As for the market tanking today, and performing badly over the past couple of weeks, well, don't believe those ******** Wall Street brokers too much. They still don't get what is causing most of these problems! There may come a time (not yet, and we're probably years away from this possibility; although it's becoming highly likely) where the issuance of more debt itself WILL NOT be enough to solve even the most basic of problems, or to pay for the most basic of things. Then you might find countries going for harder assets, like another country's state-owned assets, for example. This might be the biggest catastrophe we might face, post WWII, but let's hope we don't go there!
The Future Conflict Between the US and International Banking Cartels (& co.)
- Thread starter konkon
- Start date
Here is an interesting article from Bloomberg:
"British Companies Trading With Iran Hidden by U.K. to Avert U.S. Sanctions"
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...ran-hidden-by-u-k-to-avert-u-s-sanctions.html
"The U.K. government is determined to keep secret British companies that applied to sell goods with potential military uses to Iran, saying international banks are under U.S. pressure to drop them as clients.
The disclosure of the companies may result in them losing access to bank services, Britain’s Export Control Organization said in reply to a Freedom of Information lawsuit filed by Bloomberg News.
President Barack Obama signed a law almost a year ago broadening the scope of sanctions against Iran to stunt its nuclear development program. Even before then, U.K. banks were cutting off customers with links to Iran to avoid being targeted by American authorities or losing permits to do business in the U.S., said the export agency, which issues licenses to ship supplies with dual military or civilian uses, as well as torture equipment and radioactive material to other countries." from the Bloomberg article above.
I added the bits in bold just to emphasize the point that international banking organizations must see the US as a barrier to do more trade and to make more money. Without the US watchdog service we're pretty much #$%@#%ed!
Bloomberg is doing us a real service and I will watch more of their programs. Well done!
"British Companies Trading With Iran Hidden by U.K. to Avert U.S. Sanctions"
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...ran-hidden-by-u-k-to-avert-u-s-sanctions.html
"The U.K. government is determined to keep secret British companies that applied to sell goods with potential military uses to Iran, saying international banks are under U.S. pressure to drop them as clients.
The disclosure of the companies may result in them losing access to bank services, Britain’s Export Control Organization said in reply to a Freedom of Information lawsuit filed by Bloomberg News.
President Barack Obama signed a law almost a year ago broadening the scope of sanctions against Iran to stunt its nuclear development program. Even before then, U.K. banks were cutting off customers with links to Iran to avoid being targeted by American authorities or losing permits to do business in the U.S., said the export agency, which issues licenses to ship supplies with dual military or civilian uses, as well as torture equipment and radioactive material to other countries." from the Bloomberg article above.
I added the bits in bold just to emphasize the point that international banking organizations must see the US as a barrier to do more trade and to make more money. Without the US watchdog service we're pretty much #$%@#%ed!
Bloomberg is doing us a real service and I will watch more of their programs. Well done!
Just need to reemphasize a point here: the US defense networks will need to put their 'own people' (with appropriate qualifications, contacts/networks, expertise etc) in leadership roles, within the shadowy groups (heads of many of these organizations). This is part of what I meant by suggesting the US will target many shadowy groups.
Hey this is my opinion here, and you won't find it covered on CNN, for example: Seems to me that shadowy groups are accelerating their efforts to transfer power from USA this past week! It's as if they've been caught-out and are speeding things up a little! The S&P rating agency picked an extremely odd, difficult and sensitive time to downgrade the US.
It's also interesting to note the number of countries that are lining up to push for another reserve currency. China, Russia and the Philippines (who cares!) are three that have done so in the past few days.
Here's the annoying bit: China, for example, has had a free ride with the USD for a long time, which has meant that China has unfair trading advantages over the world. A country that makes bloggers that criticize it, for example, disappear (which is why I will never go there!), wants to criticize the US even though China has never paid a premium for its concessions over the years.
