Friday, May 29, 2009


Andrew G. Marshall wrote an article on this year's Bilderberg meeting in Greece for Global Research. He reports that the information came from inside sources. This first paragraph says a lot.

“From May 14-17, the global elite met in secret in Greece for the yearly Bilderberg conference, amid scattered and limited global media attention. Roughly 130 of the world’s most powerful individuals came together to discuss the pressing issues of today, and to chart a course for the next year. The main topic of discussion at this years meeting was the global financial crisis, which is no surprise, considering the list of conference attendees includes many of the primary architects of the crisis, as well as those poised to “solve” it.”

Apparently the “elite” were meeting to decide whether to give us a prolonged depression with decades of stagnation, decline and poverty...or an intense but shorter one that would result in a new “economic order” with less sovereignty. I'm sure the “less sovereignty” part will come with either plan.

According to Williams or his sources, a fleecing of the sheople who believe the “up-turn” propaganda is planned. Also planned is a push for the Lisbon Treaty which, says Willams, will result in a more 'provincial status' for the member states of the EU.” This is apparently dependent on the Irish being suckered into a “YES” vote. I don't know if the Irish people will decide, or whether it will be decided over their heads. Remember that, as the UK's Financial Times pointed out, the EU gets its agenda through more easily when the people aren't consulted. [See a summary and link to the article in the “New Voice” post of my lostliberty blog.]

Also reported is a planned global department of health and a global treasury and the likelihood that a shorter depression will be opted for because a long one will cost the financial barons too much money. Furthermore, it is reported that there is concern among some of the attendees that they might lose control of the chaos they create which will result in loss of control of us.

Considerably more is covered in the article including many end notes with links. If you want to know what the monied aristocracy plans for us, its serfs, read it, and then watch carefully for fulfillment or attempts to fulfill these plans. That will confirm or disprove the accuracy of this report.

Return to TOC


In writing of the enemies of America it would be gross negligence to omit the greatest domestic enemy of our Constitution and our Republic—the federal government.

The following letters assigning blame for America's decline appeared in Contract Employment Weekly in 1990. The first names the decline in American engineering as the cause and the reply points the finger at the government and those behind it. I'll refer to the writer of the first as Larry D. and of the second as Rick L.



By far the most consistent whining (not a very winning strategy) about the deteriorating state of affairs pertaining to the sputtering American industrial machine, comes from the incredible array of so-called learned economists, who are looked upon as experts by our sometimes ignorant press corps. These ivy towered academics are continually being quoted by the astute members of the 4th estate as to the standard reasons for the demise of our economy. The standard excuses are:

  1. Japanese trade policies, 2) High interest rates, 3) Budget deficits, 4)? other excuses.

The above are merely symptoms not the cause! Why do these people ALWAYS miss their mark? Are they really stupid? How could this be as they are graduates of the nation's most prestigious colleges?

Did you ever have somebody look through you and talk to somebody behind you, like you didn't exist? How does it feel to be a non-person? These learned economic "experts" talk about everything else. Do they think manufactured goods just fall from the sky like manna from heaven? Hearing panels of economic "experts" try to explain the demise of our economy is like listening to a bunch of tropical birds mimicking human voices, all form no substance, quacking away at a high volume.

The reason they are off so much is that they can't say the E word. What is the E word? It stands for ENGINEER They simply cannot get themselves to admit that an industrial-based economy is 100%, not 90%, not 50%, but I repeat myself again, 100% dependent upon the American working Engineer!!!!

Since the zenith of 1969 (moon landing, top economy in world), the American Working Engineer has been treated terribly at an increasing rate! Low wages, massive importation of foreign engineers at ridiculously low wages, and finally the piece de'resistance, Senator Moynihan's 1706, have made the practice of engineering as lucrative as Uranian mining. We seem to have forgotten that manufactured goods don't grow on trees. They are designed by Engineers, the manufacturing technology is done by Engineers, and the distribution means and software is implemented by Engineers. In the economic pecking order this fact is completely ignored. There is no special interest group or union that can effectively take care of the welfare of technical workers and professionals. Engineers are the only engine of our industries.

The old adage... "you get what you pay for" is the real story behind our economic downfall. The quality of our products has been deteriorating steadily simply because our best brains go in to other fields of endeavor, namely, medicine, law and business. We have seen a steady erosion of American brainpower leave the engineering business for greener pastures. This has had a direct impact on our manufactured products on the average. We simply design and manufacture inferior products because we have inferior people designing them today more than twenty years ago.

