Pollution Reports including Top 100 Corporate Air Polluters 2008 in US

The Toxic 100: Top Corporate Air Polluters in the United States

Rank Corporation Toxic score
(pounds released
x toxicity x
population exposure)
Minority share of health risk Low-income share of health risk

1

E.I. du Pont de Nemours

285,661

36.0%

17.3%

2

Archer Daniels Midland (ADM)

213,159

32.0%

22.5%

3

Dow Chemical

189,673

42.7%

13.%0

4

Bayer Group

172,773

24.3%

6.8%

5

Eastman Kodak

162,430

26.2%

13.4%

6

General Electric

149,061

32.4%

13.4%

7

Arcelor Mittal

134,573

61.6%

24.9%

8

US Steel

129,123

36.8%

17.8%

9

ExxonMobil

128,758

69.1%

25.4%

10

AK Steel Holding

101,428

7.9%

17.8%

11

Eastman Chemical

98,432

9.9%

25.4%

12

Duke Energy

93,174

20.3%

16.9%

13

ConocoPhillips

91,993

34.7%

15.1%

14

Precision Castparts

87,500

15.8%

9.8%

15

Alcoa

85,983

20.3%

15.2%

16

Valero Energy

83,993

59.9%

12.8%

17

Ford Motor

75,360

24.6%

11.7%

18

General Motors

73,248

29.5%

19.8%

19

Goodyear

67,632

27.3%

11.2%

20

E.ON

65,579

21.6%

15.6%

21

Matsushita Electric Indl

65,346

54.6%

15.7%

22

Freeport-McMoran Copper & Gold

63,911

62.1%

13.2%

23

Apollo Mgt. (Hexion Specialty Chemicals)

63,880

40.2%

13.1%

24

Avery Dennison

62,740

37.7%

14.8%

25

BASF

60,984

31.9%

13.3%

26

Owens Corning

59,609

42.6%

9.7%

27

Dominion Resources

58,642

29.3%

15.9%

28

Allegheny Technologies

58,375

8.3%

14.2%

29

BP

54,336

54.7%

11.3%

30

Honeywell International

50,417

42.1%

13.1%

31

International Paper

49,385

30.6%

16.2%

32

Ashland

43,492

30.7%

18.9%

33

Constellation Energy

42,972

35.5%

11.2%

34

Public Service Enterprise Group (PSEG)

41,773

57.0%

16.5%

35

AES

39,789

29.8%

15.1%

36

Progress Energy

38,027

24.0%

11.2%

37

Nucor

36,963

51.3%

21.2%

38

United Technologies

36,526

30.6%

7.6%

39

Timken

36,047

17.6%

17.4%

40

Berkshire Hathaway

35,285

37.8%

13.2%

41

SPX

34,559

39.8%

11.2%

42

Royal Dutch Shell

34,556

43.5%

13.8%

43

Southern Co

33,577

33.6%

12.5%

44

Allegheny Energy

31,539

10.2%

14.1%

45

American Electric

31,364

9.3%

124%

46

Reliant Energy

30,821

14.0%

10.7%

47

Boeing

30,453

33.7%

13.6%

48

General Dynamics

30,337

69.0%

20.9%

49

Occidental Petroleum

30,069

43.6%

16.9%

50

KeySpan

29,008

53.7%

17.8%

51

Lyondell Chemical

28,591

33.6%

14.9%

52

Sunoco

27,851

33.5%

16.6%

53

Anheuser-Busch Cos

27,032

41.0%

16.7%

54

Ball

25,709

38.5%

14.8%

55

Deere & Co

25,346

19.9%

15.6%

56

Procter & Gamble

25,238

41.2%

16.1%

57

Tesoro

24,708

24.6%

10.0%

58

Temple-Inland

24,537

47.0%

20.1%

59

Pfizer

24,508

38.3%

19.8%

60

Rowan Cos.

24,389

46.2%

21.6%

61

Leggett & Platt

23,870

28.2%

12.6%

62

Northrop Grumman

23,798

56.6%

22.6%

63

Weyerhaeuser

22,708

23.0%

17.1%

64

Rohm and Haas

22,489

40.9%

16.5%

65

Tyco International

22,115

32.7%

9.3%

66

Terex

21,730

17.3%

9.4%

67

Corning

20,942

17.6%

12.6%

68

Exelon

20,811

33.6%

13.6%

69

Fortune Brands

20,583

19.5%

8.0%

70

FirstEnergy

20,441

16.8%

10.0%

71

Suncor Energy

20,378

45.3%

12.9%

72

Crown Holdings

19,447

30.5%

14.3%

73

Masco

18,572

6.7%

12.0%

74

ThyssenKrupp Group

18,133

21.7%

12.1%

75

Textron

17,443

33.6%

13.6%

76

Sony

16,426

12.5%

5.3%

77

Mirant

16,337

42.4%

9.2%

78

RAG

16,080

52.9%

18.4%

79

Alcan

15,231

10.8%

12.1%

80

Huntsman

15,119

47.7%

20.4%

81

Bridgestone

14,952

15.9%

10.1%

82

Danaher

14,621

23.9%

15.7%

83

PPG Industries

14,300

23.2%

13.0%

84

Hess

13,687

66.5%

26.4%

85

Akzo Nobel

13,453

58.6%

25.2%

86

Dynegy Inc.

13,439

25.6%

10.1%

87

Federal-Mogul

13,435

28.0%

13.6%

88

Stanley Works

13,196

32.1%

10.2%

89

Komatsu

13,132

30.9%

19.2%

90

Saint-Gobain

13,012

38.6%

16.7%

91

PPL

12,972

11.6%

8.0%

92

Caterpillar

12,924

24.2%

11.0%

93

Smurfit-Stone Container

12,868

29.9%

12.0%

94

Siemens

12,649

32.8%

12.8%

95

MeadWestvaco

12,465

40.9%

18.3%

96

Marathon Oil

12,454

33.0%

14.3%

97

Emerson Electric

12,258

13.1%

15.1%

98

Northeast Utilities

11,115

11.7%

7.9%

99

National Oilwell Varco

11,042

78.0%

26.5%

100

Dana

10,638

36.2%

17.6%

Toxic 100 firms

4,713,588

34..%

15.2%

Other 500-list firms

459,798

31.1%

13.3%

Non-500-list firms

9,403,595

35.2%

15.5%

All Firms

14,576,982

34.8%

15.3%

U.S. population

31.8%

12.9

Source

Death Tolls from Wars Estimates include civilian and military casualties, and indirect deaths from conflict-related famine, disease, and disruptions as well as violent deaths.

Pollution Reports including Top 100 Corporate Air Polluters 2007 in US

Pollution Reports including Top 100 Corporate Air Polluters 2002 in US

The World Bank and IMF in Africa

The GM genocide: Thousands of Indian farmers are committing suicide after using genetically modified crops

Alberta Oil Sands a Pollution Nightmare/ Air car videos at the bottom of the page.

Privatization, Pollution and Free Trade, WTO

Pollution Costs Trillions Annually

US Air Testing Bombs

Uranium Mining, Grand Canyon now at Risk, Dangers, Pollution, History

Depleated Uranium Information

Israel’s Dirty Nuclear Secrets, Human experiments and WMD

The world’s worst radiation hotspot

How UK oil company Trafigura tried to cover up African pollution disaster

A Few of the World’s most polluted places

New US gov’t study shows mercury in fish widespread


Letting AP in on the Secret: Israeli Strip Searches are Torture

European Diplomats thought they had a problem at the border? They only got a couple of warning shots. They should have had to go through this like others had too. Then they would really  have something to whine about.

Seems they got off rather easy.

They should take a look at what was done to this young photojournalist. and others. Things that never made it to the mainstream media.

Letting AP in on the Secret:
Israeli Strip Searches

By Alison Weir

July 29, 2008

On June 26th a young Palestinian photojournalist named Mohammed Omer was returning home from a triumphant European tour.

In London he had been awarded the 2008 Martha Gellhorn Prize for journalism – the youngest recipient ever and one of the few non-Britons ever to receive the prestigious prize.

In Greece he had been given the 2008 journalism award for courage by the Union of Greek Journalists and had been invited to speak before the Greek parliament.

In Britain, the Netherlands, Greece, and Sweden he had met with Parliament Members and been interviewed on major radio and TV stations.

In the US several years before, he had been named the first recipient of the New America Media’s Best Youth Voice award.

In an Israeli border facility he was violently strip-searched at gunpoint, forced to do a grotesque sort of dance while completely naked, assaulted, taunted about his awards and his ethnicity, and finally, when Israeli officials feared he might have been fatally injured, taken by ambulance to a Palestinian hospital; if he died, it would not be while in Israeli custody.

As readers may have already guessed, Israel was not part of Omer’s speaking tour.

AP, in its over 60 reports from the region in the following week never mentioned any of this.

The reason Omer was even in ‘Israel’ (actually, an “immigration terminal” controlled by Israel on occupied Palestinian land in the West Bank) is a simple one: He was simply trying to go from Jordan to his home in the Gaza Strip. Gaza is basically a large concentration camp to which Israel holds the keys. It is extremely difficult for Palestinians to get out. It is just as difficult to get back in.

Despite Omer’s journalism credentials (Gaza correspondent for the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs and IPS, stringer for AFP, occasionally appears on BBC, etc.) and despite being invited to receive an international award, Omer was only able to exit Gaza through the considerable efforts of Dutch diplomats.

When the 24-year-old journalist tried to return to Gaza, it again required intercession by the Dutch Embassy. After being forced by Israel to wait in Jordan for five days (and therefore missing his brother’s wedding), Omer finally received word that he would be allowed to go home.

However, when he arrived at the Israeli immigration terminal, an Israel official told him that there was no entry permit for him in the computer and he was told to wait. Three hours later an official came out and took Omer’s cell phone away from him. While Omer’s Dutch Embassy escort waited outside, unaware of what was going on, Omer’s ordeal began.

“He then asked me to leave my belongings and follow him. I recognized we were entering the Shin Bet [Israeli internal security service] offices at Allenby. Upon entering, he motioned for me to sit in a chair within a closed corridor…

“After what seemed to be one hour and thirty minutes, both doors at the end of the corridor opened. I watched as one of the Palestinian passengers exited securing his belt to his trousers. A second man followed behind and was struggling to put on his T-shirt. Immediately I realized I was not in a good place. The rooms from which they exited must be used for strip searching…

A uniformed intelligence officer and two others began rifling through all of Omer’s possessions.

“They were looking for something specific but I wouldn’t know what until green eyes demanded, ‘Where is the money, Mohammed?’

“What money I thought. Of course I had money on me. I was traveling… For a moment I was relieved, thinking this was just a typical shakedown. I’d lose the cash with me, but that would be about it…

“However, my traveling money failed to suffice. Dissatisfied, he pressed, ‘Where is the money from the prize?’

