Simply by applying the standards upheld at Nuremberg.
"...To give a peace prize to the commander-in-chief of a war machine now churning its way through the populations of three countries (Iraq/Af-Pak), with innumerable black ops, lightning raids and drone shots on the side.... to a man who even as we speak is deciding just how he wants to kill even more civilians in Afghanistan and Pakistan... a man who has enthusiastically embraced as "an extraordinary achievement" one of the most heinous and barbaric acts of military aggression since Hitler rolled across the border into Poland... a man who blusters about leaving "all options on the table," including the use of mass-murdering nuclear weapons, to bully other nations into compliance with American wishes... to give a peace prize to such a man, while all over the world, there are men and women who have devoted their entire lives to non-violence and reconciliation, many of them suffering imprisonment, torture and ruin for their efforts... well, like I said, it's beyond words.
But it's good to see that the spirit of arms merchant Alfred Nobel -- purveyor and profiteer of death and destruction -- is being honored so perfectly with today's award..."
"Almost no one will acknowledge the single, fundamental truth about Barack Obama, the truth of greatest and most terrifying consequence:
Barack Obama is a war criminal.
Many facts overwhelmingly and conclusively compel this judgment, and no other. Not because I say so, but because an honest application of the relevant language of international law, as well as of the Nuremberg Principles, necessitates the conclusion."
Largest insolvent economy. Worthless army. Will they invade China? No. Northcom will, instead, be used to suppress revolt at home as the shit comes down and the birds come home to roost.
Everybody who is really concerned with the matter knows that in 36 months - or less - there will be NO ability by the US to pay. Empty promise on worthless paper.
How? Only speculatively. They generate only stock certificates. No other tangible value is produced that matches the dollar volume. They function on the "bigger idiot" principal.
To the original point. I will defer to those who's fortunes were made in the fractional and reserve banking "industries".
Sir Josiah Stamp, president of the Bank of England and the second richest man in Britain in the 1920s. He declared in an address at the University of Texas in 1927:
The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented. Banking was conceived in inequity and born in sin . . . . Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them but leave them the power to create money, and, with a flick of a pen, they will create enough money to buy it back again. . . . Take this great power away from them and all great fortunes like mine will disappear, for then this would be a better and happier world to live in. . . . But, if you want to continue to be the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money and control credit.
Robert H. Hemphill, Credit Manager of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta in the Great Depression, wrote in 1934:
We are completely dependent on the commercial Banks. Someone has to borrow every dollar we have in circulation, cash or credit. If the Banks create ample synthetic money we are prosperous; if not, we starve. We are absolutely without a permanent money system. When one gets a complete grasp of the picture, the tragic absurdity of our hopeless position is almost incredible, but there it is. It is the most important subject intelligent persons can investigate and reflect upon.
Graham Towers, Governor of the Bank of Canada from 1935 to 1955, acknowledged:
Banks create money. That is what they are for. . . . The manufacturing process to make money consists of making an entry in a book. That is all. . . . Each and every time a Bank makes a loan . . . new Bank credit is created -- brand new money.
Robert B. Anderson, Secretary of the Treasury under Eisenhower, said in an interview reported in the August 31, 1959 issue of U.S. News and World Report:
[W]hen a bank makes a loan, it simply adds to the borrower's deposit account in the bank by the amount of the loan. The money is not taken from anyone else's deposit; it was not previously paid in to the bank by anyone. It's new money, created by the bank for the use of the borrower.
The United States Federal Reserve has a fractional, "reserve". What is that reserve? IOU's from the U.S. Government, in the form of Bonds and Treasury Certificates. Promises to pay - which have an interest-bearing value outpaced by the Reserve System-induced inflation. Ponzi.
Right after the fan re-write of the "New Hope" script as haiku. I hear there's a Klingon translation in the works. Difficult at the outset. It is rumored that there's no Klingon word for "hope", other than the phrase "Your fear which I did not bring about." Some fans suggested coining a new word, but this was considered a violation of the received Klingon - they don't want to just "make stuff up."