Top pay attracts top people period! Exploited people also care less about innovation. Most engineers in this country don't get apenny for their patents unlike Japanese and European practices.

The quality of our engineering education has also fallen significantly in two decades. Greedy academia, eager to fill up campuses, actively recruited masses of foreign engineering students. In most cases at publicly supported state schools where out-of-state native Americans must pay full tuition, but alien students get free state tuition (including tens of thousands of Japanese graduate students who merrily steal taxpayer supported research). Thus in one stroke they get masses of students to support their salaries and perks. At the same time they worked hand in hand with greedy industrialists and government officials crying about fictitious shortages of Engineers in this country (there never has been such a shortage ever!) Thus in one stroke this alliance broke the back of the American working engineer. The department of labor would always let these graduating students stay in the country since they were sponsored by companies claiming they could hire no Americans for the job openings. This was true only in the context that these 'reserved for alien" jobs were usually at about one-third or half the then going rate for an American.

Not to be outdone in avarice, college professors, the chaps who had good salaries, perks and tenure, would turn around and fill the numerous instructor slots with low paid aliens. These instructors (I know from first hand experience) would do the bulk of the mundane teaching, freeing the professors to compete on government research projects staffed by free student labor under the guise of "thesis projects." However this cozy scheme had one major drawback. Most of these alien instructors' verbal English communication skills are so poor that to a typical American student all they could hear in class was garbled rubbish. Now there is no way that rigorous subjects such as advanced mathematics, physics or chemistry can be adequately taught to a large number of students in this manner. Sure there are always geniuses who learn completely by themselves, but for the majority of students this is not enough unless they form self-teaching groups. This could work for, let's say, law students, but most engineers have poor interpersonal skills, so this was out. What to do? Fortunately (unfortunately in a way) to the rescue came computer technology (primarily developed by industry, not academia).

Thus came to pass the primacy of "computer science" on most engineering campuses. This was followed by the degree in "engineering technology" (to get around the embarrassment of not receiving academic accreditation). Thus the schools could rely upon software programs to supply interactive computer prompts, rather than on actually teaching! Gone by the wayside were fundamental subjects that required rigorous analytical skills. In their place was a proliferation of programming languages and wire wrapping courses. Thus the phenomena of student as computer hacker. Gone was a massive loss of problem solving and communication skills plus major core subjects such as power engineering and analog electrical theory (and, yes, unfortunately, courses in English literature). Don't get me wrong, I firmly believe in computer technology having been in the field for over twenty-five years. But I could never practice it without a rigorous fundamental engineering education. This made it easy to design hardware or write software without any special training (which is absolutely necessary for most "engineering technology graduates"). The use of specific computers and languages or semiconductor devices is not the primary job of a college or university. Any well-trained engineer can pick these skills up quickly when on the job. However, that's the emphasis at too many schools today.

Thus, except for a handful of elite schools peopled by students with excellent high school or prep school educations, the average engineer employed by industry today is INFERIOR to his or her counterpart of 20 years ago! Now please note the term I used... "average." This statement is statistically true since there has been a fourfold increase in the number of practicing engineers than there was 20 years ago. Unfortunately probably more than half these engineers have graduated with inferior educations. As long as these individuals were willing to work significantly cheaper than Americans, our greedy industrialists were happy to hire them over Americans. Just like the old economist adage of cheap money driving good money out of the marketplace, so has the effect in driving many of our best brains out of what's become a low paying occupation relative to the others. This short-sighted policy was codified by the passage of 1706 of the TRA of 1986 by Senator Moynihan. Thus the blatant discrimination against engineers in our tax code as pertaining to working as an independent businessman.

To fill this gap many industrial firms rely heavily on computer aided engineering software. This software conceptually designed 20-30 years ago to run on the old mainframe IBM and Control Data computers, with an operating system and compiler developed by the telephone company 25 years ago has been ported over to the new table top workstation microcomputers. Excellent as this stuff is, it can in no way compensate for analytical thought processes and engineering fundamentals. There is no way that a superior tool with an inferior engineer can design a superior product. The resultant product will be inferior. However the reverse is always true. A superior engineer with an inferior tool can always produce a superior just takes longer.

So please, learned bean counters, economists and government policy makers, take note and face the truth. — Larry D., B.I.E. 1956, M.S.E.E. 1968, Working Engineer (sometimes), San Diego, California


This letter is long overdue. My excuse is that I have been floating on the air of self-importance since Larry D's letter on July 25 and it's taken me this long to get down to reality.