“I realized he was after the award stipend for the Martha Gellhorn Prize from the UK and I told him I did not have it with me. I’d arranged for a bank transfer rather than carry it with me. Visibly irritated the intelligence agent continued to press for money.

“The room filled with more intelligence officers, bringing the total Israeli personnel, most well armed, in the room to eight: eight Israelis and me…

“Dissatisfied that larger sums of money failed to materialize, green eyes accused me of lying. I again repeated the prize money went to bank draft and I already had shown him all the cash I had on me. Avi interjected, ordering me to empty my pockets, which I already had. Seeing they had tapped out, he escorted me into another room, this one empty.

“’OK take off your clothes’ Avi the intelligence officer ordered.

“I asked why. A simple pat-down would have disclosed any money belts or weapons; besides, I had already gone through an x-ray machine before entering the passport holding area.

“He repeated the order.

“Removing all but my underwear, I stood before Avi. In an increasingly belligerent tone he ordered, ‘take off everything’.

“’I am not taking off my underwear,’ I stated. Again he ordered me to remove my underwear.

“At this point I informed him that an escort from the Dutch embassy was currently waiting for me on the other side of the interrogation center and that I was under diplomatic transit.

“He replied he knew that, thus indicating he didn’t care, and again insisted I strip. Again I refused. There was no reason for me to do so.

Omer asked:  ‘Why are you treating me this way? I am human being.’

“For a moment I flashed on the scene in the Oscar winning film, The Pianist where the Jewish man, being humiliated by a Nazi quoted Shakespeare, invoking his faith in place of written words, ‘Doth a Jew not have eyes?’ the old man queried, attempting to appeal to the humanity buried somewhere in the soul of his oppressor. Finding myself confronting the same racism and disdain I wanted to ask Avi, ‘Doth a Palestinian not have eyes?’

Would his indoctrination inoculate him from empathy as well? Likely, I reasoned, it would.

“Avi smirked, half chuckling as he informed me, ‘This is nothing compared to what you will see now.’

“With that the intelligence officer unholstered his weapon, pressing it to my head and with his full body weight pinning me on my side, he forcibly removed my underwear. Completely naked, I stood before him as he proceeded to feel me up one side and down the other…

“Avi then proceeded to demand I do a concocted sort of dance, ordering me to move to the right and the side. When I refused, he forced me under his own power to move side to side…”

After awhile Omer was allowed to put his clothes back on, but the interrogation continued. His eight, mostly armed interrogators taunted him over his awards, his appearance on BBC, and the misery he was returning to in what they termed “dirty” Gaza. Finally, after hours in Israeli custody and a total of 12 hours without food or water, Omer collapsed.

“….without warning I began to vomit all over the room. At the same time I felt my legs buckled from the strain of standing and I passed out… I awoke on the floor to someone screaming, repeating my name over and over…

“As he screamed in my ears I felt his fingernails puncturing my skin, gouging, scraping and clawing at the tender flesh beneath my eyes. This was the intelligence officer’s method for gauging my level of consciousness. No smelling salts as is the civilized manner for reviving a person. Clawing at my eyes and tearing the skin on my face proved his manner of rendering aid.

“Realizing I was again conscious, though barely, the Israeli broadened his assault, scooping my head and digging his nails in near the auditory nerves between my head and ear drum. Rather then render first aid, which is the protocol and international law in instances whether prisoners of war or civilians, the soldier broadened his assault. The pain became sharper as he dug his nails, two fingers at a time into my neck, grazing my carotid artery and again challenging my consciousness before pummeling my chest with his full weight and strength.

“I estimate I lay on the floor approximately one hour and twenty minutes and I continued to vomit for what seemed like a half hour. Severely dehydrated, focusing took flight and the room became a menagerie of pain, sound and terror. The stench further exasperated and seemed to inflame my captors further…

“All around me I heard Israeli voices and then one placed his combat boot on my neck pressing into the hard floor. I remember choking, feeling the outline of his shoe and in my increasing delirium thought for a moment perhaps someone was rendering aid. Reality destroyed that hope. Around me, like men watching a sporting match I heard laughing and goading, a gang rape of verbal and physical violence meted by men entrenched in hatred and rage… I again lost consciousness and awoke to find myself being dragged by my feet on my back through my vomit on the floor, my head bouncing on the pavement and body sweeping to-and-fro like a mop…

Eventually, Omer was transferred to a Palestinian hospital, but only after Israeli officials tried to force him to sign a paper absolving them from responsibility.

“In other words, if I died or was permanently disabled as a result of Israel’s actions, Israel could not be held accountable. One would think I was in a third world dictatorship rather than the ‘only democracy in the Middle East’. One would think.”

Where is AP?

One would also think that such treatment of a journalist by America’s “special ally” would be news.

Since journalists tend to be particularly concerned when fellow journalists are victimized, it would be expected that Omer’s abuse would receive considerable press attention – especially since he had just received international recognition from the journalism community. One can only imagine the multitude of headlines that would result if an Israeli journalist, perhaps even one who had not just been feted internationally, had been similarly treated by the Palestinian Authority.

Oddly, however, despite the fact that Reuters, BBC, the UK Guardian, Israel’s Ha’aretz newspaper, and others issued news reports, the Associated Press, which serves virtually every daily newspaper in the U.S., sent out nothing on it.

Astounded, I finally phoned AP headquarters in New York to find out how they had missed it.

I asked for the international desk, told them I had a news tip, and briefly described the incident. I was told, “Oh yes, we know about it.”

I asked them when they were going to report it and was told: “The Jerusalem bureau is looking into it.” The Jerusalem bureau is located in Israel; many of its editors and their wives/husbands/children have Israeli citizenship. It is not the most unbiased of bureaus. Yet, it is the control bureau for the region – the filter through which virtually all AP reports, photos, video footage from Palestine and Israel must pass.

A day or two later there was still no story. I phoned the international desk in New York again and was told that the Jerusalem bureau had decided not to cover the incident. There was no explanation.

I tried phoning higher-ups, including CEO Tom Curley, who goes about the country lecturing about the “public’s right to know” and Kathleen Carroll, Executive Editor, to learn on what basis AP had determined this incident was not newsworthy. Neither returned my call. I kept trying, hoping to find somewhere in the AP hierarchy at least a semblance of a journalist committed to AP’s alleged mission of reporting the news “accurately and honestly.”

Finally, I found one. I reached the managing editor in charge of international reporting, and asked him why AP was refusing to cover the case of a prize-winning journalist being strip-searched at gunpoint and physically abused by Israeli officials when he returned to Gaza from receiving the Martha Gellhorn award in London.

The editor admitted that he hadn’t heard of the incident and was interested in the details. I told him what I knew, referred him to the UK Guardian article and others, and he said he’d look into it.

As a result, two weeks after Omer’s ordeal, and after Israel had solidified its denial narrative, AP finally sent out a report.

The belated story, datelined Jerusalem and carrying a byline by Karin Laub, left a great deal to be desired.

It depicted the incident as a “he said/she said” dispute, in which it termed Omer’s statements as “claims,” while never using this verb for Israeli statements. In every case Israeli statements are placed in the rebuttal position.

The lengthy article places Omer’s strongest descriptions in the second half of the story, where they would typically be cut by the averaged-sized print newspaper, and leaves out a great deal of important information.

For example, while AP reports that Omer was discharged from one hospital, it neglects to report that Omer was admitted to a second one where he was hospitalized for four or five days. It does not name the Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism, neglects any mention of other awards, and omits entirely Omer’s meetings with Parliament Members in multiple countries. It fails to report the statement by the former ambassador from The Netherlands:

“This is by no means an isolated incident, but part of a long-term strategy to demolish Palestinian social, economic and cultural life … I am aware of the possibility that Mohammed Omer might be murdered by Israeli snipers or bomb attack in the near future.”

The international organization Reporters Without Borders reported issued a condemnation of the attack, stating that in the ten days preceding Omer’s incident alone, it had recorded five incidents of “wrongful arrest” of journalists by Israel, and that one journalist was still being held. None of this was in Laub’s article.

All of the missing material, of course, would serve to add credibility to Omer’s statements. Perhaps this pattern of omission was a coincidence.

Early in the story, while admitting that Palestinians complain about “rough” treatment at the border (a considerable understatement), Laub seems to go out of her way to discredit Omer’s description of being forcibly strip-searched, by writing: “However, Omer’s allegation of being forced to strip naked appeared unusual.”

The Strip-Searching “Secret”

This is a bizarre statement.

As Dion Nissenbaum, Jerusalem bureau chief for McClatchy Newspapers,  wrote last year, “While Israeli security won’t admit it, it is a widely accepted secret that Palestinians and Arabs…are routinely subjected to intense, hours-long questioning that can include strip searches.”

Is it possible that AP is not in on this secret?

The reality is that frequent, random humiliation by Israeli soldiers and officials is part of the Palestinian experience. Numerous degrading strip searches – some of them particularly grotesque – have been forced on Palestinian men, women, and children of all ages for decades.

In addition, Israeli officials periodically strip search others whenever, it appears, they wish, including:
The British Consul General  (Israeli media reported that her search was “prolonged, needless and humiliating” and that she was “visibly upset)

An American holocaust survivor (she was treated to a “cavity search”)

Sixteen Christian evangelicals rounded up at gunpoint;

Journalists from around the world (an Argentinian journalist wrote: “… they made me go to another office and strip naked. An official came in stands next to me, while I’m naked, with a machine gun in his hand…” A Swiss reporter was forced to remove her pants in public and stand in her underwear, hands raised, in front of an x-ray machine);

A wheel-chair bound New Jersey woman with cerebral palsy whose sanitary pad was confiscated, humiliating her publicly;

An American doctoral student, who was also subjected to a cavity search…  and the list goes on and on.

Yet, somehow, AP missed all of these. In fact, amazingly, a LexisNexis search of Associated Press stories over the past 10 years, using the search terms “Israel” and “strip search,” turns up only one result – a few stories on a hunger strike by Palestinian prisoners protesting against, among other things, their daily strip searches by Israeli guards.

Since we think it’s unfair for AP to be excluded from what others in the region know, we compiled a very partial list of reports about Israeli strip-searches, with excerpts from each, and emailed AP the 25-page document. We asked for a correction and received the following response: “This acknowledges receipt of your e-mail. We have no further comment at this time.” Our request for an interview was “respectfully declined.”

Following are just a few of the stories on this topic that AP never reported to the thousands of newspapers, radio and television stations that rely on it for their foreign news.  The entire document is available on the If Americans Knew website.

* In 2007 the Palestinian Minister of Women’s Affairs issued a statement protesting the policy of Israeli soldiers taking Palestinian women “to separate rooms in the checkpoint and being forced to remove all clothes, to become fully naked.” The minister demanded that the UN and the international community provide security for Palestinian women.

* Even the New York Times (which justified it) reported about the Allenby border in 1987: “Before any visitor gets in, however, he must go through a stringent security check at the Israeli terminal. Besides being examined by metal detectors, each visitor must undergo a private strip search…”

* A University of Utah law student describes a PhD student conducting research in the region who was detained at the border crossing for six hours, “Then a female guard conducted a strip/cavity search while two male guards observed.”

