welfare or other purposes with the money proceeds of the government bonds financed by bank credit expansion.

In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. There is no safe store of value. If there were, the government would have to make its holding illegal, as was done in the case of gold. If everyone decided, for example, to convert all his bank deposits to silver or copper or any other good, and thereafter declined to accept checks as payment for goods, bank deposits would lose their purchasing power and government-created bank credit would be worthless as a claim on goods. The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves.

This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists' tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists' antagonism toward the gold standard.


Alan Greenspan

« Dean Baker's Simple Idea To End The Foreclosure Crisis »

From economist Dean Baker:

Discussed by Baker in detail here:


Current policy has two ways of dealing with homeowners who can't pay: Foreclosure or mortgage modification. Neither of these approaches is working to stabilize the market.

Foreclosure isn't helping, because it adds to the supply of homes. It's also devastating to neighborhoods and to the families who've been evicted. Banks can't -- or won't -- keep up with the volume of delinquent loans, so it takes them a long time to foreclose. In the meantime, some owners have simply stopped paying and are living in the bank's home for free, creating a moral hazard of the first degree.

Mortgage modifications haven't put a dent in the number of foreclosures, so that's not helping in a macro sense. And for the families involved, it means paying too much for a house that they'll never own. Many, if not most, of the modified loans ultimately default. Billions have been funneled to the banks, with very little to show for it except higher profits.

Here's Baker's solution, proposed more than three years ago. I still haven't heard a good argument against it.

Instead of foreclosing on a loan and evicting the family, the lender should take ownership of the house and rent it out to them at a market rate for an extended period. In many areas, rents are much lower than mortgage payments, so the family can afford to stay put. Eventually, once the market recovers, the bank could sell the house.

What are the benefits of the Baker plan?

  • It would reduce the supply of foreclosed homes for sale.

  • It would keep neighborhoods intact and maintain home values by avoiding the blight of boarded-up, abandoned houses.

  • It would not bail anyone out.

  • It would keep families off the street, but wouldn't force them to pay more than the going rate for rents.

What are the drawbacks to the plan?

  • It wouldn't work for everyone. Not every homeowner could afford to rent the house they now live in. Many wouldn't want to rent it.

  • Banks don't want to be landlords. And they could potentially lose money by not selling the house now. Or not: dumping millions of houses on the market right now wouldn't be prudent, anyway.

  • It would be a retreat from the idea that all Americans, regardless of their finances, should be home owners.

In France they are withdrawing all monies on the 7th December!!

Click this link .....

« Tungsten Plated Gold Bars - Bob Chapman Implicates Robert Rubin & Larry Summers »

More inside. Check this out from last week:


Video: Original German TV clip that Chapman refers to above...

Check out:


« Gold Bar Testing With Ultrasound (VIDEO) »

Watch how a gold bar is tested and scanned with ultrasound. To ensure the integrity of the gold bars stored for customers, some companies now use GE's scanning technology.

« Photo Essay: 100 Abandoned Houses »

Beautiful photos of absolute ugliness.


Housing decay slideshow:

More slideshows:



Are 'terrorists' more dangerous than how we react to them?

A TSA agent had just felt up my balls as I boarded a plane. I felt seriously fucking violated but I needed to board that red eye so I kept my mouth shut and got myself molested in the interest of 'getting where I needed to be in a harsh economy'. I handed over my boarding card and got directed to my seat. I stuck my carry on luggage into the overhead compartment. I chit chatted with the random guy who sat next to me. Both of us were uneasy as we whipped out our laptops. After all, either of us could have a strip of semtex explosive instead of a lithium battery installed. Not that the TSA would know any better. And I realized...

Airport security is theater.

The necessary fiction of modern life.

I then came to a sudden realization as I tested my flotation device, that if I were an actual terrorist boarding a flight in any American airport, why would I waste my time trying to fool the TSA and smuggle a 'bomb' on board a plane when I could cause far more havoc by simply taking the same bomb and walking to the busiest local shopping mall, tossing my bomb in a rubbish bin at the food court and walking slowly away.


The 'terrorists' have just made every shopping facility in America a no go area. The greatest hit to a consumer economy ever! Why, if the terrorist threat is so real, are soft targets like shopping malls not blowing up every week? A true terrorist would simply bypass flying and blow up soft civilian targets. If Al Qaida are so prevalent, and the war on terror is real, then why are Al Qaida wasting their time smuggling bombs onto airplanes?