I think that those countries that are quick out of the gate to push for the US's downfall, by wanting the USD to falter and by reinforcing the downgrade, should be looked at carefully. They are clearly not gong to support a US-led initiative to protect the world from potentially irreversible harm in the future (preventing countries like Iran from getting really aggressive, for example).
All those that want to criticize US defense initiatives of all kinds, especially those in Asia, who will protect the world from potential chaos if the US loses it's grip on geopolitical dynamics, and the world becomes an open place for all sorts of escalating and conflicting agendas?
China stockpiling of all kinds of resources (that are clearly not being used to make toys in factories) is really beginning to make a lot of sense now! Weren't zi Germans (not criticizing Germans now-days!) doing similar things prior to WWI and WWII? A real concern for anyone living in Asia, if you ask me. So get behind the US and don't be narrow-minded opportunists that see fragmented distributions of wealth as the new norm. The push for alternative currencies and leadership power distribution, will inevitable lead to an unsafe world, if the US and all its (real!) allies aren't properly supported by the rest of us.
Hey this is my opinion here, and you won't find it covered on CNN, for example: Seems to me that shadowy groups are accelerating their efforts to transfer power from USA this past week! It's as if they've been caught-out and are speeding things up a little! The S&P rating agency picked an extremely odd, difficult and sensitive time to downgrade the US.
It's also interesting to note the number of countries that are lining up to push for another reserve currency. China, Russia and the Philippines (who cares!) are three that have done so in the past few days.
Here's the annoying bit: China, for example, has had a free ride with the USD for a long time, which has meant that China has unfair trading advantages over the world. A country that makes bloggers that criticize it, for example, disappear (which is why I will never go there!), wants to criticize the US even though China has never paid a premium for its concessions over the years.
I think that those countries that are quick out of the gate to push for the US's downfall, by wanting the USD to falter and by reinforcing the downgrade, should be looked at carefully. They are clearly not gong to support a US-led initiative to protect the world from potentially irreversible harm in the future (preventing countries like Iran from getting really aggressive, for example).
All those that want to criticize US defense initiatives of all kinds, especially those in Asia, who will protect the world from potential chaos if the US loses it's grip on geopolitical dynamics, and the world becomes an open place for all sorts of escalating and conflicting agendas?
China stockpiling of all kinds of resources (that are clearly not being used to make toys in factories) is really beginning to make a lot of sense now! Weren't zi Germans (not criticizing Germans now-days!) doing similar things prior to WWI and WWII? A real concern for anyone living in Asia, if you ask me. So get behind the US and don't be narrow-minded opportunists that see fragmented distributions of wealth as the new norm. The push for alternative currencies and leadership power distribution, will inevitable lead to an unsafe world, if the US and all its (real!) allies aren't properly supported by the rest of us.
Glen48
Money can't buy Poverty
- Joined
- 4 September 2008
- Posts
- 2,444
- Reactions
- 3
IBM suplied the Germans during the war with a card system to assist them in record keeping of the Jew bound for the camps, Henry Ford was a Jew hater and helped the Germans with Funds and engines.
Stalin helped the Germans build and run the camps well before WW2 started.
We will never the full extent of what goes on but we are at thier mercy however maybe the net FB, Twitter, USb srticks etc will help free up information
and slowly rekaese their strangle hold,
Stalin helped the Germans build and run the camps well before WW2 started.
We will never the full extent of what goes on but we are at thier mercy however maybe the net FB, Twitter, USb srticks etc will help free up information
and slowly rekaese their strangle hold,
- Joined
- 20 May 2011
- Posts
- 1,544
- Reactions
- 1
It is interesting that you would say these two things so close to each other. Do you imply that is a politician is corrupt that they will for some reason have trouble getting re-elected?
If Obama is not corrupt, can you explain for one of many things, his complete lack of action against the individuals and institutions which caused the GFC? In many other countries they would have been given the death penalty.
I'm just speeding through your posts and....are you actually implying that the US has any interest whatsoever in protecting the world from anything?