* A British researcher reports: “While men have also reported forms of sexual torture in jail, women prisoners are particularly vulnerable to this as a form of humiliation by their captors. Women are forced to strip naked in front of guards, many of whom are male, and subjected to brutal body searches. Many women prisoners have detailed sexual assault by Israeli military and prison staff. On some occasions women are detained as a way of threatening or putting pressure on a male member of the family.

* A woman trying to reach a hospital reports: “…the labour pains grew stronger. I saw a lot of soldiers in front of me. I called out at them using the word “baby” which I think some understood. They started to talk to me in Hebrew as they pointed the guns towards me. They used signs and gestures. I understood that they wanted me to show them how pregnant I was which I did. One soldier asked me to take off my robe, which I did. But it was not sufficient and he asked me to remove the T-shirt and the trousers. I had no choice and I was ready to go as far as that in order to get to the hospital before it was late. He asked me to take off my underwear which I did. After this humiliation, they fetched a stretcher from one of the tanks. I was naked. I was carried to a tank and was given intravenous glucose into my arm. A few minutes later, they brought my father-in-law inside the tank. They drove for almost half an hour. I was thinking they were taking me to a nearby hospital but it turns out they were taking us back to the Huwwara checkpoint. We were taken out of the tank and were laid nude on the stretchers for almost one hour…”

* Reuters reported: “Three Israeli soldiers forced a Palestinian man to strip naked at gunpoint and walk like a dog in a West Bank city under curfew…A Reuters photographer snapped Yasser Sharaf, 25, standing naked in a cold, muddy street in Nablus on Sunday as two men were handing him clothes to put on and two Israeli armoured vehicles were pulling away from the scene.”

* Reporters who entered Nablus after the Israeli invasion of 2002 quoted from an interview with one of the inhabitants: “The men were then driven to a nearby yard, ordered to strip naked, and made to lie face down in the dirt. While my neighbor Jamal Sabar was taking off his pants, they shot him dead…”

*  “A soldier inside the jeep ordered me to raise my hands and get out of the car and said, ‘take off your shirt.’ I did; then he said, ‘and the pants.’ I did; then he said, ‘the undershirt and underwear.’ I begged him not to force me; and he said, ‘I’ll shoot you.’ And all the soldiers pointed their guns at me. I took off my underclothes and stood naked in front of everybody. He ordered, ‘proceed with your hands up.’ I came up to him and he gave me a transparent plastic bag to cover myself. He blindfolded me and made me sit 20 meters away. Then the soldier shouted at a passenger called Islam ‘Abed al-Sheikh Ibrahim, 18, who was sitting in the front seat, and ordered him to get out of the car. He told the soldier that his leg was broken, but the soldier insisted. He Islam got out and stood on his crutches. The soldier ordered him to take off his clothes. He tried by failed. The soldier came to me and removed the binding off my eyes and told me at gunpoint to go and help him take off his clothes. I went and helped the passenger take off all his clothes. The soldier told me to help him walk to the soldier. We walked up and he gave me another nylon bag for Islam. Then, he told us to sit on the ground. Soon after, the soldier ordered another passenger, Yasser Rasheed al-Sheikh Ibrahim,60, to get out of the car and take off his clothes like us…”

* The Guardian described an incident in which a commander was “awaiting a court martial on several charges, including ordering the boy to strip naked, holding a burning paper under his testicles, threatening to ram a bottle into his anus and threatening to shoot him…”

* “We were mostly older people, sick and wounded. We had nine handicapped people with us, three were from the same family, sons of Abu Ibrahim. Some of us were too old, they were senile. When they told them ‘go left’ they would go right, but they stripped them naked anyway. I tried to help them as much as I could. I was the only one who spoke Hebrew…Close to us was a group of young men. They were handcuffed, naked and lying on their stomachs. The Israeli tanks would pass by them so fast, only forty centimeters away from their heads.”

*  “Other residents described how young men were stripped naked and then shot. Yusuf Shalabi, a young man from the camp explained how the Israeli soldiers denied medical treatment to the wounded, ‘…I remember this nightmare very well. It is very difficult to talk about it. I remember them stripping the people naked, they would handcuff them and blindfold them. I remember seeing two wounded men, one was wounded in the shoulder and the other in the leg. They were screaming in pain and the soldiers would not allow them to be treated.’”

Incredibly, AP seems to have missed all of these, and more. As a result, Americans have little idea of the life is like for Paleestinians in the West Bank and Gaza.

Moreover, strip searches are just the tip of the iceberg. According to an Israeli government report released in 2000 (five years after it had been written) Shin Bet “used systematic torture against Palestinians and regularly lied about it.” An Israeli human rights organization estimated that 85 percent of Palestinian detainees had been subjected to torture.  In 2002 Foreign Service Journal carried a major expose on Israel torturing American citizens.  AP missed this Foreign Service Journal expose – as did, therefore, every newspaper in the country.

AP’s Ownership

AP is a cooperative. That means that every single newspaper, radio station, and television station that uses AP news stories is an owner of AP. This includes Democracy Now, which apart from a report on Mohammed Omer also seems to have covered this subject minimally, if at all.

It is time for all these news media, and for their readers, listeners, and viewers, to demand that AP provide the full story.

Americans have long given Israel, the size of New Jersey, far more of our tax money than to any other nation on earth. It is time to end the cover up. Americans need to know how Israel is using our money.

Alison Weir is executive director of If Americans Knew (which found in a statistical study that in 2004 AP had covered Israeli children’s deaths at rates 7 times greater than they had reported Palestinian deaths). The full document listing Israeli strip searches can be viewed at http://www.ifamericansknew.org/cur_sit/strip-searches.htmlDVDs containing a short video about Israeli strip searching of women and children are available for readers wishing to educate their local media and community on the information that AP is choosing not to report. The Washington Report has created a petition on the incident for people to sign.
Omer’s complete statement can be read at:

“British consul strip searched at Israeli PM’s office,” Rory, The Guardian, March 28, 2007

“Humiliation and Child Abuse at Israeli Checkpoints: Strip-Searching Children,” Alison Weir, CounterPunch, March 15, 2007; Video interview: The Easiest Targets: http://www.ifamericansknew.org/about_us/easiesttargets.html

“Israelis arrest 16 from US in roundup of Christians,” Charles M. Sennott, The Boston Globe, October 26, 1999, Pg. A2

http://peoplesgeography.com/

http://www.fpa.org.il/?categoryId=422

“Humiliation and Child Abuse at Israeli Checkpoints: Strip-Searching Children,” Alison Weir, CounterPunch, March 15, 2007; Video interview: The Easiest Targets: http://www.ifamericansknew.org/about_us/easiesttargets.html

http://www.law.utah.edu/blogs/show-entry.asp?EntryID=252

http://www.maannews.net/en/index.php?opr=ShowDetails&ID=23480

“ALLENBY BRIDGE JOURNAL; A 15-Yard Span Over a Great Divide,” Thomas L. Friedman, New York Times, July 18, 1987

http://www.law.utah.edu/blogs/show-entry.asp?EntryID=252

“Israel’s Palestinian Prisoners: The Forgotten Facts,” Isabelle Humphries, Researcher – Nazareth http://www.islamonline.net/

“Israel’s Implementation of the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT), May, 2005, Al-Haq: Law in the Service of Man, the Palestinian Centre for Human rights (PCHR), and the Women’s Centre for Legal Aid and Counselling (WCLAC)
http://www.pchrgaza.org/special/OPT%20CEDAW%20Main%20Review.pdf

“Israelis Make Palestinian Strip Naked,” Reuters, Nov. 25, 2002

“Jenin: Lying Down On Broken Glass, Crushing Bones,” April 16, 2002 (IslamOnline & News Agencies) http://www.islamonline.net/english/News/2002-04/16/article40.shtml

“Weekly Report on Israeli Human Rights Violations in the Occupied Palestinian    Territory,” 01 – 07 September 2005, http://www.pchrgaza.org/files/W_report/English/2005/08-09-2005.htm

“Commander charged with torturing Palestinian boy,” Chris McGreal, The Guardian, October 22, 2002

“Stripping Palestinians has Become Common Practice: Eyewitness Accounts,” Suzanne Russ, Palestine Chronicle, November 26, 2002, http://www.ifamericansknew.org/cur_sit/strippingcommon.html

“Stripping Palestinians has Become Common Practice: Eyewitness Accounts,” By Suzanne Russ, Palestine Chronicle, November 26, 2002, http://www.ifamericansknew.org/cur_sit/strippingcommon.html

“Report: Palestinian suspects mistreated by Israeli captors,” Joel Greenberg, Chicago Tribune, May 6, 2007

“Arab-Americans in Israel: What ‘Special Relationship’?” Jerri Bird, Foreign Service Journal, June, 2002

Source

In case you don’t get it Mohammed Omer was “tortured” just trying to go home.

Also see:

Israeli Strip Searches: A Partial List

Why Americans get a distorted View of the Conflict between Israel and Palestinians

Gaza detainee treatment ‘inhuman’

Israeli troops fire warning shots at European Diplomats

Israel Broke Ceasefire From Day One

Indexed List of all Stories in Archives

Gaza (4): A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words

January9 2009:   Since Israel launched “Operation Cast Lead”, 781 people have been killed and nearly 3,100 others have been wounded, Palestinian emergency services said.

