Economic crisis a fraud.

Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 4:57 pm

The current economic crisis was engineered. All those Harvard Phds heading the financial institutions knew what they were doing and they did it on purpose. This is the reason.

Audit of the Federal Reserve Reveals $16 Trillion in Secret Bailouts

The first ever GAO(Government Accountability Office) audit of the Federal Reserve was carried out in the past few months due to the Ron Paul, Alan Grayson Amendment to the Dodd-Frank bill, which passed last year. Jim DeMint, a Republican Senator, and Bernie Sanders, an independent Senator, led the charge for a Federal Reserve audit in the Senate, but watered down the original language of the house bill(HR1207), so that a complete audit would not be carried out. Ben Bernanke(pictured to the left), Alan Greenspan, and various other bankers vehemently opposed the audit and lied to Congress about the effects an audit would have on markets. Nevertheless, the results of the first audit in the Federal Reserve’s nearly 100 year history were posted on Senator Sander’s webpage earlier this morning: http://sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=9e2a4ea8-6e73-4be2-a753-62060dcbb3c3

What was revealed in the audit was startling: $16,000,000,000,000.00 had been secretly given out to US banks and corporations and foreign banks everywhere from France to Scotland. From the period between December 2007 and June 2010, the Federal Reserve had secretly bailed out many of the world’s banks, corporations, and governments. The Federal Reserve likes to refer to these secret bailouts as an all-inclusive loan program, but virtually none of the money has been returned and it was loaned out at 0% interest. Why the Federal Reserve had never been public about this or even informed the United States Congress about the $16 trillion dollar bailout is obvious — the American public would have been outraged to find out that the Federal Reserve bailed out foreign banks while Americans were struggling to find jobs.

To place $16 trillion into perspective, remember that GDP of the United States is only $14.12 trillion. The entire national debt of the United States government spanning its 200+ year history is “only” $14.5 trillion. The budget that is being debated so heavily in Congress and the Senate is “only” $3.5 trillion. Take all of the outrage and debate over the $1.5 trillion deficit into consideration, and swallow this Red pill: There was no debate about whether $16,000,000,000,000 would be given to failing banks and failing corporations around the world.

In late 2008, the TARP Bailout bill was passed and loans of $800 billion were given to failing banks and companies. That was a blatant lie considering the fact that Goldman Sachs alone received 814 billion dollars. As is turns out, the Federal Reserve donated $2.5 trillion to Citigroup, while Morgan Stanley received $2.04 trillion. The Royal Bank of Scotland and Deutsche Bank, a German bank, split about a trillion and numerous other banks received hefty chunks of the $16 trillion.

“This is a clear case of socialism for the rich and rugged, you’re-on-your-own individualism for everyone else.” – Bernie Sanders(I-VT)

When you have conservative Republican stalwarts like Jim DeMint(R-SC) and Ron Paul(R-TX) as well as self identified Democratic socialists like Bernie Sanders all fighting against the Federal Reserve, you know that it is no longer an issue of Right versus Left. When you have every single member of the Republican Party in Congress and progressive Congressmen like Dennis Kucinich sponsoring a bill to audit the Federal Reserve, you realize that the Federal Reserve is an entity onto itself, which has no oversight and no accountability.

Americans should be swelled with anger and outrage at the abysmal state of affairs when an unelected group of bankers can create money out of thin air and give it out to megabanks and supercorporations like Halloween candy. If the Federal Reserve and the bankers who control it believe that they can continue to devalue the savings of Americans and continue to destroy the US economy, they will have to face the realization that their trillion dollar printing presses will eventually plunder the world economy.

The list of institutions that received the most money from the Federal Reserve can be found on page 131 of the GAO Audit and are as follows..

Citigroup: $2.5 trillion ($2,500,000,000,000)
Morgan Stanley: $2.04 trillion ($2,040,000,000,000)
Merrill Lynch: $1.949 trillion ($1,949,000,000,000)
Bank of America: $1.344 trillion ($1,344,000,000,000)
Barclays PLC (United Kingdom): $868 billion ($868,000,000,000)
Bear Sterns: $853 billion ($853,000,000,000)
Goldman Sachs: $814 billion ($814,000,000,000)
Royal Bank of Scotland (UK): $541 billion ($541,000,000,000)
JP Morgan Chase: $391 billion ($391,000,000,000)
Deutsche Bank (Germany): $354 billion ($354,000,000,000)
UBS (Switzerland): $287 billion ($287,000,000,000)
Credit Suisse (Switzerland): $262 billion ($262,000,000,000)
Lehman Brothers: $183 billion ($183,000,000,000)
Bank of Scotland (United Kingdom): $181 billion ($181,000,000,000)
BNP Paribas (France): $175 billion ($175,000,000,000)
and many many more including banks in Belgium of all places.

Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2012 8:54 pm

This was first cooked up in the 1960s, when the failure of the 1960s radical violence to transform the world into a socialist dystopia failed. It's called the the Cloward-Piven Strategy.