Are you implying that US politicians (the very same ones who get millions of dollars of corrupt money from the defense contractors they give funding to, not to mention every other lobby group that comes knocking) are somehow moral and just?
I just don't understand where you are getting these assumptions from. Mate, all but maybe half a dozen US congressmen (and women) deserve the death penalty.
President Obama is not corrupt. Obama, like the rest of us, are a part of a faulty system on many levels. Fiat currencies, perpetual debt, too much credit (and not enough revenue to pay for it) are just some of the problems that spring to mind. There are a lot more.
Where does one start with the GFC? The GFC may well have started way before 2008 and there are a multiple of worldwide factors that one must take into account. Debatable, but I personally don't think sub-prime in the US caused the GFC. Europe and other parts of the world were over-leveraged too. Obama had nothing to do with the problems in Europe, for example, that were clearly brewing even 7 years ago, and maybe even before this period. And Obama had nothing to do with the problems in the US.
White collar crime is, at large, not seen as important by most people in the world, as blue collar crime. This is a world wide phenomenon and it doesn't help if those that probably could do something about this type of stealthy, but serious crime, like your law enforcement agencies, are too preoccupied (through no fault of their own) to focus on other types of crime. The system those law enforcement agencies work in is designed, subtly and over a period of time, to channel their energies, expertise etc in other directions.
And another point, that is becoming obvious in the UK, law enforcement agencies are under resourced in general. Cutbacks or proposed cutbacks certainly don't help.
Congress is a different problem altogether. I don't think congress should have as much power as they do, personally. They should perhaps spend endless amounts of time debating what the next postal stamp should look like, for example. But congress, and there are other organizations, like some media outlets, should not have such an important gatekeeper role.
Most definitely, the US (The President, defense services of all kinds etc) does have a real interest in protecting the world from all kinds of serious harm. Here's a question for you; let's say the US wasn't in control of geopolitics around the world or didn't oversee the world the way it does, which country would look after us in the West and East? There is no other country that has the expertise, will and resources to oversee geopolitical events (current and future ones).
I personally see the GFC as a time for many countries around the world to support the US and its allies' efforts to protect us from potential major global conflicts in the future. WWI and WWII were inevitable because (amongst many technical and historical reasons) you didn't have a global superpower to oversee all parts of the world and focus in on the troubled parts; this is what the US does. And not just some parts like a potential next superpower (ie. China) might focus on.
If China, for example, overtook the US's geopolitical role, China might do this fragmentedly, but there would be some serious gaps in perhaps some precarious parts of the world. There may not be a country with the will, resources etc, like the US, to take the necessary actions if (in the future) serous conflicts were brewing in some parts of the world. Without the US and its allies in control (and of course it's very difficult at times), you might have many countries in different parts of the world, at different times, go for the top dog position.
Congressmen don't deserve the death penalty! I don't know why you would suggest this! I don't have a very good opinion of congress and other organizations, like shadow banking cartels. Not talking about the local bank in town.
Like I mentioned before, I think it would be a good idea to give congress a special role of overseeing the next type of stamp that will hit the post office. As for deciding on really important issues. I think the people in general can do this without needing to be parented by their local constituents.
But I also believe (and I am not that patriotic myself, I admit) that the military and of course the President (and his team) should have a greater influence in matters internal and abroad, without being sidetracked by gatekeepers like congress and media outlets (who seem to be serving other masters).
One of the reasons why I know we will need defense agencies of all kinds to protect us, is because of the potential fragmented protective framework and the possible dangers that may arise, if we didn't have the US, for example, to oversee geopolitics on a global (and not a fragmented) scale.
In other words, ask yourself why there was never a WWIII, and the answer has to be because the US and its allies (and there are plenty) kept on preventing this from ever happening. Now ask yourself what a world without global oversight would look like.