The destruction Continues.

cluster-bomb-jan-9

January 9 : A cluster bomb disperses hundreds of bomblets in the northern Gaza Strip Photo: Yannis Behrakis/Reuters

jan-9-funeral

January 9 : Palestinians pray next to the bodies of the Salha family, who were killed in an Israeli missile strike in Gaza City Photo: Ali Ali/EPA

un-school-killing-funeral

January 7 : Mourners pray over the victims killed on Tuesday in an Israeli attack on a UN-run school building in Jabaliya, northern Gaza Photo: Abid Katib/Getty Images

woman-mourning-un-killings

A relative of the 10 members of the Deeb family weeps at their funeral in Jabaliya refugee camp. The victims died in an Israeli strike on a a UN-run school Photo: Mohammed Saber/EPA

jand-8-mosque

January 8 : Palestinians gather around the ruins of the Al-Noor mosque after an Israeli airstrike in the Sheikh Radwan neighbourhood of Gaza City Photo: Hatem Moussa/AP

jan-7-children-at-un-school

January 7 : Palestinian children are seen at the United Nations school where their families took shelter following Israeli strikes, in the refugee camp of Jabaliya Photo: Mohammed Saber/EPA

jan-1-wounded-children

January 1: Wounded Palestinian children are carried to a hospital after an Israeli air strike on the home of senior Hamas leader Nizar Rayyan in Gaza Photo: Ismail Zaydah /Reuters

jan-1-woman-and-two-family-members

January 1: A Palestinian woman with two wounded members of her family in hospital following an Israeli missile strike in Beit Hanoun.  Photo: Ashraf Amra/AP

jan-1-wounded-child

January 1 : A wounded Palestinian child screams as she arrives to the al-Shifa hospital after an Israeli air strike in Gaza City Photo: Fadi Adwan /Getty Images

child-hosam-hamdan-dec-31

December 31 : Hosam Hamdan in in Gaza City’s al-Shifa hospital intensive care unit after he was wounded and his two sisters killed in an Israeli air strike in Beit Hanoun, northern Gaza Strip. At least 25% of Palestinians killed during Israel’s massive offensive in the Gaza Strip have been civilians, the UN agency for Palestinian refugees said Photo: Mahmud Hams/AFP/Getty Images

29-children-mosqu

December 29: Palestinian children walk past a destroyed mosque and houses after they were hit by an Israeli missile strike that killed Jawaher Baalusha, 4, and her four sisters in the northern Gaza Strip

Photograph: Abid Katib/Getty Images

child-watches-funeral-dec-29

December 29 : A Palestinian boy watches the funeral of three children in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip. Palestinian medics said five young sisters, died in an Israeli air strike in Jabaliya refugee camp in northern Gaza and three other young children were killed when a bomb struck a house Photo: Ibraheem Abu Mustafa/Reuters

gaza_children_mass_burial1

wounded-man-jan-8-reuters
A wounded Palestinian is carried into Shifa hospital after an Israeli air strike in Gaza January 8, 2009. Photo: Reuters

smoke-rising-reuters Gaza January 8, 2009. Photo: Reuters

egyption-view-of-gazaAn Egyptian looks at rising clouds of smoke during Israeli strikes at the Gaza strip, in the Egyptian border city of Rafah January 8, 2009. Palestinians faced even grimmer conditions in the Gaza Strip on Thursday after a U.N. aid agency halted work, saying its staff were at risk from Israeli forces fighting Hamas militants, after two drivers were killed. Photo: Reuters

inspect-homes-in-gaza1Destroyed homes after an Israeli air strike on Rafah, in southern Gaza Photo: Getty

bombardment-in-gazaIsraeli troops continue bombardment in Gaza city on Jan.8,2009. Photo: Xinhua

dence-smoke-rises-from-gazaDense smoke rises from Gaza city after Israeli bombardment on Jan.8, 2009. Photo: Xinhua

destoyed-mosquePalestinians gather at the site of a destroyed mosque following an Israeli air strike in Gaza City, Jan. 8, 2009.  Photo: Xinhua

red-cross-israel-failedThe Red Cross says Israel has failed to meet its humanitarian law obligations Photo: Reuters

gaza-funeralJan 9: About 770 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza  Photo: AFP

gaza-hospital-over-3000-casualtiesHospitals in Gaza have been overwhelmed trying to treat about 3,000 people wounded in the Israeli operation. Doctors say they are running short of essential supplies and people are dying as a result. Photo: Getty

childen-near-remains-of-israli-misileChildren stand near the remains of an Israeli missile that landed in a building in Rafah refugee camp, southern Gaza Strip, Thursday, Jan. 8, 2009. Photo: AP / Eyad Baba)

wp-jan-8Fire and smoke is seen from Israeli military operations in Gaza City, Thursday, Jan. 8, 2009. Photo: AP / Abdel Kareem Hana

probably-phosperous

An artillery shell explodes over the Palestinian refugee camp of Jabalya in the northern Gaza Strip “Looks like White Phosphorous”. Photo: Patrick Baz/AFP/Getty Images

43-who-were-killed

Palestinians pray near the bodies of some of the 43 Palestinians who were killed the previous day. More than 600 Palestinians are now believed to have been killed since the offensive began Photo: Mohammed Saber/EPA

near-un-school

A Star of David, the Jewish symbol, is drawn on a drying pool of blood near the damaged UN school. The UN have denied Israeli allegations that Palestinian militants were firing rockets from the school. Photo: Mohammed Abed/AFP/Getty Images

jan-7-gaza-near-un-school

January 7 2009: More than 40 Palestinians, many of them them women and children, were killed by an Israeli mortar shell at a United Nations school in Gaza on Tuesday, intensifying the international pressure for a ceasefire agreement Photo: Ismail Zaydah/Reuters

beglari20090108213617828

White Phosphorus dropped in Gaza

white-phosperous-weapons2The pale blue 155mm rounds are clearly marked with the designation M825A1, an American-made white phosphorus munition Photo: Times on line

MIDEAST ISRAEL PALESTINIANS GAZABetter know as a Bunker Buster. An explosion is seen as missiles fired from an Israeli aircraft fly towards a target in the northern Gaza Strip, as seen from the Israeli side of the border,  Jan. 1, 2009.   Photo: AP/Gil Nechushtan

20090108__mlpalestiniansyoungvictimsp4

A Palestinian man reacts as he carries a girl who according to Palestinian medical sources was killed in an Israeli strike, into Shifa hospital in Gaza City, Monday, Jan. 5, 2009. Israeli forces pounded Gaza Strip houses and mosques  on Monday from the air, land and sea, killing at least seven children as they pressed a bruising offensive against Palestinian militants. Photo: AP/Khalil Hamra

child-gaza-city-attack-january-6-2008

Child in the rubble of destroyed building Gaza City January 6 2009 Photo: Fady Adwan

A Palestinian girl cries during the funeral of her brother who was killed after an Israeli air strike in the northern Gaza Strip January 4, 2009. Israeli soldiers and Palestinian militants battled on Gaza City’s outskirts on Sunday after Israeli troops and tanks invaded the coastal enclave in the worst fighting in the conflict in decades. REUTERS/Ismail Zaydah (GAZA)

A Palestinian girl cries during the funeral of a relative that was killed in an Israeli air strike in Beit Lahiya, northern Gaza Strip, Sunday, Jan. 4, 2009. Israeli ground troops and tanks cut swaths through the Gaza Strip early Sunday, cutting the coastal territory into two and surrounding its biggest city as the new phase of a devastating offensive against Hamas gained momentum.”photo by Fady Adwan/propaimages”

A Palestinian girl cries during the funeral of a relative that was killed in an Israeli air strike in Beit Lahiya, northern Gaza Strip, Sunday, Jan. 4, 2009. Israeli ground troops and tanks cut swaths through the Gaza Strip early Sunday, cutting the coastal territory into two and surrounding its biggest city as the new phase of a devastating offensive against Hamas gained momentum.”photo by Fady Adwan/propaimages”

A Charity has used the little girl above for advertising. I just did up a new post on this you may be interested in reading. 

US/Israeli Charity uses little Palestinian Childs photo to raise money for Israels Hungry

Gaza (6) A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words

Gaza (5): A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words

Gaza (3): A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words

Gaza (2): A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words

Gaza (1): A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words


Israel killing their own by Using Deadly Weapons of Mass Destuction again Gaza

Links to other Gaza stories in the January Index

January 2009 Index

Published in: on January 9, 2009 at 7:59 am  Comments Off on Gaza (4): A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words  
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Stephen Harper lied about Cadman Tape

Cadman bribe tape wasn’t doctored: Expert

A file photo of Independent MP Chuck Cadman. Author Tom Zytaruk asked the prime minister on tape about an alleged attempt by Conservative officials to bribe Cadman.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s own audio expert says a tape providing key evidence about an alleged bribe was not doctored as Harper has claimed.

Ted Colley ,  Canwest News Service

October 10, 2008

SURREY, B.C. – Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s own audio expert says a tape providing key evidence about an alleged bribe was not doctored as Harper has claimed.

Author Tom Zytaruk asked the prime minister on tape about an alleged attempt by Conservative officials to bribe Independent MP Chuck Cadman.

In 2005, Cadman told his wife, Dona Cadman, that two Conservative representatives had offered him a $1-million life insurance policy in exchange for his vote in a confidence motion aimed at bringing down the Liberal government.

Cadman was terminally ill at the time and died just two months later.

The interview, in which Harper speaks of an offer to Cadman “to replace financial considerations he might lose during an election,” has been cited by Liberals in the House of Commons and on articles posted on the Liberal party website as evidence that Mr. Harper knew of an alleged attempt to bribe Cadman in May 2005, in exchange for his vote in the Commons to topple the Liberal government of the day. Harper, who denies knowing any such thing, is suing the Liberals for $3.5-million.

Two audio experts hired earlier by Harper said the tape appeared to have been doctored.

An Ontario judge ordered another analysis and Harper tapped former FBI agent Bruce Koenig for the job.

Koenig said the portion of the tape dealing with the insurance policy “contains neither physical nor electronic splices, edits or alterations,” according to a report entered in court on Friday.

Last month, Harper was able to persuade the court to put the lawsuit on hold until after the Oct. 14 federal election. Harper also tried to keep Koenig’s report out of the court record until the vote had passed, but the Liberals were able to get it on the record Friday.

Zytaruk, who has steadfastly maintained the tape was never altered, said he’s happy about the timing.

“I’m glad this came out before the election. I was really looking forward to testifying because it’s not pleasant to be accused on a national scale of doing something dishonest, such as doctoring a tape.”

Dona Cadman, the Conservative candidate in Surrey North, could not be reached for comment before press time.

Source

Harper, Bush Share Roots in Controversial Philosophy

Close advisers schooled in ‘the noble lie’ and ‘regime change.’

What do close advisors to Stephen Harper and George W. Bush have in common? They reflect the disturbing teachings of Leo Strauss, the German-Jewish émigré who spawned the neoconservative movement.

Strauss, who died in 1973, believed in the inherent inequality of humanity. Most people, he famously taught, are too stupid to make informed decisions about their political affairs. Elite philosophers must decide on affairs of state for us.

In Washington, Straussians exert powerful influence from within the inner circle of the White House. In Canada, they roost, for now, in the so-called Calgary School, guiding Harper in framing his election strategies. What preoccupies Straussians in both places is the question of “regime change.”

Strauss defined a regime as a set of governing ideas, institutions and traditions. The neoconservatives in the Bush administration, who secretly conspired to make the invasion of Iraq a certainty, had a precise plan for regime change. They weren’t out to merely replace Saddam with an American puppet. They planned to make the system more like the U.S., with an electoral process that can be manipulated by the elites, corporate control over the levers of power and socially conservative values.

Usually regime change is imposed on a country from outside through violent means, such as invasion. On occasion, it occurs within a country through civil war. After the American Civil War, a new regime was imposed on the Deep South by the North, although the old regime was never entirely replaced.

Is regime change possible through the electoral process? It’s happening in the U.S., where the neocons are succeeding in transforming the American state from a liberal democracy into a corporatist, theocratic regime. As Canada readies for a federal election, the question must be asked: Are we next?

