Showing posts with label Failure. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Failure. Show all posts

Sunday, 3 April 2011

Meet The 171 Banks For Which The Margin Of Failure Is One Thousand Dollars

At this point the majority of the population is transfixed by the biggest borrowers from the discount window. Yes, we know by now that the bulk of these were foreign banks, primarily Dexia and Depfa, but that is simply because only Bank Holding Companies, or depository institutions (and yes, last we checked Goldman deposit branches are still sorely missing), are allowed discount window access. Keep in mind that most banks were Investment Banks and not under the BHC umbrella until after the Lehman collapse. Which is why most banks only had access to the PDCF, which is how the Fed eliminated the loophole for emergency liquidity trickling down to everyone. The majority of US investment banks therefore accessed Fed rescue funding via the PDCF, of which JPMorgan and BofNY Mellon were intermediaries due to their position as the only two tri-party repo clearers and keymasters of the shadow banking mechanism. A quick glance at the PDCF confirms that all banks, pre their conversion to Bank Holdings Companies in the week following Lehman's failure, borrowed from the Fed, if not necessarily from the Discount Window (and yes, as Bob Ivry confirmed, Goldman did borrow directly from the Discount Window on at least five occasions post its "depository status" conversion despite Gary Cohn's perjury to the contrary even as Goldman repeatedly dipped in the PDCF both before and after Lehman's failure, even setting the precedent of first pledging defaulted bonds as collateral before any other solvent bank). Yet what we are more concerned by is not the mega borrowings: after all, it makes sense that if you need tens of billions you will go to the Fed. We are far more concerned by the banks for whom the marginal amount of cash was smallest. Below we present the 171 banks that had to access the Discount Window for the paltry sum of $1,000.00. That's right - these are the banks for whom the margin of failure is as low as one thousand dollars. Any readers who have cash deposited with these banks (many of whom have not yet been visited by the FDIC's Failure Friday phenomenon), are urged to immediately remove all funds and run, Forrest, run.

The banks in question:

1St Source Bk
Albany B&Tc Na
Alpha B&Tc
Ameriana Bk Sb
American Eagle Bk
American Nb
Ameristate Bk
Andrew Johnson Bk
Atlantic Coast Bk
Banco Popular N Amer
Bank Of Alpena
Bank Of Dudley
Bank Of Elmwood
Bank Of Fl Se
Bank Of Fl Sw
Bank Of Fl Tampa Bay
Bank Of Hiawassee
Bank Of Marin
Bank Of Miami Na
Bankeast
Bb&T Fncl Fsb
Belmont B&Tc
Benjamin Franklin Bk
Beverly B&Tc Na
Boone Cty Bk
Byron Bk
Capital One Bk Usa Na
Capital One Na
Cedar Rapids B&Tc
Centier Bk
Central Il Bk
Central St Bk
Chain Bridge Bk Na
Chesapeake Bk
Citizens & Farmers Bk
Citizens Bk
Citizens Cmrc Nb
Citizens Nb
Citizens St Bk
Clear Lake B&Tc
Coastal Cmrc Bk
Coastal Fcu
Columbus Cmnty Bk
Community B&Tc
Community Bk Of Tri-Cty
Community Cap Bk
Community First Bk
Communitysouth Bk And Tr
Connecticut Bk & Tr Co
Cornerstone Cmnty Bk
Csb Bk
Dnb First Na
Eaglebank
East Carolina Bk
Eastern Mi Bk
Elizabeth St Bk
Enterprise Nb Of Palm Beac
Enterprise Nb Of Palm Beach
Equitable Bk Ssb
Farmers St Bk
Fidelity Bk
Finance Fact
Finemark Nb&Tc
First Amer B&Tc
First Century Bk
First Century Bk Na
First Chatham Bk
First Cherokee St Bk
First City Bk Of Fl
First Cmnty Bk
First Dupage Bk
First Ga Cmnty Bk
First Nb Danville
First Nb Midwest
First Nb Of Brookfield
First Nb Of Chester Cty
First Nb Of Muscatine
First T&Sb
First Tr Bk
Firstbank Fs
Franklin Svg Bk
Frederick Cty Bk
Freedom Scty Bk
Frontier Bk
Gateway B&Tc
Gateway Bk Of Cent Fl
George D Warthen Bk
Glens Falls Nb&Tc
Grand B&Tc Of Fl
Great Eastern Bk Of Fl
Greeneville Fed Bk Fsb
Harborone Cu
Heritage Bk Central Il
Hinsdale B&Tc
Home Fed Bk Corp
Home S&Lc
Home Svg Bk
Howard Bk
Idaho Tr Nat Bk
Ing Bk Fsb
Integrity First Bk
Irwin Union Bk Fsb
Killbuck Svgs Bk Co
Kress Nb
La Porte Svg Bk
Lake Cmnty Bk
Lloyds Tsb Bk Plc Miami Agy
Main St Bk
Mansfield Co-Op Bk
Marine Bk
Marine Bk Springfield
Mcintosh St Bk
Merchants Bk Of Bangor
Meredith Village Svg Bk
Midcarolina Bk
Middleburg Bk
Millennium Bcpbank Na
Minster Bk
Mitsubishi Ufj Tr & Bkg Ny Br
Morris Bk
Mount Vernon Bk
Mountain Valley Cmnty Bk
Mutual Bk
National B&Tc Of Sycamore
National Bk Indianapolis
Nationwide Bk
Nbt Bk Na
New Frontier Bk
Norstates Bk
North Bk
North Shore Bk A Co-Op Bk
North Shore Bk Fsb
North Shore Cmnty B&Tc
Northmark Bk
Northpointe Bk
Northwest Cmnty Cu
Northwest Ga Bk
Orlando Fcu
Oxford B&T
Park Ave Bk
Patterson Bk
Peachtree Bk
Peoples' Bk Arlington Heights
Pioneer Bk
Pna Bk
Premier Bk
Rainier Pacific Svg Bk
Red River Bk
River Cities Bk
Sandy Spring Bk
Security Nb Of Omaha
Signature Bk
Smartbank
Southwest Ga Bk
Statewide Bk
Sterling Bk
Strategic Cap Bk
Tower B&Tc
Traverse City St Bk
Treynor St Bk
Union Fsb
United B&T
United B&Tc Na
Unity Nb
Village B&Tc
Warren Bk
Washington Tc
Waterstone Bk
Webster Bk Na
Wheaton B&Tc
Whitesville St Bk

For those wondering what the full borrowing histogram looks like by bucket, here it is, by key distributions, with the mode between $10,000,000 and $50,000,000. And on the top side, there were 3 distinct discount window borrowings for over $50 billion, the biggest of which was for $61 billion by, surprise, AIG, and the next two were for CPFF (Commercial Paper Funding Facility) in yet another SPV shell funding scheme.

Your rating: None Average: 4.1 (10 votes)

View the original article here

Meet The 171 Banks For Which The Margin Of Failure Is One Thousand Dollars

At this point the majority of the population is transfixed by the biggest borrowers from the discount window. Yes, we know by now that the bulk of these were foreign banks, primarily Dexia and Depfa, but that is simply because only Bank Holding Companies, or depository institutions (and yes, last we checked Goldman deposit branches are still sorely missing), are allowed discount window access. Keep in mind that most banks were Investment Banks and not under the BHC umbrella until after the Lehman collapse. Which is why most banks only had access to the PDCF, which is how the Fed eliminated the loophole for emergency liquidity trickling down to everyone. The majority of US investment banks therefore accessed Fed rescue funding via the PDCF, of which JPMorgan and BofNY Mellon were intermediaries due to their position as the only two tri-party repo clearers and keymasters of the shadow banking mechanism. A quick glance at the PDCF confirms that all banks, pre their conversion to Bank Holdings Companies in the week following Lehman's failure, borrowed from the Fed, if not necessarily from the Discount Window (and yes, as Bob Ivry confirmed, Goldman did borrow directly from the Discount Window on at least five occasions post its "depository status" conversion despite Gary Cohn's perjury to the contrary even as Goldman repeatedly dipped in the PDCF both before and after Lehman's failure, even setting the precedent of first pledging defaulted bonds as collateral before any other solvent bank). Yet what we are more concerned by is not the mega borrowings: after all, it makes sense that if you need tens of billions you will go to the Fed. We are far more concerned by the banks for whom the marginal amount of cash was smallest. Below we present the 171 banks that had to access the Discount Window for the paltry sum of $1,000.00. That's right - these are the banks for whom the margin of failure is as low as one thousand dollars. Any readers who have cash deposited with these banks (many of whom have not yet been visited by the FDIC's Failure Friday phenomenon), are urged to immediately remove all funds and run, Forrest, run.