Now I probably wouldn't last three days in a military training camp, for example, and I'd probably get beaten up because I'm probably too annoying. But I'm sure glad that I can live a relatively comfortable life not worrying about serous global threats every ten minutes; I'm thinking of Jack Nicholson in a Few Good Men here and what he said to Tom Cruise while they were having lunch outdoors. Only Nicholson could pull that off like that!
Hi.
I would just like to comment that Obama was elected to fix the faulty system.
And he as I (and many others) have found that when you try to solve a problem(in his case many) that there are a number of people in powerful position will not let you have space.
There is a unwritten code that says "you will not change the system", even if the code is corrupt.
Thats they way it is I am afraid.
joea
I would just like to comment that Obama was elected to fix the faulty system.
And he as I (and many others) have found that when you try to solve a problem(in his case many) that there are a number of people in powerful position will not let you have space.
There is a unwritten code that says "you will not change the system", even if the code is corrupt.
Thats they way it is I am afraid.
joea
- Joined
- 9 August 2011
- Posts
- 38
- Reactions
- 0
I don't see how this has changed. The origins of 'The Banks' was the formalisation/legalisation of thugs lending money to anyone, and if you didn't pay back when agreed, you would be physically and emotionally 'stood over' (bashed/killed).
I don't think much has changed in the morality of this much at all.
- Joined
- 20 May 2011
- Posts
- 1,544
- Reactions
- 1
I will not disagree with your assessment under the assumption that he a genuine politician, however I will claim that the office of the president of the United States has significant power (especially after all the Bush era laws), and if Obama had the will, he could have done a lot to put the people who caused the GFC in jail.
And yes there was a 20 year credit bubble, but I don't see this as a reason to not hold people accountable. Get Greenspan and put his old **** in a maximum security jail for starters.
My counter-question is who really cares? Why do you think the USA (either people or politicians - genuine or corrupt) care about the rest of the world? You seem to think they have some sort of a moral agenda to save the world....nothing could be further from the truth.
The only agenda USA has in terms of foreign geopolitics is oil, and every single decision is largely driven by that. They would nuke the middle east for all they care and kill every last person there - if there will be no other way for them to get that oil.
What is so special about congressmen that makes them exempt from the death penalty? I do not like your way of thinking.
Why not? Because of nuclear weapons.
What would a world look like if USA and co were neutral? There would be a lot less debt and "terrorism" in the OECD.
I would argue the opposite. Our lives would be far more comfortable and safe if all our respective countries were like Switzerland.
It just seems as though things have been engineered in such a way (not by Obama), over a long period of time, to make it very difficult to prosecute white collar crime of the kinds mentioned; you probably can't even call them crimes, and the excuses might be 'bad market practices' or something like that. The media doesn't even question those practices and they tend to lead the public to believe that it's just that - bad market practices. I don't think the President or the Justice Department can do too much about this. They have to follow sets of rules etc, as much as they might want to do something about those deceitful practices by many of these white collar types.
This is what bankers and the like do; they finance bubbles of different kinds in different ways, throughout history. This is not seen as a crime at all, and maybe it shouldn't be. You can't get half pregnant so financing and speculating on extreme bubbles wouldn't be seen as a crime either. But I have to admit I do see your point about these central bankers and their inherently faulty sets of beliefs. But they will always be an insulated lot and part of this has to do with the sets of (don't forget people!) man made laws (hello Congress, and how are those stamp designs going?) or the lack of them, that protects their asses! Another reason why law enforcement agencies and even The President can't do anything about this.
I'm sure glad the US and its allies are there or I might be saluting a red flag, working 60+ hours a week for minimal pay and had my assets taken from me and nationalized, long ago.
I'd call the US's and its allies efforts over the decades to protect all our interests, as a real agenda. I certainly would prefer my mundane suburban life than, for example, those that have to work 70 hours a week at that factory that makes all our electronic gadgets, with all those safety nets!
Debt, I can handle. Worrying about geopolitics every 10 minutes would be a real problem for me.