There are so many soft targets that could do far more economic damage.

Why are they not happening?

Oh shit, as the author of this entire piece, I suddenly realize how shit gets skewed.

Cash-hungry US war Ind stays armed as schools & clinics close

Click this link .......

Financial Lobbyists Have Met at Least 510 Times with Regulators over the New Financial Regulation Act

So how many times has your special representative met with regulators over the new Dodd-Frank Financial Regulations Act? Thought so.

If you really want to know why you are going to get screwed when the ink dries on the rulings that regulators will make as part of the mandates in Dodd-Frank, here's the number to keep in mind: 510.

Since July, according to a study by LaTi, that's how many times financial lobbyists have met with regulators over Dodd-Frank.

Here's LaTi on what goes on at these meetings:

The lobbyists are often pushing for exemptions to the bill's key provisions, including measures that would limit risky Wall Street trading and shield consumers from excessive bank fees, records and interviews show...

[The] glimpse frequently shows companies arguing that their operations shouldn't be covered by the new regulations, or that the regulations should be narrowly written, according to summaries posted by the federal agencies on their websites...

Four executives of Ford's consumer finance division met with Fed officials Aug. 14, asking that its vehicle loans "be exempt" from rules that are designed to rein in risky lending, according to documents released by the agency...

...the logs show that consumer interests are heavily outnumbered by Wall Street...

Sheila Krumholz, the executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, is concerned that Wall Street's voice will be especially powerful in discussions on implementing these measures.

"As you get into the nitty-gritty details there aren't a lot of people who can give a countervailing argument," she said.
Look, the Frank-Dodd Act is likely more contorted than anything else Frank has ever done, so it's no surprise that financial institutions want to have influence over the final outcome.

LaTi explains: Despite taking up 2,319 pages, the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act left key details to regulatory agencies.

Thus, Frank-Dodd has created huge power-centers at these agencies. And it is real expensive to get access. Try calling up Sheila Bair and see if you can get a meeting with her the way Jamie Dimon did.
According to Lati, "Jamie Dimon, chairman and chief executive of JPMorgan, was among those in attendance when a bank contingent met Oct. 8 with Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Chairwoman Sheila Bair."

That's only one of 23 meetings JPMorgan had with regulators. Goldman Sachs, not surprisingly, during the same period met 21 times with regulators.

Bottom line: The nightmare that is the Dodd-Frank Act is continuing to evolve and the financial institutions and their smooth lobbyists, who know how to capture agencies, without the agencies even knowing it, are all over D.C.

Here's what will come out of it: Edges for the big banks, like Goldman and JPMorgan, against consumers and onerous regulations for anyone else trying to enter the sectors where the big banks roam.

« Can We Party like it's 1776 and Just Start Over? Thomas Jefferson's Top 10 Quotes on Money and Banking »

Thomas Jefferson

Disclosure: I am a graduate of the University of Virginia.

Jefferson's most magnificent creation -- The Rotunda at UVa in Charlottesville. Don't miss this list of quotes. Uncanny how little has changed about bankers in 200 years.


Truth from TJ:

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."

"I sincerely believe that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies, and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity under the name of funding is but swindling futurity on a large scale." --Thomas Jefferson to John Taylor, 1816.

"Everything predicted by the enemies of banks, in the beginning, is now coming to pass. We are to be ruined now by the deluge of bank paper. It is cruel that such revolutions in private fortunes should be at the mercy of avaricious adventurers, who, instead of employing their capital, if any they have, in manufactures, commerce, and other useful pursuits, make it an instrument to burden all the interchanges of property with their swindling profits, profits which are the price of no useful industry of theirs." --Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Cooper, 1814.

"The art and mystery of banks... is established on the principle that 'private debts are a public blessing.' That the evidences of those private debts, called bank notes, become active capital, and aliment the whole commerce, manufactures, and agriculture of the United States. Here are a set of people, for instance, who have bestowed on us the great blessing of running in our debt about two hundred millions of dollars, without our knowing who they are, where they are, or what property they have to pay this debt when called on."

"The treasury, lacking confidence in the country, delivered itself bound hand and foot to bold and bankrupt adventurers and bankers pretending to have money, whom it could have crushed at any moment…These jugglers were at the feet of government. For it was not, any confidence in their frothy bubbles, but the lack of all other money, which induced…people to take their paper" -- Thomas Jefferson, October 1815 letter to (former) Treasury Secretary, Albert Gallatin.