The banks in question:

1St Source Bk
Albany B&Tc Na
Alpha B&Tc
Ameriana Bk Sb
American Eagle Bk
American Nb
Ameristate Bk
Andrew Johnson Bk
Atlantic Coast Bk
Banco Popular N Amer
Bank Of Alpena
Bank Of Dudley
Bank Of Elmwood
Bank Of Fl Se
Bank Of Fl Sw
Bank Of Fl Tampa Bay
Bank Of Hiawassee
Bank Of Marin
Bank Of Miami Na
Bankeast
Bb&T Fncl Fsb
Belmont B&Tc
Benjamin Franklin Bk
Beverly B&Tc Na
Boone Cty Bk
Byron Bk
Capital One Bk Usa Na
Capital One Na
Cedar Rapids B&Tc
Centier Bk
Central Il Bk
Central St Bk
Chain Bridge Bk Na
Chesapeake Bk
Citizens & Farmers Bk
Citizens Bk
Citizens Cmrc Nb
Citizens Nb
Citizens St Bk
Clear Lake B&Tc
Coastal Cmrc Bk
Coastal Fcu
Columbus Cmnty Bk
Community B&Tc
Community Bk Of Tri-Cty
Community Cap Bk
Community First Bk
Communitysouth Bk And Tr
Connecticut Bk & Tr Co
Cornerstone Cmnty Bk
Csb Bk
Dnb First Na
Eaglebank
East Carolina Bk
Eastern Mi Bk
Elizabeth St Bk
Enterprise Nb Of Palm Beac
Enterprise Nb Of Palm Beach
Equitable Bk Ssb
Farmers St Bk
Fidelity Bk
Finance Fact
Finemark Nb&Tc
First Amer B&Tc
First Century Bk
First Century Bk Na
First Chatham Bk
First Cherokee St Bk
First City Bk Of Fl
First Cmnty Bk
First Dupage Bk
First Ga Cmnty Bk
First Nb Danville
First Nb Midwest
First Nb Of Brookfield
First Nb Of Chester Cty
First Nb Of Muscatine
First T&Sb
First Tr Bk
Firstbank Fs
Franklin Svg Bk
Frederick Cty Bk
Freedom Scty Bk
Frontier Bk
Gateway B&Tc
Gateway Bk Of Cent Fl
George D Warthen Bk
Glens Falls Nb&Tc
Grand B&Tc Of Fl
Great Eastern Bk Of Fl
Greeneville Fed Bk Fsb
Harborone Cu
Heritage Bk Central Il
Hinsdale B&Tc
Home Fed Bk Corp
Home S&Lc
Home Svg Bk
Howard Bk
Idaho Tr Nat Bk
Ing Bk Fsb
Integrity First Bk
Irwin Union Bk Fsb
Killbuck Svgs Bk Co
Kress Nb
La Porte Svg Bk
Lake Cmnty Bk
Lloyds Tsb Bk Plc Miami Agy
Main St Bk
Mansfield Co-Op Bk
Marine Bk
Marine Bk Springfield
Mcintosh St Bk
Merchants Bk Of Bangor
Meredith Village Svg Bk
Midcarolina Bk
Middleburg Bk
Millennium Bcpbank Na
Minster Bk
Mitsubishi Ufj Tr & Bkg Ny Br
Morris Bk
Mount Vernon Bk
Mountain Valley Cmnty Bk
Mutual Bk
National B&Tc Of Sycamore
National Bk Indianapolis
Nationwide Bk
Nbt Bk Na
New Frontier Bk
Norstates Bk
North Bk
North Shore Bk A Co-Op Bk
North Shore Bk Fsb
North Shore Cmnty B&Tc
Northmark Bk
Northpointe Bk
Northwest Cmnty Cu
Northwest Ga Bk
Orlando Fcu
Oxford B&T
Park Ave Bk
Patterson Bk
Peachtree Bk
Peoples' Bk Arlington Heights
Pioneer Bk
Pna Bk
Premier Bk
Rainier Pacific Svg Bk
Red River Bk
River Cities Bk
Sandy Spring Bk
Security Nb Of Omaha
Signature Bk
Smartbank
Southwest Ga Bk
Statewide Bk
Sterling Bk
Strategic Cap Bk
Tower B&Tc
Traverse City St Bk
Treynor St Bk
Union Fsb
United B&T
United B&Tc Na
Unity Nb
Village B&Tc
Warren Bk
Washington Tc
Waterstone Bk
Webster Bk Na
Wheaton B&Tc
Whitesville St Bk

For those wondering what the full borrowing histogram looks like by bucket, here it is, by key distributions, with the mode between $10,000,000 and $50,000,000. And on the top side, there were 3 distinct discount window borrowings for over $50 billion, the biggest of which was for $61 billion by, surprise, AIG, and the next two were for CPFF (Commercial Paper Funding Facility) in yet another SPV shell funding scheme.

Your rating: None Average: 4.1 (10 votes)

View the original article here

Meet The 171 Banks For Which The Margin Of Failure Is One Thousand Dollars

At this point the majority of the population is transfixed by the biggest borrowers from the discount window. Yes, we know by now that the bulk of these were foreign banks, primarily Dexia and Depfa, but that is simply because only Bank Holding Companies, or depository institutions (and yes, last we checked Goldman deposit branches are still sorely missing), are allowed discount window access. Keep in mind that most banks were Investment Banks and not under the BHC umbrella until after the Lehman collapse. Which is why most banks only had access to the PDCF, which is how the Fed eliminated the loophole for emergency liquidity trickling down to everyone. The majority of US investment banks therefore accessed Fed rescue funding via the PDCF, of which JPMorgan and BofNY Mellon were intermediaries due to their position as the only two tri-party repo clearers and keymasters of the shadow banking mechanism. A quick glance at the PDCF confirms that all banks, pre their conversion to Bank Holdings Companies in the week following Lehman's failure, borrowed from the Fed, if not necessarily from the Discount Window (and yes, as Bob Ivry confirmed, Goldman did borrow directly from the Discount Window on at least five occasions post its "depository status" conversion despite Gary Cohn's perjury to the contrary even as Goldman repeatedly dipped in the PDCF both before and after Lehman's failure, even setting the precedent of first pledging defaulted bonds as collateral before any other solvent bank). Yet what we are more concerned by is not the mega borrowings: after all, it makes sense that if you need tens of billions you will go to the Fed. We are far more concerned by the banks for whom the marginal amount of cash was smallest. Below we present the 171 banks that had to access the Discount Window for the paltry sum of $1,000.00. That's right - these are the banks for whom the margin of failure is as low as one thousand dollars. Any readers who have cash deposited with these banks (many of whom have not yet been visited by the FDIC's Failure Friday phenomenon), are urged to immediately remove all funds and run, Forrest, run.

The banks in question:

1St Source Bk
Albany B&Tc Na
Alpha B&Tc
Ameriana Bk Sb
American Eagle Bk
American Nb
Ameristate Bk
Andrew Johnson Bk
Atlantic Coast Bk
Banco Popular N Amer
Bank Of Alpena
Bank Of Dudley
Bank Of Elmwood
Bank Of Fl Se
Bank Of Fl Sw
Bank Of Fl Tampa Bay
Bank Of Hiawassee
Bank Of Marin
Bank Of Miami Na
Bankeast
Bb&T Fncl Fsb
Belmont B&Tc
Benjamin Franklin Bk
Beverly B&Tc Na
Boone Cty Bk
Byron Bk
Capital One Bk Usa Na
Capital One Na
Cedar Rapids B&Tc
Centier Bk
Central Il Bk
Central St Bk
Chain Bridge Bk Na
Chesapeake Bk
Citizens & Farmers Bk
Citizens Bk
Citizens Cmrc Nb
Citizens Nb
Citizens St Bk
Clear Lake B&Tc
Coastal Cmrc Bk
Coastal Fcu
Columbus Cmnty Bk
Community B&Tc
Community Bk Of Tri-Cty
Community Cap Bk
Community First Bk
Communitysouth Bk And Tr
Connecticut Bk & Tr Co
Cornerstone Cmnty Bk
Csb Bk
Dnb First Na
Eaglebank
East Carolina Bk
Eastern Mi Bk
Elizabeth St Bk
Enterprise Nb Of Palm Beac
Enterprise Nb Of Palm Beach
Equitable Bk Ssb
Farmers St Bk
Fidelity Bk
Finance Fact
Finemark Nb&Tc
First Amer B&Tc
First Century Bk
First Century Bk Na
First Chatham Bk
First Cherokee St Bk
First City Bk Of Fl
First Cmnty Bk
First Dupage Bk
First Ga Cmnty Bk
First Nb Danville
First Nb Midwest
First Nb Of Brookfield
First Nb Of Chester Cty
First Nb Of Muscatine
First T&Sb
First Tr Bk
Firstbank Fs
Franklin Svg Bk
Frederick Cty Bk
Freedom Scty Bk
Frontier Bk
Gateway B&Tc
Gateway Bk Of Cent Fl
George D Warthen Bk
Glens Falls Nb&Tc
Grand B&Tc Of Fl
Great Eastern Bk Of Fl
Greeneville Fed Bk Fsb
Harborone Cu
Heritage Bk Central Il
Hinsdale B&Tc
Home Fed Bk Corp
Home S&Lc
Home Svg Bk
Howard Bk
Idaho Tr Nat Bk
Ing Bk Fsb
Integrity First Bk
Irwin Union Bk Fsb
Killbuck Svgs Bk Co
Kress Nb
La Porte Svg Bk
Lake Cmnty Bk
Lloyds Tsb Bk Plc Miami Agy
Main St Bk
Mansfield Co-Op Bk
Marine Bk
Marine Bk Springfield
Mcintosh St Bk
Merchants Bk Of Bangor
Meredith Village Svg Bk
Midcarolina Bk
Middleburg Bk
Millennium Bcpbank Na
Minster Bk
Mitsubishi Ufj Tr & Bkg Ny Br
Morris Bk
Mount Vernon Bk
Mountain Valley Cmnty Bk
Mutual Bk
National B&Tc Of Sycamore
National Bk Indianapolis
Nationwide Bk
Nbt Bk Na
New Frontier Bk
Norstates Bk
North Bk
North Shore Bk A Co-Op Bk
North Shore Bk Fsb
North Shore Cmnty B&Tc
Northmark Bk
Northpointe Bk
Northwest Cmnty Cu
Northwest Ga Bk
Orlando Fcu
Oxford B&T
Park Ave Bk
Patterson Bk
Peachtree Bk
Peoples' Bk Arlington Heights
Pioneer Bk
Pna Bk
Premier Bk
Rainier Pacific Svg Bk
Red River Bk
River Cities Bk
Sandy Spring Bk
Security Nb Of Omaha
Signature Bk
Smartbank
Southwest Ga Bk
Statewide Bk
Sterling Bk
Strategic Cap Bk
Tower B&Tc
Traverse City St Bk
Treynor St Bk
Union Fsb
United B&T
United B&Tc Na
Unity Nb
Village B&Tc
Warren Bk
Washington Tc
Waterstone Bk
Webster Bk Na
Wheaton B&Tc
Whitesville St Bk