Switzerland couldn't give a rats ass about anyone other than Switzerland. I think they've shown this throughout history. I am glad Australia, the US, GB etc have protected my family, nieces, cat etc over the years and am glad to pay a premium for their continued support.
Trust me, it wouldn't take long for another country to go for the #1 position and make you and I dance to their tune. Call it human nature or something else; I have a theory, and I'm sure it's shared by many:
The only time you will get the kind of unity withing a planet that many discuss, is if the ruling life-form within that world saw a direct threat from other (but different) ruling life-forms, from another planet. One 'alien world' versus another (even if it's a light year away). Darwinism's survival of the fittest (with an obvious extension) would apply, or the threat alone would get their 'ass' (if they've got one!) in gear.
Back to Earth and we don't have this sort of problem (but with the 100 or so trillion stars out there, I'm sure other life-forms do). This opens up a whole range of probabilities, like a rapid expansion of technological achievements, not by us, but by other life forms that had/have those threats from other (not so far!) worlds. But I'm drifting.
Treat this as a hypothetical framework even if you don't believe there's life out there (100 trillion to one; are we that lucky? No way!). Based on this assumptive framework, there would be very little reason for the numerous and diverse people in different countries on this planet, to unite, especially with all our differences. The void of world domination here on Earth will continue, and if it's not the US and its allies, then who?!
Here are some articles that may interest you. You can make up your own minds or draw your own conclusions. I certainly have.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100..._LEFTWhatsNewsCollection#articleTabs=comments
http://www.alleconomists.com/2011/09/even-goldman-sachs-secretly-believes.html
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/...onomic-collapse-of-america-in-four-easy-steps
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100..._LEFTWhatsNewsCollection#articleTabs=comments
http://www.alleconomists.com/2011/09/even-goldman-sachs-secretly-believes.html
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/...onomic-collapse-of-america-in-four-easy-steps
This just came through from http://www.reuters.com/
"BREAKING NEWS: Government set to file suit against more than 12 big banks for misrepresenting quality of mortgage securities: report"
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/02/us-usa-mortages-lawsuit-idUSTRE7810ME20110902
"(Reuters) - The agency that oversees mortgage markets is preparing to file suit against "more than a dozen" big U.S. banks, accusing them of misrepresenting the quality of mortgages they packaged and sold during the housing bubble, the New York Times reported on Thursday.
The Federal Housing Finance Agency, which oversees mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, is expected to file suit against Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs and Deutsche Bank, among other banks, the Times reported, citing three unidentified individuals briefed on the matter."
"BREAKING NEWS: Government set to file suit against more than 12 big banks for misrepresenting quality of mortgage securities: report"
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/02/us-usa-mortages-lawsuit-idUSTRE7810ME20110902
"(Reuters) - The agency that oversees mortgage markets is preparing to file suit against "more than a dozen" big U.S. banks, accusing them of misrepresenting the quality of mortgages they packaged and sold during the housing bubble, the New York Times reported on Thursday.
The Federal Housing Finance Agency, which oversees mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, is expected to file suit against Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs and Deutsche Bank, among other banks, the Times reported, citing three unidentified individuals briefed on the matter."
- Joined
- 28 May 2020
- Posts
- 6,433
- Reactions
- 12,248
This thread had a run some ten years ago, so time to resurrect it.
It seems that nothing has changed.
Ten years ago , Joea said above
The private consortium of banks called the Federal reserve, is keen for the power over money and all things financial to be taken over by the chosen few with real power.
From Wall street on parade
bad luck for those who have money deposited in the banks.
Mick
It seems that nothing has changed.
Ten years ago , Joea said above
This statement is as true as ever.
The private consortium of banks called the Federal reserve, is keen for the power over money and all things financial to be taken over by the chosen few with real power.
From Wall street on parade
There is of course, no guarantee that Omaraova will get what she wants, but the fact that there has been no stink kicked up by the Republicans shows they don't think of the idea as a problem.
bad luck for those who have money deposited in the banks.
Mick
Similar threads
- Article