Regardless of the vagaries of reserve holding percentages, the arguments against the fundamental basis of a speculation economy - versus a capital investment economy - are sound. Capital speculation is the moral and functional equivalence of Ponzi. It produces no new value, only inflating larger numbers. There is, ultimately, someone who winds-up swindled. In the case of the recent "financial crisis", it is apparent that the swindled are the tax-paying populations.
Defending such a system as rational, moral and productive to the society in which it is allowed to operate? I would call that a delusional proposition. Those who do so exhibit something akin to Stockhausen Syndrome. Stockholder syndrome, perhaps?;-)
"Everything predicted by the enemies of banks, in the beginning, is now coming to pass. We are to be ruined now by the deluge of bank paper. It is cruel that such revolutions in private fortunes should be at the mercy of avaricious adventurers, who, instead of employing their capital, if any they have, in manufactures, commerce, and other useful pursuits, make it an instrument to burden all the interchanges of property with their swindling profits, profits which are the price of no useful industry of theirs."
The bank has $1. They write a loan to your friend for $100. They now declare that they have $101 dollars of assets, and represent this balance sheet as collateral on further loans, and as the basis for other financial instruments they trade. $100 dollars were 'conjured' into existence.
In any closed system, this is unsustainable. It is the functional equivalent of Ponzi and check kiting - on the macro-economic scale.
"I am afraid that the ordinary citizen will not like to be told that banks can and do create money...And they who control the credit of the nation direct the policy of Governments and hold in the hollow of their hands the destiny of the people"
-- Reginald McKenna, past Chairman of the Board, Midlands Bank of England
The article on th efront page does not draw attention to the most remarkable - and horrible - aspect of the MoD document.
It consistently groups "investigative journalists" into a category with "terrorists", "criminals" and "computer hackers".
The document states "the "enemy" is unwelcome publicity of any kind, and through any medium". This is the military. "Enemy" is not a metaphor to these people.
The thieves and pirates shouldn't seem surprised by the fact that their employees also take from them. The degraded ethical standard of the banking shell-game must be transparently obvious to those operating from within. Insolvent giants, with fraudulent assets, charge interest to loan out what they don't possess themselves, and award the tangible proceeds into executive compensation!
Taking from these bastards? It's like pulling a trinket off the dragon's horde.
Break the copiers, and sabotage the telex lines, while you're at it, folks!
By Richard H. Curtiss Former U.S. Foreign Service Officer
October 03, 2009 "WRMEA" -- For many years the American media said that "Israel receives $1.8 billion in military aid" or that "Israel receives $1.2 billion in economic aid." Both statements were true, but since they were never combined to give us the complete total of annual U.S. aid to Israel, they also were lies--true lies.
Recently Americans have begun to read and hear that "Israel receives $3 billion in annual U.S. foreign aid." That's true. But it's still a lie. The problem is that in fiscal 1997 alone, Israel received from a variety of other U.S. federal budgets at least $525.8 million above and beyond its $3 billion from the foreign aid budget, and yet another $2 billion in federal loan guarantees. So the complete total of U.S. grants and loan guarantees to Israel for fiscal 1997 was $5,525,800,000.
One can truthfully blame the mainstream media for never digging out these figures for themselves, because none ever have. They were compiled by the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs. But the mainstream media certainly are not alone. Although Congress authorizes America's foreign aid total, the fact that more than a third of it goes to a country smaller in both area and population than Hong Kong probably never has been mentioned on the floor of the Senate or House. Yet it's been going on for more than a generation.
Probably the only members of Congress who even suspect the full total of U.S. funds received by Israel each year are the privileged few committee members who actually mark it up. And almost all members of the concerned committees are Jewish, have taken huge campaign donations orchestrated by Israel's Washington, DC lobby, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), or both. These congressional committee members are paid to act, not talk. So they do and they don't.
