Monday, October 31, 2011

L'ALTERNATIVA: The Lucis Trust behind Occupy Wall street [UPDATED]

The Lucis Trust behind Occupy Wall street [UPDATED]

I know it sounds crazy, but what i found out about this movement it's just unbelievable.
I will try to make this short.

On the 15th October 2011 begun the worldwide action. For the first time in history, upwards of 15 million people in sixty countries marched together for a "global change". Their official website is: http://15october.net/
Someone decided to find out who owns that domain name by visiting this site: http://who.godaddy.com/ (This is a database with a searchable list of every single domain currently registered in the world).
As you can see from the printscreen i took, before the 18th October the registrant was
"Paulina Arcos
866 United Nations Plaza
Suite 516
New York, New York 10017
United States"


Well... Who the hell is she? I googled her name and i couldn't find many infos, but i found out that she is Francisco Carrion Mena (permanent representative of Ecuador, chairman of the special committee at the UN) 's wife. Okay. I thought i had no more things to discover. The UN were behind this movement, that's it.
Well, i was wrong... While reading a book ("Freemasonry and Secret Societies" by Epiphanius, edition "Controcorrente" April 2008, page 620 ), i found out that the unofficial Lucis Trust's address is: 866 United Nations Plaza New York, and this information appears just on two books: the one i was reading, and on "Die Netzwerke der Insider" by Peter Blackwood.
Wait a minute.... This must be a joke.
...but here it comes the unbelievable part: On the 19th October, the WHOIS Information is been changed!!! In fact the registrant now is:
DomainsByProxy.com
15111 N. Hayden Rd., Ste 160, PMB 353
Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
United States
...as you can check here: http://who.godaddy.com/whois.aspx?domain=15october.net&prog_id=GoDadd


New infos about this "global movement": Let's see WHO support them...

George Soros expressed sympathy with OWS (Occupy Wall Street).
Let's read something about him: George Soros is a member of the CFR (Council on Foreign Relations), the Trilateral Commission (a super-elite cabal of 300 international power brokers who practically rule the world), the Bilderberg Group and he is founder and chairman of the Open Society Foundations. He is known as "the Man Who Broke the Bank of England" because of his US$1 billion in investment profits earned in a single day (16th Sept 1992).


Mikhail Gorbachev says "Occupy Wall Street" signals an emerging New World Order.
Don't forgeto who is Gorbachev: a premier world Leader and boasts members at the highest levels of the United Nations bureaucracy, a member of the Lucis Trust (as reported by the EIR, Executive Intelligence Review di Washington).
..and guess what? His "Millennium Forum" is located in 866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 120, New York (as you can see here).
Here’s what Gorbachev said during on October 20th at Lafayette College. Exactly! The same address of the Lucis Trust...

“We are reaping the consequences of a strategy that is not conducive to cooperation and partnership, to living in a new global situation. The world needs goals that will bring people together. Some people in the United States were pushing the idea of creating a global American empire, and that was a mistake from the start. Other people in America are now giving thought to the future of their country. The big banks, the big corporations, are still paying the same big bonuses to their bosses. Was there ever a crisis for them? . . . I believe America needs its own perestroika. The entire world situation did not develop properly. We saw deterioration where there should have been positive movement.

My friend the late Pope John Paul II said it best. He said, ‘We need a new world order, one that is more stable, more humane, and more just.’ Others, including myself, have spoken about a new world order, but we are still facing the problem of building such a world order…problems of the environment, of backwardness and poverty, food shortages…all because we do not have a system of global governance. We cannot leave things as they were before, when we are seeing that these protests are moving to even new countries, that almost all countries are now witnessing such protests, that the people want change. As we are addressing these challenges, these problems raised by these protest movements, we will gradually find our way towards a new world order.”

Even economists support protesters (LOL). An anti-banks protest supported by big economists? Let's report some of them:

Mario Draghi: an Italian banker and economist who has been governor of the Bank of Italy since 16 January 2006. He has been designated to succeed Jean-Claude Trichet as President of the European Central Bank by November 2011.

Richard D. Wolff: an American economist, well-known for his work on Marxian economics, economic methodology, and class analysis.

Paul Robin Krugman: an American economist, professor of Economics and International Affairs at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University, Centenary Professor at the London School of Economics, and an op-ed columnist for The New York Times. In 2008, Krugman won the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for his contributions to New Trade Theory and New Economic Geography.

Jeff Madrick: a journalist, economic policy consultant and analyst. He is director of policy research at the Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis, The New School. He was formerly finance editor of Business Week Magazine and an NBC News reporter and commentator.

Joseph Eugene Stiglitz: an American economist and a professor at Columbia University. He is a recipient of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences (2001) and the John Bates Clark Medal (1979). He is also the former Senior Vice President and Chief Economist of the World Bank. He is known for his critical view of the management of globalization, free-market economists (whom he calls "free market fundamentalists") and some international institutions like the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. He is one of the most frequently cited economists in the world.

One more thing: the participants' slogan is "We are the 99%" (referred to the difference in wealth between the top 1% and the other citizens of the United States).
Isn't it ironic that they have "rich supporters"? I list two more "supporters":

Russell Simmons: an American business magnate as the co-founder, with Rick Rubin, of the pioneering hip-hop label Def Jam, and creator of the clothing fashion lines Phat Farm, Argyleculture, and American Classics. He is the third richest figure in hip-hop, having a net-worth estimate of $340 million as of April 2011.

Jimmy Wales: a co-founder and promoter of the online non-profit encyclopedia Wikipedia and the Wikia company. He is a member of the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School and the advisory board of the MIT Center for Collective Intelligence, the Board of Directors at Creative Commons, Socialtext, and Hunch.com, and former co-chair of the World Economic Forum on the Middle East 2008. By the World Economic Forum he is one of the "Young Global Leaders" of 2007.

Occupy Wall Street is now on wikipedia (what a coincidence).

Well... do you need more evidence?

ADDENDUM: Let's take a look at our protest against the Pope and the New World Order in Assisi, Italy (27th October 2011).
Only 6 guys with some banners at the second ecumenic meeting with the Pope... and we couldn't even protest!

problem...reaction...solution...

Posted via email from moneytalks's posterous

Saturday, October 29, 2011

November 9th communications shutdown: A system reboot needed to activate new code? « The PPJ Gazette

November 9th communications shutdown: A system reboot needed to activate new code?

John Boering

My take on the communications shutdown:

In what is obviously a muscle flexing exercise meant to show the public just how much power and control the federal government really has, all communications will be cut off for an estimated three minutes on November 9th, 2011. 

Claiming this is a test of the emergency response system, the terror alert system, and any other excuse they can come up with, Fema (that would be the same FEMA in charge of those camps they deny exist) will conduct a complete communications shutdown: all TV, radio, internet, and phone systems will be disabled simultaneously. This will be at 1:00 CST. 

I am trying to figure out what kind of national emergency would require cutting all communications, broadcasts and internet use?  Maybe an emergency in which the government itself feels threatened by …….the people?  If this were a test to make sure the system was intact in the event of an emergency I could understand it.  But that isn’t what this is.  This is a test meant to ensure that the apparatus is in place and operational in the event the government wants to prevent communication between citizens: this is a test to make sure they CAN shut it all down if they choose to.  

Think Egypt here.  As the protest crowds grew in Egypt, what did the government do? They shut down all cell phones and internet access in an effort to halt communications. It didn’t stop anything, the crowds still grew, but the idea behind this action was clear. 

I believe what is actually behind this might be the downloading of some kind of code needed to make the shut-down apparatus work efficiently.  Think about your cable system if you have one or even an upgrade to many computer programs.  A new code must be downloaded and installed, then the system shutdown and re-booted for the changes to take effect.  And, just like these coded program changes in computers and cable, once you re-boot, whatever was newly installed is activated and just runs silently behind the scenes.  In fact, in almost every case, you are not even aware of what changes were made. I have a strange feeling this is what is happening here.  I also think this is somehow attached to the all-digital system they forced everyone onto a few years back. 