The ‘noble lie’

Strauss believed that allowing citizens to govern themselves will lead, inevitably, to terror and tyranny, as the Weimar Republic succumbed to the Nazis in the 1930s. A ruling elite of political philosophers must make those decisions because it is the only group smart enough. It must resort to deception — Strauss’s “noble lie” — to protect citizens from themselves. The elite must hide the truth from the public by writing in code. “Using metaphors and cryptic language,” philosophers communicated one message for the elite, and another message for “the unsophisticated general population,” philosopher Jeet Heer recently wrote in the Globe and Mail. “For Strauss, the art of concealment and secrecy was among the greatest legacies of antiquity.”

The recent outing of star New York Times reporter Judith Miller reveals how today’s neocons use the media to conceal the truth from the public. For Straussians, telling Americans that Saddam didn’t have WMD’s and had nothing to do with Al-Qaeda, but that we needed to take him out for geopolitical and ideological reasons you can’t comprehend, was a non-starter. The people wouldn’t get it. Time for a whopper.

Miller was responsible for pushing into the Times the key neocon lie that Saddam was busy stockpiling weapons of mass destruction. This deception helped build support among Americans for the invasion of Iraq. Miller was no independent journalist seeking the truth nor a victim of neocon duplicity, as she claimed. She worked closely with Lewis “Scooter” Libby, who was U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney’s Chief of Staff and responsible for coordinating Iraq intelligence and communication strategy. Libby is a Straussian who studied under Paul Wolfowitz, now head of the World Bank, and before that, deputy secretary of defense, where he led the ‘Invade Iraq” lobby. Wolfowitz studied under Strauss and Allan Bloom, Strauss’s most famous student.

Miller cultivated close links to the neocons in the administration and at the American Enterprise Institute, the leading Washington-based neocon think tank. AEI played the key role outside government in fabricating intelligence to make the case for invading Iraq. Straussian Richard Perle, who chaired the Defence Policy Board Advisory Committee until he was kicked off because of a conflict of interest, is a senior fellow at AEI and coordinated its efforts. Miller co-wrote a book on the Middle East with an AEI scholar. Rather than being a victim of government manipulation, Miller was a conduit between the neocons and the American public. As a result of her reporting, many Americans came to believe that Saddam had the weapons. War and regime change followed.

‘Regime change’ in Canada

As in the U.S., regime change became a Canadian media darling. Before 9-11, the phrase appeared in Canadian newspapers less than ten times a year. It usually referred to changes in leadership of a political party or as part of the phrase “regulatory regime change.” Less than a week after 9-11, the phrase began to be used in its Straussian sense, as if a scenario was being choreographed.

From 19 mentions in Canadian newspapers in 2001, regime change soared to 790 mentions in 2002 and 1334 mentions in 2003. With the Iraq invasion accomplished that year, usage tailed off in 2004 (291 mentions) and in 2005 (208 mentions to November 10).

There’s one big difference between American and Canadian Straussians. The Americans assumed positions of power and influence in the administrations of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. The Canadians have not had much opportunity to show (or is that hide?) their stuff. That may change with a Harper victory.

Paul Wolfowitz’s teacher, Allan Bloom, and another Straussian, Walter Berns, taught at the University of Toronto during the 1970s. They left their teaching posts at Cornell University because they couldn’t stomach the student radicalism of the ’60s. At Toronto, they influenced an entire generation of political scientists, who fanned out to universities across the country.

Two of their students, Ted Morton and Rainer Knopff, went to the University of Calgary where they specialize in attacking the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. They claim the charter is the result of a conspiracy foisted on the Canadian people by “special interests.” These nasty people are feminists, gays and lesbians, the poor, prisoners and refugee-rights groups who are advancing their own interests through the courts at the expense of the general public, these Straussians allege.

The problem with their analysis is that the special interest which makes more use of the courts to advance its interests than all these other groups combined — business — receives not a mention. Deception by omission is a common Straussian technique. The weak are targeted while the real culprits disappear.

Harper’s mentors

Harper studied under the neocons at the University of Calgary and worked with them to craft policies for the fledgling Reform Party in the late 1980s. Together with Preston Manning, they created an oxymoron, a populist party backed by business.

Ted Morton has turned his attention to provincial politics. He’s an elected MLA and a candidate to succeed Premier Ralph Klein. But he did influence the direction of right-wing politics at the federal level as the Canadian Alliance director of research under Stockwell Day.

When Harper threw his hat in the ring for the leadership of the Alliance, Tom Flanagan, the Calgary School’s informal leader, became his closest adviser. Harper and Flanagan, whose scholarship focuses on attacking aboriginal rights, entered a four-year writing partnership and together studied the works of government-hater Friedrich Hayek. Flanagan ran the 2004 Conservative election campaign and is pulling the strings as the country readies for the election.

Political philosopher Shadia Drury is an expert on Strauss, though not a follower. She was a member of Calgary’s political science department for more than two decades, frequently locking horns with her conservative colleagues before leaving in 2003 for the University of Regina.

Strauss recommended harnessing the simplistic platitudes of populism to galvanize mass support for measures that would, in fact, restrict rights. Does the Calgary School resort to such deceitful tactics? Drury believes so. Such thinking represents “a huge contempt for democracy,” she told the Globe and Mail‘s John Ibbotson. The 2004 federal election campaign run by Flanagan was “the greatest stealth campaign we have ever seen,” she said, “run by radical populists hiding behind the cloak of rhetorical moderation.”

Straus and ‘Western alienation’

The Calgary School has successfully hidden its program beneath the complaint of western alienation. “If we’ve done anything, we’ve provided legitimacy for what was the Western view of the country,” Calgary Schooler Barry Cooper told journalist Marci McDonald in her important Walrus article. “We’ve given intelligibility and coherence to a way of looking at it that’s outside the St. Lawrence Valley mentality.” This is sheer Straussian deception. On the surface, it’s easy to understand Cooper’s complaint and the Calgary School’s mission. But the message says something very different to those in the know. For ‘St. Lawrence Valley mentality,’ they read ‘the Ottawa-based modern liberal state,’ with all the negative baggage it carries for Straussians. And for ‘Western view,’ they read ‘the right-wing attack on democracy.’ We’ve provided legitimacy for the radical-right attack on the Canadian democratic state, Cooper is really saying.

A network is already in place to assist Harper in foisting his radical agenda on the Canadian people.

In 2003, he delivered an important address to a group called Civitas. This secretive organization, which has no web site and leaves little paper or electronic trail, is a network of Canadian neoconservative and libertarian academics, politicians, journalists and think tank propagandists.

Harper’s adviser Tom Flanagan is an active member. Conservative MP Jason Kenney is a member, as are Brian Lee Crowley, head of the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies and Michel Kelly-Gagnon of the Montreal Economic Institute, the second and third most important right-wing think tanks after the Fraser Institute.

Civitas is top-heavy with journalists to promote the cause. Lorne Gunter of the National Post is president. Members include Janet Jackson (Calgary Sun) and Danielle Smith (Calgary Herald). Journalists Colby Cosh, William Watson and Andrew Coyne (all National Post) have made presentations to Civitas.

The Globe and Mail‘s Marcus Gee is not mentioned in relation to Civitas but might as well be a member, if his recent column titled “George Bush is not a liar,” is any evidence. In it, Gee repeats the lies the Bush neocons are furiously disseminating to persuade the people that Bush is not a liar.

Neo-con to Theo-con

The speech Harper gave to Civitas was the source of the charge made by the Liberals during the 2004 election — sure to be revived in the next election — that Harper has a scary, secret agenda. Harper urged a return to social conservatism and social values, to change gears from neocon to theocon, in The Report‘s Ted Byfield’s apt but worrisome phrase, echoing visions of a future not unlike that painted in Margaret Atwood’s dystopian work, A Handmaid’s Tale.

The state should take a more activist role in policing social norms and values, Harper told the assembled conservatives. To achieve this goal, social and economic conservatives must reunite as they have in the U.S., where evangelical Christians and business rule in an unholy alliance. Red Tories must be jettisoned from the party, he said, and alliances forged with ethnic and immigrant communities who currently vote Liberal but espouse traditional family values. This was the successful strategy counselled by the neocons under Ronald Reagan to pull conservative Democrats into the Republican tent.

Movement towards the goal must be “incremental,” he said, so the public won’t be spooked.

Regime change, one step at a time.

Donald Gutstein, a senior lecturer in the School of Communication at Simon Fraser University,

Source

The we have this:

US War Resister faces deportation from Canada

Canada hit hard by war on Taleban

We won’t win Afghan war, admits UK commander

And This

Omar Khadr:

He was 15 years old at the time and has now spent more than a quarter of his life in prison. Khadr has been in U.S. custody since 2002, when he was captured in Afghanistan and charged with murdering an American soldier during a firefight.

Stephen Harper, George Bush’s Fart Catcher

Well put I must say.

The End of the American order

KEVIN CARMICHAEL ,  From Saturday’s Globe and Mail

October 10 2008

OTTAWA — Before U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson was pressed into becoming the fire chief of the financial crisis, he had a good thing going as an economic missionary.

Basking in what he liked to call “the strongest global economy” of his business lifetime, Mr. Paulson, who joined President George W. Bush’s administration in June, 2006, embraced with zeal an aspect of his new job with roots in Cold War diplomacy.

In his two years as Treasury Secretary before financial markets came totally unhinged this summer, Mr. Paulson conducted more official business in China than he did in New York. He has visited as many cities in Latin America as he has cities in the United States of America. He rolled through Calcutta, New Delhi and Mumbai in three days in October, 2007; two weeks later, he spent five days in Africa.

The places changed, but the message stayed the same: American-style banking, unencumbered by regulation and open to U.S. financial institutions, is the surest way to create wealth.

“An open, competitive and liberalized financial market can effectively allocate scarce resources in a manner that promotes stability and prosperity far better than government intervention,” Mr. Paulson told an auditorium full of officials in Shanghai in March, 2007.

Mr. Paulson’s brand of capitalism isn’t promoting much stability these days, and prosperity isn’t a word that jumps to mind as policy makers from Canada to Japan to France scramble to avert a global economic recession.

The Made in America financial crisis has seriously undermined the U.S.’s standing as the undisputed leader of the international economy, posing the first serious threat to U.S. hegemony since the height of the Soviet Union.

After decades of strong-arming governments in Asia, Latin America and Eastern Europe to keep the state out of the economy, the U.S. government in September put up $285-billion (U.S.) to nationalize mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and insurer American International Group Inc.

That’s nothing compared with the $700-billion Mr. Paulson got from Congress yesterday to purge the financial system of the bad debt at the root of the credit crisis. With governments saving failing banks in Europe, stock markets plunging in China and exports slowing in Brazil, the world is in no mood to take economic lessons from the U.S. government.

“There is a real element of anger and frustration around the planet that this is a U.S.-originated problem with global repercussions,” John Manley, a finance and foreign affairs minister under former prime minister Jean Chrétien, said in an interview. “The world will be looking for a loss of hubris from the United States as a result of this.”