The aim of this global movement is to collapse the West with overburdening governments with spending/debt.

Globalization was actually first concocted by Carroll Quigley in the early 1960s, when he came up with the idea of make world government inevitable through a global market. He was Bill Clinton's advisor at Georgetown.

Much more recently other socialist interests in USA, notably the neoconservatives, which are not conservatives at all. They totally violate the most basic principles of conservatives:

1. Much smaller central government
2. Thrift in spending
3. Non-interventionism in the world, except under dire circumstances
4. Fundamental liberties protected under our constitution, and strict adherence to it
5. The importance of the individuals to regulate themselves. Nothing can improve society except wiser people with more common sense and self-limitation/reserve/discipline.
6. More ...

Cherokee (3.8 mt) Joined: Mar 17, 2008 Posts: 402

Quote:

Nothing can improve society except wiser people with more common sense and self-limitation/reserve/discipline.

"Wise" people shall govern us instead of laws and regulations? Sounds an awful lot like a dictatorship to me...

Posted: Mon Apr 30, 2012 11:14 am

bueschu wrote:

Quote:

Nothing can improve society except wiser people with more common sense and self-limitation/reserve/discipline.

"Wise" people shall govern us instead of laws and regulations? Sounds an awful lot like a dictatorship to me...

No.

"Wise" encompasses competency, skills, merit, honesty, truth, and good intention for broader community, without losing touch with common sense and reality. It also involves equal justice for all, NOT social justice socialist nonsense, that only favors political whims of the system party (or parties). You never have a good system or country without a reasonable number of people adhering to these personal character principles.

Cherokee (3.8 mt) Joined: Mar 17, 2008 Posts: 402

Quote:

"You never have a good system or country without a reasonable number of people adhering to these personal character principles."

Sounds neat - but surely you realize that a good system still needs an institutional framework in order to run? History teaches us that systems which only depended on the "wisdom" of people all too often were corrupt and vile regimes.

Fizzle Joined: May 03, 2012 Posts: 1

The Federal Reserve now has a Twitter manage. Finance-minded customers with an eye for transparency can follow the organization now, @federalreserve. Well, source predict that Federal Reserve videos linked to via Twitter will be a mix of current topics and instructional archived lectures. With only-140 character brevity, Fed's twitter account is the simplified @fedralreserve instead of policy making panel which is the Federal Open Market Committee. In fact, Bernanke and top officials likely won't be doing the tweeting directly. That job will fall upon the tweeting fingers of junior Fed staff. Article source: Federal Reserve starts tweeting updates of interest rates, speeches and more.

Posted: Wed May 30, 2012 3:15 pm

There is a colossal problem with this original post, by the way. There never was an audit of the Federal Reserve.

Ron Paul, chairman of the United States House Committee on Financial Services, and and a handful of other sane politicians have been calling for an unprecedented audited of the Fed, since it ridiculously was never allowed, since the Fed is too powerful.

Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2012 2:04 pm

bueschu wrote:

Quote:

"You never have a good system or country without a reasonable number of people adhering to these personal character principles."

Sounds neat - but surely you realize that a good system still needs an institutional framework in order to run? History teaches us that systems which only depended on the "wisdom" of people all too often were corrupt and vile regimes.

The problem is NOT government, but TOO MUCH GOVERNMENT. Too much centralized power destroys personal liberties and only attracts far more destructive corruption.

Cherokee (3.8 mt) Joined: Mar 17, 2008 Posts: 402

Quote:

"Too much centralized power destroys personal liberties and only attracts far more destructive corruption."

Honestly, I agree with you (which is rare enough).
Problem is, the current rulers of the Reps in the US don't just want less government, they want to reduce the state to a smoldering ruin.
There can be no personal liberty in a society that has abandoned all forms of statism. I mean, look what happened to Somalia. For the great majority of the population there is virtually no garantee or protection of education, water supply, property, sexual integrity, life or whatever else.

Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 2:47 pm

bueschu wrote:

Quote:

"Too much centralized power destroys personal liberties and only attracts far more destructive corruption."

Honestly, I agree with you (which is rare enough).
Problem is, the current rulers of the Reps in the US don't just want less government, they want to reduce the state to a smoldering ruin.
There can be no personal liberty in a society that has abandoned all forms of statism. I mean, look what happened to Somalia. For the great majority of the population there is virtually no garantee or protection of education, water supply, property, sexual integrity, life or whatever else.

That is a total exaggeration. That is not true. The truth about the Republican Party leadership powers *behind the scenes* want big government, with huge military expansion, more forced international power, and far more. These are defined by the neocons that have taken over the party and pretend to be conservatives, while they are anything BUT conservatives.

People like Ron Paul brought the truly conservative idea of reducing government, neither eliminating nor bringing it down to a trivial level. Yet he was rejected by the neconservative powers that dictate the party's policies.

The far left progressives that rule the Democratic Party rattle on with mindless propaganda, trying to accuse an actually less socialistic -- yet socialistic the same in ridiculously overdone nanny state push of too much government intruding in our lives -- of trying to destroy the country. This is hogwash, what progressives try to accuse, in desperate attempts to hold power.