"I own it to be my opinion, that good will arise from the destruction of our credit. I see nothing else which can restrain our disposition to luxury, and to the change of those manners which alone can preserve republican government. As it is impossible to prevent credit, the best way would be to cure its ill effects by giving an instantaneous recovery to the creditor. This would be reducing purchases on credit to purchases for ready money. A man would then see a prison painted on everything he wished, but had not ready money to pay for." --Thomas Jefferson to Archibald Stuart, 1786.

"If the debt which the banking companies owe be a blessing to anybody, it is to themselves alone, who are realizing a solid interest of eight or ten per cent on it. As to the public, these companies have banished all our gold and silver medium, which, before their institution, we had without interest, which never could have perished in our hands, and would have been our salvation now in the hour of war; instead of which they have given us two hundred million of froth and bubble, on which we are to pay them heavy interest, until it shall vanish into air... We are warranted, then, in affirming that this parody on the principle of 'a public debt being a public blessing,' and its mutation into the blessing of private instead of public debts, is as ridiculous as the original principle itself. In both cases, the truth is, that capital may be produced by industry, and accumulated by economy; but jugglers only will propose to create it by legerdemain tricks with paper." --Thomas Jefferson to John W. Eppes, 1813.

"The Bank of the United States is one of the most deadly hostilities existing, against the principles and form of our Constitution. An institution like this, penetrating by its branches every part of the Union, acting by command and in phalanx, may, in a critical moment, upset the government. I deem no government safe which is under the vassalage of any self-constituted authorities, or any other authority than that of the nation, or its regular functionaries. What an obstruction could not this bank of the United States, with all its branch banks, be in time of war! It might dictate to us the peace we should accept, or withdraw its aids. Ought we then to give further growth to an institution so powerful, so hostile?" --Thomas Jefferson to Albert Gallatin, 1803.

Regulating Banking Institutions

"The principle of rotation... in the body of [bank] directors... breaks in upon the espirit de corps so apt to prevail in permanent bodies; it gives a chance for the public eye penetrating into the sanctuary of those proceedings and practices, which the avarice of the directors may introduce for their personal emolument, and which the resentments of excluded directors, or the honesty of those duly admitted, might betray to the public; and it gives an opportunity at the end of the year, or at other periods, of correcting a choice, which on trial, proves to have been unfortunate." --Thomas Jefferson to Albert Gallatin, 1803.

Paper Speculation

"A spirit... of gambling in our public paper has seized on too many of our citizens, and we fear it will check our commerce, arts, manufactures, and agriculture, unless stopped." --Thomas Jefferson to William Carmichael, 1791.

"Our public credit is good, but the abundance of paper has produced a spirit of gambling in the funds, which has laid up our ships at the wharves as too slow instruments of profit, and has even disarmed the hand of the tailor of his needle and thimble. They say the evil will cure itself. I wish it may; but I have rarely seen a gamester cured, even by the disasters of his vocation." --Thomas Jefferson to Gouverneur Morris, 1791.

Austerity In Action: Crazy Photos From Yesterday's Greek Riots (Slideshow 22 PICS) »

NEWER Stories are below...

Will this type of anger ever reach our shores, or is televised dancing with Bristol Palin just too damn important...

Slideshow (22 pictures):


You might also enjoy these:

  • and



Editor's note - this story originally ran over the Summer.


Personal property of Jewish financier Bernard Madoff were sold in an auction that raised more than $2 million to repay the victims of his multi-billion dollar Ponzi scheme.

Billions are missing or owed, $2 Million will repay?
Is there a new scheme in the making??

Auction of Madoff Family Possessions Brings in $2 Million for Victims

Personal property of Jewish financier Bernard Madoff were sold in an auction that raised more than $2 million to repay the victims of his multi-billion dollar Ponzi scheme.

The weekend auction in New York run by the U.S. Marshals Service raised money for the Department of Justice’s Asset Forfeiture Fund, whose proceeds are used to compensate Madoff’s victims.

Among the items sold was Madoff’s wife’s 10.5-carat diamond engagement ring, for $550,000, and a pair of slippers embroidered with Madoff’s initials, for $6,000, Reuters reported, Unused Madoff underwear was also sold, as well as a Rolex watch, furniture and antiques.

An auction of Madoff’s possessions last year raised $1 million.