As an engineer, it would certainly be gratifying to think I was as important as Mr. D says, but I can't. The reason I can't accept his theory on the cause of America's demise is that I have been fighting the cause, with varying vigor, for the last twenty years. Personal experience, extensive reading and contact I've had with very knowledgeable people make me conclude that Mr. D has missed the mark, both in his assessment of the effect of the engineer's decline on America's economy and of the cause (motive?) of the economists' inaccurate assessments.

We hear a lot about the trade deficit and the deplorable state of American manufacturing, but as Mr. D points out, the real causes of America's decline are rarely mentioned—never by the "recognized expert" economists. Actually, the American economy isn't declining. As anyone who went through the last twenty years or so with their eyes open should be able to see — it's being systematically dismantled. The reasons are many — and they are one.

From the end of WWII to around 1971 or 1972 our industry had maintained a favorable trade balance, yet our balance of payments was consistently unfavorable. The difference was U.S. Government handouts and expenditures all over the world. Say what you will about the brilliance of Japanese management, it would have been in vain if the Japanese government had embarked on a program to bleed their economy dry, and that is exactly what has happened here. Through the twin jugular incisions of "Foreign Aid" and Militarism, our government has been bleeding capital, the life-blood of any modern economy, from our land.

At the same time, our government began destroying the independent middle class with crippling regulation, crushing taxation, and the all-consuming three-headed monster, inflation. Regulation weakened and demoralized the middle class. The three heads of inflation—government deficit spending, the Federal Reserve, and the Fractional Reserve Banking System—began swallowing its wealth (and the wealth of most Americans) and, together with taxation, began transferring it to the financiers and big corporations that finance the national debt. Many small businessmen, especially manufacturers, couldn't afford to comply with the regulations; others began thinking, "If I can't run it myself and I can't enjoy the fruits of my own labor, what's the point in owning a business." One by one independent manufacturers folded or were absorbed by the giant corporations. The courage, drive, individualistic spirit, and innovation of these entrepreneurs was lost to America. The spiritless collective mentality of the corporate 'manager" replaced it. To compound the loss, most of the giant corporations are multi-national and they frequently transfer production to other countries where they have a cheap labor supply and no need for government regulation to destroy competition: there is none.

Finally, as the Federal Government grew into an all powerful centralized National Government through gradual usurpation of the rights and powers of the States, local governments, and the people themselves, the citizen inevitably shrank. The individualistic (dirty word), innovative spirit of the average American was replaced by the collectivist, regimented spirit? of the bureaucrat. The plans for their own economic well-being that were made by tens of millions of free Americans were replaced by the plans of tens of thousands of self-aggrandizing government "planners". Thus, the most thoroughly planned and prosperous economy in history, one that had had input from millions of planners (the people) degenerated into the "planned" chaos created by politically appointed "experts".

There are other contributing factors, but they are all part of the same cause I've been writing about. As I said earlier, "the causes are many, and they are one." They can be summed up in one word, the word the establishment economists won't say. It is the G word — Government. Even the decline in the quality of college education has been caused in part by the desire to increase head count to increase government subsidy.

The big question is, why is all this happening? Why don't the "bean counters", economists and government policy makers "take note and face the truth?" Is it stupidity, poor judgment, or are we all being driven by events beyond our control? I have my own ideas, but before I relate them, I want to warn you. I'm one of those "kooks" that believe in the "Conspiracy Theory of History" (as opposed to the "fools" who believe in the "Accidental Theory"). Anyone who has difficulty planning what they're going to do this weekend and feels uncomfortable with the idea that there may be people who plan decades ahead, even for things that will not come to pass in their own lifetimes, had better skip the rest of this letter.

As to our being driven by events, I believe that hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, and earthquakes are typical of events beyond man's control (but with weather control, underground nuclear testing, etc., I'm not too sure about this anymore). On the other hand, booms and busts, inflation and deflation, war and peace, although they are beyond the control of most men, they themselves are driven by men. Why? For personal gain, of course!

If you analyze history instead of just accepting it as a series of dates and unrelated events that drove the human race along, I think you'll find a characteristic generally common to all times and places; those who dominate the wealth of an area and time usually dominate the politics and vice-versa. That's not really a difficult concept to grasp. I think most people will agree that politics and economics are inextricably intertwined and, like matter and energy, each can be converted into the other. Not so obvious is that, as a rule, those who are able attempt to pull power to the level of their economic interests. Sociological studies in the U.S. show that when a business is local, the businessman is active in local affairs. When it is operating over a wider area, perhaps in several cities within a state, the businessman stays out of local affairs because the locals would deem his activity interference. However, it's reasonable to assume that he has still not lost interest in those local issues that affect his business. Since he doesn't want to appear to be interfering in local affairs, but still wants to protect and advance his economic interests, his best move is to draw those government functions that affect his business to the state level where he is now influential.