America has dominated global economic affairs virtually unopposed since the collapse of the Berlin Wall, an era marked by the acceleration of global free-trade agreements, the confirmation of the dollar as the world’s de facto currency, and the rise of Wall Street as the world’s financial centre.

The U.S. and Britain dictated the Bretton Woods agreement in 1944, establishing the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. The U.S. became the largest shareholder in the global institutions, which built their headquarters side by side in Washington. Unsurprisingly, the American vision of private ownership and unfettered markets dominated the prescriptions those agencies imposed on weaker economies in return for financial aid. That culminated in the Washington Consensus, a term coined in the 80s to encompass policies such as privatization, lower taxes and deregulation.

These days, countries can’t distance themselves fast enough from the Washington way of economic management.

“The world is on the edge of the abyss because of an irresponsible system,” French Prime Minister François Fillon said on the eve of a gathering of European Union leaders to discuss the financial turmoil.

German Finance Minister Peer Steinbrueck predicted the end of the U.S.’s status as the “superpower of the global financial system.” Chinese officials are rethinking their embrace of globalization, and Colombian President Alvaro Uribe said the U.S. must ensure the situation doesn’t get any worse.

“The Anglo-American model has suffered a big setback,” John Snow, who preceded Mr. Paulson as treasury secretary and is now chairman of private equity firm Cerberus Capital Management, said in an interview. “We don’t have the moral authority we might have had a few years ago to get others to follow our model.”

Other nations appear ready to assume a more assertive role in the global economy.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy, current President of the European Union, wants to host a summit of the world’s major economies next month to consider global rules for financial markets. Germany’s Mr. Steinbrueck, whose push for stricter oversight of hedge funds and private equity firms last year was blocked by Mr. Paulson, will be a ready ally.

“The whole spectrum of options for regulation is now open again,” said Glen Hodgson, chief economist at the Conference Board of Canada and an IMF official. “You only have moral authority when you have your own house in order.”

A new era of global financial regulation – however appropriate given the serious gaps exposed by the credit crunch – will increase costs for businesses and slow global economic growth.

Say what you will about U.S.-style capitalism, its ability to produce wealth is unchallenged. The world economy expanded at an average annual rate of 3.9 per cent over the past decade, as more emerging market nations embraced free-market ideals. Over the previous 10 years, global growth averaged 3.5 per cent.

There’s a risk that countries such as China and India could become more reluctant to ease barriers to international investors, especially in the financial sector.

“It’s a possibility that you see countries become more protectionist,” said Mr. Manley, who is now a senior counsel at law firm McCarthy Tétrault LLP. “That’s going to slow growth.”

There’s an element of schadenfreude in the world’s criticism of the U.S. government’s role in the financial meltdown.

After all, nobody likes a bully, which is essentially the approach American officials have taken to international negotiations for decades, said John Curtis, a former chief economist at Canada’s Trade Department. “They can be insensitive at times to others’ interests,” said Mr. Curtis, who is now a distinguished fellow at the Waterloo, Ont.-based Centre for International Governance Innovation.

Still, Mr. Curtis and others said it would be a mistake to get carried away with the idea that we’re witnessing the death of the American empire.

The U.S. hardly has a monopoly on economic crises, and the German and French governments, among others, have had to put up billions of their own to save several European banks from collapse, which has muted their criticisms of the U.S.

“I don’t think any country is in position to say they have the right regulatory system,” said James Barth, a senior fellow at the Sana Monica, Calif.-based Milken Institute and a former chief economist at the U.S. Office of Thrift Supervision. “One has to be careful to say the U.S. has a terrible financial system and that capitalism doesn’t work because of this particular situation.”

One reason the U.S. can’t be counted out is that Americans are used to such calamities.

Mr. Paulson would often tell his audiences that the U.S. copes with a financial crisis every decade or so because the country’s entrepreneurs get too greedy and overreach. The cleanup is wrenching, but the country’s economy is left stronger as a result, Mr. Paulson argued. The country’s rebound from the collapse of the dot.com bubble is perhaps the most recent example of Mr. Paulson’s creative destruction thesis.

There’s also the sheer size of the U.S. economy. The spread of the Wall Street crisis to other continents is a graphic example of how much the rest of the world still depends on America for their economic growth. The U.S.’s gross domestic product is three times the size of that of Japan, the world’s second biggest economy, and is four times the size of China’s.

The U.S. dollar still makes up more than 60 per cent of the world’s currency reserves, according to IMF data.

“They are so big, you can’t get along without them,” said Mr. Curtis, who also served at the IMF. “They are pre-eminent, they are no longer dominant.”

The U.S.’s standing in the world of global finance may well be determined by the outcome of Mr. Paulson’s $700-billion rescue package.

Observers marvel at the speed with which Mr. Paulson and U.S. Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke developed the plan after earlier efforts failed to reverse the credit squeeze. It took years to sort out the mess created by the defaults of Argentina and Brazil.

If the U.S. can save its banks faster than the Europeans save theirs, Mr. Paulson will restore some of his department’s reputation abroad, said Daniel Drezner, a political science professor at Medford, Mass.-based Tufts University and a former Treasury Department economist.

But gone are the days when a U.S. treasury secretary will automatically be seen as the smartest guy in the room.

“It’s tough to tell other countries you should privatize and liberalize when you are going the other way,” Mr. Drezner said. “The Washington consensus is dead.”

Source

Privatization benefits only those who operate the corporations etc. It does not benefit anyone else. Everything in the end becomes more expensive.

Like Health Care for example. Those profits made by Insurance companies eat up a lot of money. Government run Health Care is more efficient and more cost effective by a long shot. Of course private companies that have tried and have succeeded in some countries have driven up the cost of Health Care and should be eliminated.

Government run systems have no need to advertise so money is not wasted there. The cost of advertising is massive.

You also don’t have to hire a Lawyer to get treatment, because your insurance companies says no. Universal Health Care is something that needs to be protected at all cost.

Social agencies like Welfare, is another thing that should not now, or ever be privatized.

Child protection agencies, should never be privatized.

Prisons should, never be privatized.

Electricity should, never be privatized.

Water should, never be privatized and numerous other things should always be operated by the Governments for the protection of services to the people.

It also keeps the price of services much lower.

Never believe privatizing anything will save you money.

That is a lie always was and always will be.

Governments have no need for profit to feed shareholders.

Their only share holders they have to protect, are the people of their countries.

That is the Governments Jobs to serve and protect the people of their country.

Capitalism just doesn’t work as we have seen. If anything it has caused a world wide epidemic of problems.

Massive problems. Cleaning up this mess is going to take a long time.

Free Trade Agreements should also be revisited as well and changes to them should be turned in to Fair Trade and be absolutely sure it benefits the people and not the Corporations.  Corperations should be regulated so they are not allowed to pollute or sue governments and numerous other restrictions should be implemented to protect all the people around the world.

Trade Agreements, as they stand now are geared giving profit and control to Corporations and do little if anything to protect people or to enhance their standard of living.  If anything they cause an increase in poverty.  Ask Farmers,  in  countries around the world how Free Trade has helped them. Many have gone out of Business. Problems as these have to be rectified. The sooner the better.

Related

A Crisis Made in the Oval Office

Guess What AIG did after the Bailout? Party Time?

Europeans Angry at their Money being Used for Bailouts

Europe catches America’s financial disease

Europe catches America’s financial disease

FEDERAL RESERVE OWNERS AND HISTORY

March 2012 — Just added the First Audit of the Federal Reserve in 99 years. It is at the bottom of the page.

Seems the Federal Reserve is deep in a Fraud and Money Laundering Scam. This began in the George W Bush Era.

This may just be the tip of the iceberg.

Bush, Fed, Europe Banks in $15 Trillion Fraud, All Documented

FEDERAL RESERVE OWNERS


Here’s a look into who was involved in setting up the Federal Reserve in 1913.

* Rothschild Banks of London and Berlin
* Lazard Brothers Bank of Paris
* Israel Moses Sieff Banks of Italy
* Warburg Bank of Hamburg, Germany and Amsterdam
* Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York
* Lehman Brothers Bank of New York
* Goldman Sachs Bank of New York
* Chase Manhattan Bank of New York (Controlled By the Rockefeller Family Tree)

Charles A. Lindbergh, Sr. 1913 “When the President signs this bill, the invisible government of the monetary power will be legalized….the worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking and currency bill.”

A Bit of History

In August of 1929, the Fed began to tighten the money supply continually by buying more government bonds. At the same time, all the Wall Street giants of the era, including John D. Rockefeller and J.P. Morgan divested from the stockmarket and put all their assets into cash and gold.

Soon thereafter, on October 24, 1929, the large brokerages all simultaneously called in their 24 hour “call-loans.” Brokers and investors were now forced to sell their stocks at any price they could get to cover these loans. The resulting market crash on “Black Thursday” was the beginning of the Great Depression.

The Chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee, Representative Louis T. Mc Fadden, accused the Fed and international bankers of premeditating the crash. “It was not accidental,” he declared, “it was a carefully contrived occurrence (created by international bankers) to bring about a condition of despair…so that they might emerge as rulers of us all.”

He went on to accuse European “statesmen and financiers” of creating the situation to facilitate the reacquisition of the massive amounts of gold which Europe had lost to the U.S. during WWI. In a 1999 interview, Nobel Prize winning economist and Stanford University Professor Milton Friedman stated: “The Federal Reserve definitely caused the Great Depression.”

US DECLAIRED bankruptcy

Because the government of the U.S. (a corporation) had paid its loans to the Fed with real money exchangeable for gold, it was now insolvent and could no longer retire its debt. It now had no choice but to file chapter 11. Under the Emergency Banking Act (March 9, 1933, 48 Stat.1, Public law 89-719) President Franklin Roosevelt effectively dissolved the United States Federal Government by declaring the entity bankrupt and insolvent.

June 5, 1933 Congress enacted HJR 192 which made all debts, public or private, no longer collectible in gold. Instead, all debts public or private were to be payable in un-backed Fed-created fiat currency. This new currency would now be legal tender in the U.S. for all debts public and private.

Henceforth, our United States Constitution would be continuously eroded due to the fact that our nation is now owned “lock stock and barrel,” by a private consortium of international bankers, contemptuous of any freedoms or sovereignties intended by our forefathers. This was all accomplished by design.

How the Gold was Stolen from America

Under orders of the creditor (the Federal Reserve System and its private owners) on April 5, 1933 President Franklin D. Roosevelt issued Presidential order 6102, which required all Americans to deliver all gold coins, gold bullion, and gold certificates to their local Federal Reserve Bank on or before April 28, 1933.

Any violators would be fined up to $10,000, imprisoned up to ten years, or both for knowingly violating this order. This gold was then offered by the Fed owners to any foreign, non-U.S. citizen, at $35.00 per ounce. Over the entire previous 100 years, gold had remained at a stable value, increasing only from $18.93 per ounce to $20.69 per ounce.