Being a rather rational and logical person, the idea of shutting off communications of all kinds during a national emergency just doesn’t make any sense to me.  Why would anyone want to do that?  Wouldn’t your first reaction be to make sure communications were all intact and operational?  Unless of course, their definition of an emergency is something other than say extreme weather, floods or things of that kind. 

In what kind of emergency situation would it benefit the public to have all communications shut down?  I can’t even think of one.

If I were the government I could see where it could be really handy especially in light of the steady growing unrest across the country. Of course their phones, computers and broadcast systems would all be working just fine as their communications systems are independent of the system the public uses. 

We have long since passed the point where we can trust government on any level.  This impending communications shut down is only a test run for something far more serious.  This is not about public safety, emergency response or any of the other fluff and hype put out to try and explain why the government would engage in such a test.  In my opinion, this is merely a test run for a future event which could be catastrophic as far as the general public is concerned.

 Keep your eyes and ears open…….something is afoot here and it doesn’t look good for most of us.

Posted via email from moneytalks's posterous

John-F-Kennedy.net - John F. Kennedy vs The Federal Reserve

John F. Kennedy
vs
The Federal Reserve
 

John-F-Kennedy.net Message Board
Post | Read

On June 4, 1963, a virtually unknown Presidential decree, Executive Order 11110, was signed with the authority to basically strip the Bank of its power to loan money to the United States Federal Government at interest. With the stroke of a pen, President Kennedy declared that the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank would soon be out of business. The Christian Law Fellowship has exhaustively researched this matter through the Federal Register and Library of Congress. We can now safely conclude that this Executive Order has never been repealed, amended, or superceded by any subsequent Executive Order. In simple terms, it is still valid.

When President John Fitzgerald Kennedy - the author of Profiles in Courage -signed this Order, it returned to the federal government, specifically the Treasury Department, the Constitutional power to create and issue currency -money - without going through the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank. President Kennedy's Executive Order 11110 [the full text is displayed further below] gave the Treasury Department the explicit authority: "to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury." This means that for every ounce of silver in the U.S. Treasury's vault, the government could introduce new money into circulation based on the silver bullion physically held there. As a result, more than $4 billion in United States Notes were brought into circulation in $2 and $5 denominations. $10 and $20 United States Notes were never circulated but were being printed by the Treasury Department when Kennedy was assassinated. It appears obvious that President Kennedy knew the Federal Reserve Notes being used as the purported legal currency were contrary to the Constitution of the United States of America.

"United States Notes" were issued as an interest-free and debt-free currency backed by silver reserves in the U.S. Treasury. We compared a "Federal Reserve Note" issued from the private central bank of the United States (the Federal Reserve Bank a/k/a Federal Reserve System), with a "United States Note" from the U.S. Treasury issued by President Kennedy's Executive Order. They almost look alike, except one says "Federal Reserve Note" on the top while the other says "United States Note". Also, the Federal Reserve Note has a green seal and serial number while the United States Note has a red seal and serial number.

President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 and the United States Notes he had issued were immediately taken out of circulation. Federal Reserve Notes continued to serve as the legal currency of the nation. According to the United States Secret Service, 99% of all U.S. paper "currency" circulating in 1999 are Federal Reserve Notes.

Kennedy knew that if the silver-backed United States Notes were widely circulated, they would have eliminated the demand for Federal Reserve Notes. This is a very simple matter of economics. The USN was backed by silver and the FRN was not backed by anything of intrinsic value. Executive Order 11110 should have prevented the national debt from reaching its current level (virtually all of the nearly $9 trillion in federal debt has been created since 1963) if LBJ or any subsequent President were to enforce it. It would have almost immediately given the U.S. Government the ability to repay its debt without going to the private Federal Reserve Banks and being charged interest to create new "money". Executive Order 11110 gave the U.S.A. the ability to, once again, create its own money backed by silver and realm value worth something.

Again, according to our own research, just five months after Kennedy was assassinated, no more of the Series 1958 "Silver Certificates" were issued either, and they were subsequently removed from circulation. Perhaps the assassination of JFK was a warning to all future presidents not to interfere with the private Federal Reserve's control over the creation of money. It seems very apparent that President Kennedy challenged the "powers that exist behind U.S. and world finance". With true patriotic courage, JFK boldly faced the two most successful vehicles that have ever been used to drive up debt:

1) war (Viet Nam); and,

2) the creation of money by a privately owned central bank. His efforts to have all U.S. troops out of Vietnam by 1965 combined with Executive Order 11110 would have destroyed the profits and control of the private Federal Reserve Bank.


Executive Order 11110

AMENDMENT OF EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 10289 AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE PERFORMANCE OF CERTAIN FUNCTIONS AFFECTING THE DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY. By virtue of the authority vested in me by section 301 of title 3 of the United States Code, it is ordered as follows:

SECTION 1. Executive Order No. 10289 of September 19, 1951, as amended, is hereby further amended - (a) By adding at the end of paragraph 1 thereof the following subparagraph (j): "(j) The authority vested in the President by paragraph (b) of section 43 of the Act of May 12, 1933, as amended (31 U.S.C. 821 (b)), to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury not then held for redemption of any outstanding silver certificates, to prescribe the denominations of such silver certificates, and to coin standard silver dollars and subsidiary silver currency for their redemption," and (b) By revoking subparagraphs (b) and (c) of paragraph 2 thereof. SECTION 2. The amendment made by this Order shall not affect any act done, or any right accruing or accrued or any suit or proceeding had or commenced in any civil or criminal cause prior to the date of this Order but all such liabilities shall continue and may be enforced as if said amendments had not been made.

JOHN F. KENNEDY THE WHITE HOUSE, June 4, 1963


Once again, Executive Order 11110 is still valid. According to Title 3, United States Code, Section 301 dated January 26, 1998:

Executive Order (EO) 10289 dated Sept. 17, 1951, 16 F.R. 9499, was as amended by:

EO 10583, dated December 18, 1954, 19 F.R. 8725;

EO 10882 dated July 18, 1960, 25 F.R. 6869;

EO 11110 dated June 4, 1963, 28 F.R. 5605;

EO 11825 dated December 31, 1974, 40 F.R. 1003;

EO 12608 dated September 9, 1987, 52 F.R. 34617

The 1974 and 1987 amendments, added after Kennedy's 1963 amendment, did not change or alter any part of Kennedy's EO 11110. A search of Clinton's 1998 and 1999 EO's and Presidential Directives has also shown no reference to any alterations, suspensions, or changes to EO 11110.

The Federal Reserve Bank, a.k.a Federal Reserve System, is a Private Corporation. Black's Law Dictionary defines the "Federal Reserve System" as: "Network of twelve central banks to which most national banks belong and to which state chartered banks may belong. Membership rules require investment of stock and minimum reserves." Privately-owned banks own the stock of the FED. This was explained in more detail in the case of Lewis v. United States, Federal Reporter, 2nd Series, Vol. 680, Pages 1239, 1241 (1982), where the court said: "Each Federal Reserve Bank is a separate corporation owned by commercial banks in its region. The stock-holding commercial banks elect two thirds of each Bank's nine member board of directors".

The Federal Reserve Banks are locally controlled by their member banks. Once again, according to Black's Law Dictionary, we find that these privately owned banks actually issue money:

"Federal Reserve Act. Law which created Federal Reserve banks which act as agents in maintaining money reserves, issuing money in the form of bank notes, lending money to banks, and supervising banks. Administered by Federal Reserve Board (q.v.)".