That tendency of economic dominants to pull government power with them to their new level of economic interests is evident in America. As the geographic scope of business has expanded, power has shifted in great proportion from the local and state governments to the Federal Government (see Strohm, CEW-818/90, "But state laws conform to federal laws"). It is the continuance of that trend into the international sphere that provides the motive for the systematic destruction of the American economy.

Today, Mega-Corp and Daddy Big Bucks no longer see themselves as Americans. They are, and they see themselves as, internationalists. They call themselves and their henchmen, "The New World Order". It is in their interests to promote world government to further and protect their global economic interests, and they don't give a damn what the cost is to the rest of us — and the cost is high. After WWII no country on earth could touch our standard of living and its potential was almost limitless. There was no way the American people could have been persuaded to give up all they had for a world government. It became necessary to take it away bit by bit. That's the reason for what has been and is happening to America. If you think times are bad now, just wait until 2000, the year these guys plan to have "Service" America completed. Engineers know what a service economy means. It means we'll be at the arrivals gate of the international airport fighting each other for the right to shine the rich tourist's shoes or to sell him our "sister" (she very nice girl — big fun).

If you don't believe our de-industrialization is planned, get a copy of long time 'think tank" member Vincent P. Rock's, "A Strategy for Interdependence", Scribner's, 1964. Also, try to get a copy of, The Declaration of Interdependence", another "think tank" developed document. You'll believe!

For those not aware, "think tanks" are gaggles of intellectual whores who have sold their minds to the highest bidders. They are charged with developing and implementing plans for the 'One World' scam and couching them in idealistic terms for the appeasement of the victims. This brings us to the question, "Why don't the economists see this and expose it?" Some have, but they are not "recognized experts" and aren't likely to be. It's also unlikely they or their schools will get grants from government or the big foundations to continue their work, and you won't see them quoted often by the media. For funding, credibility, and publicity, you must be "recognized." To become "recognized" an economist must prostitute himself to the moguls of the New World Order. Like the witchdoctor of old, he must mesmerize the people with tricks, incoherent chants, and smoke—lots of smoke. He must convince them that he and he alone possesses esoteric wisdom that permits him to speak to the great god, Economindexus. Above all, HE MUST NEVER TELL THE TRUTH! – Rick L. Ind./Mfg. Engr. [aka PhreedomPhan]

Return To TOC

Thursday, May 21, 2009


I have listed the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission and the Rhodes Scholars as America's enemies. Also belonging to that list is the Bilderberg Group and the Club of Rome. I haven't mentioned them because they are international equivalents of the CFR and the TC so their membership in our government is relatively small. They are, never-the-less, continuing the dirty work of our domestic Treason Clubs. Many high level American low lifes are invited to attend the Bilderberg meetings.

I admit that I am being insular in calling these groups “America's enemies.” They are, in fact, enemies of the entire human race. They pit us one against the other in wars, revolutions, terrorism, economic upheavals, and all sorts of managed crises of their making. They are immune to the chaos they create and sit back and rake in the profits and power.

Below is a preliminary listing of invitees to the 2009 Bilderberg meeting in Greece. The list was taken from a Greek newspaper, Vima, and translated into German by Freeman the blogger at:
(everything noise and smoke)(the blog is in German)

Some of the names he said were derived phonetically, probably from an insider phone call, so the spelling may not be correct. Compound this by my having to reach back 40 years to translate from German.

Freeman says not all the invitees attended, but points out that the significant thing is the fact they received an invitation.

He doesn't certify that the list is accurate, only that it is the list given by the Greek newspaper (to) Vima. To the skeptics who insist that the source be the mainstream press, he says ... “here it is, a serious, nationwide, Greek daily newspaper.”

He notes that there is nobody from Russia or China. Bilderberg is strictly a European and North American “Club.”

The blog's author points out the clear conflict of interest. “Heads of business concerns are meeting with heads of ministries and bureaus that are supposed to control them and with secret service and military people, and with national leaders and politicians, and, at the same time with media bosses, who should control it all. That's absurd. Where is the separation of powers. A Gemauschel (joke?) and a farce. They apparently stick everything under one cover. We are clearly 'verarscht' from all sides.” (I couldn't find this word in my dictionary, but Arsch means butt so I assume it means we're being made asses of or simply shown only the butt end.) He continues, “No wonder the media reports nothing and is dead silent on the meetings. They are part of it.” (See the media and encyclopedia sections of the America's Ruling Party Post in this blog. Sound familiar?)