Madoff, 73, was jailed last year after pleading guilty to running a multi-billion dollar Ponzi scheme that defrauded thousands and caused the collapse of several Jewish charities. He was sentenced to 150 years in prison.


Image by Bendib


Lynn E. Szymoniak, Esq., Editor, Fraud Digest, November 11, 2010

When men and women leave the military, the business community often does not reward them for their years of service with good-paying jobs. It is not surprising that veterans are among the Americans who are struggling to stave off foreclosure. Like many others, they are hoping that the bank will re-work the terms of their loans and help them through tough economic times – in the same way that the government helped the banks. They are hopeful that the banks will honor the mandate of Fannie and Freddie and offer meaningful re-working of the terms of their loans. Perhaps their 9% adjustable rates will be reduced to a 5% fixed rate. Perhaps the loan balance will be reduced to reflect the loss in value caused by the mortgage meltdown. Perhaps they can stay in their homes, because it would make economic sense for the bank to re-work their loans instead of forcing them out only to sell the house at less than 60% of the loan balance.

In this foreclosure struggle, these veterans are given no respect by the foreclosure mills. The Florida Attorney General has found that in thousands of cases involving members of the military, proof of service of process has been falsified. In thousands of other cases, former military families cannot get legal representation because they cannot afford to retain lawyers, but have just enough income to disqualify them for free representation through legal services programs. Without legal representation, they are left on their own to identify bank fraud. They must prove that the documents being presented by the mortgage-backed trusts are fraudulent and that the banks are fabricating evidence to force them out of their homes. Their years of military training and service did not prepare them for this particular battle.

Instead of a rocket-docket that forces military families out of their homes with no more than a 90-second hearing and a rubber stamp of the bank practices, there could be special measures taken in cases involving military families. The banks could be required to engage in mandated (but most often ignored) meaningful mediation. The banks could be required to present to the Courts a one-page straightforward “before and after” comparison that plainly shows the revised loan terms that were offered to these families.

Where no substantial effort was made by the banks, courts could appoint Special Masters to carefully examine the bank documents to make sure that banks were not relying on documents that had been fabricated just to speed the foreclosure. Where such documents were used to beat military families in foreclosure, courts could sanction the banks by requiring substantial concessions to meaningfully penalize the wrong-doing. Some restaurants and area businesses offer a free sandwich to veterans on Veterans Day. An offer of economic justice is more befitting the many sacrifices of these families.

Lynn E. Szymoniak, Esq.



I sure could use some…

Bob Chapman on the Tungsten Plated Gold Bars Scandal

Click this link ........

The Great "Depression"

The One-handed Economist took a new position in its letter of Sept. 17, 2010 shifting its commodity holdings from gold to silver. Another change of position is in a special bulletin issued Nov. 10, 2010. However, since this is so recent, in order to learn the contents a subscriber must cross my palm with silver. (See below.)

Today I would like to continue my discussion of the (so-called) Great Depression as this is the giant lie which is behind most of the other economic lies which have deceived so many people and cost them so much money.

What is a depression? It is a period in a country’s economic history where the large majority of the people become poorer. It is alleged that such a period occurred in the early 1930s. I have pointed out previously that Economic Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970, reports that during this period Americans shifted from margarine to butter. They increased their per capita meat consumption (from 129 lb to 144 lb.). And they gave (substantially) more to charity. Further, real wages rose during this period, and the savings of the average American increased in value (buying power) by 30%. This does not sound like a getting poorer to me.

Let us examine the increase in buying power of the average American’s savings. In the early 1930s, the average American saved and had been saving since interest was legalized (by Noah Webster) in the 1780s. Given an average interest rate of 5% (normal through the 19th century and up until 1933) the average person’s savings would multiply by 4.25 times over the course of his working lifetime.

Average annual wages in manufacturing in America for 1933 were $1,086. At first glance, this sounds like a small amount of money, but one must bear in mind that in early 1933 the country was on the gold standard, and prices were much lower than they are today. In 1933, a new car could be purchased for $400. A two bedroom apartment (San Francisco) could be rented for $25/mo. And a gallon of gas cost a dime. (That dime, by the way, was .075 oz. of silver, which exchanges today for $1.95.)

But I have not found that the careful recitation of statistics has much effect on believers in the Great Depression. The more dispassionate and factual I become the more emotional they become. “But, Mr. Katz, what about the bread lines? What about 25% unemployment? Have you no heart, Mr. Katz.