The privately owned Federal Reserve (FED) banks actually issue (create) the "money" we use. In 1964, the House Committee on Banking and Currency, Subcommittee on Domestic Finance, at the second session of the 88th Congress, put out a study entitled Money Facts which contains a good description of what the FED is: "The Federal Reserve is a total money-making machine. It can issue money or checks. And it never has a problem of making its checks good because it can obtain the $5 and $10 bills necessary to cover its check simply by asking the Treasury Department's Bureau of Engraving to print them".

Any one person or any closely knit group who has a lot of money has a lot of power. Now imagine a group of people who have the power to create money. Imagine the power these people would have. This is exactly what the privately owned FED is!

No man did more to expose the power of the FED than Louis T. McFadden, who was the Chairman of the House Banking Committee back in the 1930s. In describing the FED, he remarked in the Congressional Record, House pages 1295 and 1296 on June 10, 1932:

"Mr. Chairman, we have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal reserve banks. The Federal Reserve Board, a Government Board, has cheated the Government of the United States and he people of the United States out of enough money to pay the national debt. The depredations and the iniquities of the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal reserve banks acting together have cost this country enough money to pay the national debt several times over. This evil institution has impoverished and ruined the people of the United States; has bankrupted itself, and has practically bankrupted our Government. It has done this through the maladministration of that law by which the Federal Reserve Board, and through the corrupt practices of the moneyed vultures who control it".

Some people think the Federal Reserve Banks are United States Government institutions. They are not Government institutions, departments, or agencies. They are private credit monopolies which prey upon the people of the United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers. Those 12 private credit monopolies were deceitfully placed upon this country by bankers who came here from Europe and who repaid us for our hospitality by undermining our American institutions.

The FED basically works like this: The government granted its power to create money to the FED banks. They create money, then loan it back to the government charging interest. The government levies income taxes to pay the interest on the debt. On this point, it's interesting to note that the Federal Reserve Act and the sixteenth amendment, which gave congress the power to collect income taxes, were both passed in 1913. The incredible power of the FED over the economy is universally admitted. Some people, especially in the banking and academic communities, even support it. On the other hand, there are those, such as President John Fitzgerald Kennedy, that have spoken out against it. His efforts were spoken about in Jim Marrs' 1990 book Crossfire:"

Another overlooked aspect of Kennedy's attempt to reform American society involves money. Kennedy apparently reasoned that by returning to the constitution, which states that only Congress shall coin and regulate money, the soaring national debt could be reduced by not paying interest to the bankers of the Federal Reserve System, who print paper money then loan it to the government at interest. He moved in this area on June 4, 1963, by signing Executive Order 11110 which called for the issuance of $4,292,893,815 in United States Notes through the U.S. Treasury rather than the traditional Federal Reserve System. That same day, Kennedy signed a bill changing the backing of one and two dollar bills from silver to gold, adding strength to the weakened U.S. currency.

Kennedy's comptroller of the currency, James J. Saxon, had been at odds with the powerful Federal Reserve Board for some time, encouraging broader investment and lending powers for banks that were not part of the Federal Reserve system. Saxon also had decided that non-Reserve banks could underwrite state and local general obligation bonds, again weakening the dominant Federal Reserve banks".

In a comment made to a Columbia University class on Nov. 12, 1963,

Ten days before his assassination, President John Fitzgerald Kennedy allegedly said:

"The high office of the President has been used to foment a plot to destroy the American's freedom and before I leave office, I must inform the citizen of this plight."

In this matter, John Fitzgerald Kennedy appears to be the subject of his own book... a true Profile of Courage.

This research report was compiled for Lawgiver. Org. by Anthony Wayne

What is the Federal Reserve Bank?

What is the Federal Reserve Bank (FED) and why do we have it?

by Greg Hobbs November 1, 1999

The FED is a central bank. Central banks are supposed to implement a country's fiscal policies. They monitor commercial banks to ensure that they maintain sufficient assets, like cash, so as to remain solvent and stable. Central banks also do business, such as currency exchanges and gold transactions, with other central banks. In theory, a central bank should be good for a country, and they might be if it wasn't for the fact that they are not owned or controlled by the government of the country they are serving. Private central banks, including our FED, operate not in the interest of the public good but for profit.

There have been three central banks in our nation's history. The first two, while deceptive and fraudulent, pale in comparison to the scope and size of the fraud being perpetrated by our current FED. What they all have in common is an insidious practice known as "fractional banking."

Fractional banking or fractional lending is the ability to create money from nothing, lend it to the government or someone else and charge interest to boot. The practice evolved before banks existed. Goldsmiths rented out space in their vaults to individuals and merchants for storage of their gold or silver. The goldsmiths gave these "depositors" a certificate that showed the amount of gold stored. These certificates were then used to conduct business.

In time the goldsmiths noticed that the gold in their vaults was rarely withdrawn. Small amounts would move in and out but the large majority never moved. Sensing a profit opportunity, the goldsmiths issued double receipts for the gold, in effect creating money (certificates) from nothing and then lending those certificates (creating debt) to depositors and charging them interest as well.

Since the certificates represented more gold than actually existed, the certificates were "fractionally" backed by gold. Eventually some of these vault operations were transformed into banks and the practice of fractional banking continued.

Keep that fractional banking concept in mind as we examine our first central bank, the First Bank of the United States (BUS). It was created, after bitter dissent in the Congress, in 1791 and chartered for 20 years. A scam not unlike the current FED, the BUS used its control of the currency to defraud the public and establish a legal form of usury.

This bank practiced fractional lending at a 10:1 rate, ten dollars of loans for each dollar they had on deposit. This misuse and abuse of their public charter continued for the entire 20 years of their existence. Public outrage over these abuses was such that the charter was not renewed and the bank ceased to exist in 1811.

The war of 1812 left the country in economic chaos, seen by bankers as another opportunity for easy profits. They influenced Congress to charter the second central bank, the Second Bank of the United States (SBUS), in 1816.

The SBUS was more expansive than the BUS. The SBUS sold franchises and literally doubled the number of banks in a short period of time. The country began to boom and move westward, which required money. Using fractional lending at the 10:1 rate, the central bank and their franchisees created the debt/money for the expansion.

Things boomed for a while, then the banks decided to shut off the debt/money, citing the need to control inflation. This action on the part of the SBUS caused bankruptcies and foreclosures. The banks then took control of the assets that were used as security against the loans.

Closely examine how the SBUS engineered this cycle of prosperity and depression. The central bank caused inflation by creating debt/money for loans and credit and making these funds readily available. The economy boomed. Then they used the inflation which they created as an excuse to shut off the loans/credit/money.

The resulting shortage of cash caused the economy to falter or slow dramatically and large numbers of business and personal bankruptcies resulted. The central bank then seized the assets used as security for the loans. The wealth created by the borrowers during the boom was then transferred to the central bank during the bust. And you always wondered how the big guys ended up with all the marbles.

Now, who do you think is responsible for all of the ups and downs in our economy over the last 85 years? Think about the depression of the late '20s and all through the '30s. The FED could have pumped lots of debt/money into the market to stimulate the economy and get the country back on track, but did they? No; in fact, they restricted the money supply quite severely. We all know the results that occurred from that action, don't we?

Why would the FED do this? During that period asset values and stocks were at rock bottom prices. Who do you think was buying everything at 10 cents on the dollar? I believe that it is referred to as consolidating the wealth. How many times have they already done this in the last 85 years?

Do you think they will do it again?

Just as an aside at this point, look at today's economy. Markets are declining. Why? Because the FED has been very liberal with its debt/credit/money. The market was hyper inflated. Who creates inflation? The FED. How does the FED deal with inflation? They restrict the debt/credit/money. What happens when they do that? The market collapses.