Freeman asks that anyone who uses this list in their website include a backlink. I've already posted his site link above. He may mean to the Greek newspaper. Not many will be able to read it. I certainly can't, but here it is:

Where I could, I tried to identify CFR and TC members. I used an 1996 CFR list, so there are a lot of TC members from a 2009 TC list who do not show as CFR. There's usually a close correlation as the larger TC fish are usually drawn from the CFR cesspool so it's likely most of them are also CFR. I've also added BB next to some of the names. These are people who showed up on my CFR list as having attended at least one previous meeting. I also found what I thought a major anomoly. Peter Denis Southerland is the European Chairman of the Trilateral Commission and is also listed as CFR. I had never known that anyone other than Americans and maybe some Canadians belonged to the CFR, and I have some partial lists buried somewhere in my files from the 70's. Anyway, for better or for worse, here is the list:

Beatrix – Queen of the Netherlands (Holland)
Sofia – Queen of Spain
Konstantin – former King of Greece
Philipp – Prince of Belgium, member of the Club of Rome
Joseph Ackerman – Chairman of the Deutsche (German) Bank
Keith Alexander - Director of the US National Security Agency (NSA), which the blogger calls the largest security service in the world (take that Gestapo and KGB).
Georgios Alogoskoufis – former Economic and Finance Minister of Greece
Roger Altman – Deputy Treasury Secretary under Rhodes Scholar President Clinton CFR
Efstratios-Georgios A. Arapoglou – head of the Central Bank of Greece
Ali Babacan – Turkish Foreign Minister, Coordinator for Turkish trade with the EU
Dora Bakoyannis – Foreign Minister of Greece
Francisco Pinto Balsemão – Portugese Ministerpräsident (Prime Minister?)
Nicolas Baverez – Editor or Publisher of the French “Le Point.”
Franco Bernabè - Chief of Telecom Italy, Deputy Chairman of the Board of Rothschild Europe
Xavier Bertrand – General Secretary of the UMP Party of France
Nils Daniel Carl Bildt – Foreign Minister of Sweden TC
Jan Arne Björklund – Cultural? Minister, Party Chairman of the Folkpartiet liberalerna Sweden
Christoph Blocher - former Bundesrat member and former Party boss of the SVP
Alexandre Bompard - Journalist for Radio Europe 1 France
Ana Botín – Daughter of the Chairman of the Bank of Santander Emilio Botín TC
Juan Luis Cebrián – Chief of the PRISA Group of Media Spain
W. Edmund Clark – Head of the Toronto-Dominion Bank of Canada
Kenneth Harry Clarke – ex-Finance Minister of Britain
Luc Coene – head of the Belgian Nationalbank TC
George David - President of CocaCola Greece
Sir Richard Billing Dearlove - ex-Chief of the british security service MI6
Anna Diamantopoulou - PASOK parliament member, Greece
Mario Draghi – Head of the Italian Central Bank
Anders Eldrup - Head und President of DONG Energy Denmark
John Jacob Philip Elkann – Vice president of Fiat- Konzerns? (Corporation?)
Thomas Enders – head of Airbus
José Manuel Entrecanales – Head of Baukonzerns Acciona Spain
Isidro Fainé Casas - President of Caixa Bank and SEAT advisor
Niall Ferguson - Professor of Economics at Havard Business School
Timothy Franz Geithner – Treasury Secretary of the USA CFR, TC
Dermot Gleeson – Advisor to the Irish government and businessman (Chrmn AIB Group, Dublin?) TC
Donald E. Graham – CEO and Chairman of the board of the Washinton Post TC
Alfred Gusenbauer – ex-Chancellor of Austria
Victor Halberstadt - Professor of economic sciences at the University of Leiden
Ernst Hirsch Ballin – Justice Minister of the Netherlands (Holland)
Richard Holbrooke – Special Envoy for Pakistan und Afghanistan for Obama CFR, TC BB
Jaap de Hoop Scheffer – NATO-General Secretary
James Logan Jones Jr. - National Security Advisor for President Obama TC
Vernon Eulion Jordan – former security advisor for Clinton CFR BB
Robert Kagan – US-Security Advisor for Security, Terrorism, and the Balkans CFR, TC
Jyrki Katainen – Finance Minister of Finnland
Henry Alfred Kissinger – ex-US-Security Advisor and US-Secretary of State CFR, TC BB
Mustafa Koç – Chairman of the Koç Holding of the great Turkish Mischkonzern
Roland Koch – Hessian Minister President
Sami Kohen – Foreign Political Columnist for the Turkish newspaper Milliyet
Henry Kravis - Hudson Institute CFR BB
Marie-Josee Kravis - Hudson Institute CFR
Neelie Kroes – EU-Commissioner of Commerce
Odysseas Kyriakopoulos - President of the Combined? Greek Industries
Manuela Ferreira Leite – Economist and Politician