For those wondering what the full borrowing histogram looks like by bucket, here it is, by key distributions, with the mode between $10,000,000 and $50,000,000. And on the top side, there were 3 distinct discount window borrowings for over $50 billion, the biggest of which was for $61 billion by, surprise, AIG, and the next two were for CPFF (Commercial Paper Funding Facility) in yet another SPV shell funding scheme.

Your rating: None Average: 4.1 (10 votes)

View the original article here

Thursday, 31 March 2011

The Failure of Multiculturalism and How to Turn the Tide-Speech by Geert Wilders, Rome, 25 March 2011

The Failure of Multiculturalism and How to Turn the Tide

Speech by Geert Wilders, Rome, 25 March 2011

Signore e signori, ladies and gentlemen, dear friends of the Magna Carta Foundation, molte grazie. Thank you for inviting me to Rome. It is great to be here in this beautiful city which for many centuries was the capital and the centre of Europe’s Judeo-Christian culture.

Together with Jerusalem and Athens, Rome is the cradle of our Western civilization — the most advanced and superior civilization the world has ever known.

As Westerners, we share the same Judeo-Christian culture. I am from the Netherlands and you are from Italy. Our national cultures are branches of the same tree. We do not belong to multiple cultures, but to different branches of one single culture. This is why when we come to Rome, we all come home in a sense. We belong here, as we also belong in Athens and in Jerusalem.

It is important that we know where our roots are. If we lose them we become deracinated. We become men and women without a culture.

I am here today to talk about multiculturalism. This term has a number of different meanings. I use the term to refer to a specific political ideology. It advocates that all cultures are equal. If they are equal it follows that the state is not allowed to promote any specific cultural values as central and dominant. In other words: multiculturalism holds that the state should not promote a leitkultur, which immigrants have to accept if they want to live in our midst.

It is this ideology of cultural relativism which the German Chancellor Angela Merkel recently referred to when she said that multiculturalism has proved “an absolute failure.”

My friends, I dare say that we have known this all along. Indeed, the premise of the multiculturalist ideology is wrong. Cultures are not equal. They are different, because their roots are different. That is why the multiculturalists try to destroy our roots.

Rome is a very appropriate place to address these issues. There is an old saying which people of our Western culture are all familiar with. “When in Rome, do as the Romans do,” it says. This is an obvious truth: If you move somewhere, you must adapt to the laws and customs of the land.

The multicultural society has undermined this rule of common sense and decency. The multicultural society tells the newcomers who settle in our cities and villages: You are free to behave contrary to our norms and values. Because your norms and values are just as good, perhaps even better, than ours.

It is, indeed, appropriate to discuss these matters here in Rome, because the history of Rome also serves as a warning.

Will Durant, the famous 20th century American historian, wrote that “A great civilization cannot be destroyed from outside if it has not already destroyed itself from within.” This is exactly what happened here, in Rome, 16 centuries ago.

In the 5th century, the Roman Empire fell to the Germanic Barbarians. There is no doubt that the Roman civilization was far superior to that of the Barbarians. And yet, Rome fell. Rome fell because it had suffered a loss of belief in its own civilization. It had lost the will to stand up and fight for survival.

Rome did not fall overnight. Rome fell gradually. The Romans scarcely noticed what was happening. They did not perceive the immigration of the Barbarians as a threat until it was too late. For decades, Germanic Barbarians, attracted by the prosperity of the Empire, had been crossing the border.

At first, the attraction of the Empire on newcomers could be seen as a sign of the cultural, political and economic superiority of Rome. People came to find a better life which their own culture could not provide. But then, on December 31st in the year 406, the Rhine froze and tens of thousands of Germanic Barbarians, crossed the river, flooded the Empire and went on a rampage, destroying every city they passed. In 410, Rome was sacked.

The fall of Rome was a traumatic experience. Numerous books have been written about the cataclysmal event and Europeans were warned not to make the same mistake again. In 1899, in his book ‘The River War,’ Winston Churchill warned that Islam is threatening Europe in the same way as the Barbarians once threatened Rome. “Mohammedanism,” Churchill wrote — I quote — “is a militant and proselytizing faith. No stronger retrograde force exists in the World. […] The civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.” End of quote.

Churchill is right. However, if Europe falls, it will fall because, like ancient Rome, it no longer believes in the superiority of its own civilization. It will fall because it foolishly believes that all cultures are equal and that, consequently, there is no reason why we should fight for our own culture in order to preserve it.

This failure to defend our own culture has turned immigration into the most dangerous threat that can be used against the West. Multiculturalism has made us so tolerant that we tolerate the intolerant.

Ladies and gentlemen, make no mistake: Our opponents are keenly aware of our weakness. They realize that the pattern which led to the fall of Rome, is at play today in the West. They are keenly aware of the importance of Rome as a symbol of the West. Over and over again they hint at the fall of Rome. Rome is constantly on their minds.

* The former Turkish Prime Minister Erbakan said — I quote: “The whole of Europe will become Islamic. We will conquer Rome”.
* Yunis al-Astal, a Hamas cleric and member of the Palestinian Parliament said — I quote: “Very soon Rome will be conquered.”
* Ali Al-Faqir, the former Jordanian Minister of Religion, stated that — I quote: “Islam will conquer Rome.”
* Sheikh Muhammad al-Arifi, imam of the mosque of the Saudi Defence Academy, said — I quote: “We will control Rome and introduce Islam in it.”

Our opponents are hoping for an event that is akin to the freezing of the Rhine in 406, when thousands of immigrants will be given an easy opportunity to cross massively into the West.

* In a 1974 speech to the UN, the Algerian President Houari Boumédienne, said — I quote: “One day, millions of men will leave the Southern Hemisphere to go to the Northern Hemisphere. And they will not go there as friends. Because they will go there to conquer it. And they will conquer it with their sons. The wombs of our women will give us victory.” End of quote.
* Libyan dictator Kadhafi said, I quote: “There are tens of millions of Muslims in the European continent today and their number is on the increase. This is the clear indication that the European continent will be converted into Islam. Europe will one day soon be a Muslim continent.” End of quote.

Our opponents are aiming for a repetition of the fall of Rome in the 5th century and want to use exactly the same methods. “The strategy of exporting human beings and having them breed in abundance is the simplest way to take possession of a territory,” warned the famous Italian author Oriana Fallaci.

However, the situation today could be worse than it was when the Roman Empire fell. The Germanic Barbarians who overran Rome were not driven by an ideology. After having sacked Rome, they eventually adopted the Judeo-Christian civilization of Rome. They destroyed Rome because they wanted its riches, but they realized and recognized that Roman civilization was superior to their own Barbaric culture.

Having destroyed Rome, the Germanic tribes eventually tried to rebuild it. In 800, the Frankish leader Charlemagne had himself crowned Roman Emperor. Three hundred years later, the Franks and the other Europeans would go on the Crusades in defence of their Christian culture. The Crusades were as Oriana Fallaci wrote — I quote — a “counter-offensive designed to stem Islamic expansionism in Europe.” Rome had fallen, but like a phoenix it had risen again.

Contrary to the Barbarians which confronted Rome, the followers of Muhammad are driven by an ideology which they want to impose on us.

Islam is a totalitarian ideology. Islamic Shariah law supervises every detail of life. Islam is not compatible with our Western way of life. Islam is a threat to our values. Respect for people who think otherwise, the equality of men and women, the equality of homosexuals and heterosexuals, respect for Christians, Jews, unbelievers and apostates, the separation of church and state, freedom of speech, they are all under pressure because of islamization.

Europe is islamizing at a rapid pace. Many European cities have large islamic concentrations. In some neighbourhoods, Islamic regulations are already being enforced. Women’s rights are being trampled. We are confronted with headscarves and burqa’s, polygamy, female genital mutilation, honour-killings. “In each one of our cities” says Oriana Fallaci, “there is a second city, a state within the state, a government within the government. A Muslim city, a city ruled by the Koran.” — End of quote.

Ladies and gentlemen, make no mistake: The multiculturalist Left is facilitating islamization. Leftist multiculturalists are cheering for every new shariah bank, for every new islamic school, for every new mosque. Multiculturalists consider Islam as being equal to our own culture. Shariah law or democracy? Islam or freedom? It doesn’t really matter to them. But it does matter to us. The entire leftist elite is guilty of practising cultural relativism. Universities, churches, trade unions, the media, politicians. They are all betraying our hard-won liberties.