Several months back, after certain central banks said they would be selling large quantities of gold, the price of gold fell to a 25-year low of about $260 per ounce. The central banks then bought gold. After buying at the bottom, a group of 15 central banks announced that they would be restricting the amount of gold released into the market for the next five years. The price of gold went up $75.00 per ounce in just a few days. How many hundreds of billions of dollars did the central banks make with those two press releases?

Gold is generally considered to be a hedge against more severe economic conditions. Do you think that the private banking families that own the FED are buying or selling equities at this time? (Remember: buy low, sell high.) How much money do you think these FED owners have made since they restricted the money supply at the top of this last current cycle?

Alan Greenspan has said publicly on several occasions that he thinks the market is overvalued, or words to that effect. Just a hint that he will raise interest rates (restrict the money supply), and equity markets have a negative reaction. Governments and politicians do not rule central banks, central banks rule governments and politicians. President Andrew Jackson won the presidency in 1828 with the promise to end the national debt and eliminate the SBUS. During his second term President Jackson withdrew all government funds from the bank and on January 8, 1835, paid off the national debt. He is the only president in history to have this distinction. The charter of the SBUS expired in 1836.

Without a central bank to manipulate the supply of money, the United States experienced unprecedented growth for 60 or 70 years, and the resulting wealth was too much for bankers to endure. They had to get back into the game. So, in 1910 Senator Nelson Aldrich, then Chairman of the National Monetary Commission, in collusion with representatives of the European central banks, devised a plan to pressure and deceive Congress into enacting legislation that would covertly establish a private central bank.

This bank would assume control over the American economy by controlling the issuance of its money. After a huge public relations campaign, engineered by the foreign central banks, the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 was slipped through Congress during the Christmas recess, with many members of the Congress absent. President Woodrow Wilson, pressured by his political and financial backers, signed it on December 23, 1913.

The act created the Federal Reserve System, a name carefully selected and designed to deceive. "Federal" would lead one to believe that this is a government organization. "Reserve" would lead one to believe that the currency is being backed by gold and silver. "System" was used in lieu of the word "bank" so that one would not conclude that a new central bank had been created.

In reality, the act created a private, for profit, central banking corporation owned by a cartel of private banks. Who owns the FED? The Rothschilds of London and Berlin; Lazard Brothers of Paris; Israel Moses Seif of Italy; Kuhn, Loeb and Warburg of Germany; and the Lehman Brothers, Goldman, Sachs and the Rockefeller families of New York.

Did you know that the FED is the only for-profit corporation in America that is exempt from both federal and state taxes? The FED takes in about one trillion dollars per year tax free! The banking families listed above get all that money.

Almost everyone thinks that the money they pay in taxes goes to the US Treasury to pay for the expenses of the government. Do you want to know where your tax dollars really go? If you look at the back of any check made payable to the IRS you will see that it has been endorsed as "Pay Any F.R.B. Branch or Gen. Depository for Credit U.S. Treas. This is in Payment of U.S. Oblig." Yes, that's right, every dime you pay in income taxes is given to those private banking families, commonly known as the FED, tax free.

Like many of you, I had some difficulty with the concept of creating money from nothing. You may have heard the term "monetizing the debt," which is kind of the same thing. As an example, if the US Government wants to borrow $1 million ó the government does borrow every dollar it spends ó they go to the FED to borrow the money. The FED calls the Treasury and says print 10,000 Federal Reserve Notes (FRN) in units of one hundred dollars.

The Treasury charges the FED 2.3 cents for each note, for a total of $230 for the 10,000 FRNs. The FED then lends the $1 million to the government at face value plus interest. To add insult to injury, the government has to create a bond for $1 million as security for the loan. And the rich get richer. The above was just an example, because in reality the FED does not even print the money; it's just a computer entry in their accounting system. To put this on a more personal level, let's use another example.

Today's banks are members of the Federal Reserve Banking System. This membership makes it legal for them to create money from nothing and lend it to you. Today's banks, like the goldsmiths of old, realize that only a small fraction of the money deposited in their banks is ever actually withdrawn in the form of cash. Only about 4 percent of all the money that exists is in the form of currency. The rest of it is simply a computer entry.

Let's say you're approved to borrow $10,000 to do some home improvements. You know that the bank didn't actually take $10,000 from its pile of cash and put it into your pile? They simply went to their computer and input an entry of $10,000 into your account. They created, from thin air, a debt which you have to secure with an asset and repay with interest. The bank is allowed to create and lend as much debt as they want as long as they do not exceed the 10:1 ratio imposed by the FED.

It sort of puts a new slant on how you view your friendly bank, doesn't it? How about those loan committees that scrutinize you with a microscope before approving the loan they created from thin air. What a hoot! They make it complex for a reason. They don't want you to understand what they are doing. People fear what they do not understand. You are easier to delude and control when you are ignorant and afraid.

Now to put the frosting on this cake. When was the income tax created? If you guessed 1913, the same year that the FED was created, you get a gold star. Coincidence? What are the odds? If you are going to use the FED to create debt, who is going to repay that debt? The income tax was created to complete the illusion that real money had been lent and therefore real money had to be repaid. And you thought Houdini was good.

So, what can be done? My father taught me that you should always stand up for what is right, even if you have to stand up alone.

If "We the People" don't take some action now, there may come a time when "We the People" are no more. You should write a letter or send an email to each of your elected representatives. Many of our elected representatives do not understand the FED. Once informed they will not be able to plead ignorance and remain silent.

Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution specifically says that Congress is the only body that can "coin money and regulate the value thereof." The US Constitution has never been amended to allow anyone other than Congress to coin and regulate currency.

Ask your representative, in light of that information, how it is possible for the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, and the Federal Reserve Bank that it created, to be constitutional. Ask them why this private banking cartel is allowed to reap trillions of dollars in profits without paying taxes. Insist on an answer.

Thomas Jefferson said, "If the America people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currencies, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their prosperity until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."

Jefferson saw it coming 150 years ago. The question is, "Can you now see what is in store for us if we allow the FED to continue controlling our country?"


"The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he breaks, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime, and the punishment of his guilt."

John P. Curran

Source: http://www.roc-grp.org/jfk.html

Posted via email from moneytalks's posterous

Rep. Lofgren: Copyright bill is the 'end of the Internet' | Privacy Inc. - CNET News

Rep. Lofgren: Copyright bill is the 'end of the Internet'

by

October 27, 2011 11:25 AM PDT

Rep. Zoe Lofgren, a Democrat whose district includes the heart of Silicon Valley, in 2009

Rep. Zoe Lofgren, a Democrat whose district includes the heart of Silicon Valley, speaking in 2009

(Credit: U.S. House of Representatives)

Rep. Zoe Lofgren, the California Democrat whose district includes the heart of Silicon Valley, is preparing to lead congressional opposition to the new Stop Online Piracy Act.

The antipiracy legislation, introduced yesterday in the House of Representatives to the applause of lobbyists for Hollywood and other large content holders, is designed to make allegedly copyright-infringing Web sites, sometimes called "rogue" Web sites, virtually disappear from the Internet.

"I'm still reviewing the legislation, but from what I've already read, this would mean the end of the Internet as we know it," Lofgren told CNET.

Lofgren, whose congressional district includes the high-tech center of San Jose, will be a key ally for Google, Yahoo, and other tech companies who are already working with advocacy groups through trade associations to figure out how to defeat SOPA (PDF), also known as the E-Parasite Act.

So far, at least, they're outnumbered, outspent, and outgunned. SOPA's backers include the Republican or Democratic heads of all the relevant House and Senate committees, and groups as far afield as the Teamsters have embraced the measure on the theory that it will protect and create U.S. jobs.

SOPA is so controversial -- the Electronic Frontier Foundation calls it "disastrous" -- because it would force changes to the Domain Name System and effectively create a blacklist of Internet domains suspected of intellectual property violations.