Actually, I do have a heart. It is the defenders of the Great Depression who lack common humanity because the lies of the Great Depression are carefully calculated to defend the interests of the rich and powerful and injure the common man. Let us examine a little history.

There was a phenomenon very similar to the “depression” of the 1930s in the period 1873-79. Prominent businessmen (e.g., Jay Cooke) went bankrupt. Unemployment was high, and prices declined.

And yet, the party in power (the Republicans) were not kicked out of office in the 1876 election. Nobody seemed to know that America was in a depression. The unemployment was absorbed fairly rapidly by the free economy, and America went on to have the greatest economy in the world for the last 3rd of the 19th century. At the same time, millions of immigrants flooded into America because, in America, the streets were paved with gold.

The correct name for such a phenomenon is a credit contraction. You have heard the expression, “Neither a borrower nor a lender be.” Well, a credit contraction is a period when many people seem to heed that advice. It may be good for some people in the country and bad for others, but there is no clear cut harm or benefit to the country as a whole.

What caused the money/credit contraction of the 1870s was the money/credit expansion of the Civil War. The two periods were directly opposite. During the Civil War prices rose rapidly. During the 1870s prices fell. During the Civil War stocks went up. During the 1870s stocks went down. During the Civil War both real wages and unemployment fell. During the 1870s both real wages and unemployment rose.

Well after these events there was another war (World War I) and the Civil War scenario repeated itself. During the war prices rose and both real wages and unemployment fell. Notice the role that unemployment plays in this. Unemployment goes down precisely when real wages go down. For this reason, if someone wants to lie to you, then unemployment makes a very good statistic. A decline in unemployment makes it easy to feign sympathy for the working man, while you are lowering his wages. It is a perfect statistic if you have an intent to deceive because it takes a complex of data and oversimplifies it. If we take a credit expansion, such as the Civil War or World War I, then this benefits the unsympathetic characters of our society (the banks and Wall Street). By replacing this complex (and correct) analysis with the oversimplified statistic of unemployment, this allows one to pose as the friend of the working man even as one is trying to lower his wages.

For example, I mentioned that average annual earnings in manufacturing in 1933 were $1086. (See, Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970, Series D, 740.) But since at that time the dollar was approximately 1/20 ounce of gold (25.8 grains of gold, 9/10 fine as defined by the Gold Standard Act of 1900), $1086 was 54 ounces of gold. But of course you all know that this past Tuesday 54 ounces of gold had a value of $1400 x 54 = $75,600. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that average wages in the U.S. for October of this year were $47,216, about 5/8 of wages in the Great “depression.” In words of one syllable, in the middle of The Depression the average working man was making almost double what he makes today.

In early 1933, the average American worker was receiving 54 ounces of gold per year. If he saved 15% of this, he was saving a bit over 8 ounces of gold per year. Assume that the average worker had accumulated 25 years of savings (half of an average working lifetime) or 200 oz. of gold, and this would have approximately doubled due to accumulated interest at 5% over 25 years. Thus the average American working man had savings of 400 ounces of gold (in 1933).

But remember that these savings increased in value (due to the appreciation of the currency by 30% from 1930-33. That is, the average American worker received an additional 120 ounces of gold (almost 2½ years income) over these 3 years without doing any extra work. This was, of course, money which had been stolen from him during World War I (when prices doubled) and given to the paper aristocracy (courtesy of the Democrats). In words of one syllable, the Democrats were the party of the banks and Wall Street (despite their loud protestations to the contrary).

The Republicans, on the other hand, were the party of the common man. These idiots who pretend to be economists today do not even know that what they call “The Great Depression” was a deliberately planned event. It was planned by the Republican Party of 1919. At that time, prices had just doubled (from 1914 to 1919). Both the savings and the buying power of the average working man had fallen in half over these 5 years and given to the bankers (principally J.P. Morgan, who had fomented U.S. entry into World War I) and Wall Street. (The DJI approximately doubled from 1914 to 1919.) The Republicans saw that this stolen wealth had to be returned to its rightful owners, the working people of America. And they devised a policy to do this. Increase the value of the U.S. dollar back to its level of 1914. In other words, reduce prices in the country from their 1919 level to their 1914 level. Since cigars had risen in price from 5¢ to 10¢ from 1914 to 1919 and since the smoke-filled room was an institution of the day (the dangers of smoking being unknown), this was referred to as the policy of “a good 5¢ cigar.”