Bernardino León – Spanish Secretary of Foreign Affairs
Jessica Tuchman Mathews – President of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace CFR
Philippe Maystadt - President of the European Investment Bank (EIB)
Frank McKenna – Vice-Chairman of the TD Bank Financial Group
John Micklethwait – Economics Editor of The Economist
Thierry Montbrial - President of the French Institute of International Relations
Mario Monti – President, Bocconi University, member of the EU Reflection Group on the Future TC
Miguel Ángel Moratinos – Spanish Foreign Minister
Craig Mundie – Chief Research and Strategy officer for Microsoft
Egil Myklebust – ex-Chairman of SAS, Norwegian Hydro ASA, Member of the World Economic Advisors for sustained development
Matthias Nass – Assistant Editor (Publisher?) "Die Zeit"
Denis Olivennes - Director of the New Observer of France
Frederic Oudea – Head of the Societe General Bank of France
Cem Özdemir – Chairman of the Bündnis 90 Party/The Greens
Tommaso Padoa-Schioppa – ex-Finance Minister of Italy
Dimitris Papalexopoulos – Head of Titan Cement Company S.A. Greece
Jannos Papathanasiou – Greek Economics and Finance Minister
Richard Perle – Security Advisor under George W. Bush CFR
David Petraeus – US-Four-Star General, Commander of the US Central Command, responsible for the Near East and Central Asia CFR
Manuel Pinho – Portugese Minister for Economics and Innovation?
Robert Prichard - Head of the Toronto Star Newspaper, Canada
Romano Prodi – ex-Prime Minister of Italy, ex-President of the European Commission
Olli Rehn – EU-Progress Commissioner of Finnland
Heather Reisman – Head of Indigo Books & Music Inc Canada
Eivind Reiten – General Director of Petroleum Operations? Norsk Hydro
Michael Ringier – Administrative Board President of Ringier Holding AG, largest publisher? in Switzerland
David Rockefeller – Banker (an understatement), founder of the Council on Foreign Relations and Trilateral Commission, Capo di tutti Capi (I don't know what that means, but I suspect it corrects the understatement. Maybe “Godfather?”) CFR, TC (Founder and Honorary Chairman) BB
Dennis B. Ross – Director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy Thinktank (Idea Factory)
Special Middle East Coordinator for Clinton CFR, TC
Robert Edward Rubin – Treasury Secretary under Clinton, Economic Advisor for Obama
Alberto Ruiz-Gallardòn – Mayor of Madrid
Suzan Sabancı Dinçer – Head of the Akbank of Turkey
Indira Samarasekera – President of the University of Alberta
Rudolf Scholten – Board Member of the Austrian Kontrollbank AG
Jürgen Schrempp – ex-Chairman of DaimlerChrysler AG
Pedro Solbes Mira - ex-Economic- and Finance Minister of Spain (This from a 1-23-09 TC list: Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of the Economy and Finances, Spain; former Member of the European Commission) TC
Sampatzi Saraz - Turkish Banker
Sanata Seketa - Canada
Dominique Strauss-Kahn – Head of the International Currency Exchange?
Lawrence Summers – ex-President of the Worldbank, ex-Treasury Secretary under Clinton, Economic Advisor to Obama CFR, TC BB
Peter Denis Sutherland – ex-EU-Trade? Commissioner, Chairman of the Board of BP and Goldman Sachs International CFR, TC European Chairman
Martin Taylor – ex-Head of Barclays Bank, Chairman of Syngenta, ex-Generalsecretary of the Bilderberg Group
Peter Thiel – ex-head of PayPal
Jean-Claude Trichet – Head of the European Centralbank
Agan Ourgkout - Turkey
Matti Vanhanen – Prime Minister Finnland
Daniel Vasella – Head of Novartis
Jeroen van der Veer – Head of Royal Dutch Shell TC
Guy Verhofstadt – former Prime Minister of Belgium
Paul Volcker – former Chairman of the Federal Reserve, Economic Advisor to Barack Obama CFR, TC BB
Jacob Wallenberg - Banker and powerful industrialist from Sweden
Marcus Wallenberg - Banker and powerful industrialist from Sweden TC
Nout Wellink – Head of the Netherlands Centralbank, Member of the European Centralbank
Gerardus Johannes Wijers – Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, AkzoNobel, ex-Economics Minister of the Netherlands (Holland) TC
Martin Wolf - Journalist for the Financial Times
James David Wolfensohn – former President of the World Bank CFR BB
Paul Wolfowitz - ex-President of the World Bank, advisor to George W. Bush, and former deputy Secretary of Defense of the USA, High Level-Neocon CFR, TC BB
Fareed Zakaria – Chief Editor of Newsweek International and political Commentator for ABC News, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, New Yorker und CNN CFR, TC
Robert Zoellick - President of the World Bank CFR, TC BB