Ladies and gentlemen, what is happening in Europe today has to some extent been deliberately planned

In October 2009, Andrew Neather, the former advisor of British Prime Minister Tony Blair, confirmed that the British Government had deliberately organized mass immigration as part of a social engineering project. The Blair Government wanted to — I quote — “make the UK truly multicultural.” To achieve this end, 2.3 million foreigners were allowed to enter Britain between 2000 and 2009. Neather says this policy has “enriched” Britain.

Ordinary people, however, do not consider the decline of societal cohesion, the rise of crime, the transformation of their old neighborhoods into no-go zones, to be an “enrichment.”

Ordinary people are well aware that they are witnessing a population replacement phenomenon. Ordinary people feel attached to the civilization which their ancestors created. They do not want it to be replaced by a multicultural society where the values of the immigrants are considered as good as their own. It is not xenophobia or islamophobia to consider our Western culture as superior to other cultures — it is plain common sense.

Fortunately, we are still living in a democracy. The opinion of ordinary people still matters. I am the leader of the Dutch Party of Freedom which aims to halt the Islamization process and defend the traditional values and liberties in the Netherlands. The Party of Freedom is the fastest growing party in the Netherlands.

Because the message of my party is so important, I support initiatives to establish similar parties in other countries, such as Germany, France and the United Kingdom, where they do not yet exist. Last month, a poll in Britain showed that a staggering 48 percent of the British would consider supporting a non-fascist and non-violent party that vows to crack down on immigration and Islamic extremists and restrict the building of mosques. In October last year, I was in Berlin where I gave a keynote speech at a meeting of Die Freiheit, a newly established party led by René Stadtkewitz, a former Christian-Democrat. German polls indicate that such a party has a potential of 20 percent of the electorate.

My speech, in which I urged the Germans to stop feeling ashamed about their German identity drew a lot of media attention. Two weeks later, German Chancellor Angela Merkel stated that multiculturalism is “an absolute failure.” Horst Seehofer, the leader of the Bavarian Christian-Democrats, was even more outspoken. “Multiculturalism is dead,” he said.

Last month, French President Nicolas Sarkozy said: “We have been too concerned about the identity of the immigrant and not enough about the identity of the country that was receiving him.” — End of quote.

Five weeks ago, British Prime Minister David Cameron blamed multiculturalism for Islamic extremism. “We have allowed the weakening of our collective identity,” he said. “Under the doctrine of state multiculturalism, we have encouraged different cultures to live […] apart from the mainstream.” — End of quote.

In his speech, David Cameron still makes a distinction between the Islamist ideology, which he calls extremist and dangerous, and Islam, which he says is peaceful religion. I do not share this view, and neither did Cameron’s great predecessor Winston Churchill. Stating that Islam is peaceful is a multiculturalist dogma which is contrary to the truth.

Politicians such as Merkel. Sarkozy and Cameron still do not seem to have understood what the problem really is. Nevertheless, the fact that they feel compelled to distance themselves from multiculturalism is a clear indication that they realize they need to pay lip-service to what the majority of their populations have long understood. Namely that the massive influx of immigrants from Islamic countries is the most negative development that Europe has known in the past 50 years.

Yesterday, a prestigious poll in the Netherlands revealed that 50 percent of the Dutch are of the opinion that Islam and democracy are not compatible, while 42 percent think they are. Even two thirds of the voters of the Liberal Party and of the Christian-Democrat Party are convinced that Islam and democracy are not compatible.

This, then, is the political legacy of multiculturalism. While the parties of the Left have found themselves a new electorate, the establishment parties of the Right still harbour their belief that Islam is a religion of peace on a par with peaceful religions such as Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism and others.

The problem with multiculturalism is a refusal to see reality. The reality that our civilization is superior, and the reality that Islam is a dangerous ideology.

Today, we are confronted with political unrest in the Arab countries. Autocratic regimes, such as that of Ben Ali in Tunisia, Mubarak in Egypt, Kadhafi in Libya, the Khalifa dynasty in Bahrain, and others, have been toppled or are under attack. The Arab peoples long for freedom. This is only natural. However, the ideology and culture of Islam is so deeply entrenched in these countries that real freedom is simply impossible. As long as Islam remains dominant there can be no real freedom.

Let us face reality. On March 8, the International Women’s Day, 300 women demonstrated on Cairo’s Tahrir Square in post-Mubarak Egypt. Within minutes, the women were charged by a group of bearded men, who beat them up and dragged them away. Some were even sexually assaulted. The police did not interfere. This is the new Egypt: On Monday, people demonstrate for freedom; on Tuesday, the same people beat up women because they, too, demand freedom.

I fear that in Islamic countries, democracy will not lead to real freedom. A survey by the American Pew Center found that 59 percent of Egyptians prefer democracy to any other form of government. However, 85 percent say that Islam’s influence on politics is good, 82 percent believe that adulterers should be stoned, 84 percent want the death penalty for apostates, and 77 percent say that thieves should be flogged or have their hands cut off.

Ronald Reagan was right when he called Kadhafi a “mad dog.” However, we should not harbor the illusion that there can be real freedom and real democracy in a country where Islam is dominant. There is no doubt that the results of the Pew survey in Egypt apply in Libya, too. It is not in our interest to bring the Muslim Brotherhood to power in Tripoli and install a khalifate in Libya.

Of course, the world has to stop Kadhafi from killing his own people. However, as UN Resolution 1973 stated last week, this is primarily the responsibility of — I quote — “in particular [the] States of the region.” End of quote. Why does a country like the Netherlands have to contribute six F16 fighter jets to enforce the arms embargo in Libya, while Saudi Arabia does not contribute a single plane from its fleet of nearly 300 fighter jets? Arabs are dying, but the Arab countries are shirking their responsibilities.

And one of the major threats of the current crisis is not even addressed by our leaders: How are we going to prevent that thousands of economic fugitives and fortune seekers cross the Mediterranean and arrive at place like Lampedusa? Now that Tunisia is liberated, young Tunisians should help to rebuild their country instead of leaving for Lampedusa. Europe cannot afford another influx of thousands of refugees.

Ladies and gentlemen,

It is time to wake up. We need to confront reality and we need to speak the truth. The truth is that Islam is evil, and the reality is that Islam is a threat to us.

Before I continue I want to make clear, however, that I do not have a problem with Muslims as such. There are many moderate Muslims. That is why I always make a clear distinction between the people and the ideology, between Muslims and Islam. There are many moderate Muslims, but there is no such thing as a moderate Islam.

Islam strives for world domination. The koran commands Muslims to exercise jihad and impose shariah law.

Telling the truth about immigration and warning that Islam might not be as benevolent as the ruling elite says, has been made a hate speech crime in several EU member states. As you probably know, I have been brought to court on charges of hate speech. That is the paradox of the multicultural society. It claims to be pluralistic, but allows only one point of view of world affairs, namely that all cultures are equal and that they are all good.

The fact that we are treated as criminals for telling the truth must not, however, deter us. The truth that Islam is evil has always been obvious to our ancestors. That is why they fought. It was very clear to them that our civilization was far superior to Islam.

It is not difficult to understand why our culture is far better than Islam. We Europeans, whether we be Christians, Jews, agnostics or atheists, believe in reason. We have always known that nothing good could be expected from Islam.

While our culture is rooted in Jerusalem, Athens and Rome, Islam’s roots are the desert and the brain of Muhammad. Our ancestors understood the consequences very well. The Koran, wrote the historian Theophanes, who lived in the second half of the 8th century, is based on hallucinations.

“Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman,” the Byzantine Emperor Manuel II said in 1391, adding: “God is not pleased by blood — and not acting reasonable is contrary to God’s nature.”

For 1,400 years, Westerners have been criticizing Islam and its founder because they recognized evil when they saw it. But then, suddenly, in the last decades of the past century, especially from the 1970s onwards, Western intellectuals stopped doing so.

The moral and cultural relativism of Marxism led the West’s political and intellectual elites to adopt a utopian belief in a universal brotherhood of mankind.

Multiculturalism is a culture of repudiation of Europe’s heritage and freedoms. It weakens the West day by day. It leads to the self-censorship of the media and academia, the collapse of the education system, the emasculation of the churches, the subversion of the nation-state, the break-down of our free society.

While today — at last — our leaders seem to realize what a disastrous failure multiculturalism has been, multiculturalism is not dead yet. More is needed to defeat multiculturalism than the simple proclamations that it has been an “absolute failure.” What is needed is that we turn the tide of Islamization.

There are a few things which we can do in this regard.

One thing which we should do is to oppose the introduction of Sharia or Islamic law in our countries. In about a dozen states in the United States, legislation is currently being introduced to prevent the introduction of Sharia. In early May, I will be travelling to the U.S. to express my support to these initiatives. We should consider similar measures in Europe.

Another thing which we should do is support Muslims who want to leave Islam. An International Women’s Day is useless in the Arab world if there is no International Leave Islam Day. I propose the introduction of such a day in which we can honor the courageous men and women who want to leave Islam. Perhaps we can pick a symbolic date for such a day and establish an annual prize for an individual who has turned his back on Islam or an organization which helps people to liberate themselves from Islam. It is very easy to become a Muslim. All one has to do is to pronounce the Shahada, the Islamic creed, which says — I quote “There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.” It should be equally easy to leave Islam by pronouncing a counter-Shahada, which says “I leave Islam and join humankind.”