In other words, what the idiot Bernanke refers to as a mistake was a deliberate, conscious policy. It was humane policy (designed to help the working man), and it worked. By 1933, prices in the U.S. had returned to their 1914 level. (This, by the way, was the same price level, according to the Wholesale Price Index, as had obtained in 1793 – 140 years of price stability.) This was hard on Wall Street, but it was for the good of the American working man. (Stocks lost 90% of their value from 1929 to 1932.)

The Republicans were confident that their policy would be politically popular because it had been politically popular in the 1870s. The Republicans were reelected in 1876, right in the middle of the “depression,” and remained the dominant political party by standing against rising prices and for the gold standard (Tea Party members take note).

What happened in 1932 was that the media of the U.S. swallowed a giant pack of lies (taken mostly from Marxism) and perpetrated this on the American people. The media of that day played both sides of the fence. They represented the interests of the paper aristocracy and then portrayed themselves as supporters of the working class. To this day, people do not know that Franklin D. Roosevelt was a Wall Streeter who ran a vulture fund in the 1920s. A vulture fund is a (mutual) fund which swoops down on dying companies and gobbles them up. A “traitor to his class?” That was a deliberate and conscious lie.

Stories of bread lines and soup kitchens were part of the propaganda of the day. Remember, this was the era which saw Adolf Hitler get elected in Germany. It was not a proud moment in the history of the world. You have all been taught that Wall Streeters were jumping off buildings after the crash of 1929. What a bunch of malarkey. First, the 1929 crash was caused by Herbert Hoover (who hated free enterprise). He had the Fed choke off brokers’ loans, thus forcing stock speculators to dump their holdings. Second, I have researched the supposed wave of suicides in the wake of the crash. IT NEVER HAPPENED. There was no increase in suicides in late 1929 for New York State and no increase for the nation as a whole. There are always some suicides, of course. In a nation this big, you can find a few of anything, but there was no wave of suicides out of the ordinary. IT WAS A CONSCIOUS AND DELIBERATE LIE.

We can see the same kind of media lies today. You all know that in every village and hamlet today there are pharmacies telling you to get your flu shot. First, the government is involved because it pays the vaccine companies (an outrageous sum) for the vaccine. Second, in 2009 there was a campaign of lies in which the predicted swine flu for 2010 was wildly exaggerated and called a pandemic (a made up word). Not only did the pandemic fail to happen, flu deaths for 2010 are running one-third normal. That is, there was no problem, but instead of investigating the waste of money we are simply getting more lies to get rid of the last batch of flu shots which the public refused to take. Third, the vaccine itself is dangerous, containing mercury and aluminum, and it is far more likely that more people were killed by the vaccine than were ever saved by it. (My mother was killed by an earlier-day flu campaign and shot, which gave her a heart attack and led to her death.) I call this to your attention to illustrate just how naïve and gullible the average person is and how incapable of acting in their own self interest.

America was not this way for the period 1776-1929, but it is now. This is the world into which you were born. Those who see reality as it is have a chance, but this is a small minority.

Now what is Ben Bernanke, the apostle of the “Great Depression,” going to do? He is going to serve the interest of the paper aristocracy. He is going to print money as never before in American history. (Note, the Coinage Act of 1792 carries the death penalty for debasement of the currency.) From mid-2008 to the projected end of QE2, the U.S. money supply will have approximately tripled, and, after a lag, I expect average prices to do the same. You know what this will do to the price of gold. At this writing, commodity prices (as given by the [real] CRB index) are close to a new all-time high. This is an end to another lie, the New York Times’ fabrication that we are on the verge of a “deflation.” One after another, like the layers of an onion, these lies dominate our age, and if one does not wish to be destroyed by them, one must see reality as it is.

To help you see reality as it is, I publish a fortnightly (every two weeks) newsletter, The One-handed Economist. You may subscribe by visiting my web site, www.thegoldspeculator.com, and hitting the Pay Pal button ($300). Or you may send $290 ($10 cash discount) to: The One-handed Economist, 614 Nashua St. #122, Milford, N.H. 03055.

Thank you for your interest.

Read More Articles at goldseek.com

Howard S. Katz wrote "The Paper Aristorcacy in 1972"..I was delighted to find out he is still alive.. That single book changed my life.. He is a great economist and communicator... pr

« Financial Times: "The real danger here for banks is that 'show me the note' becomes widespread" »

An except is printed below. It's worth reading the whole piece.

Just a reminder:


The MBS mess from the beginning – the deal docs

If the mortgage notes weren’t correctly shifted from the originators to the depositors to the trustees, with the corresponding assignments, the foreclosure process could be held up should anyone actually stop to ask where the mortgage note is, or who holds it. Likewise, if MERS’ authority to foreclose is challenged (more on that here).

There are potentially more insidious reasons behind documentation slips. Fixing the chain of title — if a break is discovered — can be a lengthy and expensive exercise. Fudging over a missing mortgage assignment may be be quicker and cheaper. For a ‘real life’ paperwork story, check out mortgage-blogger Tanta’s experience back in 2007 — which leads rather nicely to the next point.

Improper documentation has existed for as long as the originate-to-distribute system. Katherine Porter at the Ohio University estimated back in 2007 that “a majority” of US foreclosures are made without the right paperwork. And you’ll notice the 2006-date on the Florida case cited in the GSAMP prospectus above.

The danger here is that ’show me the note’ becomes widespread. Savvy lawyers start demanding the docs (which of course they are legally entitled to do) — foreclosures freeze, lawsuits fly, the RMBS market stagnates, the big banks get hit, and so on.

As a structured finance footnote (because securitisation has a tendency toward irony) we’ll add that GSAMP Trust 2006-FM1’s sister deal — FM2 — was included as a reference entity in the now-infamous Goldman Sachs offering … the Abacus CDO.


New details from the latest lawsuit:


And Felix Salmon has a must-read nightmare scenario:

You thought the foreclosure mess was bad? You’re right about that. But it gets so much worse once you start adding in a whole bunch of parallel messes in the world of mortgage bonds. For instance, as Tracy Alloway says, mortgage-bond documentation generally says that if more than a minuscule proportion of notes in a mortgage pool weren’t properly transferred, then the trustee for the bondholders can force the investment bank who put the deal together to repurchase the mortgages. And it’s looking very much as though none of the notes were properly transferred.

But that’s not even the biggest potential problem facing the investment banks who put these deals together. It also turns out that there’s a pretty strong case that they lied to the investors in many if not most of these deals.

I mentioned this back in September, and I’ve been doing a bit more digging since then. And I’m increasingly convinced that the risk to investment banks isn’t only one of dodgy paperwork; there’s also a serious risk of massive lawsuits from the SEC or other prosecutors, as well as suits from individual mortgage investors.

The key firm here is Clayton Holdings, a company which was hired by various investment banks — Goldman Sachs, Bear Stearns, Citigroup, Merrill Lynch, Lehman Brothers, Morgan Stanley, Deutsche Bank, everyone — to taste-test the mortgage pools they were buying from originators.


And John Carney has good background here:

Our recent coverage:

« Demand To See Your Mortgage Note! -- Brand New Website Makes It Simple »

Click this link .......

Why? Geraldo Rivera changes mind on AE911Truth

Why Geraldo has finally come around is the real mystery here. After all - one must only take a look at the fall of WTC7 - and the lame fires blamed for its collapse to realize something is amiss. After all - no plane hit WTC7. Yet it collapsed just like two buildings that were.

Take a look at this recent fire. Looks pretty bad to me. But - as usual - as always - except for on September 11, 2001 in New York City - the building refuses to commit suicide. Click here for more pics.

The evidence is overwhelming. What is lacking is a public that will look into that telescope Galileo built - trained on the moons of Jupiter, just waiting to shatter their world view. Do you have the courage to look into the telescope - to see with your own eyes that this is not a Geocentric universe? Or is it simply easier to look away - and live the fantasy?

Here's a video we all know about. Why hasn't this guy been interrogated?

I don't like getting carried away with speculation. However - as I said earlier - the biggest mystery is why Fox News and Geraldo are giving the AE911Truth people air time?

Probably because in our near future there is another 911-style false flag planned. Since it will eclipse the original September 11, 2001 - in order to stampede America into another war with Iran and beyond - the time has come for the shills that participated in the cover-up of 911 to begin "seeing the light." This will exculpate them from suspicion as they assist in the cover-up of the coming false-flag operation.

There's a conspiracy theorist's take on all this. I hope I am wrong.

firefox 2010 11 09 22 25 03 32

Click this link ......