Are you as shocked as I that this group of people who are working so diligently to give us a global “democracy” for “all” the people failed to include invitations to factory workers, office workers, restaurant employees, low and middle management, farmers, repairmen, your local party committee people, etc.? Maybe it was an oversight.... or maybe this is just a partial list.


Return to TOC

Sunday, May 17, 2009

Did I Offend Anyone?

I wonder if anyone who read this blog took offense at my calling Obama “Uncle Tom.” Anyone who did might be interested in this summary statement from Bruce Dixon in his report card for Obama's first 100 days published in Black Agenda Report.

"A hundred days is far too early for anyone to score a hundred points on a list of concerns like these. 55 would have been passing, and 45 a sign of hopes being actually redeemed on some fronts. But at under 25 out of a possible 100 our First Black President is at best a chronic underacheiver, as far as the real needs of African Americans go. "

Understand I don't exactly sympathize with Dixon. I don't want to see Obama do anything for the blacks nor do I want to see him do anything for whites, hispanics, nor asians. The more the government does for us, the less freedom we have to do for ourselves. It's that very loss of freedom that has put us in the mess we're in today. My point was that Obama is serving the very tiny financial elite that put him in office.

Here are a few more items from the home page of the Black Agenda Report.

Freedom Rider: Af-Pak Is Obama's War
Submitted by Margaret Kimberley on Wed, 05/13/2009 - 06:58

* Af-Pak War
* Department of Broken Promises
* Department of War

Af-Pak War by BAR editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley
President Obama, who campaigned behind a thin veil of peace, dragged two heads of client states into the White House to demand “that both Afghanistan and Pakistan allow their citizens to be murdered and or displaced in the thousands” – or else. Obama read Presidents Zardari and Karzai “the riot act” to let them know who is boss in the military theater called “AfPak.” Obama claims to “want to respect their sovereignty, but” – there’s always the imperial ‘but’ – America has “huge national security interests” in the region. Afghanistan’s Karzai later wondered, “How can you expect a people who keep losing their children to remain friendly?”


Obama Shows His True Katrina Colors
Submitted by Glen Ford on Wed, 05/13/2009 - 06:48

* Department of Broken Promises
* post-Katrina

The line between Bush and Obama has not simply blurred in New Orleans: it has disappeared." President Obama has adopted, in whole, the Bush approach to rebuilding the city - minus the Black Diaspora that was scattered to the winds in 2005. Notices of eviction have been served on the mostly elderly and Black inhabitants of 3,000 FEMA trailers. The Obama Department of Housing and Urban Development is putting the finishing touches on public housing demolition in the city. Not a single "Katrina Cottage" has been made ready for occupancy. Obama no more favors the "right to return" to - or remain in - New Orleans, than Bush did.

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

U.S. Economy: The Cancer is Still There
Submitted by Glen Ford on Wed, 05/13/2009 - 06:37

* debt crisis
* the American disease
* Wall Street Bailout

"In the cold assessment of history, Barack Obama will be remembered more for his massive transfers of national wealth to the finance capitalist class, than as the first Black president of the United States." Mostly under his administration, $12.8 trillion dollars has been committed to prop up the Wall Street oligarchy. Yet the five banks that are the biggest recipients of federal largess continue to hold $195 trillion in fatally toxic derivatives - a notional value more than three times the planetary domestic product! "There is nothing rational to do but to wipe the obligations, and their holders, off the face of the Earth, in order to save the real economy."

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

Sort of off subject, but a passing thought. I wonder what would happen to anyone who published a “White Agenda Report?”