Since then, every U.S. citizen (by virtue of their birth certificate) has become an asset of the government, pledged at a specific dollar amount to pay this debt through future taxation. Thus, every American citizen is in debt from birth (via future taxation), and is, for all practical purposes, property of the creditors, the privately owned Federal Reserve System.

Presently, the United States Government (which again, is completely owned and controlled by the international bankers) continues to forfeit its sovereignty by entering into international monetary and trade agreements which abolish almost all forms of trade tariffs that previously protected not only the value of American commercial productivity and workforce labor, but which were also a substantial source of revenue for the government.

The loss of this revenue, as well as the expanding deficits created by recent massive reduction in taxation for large corporations and the very wealthiest citizens, insures continued borrowing by the government. This self-perpetuating cycle of borrowing is made possible only by the ability of the government to guarantee repayment (of only the interest, never the principal) through future taxation on the earnings of every American citizen.

Due to our banking history of deception, fraud and counterfeiting, which only benefits the purported elite bankers and their underlings, the borrowed principal itself is being used to make the payments on our debt at interest, thus, it is mathematically impossible to pay off.

We are, therefore, obligated to continue this cycle of borrowing indefinitely, causing complete money slavery for life. The amount owed will expand endlessly, until our monthly payments exceed our income, we are bankrupt, and all we have acquired in this lifetime is pillaged from us. Or, until the privately owned Federal Reserve System is ended and all debts are terminated.

This IS WAY Custsy

BANKING SECRETS THAT BANKS DON’T WANT PUBLISHED

With debt termination/debt reconciliation, you’re out of credit card debt and unsecured loans quickly and easily, once and for all! Here, you will learn the the violations that occur in the issuance of credit cards and loans, plus a touch of the legalities employed in terminating your debts. After qualifying and receiving a telephone presentation, you’ll concur that this is the safest, fastest, most legal, lawful, honest and ethical way of getting out of debt there ever was.

Through extensive research and development by economists, bankers, bank auditors, CPA’s, attorneys, underwriters, authors, and database programmers, we have developed a state-of-the-art legal administrative remedy, designed to anticipate and overcome nearly every variation of creditor response.

The successful termination of your debt also includes all-inclusive Credit Clean-Up of the accounts enrolled. Utilizing these abundant resources, we can work toward the termination of your debt within 18 months, with a much lower monthly payment, ending with nothing negative on your credit report.

With the immeasurable assistance and response from consumers nationwide, combined with our passion to do whatever it takes to neutralize this iniquity, our highly effective, proprietary system, and network of highly capable attorneys, will never cease to improve. The laws described below are the foundation of this process.

Your debt termination relies on applying Federal Laws, U.S. Supreme Court decisions, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Fair Credit Billing Act, the Uniform Commercial Code, the Truth in Lending Act, and numerous other banking and lending laws – to overcome the following banking practices…

Banks bombard consumers with over 6 billion mail solicitations each year. Notwithstanding newspaper, radio, television, magazine, sporting event advertising and numerous other forms of marketing, the average working class, credit-worthy, American is exposed to over 75 loan solicitations per year.

These banking ads represent, in one way or another, that the bank will lend you money in exchange for repayment, plus interest. This absurd idea is completely contrary to what, in reality, transpires and what is actually intended. In actual fact, banks do not lend you any of their own, or their depositors money.

False advertising is an act of deliberately misleading a potential client about a product, service or a company by misrepresenting information or data in advertising or other promotional materials. False advertising is a type of fraud and is often, a crime.

To substantiate this premise, we will begin by examining the funding process of credit cards and loans. When you sign and remit a loan or credit card application, (say you are approved for $10,000.00) the commercial bank stamps the back of the application, as if it were a check, with the words: “Pay $10,000.00 to the order of…” which alters your application, transforming it into a promissory note.

Altering a signed document, after the fact with the intention of changing the document’s value, constitutes forgery and fraud. Forgery is the process of making or adapting objects or documents with the intent to deceive. Fraud is any crime or civil wrong perpetuated for personal gain that utilizes the practice of deception as its principal method.

In criminal law, fraud is the crime or offense of deliberately deceiving another, to damage them – usually, to obtain property or services without compensation. This practice may also be referred to as “theft by deception,” “larceny by trick,” “larceny by fraud and deception” or something similar.

Having altered the original document, the (now) promissory note is deposited at the local Federal Reserve Bank as new money. Generally Accepted Accounting Principels (the publication governing corporate accounting practices) states: “Anything accepted by the bank as a deposit is considered as cash.” This new money represents a three to ten percent fraction of what the commercial bank may now create and do with as they please.

So, $100,000.00 to $330,000.00.00, minus the original $10,000.00 is now added to the commercial bank’s coffers. With this scheme they are taking your asset, depositing it, multiplying it and exchanging it for an alleged loan back to you. This may constitute deliberate theft by deception. In reality, of course, no loan exists.

At this point in the process, they have now transferred and deposited your note (asset) to the Federal Reserve Bank. This note will permanently reside and be concealed there. Since they’ve pilfered your promissory note, they owe it back to you. It is you, therefore, who is actually the creditor. This deceptive acquisition and concealment of such a potentially valuable asset amounts to fraudulent conveyance.

In legal jargon, the term “fraudulent conveyance” refers to the illegal transfer of property to another party in order to defer, hinder or defraud creditors. In order to be found guilty of fraudulent conveyance, it must be proven that the intention of transferring the property was to put it out of reach of a known creditor – in this case, you.

Once they have perpetrated this fraudulent conveyance, the creditor then establishes a demand deposit transaction account (checking account) in your name. $10,000.00 of these newly created/acquired funds are then deposited into this account. A debit card, or in this case, a credit card or paper check is then issued against these funds. Remember – it’s all just bookkeeping entries, because this money is backed by nothing.

Money laundering is the practice of engaging in financial transactions in order to conceal the identity, source and/or destination of money. Previously, the term “money laundering” was applied only to financial transactions related to otherwise criminal activity.

Today, its definition is often expanded by government regulators (such as the United States Office of the Comptroller of the Currency) to encompass any financial transactions which generate an asset or a value as the result of an illegal act, which may involve actions such as tax evasion or false accounting.

As a result, the illegal activity of money laundering is now recognized as routinely practiced by individuals, small or large businesses, corrupt officials, and members of organized crime (such as drug dealers, criminal organizations and possibly, the banking cartel).

Since receipt of your first “statement” from each of your creditors, they have perpetuated the notion of your indebtedness to them. These assertions did not disclose a remaining balance owed to you, as would your checking account. Mail fraud refers to any scheme which attempts to unlawfully obtain money or valuables in which the postal system is used at any point in the commission of a criminal offence.

When they claim you owe a delinquent payment, you are typically contacted via telephone, by their representative, requesting a payment. In some cases this constitutes wire fraud, which is the Federal crime of utilizing interstate wire communications to facilitate a fraudulent scheme.

Throughout the process of receiving monthly payment demands, you may have been threatened with late fees, increased interest rates, derogatory information being applied to your credit reports, telephone harassment and the threat of being “wrongfully” sued.

Extortion is a criminal offense which occurs when a person obtains money, behavior, or other goods and/or services from another by wrongfully threatening or inflicting harm to this person, their reputation, or property. Refraining from doing harm to someone in exchange for cooperation or compensation is extortion, sometimes euphemistically referred to as “protection”. This is a common practice of organized crime groups.

Blackmail is one kind of extortion – specifically, extortion by threatening to impugn another’s reputation (in this case) by publishing derogatory information about them, true or false, on credit reports. Even if it is not criminal to disseminate the information, demanding money or other consideration under threat of injury constitutes blackmail.

New money was brought into existence by the deposit of your agreement/promissory note. If you were to pay off the alleged loan, you would never receive your original deposit/asset back (the value of the promissory note). In essence, you have now paid the loan twice. Simultaneously, the banks are able to indefinitely hold and multiply the value of your note (by a factor of 10 to 33) and exponentially generate additional profits.

For an agreement or a contract to be valid, there must be valuable consideration given by all parties. Valuable consideration infers a negotiated exchange and legally reciprocal obligation. If no consideration is present, the contract is generally void and unenforceable.

The bank never explained to you what you have now learned. They did not divulge that they were not loaning anything. You were not informed that you were exchanging a promissory note (which has a real cash value) that was appropriated to fund the implicit loan.

You were led to assume that they were loaning you their own, or other people’s money, which we have established as false. They blatantly concealed this fact. If you were misinformed, according to contract law, the agreement is null and void due to “non-disclosure.”

Contract law states that when an agreement is made between two parties, each must be given full disclosure of what is transpiring. An agreement is not valid if either party conceals pertinent information.

Related Article

A Wee Family Tree up 1976 Really Interesting

A must to check out for sure. It is very enlightening as to who owns and controls what. They own and control even more today.

Related Articles

The owners of the Federal Reserve. Our ruling transatlantic elite? and how JFK challenged the Fed.

List of failed banks and banking writedowns

Any President that Would Dare Oppose The Federal Reserve Gets Assassinated: History Lesson & JP Morgan Buyout of Bear Stearns

Article Source

Somewhere in the trillionaires room of Heaven three old codgers are sitting around a table smoking cigars and chuckling over the J. P Morgan Chase & Company buyout of Bear Stearns for a paltry $2.00 a share. Not so much because the price had been over $130 a share a few weeks earlier but because the Federal Reserve Board put up $30 billion of the government’s money to guarantee the sale.

Yes, Mayer Amschel Rothschild, J. P. Morgan and John D. Rockefeller, patriarchs of three of the most powerful family fortunes in history have waited nearly two centuries to see their dreams fulfilled. Perhaps such patience is why their families have remained successful by steadfastly maintaining the rules of the game as set down by their founders.

It was 248 years ago, in 1760 that Mayer Amschel Rothschild created the House of Rothschild that was to pave the way for international banking and control of the world’s resources on a scale unparalleled and somewhat mysterious to this date. He disbursed his five sons to set up banking operations throughout Europe and the various European empires.

“Give me control of a nation’s money
and I care not who makes the laws.”
Mayer Amschel Rothschild

In time the House of Rothschild was able to take control of the Bank of France and Bank of England and relentlessly pursued an effort over two centuries to control a national bank in the USA. By 1850 it was said the Rothschild family was worth over $6 billion and owned one half of the world’s wealth.

From oil (Shell) to diamonds (DeBeers) to gold (from 1919 until 2004 a Rothschild was permanent Chairman of the London Gold Fixing committee which met twice a day in the Rothschild offices in London) the Rothschild’s quietly accumulated a foothold in critical industries and commodities throughout the world.

A master at building impenetrable walls around his family assets the current value of the Rothschild holdings are estimated to be between $100 and $300 trillion, yes that is trillion dollars! Now for a point of reference the current United States National Debt is $9.4 trillion.

J. P. Morgan began as the New York agent for his father’s business in London in 1860 and by 1877 was floating $260 million in US Bonds to save the government from an economic collapse. In 1890 he inherited the business and in 1895 bought $200 million in US Bonds with gold to again save the US economy.