The same applies to the president, the secretary of state, and the foreign aid administrator. They all submit a budget that includes aid for Israel, which Congress approves, or increases, but never cuts. But no one in the executive branch mentions that of the few remaining U.S. aid recipients worldwide, all of the others are developing nations which either make their military bases available to the U.S., are key members of international alliances in which the U.S. participates, or have suffered some crippling blow of nature to their abilities to feed their people such as earthquakes, floods or droughts.
Israel, whose troubles arise solely from its unwillingness to give back land it seized in the 1967 war in return for peace with its neighbors, does not fit those criteria. In fact, Israel's 1995 per capita gross domestic product was $15,800. That put it below Britain at $19,500 and Italy at $18,700 and just above Ireland at $15,400 and Spain at $14,300.
All four of those European countries have contributed a very large share of immigrants to the U.S., yet none has organized an ethnic group to lobby for U.S. foreign aid. Instead, all four send funds and volunteers to do economic development and emergency relief work in other less fortunate parts of the world.
The lobby that Israel and its supporters have built in the United States to make all this aid happen, and to ban discussion of it from the national dialogue, goes far beyond AIPAC, with its $15 million budget, its 150 employees, and its five or six registered lobbyists who manage to visit every member of Congress individually once or twice a year.
AIPAC, in turn, can draw upon the resources of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, a roof group set up solely to coordinate the efforts of some 52 national Jewish organizations on behalf of Israel.
Among them are Hadassah, the Zionist women's organization, which organizes a steady stream of American Jewish visitors to Israel; the American Jewish Congress, which mobilizes support for Israel among members of the traditionally left-of-ce
This is careful language couched in diplomatic terms, that translates into a denunciation of "Bullshit!"
Obama at G20? He completely warped the facts and shadow-boxed an agenda. The anti nuke talk has no concrete actions behind it, and is intended only to portray the nuclear states as "anti-nuclear" so they can maintain their monopoly under the appearance of moral high-ground, as they plan destruction for Iran. http://www.mathaba.net/news/?x=621785
Slashdot Mirror
I think casting Keanu Reeves as Neils Bohr was a stroke of unmatched brilliance.
Lady GaGa is, of course, a surprise as "the loathsome particle". She does a good Burlesconi imitation, all thing considered...
Well said. Was this your first Letter to Penthouse, or do you write them all?
are we talking about mechanics having sex now?
I'll just say "Car Talk" - and leave your imagination to create the horrors.
Taleban offered a hotel for OBL. Before that it was SUdan.
You believe in fairy-tales. If you buy the official 911 story, then yje US should have attacked Yemen and Saudi Arabia.
I think they should have invaded Israel - as the home of "Al-Qaeda".
Well here's another clue for you all. The Walrus was Paul.
http://www.examiner.com/x-2086-Foreign-Policy-Examiner~y2009m4d17-Breaking-News-Algerian-daily-confirms-Mossad-training-camps-for-alQaida?cid=email-this-article
http://www.ennaharonline.com/en/news/943.html
Just begin your day, each morning, with the admonition: "Everything you know is wrong."
No.
He orders drones to burn them and their infant children to crisps.
http://www.distantocean.com/2009/10/what-it-takes-to-win-a-nobel.html
Guernica by push-button.
Obama is Cheney v.2.0 - with good PR, like Windows 7 is Vista in lipstick.
Simply by applying the standards upheld at Nuremberg.
"...To give a peace prize to the commander-in-chief of a war machine now churning its way through the populations of three countries (Iraq/Af-Pak), with innumerable black ops, lightning raids and drone shots on the side .... to a man who even as we speak is deciding just how he wants to kill even more civilians in Afghanistan and Pakistan ... a man who has enthusiastically embraced as "an extraordinary achievement" one of the most heinous and barbaric acts of military aggression since Hitler rolled across the border into Poland ... a man who blusters about leaving "all options on the table," including the use of mass-murdering nuclear weapons, to bully other nations into compliance with American wishes ... to give a peace prize to such a man, while all over the world, there are men and women who have devoted their entire lives to non-violence and reconciliation, many of them suffering imprisonment, torture and ruin for their efforts ... well, like I said, it's beyond words.