Return to TOC

Thursday, May 14, 2009

Bailouts -- The Sinking of the American Ship of State

“So this is how the auto bailout will work. American taxpayers pump tens of billions into rescuing General Motors from bankruptcy. Then GM pays us back by shipping more jobs overseas--the equivalent of four assembly plants. The federal money will directly subsidize more imports from abroad, enabling GM to double its car production in Mexico, South Korea and China and selling the cars into the US market.”

This is how William Greider opens his May 8 article in The Nation:

He then asks, “Can someone explain how this is in our national interest?”

Of course, that's a rhetorical question. Mr. Greider already knows the answer. It isn't! As he suggests, it's “Better to settle for bankruptcy court than provide public financing to further the destruction of US manufacturing.” That's the game! That's the aim! The destruction of U.S. manufacturing. I've been trying to tell people that for over 35 years. As long as the U.S. had a standard of living so much higher than the rest of the world, the American people would never have been foolish enough to accept a world government with its inevitable “redistribution” of their wealth. First our wealth had to be “redistributed.” Then we would have less to lose. More than likely, they will create, (and are creating), an economic situation in which we will have to accept a globalist ultimatum just to eat.

Although obviously astute, Greider then commits a series of errors that I can only attribute to mental laziness or an acute hangover. He calls Obama an “orthodox free trader” (Obama is a “free trader” or a protectionist according to the orders from his handlers) and says his administration “has stumbled into the middle of the political train wreck known as globalization.” He should know that Obama, with Trilateral “guidance,” leaped nimbly into the wreck with orders to pile on more cars.

He says, “It begins to look like another sly victory for the old order that has failed.” No, Mr. G.! It's the “New Order” and it has not failed. (See my post quoting Garet Garrett in my lostliberty blog). If I, a purely amateur writer, may be so audacious as to correct an error on his timetable and on his cause of our debtor nation status, the seed of this “free-trade” model, which he says was a product of the “Clintonistas” in the 90's, was planted during the Kennedy administration. That's when the law was passed that permitted U.S. corporations that build or invest overseas to escape income tax on earnings there. Furthermore, America became a debtor nation because of government handouts and expense of running a global empire. We had a favorable trade balance until around 1971, but our balance of payments was unfavorable since WWII. That means that our industry was holding up its end until too much of our economic life blood had been leeched by federal expenditures abroad to build the economies of other nations. After that the blood gushed from a thousand government inflicted wounds.

The author suggests that Obama was “probably hoping to evade the fight on globalization.” No doubt! Like Bush he's probably hoping to sneak it by in the darkness of the looming depression. Somehow I find it hard to sympathize with a President who has a lot of “large matters” on his plate when it's just a matter of time before we have nothing on ours.

“But the unfolding facts demand full-throated debate and political resistance in Congress” says Greider. “The United Auto Workers sent a letter to Capitol Hill the other day that revealed the terms. GM's restructuring plan envisions a doubling of the vehicles it will import from overseas factories, from 372,000 to 737,000, in the next four years. GM's imported cars--already 15.5 percent of its domestic sales--will rise to 23.5 percent.”

I agree that the “facts demand full-throated debate and political resistance in Congress,” but not the usual carefully choreographed professional wrestling matches designed to convince the people that our imaginary “democracy” works.

I have to wonder if the sheeple will listen more attentively to Alan Reuther or Steelworkers pres. Leo Gerard than they listened to John L. Lewis. He reversed his pro New Deal position in 1940 and told union workers that if they elected FDR he would make cannon fodder of their sons.

Speaking of cannon fodder, most of us are aware of the damage being done to our economy and the jobs lost as our basic steel and heavy manufacturing plants are being systematically shutdown, but how many consider this? As “our” government continues to manufacture enemies all over the world, we are being methodically disarmed. If we are attacked, where will we get our tanks and planes and missiles when we can no longer make them? Yeah! I know! That's a stupid question! We and our enemies will be supplied by the same international bankers and munitions makers as in any other war.

Greider offers this ray of “hope,” but then realism sets in. “President Obama has taken an important step toward changing this system with his recent proposals for taxing US multinationals more aggressively. That could be the start of something big--a more effective strategy that defends the national interest in the global system. Or it could be just more good talk. The outlines of the auto deal suggest the president is sticking with Rubinomics. Will other Democrats be brave enough to stand in his way?”

You've got that right, William. Just more good talk. More Obama hope-nosis to mesmerize the people.

Be sure to read the whole article at the link above.

Oh, yes! Let's remind ourselves once more of the words of Sir John Harrington. "Treason doth never prosper. What's the reason? Why, if it prosper, none dare call it treason." As another sage put it, "We have met the enemy and it is our leaders."

Return to TOC