“If you have to ask how much it costs,
you can’t afford it.”
J. P. Morgan

By 1912 he controlled $22 billion and had started companies such as US Steel and General Electric while he owned several railroads. Morgan was also an American agent for the House of Rothschild in London and used the Rothschild resources to help people like John D. Rockefeller.

Rockefeller, who started Standard Oil in 1863 with the help of Morgan, grew his company into the largest oil company in the world and by 1916 Rockefeller was the first billionaire in American history. In 1909 he had set up the Rockefeller Foundation with $225 million and donated nearly a billion more dollars to various causes. The Rockefeller family fortune is estimated to be around $11 trillion today.

“The way to make money is to buy
when blood is running in the streets.”
John D. Rockefeller

So what did they have in common these extraordinary capitalists? They all were dedicated to owning a national bank in America so they could determine the fiscal policies of the nation and earn interest on the debt of the nation.

Rothschild agents in 1791 formed the First Bank of the United States but intense opposition to foreign ownership by President Jefferson and others helped kill it by 1811. A Second Bank of the United States was formed in 1816 once again by Rothschild agents and this time they secured a 20-year charter. However, President Andrew Jackson was also opposed to foreign ownership and withdrew the federal deposits in 1832 as part of his plan to kill the bank charter in 1836.

An attempt to assassinate Jackson in 1834 left him wounded but more determined than ever to stop the central bank. Thirty years later President Lincoln refused to pay international bankers extremely high interest rates during the Civil War and ordered the printing of government bonds. With the help of Russian Czar Alexander II who also blocked a similar national bank from being set up in Russia by the international bankers they were able to survive the economic squeeze.

Lincoln said, “The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity. The banking powers are more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy. They denounce as public enemies all who question their methods or throw light upon their crimes. I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest foe. Corporations have been enthroned, and an era of corruption in high places will follow. The money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in the hands of a few, and the Republic is destroyed.”

Both Lincoln and Alexander II were assassinated. In 1881 James Garfield became president and he was dedicated to restoring the right of the federal government to issue money like Lincoln did in the Civil War and he was also assassinated.

Finally along came 1913 and the US was again suffering from a weak economy and there was a threat of another costly war, a world war this time, and business tycoons J.P. Morgan, John D. Rockefeller and E.H. Harriman were part of a group that got Woodrow Wilson to sign into law the Federal Reserve Act creating a network of 12 privately owned banks as part of a new Federal Reserve network.

One of the largest stockholders in the new Federal Reserve was the House of Rothschild through their direct and indirect holdings. A few years later it was disclosed that the Rothschilds also owned about 20% of J. P. Morgan. In time Morgan would merge with the Chase Manhattan Bank of the Rockefellers.

Years later John F. Kennedy opposed a private national bank and was assassinated in 1963 and Ronald Reagan opposed a private national bank and in 1981 an attempt was made to assassinate him. Coincidence or not the opposition to a privately owned national bank was a common characteristic.

Which brings us full circle to the present bailout of Bear Stearns by J.P. Morgan Chase & Company and we find the Rothschild, Morgan and Rockefeller families are all conveniently part of the same group benefiting from the bailout and the $30 billion guarantee by the Federal Reserve. This is the third time the J. P. Morgan Company has come to the rescue of the American banking system and economy.

John Perkins “Confessions of an Economic Hitman”Extended Interview 2008

Talks about Banks, Corporations, Free Trade,Wars, Toppling Governments, assassinations and numerous other things the US does to manipulate other countries.

How banks create money out of thin air

In Libya loans were interest free. Libya had no Debt. They instead had a surplus.Its no wonder the US/NATO countries wanted this example of good banking gone.

The Libya American’s never saw on Television

Related Articles

US Spending and Revenues 1902 to 2008

Who Benefited the most by J.F. Kennedy’s Death?

President John F.Kennedy, The Federal Reserve And Executive Order 11110

From September 2009

Federal Reserve rejects request for public Audit

First independent audit of the Federal Reserve in the Fed’s 99 year history.

By Alan Grayson

I think it’s fair to say that Congressman Ron Paul and I are the parents of the GAO’s audit of the Federal Reserve.

Anyway, one of our love children is a massive 251-page GAO report technocratically entitled “Opportunities Exist to Strengthen Policies and Processes for Managing Emergency Assistance.” It is almost as weighty as that 13-lb. baby born in Germany last week, named Jihad. It also is the first independent audit of the Federal Reserve in the Fed’s 99-year history.

It documents Wall Street bailouts by the Fed that dwarf the $700 billion TARP, and everything else you’ve heard about.

I wouldn’t want anyone to think that I’m dramatizing or amplifying what this GAO report says, so I’m just going to list some of my favorite parts, by page number.

Page 131 – The total lending for the Fed’s “broad-based emergency programs” was $16,115,000,000,000. That’s right, more than $16 trillion. The four largest recipients, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch and Bank of America, received more than a trillion dollars each. The 5th largest recipient was Barclays PLC. The 8th was the Royal Bank of Scotland Group, PLC. The 9th was Deutsche Bank AG. The 10th was UBS AG. These four institutions each got between a quarter of a trillion and a trillion dollars. None of them is an American bank.

Pages 133 & 137 – Some of these “broad-based emergency program” loans were long-term, and some were short-term. But the “term-adjusted borrowing” was equivalent to a total of $1,139,000,000,000 more than one year. That’s more than $1 trillion out the door. Lending for these programs in fact peaked at more than $1 trillion.

Pages 135 & 196 – Sixty percent of the $738 billion “Commercial Paper Funding Facility” went to the subsidiaries of foreign banks. 36% of the $71 billion Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility also went to subsidiaries of foreign banks.

Page 205 – Separate and apart from these “broad-based emergency program” loans were another $10,057,000,000,000 in “currency swaps.” In the “currency swaps,” the Fed handed dollars to foreign central banks, no strings attached, to fund bailouts in other countries. The Fed’s only “collateral” was a corresponding amount of foreign currency, which never left the Fed’s books (even to be deposited to earn interest), plus a promise to repay. But the Fed agreed to give back the foreign currency at the original exchange rate, even if the foreign currency appreciated in value during the period of the swap. These currency swaps and the “broad-based emergency program” loans, together, totaled more than $26 trillion. That’s almost $100,000 for every man, woman, and child in America. That’s an amount equal to more than seven years of federal spending — on the military, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, interest on the debt, and everything else. And around twice American’s total GNP.

Page 201 – Here again, these “swaps” were of varying length, but on Dec. 4, 2008, there were $588,000,000,000 outstanding. That’s almost $2,000 for every American. All sent to foreign countries. That’s more than twenty times as much as our foreign aid budget.

Page 129 – In October 2008, the Fed gave $60,000,000,000 to the Swiss National Bank with the specific understanding that the money would be used to bail out UBS, a Swiss bank. Not an American bank. A Swiss bank.

Pages 3 & 4 – In addition to the “broad-based programs,” and in addition to the “currency swaps,” there have been hundreds of billions of dollars in Fed loans called “assistance to individual institutions.” This has included Bear Stearns, AIG, Citigroup, Bank of America, and “some primary dealers.” The Fed decided unilaterally who received this “assistance,” and who didn’t.

Pages 101 & 173 – You may have heard somewhere that these were riskless transactions, where the Fed always had enough collateral to avoid losses. Not true. The “Maiden Lane I” bailout fund was in the hole for almost two years.

Page 4 – You also may have heard somewhere that all this money was paid back. Not true. The GAO lists five Fed bailout programs that still have amounts outstanding, including $909,000,000,000 (just under a trillion dollars) for the Fed’s Agency Mortgage-Backed Securities Purchase Program alone. That’s almost $3,000 for every American.

Page 126 – In contemporaneous documents, the Fed apparently did not even take a stab at explaining why it helped some banks (like Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley) and not others. After the fact, the Fed referred vaguely to “strains in the financial markets,” “transitional credit,” and the Fed’s all-time favorite rationale for everything it does, “increasing liquidity.”

81 different places in the GAO report – The Fed applied nothing even resembling a consistent policy toward valuing the assets that it acquired. Sometimes it asked its counterparty to take a “haircut” (discount), sometimes it didn’t. Having read the whole report, I see no rhyme or reason to those decisions, with billions upon billions of dollars at stake.

Page 2 – As massive as these enumerated Fed bailouts were, there were yet more. The GAO did not even endeavor to analyze the Fed’s discount window lending, or its single-tranche term repurchase agreements.

Pages 13 & 14 – And the Fed wasn’t the only one bailing out Wall Street, of course. On top of what the Fed did, there was the $700,000,000,000 TARP program authorized by Congress (which I voted against). The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC) also provided a federal guarantee for $600,000,000,000 in bonds issued by Wall Street.

There is one thing that I’d like to add to this, which isn’t in the GAO’s report. All this is something new, very new. For the first 96 years of the Fed’s existence, the Fed’s primary market activities were to buy or sell U.S. Treasury bonds (to change the money supply), and to lend at the “discount window.” Neither of these activities permitted the Fed to play favorites. But the programs that the GAO audited are fundamentally different. They allowed the Fed to choose winners and losers.

So what does all this mean? Here are some short observations:

(1) In the case of TARP, at least The People’s representatives got a vote. In the case of the Fed’s bailouts, which were roughly 20 times as substantial, there was never any vote. Unelected functionaries, with all sorts of ties to Wall Street, handed out trillions of dollars to Wall Street. That’s now how a democracy should function, or even can function.

(2) The notion that this was all without risk, just because the Fed can keep printing money, is both laughable and cryable (if that were a word). Leaving aside the example of Germany’s hyperinflation in 1923, we have the more recent examples of Iceland (75% of GNP gone when the central bank took over three failed banks) and Ireland (100% of GNP gone when the central bank tried to rescue property firms).

(3) In the same way that American troops cannot act as police officers for the world, our central bank cannot act as piggy bank for the world. If the European Central Bank wants to bail out UBS, fine. But there is no reason why our money should be involved in that.

(4) For the Fed to pick and choose among aid recipients, and then pick and choose who takes a “haircut” and who doesn’t, is both corporate welfare and socialism. The Fed is a central bank, not a barber shop.

(5) The main, if not the sole, qualification for getting help from the Fed was to have lost huge amounts of money. The Fed bailouts rewarded failure, and penalized success. (If you don’t believe me, ask Jamie Dimon at JP Morgan.) The Fed helped the losers to squander and destroy even more capital.

(6) During all the time that the Fed was stuffing money into the pockets of failed banks, many Americans couldn’t borrow a dime for a home, a car, or anything else. If the Fed had extended $26 trillion in credit to the American people instead of Wall Street, would there be 24 million Americans today who can’t find a full-time job?

And here’s what bothers me most about all this: it can happen again. I’ve called the GAO report a bailout autopsy. But it’s an autopsy of the undead.

Feel free to take a look at it yourself, it’s right here.

Source

Ron Paul and what he went through to get this Audit done.