But it's good to see that the spirit of arms merchant Alfred Nobel -- purveyor and profiteer of death and destruction -- is being honored so perfectly with today's award..."
http://www.chris-floyd.com/component/content/article/1-latest-news/1856-well-nobel-was-the-inventor-of-dynamite-after-all.html
"Almost no one will acknowledge the single, fundamental truth about Barack Obama, the truth of greatest and most terrifying consequence:
Barack Obama is a war criminal.
Many facts overwhelmingly and conclusively compel this judgment, and no other. Not because I say so, but because an honest application of the relevant language of international law, as well as of the Nuremberg Principles, necessitates the conclusion."
http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com/2009/10/depraved-obscene-absurdities.html
Oh! My Surprise! "WAR IS PEACE!"
Barack Obama just used his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech to reiterate his threats against Iran.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Building-a-World-that-Gives-Life-to-the-Promise-of-Our-Founding-Documents/
That's change you can deceive in.
Might makes right, eh?
http://nbgazette.com/index.php?entry=entry090910-210927
http://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/167/35807.html
"Less Evil".
Now, there's a real high watermark for America to set its sights on. Keep on leading the "free world", dudes.
You are an increasingly irrelevant has-been. Enjoy your impending collapse:"Soviet II, The Sequel - This Time, It's Impersonal"
Nope. He just crisps Afghan babies to charcoal. "Sorry 'bout your wedding party. Shame about the bride."
He got the prize 'cos he's not GWB. That's how low the threshold is, these days.
Obama is only perpetuating two illegal wars of agression and a global network of 737 military bases.
Actually, I think they did this to PREVENT him from launching aggression on Iran. ;-)
Mahmoud is responsible for fewer bodies in six years, than Barack was in his first six months.
Got 2 troll mods in this? With no comment on the content or context of the links?
Largest insolvent economy. Worthless army. Will they invade China? No. Northcom will, instead, be used to suppress revolt at home as the shit comes down and the birds come home to roost.
Everybody who is really concerned with the matter knows that in 36 months - or less - there will be NO ability by the US to pay. Empty promise on worthless paper.
Hence, the unprecedented activity of the past week:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/the-demise-of-the-dollar-1798175.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8289302.stm
The insolvency of the principal banking houses happened 25 years ago - and was hidden behind successive speculative bubbles. The kind that say 1 share of Google is worth 475 USD of trade in real goods and services.
http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2009/10/real-reason-giant-insolvent-banks-arent.html
"worth billions"
How? Only speculatively. They generate only stock certificates. No other tangible value is produced that matches the dollar volume. They function on the "bigger idiot" principal.
To the original point. I will defer to those who's fortunes were made in the fractional and reserve banking "industries".
Sir Josiah Stamp, president of the Bank of England and the second richest man in Britain in the 1920s. He declared in an address at the University of Texas in 1927:
The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented. Banking was conceived in inequity and born in sin . . . . Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them but leave them the power to create money, and, with a flick of a pen, they will create enough money to buy it back again. . . . Take this great power away from them and all great fortunes like mine will disappear, for then this would be a better and happier world to live in. . . . But, if you want to continue to be the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money and control credit.
Robert H. Hemphill, Credit Manager of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta in the Great Depression, wrote in 1934:
We are completely dependent on the commercial Banks. Someone has to borrow every dollar we have in circulation, cash or credit. If the Banks create ample synthetic money we are prosperous; if not, we starve. We are absolutely without a permanent money system. When one gets a complete grasp of the picture, the tragic absurdity of our hopeless position is almost incredible, but there it is. It is the most important subject intelligent persons can investigate and reflect upon.
Graham Towers, Governor of the Bank of Canada from 1935 to 1955, acknowledged:
Banks create money. That is what they are for. . . . The manufacturing process to make money consists of making an entry in a book. That is all. . . . Each and every time a Bank makes a loan . . . new Bank credit is created -- brand new money.
Robert B. Anderson, Secretary of the Treasury under Eisenhower, said in an interview reported in the August 31, 1959 issue of U.S. News and World Report:
[W]hen a bank makes a loan, it simply adds to the borrower's deposit account in the bank by the amount of the loan. The money is not taken from anyone else's deposit; it was not previously paid in to the bank by anyone. It's new money, created by the bank for the use of the borrower.