Lofgren's long familiarity with tech issues (I interviewed her at a Santa Clara law school conference in February, and she's been dubbed a politician who "actually understands how the Internet works") will help her rally SOPA opposition. More importantly, though, she's a member of the Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, Competition, and the Internet that will meet soon to review the legislation.

A Senate version of the bill called the Protect IP Act, which a committee approved in May, was broadly supported by film and music industry companies, who say there's no other realistic way to shut down rogue Web sites. But Google chairman Eric Schmidt was sharply critical, as were prominent venture capitalists, civil liberties groups, and trade associations representing Web companies.

For Lofgren, at least, opposing an expansion of copyright law won't be a novel task. After the Department of Homeland Security began seizing alleged piratical domains last fall, Lofgren wrote a letter to the department expressing concerns about the practice.

When an earlier version of Protect IP was advancing in the Senate last year, Lofgren said: "I'm particularly concerned that it could set a precedent for further control and censorship of the Internet by foreign governments, and risk the fragmentation of the global domain name system. Many prominent human rights activists and Internet engineers have voiced these concerns, and they deserve serious consideration."

Lofgren has also earned the enmity of some copyright lobbyists for trying to expand Americans' fair use rights. In 2002, she introduced a bill--which was ultimately unsuccessful--that would amend the Digital Millennium Copyright Act to allow consumers to make backup copies of digital media such as DVDs that they had lawfully purchased.

Declan McCullagh is the chief political correspondent for CNET. Declan previously was a reporter for Time and the Washington bureau chief for Wired and wrote the Taking Liberties section and Other People's Money column for CBS News' Web site.

Posted via email from moneytalks's posterous

Nevada Makes Illegal Foreclosures Felony

Nevada Makes Illegal Foreclosures Felony

By Mike Colpitts

Bookmark and Share

Responding to homeowner complaints, Nevada has become the first state in the nation to make illegally repossessing a home a felony, and cash may send bankers to jail for doing such. The new law was enacted after tens of thousands of homeowners complained to lawmakers about their homes being foreclosed without proof of ownership.

The outcry of consumer complaints over illegal robo-signing tactics has produced a series of lawsuits against mortgage servicing companies and banks in Nevada, which has led the U.S. in foreclosures six straight years.

The Nevada law makes it a felony for a mortgage servicer or trustee of a mortgage to make false representations concerning a title such as claiming that they are an executive of a bank or mortgage servicer, which was the case in at least hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of robo-signings. A $5,000 fine will also be assessed if fraud is found. The law requires mortgage companies to provide a new affidavit with the amount owed on the loan, the person who is in possession of the note and the individual with the authority to foreclose on the property.

Some 26 U.S. states conduct foreclosures through the courts, but the new law does not make Nevada a judicial foreclosure state. Foreclosures have been delayed in many cases since the law went into effect Oct. 1 st.

price reduced

Cathe Cole, vice president of default for Trustee Corps., and foreclosure counsel in Nevada for Freddie Mac said as long as trustees can show a clear chain of title, including the named servicer of the mortgage there would be nothing for companies carrying out foreclosures to fear. “They just want to make sure we're doing things correctly,” said Cole.

Nevada’s state attorney general is attempting to halt illegal foreclosure practices such as robo-signing with the new law, which they believe are still taking place. Proof of ownership title is critical to the chain of title. If the proof has been lost or never forwarded to a mortgage servicing company the foreclosing party may have no right to formally foreclose and take the real estate.

The Nevada law could provide an example for other states to follow implementing the new law. Homeowners throughout the U.S. have filed lawsuits against mortgage servicing companies alleging fraud in foreclosure proceedings used to formally repossess their homes after Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS) reportedly failed to provide the physical documents on foreclosures their electronic system was used for to provide foreclosures through. MERS ordered mortgage servicers and banks to halt foreclosures in its name earlier this year.

Published October 25, 2011

Posted via email from moneytalks's posterous

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

16 Things Libya Will Never See Again | Disinformation

16 Things Libya Will Never See Again

Posted by Saya on October 24, 2011

Great Manmade River

  1. There is no electricity bill in Libya; electricity is free for all its citizens.
  2. There is no interest on loans, banks in Libya are state-owned and loans given to all its citizens at zero percent interest by law.
  3. Having a home considered a human right in Libya.
  4. All newlyweds in Libya receive $60,000 dinar (U.S.$50,000) by the government to buy their first apartment so to help start up the family.
  5. Education and medical treatments are free in Libya. Before Gaddafi only 25 percent of Libyans were literate. Today, the figure is 83 percent.
  6. Should Libyans want to take up farming career, they would receive farming land, a farming house, equipments, seeds and livestock to kickstart their farms are all for free.
  7. If Libyans cannot find the education or medical facilities they need, the government funds them to go abroad, for it is not only paid for, but they get a U.S.$2,300/month for accommodation and car allowance.
  8. If a Libyan buys a car, the government subsidizes 50 percent of the price.
  9. The price of petrol in Libya is $0.14 per liter.
  10. Libya has no external debt and its reserves amounting to $150 billion are now frozen globally.
  11. If a Libyan is unable to get employment after graduation the state would pay the average salary of the profession, as if he or she is employed, until employment is found.
  12. A portion of every Libyan oil sale is credited directly to the bank accounts of all Libyan citizens.
  13. A mother who gives birth to a child receive U.S.$5,000.
  14. 40 loaves of bread in Libya costs $0.15.
  15. 25 percent of Libyans have a university degree.
  16. Gaddafi carried out the world’s largest irrigation project, known as the Great Manmade River project, to make water readily available throughout the desert country.

Related Posts with Thumbnails

Posted via email from moneytalks's posterous

Thursday, October 20, 2011

savethemales.ca - Banker Explained "Occupy America" Scam

Banker Explained "Occupy America" Scam

October 19, 2011


kahn.jpg
Asked why bankers would back Bolshevism, a system supposedly inimical to private ownership, Otto Kahn (left) explained that Illuminati Jewish bankers create apparent opposites to "remake the world" according to their satanic specifications.

by Henry Makow Ph.D.


Otto Kahn, (1869-1934) was a partner in America's most influential investment bank Kuhn Loeb with Jacob Schiff and Paul Warburg.

He was the George Soros of his time,

Soros, who is worth $22 Billion, has expressed support for the "Occupy Wall Street" movement and is financing it indirectly.  This movement has been identified as wholly Socialist and Communist, with the goal of ending free enterprise. Half would vote for Obama.  

Thus, it is worth recalling what the Illuminati Jewish banker game is here.

In his book Geneva Versus Peace (1937) the Comte de St. Aulaire, who was the French ambassador to London, recalled a dinner conversation with Otto Kahn which took place shortly after WWI. This shocking expose is fast disappearing down the memory hole. 

Asked why bankers would back Bolshevism, a system supposedly inimical to private ownership, Kahn took a pull from his enormous cigar and explained that the Illuminati Jewish bankers create apparent opposites to "remake the world" according to their satanic specifications:

"You say that Marxism is the very antithesis of capitalism, which is equally sacred to us [Illuminati Jewish bankers.] It is precisely for this reason that they are direct opposites to one another, that they put into our hands the two poles of this planet and allow us to be its axis. These two contraries, like Bolshevism and ourselves, find their identity in the International." [Presumably, he means the Comintern.]

"These opposites ... meet again in the identity of their purpose and end in the remaking of the world from above by the control of riches, and from below by revolution. Our mission consists in promulgating the new law and in creating a God, that is to say in purifying the idea of God and realizing it, when the time shall come. We shall purify the idea by identifying it with the nation of Israel, which has become its own Messiah. the advent of it will be facilitated by the final triumph of Israel..." 

"Our essential dynamism makes use of the forces of destruction and  forces of creation, but uses the first to nourish the second...Our organization for revolution is evidenced by destructive Bolshevism and for construction by by the League of Nations which is also our work. Bolshevism is the accelerator and the League is the brake on the mechanism of which we supply both the motive force and the guiding power.  What is the end? It is already determined by our mission. It is formed of elements scattered throughout the whole world, but cast in the flame of our faith in ourselves. We are a League of Nations which contains the elements of all others...Israel is the microcosm and the germ of the city of the future."   

 The essential element here is that the Cabalistic Jewish bankers and their minions take the place of God. They define reality and morality, turning them upside down. They enjoy a worldwide political, economic and cultural monopoly institutionalized in a world government.

obamahitler.jpgThis is achieved by a dialectical process of pitting apparent opposites against each other and achieving a synthesis which resembles this monolithic monopoly.

The "Occupy Wall Street" protests are designed to facilitate the "redistribution" of wealth. However this wealth will not go to the intended recipients but to the State, which "owes" the bankers trillions.

Socialism/Communism have always been gambits to transfer wealth to members of the club. Castro and Hugo Chavez are both worth a billion dollars. Meanwhile, everyone else works cheaply for the "common good." 

This is why the mass media and many millionaire "socialists" support this movement. Their money will not be touched. They are traitors and collaborators. There is a list of them here.

 
In the Red Symphony revelation, insider Christian Rakovsky showed how Communism and Capitalism were part of this dialectical process. . In each case, the Illuminati Jewish banking cartel controls all wealth and power.

"In Moscow there is Communism: in New York capitalism. It is all the same as thesis and antithesis. Analyze both. Moscow is subjective Communism but [objectively] State capitalism. New York: Capitalism subjective, but Communism objective. A personal synthesis, truth: the Financial International, the Capitalist Communist one. 'They.' "

The US has Communism objectively because the Illuminati bankers control most of the corporations.


CONCLUSION

We are in the final stages of a long-term conspiracy by Cabalist Jewish bankers and their Masonic lackeys to erect a world police state, and to control us by mind control or force. This has been achieved by a contrived "dialectical process" best exemplified by World War Two and the Cold War.  "Occupy Wall Street" is but the latest instance of this inexorable march to enslavement.

Mass protests would be real if they demanded 1. Nationalizing the Fed, creation of debt-free currency and disowning that portion of the national debt created by book entry. 2. Independent investigation of 9-11 and prosecution of those responsible for the attack and the cover-up. 3. All national political campaigns be publicly funded.  For the price of one battle cruiser, we could have real democracy. 4. Media monopolies be broken up. As is, popular resistance is a banker Punch and Judy Puppet Show.    


NOTE:

Otto Kahn also exemplifies how these bankers create reality by controlling what passes for culture. Kahn financed many movies and virtually created the New York's Metropolitan Opera. He was responsible for introducing Stanislavski, Nijinski, the Abbey Players, the Moscow Art Theater, and practically every other important personage and event in the most vigorous era of American theatrical history. He subsidized, sponsored, and had close relationships with Toscanini, Caruso, Chaliapin, Pavlova, Pirandello, Eugene O'Neill, Paul Robeson, Grace Moore, and hundreds of other artists whose names are now part of that history.

Apparent to all with eyes to see, their satanic agenda includes destroying marriage and family and  mainstreaming satanism, homosexuality, pornography, promiscuity, pederasty and incest. 

--


Related: Makow:   Our Illuminati Reality Bubble

Makow - The Zionist Billionaires Who Control Politics

 


REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED

Comments for "Banker Explained "Occupy America" Scam "

Dan said (October 20, 2011):

In 2009 we saw the creation of the 'Tea Party Movement' which seemed spontaneous at first, but soon as I observed the cell that formed where I live I recognized all the features of 'handled' opposition. In September 2009 over million of them marched on the National Mall in Washington D.C. Rather than gathering consensus of the entire disfranchised public that should properly be on the same side, they fell right into the old pro-war neo-con mold and turned their hostility on the unemployed and aliens.

After all, the genesis of the Tea Party came out of the "town hall meetings" held by John McCain during the 2008 election.
The 'Tea Party' was created first and given time and media coverage to mature into full blown right wing controlled opposition. This bred a sufficient reaction from youth to want to oppose it, and lo and behold out popped the Occupy Together Movement. Not created by 'Anonymous', by the way.

The average person doesn't see that such events are set up as staging areas for handfuls of professional organizers to recruit people for what they believe are informal house gatherings to discuss what members of a community can do. They're never told that the organizers spend months in planning meetings. The protesters we see on TV are genuinely unaware of the organizational iceberg behind the 'movement'.

I venture to say the rough sketch planning for OWS and the Tea Parties was on the drawing board no later than 2006.
My street sense reasoning goes like this:

The American Political Dialectic is "Iron Fist" alternates with "Velvet Glove" . Bush and the NeoCons were obviously 'Iron Fist'. Once Iron Fist has accomplished it's stage of the long term business plan, you need "Velvet Glove" to act out policies not credible for Iron Fist to do. A perfect example of how 'Velvet Glove' is used is from a letter by Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger to one of her funders on how to keep black mothers from figuring out that Planned Parenthood's goals was reduction of black population strictly for racist reasons.
“We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population.”

Looking at current events this way, one can see why Obama been able to order US jets to bomb largely black Libyan villages, and just invaded Uganda last week.

"Barrack Obama is the most dangerous president in recent memory for Africa" - T. West, Afri-Synergy


Roger (General response) said (October 19, 2011):

Thank you! I had the distinct pleasure to read your book. Normally a book of that length I would finish in a day, however I took it very slow and concentrated on every thought. It is a masterpiece of truth!!

For years I have researched why the world is the way it is. I began my quest for the truth at age 30 while working on a trading desk. It was obvious to me nothing was as it seemed. An elderly gentleman at the firm overheard my questions and disgust about the way I saw things. He called me aside and asked me to read a book. The book was Tragedy & Hope. I read it, and since that time I have always been searching for truth. I found,as you have,that the truth is within. Everything outside of us is a reflection of our thoughts, we cannot change the outside without first changing our innermost thoughts. I long ago gave up caring about the outside, money and material things mean nothing to me. I realized how worthless they truly are years ago as I became successful, the more money I had, the less I wanted things it could buy. I was the opposite of most, I found "success" in the worldly sense very unsatisfying. My wife and children and our happiness through a simple family lifestyle was what brought me joy.

When Lehman Brothers collapsed so did my business, but the material loss had no lasting impact on us. I had awakened to the fact that money was an illusion, a trap, many years ago and therefore never let it get its hold on me or my family. I thank God everyday for the opportunity to experience life and I always put Him first. I gave up on organized religion many years ago also. Everything of this world is of men, my true home is with God. I look at our human body as a vehicle to experience this life. Our physical bodies are not who we are, sadly most have been tricked to believe our bodies are all we are. What a shame to fall into that trap.

Posted via email from moneytalks's posterous

Friday, October 14, 2011

Vitamin D Better than Fluoride at Cavity Prevention | Natural Society

Vitamin D Better than Fluoride at Cavity Prevention

Anthony Gucciardi
NaturalSociety
October 10, 2011

dentist2 210x131 Vitamin D Better than Fluoride at Cavity PreventionThe link between adequate vitamin D levels and increased cavity prevention is long established, with documentation as far back as the Civil War demonstrating the effect of natural sunlight exposure on dental health. Fluoride, which is currently pushed by the government and some mainstream health organizations as a powerful anti-cavity measure, has an even larger amount of scientific research highlighting its negative benefits such as reduced IQ and cancer. Furthermore, it has been found that fluoride does not effectively prevent cavities.

In a report of men rejected from the Civil War draft for lost teeth, a distinction was made between those who received adequate amounts of vitamin D-generating sunlight and those who did not. Only 8 per 100 men from Kentucky suffered from lost teeth, while the number jumped to 25 out of 100 New England men found to have missing teeth.

Of course the increased sunlight allows for optimum vitamin D production, which in northern areas is not possible during many parts of the year. It was Clarence Mills and Bion East who first conducted studies over geographical location and the prevalence of sunlight exposure back in the 1930s. The study observed young males between 12 and 14 from a cross-section survey taken between 1933 and 1934. East found that cavities were inversely related to mean hours of annual sunlight and subsequent vitamin D levels.

The subjects living in the west, where vitamin D production and sunlight are at higher levels, averaged 3,000 hours of sunlight per year and half as many cavities as those in the northeast. The study found that northeastern participants averaged less than 2,200 hours of annual sunlight, leading to significantly less vitamin D production.

Another interesting fact is that vitamin D also attacks oral bacteria, due to the production of a polypeptide known as cathelicidin, which is made in addition to vitamin D by your body in response to direct sunlight.

Meanwhile studies have been documenting how your drinking water may be giving you cancer, reducing your IQ, and causing other health problems. The reason for this is the presence of fluoride in the drinking water, a substance which a 2010 study published in the Environmental Health Perspectives found to decrease IQ in children. Shockingly, over 24 studies have confirmed the link between fluoride consumption and decreased cognitive function. However fluoride also wreaks havoc on other parts of the body, with 100 animal studies linking fluoride to an increase in male infertility, diabetes, and other diseases.

Vitamin D is not only naturally produced by the body in response to sunlight, but it comes with 0 side effects when properly utilized. Preventing cavities through sunlight exposure and vitamin D3 supplementation is a very simple and effective method. Fluoride, on the other hand, not only does not adequately prevent cavities but will heavily damage your body and increase your risk of cancer. Keep in mind that in many areas vitamin D production during winter months is very limited, so it may be necessary to supplement with around 5 to 10,000 IU of vitamin D3 daily. The only way to know for sure if your vitamin D levels are optimal is to have your blood tested.

Sources:

1. http://www.landesbioscience.com/journals/dermatoendocrinology/Grant2DE3-3.pdf
2. Lewis JR. Exemptions from military service on account  of loss of teeth. Dental Cosmos 1865; 7:240-2. (in East  BR. Some epidemiological aspect of tooth decay. Am J  Pub Health 1942; 32:1424-50).
3. McBeath EW, Zucker TF. The Role of vitamin D in the control of dental caries in children. J Nutrition 1938; 15:6.
4. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/110930%2C110949?dopt=Abstract
5. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10601780?dopt=Abstract
6. Cheng YX, IQ of children in areas of high fluorine content, Chinese Journal of Control of Endemic Diseases,Supplement 1991.
7. J Epidemiol (CL8), 1996 Dec; 6 (4): 184-91
8. Avioli LV. Fluoride treatment of osteoporosis. Postgrad Med: a special report, 14 Sept 1987:26-27.

Posted via email from moneytalks's posterous

Cain's 9-9-9 plan: Good for the rich, bad for the poor | McClatchy

Cain's 9-9-9 plan: Good for the rich, bad for the poor

McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON — Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain's proposed 9-9-9 tax plan would shift the tax burden in the United States, raising taxes on the poor while cutting taxes for the wealthy.

Cain proposes to scrap the current tax code and replace it with a flat 9 percent tax on personal income, a second 9 percent tax on corporate income, and a third 9 percent tax on sales. It also would eliminate the payroll tax paid for Medicare and Social Security, the estate tax, and capital gains taxes.

While the Cain campaign has not produced enough details for thorough independent analysis, a flat 9 percent income tax and a 9 percent national sales tax would almost certainly mean higher taxes for at least the 30 million U.S. households that now pay no federal taxes.

And it almost certainly would mean big tax cuts for the wealthy, who now pay a 35 percent marginal rate on their income above $379,150.

The catchy 9-9-9 tax plan has helped the former Godfathers pizza CEO surge into the top tier contending for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination. With his rising support, Cain's plan is drawing more scrutiny, with the potential shift of the tax burden just one of the profound effects the dramatic change in tax policy could have — if Cain were elected and managed somehow to get it past an army of lobbyists and through Congress to enactment.

Ultimately, in a second phase, Cain's plan would eliminate all income taxes for individuals and for corporations in favor of a national sales tax. To raise sufficient money to fund the government, the sales tax rate would rise significantly, perhaps to 23 percent, analysts estimate, though Cain hasn't specified a level yet.

The changes in income taxes would turn away from the progressive tax policy that's shaped U.S. policy for a century, based on the principle that the wealthier people are, the more they can afford to pay in taxes to the society that's enriched them.

"The plan could be expected to raise substantial amounts of revenue, but does so largely by skewing downwards the distribution of tax burdens," said a new analysis of the Cain plan this week by Edward D. Kleinbard, a professor of tax law at the University of Southern California. He's also a former chief of staff at the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation, which analyses all tax legislation for Congress. "The 9-9-9 Plan would materially raise the tax burden on many low- and middle-income taxpayers."

Others agree.

"It's regressive relative to what we have now," said Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center, a joint effort of the Urban Institute and Brookings Institution, center-left policy-research centers. "It would raise taxes for people at the bottom and lower taxes at the top end."

Cain has insisted it would not hurt poorer Americans, in large part because he would eliminate the payroll tax. But nearly 30 million households — about 18 percent — pay neither income taxes nor the FICA payroll tax, according to Williams. Most would pay more, perhaps much more.

Cain proposes to levy the 9 percent flat tax on all income after allowing an undetermined amount of charitable contributions to be deducted. He also would create "empowerment zones" where people would have additional deductions.

People with lower incomes also would pay a disproportionate share of their income in sales taxes, because they spend much more of their income on retail goods.

Wealthier Americans could pay lower taxes. First, there would be no taxes on capital gains or large estates. Second, all income after deductions would be taxed at 9 percent. As of now, taxable income over $379,950 is taxed at 35 percent.

"If you're one of the minority of people, the top 10 percent of the population, who pay 70 percent of the income tax revenues, you might see the change as a good deal," said Dean Clancy, legislative counsel for FreedomWorks, a conservative group.

"But if you're lower down the income scale, and especially if you're one of the 50 percent of Americans who don't pay any income taxes, then you might not see it as such a good trade. And if you're poor, you might really hate it."

A lot depends on details that Cain has not yet released. For example, it's unknown if he would make people pay the sales tax on food and medicine. If he exempted those, as many states do, more people would pay lower taxes.

But the government also would collect fewer revenues to pay its bills — or it would have to raise the sales tax rate.

Cain said in a debate Tuesday that his plan would leave government revenues essentially the same, basing his conclusion on advice from "well-recognized economists" and a study by an "independent" firm. He did not identify either the economists or the firm, and did not release the study. The one economic adviser he did name was Rich Lowrie, a manager for Wells Fargo who is not a trained economist.

Moreover, he said he relied on "dynamic" scoring, the theory that revenue estimates of what changes to taxes would yield should be based not just on the taxes themselves, but on presumed growth in the economy after taxes fall.

One media analysis by the Bloomberg news service said the plan as proposed would leave the government with about $200 billion less in revenues than it's collecting now.

Cain's talk of his 9-9-9 plan also does not address his ultimate goal, the abolition of income taxes and the Internal Revenue Service in favor of a national sales tax alone, or Fair Tax.

While that would replace two of the nines with zeros, it also would necessarily multiply the third. One recent Fair Tax proposal hinged on a 23 percent national sales tax as necessary to match today's revenues.

Cain hasn't said what he'd exempt from that tax, or how high the rate would be. That may be murky policy, but it is good politics.

"The more things you exempt, the higher the rate," said Michael Franc, a vice president at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative research group. "And the higher the rate, the harder the sell."

ON THE WEB

Cain's 9-9-9 plan

Posted via email from moneytalks's posterous

Monday, October 10, 2011

savethemales.ca - Occupy Wall Street is COINTELPRO (Phony Opposition)

Occupy Wall Street is COINTELPRO (Phony Opposition)

October 10, 2011

Otpor3.jpgIMPORTANT:   Controlled opposition scam alert....The "OCCUPY AMERICA MOVEMENT".

  It's everywhere!  Just like Arab Spring for North America!  and it's sooooooo grass roots and spontaneous!

  [Editor's Note: The "tell" is the  publicity this is getting from the TV Networks who spin it as the Democratic Party equivalent of the Tea Party.]

by Richard Evans
(henrymakow.com) 


COINTELPRO was the FBI acronym for 'Counter Intelligence Program'. COINTELPRO not only infiltrated domestic antiwar and civil rights protest groups, it also created them.  By 1968, the largest leading 'counterculture' groups were entirely FBI/CIA controlled.

  In fact the leading 'Anti-Establishment' figures of the late 60's early 70's were outed years later as having been double agents for the CIA. 

SDS-1969.jpgLSD promoter Harvard Dr. Timothy Leary;  feminist icon and co-founder editor of MS Magazine, Gloria Steinem -- who persists today as an icon of feminism.

COINTELPRO SDS LOGO c.1969


COINTELPRO never went away, it got privatized.

ORGANIZED BY A SERBIAN OUTFIT  

OCCUPY WALL STREET and the OCCUPY TOGETHER MOVEMENT is the work of SERBIAN contract revolution organizers the CENTER FOR APPLIED NONVIOLENT ACTION AND STRATEGIES [C.A.N.V.A.S]  in Belgrade and it's field operative organizer company, "OPTOR!"

So don't you believe it when ABC says "Everybody and nobody are in charge...."  or the Guardian hints, "rumors persist the group "Anonymous" is behind the Occupy Together Movement".  

OTPOR.pngThe cover story is that back in 1998 some college students at the University of Belgrade that were unhappy with totalitarian regime of Slobodan Milošević decided it would be fun to topple the Serbian government.  The smartest guy in the room, Ivan Marovic, allegedly dreamed up a grass roots strategy and they went to work organizing protests as OTPOR! which means RESISTANCE! in English.

  <The group was helped by the fact that the US and NATO started bombing the heck out of Serbia in 1999 accelerated the fall of Slobodan Milošević (below left) by 2000.  Western media hailed Marovic and OTPOR! as new age geniuses, but it came out later that Ivan Marovic's stragegy and program came from a Boston think tank's subversion manual, 'From Dictatorship to Democracy' by a Harvard Professor named Gene Sharp.

Hundreds of copies of the Boston manual were provided in the Serbian language by the Albert Einstein Institution - "a non-profit organization that specializes in the study of the methods of non-violent resistance in conflicts".

slob.jpgA documentary on Professor Sharp's global influence on the revolutions export, "How to Start a Revolution" was released in September 2011. It won awards at the Boston Film Festival and London's Raindance Film Festival on October 2nd 2011.  

Basking in media hype that OTPOR! had toppled the big bad Serbian regime, Ivan Marovic and his band of merry pranksters founded the CENTER FOR APPLIED NONVIOLENT ACTION AND STRATEGIES [C.A.N.V.A.S] .  It occupies an office building in downtown Belgrade, which plans revolutions and trains organizers in subversive strategy and tactics for money.  . The Belgrade office is nicknamed 'Revolution University'.  http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/02/16/revolution_u?page=full

fistcommunism.jpgPEELING THE ONION

Well, hold the bus. That's the story currently on the Internet, but it omits the same operation in the color and flower revolutions dating back to Czechoslovakia 1989. The VELVET Revolution.
Radio Prague history online:http://archiv.radio.cz/history/history15.html

Word on the street in Prague was that there was KGB involvement getting it started, and we know there was CIA support and Western funding as well.  That may be a meaningful case in itself, and the history of these 'people's revolutions' mustn't be allowed to fall through the cracks of mainstream media.  OTPOR's being portrayed as the genesis of 'people power' but it was the baby on the block in 1998.    The news today is scripted for an audience born after 1987, evidently.

C.A.N.V.A.S.  even markets a computer game that teaches all ages how to start your own revolution called  "People Power".  Marovic said candidly in a documentary interview that the game was funded by one of the original backers of Otpor!  A previous version of the game was called 'A Force More Powerful'.

  Marovic said he can personally train only 150 subversives a year, the game reaches tens of thousand at a price of ten dollars a download.   I've reviewed the game and attest it's a highly detailed simulation of how these export revolutions are organized, complete with 'establishment' reactions.

The so-called 'spontaneous'  'Twitter' Revolutions in the Middle East in February.  Who do you think is organizing the unemployed, uneducated, angry Middle East youth who are the brown shirts of these revolutions?  The Carnegie Foundation says the most wonderful things about them.

OTPOR-LOGOS.jpgThey all have the same fist logo. --

 http://www.carnegiecouncil.org/resources/articles_papers_reports/0087.html/:pf_printable


Let's be honest. C.A.N.V.A.S. is a for-profit business, not a non-profit NGO. "Ivan Marovic" is a CIA contractor: a front man like 'Wikileaks' Julian Assange.  

OCCUPY WALL STREET

fistoffem.jpg(left, the phoney feminist fist)

What's all this got to do with OCCUPY WALL STREET and the the OCCUPY TOGETHER 'grass roots' movement in America?  
Take a minute to watch this.  You'll figure out.

Ivan Marovic of 'Otpor!' addresses Occupy Wall Street     NYC Sept. 22, 2011

Need more?
The Revolution Business -



NOT ALL PROTESTS ARE FAKE

COINTELPRO fake protests partner with MEDIA to distract from real protests.  I believe the Greek protest is genuine.  OCCUPY WALL STREET was timed to drown out the Greeks.

I think this because the Greeks had a specific demand  last month in direct response to their government's sellout to the IMF.    The Greek protest was saying 'Don't vote to accept this debt, traitors!'The "Occupy Wall Street" type protest is  NON SPECIFIC.

CONINTELPRO handled  protests don't make demands - they make 'statements'.  Like, "STOP WAR! LEGALIZE POT! "Give us back our future!"   and "Stop pollution!"

OCCUPY TOGETHER in the US and Canada are directed by C.A.N.V.AS., the same directors behind the Tunisian and Egyptian and 'Arab Spring' revolutions.  They may look the same but the objectives are quite different.  The objective in America and Canada is NOT to topple 'regimes'.  C.A.N.V.AS. is backed by Council on Foreign Relations foundations like Carnegie Group and the Albert Einstein Institute and myriad other funnels of Illuminati funding.

 - this is yet another orchestrated international  'controlled opposition' mouse trap.  the 'Tea Party' is the controlled opposition trap for the convervative, this is the controlled opposition trap for the naive lefties.

  Remember the Venus Project?  http://www.henrymakow.com/global_tyranny_moving_forward.html


-------------

Occupy Backed by Lefty Millionaires (aka Communists)

99% Wrong

Serbia: The Legacy of Otpor

COINTELPRO: THE FBI'S COVERT ACTION PROGRAMS AGAINST AMERICAN CITIZENS
http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/cointelpro/churchfinalreportIIIa.htm

Gloria Steinem - How The CIA Used Feminism To Destabilize Society
http://www.rense.com/general21/hw.htm

What Gloria Steinem, Henry Kissinger Have in Common: CIA Pay
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=a1M9EAly2hog&refer=home

C.A.N.V.A.S.  Website
http://www.canvasopedia.org/legacy/content/serbian_case/otpor_campaign.htm

If its on Huffington Post, It is Soros-Obama

Posted via email from moneytalks's posterous