Again, neoconservatives are NOT conservatives. They are socialistic. They also hugely expanded government under GW Bush, including the tragic creation of the Department of Homeland Security. They also crazily exploded the size of Medicare benefits to ruinous cost levels, among far more expansions.

Cherokee (3.8 mt) Joined: Mar 17, 2008 Posts: 402

Quote:

"That is a total exaggeration. That is not true. "

Really?
Last time I checked, the Reps wanted to lower taxes, reduce social obligations for enterprises, cut the federal budget and many social programs in it, most notably "Obamacare". I'd say, Paul is in exactly the right party.
Sure, they want a stronger and more "global" military than him - but that's about it.

Posted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 4:36 pm

bueschu wrote:

Quote:

"That is a total exaggeration. That is not true. "

Really?
Last time I checked, the Reps wanted to lower taxes, reduce social obligations for enterprises, cut the federal budget and many social programs in it, most notably "Obamacare". I'd say, Paul is in exactly the right party.
Sure, they want a stronger and more "global" military than him - but that's about it.

They don't really want to reduce the government behind the scenes. It's all a political ploy to regain neoncon (fake conservative) power. In fact, Romney wants to roll huge amounts of money back into the military.

You also might or might not know, as governor of his state, he supported a universal healthcare system very similar to Obama's that was a failure, like Obama's would be in it extreme costliness in explosive regulations that cost way too much to sanely implement.

The cartoon below illustrates some of the problem. The global elite bankers, all strongly to the left, confirmed by the political sway of the Davos meetings and far more, not leaving out the Federal Reserve and Goldman Sachs, run both parties in USA.

MSM = "mainstream media" of all types, including MSNBC, Fox, CNN, and more.

The voters, shown below, are the non-aligned voters, while the legs are the partisan factions.

Goldman Sachs and their partners are also hugely behind the fake "green" movement, to push neo-Marxist globalization and related governance far higher, using their ideological partners in the scientific community to push the fake human influence of global warming.

Cherokee (3.8 mt) Joined: Mar 17, 2008 Posts: 402

Quote:

"You also might or might not know, as governor of his state, he supported a universal healthcare system very similar to Obama's that was a failure, like Obama's would be in it extreme costliness in explosive regulations that cost way too much to sanely implement. "

And you might have also noticed that Romney isn't exactly popular with his own crowd because of such stunts.
Or maybe you didn't.

As for the rest of your post... Well, I was naive to expect that we could discuss for a longer period of time without you bringing up your usual right wing paranoia crap. Confused

Posted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 10:50 pm

bueschu wrote:

Quote:

"You also might or might not know, as governor of his state, he supported a universal healthcare system very similar to Obama's that was a failure, like Obama's would be in it extreme costliness in explosive regulations that cost way too much to sanely implement. "

And you might have also noticed that Romney isn't exactly popular with his own crowd because of such stunts.
Or maybe you didn't.

As for the rest of your post... Well, I was naive to expect that we could discuss for a longer period of time without you bringing up your usual right wing paranoia crap. Confused

It isn't right wing paranoia. It's a fact. It's your dismissing the fact that there are conspiracies. Your denying this doesn't meet with historical facts and records.

They happen in business, government, just about any organization or group of people.

Examples:

Business: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/us-demanding-harsh-penalties-price-fixers

Government: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird

Quote:

Further details of Operation Mockingbird were revealed as a result of the Frank Church investigations (Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities) in 1975. According to the Congress report published in 1976:

"The CIA currently maintains a network of several hundred foreign individuals around the world who provide intelligence for the CIA and at times attempt to influence opinion through the use of covert propaganda. These individuals provide the CIA with direct access to a large number of newspapers and periodicals, scores of press services and news agencies, radio and television stations, commercial book publishers, and other foreign media outlets."

.
.
.

In February 1976, George H. W. Bush, the recently appointed Director of the CIA, announced a new policy: "Effective immediately, the CIA will not enter into any paid or contract relationship with any full-time or part-time news correspondent accredited by any U.S. news service, newspaper, periodical, radio or television network or station." However, he added that the CIA would continue to "welcome" the voluntary, unpaid cooperation of journalists.[25]

Is everything RIGHT WING PARANOIA CRAP because it points out criminal intent of groups or individuals aligned with left-wing interests? NO.

Cherokee (3.8 mt) Joined: Mar 17, 2008 Posts: 402

Quote:

It's your dismissing the fact that there are conspiracies.

Oh, for crying out loud! I don't deny that there are conspiracies, laserbrain!
But there's a huge difference between a CIA-operation (which is still soooo incredibly secret that you can read on Wiki about it) and that paranoid New-World-Order-crap you believe in!

And of course, you've once more managed to steer away from the topic of our little chat, congrats!
You'd make a marvelous spin doctor, Grav! Why don't you offer your services to Romney? I'm sure he'd apreciate some help from the fringe right now. Very Happy