The United States Federal Reserve has a fractional, "reserve". What is that reserve? IOU's from the U.S. Government, in the form of Bonds and Treasury Certificates. Promises to pay - which have an interest-bearing value outpaced by the Reserve System-induced inflation. Ponzi.
Rewind.
Well. Second largest.
Right after the fan re-write of the "New Hope" script as haiku. I hear there's a Klingon translation in the works. Difficult at the outset. It is rumored that there's no Klingon word for "hope", other than the phrase "Your fear which I did not bring about." Some fans suggested coining a new word, but this was considered a violation of the received Klingon - they don't want to just "make stuff up."
They have placed the lawful activity of public interest journalism into the functional category of hostile, combat action.
They are not "your" military, any more, are they?
Nice ad hominem.
Regardless of the vagaries of reserve holding percentages, the arguments against the fundamental basis of a speculation economy - versus a capital investment economy - are sound. Capital speculation is the moral and functional equivalence of Ponzi. It produces no new value, only inflating larger numbers. There is, ultimately, someone who winds-up swindled. In the case of the recent "financial crisis", it is apparent that the swindled are the tax-paying populations.
Defending such a system as rational, moral and productive to the society in which it is allowed to operate? I would call that a delusional proposition. Those who do so exhibit something akin to Stockhausen Syndrome. Stockholder syndrome, perhaps? ;-)
"Everything predicted by the enemies of banks, in the beginning, is now coming to pass. We are to be ruined now by the deluge of bank paper. It is cruel that such revolutions in private fortunes should be at the mercy of avaricious adventurers, who, instead of employing their capital, if any they have, in manufactures, commerce, and other useful pursuits, make it an instrument to burden all the interchanges of property with their swindling profits, profits which are the price of no useful industry of theirs."
--Thomas Jefferson letter to Thomas Cooper, 1814.
You are not describing the system as it exists.
The bank has $1. They write a loan to your friend for $100. They now declare that they have $101 dollars of assets, and represent this balance sheet as collateral on further loans, and as the basis for other financial instruments they trade. $100 dollars were 'conjured' into existence.
In any closed system, this is unsustainable. It is the functional equivalent of Ponzi and check kiting - on the macro-economic scale.
Check out "Money is Debt" - for the Schoolhouse Rock version:
http://vodpod.com/watch/1544492-money-as-debt
"I am afraid that the ordinary citizen will not like to be told that banks can and do create money ...And they who control the credit of the nation direct the policy of Governments and hold in the hollow of their hands the destiny of the people"
-- Reginald McKenna, past Chairman of the Board, Midlands Bank of England
The article on th efront page does not draw attention to the most remarkable - and horrible - aspect of the MoD document.
It consistently groups "investigative journalists" into a category with "terrorists", "criminals" and "computer hackers".
The document states "the "enemy" is unwelcome publicity of any kind, and through any medium". This is the military. "Enemy" is not a metaphor to these people.
Fractional reserve banking IS fraud!
The thieves and pirates shouldn't seem surprised by the fact that their employees also take from them. The degraded ethical standard of the banking shell-game must be transparently obvious to those operating from within. Insolvent giants, with fraudulent assets, charge interest to loan out what they don't possess themselves, and award the tangible proceeds into executive compensation!
Taking from these bastards? It's like pulling a trinket off the dragon's horde.
Break the copiers, and sabotage the telex lines, while you're at it, folks!
The Cost of Israel to US Taxpayers
By Richard H. Curtiss
Former U.S. Foreign Service Officer
October 03, 2009 "WRMEA" -- For many years the American media said that "Israel receives $1.8 billion in military aid" or that "Israel receives $1.2 billion in economic aid." Both statements were true, but since they were never combined to give us the complete total of annual U.S. aid to Israel, they also were lies--true lies.