A third measure to turn the tide of Islamization is to reemphasize the sovereignty of the nation-state. The peoples of the free world will only be able to fight back against Islam if they can rally around a flag with which they can identify. This flag, symbolizing pre-political loyalty, can only be the flag of our nation. In the West, our freedoms are embodied in our nation-states. This is why the multiculturalists are hostile to the nation-state and aim to destroy it.

National identity is an inclusive identity: It welcomes everyone, whatever his religion or race, who is willing to assimilate into a nation by sharing the fate and future of a people. It ties the individual to an inheritance, a tradition, a loyalty, and a culture.

I want to elaborate a bit on this since we are gathered here today in Rome. Again, it is appropriate that we are in Rome. In this city, in 1957, and — what an ironic coincidence — on this very day, the 25th of March, the Treaty of Rome was signed. This Treaty obliges the member states of the European Union to aim for “an ever closer union.”

Unfortunately, this union, like other multinational organizations, has become one of the vehicles for the promotion of multiculturalism. The EU has fallen in the hands of a multiculturalist elite who by undermining national sovereignty destroy the capacity of the peoples of Europe to democratically decide their own future.

The new government in my country, which is supported by my party, wants to restrict immigration. That is what our voters want. But we are confronted by the fact that our policies have to a large extent been outsourced to “Europe” and that our voters no longer have a direct say over their own future.

On account of international treaties, EU legislation prevails over national legislation and cannot be reversed by national parliaments. Indeed, in 2008, the European Court of Justice, the highest court in the EU, annulled both Irish and Danish immigration legislation. The Court stated that national law is subordinate to whatever is ruled on the European level. In March 2010, the European Court of Justice annulled Dutch legislation restricting family reunification for immigrants on welfare.

The ease with which Europe’s political elite conducts an immigration policy aimed at the deracination of Europe shows the insensitivity of this elite. It willingly sacrifices its own people to its political goal, without any consideration for the people involved.

Lower class blue-collar people have been driven from their neighborhoods. There is no respect for their democratic vote. On the contrary, people who do not agree with the multiculturalist schemes are considered to be racists and xenophobes, while the undefined offence of “racism and xenophobia” has been made central to all moral pronouncements by the European Union, the Council of Europe, the United Nations, and other supra-national organizations. This represents a systematic assault by the elite on the ordinary feelings of national loyalty.

In 2008, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe stated that the member-states must — I quote — “condemn and combat Islamophobia” and ensure “that school textbooks do not portray Islam as a hostile or threatening religion.” — end of quote.

In March 2010, the United Nations Human Rights Council passed a resolution criminalizing so-called “defamation of religions.” The resolution, authored by Pakistan, mentions only one religion by name: Islam. With its 57 member states the Organization of the Islamic Conference systematically uses its voting power in the UN to subvert the concept of freedom and human rights. In 1990, the OIC rejected the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and replaced it by the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, which states in articles 24 that — I quote — “All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Sharia.” — end of quote.

This “human rights” charade has to stop if Western civilization wants to survive. Human rights exist for the protection of individuals, not religions and ideologies.

The EU’s aim, meanwhile, seems to be to destroy the old sovereign nations and replace them by new provincial identities, which are all clones of each other. Britanistan will not differ from Netherlandistan, nor Germanistan from Italiastan, or any other province of the European superstate in the making.

We must reclaim Europe. We can only do so by giving political power back to the nation-state. By defending the nation-states which we love, we defend our own identity. By defending our identity, we defend who we are and what we are against those who want to deracinate us. Against those who want to cut us from our roots, so that our culture withers away and dies.

My friends,

Twenty years after the ordinary people, Europe’s mainstream conservative leaders, such as Merkel, Sarkozy and Cameron, have finally — better late than never — come to the obvious conclusion, namely that multiculturalism is a failure. However, they do not have a plan to remedy the situation.

Ladies and gentlemen, it is time for change. We must make haste. Time is running out. Ronald Reagan said: “We need to act today, to preserve tomorrow”. That is why I propose the following measures in order to preserve our freedom:

First, we will have to defend freedom of speech. It is the most important of our liberties. If we are free to speak, we will be able to tell people the truth and they will realize what is at stake.

Second, we will have to end cultural relativism. To the multiculturalists, we must proudly proclaim: Our Western culture is far superior to the Islamic culture. Only when we are convinced of that, we will be willing to fight for our own identity.

Third, we will have to stop Islamization. Because more Islam means less freedom. We must stop immigration from Islamic countries, we must expel criminal immigrants, we must forbid the construction of new mosques. There is enough Islam in Europe already. Immigrants must assimilate and adapt to our values: When in Rome, do as the Romans do.

Fourth, we must restore the supremacy and sovereignty of the nation-state. Because we are citizens of these states, we can take pride in them. We love our nation because they are our home, because they are the legacy which our fathers bestowed on us and which we want to bestow on our children. We are not multiculturalists, we are patriots. And because we are patriots, we are willing to fight for freedom.

Let me end with a final — and a positive — remark: Though the situation is bad and multiculturalism is still predominant, we are in better shape than the Roman Empire was before its fall.

The Roman Empire was not a democracy. The Romans did not have freedom of speech. We are the free men of the West. We do not fight for an Empire, we fight for ourselves. We fight for our national republics. You fight for Italy, I fight for the Netherlands, others fight for France, Germany, Britain, Denmark or Spain. Together we stand. Together we represent the nations of Europe.

I am confident that if we can safeguard freedom of speech and democracy, our civilization will be able to survive. Europe will not fall. We, Europe’s patriots, will not allow it.

Thank you very much.

http://leejohnbarnes.blogspot.com/2011/03/gates-of-vienna-geert-wilders-speaks.html


View the original article here

Sunday, 27 March 2011

FuKuSHiMa: CoRRuPTioN, SySTeMiC FaiLuRe oR BoTH?

[T]here are known knowns; there are things we know we know.

We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know.

But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know.

Rummy

Before I get started, I want to make two initial points:

First, if you go and look at Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) published last October, Japan was ranked 17 and the United States was ranked 22 (a ranking of one being least corrupt). For this purpose, corruption is defined as "the abuse of entrusted power for economic gain." We all know there are many shades and gradations of "corruption."

No matter how you cut it, the United States is hardly in a position to call the Japanese kettle black, particularly when you examine the sorry state of our captive/revolving door regulatory system. This is one of many reasons why I find the Fukushima catastrophe particularly relevant at this time. This is not just about the viability of nuclear power, it is about the way government institutions assess risks and hazards, how policies are framed and how those policies are then enforced vis a vis the private sector. We have more than a little to be concerned about given recent events.

Second, as I have said in other posts, there is a tremendous human tragedy unfolding in Northern Japan. That tragedy has by and large dropped off the front pages of the MSM. As a matter of our common decency and humanity, we should remember this and strive to do whatever each of us can do to help. Help, does not necessarily mean sending money. I for one do not believe money or the lack thereof is what is causing the suffering going on at this time. 

I don't mean to preach here. I merely want to point out that one can focus attention on the unfolding nuclear crisis without necessarily debasing the importance of the human tragedy. Indeed, the former is having a huge impact on the Japanese government's ability to deal effectively with the latter. Moreover, thousands of evacuees are unable to get on with recovering their personal lives because of the the unfolding nuclear crisis.

Known Knowns

I am not an engineer or scientist. But I am a student of human nature and the interaction of government and private sector. There are a number of "known knowns" at this point. I will hit upon two that jump out at me.

First, the nuclear power industry in Japan, of which TEPCO is the leading private sector player, has a long and storied history of lying and falsifying data. It is very easy to research this point. Look for the Articles written by Mark Johnston. I will only say that forcing a change of management at the top of TEPCO is not a panacea for curing an embedded culture of deception in the name of the mother ship and the attendant forms of information opacity. CEO Shimizu, who is apparently vacationing with King Abdullah, was clearly not the guy to remediate the problem.

On the other hand, I am not certain that the opacity we are now seeing is primarily caused by coordinated management deception, "face saving" or good old Yankee C.Y.A.S. (cover your ass syndrome). TEPCO is under siege and events are spinning rapidly and skirting the edge. They are "frantically" trying to regain control or "stabilize the situation." I suspect what we are seeing is the inability of the Japanese "collective" style of management and government oversight to decisively keep up with a crisis event of this complexity and magnitude. Almost two weeks ago, TEPCO proposed handing the whole thing over the the government. Why? 

Meanwhile, every day brings a new question. Yesterday I was wondering how is it that nobody started planning around the need to bring in fresh water 2 weeks ago? Did someone just have a eureka moment before the weekend? Yikes, we better switch to fresh water or the reactor will fill with sea salt! Call the US Navy barge crew.

Today I am wondering why everyone is surprised that the sea is so contaminated. They have been spraying tons of sea water on the thing for over a week. Where else is the run off going to go. Now they suddenly realized that they have to remove the contaminated water from the reactor buildings and they are "frantically" trying to figure out how to do that. Hey Abbott!!!!! 

The company also apologized for communication problems leading to the injuries on Thursday. To me, ignoring instrument measurements and warnings is a curious communication problem. Perhaps someone was told not to worry?

In the midst of all this, I have lost track of where precisely operation extension chord stands. 

My point here is, the "Japanese way" of managing human endeavors is not ideally suited for dealing with so many turbulent events occurring simultaneously or in quick succession. Remarkably, the government's point man for dealing with the nuclear disaster was appointed only yesterday. He is the former Transportation Minister. I am sure he knows how to keep a schedule.

Conversely, what do you think the government's calculus of information flow is given the paramount objective of maintaining public order in the most orderly country in the world behind Switzerland? How many disaster movies of recent vintage have exhausted that imponderable?

Second known, known. This one is very simple. The management of TEPCO was warned of the very real possibility that a tsunami exceeding the design parameters of the site could strike. Even if they listened to the warning, it is unclear that they could have taken preventive measures in time to avert the disaster. But the point is they refused to accept a very real scenario given other recent events in the region such as the SE Asian tsunami and its impact on a reactor site in India. According to news reports, the government agencies involved did not overtly object.

Here is my way of looking at these risks. I don't know if Japan could or could not exist without greater Tokyo. What I do know is that a Japan without an inhabitable Tokyo would be a very very different Japan indeed. It's not like everyone could just pick up and move to Montana soon. For that reason alone, one would think that all risk assessment exercises should have been very very very conservatively framed. 

Known Unknowns

Once again, there are many of these flying around. But here are the two that stand out from my layman's perspective.

The pro-nuclear pundits keep telling us this is not the same as Chernobyl. I would agree at face value that this appears not to be Chernobyl.

But the town of Chernobyl is not Tokyo either. I don't know what the tipping point is for telling everyone it's time to leave Dodge City and I doubt anyone knows the answer to that question in Tokyo. All we keep hearing is stay calm please. Exactly how calm would you be if this was your city?  We know what expatriates have been told to do by their governments. For the record, I'm not saying people shouldn't be calm.  They'd better be.

But just think about it, the government announces the crisis is a 6 out of 7 and tells you to please remain calm. Does that mean, as a matter of human nature, you don't start thinking about your plan B?

Second, it is very difficult is it not, to keep up with six chess matches running simultaneously. Particularly when the state of play in each match impacts the ability of the player to properly attend to the other ongoing matches. That is what is happening in real time. If one reactor starts smoking or steaming or leaking or who knows what else, everything else is impacted. This means if one of these things really goes big time, you lose control of the whole site.

BTW, who is the Gary Kasparov running the show? What are his credentials?

This is truly frightening to consider. No wonder the Prime Minster is "gravely concerned." There is no point in trying to spin this.

Just as an aside, I thought I would call attention to the fact that Tokyo, being the center of Japan Inc., has more than its fair share of above average engineering intellects watching the evening news. I wonder what they are all thinking cooly and calmly.

Unknown Unknowns

The one's we don't know we don't know. When we refer to outliers and Black Swans, this is what is being referred to. Things we don't know we don't know. When I read all the technical summaries released on a daily basis and look at the debris strewn multi-reactor site, I think about this.

Right now,  every day that whole site is one big unknown unknown.

Here's an unknown for you: Is the guy that is saying there is nothing to worry about willing to indulge in some Fukushima sushi with a bottle of fresh tap water?

CR

OoPs make it a 6, I'm to tired to get the water bucket again ;-)

PIR

IT

IT   

Fish

Life imitating cartoons.

Happy 80th Birthday Mr Spock...

Spock

Jim: Mr Spock are you getting any readings on those instruments?

Spock: Yes, sir. There's a...tiger, tiger burning bright into the forest of the night.

VC

Your rating: None Average: 5 (10 votes)

View the original article here

Monday, 7 March 2011

Will Euro Failure Usher in World Currency?

Thursday, March 03, 2011 – by  Staff Report

German-Irish brinkmanship raises EMU stakes … German bail-out fatigue and fierce resistance to EMU “rescue creep” threaten to derail a eurozone deal this month, and risk triggering a fresh round of Europe’s debt crisis. The EU’s new criteria for bank stress tests to be agreed this week adds another risk. Ireland’s new leader Enda Kenny faces a daunting task as he tries to change the terms of his country’s €67bn (£57b EU-IMF package, either by cutting the penal rate of interest or changing the remit of the rescue fund to help Ireland claw its way out of a debt trap. – UK Telegraph

Dominant Social Theme: So much to muddle through. The EU will survive.

Free-Market Analysis: The Telegraph’s Ambrose Evans-Pritchard has published one of his usual insightful analyses on the upcoming difficulties the Irish will face in renegotiating debt payments to prop up failing Irish banks (see article excerpt above). Irish bank bonds are held by German and French banks, among others, and there has been overwhelming pressure placed on Ireland ‘s government to borrow money, raise taxes and cut expenses so as to ensure the ailing banks do not founder entirely.

The stresses placed on the Irish economy and Irish taxpayers in particular are tremendous. Iceland chose not to support its insolvent banks and as a result the Icelandic economy has show some improvement; the Irish economy still lags badly and there is no expectation that it will much improve; in fact it is likely to end in a kind of national bankruptcy or popular rebellion.

For this reason, the Irish turned to the country’s main opposition party, Fine Gael, in recent elections to provide a clear alternative to what has already been agreed upon with the EU. Nonetheless, as Evans-Pritchard shows, there are grave obstacles in the way of renegotiating an agreement with the EU that provided bank bailout money to stabilize Irish finances last year.

Much of the problem with renegotiating the current, likely unsupportable, agreement lies with Germany itself. Most recently it has been suggested that the EU could issue “eurobonds” that would considerably ease the financial crunch that countries like Ireland face. But Angela’s Merkel’s three-party German coalition is opposed to the eurobond idea, Evans-Pritchard reports, because ultimately all EU countries would end up guaranteeing such bonds. The coalition intends to put any agreement reached by the EU to a vote in the Bundestag. More than this, “A group of 189 German professors has [warned] of ‘fatal consequences for the whole process of European integration’ if the EU crosses the Rubicon to a de facto debt union.”

“I cannot remember any occasion when lawmakers have set guidance like this before: Merkel has very little leeway,” Pritchard-Evans quotes Hans Redeker, currency chief at BNP Paribas as saying. “There is going to be disappointment at the summit and that will make life even harder for the EMU periphery.” Meanwhile, an oil spike will considerably reduce EU growth and make the Irish economy (among others) even less responsive. Such “peripheral countries” are most at risk from exogenous financial difficulties.

Merkel’s administration has an alternative plan to offer Eurocrats. In return for expanding the bailout pool, those recipients of aid will agree to an intrusive EU (German) regulatory and inspection reign. This has already met stiff resistance from the Irish and others. Resentments from World War II are still evident, especially in such countries as Greece, and the perception is that Germany is trying to use its financial clout to gain in peacetime the European empire it could not claim long ago by war.

The European Commission, Evans-Pritchard points out, has drafted a compromise plan, but in Germany, already, it is seen as more of the same. Outgoing Bundesbank chief Axel Weber – a vehement critic of any agreement that would further enmesh Germany financially into third-party bailouts – has attacked the plan, claiming it would eventually resolve itself into a move toward a eurobond program. Germany’s views on this matter are increasingly shared in Holland and Finland – other so-called “Northern” states that are considerably more solvent than Southern ones.

Ireland currently pays nearly 6 percent for EU loans, versus the EU funding cost of 2.6 percent and there is no guarantee that the carrying costs won’t rise as the EU gradually continues its recovery from the 2008 crisis. Evans Pritchard believes the new Irish regime has one considerable weapon in its arsenal, which is to “threaten ‘haircuts’ on senior bank creditors if the EU refuses to compromise, a move that might set off EMU-wide contagion and inflict big losses on German Landesbanken.” To play it, he concludes, would encourage the wrath of the eurozone. To allow the situation to remain as it is will reignite the wrath of the voters that the just handed a resounding defeat to the previous regime that negotiated the current bailout terms. The alternatives could not be starker.

Evans-Pritchard’s analysis ceases with the observation of the various alternatives. But we want to suggest a fourth option here – one that no respectable mainstream publication would likely speculate on. Our idea is that at this point the euro is actually being set up for failure. The current dilemma may be no accident and is in fact perfectly predictable. We have argued in the past that the eurozone is an integral part of the Anglo-American power elite’s plans for closer global governance. But the EU itself has harmonized much of Europe’s regulatory disparities and in a sense, even without full political power, has turned the Eurozone into a homogenous whole.

It may be that the euro itself is expendable at this point. The idea would be, of course, that as the euro continues to falter, an alternative currency must be waiting in the wings. The Anglosphere has such a currency available in the IMF’s SDRs, which can be resolved into an even more fungible currency called the “bancor” as economist John Maynard Keynes suggested 50 years ago.

While this may sound somewhat unrealistic, to say the least, we would argue (as Devil’s advocate) that it is sociopolitical and economic chaos that drives sizable economic changes. Is such chaos looming on the horizon? It seems to us that the power elite has already begun to inflict it on the world, creating regime change throughout the Middle East and Africa. We’ve covered Western culpability in this regard in numerous articles. We would argue that any elite capable of setting off controlled revolutions in a dozen countries is certainly willing to introduce similar chaos in the West.

What signs to do we see? We think that Western central banking policies may have deliberately introduced raging price inflation in developed and developing countries. We believe the sudden advent of food scarcity (to be followed by water scarcity) may be no accident either. All these factors are controllable via money power and we it would seem to us, arguably anyway, that this controlled – and expanding – chaos is meant to be.

In America, Barack Obama has added trillions to the national debt and made George Bush’s profligacy look almost modest by comparison. Again, we believe that this may be a deliberate destabilization of the nation’s fiscal and monetary situation. Homeland Security’s authoritarian depredations are acting as deliberate incitements as well. With 40 million on food stamps, 20 percent unemployment (at least), mounting price inflation, failing wars, 10-percent foreclosures and a polarized political environment, we would tend to believe that America is on the verge of the kinds of civil disturbances that Europe is likely to face as the weather warms.

It is not the civil unrest itself that will make the difference but the inflationary decline of the dollar reserve system. The combination of monetary destabilization, social unrest and military tension (the West versus the growing “threat” of a (controlled) faux-militant Islam) could create the necessity for a grand G-20 compromise that could usher in a new monetary environment administered by the IMF under the auspices of the UN. At that point, all that would be needed to create a UN-driven “new world order” is a taxing authority, something the UN has been suggesting with increased enthusiasm for the past several years.

Conclusion: Certainly all the above sounds radically speculative but we have been astonished at the boldness – desperation? – of the power elite’s depredations in the past few years. Destabilizing a quarter of the world is apparently not beyond it and we would not put it past this shadowy cabal to purposefully begin to destabilize the euro as they have evidently destabilized the dollar. China has all but broken away from the dollar-reserve system in the past months and Russia shall not be far behind in our opinion. We do not yet foresee the exact mechanisms that might resolve themselves into a new monetary system but in this article we have done our best to pursue the issue logically. Far-fetched? Sure. But no more than many other events occurring in the world today.

http://www.thedailybell.com/1816/Will-Euro-Failure-Usher-in-World-Currency.html

No, not far fetched at all….

IT’S TIME FOR GADAFFI TO GO…CAMERON

IS GETTING OBSESSED…………..CONCENTRATE ON THIS COUNTRY IDIOT!!

Sat Apr 12 18:51:06 2003
208.152.73.35

To All,

I forward this a second time in case any of you missed it the first time I sent it. Most people are aware of the term “Big Brother” but I am often amazed at how few know it came from this classic novel.

If you haven’t read “1984? it is safe to say, “you don’t know what you are missing”. “1984? was written by a member of the secret society known as “The Fabians”. The way I heard this part of it, George Orwell (the pen-name) “woke up” to realize what he was involved in as this “society” was nothing more than a think tank for “social engineering”. Not knowing a better way to tell the truth of what was being PLANNED for the world’s future (and fearing for his life), he warned us in “story form”. What is foretold in “1984? has been coming to fruition for years. Written in 1948 (if memory serves), how could the author have possibly even known of the technology he addresses in the writing ?

The principle is simple; evil forces operating through willing “change agents” (we call them men and women “leaders”) intend to be your god. They intend to know and orchestrate everything in your life. The antithesis of God.

Paperbacks and hard cover copies are getting harder and harder to find. you might want to down-load this printing.

LLTF,
Roland

Hello,

This was sent to me for free and I thought I would just pass it on. This is an excellent read even for the second or third time.

NineteenEighty-Four-GeorgeOrwell

The Fabians
by Norman Ian. MacKenzie
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/067122347X/fast-bkasin-20/002-1527871-4232805
=========================================

Posted – 01/28/2003 : 11:15:01 Show Profile Reply with Quote
http://lufa.ca/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=375

I have been asked to post some of my findings here for you people to read. I caution you that if you are anything like me you will find the information “unsettling” at first. I wish it were not true, but it is…it REALLY is.

There is quite a bit of information to read, far more than can be read in one sitting. Try NOT to scan this info… it needs to be understood.

I will give you the links to the information here, and you can copy and paste them and read them as you like. O.K. … let’s get started

Begin here and read the Grand Deception under the Issues heading ” http://www.freedom-force.org/granddeception.htm

Then you can validate their existance here ” http://junior.apk.net/~forestj/ifabian.html

and ” http://cepa.newschool.edu/het/schools/fabian.htm

and ” http://www.voiceoftheturtle.org  /”

and ” http://www.alphalink.com.au/~noelmcd/wolves.htm  “

and ” http://www.lewrockwell.com/archives/fm/4-93.html  “

and finally ” http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Pfabian.htm  “

Now… as if that isn’t enough you need to read this “http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/regionalism/dodd.htm  “

and this ” http://www.davidicke.net/tellthetruth/research/fabiansociety.html  “

There is more, but this is enough to get an understanding of something that everyone should be cognizant of. It is real, they are serious and we see the effects of their efforts evry day. Moreso once you understand what is taking place.

Cheers! George.
=========================

The New York Review of Books: HELP THE FABIANS
… 12, 1977 Letter HELP THE FABIANS By John Kenneth Galbraith … Kermode’s review of the MacKenzies on the Fabians (NYR, March 17), all who read the … civilize modern industrial existence? The Fabians are still at work, still exploring …
Description: An article by John Kenneth Galbraith from The New York Review of Books, May 12, 1977
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/8497  – 6 KB

The Fabians and the British Empire, Part IV – Suite101.com
… The Fabians and the British Empire, Part IV Author: Joseph Sramek Published on: June 9, 2000 Related …
more hits from: http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/945/33734  – 42 KB

LUFA – The Fabians are why you are losing your freedoms.
… All Forums LUFA Forums Political unrest The Fabians are why you are losing your freedoms. New Topic Reply to Topic …
more hits from: http://lufa.ca/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=375
===================================

Routing The Fabians
Kenneth McDonald
http://www.libertyhaven.com/theoreticalorphilosophicalissues/economichistory/routingfabians.shtml

I can still hear Sidney Webb explaining to me that the future belonged to the great administrative nations, where the officials govern and the police keep order

-Elie Halevy

Founded in England in 1884, the Fabian Society’s aim was to spread the ideas of socialism gradually by democratic means. For almost a century it succeeded. In Great Britain and North America, under liberal and conservative governments alike, the state’s influence spread. As recently as the late 1970s, every member of (British) Prime Minister James Callaghan’s cabinet was a Fabian.

Nevertheless it was increasingly plain to majorities of British and North American voters that attempts in the Fabian mode “to achieve through state action the coordinated control of the economic forces of society” had built up a governmental apparatus that was choking their economies. The election of Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan and, later, Brian Mulroney signaled a rejection of Fabianism.

What has not been signaled is the nature of the “ism” that will replace it. It is not enough to hail the blessings of individual enterprise, or freer trade, or even individual freedom. All three stand to be enhanced as the state assumes a less active role in the economy. Desirable though that enhancement may be, it lacks the appeal that wins elections. Nor can we afford the luxury of the Fabians’ gradualism in reverse. The accelerating burden of debt–servicing charges alone demands action in years, not generations.

The political task is to establish a principle, to form policies that adhere to it, and to explain the combination to the people.

Suppose that in North America the principle were to be that the best government is that which governs least, i.e., the antithesis of Fabian socialism. Policy would then be directed toward dismantling the governmental apparatus. Government corporations would be offered for sale. Any unsold after a stated interval would be dissolved. Services provided solely by federal governments would be contracted out to private suppliers whose terms of contract would stipulate criteria of service and performance. Federal governments would withdraw from revenue-sharing programs of a service nature (education, health and hospital care), leaving to states and provinces the options of making up the difference by direct taxation or contracting the services out.
Individual Choice

The effect would be to transfer significant amounts of spending power, and decisions about spending, from governments back to the individuals who contribute to their revenue.

Two consequences would follow. First, as federal spending fell, budgets would move into balance while providing for steady retirement of the public debt. Second, as states and provinces assumed full responsibility for matters now subject to revenue sharing, the cost of discharging that responsibility would be met by direct taxation supplemented by borrowing on their sole credit.

In short, the governmental apparatus, which now absorbs about half of national incomes and is adding more to debt every day, would return to solvency. State and provincial governments, whose seduction into shared cost programs has also forced them to share the debt that the programs have incurred, would regain control of their affairs.

Fabians and other critics would denounce the foregoing as a return to laissez faire and the law of the jungle. In fact, however, except for a period in 19th century England, Francois Quesnay’s laisser passer et laisser faire (free passage and freedom of action) has not been tried.

One of many myths about laisser faire is that it caused the Great Depression. As Murray Rothbard wrote: “Hoover’s role as founder of a revolutionary program of government planning to combat depression has been unjustly neglected by historians. Franklin D. Roosevelt, in large part, merely elaborated the policies laid down by his predecessor. To scoff at Hoover’s tragic failure to cure the depression as a typical example of laissez faire is drastically to misread the historical record. The Hoover rout must be set down as failure of government planning and not of the free market.” 1

By contrast, the period from the end of the Napoleonic War to 1890 saw England’s governmental expenditure fall from 29 per cent of the national product to nine per cent. As H.S. Ferns described it: “This period of government expenditure declining in proportion to the total product of the community was one of economic success measured by almost any indicator one cares to choose: population growth, production per capita, intake of food per capita, house building, technological innovation, saving and investment, improvements in literacy, average length of life, etc.” 2

The irony is that laissez faire capitalism, which would engage everyone’s self-interest to everyone’s benefit, is hobbled by self–interest in league with the state. Powerful groups use elected governments as their agents to restrain trade in their favor. Industry associations, commercial and financial interests, labor unions, even the associations of consumers who have most to gain from laissez faire – all demand special treatment. The results are seen in oligopolies, cartels, import quotas, tariffs, restrictive labor laws and affirmative action programs. In Canada, goods often pass more readily to and from the United States than they do between provinces.

The truth is that all of us are demanding more from governments than they can provide at the cost we are prepared to pay. We won’t pay more taxes – the growth of the underground economy bears witness to that – yet we expect governments to supply the services below cost. It is the rising cost of subsidizing the services, and politicians’ reluctance to reduce the subsidies, that has put governments into debt.
Invest in the Private Sector

Nevertheless, appeals to self-interest may constitute the best hope for change.

It is a fact that the growing proportion of federal budgets consumed by debt charges reduces the proportion that is available to fund government services. As the debt rises, the taxpayers get smaller and smaller returns on their investment in the government that taxes support. If the government raises taxes to meet its rising costs, the taxpayers will keep less of their income. Everything points to the taxpayers getting less value for their money.

It is also a fact, borne out by tax payers’ daily experience, that private suppliers give better service than governments.

Take those two facts together and it is plainly in the taxpayers’ interest to invest less in the government and more in the private sector.

Getting politicians to subscribe openly to the proposition would call for a self-denying ordinance whereby they would resist the temptation to spend other people’s money and start helping them to save some of it instead.

This might be accomplished by looking upon taxes as an investment in government services rather than a levy to meet government’s expenses. Switching from the slow, cumbersome and costly supplier to the efficient and competitive one would be simply an act of good business.

It remains to consider how pow-erful groups might be resisted in their claims for special treatment. The remedy is to be found in appeals to the principle of equality before the law. “We’re sorry, we sympathize with your proposal, but we must treat everyone alike. Government as it has been allowed to expand is a drag on the economy. You and everyone else will benefit through its withdrawal from active participation.”

Thus two principles are involved: the best government governs least; and all are equal before the law. Having established them, the political leadership would need a rallying cry that would convey the message to the people.

Quesnay’s free passage and freedom of action is ready made. There is an exuberant ring to it, a slogan to blow fresh air across the barriers to freedom.
At the time of the original publication, Kenneth McDonald was a free-lance writer and editor living in Toronto.

1. Murray N. Rothbard, America’s Great Depression (Princeton, N.J.: Van Nostrand, 1963), p. 168.

2. H.S. Ferns, The Disease of Government (London: Maurice Temple Smith Ltd., 1978), p. 15.

Reprinted with permission from The Freeman, a publication of the Foundation for Economic Education, Inc., October 1985, Vol. 35, No. 10.

http://www.apfn.net/MESSAGEBOARD/4-13-03/discussion.cgi.54.html

The Fabian JM Keynes

Lenin is said to have declared that the best way to destroy the capitalist system was to debauch the currency. By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. By this method they not only confiscate, but they confiscate arbitrarily; and, while the process impoverishes many, it actually enriches some. The sight of this arbitrary rearrangement of riches strikes not only at security, but at confidence in the equity of the existing distribution of wealth. Those to whom the system brings windfalls, beyond their deserts and even beyond their expectations or desires, become ‘profiteers,’ who are the object of the hatred of the bourgeoisie, whom the inflationism has impoverished, not less than of the proletariat. As the inflation proceeds and the real value of the currency fluctuates wildly from month to month, all permanent relations between debtors and creditors, which form the ultimate foundation of capitalism, become so utterly disordered as to be almost meaningless; and the process of wealth-getting degenerates into a gamble and a lottery.

Lenin was certainly right. There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose.

- John Maynard Keynes

The full power of Keynesian economics and deficit spending wasn’t realized until the 1960's and Linden Johnson’s Great Society. Since then, the United States has had ballooning deficits, the abandonment of the gold standard (1971), and a migration from the world’s largest creditor to the world’s largest debtor. The economic crisis we see today is a direct result of Kenesian economics replacing Austrian economics. And, when the United States finally bankrupts itself over this mess, the Soviet Union prediction 60 years ago was that Communism or Socialism will rise as the new form of government.

Two generations of Americans have now been raised on Keynesian economic and communist social issues. While not acknowledged in the United States, this movement was exactly the agenda of the Fabian Society- a movement whose purpose is to advance the principles of socialism via gradualist and reformist, rather than revolutionary means.

It would be much better to be ruled by Stalin than by the restrictive and monopolistic cliques which dominate Western capitalism. For it would be much better to live within a system, however barbaric in some of its features, that has in some creative force making the liberation of mankind from class oppression and primary poverty than to thrust back under dead the hand of deycaying capitalism.
- GDH Cole, Fabian Society

The program outlined by Stalin and advanced via the Fabian Society is soon coming to its end. We are in the midst of the financial collapse Stalin predicted for us. Government involvement in private industry has undermined capitalism, and thus our economy exists only in a credit bubble that is now bursting. But capitalism didn’t fail, for capitalism ceased to exist once government started intervening.

Our universities don’t teach it this way, though, and so Americans may be ready to accept- with open arms- their new socialist society.

“Under Socialism, you would not be allowed to be poor. You would be forcibly fed, clothed, lodged, taught, and employed whether you liked it or not. If it were discovered that you had not character and industry enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be executed in a kindly manner; but whilst you were permitted to live, you would have to live well.”
- George Bernard Shaw

Principled capitalists, conservatives, and libertarians worry, rightfully so, about a $700 billion bailout and $790 billion stimulus bills, but social security is a $50 trillion obligation and growing. And hedge funds? They are currently leveraged at ten times the global combined GDP. The great instigators for this are numerous; interest rates were forced down to where an uncoherced market would have never supported them, all in the name of political gain.

The credit crisis has only begun, and it will culminate when China stops funding our federal deficit, causing pressure to send bond rates skyrocketing. But with an out-of-control government keen on spending its way into more problems, and raising interest rates during a recession being political suicide, we’ll instead see the outright destruction of the dollar when the Federal Reserve becomes the main buyer of unprecedented amounts of government bonds via “printed” money.

Stalin was right: the unbearable burden of government involvement in private industry has indeed broken the back of capitalism.

The timing couldn’t be worse for patriotic Americans nor better for socialists. President Obama’s “stimulus” package attacks producers; in other words his policies seek to marginalize the very people needed most to fuel a recovery. He seeks to raise energy prices again (his own internal documents show this!), raise capital gains taxes to discourage reinvestment in America, and make income tax more progressive to punish success. Doug Ross summarizes these policies, and can only wonder, “Is he doing this on purpose?“? By surpressing a recovery, this sets the stage for a state takeover of private industry. If Stalin, GDH Cole, and others are right, Americans will be grateful to their government for saving them from evil capitalism. It’s like choosing a life in a prison for its protection from street crime.

Who will weild power in the global financial meltdown? Those who can rebuild. Russia has a controlling interest in the world’s oil production and is even moving towards a gold-backed currency. China, meanwhile, is the production center of the world. Expect their influences to expand rapidly.

Good day, comrades.

I have talked face to face with the godless communist leaders. It may surprise you to learn that I was host to Mr. Kruschev for a half day when he visited the United States, not that I’m proud of it. I opposed his coming then, and I still feel it was a mistake to welcome this atheistic murderer as a state visitor. But, according to President Eisenhower, Kruschev had expressed a desire to learn something of American Agriculture – and after seeing Russian agriculture I can understand why. As we talked face to face, he indicated that my grandchildren would live under communism. After assuring him that I expected to do all in my power to assure that his and all other grandchildren will live under freedom he arrogantly declared in substance:

” ‘You Americans are so gullible. No, you won’t accept communism outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of socialism until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism. We won’t have to fight you. We’ll so weaken your economy until you’ll fall like overripe fruit into our hands.’

“And they’re ahead of schedule in their devilish scheme.”

-Ezra Taft Benson

Not just gullable but like Brits Trible and that is what Fabians cultivated- making the workers think that Fabians stood for workers- Labour Party!!

The full power of Keynesian economics and deficit spending wasn’t realized until the 1960's and Linden Johnson’s Great Society. Since then, the United States has had ballooning deficits, the abandonment of the gold standard (1971), and a migration from the world’s largest creditor to the world’s largest debtor. The economic crisis we see today is a direct result of Kenesian economics replacing Austrian economics. And, when the United States finally bankrupts itself over this mess, the Soviet Union prediction 60 years ago was that Communism or Socialism will rise as the new form of government.

No gold standard – FIAT money without value.

The Austrian Ludwig Von Mises knew what Keynes was about – he was ignored- well- with Fabians at the helm thats’ to be expected…………Brown and co followed the Kenysian economic model…………….The Fabian model that is!!

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=12700

THE PLANNED DEMISE OF CAPITALISM- WE HAVEN’T LIVED UNDER THAT SYSTEM FOR A LONG WHILE- WE HAVE CORPORATE FACISM- PPPs SOFT FASCISM.

WHY ARE TAX PAYERS PAYING TAX CREDITS FOR MULTINATIONALS  WITH HUGE PROFITS- THATS’ COPORATE FASCISM.

GIVING TAX MONEY TO PRIVATE RAIL COMPANIES AS A SUBSIDY VIA PPPs THAT’S SOFT FASCISM.

CAPITALISM- YOUR BUSINESS FAILS- TOO BAD DOWN THE PAN YOU GO!!

WE ARE MAKING UP POORLY PAID FOLK’S WAGES FROM OUR TAXES- THEN WONDER WHY THE COUNTRY IS FAILING…HEARD OF A POOR INTERNATIONAL COPORATION?

THAT MAKES’ SERFS OF US ALL- LOW WAGES- HIGH TAXES – HIGH PRICES ETC ETC ETC.


View the original article here