Oil And Gas Leaks Continue Unabated At Macondo: Photos document oily fluid all over the seafloor

Secret Chemical Spraying at Macondo has not ceased since official well shutdown on 15 July.

– BK Lim

13 Nov 2010

The MC 252 well has been officially shut since 15 July (BP’s press release and website announcement). As late as Sept 2010, the world was still publicly assured that the bottom kill by the relief wells was the surest and most reliable way of permanently killing the oil leak from the reservoir. BP and Thad Alan publicly declared the rogue well was “successfully and permanently” cemented at 18,000 ft below mudline (bml) by the relief wells that started unannounced on 15 Sept 2010. Is this just empty rhetoric and part of BP’s elaborate Mass Deception Act?

First of all, please be informed that the oil leak from the reservoir was never killed and could never be killed. The late Matt Simmons paid with his life to bring us that message. And the world repaid him with words of ridicule in technical blogs around the world.


Peak oiler, energy blogger, and chemical engineer Robert Rapier has published a series of critical evaluations of Simmons’ work, the most recent of which was published — of all places (!) — inThe Oil Drum website. The TOD article takes a close look at some of Simmons’ recent statements about the oil spill in the Gulf. A careful reader will come away with the clear conclusion that Simmons’ credibility is in tatters, blowing in the breeze. Only the truest of Simmons true believers in TOD comments persists in defending the recent incredible and fantastic statements that Simmons had made to the press.


~~~~end of quote ~~~~~~~~

We have been lied to, through and through. It is very obvious why the activities (besides ramming up the recovery costs to capitalize on the idling rigs) did not decrease after the official “shut down date of 15 July”. The gas-oil spill continues unabated till this day. The capping of well A was just a “dog & pony show” to fool the world. There is a constant need to spray chemicals to disperse and to coagulate the oil and methane leaking into the gulf, to cover up the magnitude of the disaster.

The deception is obvious when BP had to disguise the chemical spraying operations as “Cement OPS” and “Rig Move”; inspection of the grouted seafloor as “biological survey” and intended explosion operations as “gooseneck ops” just to name a few. Any seasoned viwer can tell that these ROV videos are not recording what the label says. Why is the US government still in denial and the main media completely silent? The official spin is that we do not need anymore bad news to derail the financial recovery. This is just as bad as Burma’s Generals with their chests full of fake medals. (See Burma Bummer – by Dean Johns). Would a few more disasters spur the economy?

Admittedly, one crow does not make a new sun rise. But tens of concrete evidences of criminality and still no prosecution? People of the humane First World were shocked by the immense sufferings and atrocities committed by the authoritarian regimes of Burma, North Korea, Zimbabwe, Somalia and many other 3rd world countries. Powerful first world countries are unwilling to act for various political and economic reasons. But genocide being carried by a foreign multi-national corporation right in the backyard of the world’s most powerful nation and blatantly ignored by the world’s mainstream media? What the heck is going on? Does the world not care a single bit on the mass destruction of the marine life and condemnation of whole coastal communities to a future life of pain and suffering? And we call ourselves civilized?

Capping the well and bottom-killing it with relief wells were the wrong moves. See The High Risk Of Capping BP’s Gushing Well. Despite sending them all the emails and copies of my articles, BP and those in control never responded and never listened. Now we are living out a mega-disaster with urgency as the worst is yet to come.

The evidences at hand clearly debunk that hollow premature victory cry on 19 Sept10. Would BP admit defeat at the hands of Mother Nature? No. Keeping with the same reckless spirit that drove the Macondo Wells to destruction and disaster, BP is now speeding the world into an irreversible ecological catastrophe; one that will start us on the express highway to the eventual destruction of world civilization. Not the planet itself, as Mother Earth is more resilient than the human beings renting the living accommodation on its land surface.

The images of mass destruction and deception in the Gulf are brought to you by concerned citizens of the world. See for yourself, the future of this planet flashing before your eyes in the comfort of your living room. You have been forewarned. In generations to come, you have to answer to your children why nothing had been done to avert their untold miseries.

(Pictures are updated from time to time in no particular order …last update 13 Nov 2010).

9 Nov10


9 Nov10


9 Nov 10














Click on each picture to enlarge:

Ads by Google
Navy Squadron Ship Patch
For Squadrons Bases Ships Aircraft G-1 Flight Jackets Hats T-Shirts

The Importance of Saving Money

Click this link ......

Letter To Bernanke: Stop QE2

Click this link ......