Recently Americans have begun to read and hear that "Israel receives $3 billion in annual U.S. foreign aid." That's true. But it's still a lie. The problem is that in fiscal 1997 alone, Israel received from a variety of other U.S. federal budgets at least $525.8 million above and beyond its $3 billion from the foreign aid budget, and yet another $2 billion in federal loan guarantees. So the complete total of U.S. grants and loan guarantees to Israel for fiscal 1997 was $5,525,800,000.
One can truthfully blame the mainstream media for never digging out these figures for themselves, because none ever have. They were compiled by the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs. But the mainstream media certainly are not alone. Although Congress authorizes America's foreign aid total, the fact that more than a third of it goes to a country smaller in both area and population than Hong Kong probably never has been mentioned on the floor of the Senate or House. Yet it's been going on for more than a generation.
Probably the only members of Congress who even suspect the full total of U.S. funds received by Israel each year are the privileged few committee members who actually mark it up. And almost all members of the concerned committees are Jewish, have taken huge campaign donations orchestrated by Israel's Washington, DC lobby, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), or both. These congressional committee members are paid to act, not talk. So they do and they don't.
The same applies to the president, the secretary of state, and the foreign aid administrator. They all submit a budget that includes aid for Israel, which Congress approves, or increases, but never cuts. But no one in the executive branch mentions that of the few remaining U.S. aid recipients worldwide, all of the others are developing nations which either make their military bases available to the U.S., are key members of international alliances in which the U.S. participates, or have suffered some crippling blow of nature to their abilities to feed their people such as earthquakes, floods or droughts.
Israel, whose troubles arise solely from its unwillingness to give back land it seized in the 1967 war in return for peace with its neighbors, does not fit those criteria. In fact, Israel's 1995 per capita gross domestic product was $15,800. That put it below Britain at $19,500 and Italy at $18,700 and just above Ireland at $15,400 and Spain at $14,300.
All four of those European countries have contributed a very large share of immigrants to the U.S., yet none has organized an ethnic group to lobby for U.S. foreign aid. Instead, all four send funds and volunteers to do economic development and emergency relief work in other less fortunate parts of the world.
The lobby that Israel and its supporters have built in the United States to make all this aid happen, and to ban discussion of it from the national dialogue, goes far beyond AIPAC, with its $15 million budget, its 150 employees, and its five or six registered lobbyists who manage to visit every member of Congress individually once or twice a year.
AIPAC, in turn, can draw upon the resources of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, a roof group set up solely to coordinate the efforts of some 52 national Jewish organizations on behalf of Israel.
Among them are Hadassah, the Zionist women's organization, which organizes a steady stream of American Jewish visitors to Israel; the American Jewish Congress, which mobilizes support for Israel among members of the traditionally left-of-ce
Neither one of them would front he kind of lies made by either the NYT or the POTUS.
IAEA on the NYT "Pravda":
http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/MediaAdvisory/2009/MA200919.html
This is careful language couched in diplomatic terms, that translates into a denunciation of "Bullshit!"
Obama at G20? He completely warped the facts and shadow-boxed an agenda. The anti nuke talk has no concrete actions behind it, and is intended only to portray the nuclear states as "anti-nuclear" so they can maintain their monopoly under the appearance of moral high-ground, as they plan destruction for Iran.
http://www.mathaba.net/news/?x=621785
Israel commits crimes that make Iranian transgression look like shoplifting by comparison.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_vjJ5fOtvksM/SWYvR4IFthI/AAAAAAAAAAU/AcXQzvRoxsw/S1600-R/headline9637e7.jpg
They are a house of horrors, paid for by the endless U.S. debt.
Who they are:
http://www.itisapartheid.org/
http://politicaltheatrics.org/2009/10/01/binyamin-council-head-jews-arabs-should-have-separate-roads/
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Israeli-Army-T-Shirts-Mock-Killing-Palestinian-Women-And-Children-During-Gaza-Offensive/Article/200903315245946
What they do:
http://www.kawther.info/wpr/2009/09/30/israeli-army-terrorizes-teenagers-inside-a-school
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1253198149221&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull