Saturday, January 31, 2009


Taleb Says Nationalize Banks,
You Can't Trust Them January 29th, 2009 3:55 pm
By Svenja O'Donnell and Francine Lacqua.

Jan. 29 (Bloomberg) -- Bank nationalizations are "absolutely necessary" to stop them damaging the financial system further with more losses, said Nassim Nicholas Taleb, author of the best-selling finance book "The Black Swan."
"You cannot trust the banks in taking risks," Taleb said in an interview with Bloomberg Television in Davos. "We have a very strange situation in which it's the worst of capitalism and socialism, a situation in which profits were privatized and losses were socialized. We taxpayers have the worst."
The global economy will slow close to a halt this year as more than $2 trillion of bad assets in the U.S. help sink economies from there to the U.K. and Japan, the International Monetary Fund said yesterday. Taleb echoed comments from New York University Professor Nouriel Roubini, who says the majority of U.S. banks are insolvent.
"You have to eventually nationalize U.S. banks, you have to take the problem by the horns," Roubini told Bloomberg Television in Davos today. "In my view actually most of the U.S. banking system is insolvent."
Roubini, a former economist in President Bill Clinton's White House, predicted the financial crisis as early as July 2006. Last February he forecast a "catastrophic" meltdown that central bankers would fail to prevent, leading to the bankruptcy of large banks with mortgage holdings.

Black Swans
Rare and unforeseen events are known as "black swans," after Taleb's book, "The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable." It was published in May 2007, about three months before the credit crunch rocked global markets and led banks to announce more than $1 trillion of writedowns and credit losses.
"We should not trust these bankers; look at their track record," Taleb said. "They know we're going to bail them out. They hold us as hostages" and "the only way to stop the process is for the government to own those banks, tell them what to do."

Taleb today signaled he favors curbs on the trading of some financial instruments.

House of Representatives Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson of Minnesota circulated an updated draft bill yesterday that would ban credit-default swap trading unless investors owned the underlying bonds.

That might prohibit most trading in their $29 trillion market.

"I don't like credit default swaps," Taleb said. "We should probably stop trading derivatives, anything more complex than regular options" because "I am an options trader, and I don't understand options. How do you expect a regulator to understand them?"

As the founder of New York-based Empirica LLC, a hedge-fund firm he ran for six years before closing it in 2004, Taleb built a strategy based on options trading to bullet-proof investors from market blowups while profiting from big rallies.
He now advises Universa Investments LP, a Santa Monica, California-based firm opened in 2007 by Mark Spitznagel, Taleb's former trading partner, using some of the same strategies they'd run since 1999.

Other items in this section

* Latest News
* In The News
* The '06 Fix
* Katrina Updates
* Rosa Parks Day E-mails
* Facts in Mike's Films

More of Latest News
January 29th, 2009 4:50 pm
Obama calls $18B in Wall St. bonuses 'shameful'
January 29th, 2009 3:55 pm
Taleb Says Nationalize Banks, You Can't Trust Them
January 29th, 2009 11:58 am
Massive Strike Closes France
January 29th, 2009 11:32 am
CIA Station Chief in Algeria Accused of Rapes
January 29th, 2009 8:29 am
FBI saw mortgage fraud early
January 29th, 2009 5:52 am
Troubled Times Bring Mini-Madoffs to Light
January 29th, 2009 5:50 am
What Red Ink? Wall Street Paid Hefty Bonuses
January 28th, 2009 8:26 pm
Salmonella Was Found at Peanut Plant Before
January 28th, 2009 7:44 pm
House Passes Obama's Stimulus Package
January 28th, 2009 1:36 pm
Boots of fallen soldiers bring home impact of war
Mike's Latest News Archive

The Amazing Story Behind the Global Warming Scam

The Amazing Story Behind the Global Warming Scam

By John Coleman

The key players are now all in place in Washington and in state governments across America to officially label carbon dioxide as a pollutant and enact laws that tax we citizens for our carbon footprints. Only two details stand in the way, the faltering economic times and a dramatic turn toward a colder climate. The last two bitter winters have led to a rise in public awareness that there is no runaway global warming. The public is now becoming skeptical of the claim that our carbon footprints from the use of fossil fuels is going to lead to climatic calamities.

How did we ever get to this point where bad science is driving big government to punish the citizens for living the good life that fossil fuels provide for us?

The story begins with an Oceanographer named Roger Revelle. He served with the Navy in World War II. After the war he became the Director of the Scripps Oceanographic Institute in La Jolla in San Diego, California. Revelle saw the opportunity to obtain major funding from the Navy for doing measurements and research on the ocean around the Pacific Atolls where the US military was conducting atomic bomb tests. He greatly expanded the Institute's areas of interest and among others hired Hans Suess, a noted Chemist from the University of Chicago, who was very interested in the traces of carbon in the environment from the burning of fossil fuels. Revelle tagged on to Suess studies and co-authored a paper with him in 1957. The paper raises the possibility that the carbon dioxide might be creating a greenhouse effect and causing atmospheric warming. It seems to be a plea for funding for more studies. Funding, frankly, is where Revelle's mind was most of the time.

Next Revelle hired a Geochemist named David Keeling to devise a way to measure the atmospheric content of Carbon dioxide. In 1960 Keeling published his first paper showing the increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and linking the increase to the burning of fossil fuels.
These two research papers became the bedrock of the science of global warming, even though they offered no proof that carbon dioxide was in fact a greenhouse gas. In addition they failed to explain how this trace gas, only a tiny fraction of the atmosphere, could have any significant impact on temperatures.

Now let me take you back to the1950s when this was going on. Our cities were entrapped in a pall of pollution from the crude internal combustion engines that powered cars and trucks back then and from the uncontrolled emissions from power plants and factories. Cars and factories and power plants were filling the air with all sorts of pollutants. There was a valid and serious concern about the health consequences of this pollution and a strong environmental movement was developing to demand action. Government accepted this challenge and new environmental standards were set. Scientists and engineers came to the rescue. New reformulated fuels were developed for cars, as were new high tech, computer controlled engines and catalytic converters. By the mid seventies cars were no longer big time polluters, emitting only some carbon dioxide and water vapor from their tail pipes. Likewise, new fuel processing and smoke stack scrubbers were added to industrial and power plants and their emissions were greatly reduced, as well.

But an environmental movement had been established and its funding and very existence depended on having a continuing crisis issue. So the research papers from Scripps came at just the right moment. And, with them came the birth of an issue; man-made global warming from the carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels.

Revelle and Keeling used this new alarmism to keep their funding growing. Other researchers with environmental motivations and a hunger for funding saw this developing and climbed aboard as well. The research grants began to flow and alarming hypothesis began to show up everywhere.

The Keeling curve showed a steady rise in CO2 in atmosphere during the period since oil and coal were discovered and used by man. As of today, carbon dioxide has increased from 215 to 385 parts per million. But, despite the increases, it is still only a trace gas in the atmosphere. While the increase is real, the percentage of the atmosphere that is CO2 remains tiny, about 41 hundredths of one percent.

Several hypothesis emerged in the 70s and 80s about how this tiny atmospheric component of CO2 might cause a significant warming. But they remained unproven. Years have passed and the scientists kept reaching out for evidence of the warming and proof of their theories. And, the money and environmental claims kept on building up.

Back in the 1960s, this global warming research came to the attention of a Canadian born United Nation's bureaucrat named Maurice Strong. He was looking for issues he could use to fulfill his dream of one-world government. Strong organized a World Earth Day event in Stockholm, Sweden in 1970. From this he developed a committee of scientists, environmentalists and political operatives from the UN to continue a series of meeting.

Strong developed the concept that the UN could demand payments from the advanced nations for the climatic damage from their burning of fossil fuels to benefit the underdeveloped nations, a sort of CO2 tax that would be the funding for his one-world government. But, he needed more scientific evidence to support his primary thesis. So Strong championed the establishment of the United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. This was not a pure climate study scientific organization, as we have been led to believe. It was an organization of one-world government UN bureaucrats, environmental activists and environmentalist scientists who craved the UN funding so they could produce the science they needed to stop the burning of fossil fuels. Over the last 25 years they have been very effective. Hundreds of scientific papers, four major international meetings and reams of news stories about climatic Armageddon later, the UN IPCC has made its points to the satisfaction of most and even shared a Nobel Peace Prize with Al Gore.

At the same time, that Maurice Strong was busy at the UN, things were getting a bit out of hand for the man who is now called the grandfather of global warming, Roger Revelle. He had been very politically active in the late 1950's as he worked to have the University of California locate a San Diego campus adjacent to Scripps Institute in La Jolla. He won that major war, but lost an all important battle afterward when he was passed over in the selection of the first Chancellor of the new campus.

He left Scripps finally in 1963 and moved to Harvard University to establish a Center for Population Studies. It was there that Revelle inspired one of his students to become a major global warming activist. This student would say later, "It felt like such a privilege to be able to hear about the readouts from some of those measurements in a group of no more than a dozen undergraduates. Here was this teacher presenting something not years old but fresh out of the lab, with profound implications for our future!" The student described him as "a wonderful, visionary professor" who was "one of the first people in the academic community to sound the alarm on global warming," That student was Al Gore. He thought of Dr. Revelle as his mentor and referred to him frequently, relaying his experiences as a student in his book Earth in the Balance, published in 1992.

So there it is, Roger Revelle was indeed the grandfather of global warming. His work had laid the foundation for the UN IPCC, provided the anti-fossil fuel ammunition to the environmental movement and sent Al Gore on his road to his books, his move, his Nobel Peace Prize and a hundred million dollars from the carbon credits business.
What happened next is amazing.

The global warming frenzy was becoming the cause celeb of the media. After all the media is mostly liberal, loves Al Gore, loves to warn us of impending disasters and tell us "the sky is falling, the sky is falling". The politicians and the environmentalist loved it, too.

But the tide was turning with Roger Revelle. He was forced out at Harvard at 65 and returned to California and a semi retirement position at UCSD. There he had time to rethink Carbon Dioxide and the greenhouse effect. The man who had inspired Al Gore and given the UN the basic research it needed to launch its Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was having second thoughts. In 1988 he wrote two cautionary letters to members of Congress. He wrote, "My own personal belief is that we should wait another 10 or 20 years to really be convinced that the greenhouse effect is going to be important for human beings, in both positive and negative ways." He added, "…we should be careful not to arouse too much alarm until the rate and amount of warming becomes clearer."

And in 1991 Revelle teamed up with Chauncey Starr, founding director of the Electric Power Research Institute and Fred Singer, the first director of the U.S. Weather Satellite Service, to write an article for Cosmos magazine. They urged more research and begged scientists and governments not to move too fast to curb greenhouse CO2 emissions because the true impact of carbon dioxide was not at all certain and curbing the use of fossil fuels could have a huge negative impact on the economy and jobs and our standard of living. I have discussed this collaboration with Dr. Singer. He assures me that Revelle was considerably more certain than he was at the time that carbon dioxide was not a problem.

Did Roger Revelle attend the Summer enclave at the Bohemian Grove in Northern California in the Summer of 1990 while working on that article? Did he deliver a lakeside speech there to the assembled movers and shakers from Washington and Wall Street in which he apologized for sending the UN IPCC and Al Gore onto this wild goose chase about global warming? Did he say that the key scientific conjecture of his lifetime had turned out wrong? The answer to those questions is, "I think so, but I do not know it for certain". I have not managed to get it confirmed as of this moment. It’s a little like Las Vegas; what is said at the Bohemian Grove stays at the Bohemian Grove. There are no transcripts or recordings and people who attend are encouraged not to talk. Yet, the topic is so important, that some people have shared with me on an informal basis.

Roger Revelle died of a heart attack three months after the Cosmos story was printed. Oh, how I wish he were still alive today. He might be able to stop this scientific silliness and end the global warming scam.

Al Gore has dismissed Roger Revelle’s Mea culpa as the actions of senile old man. And, the next year, while running for Vice President, he said the science behind global warming is settled and there will be no more debate, From 1992 until today, he and his cohorts have refused to debate global warming and when ask about we skeptics they simply insult us and call us names.

So today we have the acceptance of carbon dioxide as the culprit of global warming. It is concluded that when we burn fossil fuels we are leaving a dastardly carbon footprint which we must pay Al Gore or the environmentalists to offset. Our governments on all levels are considering taxing the use of fossil fuels. The Federal Environmental Protection Agency is on the verge of naming CO2 as a pollutant and strictly regulating its use to protect our climate. The new President and the US congress are on board. Many state governments are moving on the same course.

We are already suffering from this CO2 silliness in many ways. Our energy policy has been strictly hobbled by no drilling and no new refineries for decades. We pay for the shortage this has created every time we buy gas. On top of that the whole thing about corn based ethanol costs us millions of tax dollars in subsidies. That also has driven up food prices. And, all of this is a long way from over.

And, I am totally convinced there is no scientific basis for any of it.

Global Warming. It is the hoax. It is bad science. It is a high jacking of public policy. It is no joke. It is the greatest scam in history.

__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 3814 (20090131) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

Friday, January 30, 2009

Tehran 'can co-operate with US'

Tehran 'can co-operate with US'

Real change in Washington's policy in the Middle East would enable Iran to have a "co-operative" attitude towards the US, Iran's foreign minister says.

Manouchehr Mottaki was speaking at a session at the World Economic Forum.

A day earlier, Iran's president, responding to an overture by the new US president, said the US should apologise for its past "crimes" against Iran.

This was the first official response to Barack Obama's offer to extend a hand if Iran "unclenched its fist".

Mr Obama has emphasised the need to engage with Iran, a country his predecessor viewed as among the most dangerous in the Middle East.

"We do believe that if the new administration of the United States, as Mr Obama said, is going to change its policies, not in saying but in practice, definitely they will find the region in a co-operative approach and reaction," Mr Mottaki told a panel in Davos.

"And Iran is not excluded from this general understanding in our region."

Iran had noted Mr Obama's stated intention to pull troops out of Iraq and believed he should withdraw from Afghanistan, too, Mr Mottaki said.

Quoted by Reuters news agency, he praised Mr Obama for having "courage" to move away from the policies of George W Bush and an era of "might equals right".

"We are in a turning point. We are at a milestone now," Mr Mottaki said.


In his televised address on Wednesday, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said the US had "stood against the Iranian people in the past 60 years".

"Those who speak of change must apologise to the Iranian people and try to repair their past crimes," he said in the western Iranian region of Kermanshah.

Iranian anger remains over issues such as Washington's support for the Iranian coup of 1953, for Saddam Hussein in the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s, and for Israel, and also over its wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The BBC's Jon Leyne in Tehran describes the speech as one of Mr Ahmadinejad's strongest tirades against the US.

Relations between Washington and Tehran reached new lows in recent years over attempts by the US and its allies in the UN to curtail Iran's nuclear programme over fears it is trying to build nuclear weapons.

Tehran says its programme is to develop civilian nuclear power only.

Stormy debate in Davos over Gaza

Stormy debate in Davos over Gaza

Erdogan was angered by the moderator not giving him a chance to counter Pires' lengthly argument [AFP]

The Turkish prime minister has stormed out of a heated debate at the World Economic Forum in Davos over Israel's offensive in the Gaza Strip.00000

Recep Tayyip Erdogan walked out of the televised debate on Thursday, after the debate moderator refused to allow him to rebut the Israeli president's justification about the war that left a trail of death and destruction.

Before storming out, Erdogan told Shimon Peres, the Israeli president: "You are killing people."

Peres told Erdogan that he would have acted in the same manner if rockets had been falling on Istanbul.

Amr Moussa, the leader of the Arab League and former Egyptian foreign minister, said Ergodan's action was understandable.

He said: "Mr. Ergodan said what he wanted to say and then he left. That's all. He was right," adding that Israel "doesn't listen".

The exchange took place on the second day of the summit, where business and political leaders have been discussing trade, financial regulation and global security.

After grappling with a bleak global economy on the opening day, leaders attending the forum switched to debates on the new administration in the United States and unrest in the Middle East, Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Kamal Nath, India's trade minister, warned that the global economic crisis could fuel protectionism to safeguard national industries and jobs.

Ban Ki-moon, the United Nations secretary-general, used the forum to announce the launch of an emergency appeal for $613m to help Palestinians recover from Israel's attack on Gaza.

Protectionist fears

Nath said that India saw growing signs of protectionism and would respond with its own measures if its exporters were threatened.

He said: "We do fear this because one must recognise that at the heart of globalisation lies global competitiveness, and if governments are going to protect their non-competitive production facilities it's not going to be fair trade.

"If there are protectionist measures India will be compelled to also take commensurate measures against those countries which will be good for no one."

India itself has raised tariffs on steel to protect local producers, a measure trade experts say was aimed at China, which India does not regard as a market economy.

The deepening economic crisis, and the failure to complete the World Trade Organisation's long-running Doha round on freeing up global commerce, have raised fears that countries will block their partners' exports to protect jobs at home.

Such protectionism, if it led to tit-for-tat retaliation, would intensify the current crisis.

Emerging economies

The economies of India, China and Russia, which have been experiencing rapid growth in recent years, have taken precedence at the forum.

Timothy Garton Ash, professor of European studies at Oxford University, said emerging markets are almost overshadowing the importance of the US economy.

"What is really striking to me about this Davos, is the lack of a sense of a new beginning with Barack Obama," he told Al Jazeera.

"That is not what we've been hearing about in the last 24 hours, we've been hearing about China, about Russia, about India, about emerging economies, and that I think is a very significant fact.

"It's not just the American investment banks that have gone down, it's America's own soft power, and ability to lead that has been badly damaged by the crash."

Rachid Mohamed Rachid, Egypt's minister of trade and industry, said there would be a rush towards emerging markets.

"People understand today that there will not be growth in developed countries for a long time to come, the growth will continue to be in emerging markets, even more than before," he told Al Jazeera.

"And for that purpose I assume the countries who stay the course of reform will be able to attract even more investment and more interest and more trade in the years to come."

Gaza appeal

The UN secretary general said he had been deeply moved by his visit to Gaza and that he had given his word that the UN would help the Gazans in their hour of need.

He said the appeal for fund covered the requirements of the UN and other aid organisations for the next six to nine months.

Ban said it would help provide aid such as medical care and clean water and that an appeal for longer-term needs would be launched later.

The secretary-general said "these needs are massive and multi-faceted" and can "help overcome at least some measures of this hardship".

Asked about achieving peace in Gaza, Benjamin Netanyahu, the leader of Israel's Likud party who was attending the forum, swiftly turned his answer to Iran, which he said was in a "100-yard dash" to get nuclear weapons.

While he did not specify any planned military action, Netanyahu said if Iranian rulers were "neutralised", the danger posed to Israel and others by Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in south Lebanon would be reduced.

Netanyahu said the global financial meltdown was reversible but "what is not reversible is the acquisition of nuclear weapons by a fanatic radical regime".

Iran gesture

Meanwhile, Manouchechr Mottaki, Iran's foreign minister, who is also in Davos, said Tehran had taken note of the intention of Barack Obama, the US president, to withdraw troops from Iraq and believed he should also pull out of Afghanistan.

"We believe this should be extended to Afghanistan as well," he said.

Mottaki told a panel at the forum that Obama had "courage" to say which of the policies of George Bush, the former US president, he disagreed with and said his approach marked a move away from an era of "might equals right".

"We are in a turning point. We are at a milestone now," he said.

Bail-outs and Stumulus Package 1.28.09 (I-N)


Sir Peter Bonnell CJSJ

Jan. 28, 2009

Bringing you the TRUTH since 1982

"An American patriotic news column for Patriots"

The truth in the news you will never see or hear on the 96% controlled world media

Please pass this email on to your friends and relatives

Write, email or call your Congressman – NOW before its too late.

Articles in this column:

1. The economy.

2. Bail out funds.

3. Waste of Bail-Out funds.

4. Bail-Outs are a scam perpetrated on the American taxpayer and those doing it

should be put in prison. Plus present "Stimulus Package".

5. Social Security is a General not a Private fund and has been raped by Congress.

6. The Vatican and the Jewish Holocaust claims.


THE ECONOMY:: Job Cuts - Home Depot 7,000, Caterpillar 20,000, Sprint 8,000, Dutch Financial 7,000, Pfizer 8,000, GM 1,200 including 800 in Lordstown, OH and has closed 20 plants, 40% of American companies plan cuts in employment, Iceland is bankrupt, Fanny Mae $5 Trillion bailout in 2008, Freddie Mac broke, AIG bailout $85 Billion, Circuit City shut down completely 30,000 employees lost their jobs, Hertz 4,000 jobs lost, G.E Capital will not say how many jobs lost. U.S. home loss $2 Trillion in 2008, bankruptcy filings up 30% in 2008. Bloomberg TV- hedge funds from 10,233 dropped to 3, 200, 8 million mortgage loans will be lost in the next 4 years and then get worse-1out of 10 homes in default NOW. John Thain of S & P wants a $10 Million dollar bonus, AIG executives want millions of taxpayer money in bonuses also Henry Paulson Secretary of Treasury (who's net worth when taking the position was $700 Million) previously with Bear Sterns wanted deregulation of Banks that caused this, market drop 20% in one day, CNN 1/22/09-Job benefits such as unemployment insurance hit a all-time high of 562,586 at this time, a 26 year high last week.


THE $2 TRILLION BAIL-OUT is the amount collected in all income tax in 2007-2008. 2007 income tax collected was $1.2 Trillion, 2008 income tax collected was $850 Billion.

Citi Group $8 Billion in loses, divided into two banks, used $50 Million to buy a 12 seat corporate jet plane. Banks refuse to say where money has gone. Chrysler refuses to give list of major stock holders. Bank of America $2 Billion lost, given a $45 Billion loan, their stock given to the government not to the taxpayer who's money purchased it.


ALL ECONOMY IS BUILT ON PEOPLE BUYING PRODUCTS; Auto companies build cars and trucks: they do not BUY them. Manufacturing companies make products they do not BUY them. Banks make loans they do not buy them; giving them money DOES NOTHING to help the economy. PEOPLE BUY PRODUCTS AND MAKE HOME, CAR AND OTHER LOANS, the TAXPAYERS should be getting this money DIRECTLY based on the income tax they have paid over say the last 5 to 10 years- to buy cars, homes and all other products, including car loans, home loans that save the construction industry, buy insurance, etc. The entire government and both houses of Congress know this is a scam but would rather give this money to those who just put it in their pockets as the Banks did, with NO ACCOUNTABILITY and pay off

congressman and other government officials. All these people should be charged with fraud and grand larceny and sent to prison because it is THEFT of the taxpayer's money and illegal and unconstitutional to give this money to anyone EXCEPT THE TAXPAYER. They cannot give it to these companies and banks any more than they can to the corner gas station or grocery store. Also the government cannot OWN stock the stock belongs to the taxpayer and as PREFERRED STOCK AT TODAYS DEPRECIATED VALUE.


THE $2 TRILLION GIVEN TO THE BANKS in the hands of the taxpayer WOULD SOLVE THE ENTIRE MONITARY AND ECONOMIC CRISIS WE FACE AT THIS TIME AND CONGRESS KNOWS IT….NOT THE NON-PRODUCTIVE –present "Stimulus Package" which does little. Example: It calls for new vehicles for the Federal Gov't., $84 Billion in failed programs now being criticized, and additional $200 Billion to welfare recipients that do not pay income tax or create any jobs, (welfare costs the taxpayer for 48 million families now on welfare approximately $2.5 Trillion per year. This 48 Million includes many that have never worked for generations, add TO THAT the 28 Million illegal aliens already granted amnesty and most on welfare and another 20 Million seeking amnesty which would be another $2 Trillion total cost of welfare) also the package increased welfare Medicaid even though Medicaid pays all medical including dental care and many other things that the people on Social Security do not get in any form under Medicare A & B, yet these people worked all their lives for that given to people on welfare and are left out in the cold. Also Billions in increased Food Stamps, who now get more than the average household workers spend on food, none of this spending on welfare does anything to create jobs. Welfare cost for each family of three is between $60-$70 Thousand per year to the taxpayer. $3 Billion dollars are to be given to National Science Foundation on top of $6 Billion they now receive and reportedly some people working there have now been known to have spent 20% of their time watching pornography on their computers during the work day.

The only people I have heard mention that the money should go to the taxpayer was Peter Schiff of Euro Pacific Capital on Bloomberg TV on 12/2/08,said"the government has no right to give money to any company, it is illegal". Sen. Roland Burris (D-IL) on Fox News-wants money in hands of the people to buy products and end economic problem.


SOCIAL SECURITY IS A GENERAL FUND used to pay welfare, the Military Complex and anything congress wishes to spend it on. It would be the richest fund in the world if it were a private fund and be worth more than many countries if the money taken from it over the years were paid back into it and double that amount if interest was paid also. ALL CITIZENS SHOULD DEMAND SOCIAL SECURITY SHOULD BE MADE A PRIVATE FUND AND START PAYING IT BACK.


FINALLY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH has stopped somewhat from being "Politically Correct" again as they and the International Red Cross did just after WWII when they both signed statements that although they were allowed in the German internment camps all throughout WWII that housed communists in Germany that there were never any so called "Gas Ovens". Actually there never were anywhere near 6 million Jews in Germany or all its occupied territory nor from 1938 thru the end of the war in Germany on May 8, 1945, in fact there were less than 1 million Jews in all of Germany and most left to other countries after Hitler took over and started to incarcerate all communists. There are some 241,000 Jews missing and most had been sent to Madagascar by Hitler or fled to other countries such as the Soviet Union, England, United States, etc., others died of disease, allied bombing of Germany, shot for shooting Germans as part of "communist resistance movements" such as the "French Resistance" and others who claimed to have killed 250,000 German military.

In all my studies for 25 years I have never seen a picture of a starving prisoner with a German soldier in it: but the voice on the Jewish controlled TV is telling you this was under the Germans.

Every Soviet prisoner that was in the camps was sent by the Soviets to Siberia in the Soviet Union or shot claiming they were traitors for surrendering even though many of them were wounded and had no choice.

Historians realize that when the Jews in early 1946 decided to spread the "Gas Oven" and "6 million gassed" theory to gain world support and world sorrow for them and be able to extort millions of dollars by it; could not allow prisoners who were in the camps to disclaim the "Gas Oven Theory" Spotlight newspaper in Washington D.C. for years every week printed the names of living Jews that the Soviets and Jewish agencies claimed to have been gassed.

All the supposed gas ovens just happen to be in the Soviet sector. (All of the Soviet Union was Jewish controlled under communism starting with Lenin-all communism was started and run by Zionist Jews since its beginning, all over the world where it exists: take them out of communism and there is none. Zionist Judaism and communism are synonymous). In addition, if you read any American magazine, Time, Life, Look, that were the big ones at that time, from the end of the war in Germany, May 8, 1945 thru the end of 1945 (7 months) when all these magazine reporters were in Germany and the internment camps you cannot find ANY mention of "Gas Ovens" in any of them. The first mention to my knowledge was Feb. 1946 and by the Soviets and in only the Soviet sector.

Now many of the politically astute Catholic's who left the church may return now that the church is allowing the truth to be expressed again.

Perhaps now Priests and many patriotic Protestant Ministers also will read John 8:23 thru 44 from the pulpit where JESUS speaks to the Jews (Pharisees)-those we call Jews today are Pharisees and tells us they are the devils on this earth.

Benjamin H. Freedman, Jewish Historian-Researcher-Scholar, From "Common Sense" P 2-1-53 and 5-1-59:"This big lie" technique is brainwashing United States Christian into believing that JESUS CHRIST was "King of the Jews", in the sense that so-called "Jews" today call themselves "Jews". This reference was first made in English translation of the Old and New Testaments, centuries before the so-called Jews high-jacked the word Jew in the 18th A.D. century to palm themselves off on the Christian world as having a kinship with JESUS CHRIST. This alleged kinship comes from the myth of their common ancestry with the so-called "Jews" of the Holy Land in the Old Testament history, a fiction based on fable."

The first time jews are mentioned in the Bible, is in 2nd Kings 16:6(and then only

in translations revised in the eighteenth century) where we find Israel was at war

with the jews and drove the jews from Elath . END

Claiming the Jews are the "Chosen People" is false… the Israelites are the chosen people who are not Jews but the Christians of today. Also in this writing of John mentioned above the Pharisees admit they cannot be the Israelites as in John 8:33 they say "and were never in bondage to any man". Everyone knows that the Israelites were in captivity in Egypt and Moses lead them out of captivity. The Israelites then went to what is now known as Europe and settled there.

These people were Caucasian and the Pharisees where mainly gypsies (mixture of Finn &Turk)"Khazar's" of the Khazar Empire of Eastern Europe which converted to Judaism which is the 13th Tribe mainly wiped out by Genghis Khan and those that were not migrated to Poland and formed Western Jewry.

What's the connection…the Federal Reserve is a private corporation not in anyway controlled by the government, it and practically every Bank, Insurance & Oil Companies, TV & Radio station, Hollywood, Major Newspaper and News Magazine, Radio, Military Complex. Large Corporations including the Auto Industries are all owned and controlled by these international Zionist Jews who do not believe in GOD or a after life. Are you starting to get the picture? I realize this is different than you have heard for years, but don't take my word for it, check it out!!

*Sir Peter Bonnell is an American who was Knighted in 1977 for "an outstanding fight against world communism". He was promoted to Commander & Brig. Gen. in 1978, served as Ambassador 1978 - 1980, appointed as Chairman of the Ohio Governor's Export Council to Central America in 1982 and also raised and delivered free medical supplies to those fighting the communists in Nicaragua during that time. His political writings are distributed to news services in the U. S. and other countries.

Other websites recommended by Tidbits:

John "Birdman" Bryant …All truth passes through three stages, first, it is ridiculed; second, it is violently opposed; and third, it is accepted as self-evident--Arthur Schopenhauer.

Friends of Liberty

Information Times

Graham Jukes

News and Views



By Dave Hodges

In the United States, credit swap derivatives created national debt totals of over one quadrillion dollars. That is one thousand trillion dollars! The entire GDP of the planet is estimated at $66 trillion dollars. And somehow, in the infinite wisdom of Congress, we falsely and naively believed that a $750 billion transfer of wealth (i.e., bailout) was magically going to save the economy and the collective futures of the American middle class. In short, the debt created by futures speculation is approximately 16 times greater than the sum total of the entire wealth on the planet! And we think we are going to climb out of this?

The bailout is enough, just enough, to float the economy through the 2009 presidential inauguration. The placebo effect of the anticipated widespread public hope, which will be fueled by the Obama inauguration, may push the inevitable economic crash out another 30 days, but not much further. America is living on both borrowed money and borrowed time.

The present bail out (i.e., the public theft of our collective private assets) will not save your job, your mortgage or your pension. If the bailout was going to preserve anything but the bottom line of the international banksters, then ask yourself why NORTHCOM is constantly conducting riot suppression activities. What does NORTHCOM and the Government know that most Americans do not know with regard to what lies ahead?

The bailout is nothing but a power play which provided the means for the Treasury Secretary (i.e., the treasury czar), the former head of Goldman Sachs, Henry Paulson, to gain absolute power over the economy. Does any well-informed person think that Obama is going to bring about real change? Where is Obama's new Treasury Secretary coming from?

Meet the new boss, the same as the old boss. The new Treasury Secretary elect, Timothy Geithner, is the President the New York Fed. And what about Clinton's chief financial advisor, Larry Summers who has now resurfaced in the Obama administration? Summers and Robert Rubin, another Goldman Sachs colleague, in conjunction with Paulson, undermined the Glass-Steagall Act during the Clinton administration. The Glass-Steagall Act resulted from Depression era policies which wisely prohibited banks from becoming insurance brokers and engaging in other unsavory practices such as participating in the credit swap derivatives ponzi schemes. If Rubin and company had not convinced Clinton to scrap Glass-Steagall, we might not be on the precipice of economic disaster. In short, we have the same crew applying the same screws.

"Yes we can (bring about change)" shouted the Obama supporters on the evening of November 4th. The only change that Americans are going to see with an Obama presidency is the measly change left in their pockets after this puppet's de jour and his merry band of gangster banksters are done fleecing the American public. Do you remember when Congress asked Henry Paulson where $2 trillion missing dollars disappeared to and he arrogantly replied "it is none of your business." The international bankers now have complete control over our economy without any oversight from congress

The Fed, the engineer of the current economic collapse, is engaging in what could be called the "Bernanke Two Step." The only two solutions that "Helicopter Ben" keeps coming up with is to, first, downwardly adjust interest rates which have effectively slipped to zero percent. Please ask yourself, what is the dollar really worth when you can borrow on it interest free? The second half of the Bernanke Two Step" is to recklessly increase the money supply. The Fed is currently doubling the money supply every six weeks! These are not solutions; they are only delaying the inevitable. Two weeks ago the dollar was worth $1.24 against the Euro. Two weeks later, the dollar is worth only $1.47 against the same Euro.

Additionally, American consumers have $15 trillion dollars of credit card debt and we don't even know for sure how much the government is in debt given the recent theft of trillions of dollars courtesy of our self-anointed economic czar (i.e., Henry Paulson and his secret handshake friends). The best estimates of our national debt range from $12 trillion to $15 trillion dollars. We are quickly approaching a Weimar Republic type of hyperinflation in which it will take a wheel barrow full of money to purchase a mere loaf of bread. The dollar is indeed tanking!

America, your country has been conquered in a masterful coup de tat and most Americans are not even aware of it.

We are in the midst of the The Greatest Depression in world history.

How bad will it get?


America just experienced the most dismal Christmas retail season on record. We are already seeing massive retail failures which are tearing at the guts of economy (e.g., KB Toys, Linens and Things, Comp USA, Sharper Images, Circuit City). And this is just the tip of the iceberg.

Based on the notion that current events form our future, let's look at what is coming. Starbucks and Office Depot are already closing stores. Wall Street is emptying out entire floors of buildings and in some cases, they are emptying out entire buildings. Who is going to rent all of these empty buildings? The simple answer is nobody. America is going to have a commercial real estate collapse which is going make the home real estate collapse look like a walk in the park. The commercial real estate market is grossly overleveraged. We are not going to have to wait much longer as this total commercial real estate collapse will be recognizable by March of 2009. When Obama is inaugurated, the United States will see about 30 days of hope. However, as the office parks and shopping malls are emptied, the realization that we are in the greatest of all depressions will come into American conscious awareness.

Not even the corporate controlled mainstream media will be able to deny that we have slipped into the mother of all depressions. The media will label this event The Greatest Depression as it will be far worse than the Depression of the 1930's. Back then, most Americans did not have a home mortgage. Back then, Americans did not have credit cards. Back then, America had a trade surplus. Back then, Americans had a sense of self-reliance and possessed real skills. Back then, America was an ascending society whose people valued education. Back then, America had an enormous and emerging manufacturing base. Today, Americans are awash in $15 trillion dollars of credit card debt. Today, America has the greatest trade deficit in the history of the planet. Today, Americans are spoiled and possess a personal belief in their own entitlements. Today, our manufacturing base has left the country in search of a cheaper labor force. Today, we are a descending society in which we are witnessing the emergence of a permanent underclass created in large part by the 50% drop out rate present in many of our major metropolitan areas. Today, we do not have the capacity to push out of the current calamity.

Real unemployment numbers are about 13%. By the end of 2009, we will approach 25% unemployment and the end may not be in sight even by the end of next year. Where are these unemployed persons going to get a job? Where are the college graduates going to work? Most will not even be able to get a job at Kmart, assuming Kmart is still in business. Ask yourself why we are bailing out the auto industry. Who can afford to buy cars? Are we even aware that the only job gains in the present economy are in the government?

After the commercial real estate collapse, we are going to see civil unrest eventually explode into a revolution. What is going on in Greece is not about the murder of a 15 year old child. The riots in Greece are about pent up anger, particularly among the young people who are staring directly into a futureless future. These young Greek adults are looking at the corruption in their government, the repeated string of scandals and the fact that many have no job to go to. When people lose everything, they have nothing left to lose and they will subsequently lose it. In your American bred ignorance, if you really believe that social unrest only happens in foreign lands, you are not going to have wait very long to find out just how wrong you really are. When you have the homeless, the hapless and the hungry on the streets of America, you are going to see civil unrest to such a degree that the 1992 LA Riots will seem like a benign protest by comparison. We are going to see a revolution in this country and these are the beginning phases. Whether it is in Athens, Greece, or in Athens, Georgia, this scenario will soon play out over the entire planet.

Federal, state and local governments are in the midst of squeezing every last ounce of financial life blood out the average American. New York is enacting the 18% obesity tax on soda. The inept, immoral and corrupt photo radar, complete with its proven unreliability, is hell bent on separating as many Americans as possible from their money. At a time when property values are plummeting by as much as 40-50%, property taxes should be going down. But at a time when Americans can least afford it, our property taxes are skyrocketing along with the rest of our taxes as failing governments, at all levels, are attempting to bail themselves out at our expense. History is replete with this type of governmental fleecing in which governments push the average citizen over the revolutionary cliff with abusive and unsustainable levels of personal taxation.

Who will fire the first shot of the coming revolution? Will it start with the displaced workers? Will it emanate from our college campuses? I cannot say for certain, but it is coming and it is coming very soon.

What is your place in all of this? When the Titanic went down, who did they save? They saved 70% of the wealthy as they were the ones that got into the life boats while the coach passengers were locked into steerage in which only 10% of those poor persons survived. This is exactly what is going on now. The government is not bailing out small business owners, pensions and the average investor. They, we, are only bailing out the rich friends of the international bankers. The rest of us are locked into middle class steerage.

Don't you just love the language of the Treasury Department as they tell us we are going to have a car czar, just like the drug czar, or the education czar? Is this the language of a democracy? Just look at the people who are the players in all of this (e.g., Henry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, George Bush, etc.). What have any of these people ever accomplished? Can any of these buffoons say "Look at the greatness which I have created?" Everything that these gangster bankster minions have done is of Katrina rescue quality. They are not going to bail us out; they are not going to save the economy. They are simply forestalling the inevitable. The epitaph of the American economy has already been written by what John F. Kennedy called the Gnomes of Zurich.

We may have elected a new president for the country, but the country club remains the same. Whether it is Robert Rubin of Goldman Sachs or Henry Paulson of Goldman Sachs, or Timothy Geithner of the Federal Reserve, running our economy into the ground behind the scenes, does it really matter who we elect? Most Americans mistakenly believe that the answer lies in participating in the endless pendulum shift between electing a different set of democrats and republicans every four years. When democrat Bill Clinton was elected, the present economic train wreck began with NAFTA. Republican George Bush pushed through CAFTA and the North American Union. Both political parties are bought and paid for by the global corporations who are ultimately controlled by the international bankers. I am afraid that we are not going to be able to get through this ordeal without a lot of dead American citizens.

How bad will it get?


The Economic Collapse of 2009 (Part 3):

The Establishment of the American

Police State

Dave Hodges


Dave Hodges

How bad will it get?

The first two parts of this series were largely received with skepticism and doubt because it is inherent in our human nature to patently deny sudden cataclysmic events. I am fully cognizant that nobody, including myself, wants to believe that our existing order, our daily routines, will soon be history and will be replaced by events so tumultuous that it may be a fool's errand to try and predict what this country will look like by the end of 2009.

The United States government, as well as several reputable international sources are predicting widespread civil unrest (i.e., revolution) with an accompanying breakdown of America's economic, political, social and legal order. The evidence comes from multiple sources and is largely irrefutable.

Retired Lt. Col, Mr. Nathan P. Freier, states in his article, Known Unknowns: Unconventional "Strategic Shocks" in Defense Strategy Development, which was written for the Army War College (11/04/2008), that the United States military establishment must be prepared for "an unforeseen economic collapse" or "loss of functioning political and legal order." The War College's report also goes on to warn of a possible "rapid dissolution of public order in all or significant parts of the United States," and, "The DoD might be forced by circumstances to put its broad resources at the disposal of civil authorities to contain and reverse violent threats to domestic tranquility. Under the most extreme circumstances, this might include use of military force against hostile groups inside the United States."

Newsmax's Jim Meyers reported in his article U.S. Military Preparing for Domestic Disturbances (retrieved on 12/23/08 from 2008/12/23/164765.html) the Defense Department has made plans to deploy 20,000 troops nationwide. Meyers further reported that "Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma and Rep. Brad Sherman of California disclosed that Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson discussed a worst-case scenario as he pushed the Wall Street bailout in September, and said that scenario might even require a declaration of martial law."

Mike Sunnucks of the Phoenix Business Journal in his article entitled, Ariz. police say they are prepared as War College warns military must prep for unrest; IMF warns of economic riots (retrieved on 12/17/08 from, reports that International Monetary Fund Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn warned Wednesday of "economy-related riots and unrest in various global markets if the financial crisis is not addressed and lower-income households are hurt by credit constraints and rising unemployment."

Bob Burnett of the Huffington Post writes that Obama needs to enlist a broad coalition of spies in order to ensure domestic tranquility. In his article, Obama's Crisis Presidency (retrieved on 12/12/08 from , Burnett compares such an effort to the creation of American Coast Watchers from the WWII era. One would wish that Obama's plan would be so patriotic, so benign. The Washington Times Bill Gertz (Obama, McCain Eye Better Use of Spies, 10/23/08 retrieved from states that "Obama will use spies to keep tabs on his domestic opposition. ..". "Obama will develop new military and civilian capabilities to target terrorists".

In Obama's Blueprint for Change (, the President-elect announced that he will establish a Shared Security Partnership Program to "build international military, intelligence, and law enforcement cooperation." In the fight against crime and terrorism, Obama, in his own words, calls for a million U.S. civilians to engage in "domestic intelligence" through the use of a civilian security force with one that is just as well funded and strong as our military (

Do we understand what Obama is calling for here? We are looking into the jaws of the darkest days of Nazi Germany with an American flavor of the brown shirted SA of Hitler's henchmen aka THE AMERICAN POLICE STATE.

In my years of living in this country, I have lived through several recessions, some which were very severe. However, in the midst of the worst recessions, or even the Great Depression of the 1930's, I cannot remember hearing about or reading about calls for military intrusions into domestic affairs. I cannot recall hearing or reading about the American military engaged in civil unrest training activities to be employed against its own citizens because of an economic calamity. I cannot recall an American president calling for the creation of domestic spies to be utilized against fellow Americans. However, history is replete with examples of the KGB and the Nazi SS spying and ultimately persecuting its own citizens in the name of preserving domestic tranquility. Our leaders are speaking to us in clear and unambiguous language:

There is going to be an economic disaster, to such a severe degree, that the American military will be needed put down the resulting insurrections. Americans will soon come to know the police state tactics that have given the world some of its darkest days. Hitler and Stalin could only marvel at the level of sophistication of the technology that is at the intelligence agencies disposal. And if one does not think America capable of emulating the darkest days of Nazi Germany, perhaps everyone should google Stanley Milgram and review his experiment on compliance which he was a professor of psychology at Yale University back in the 1960's.

Lest you think that these are the inane and insane ramblings of a "Chicken Little" with too much time on his hands, I would challenge you to follow the URL links and come up with another interpretation.

How bad will it get? Part four of this series will connect the random dots that will form an understandable blueprint for America's immediate future.

Dave Hodges is a psychology and statistics instructor as well as a college basketball coach. He is also the host of the radio talk show, The Common Sense Show, which airs on over 50 stations, on satellite and world wide on the internet. Dave's show airs on Sunday evenings from 9-11PM Central time. The Common Sense Show can be accessed live at The shows are archived at

The Final Hour: New Bill Will Turn Old Military Bases Into FEMA Camps

The Final Hour: New Bill Will Turn Old Military Bases Into FEMA Camps

New Bill Will Turn Old Military Bases Into FEMA Camps
Posted by Shattered Paradigm On Tuesday, January 27, 2009

On January 22nd, Representative Alcee Hastings [D-FL] introduced a new bill in the U.S. House of Representatives called the National Emergency Centers Act (also known as HR 645).

If Congress passes this bill, the Department of Homeland Security will be REQUIRED to establish national emergency centers (FEMA camps) on closed military bases.

For years, mainstream apologists have tried to deny that the government was putting together a network of FEMA detention camps across the United States. But now the wording of this new law would require that closed military bases be converted into Homeland Security "emergency centers". Just check out this language from the bill: "Wherever possible, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall designate a closed military installation as a site for a national emergency center."

You can see the entire text of this new bill here:

Let's take a look at some of the specific language in this bill.....

"In accordance with the requirements of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish not fewer than 6 national emergency centers on military installations."

This law would require that AT LEAST 6 FEMA camps be established on military installations around the United States. But it does not set a maximum. So the number of FEMA camps established under this law could be 6 or it could be 60.

"(4) to meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security."

This language gives the Secretary of Homeland Security the authority to use these FEMA camps for any purpose that he or she wishes. That is a truly sobering thought.

".....capable of meeting for an extended period of time the housing, health, transportation, education, public works, humanitarian and other transition needs of a large number of individuals affected by an emergency or major disaster"

Note that the law would require that these FEMA camps be able to house (or imprison?) large populations for an extended period of time. There camps are not just being set up as command and control centers - they are being designed to hold "a large number of individuals".

".....capable of hosting the infrastructure necessary to rapidly adjust to temporary housing"

Once again we see that these FEMA camps specifically have the purpose of "housing" people.

(c) Location of National Emergency Centers- There shall be established not fewer than one national emergency center in each of the following areas:

(1) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions I, II, and III.

(2) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IV.

(3) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions V and VII.

(4) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region VI.

(5) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions VIII and X.

(6) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IX.

Please note that the law REQUIRES that at least one of these FEMA camps be established in specific FEMA regions.

Which FEMA region do YOU live in?

If the Secretaries of Homeland Security and Defense jointly determine that there is not a sufficient number of closed military installations that meet the requirements of subsections (b) and (c), the Secretaries shall jointly designate portions of existing military installations other than closed military installations as national emergency centers.

This part of the bill actually requires the use of an active military base for a FEMA camp if there are not enough closed military bases to do the job.

Where do you think the FEMA camp closest to your house will be established?

Are you ready to go to a "national emergency center" when the government declares martial law?

What will your response be if they come to put you on a train that will take you and your family to one of these camps?

But you know what one of the saddest things is?

The machinery of martial law is being put into place, and the American people are hardly uttering a peep in protest.


scary stuff happening all over

Peace, Hugs, and Purrs,
Carolyn Rose Goyda
Missouri, USA

The 10 Worst Corporations of 2008
The 10 Worst Corporations of 2008
By Robert Weissman, Express Milwaukee, Wednesday, January 28,2009

What a year for corporate criminality and malfeasance! As the Multinational Monitor compiled its annual list of the 10 Worst Corporations, it would have been easy to restrict the 2008 awardees to Wall Street firms.

But the rest of the corporate sector was not on good behavior during 2008 either, and didn't deserve to escape justified scrutiny.

So, in keeping with the tradition of highlighting diverse forms of corporate wrongdoing, the list includes only one financial company out of the 10 worst. Here, presented in alphabetical order, are the 10 Worst Corporations of 2008.

AIG: Money for Nothing

There's surely no one party responsible for the ongoing global financial crisis. But if you had to pick a single responsible corporation, there's a very strong case to make for American International Group (AIG), which has already sucked up more than $150 billion in taxpayer support. Through "credit default swaps," AIG basically collected insurance premiums while making the ridiculous assumption that it would never pay out on a failure—let alone a collapse of the entire market it was insuring. When reality set in, the roof caved in.

Cargill: Food Profiteers

When food prices spiked in late 2007 and through the beginning of 2008, countries and poor consumers found themselves at the mercy of the global market and the giant trading companies that dominate it. As hunger rose and food riots broke out around the world, Cargill saw profits soar, tallying more than $1 billion in the second quarter of 2008 alone.

In a competitive market, a grain-trading middleman would not make super-profits. In fact, rising prices would crimp the middleman's profit margin. But the global grain trade is not competitive, and the legal rules of the global economy—devised at the behest of Cargill and friends—ensure that poor countries will be dependent on, and at the mercy of, the global grain traders.

Chevron: "We Can't Let Little Countries Screw Around With Big Companies"

In 2001, Chevron swallowed up Texaco. It was happy to absorb Texaco's revenue streams. It has been less willing to take responsibility for Texaco's ecological and human-rights abuses.

In 1993, 30,000 indigenous Ecuadorians filed a class-action suit in U.S. courts, alleging that over a 20-year period Texaco had poisoned the land where they live and the waterways on which they rely, allowing billions of gallons of waste to spill and leaving hundreds of waste pits unlined and uncovered. Chevron had the case thrown out of U.S. courts on the grounds that it should be litigated in Ecuador, closer to where the alleged harms occurred. But now the case is going badly for Chevron in Ecuador—Chevron may be liable for more than $7 billion. So, the company is lobbying the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative to impose trade sanctions on Ecuador if the Ecuadorian government does not make the case go away.

"We can't let little countries screw around with big companies like this—companies that have made big investments around the world," a Chevron lobbyist said to Newsweek in August (Chevron subsequently stated that the comments were not approved.)

CNPC: Fueling Violence in Darfur

Sudan has been able to laugh off existing and threatened sanctions for the slaughter it has perpetrated in Darfur because of the huge support it receives from China, channeled above all through the Sudanese relationship with the China National Petroleum Corp. (CNPC).

"The relationship between CNPC and Sudan is symbiotic," notes the Washington, D.C.-based Human Rights First in a March 2008 report, "Investing in Tragedy." "Not only is CNPC the largest foreign investor in the Sudanese oil sector, but Sudan is CNPC's largest market for overseas investment."

Oil money may have fueled violence in Darfur. "The profitability of Sudan's oil sector has developed in close chronological step with the violence in Darfur," notes Human Rights First.

Constellation Energy Group: Nuclear Operators

Although it seems too dangerous, too expensive and too centralized to make sense as an energy source, nuclear power won't go away, thanks to equipment makers and utilities that find ways to make the public pay and pay.

Constellation Energy Group, the operator of the Calvert Cliffs nuclear plant in Maryland—a company recently involved in a startling, partially derailed scheme to price-gouge Maryland consumers—plans to build a new reactor at Calvert Cliffs, potentially the first new reactor built in the United States since the near-meltdown at Three Mile Island in 1979.

It has lined up to take advantage of U.S. government-guaranteed loans for new nuclear construction, available under the terms of the 2005 Energy Act. The company acknowledges it could not proceed with construction without the government guarantee.
Related Content:
Never and Always9th Annual Capoeira and Brazilian Cultural Conference - Day 2Traditional Values
Related to:10 Worst CompaniesAIGGargillHIV DrugsCargillChevronCNCPDarfurConstellation Energy GroupDole PineappleGeneral ElectricGEBrazilImperial SugarPhilip MorrisTobaccoRocheSouth KoreaFuzeon

Dole: The Sour Taste of Pineapple

A 1988 land reform effort in the Philippines has proven to be a fraud. Plantation owners helped to draft the law and invented ways to circumvent its alleged purpose. Dole pineapple workers are among those paying the price.

Under the land reform, Dole's land was divided among its workers and others who had claims on the land prior to the pineapple giant. Workers were then required to form labor cooperatives. However, wealthy landlords maneuvered to gain control of these cooperatives, and then focused more on maximizing profits than providing fair wages and healthy working conditions, according to an October report by Washington, D.C.-based International Labor Rights Forum (ILRF).

Dole has since slashed its regular workforce and replaced them with contract workers from these labor cooperatives. Contract workers are paid under a quota system, and earn about $1.85 a day, according to ILRF.

GE: Creative Accounting

In June, former New York Times reporter David Cay Johnston reported on internal General Electric (GE) documents that appeared to show the company had engaged in a long-running effort to evade taxes in Brazil. In a lengthy report in Tax Notes International, Johnston reported on a GE subsidiary's scheme to invoice suspiciously high sales volume for lighting equipment in lightly populated Amazon River regions of the country. These sales would avoid the higher value added taxes (VAT) of urban states, where sales would be expected to be greater.

Johnston wrote that the state-level VAT at issue, based on the internal documents he reviewed, appeared to be less than $100 million. But, he speculated, the overall scheme could have involved much more.

Johnston did not identify the source that gave him the internal GE documents, but GE has alleged it was a former company attorney, Adriana Koeck. GE fired Koeck in January 2007 for what it says were "performance reasons."

Imperial Sugar: 14 Dead

On Feb. 7, 2008, an explosion rocked the Imperial Sugar refinery in Port Wentworth, Ga., near Savannah. Days later, when the fire was finally extinguished and search-and-rescue operations completed, the horrible human toll was finally known: 14 dead, dozens badly burned and injured.

As with almost every industrial disaster, it turns out the tragedy was preventable. The cause was accumulated sugar dust, which, like other forms of dust, is highly combustible.

A month after the Port Wentworth explosion, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) inspectors investigated another Imperial Sugar plant, in Gramercy, La. They found one-fourth-inch to 2-inch accumulations of dust on electrical wiring and machinery. They found as much as 48inch accumulations on workroom floors.

Imperial Sugar knew of the conditions in its plants. It had in fact taken some measures to address its operations prior to the explosion. The company brought in a new vice president to clean up operations in November 2007, and he took some important measures to improve conditions. But it wasn't enough. The vice president told a congressional committee that top-level management had told him to tone down his demands for immediate action.

Philip Morris International: Unshackled

The old Philip Morris no longer exists. In March, the company formally divided itself into two separate entities: Philip Morris USA, which remains a part of the parent company Altria, and Philip Morris International. Philip Morris USA sells Marlboro and other cigarettes in the United States. Philip Morris International tramples the rest of the world.

Philip Morris International has already signaled its initial plans to subvert the most important policies to reduce smoking and the death toll from tobacco-related disease (now at 5 million lives a year). The company has announced plans to inflict on the world an array of new products, packages and marketing efforts. These are designed to undermine smoke-free workplace rules, defeat tobacco taxes, segment markets with specially flavored products, offer flavored cigarettes to appeal to youth and overcome marketing restrictions.

Roche: "Saving Lives Is Not Our Business"

The Swiss company Roche makes a range of HIV-related drugs. One of them is enfuvirtide, sold under the brandname Fuzeon. Fuzeon brought in $266 million to Roche in 2007, though sales are declining

Roche charges $25,000 a year for Fuzeon. It does not offer a discount price for developing countries.

Like most industrialized countries, South Korea maintains a form of price controls. The national health insurance program sets prices for medicines, and the Ministry of Health, Welfare and Family Affairs listed Fuzeon at $18,000 a year. South Korea's per capita income is roughly half that of the United States. Instead of providing Fuzeon at South Korea's listed level—and still turning a profit—Roche refuses to make the drug available in South Korea.

South Korean activists report that the head of Roche Korea told them, "We are not in business to save lives, but to make money. Saving lives is not our business."

Obama's Oval Office Hypocrisy Update

Jan. 29, 2009

We know times are tough... but is trying to prevent climate
from making them tougher...

Please donate

Thank you for your help. And now for a special post-inaugural thrashing...

Obama's Oval Office Hypocrisy
By Steven Milloy,
January 29, 2009
The New York Timesreported this morning that,

The capital flew into a bit of a tizzy when, on his
first full day in the White House, President Obama was photographed in
the Oval Office without his suit jacket. There was, however, a logical
explanation: Mr. Obama, who hates the cold, had cranked up the

"He's from Hawaii, O.K.?" said Mr. Obama's senior adviser,
Axelrod, who occupies the small but strategically located office next
door to his boss. "He likes it warm. You could grow orchids in

this be the same Barack Obama who said last May that,

"We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our
homes on 72 degrees at all times... and then just expect that other
countries are going to say "OK"... That's not leadership.
That's not
going to happen."

And could this be the same Barack Obama who is looking to sign a
stimulus bill that would spend billions of dollars installing millions
"smart meters" that would enable your power company to prevent you
being as comfortable as Bambi on hot and cold days?

While Bambi is warm-and-toasty in the Oval Office, is he considering the plight

of Michigan's Marvin Schur,
a 93-year World War II veteran, who was recently found frozen to death
courtesy of a malfunctioning electricity "limiter" device installed
his power company?
Change has come to Washington. Elitism is dead. Long live


Apocalypse? NO!

Why 'global warming isn't a global crisis!

Are Al Gore and the IPCC right about global warming being a planetary
NO! ... says the Viscount Monckton of Brenchley in a devastating 2007 lecture
at Cambridge University.
Watch Lord Monckton expose and eviscerate climate myth after climate myth.
change is a non-problem. The correct policy to address a non-problem is to
courage to do nothing," says lord Monckton.
DVD available in NTSC (US & Canada) and PAL (Europe and Asia).


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ needs your support to stay online.

Donate or shop at the Store!

Steven Milloy




Featured Product

Carbon Dioxide and the

Climate Crisis (DVD)
by CO2


Keep CEO's focused on Profits not Politics!

Join Our Mailing List


This email was sent to by

Update Profile/Email Address

Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe(TM)

Privacy Policy:

Email Marketing by
Constant Contact(R) | 12309 Briarbush Lane | Potomac | MD | 20854

Al Gore and Venus Envy Update

Jan. 29,

We know times are tough... but is trying to prevent climate
from making them tougher..

Al Gore and Venus Envy
By Steven Milloy
January 29, 2009
Al Gore has a new argument for why carbon dioxide is the global warming
-- and it's simply out of this world.
Read the full column at
Read the full column at

Apocalypse? NO!

Why 'global warming isn't a global crisis!

Are Al Gore and the IPCC right about global warming being a planetary
NO! ... says the Viscount Monckton of Brenchley in a devastating 2007 lecture
at Cambridge University.
Watch Lord Monckton expose and eviscerate climate myth after climate myth.
change is a
non-problem. The correct policy to address a non-problem is to
courage to do nothing," says lord Monckton.
DVD available in NTSC (US & Canada) and PAL (Europe and Asia).


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ needs your support to stay online.

Donate or shop at the Store!

Steven Milloy




Featured Product

Carbon Dioxide and the

Climate Crisis (DVD)
CO2 Science


Keep CEO's focused on Profits not

Join Our Mailing List


This email was sent to by

Update Profile/Email Address

Instant removal with

Privacy Policy:

Email Marketing by
Constant Contact(R) | 12309 Briarbush Lane | Potomac | MD | 20854

Thursday, January 29, 2009

Israel hopes to colonize parts of Iraq as "Greater Israel"

January 28, 2008 -- Israel hopes to colonize parts of Iraq as "Greater Israel"
publication date: Jan 27, 2009

Previous | Next

January 28, 2008 -- Israel hopes to colonize parts of Iraq as "Greater Israel"
Israeli expansionists, their intentions to take full control of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and permanently keep the Golan Heights of Syria and expand into southern Lebanon already well known, also have their eyes on parts of Iraq considered part of a biblical "Greater Israel."
Israel reportedly has plans to re-locate thousands of Kurdish Jews from Israel, including expatriates from Kurdish Iran, to the Iraqi cities of Mosul and Nineveh under the guise of religious pilgrimages to ancient Jewish religious shrines. According to Kurdish sources, the Israelis are secretly working with the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) to carry out the integration of Kurdish and other Jews into areas of Iraq under control of the KRG.
Kurdish, Iraqi Sunni Muslim, and Turkmen have noted that Kurdish Israelis began to buy land in Iraqi Kurdistan after the U.S. invasion in 2003 that is considered historical Jewish "property."
The Israelis are particularly interested in the shrine of the Jewish prophet Nahum in al Qush, the prophet Jonah in Mosul, and the tomb of the prophet Daniel in Kirkuk. Israelis are also trying to claim Jewish "properties" outside of the Kurdish region, including the shrine of Ezekiel in the village of al-Kifl in Babel Province near Najaf and the tomb of Ezra in al-Uzayr in Misan Province, near Basra, both in southern Iraq's Shi'a-dominated territory. Israeli expansionists consider these shrines and tombs as much a part of "Greater Israel" as Jerusalem and the West Bank, which they call "Judea and Samaria."
Kurdish and Iraqi sources report that Israel's Mossad is working hand-in-hand with Israeli companies and "tourists" to stake a claim to the Jewish "properties"of Israel in Iraq. The Mossad has already been heavily involved in training the Kurdish Pesha Merga military forces.
Reportedly assisting the Israelis are foreign mercenaries paid for by U.S. Christian evangelical circles that support the concept of "Christian Zionism."
Iraqi nationalists charge that the Israeli expansion into Iraq is supported by both major Kurdish factions, including the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan headed by Iraq's nominal President Jalal Talabani. Talabani's son, Qubad Talabani, serves as the KRG's representative in Washington, where he lives with his wife Sherri Kraham, who is Jewish.
Also supporting the Israeli land acquisition activities is the Kurdistan Democratic Party, headed by Massoud Barzani, the President of the KRG. One of Barzani's five sons, Binjirfan Barzani, is reportedly heavily involved with the Israelis.
The Israelis and their Christian Zionist supporters enter Iraq not through Baghdad but through Turkey. In order to depopulate residents of lands the Israelis claim, Mossad operatives and Christian Zionist mercenaries are staging terrorist attacks against Chaldean Christians, particularly in Nineveh, Irbil, al-Hamdaniya, Bartalah, Talasqaf, Batnayah, Bashiqah, Elkosheven, Uqrah, and Mosul.
These attacks by the Israelis and their allies are usually reported as being the responsibility of "Al Qaeda" and other Islamic "jihadists."
The ultimate aim of the Israelis is to depopulate the Christian population in and around Mosul and claim the land as biblical Jewish land that is part of "Greater Israel." The Israeli/Christian Zionist operation is a replay of the depopulation of the Palestinians in the British mandate of Palestine after World War II.
In June 2003, a delegation of Israelis visited Mosul and said that it was Israel's intentions, with the assistance of Barzani, to establish Israeli control of the shrine of Jonah in Mosul and the shrine of Nahum in the Mosul plains. The Israelis said Israeli and Iranian Jewish pilgrims would travel via Turkey to the area of Mosul and take over lands where Iraqi Christians lived.

Readers are solely responsible for the content of the comments they post on this web site. Comments are subject to the site's terms and conditions of use and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or approval of Wayne Madsen Readers whose comments violate the terms of use may have their comments removed or all of their content blocked from viewing by other users without notification.

Putin Speaks at Davos

Putin Speaks at Davos


The following text is a transcript of Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin's speech at the opening ceremony of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

Good afternoon, colleagues, ladies and gentlemen,

I would like to thank the forum's organisers for this opportunity to share my thoughts on global economic developments and to share our plans and proposals.

The world is now facing the first truly global economic crisis, which is continuing to develop at an unprecedented pace.

The current situation is often compared to the Great Depression of the late 1920s and the early 1930s. True, there are some similarities.

However, there are also some basic differences. The crisis has affected everyone at this time of globalisation. Regardless of their political or economic system, all nations have found themselves in the same boat.

There is a certain concept, called the perfect storm, which denotes a situation when Nature's forces converge in one point of the ocean and increase their destructive potential many times over. It appears that the present-day crisis resembles such a perfect storm.

The current situation is no exception either. Although the crisis was simply hanging in the air, the majority strove to get their share of the pie, be it one dollar or a billion, and did not want to notice the rising wave.

In the last few months, virtually every speech on this subject started with criticism of the United States. But I will do nothing of the kind.

I just want to remind you that, just a year ago, American delegates speaking from this rostrum emphasised the US economy's fundamental stability and its cloudless prospects. Today, investment banks, the pride of Wall Street, have virtually ceased to exist. In just 12 months, they have posted losses exceeding the profits they made in the last 25 years. This example alone reflects the real situation better than any criticism.

The time for enlightenment has come. We must calmly, and without gloating, assess the root causes of this situation and try to peek into the future.

In our opinion, the crisis was brought about by a combination of several factors.

The existing financial system has failed. Substandard regulation has contributed to the crisis, failing to duly heed tremendous risks.

Add to this colossal disproportions that have accumulated over the last few years. This primarily concerns disproportions between the scale of financial operations and the fundamental value of assets, as well as those between the increased burden on international loans and the sources of their collateral.

The entire economic growth system, where one regional centre prints money without respite and consumes material wealth, while another regional centre manufactures inexpensive goods and saves money printed by other governments, has suffered a major setback.

I would like to add that this system has left entire regions, including Europe, on the outskirts of global economic processes and has prevented them from adopting key economic and financial decisions.

Moreover, generated prosperity was distributed extremely unevenly among various population strata. This applies to differences between social strata in certain countries, including highly developed ones. And it equally applies to gaps between countries and regions.

A considerable share of the world's population still cannot afford comfortable housing, education and quality health care. Even a global recovery posted in the last few years has failed to radically change this situation.

And, finally, this crisis was brought about by excessive expectations. Corporate appetites with regard to constantly growing demand swelled unjustifiably. The race between stock market indices and capitalisation began to overshadow rising labour productivity and real-life corporate effectiveness.

Unfortunately, excessive expectations were not only typical of the business community. They set the pace for rapidly growing personal consumption standards, primarily in the industrial world. We must openly admit that such growth was not backed by a real potential. This amounted to unearned wealth, a loan that will have to be repaid by future generations.

This pyramid of expectations would have collapsed sooner or later. In fact, this is happening right before our eyes.

* * *

Esteemed colleagues, one is sorely tempted to make simple and popular decisions in times of crisis. However, we could face far greater complications if we merely treat the symptoms of the disease.

Naturally, all national governments and business leaders must take resolute actions. Nevertheless, it is important to avoid making decisions, even in such force majeure circumstances, that we will regret in the future.

This is why I would first like to mention specific measures which should be avoided and which will not be implemented by Russia.

We must not revert to isolationism and unrestrained economic egotism. The leaders of the world's largest economies agreed during the November 2008 G20 summit not to create barriers hindering global trade and capital flows. Russia shares these principles.

Although additional protectionism will prove inevitable during the crisis, all of us must display a sense of proportion.

Excessive intervention in economic activity and blind faith in the state's omnipotence is another possible mistake.

True, the state's increased role in times of crisis is a natural reaction to market setbacks. Instead of streamlining market mechanisms, some are tempted to expand state economic intervention to the greatest possible extent.

The concentration of surplus assets in the hands of the state is a negative aspect of anti-crisis measures in virtually every nation.

In the 20th century, the Soviet Union made the state's role absolute. In the long run, this made the Soviet economy totally uncompetitive. This lesson cost us dearly. I am sure nobody wants to see it repeated.

Nor should we turn a blind eye to the fact that the spirit of free enterprise, including the principle of personal responsibility of businesspeople, investors and shareholders for their decisions, is being eroded in the last few months. There is no reason to believe that we can achieve better results by shifting responsibility onto the state.

And one more point: anti-crisis measures should not escalate into financial populism and a refusal to implement responsible macroeconomic policies. The unjustified swelling of the budgetary deficit and the accumulation of public debts are just as destructive as adventurous stock-jobbing.

* * *

Ladies and gentlemen, unfortunately, we have so far failed to comprehend the true scale of the ongoing crisis. But one thing is obvious: the extent of the recession and its scale will largely depend on specific high-precision measures, due to be charted by governments and business communities and on our coordinated and professional efforts.

In our opinion, we must first atone for the past and open our cards, so to speak.

This means we must assess the real situation and write off all hopeless debts and "bad" assets.

True, this will be an extremely painful and unpleasant process. Far from everyone can accept such measures, fearing for their capitalisation, bonuses or reputation. However, we would "conserve" and prolong the crisis, unless we clean up our balance sheets. I believe financial authorities must work out the required mechanism for writing off debts that corresponds to today's needs.

Second. Apart from cleaning up our balance sheets, it is high time we got rid of virtual money, exaggerated reports and dubious ratings. We must not harbour any illusions while assessing the state of the global economy and the real corporate standing, even if such assessments are made by major auditors and analysts.

In effect, our proposal implies that the audit, accounting and ratings system reform must be based on a reversion to the fundamental asset value concept. In other words, assessments of each individual business must be based on its ability to generate added value, rather than on subjective concepts. In our opinion, the economy of the future must become an economy of real values. How to achieve this is not so clear-cut. Let us think about it together.

Third. Excessive dependence on a single reserve currency is dangerous for the global economy. Consequently, it would be sensible to encourage the objective process of creating several strong reserve currencies in the future. It is high time we launched a detailed discussion of methods to facilitate a smooth and irreversible switchover to the new model.

Fourth. Most nations convert their international reserves into foreign currencies and must therefore be convinced that they are reliable. Those issuing reserve and accounting currencies are objectively interested in their use by other states.

This highlights mutual interests and interdependence.

Consequently, it is important that reserve currency issuers must implement more open monetary policies. Moreover, these nations must pledge to abide by internationally recognised rules of macroeconomic and financial discipline. In our opinion, this demand is not excessive.

At the same time, the global financial system is not the only element in need of reforms. We are facing a much broader range of problems.

This means that a system based on cooperation between several major centres must replace the obsolete unipolar world concept.

We must strengthen the system of global regulators based on international law and a system of multilateral agreements in order to prevent chaos and unpredictability in such a multipolar world. Consequently, it is very important that we reassess the role of leading international organisations and institutions.

I am convinced that we can build a more equitable and efficient global economic system. But it is impossible to create a detailed plan at this event today.

It is clear, however, that every nation must have guaranteed access to vital resources, new technology and development sources. What we need is guarantees that could minimise risks of recurring crises.

Naturally, we must continue to discuss all these issues, including at the G20 meeting in London, which will take place in April.

* * *

Our decisions should match the present-day situation and heed the requirements of a new post-crisis world.

Responsible and knowledgeable people must prepare for it. Nevertheless, it always flares up unexpectedly.

The global economy could face trite energy-resource shortages and the threat of thwarted future growth while overcoming the crisis.

Three years ago, at a summit of the Group of Eight, we raised the issue of global energy security. We called for the shared responsibility of suppliers, consumers and transit countries. I think it is time to launch truly effective mechanisms ensuring such responsibility.

The only way to ensure truly global energy security is to form interdependence, including a swap of assets, without any discrimination or dual standards. It is such interdependence that generates real mutual responsibility.

Unfortunately, the existing Energy Charter has failed to become a working instrument able to regulate emerging problems.

I propose we start laying down a new international legal framework for energy security. Implementation of our initiative could play a political role comparable to the treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community. That is to say, consumers and producers would finally be bound into a real single energy partnership based on clear-cut legal foundations.

Every one of us realises that sharp and unpredictable fluctuations of energy prices are a colossal destabilising factor in the global economy. Today's landslide fall of prices will lead to a growth in the consumption of resources.

On the one hand, investments in energy saving and alternative sources of energy will be curtailed. On the other, less money will be invested in oil production, which will result in its inevitable downturn. Which, in the final analysis, will escalate into another fit of uncontrolled price growth and a new crisis.

It is necessary to return to a balanced price based on an equilibrium between supply and demand, to strip pricing of a speculative element generated by many derivative financial instruments.

To guarantee the transit of energy resources remains a challenge. There are two ways of tackling it, and both must be used.

The first is to go over to generally recognised market principles of fixing tariffs on transit services. They can be recorded in international legal documents.

The second is to develop and diversify the routes of energy transportation. We have been working long and hard along these lines.

In the past few years alone, we have implemented such projects as the Yamal-Europe and Blue Stream gas pipelines. Experience has proved their urgency and relevance.

I am convinced that such projects as South Stream and North Stream are equally needed for Europe's energy security. Their total estimated capacity is something like 85 billion cubic meters of gas a year.

Gazprom, together with its partners – Shell, Mitsui and Mitsubishi – will soon launch capacities for liquefying and transporting natural gas produced in the Sakhalin area. And that is also Russia's contribution to global energy security.

We are developing the infrastructure of our oil pipelines. The first section of the Baltic Pipeline System (BPS) has already been completed. BPS-1 supplies up to 75 million tonnes of oil a year. It does this direct to consumers – via our ports on the Baltic Sea. Transit risks are completely eliminated in this way. Work is currently under way to design and build BPS-2 (its throughput capacity is 50 million tonnes of oil a year.

We intend to build transport infrastructure in all directions. The first stage of the pipeline system Eastern Siberia – Pacific Ocean is in the final stage. Its terminal point will be a new oil port in Kozmina Bay and an oil refinery in the Vladivostok area. In the future a gas pipeline will be laid parallel to the oil pipeline, towards the Pacific and China.

* * *

Addressing you here today, I cannot but mention the effects of the global crisis on the Russian economy. We have also been seriously affected.

However, unlike many other countries, we have accumulated large reserves. They expand our possibilities for confidently passing through the period of global instability.

The crisis has made the problems we had more evident. They concern the excessive emphasis on raw materials in exports and the economy in general and a weak financial market. The need to develop a number of fundamental market institutions, above all of a competitive environment, has become more acute.

We were aware of these problems and sought to address them gradually. The crisis is only making us move more actively towards the declared priorities, without changing the strategy itself, which is to effect a qualitative renewal of Russia in the next 10 to 12 years.

Our anti-crisis policy is aimed at supporting domestic demand, providing social guarantees for the population, and creating new jobs. Like many countries, we have reduced production taxes, leaving money in the economy. We have optimised state spending.

But, I repeat, along with measures of prompt response, we are also working to create a platform for post-crisis development.

We are convinced that those who will create attractive conditions for global investment already now and will be able to preserve and strengthen sources of strategically meaningful resources will become leaders of the restoration of the global economy.

This is why among our priorities we have the creation of a favourable business environment and development of competition; the establishment of a stable loan system resting on sufficient internal resources; and implementation of transport and other infrastructure projects.

Russia is already one of the major exporters of a number of food commodities. And our contribution to ensuring global food security will only increase.

We are also going to actively develop the innovation sectors of the economy. Above all, those in which Russia has a competitive edge – space, nuclear energy, aviation. In these areas, we are already actively establishing cooperative ties with other countries. A promising area for joint efforts could be the sphere of energy saving. We see higher energy efficiency as one of the key factors for energy security and future development.

We will continue reforms in our energy industry. Adoption of a new system of internal pricing based on economically justified tariffs. This is important, including for encouraging energy saving. We will continue our policy of openness to foreign investments.

I believe that the 21st century economy is an economy of people not of factories. The intellectual factor has become increasingly important in the economy. That is why we are planning to focus on providing additional opportunities for people to realise their potential.

We are already a highly educated nation. But we need for Russian citizens to obtain the highest quality and most up-to-date education, and such professional skills that will be widely in demand in today's world. Therefore, we will be pro-active in promoting educational programmes in leading specialities.

We will expand student exchange programmes, arrange training for our students at the leading foreign colleges and universities and with the most advanced companies. We will also create such conditions that the best researchers and professors – regardless of their citizenship – will want to come and work in Russia.

History has given Russia a unique chance. Events urgently require that we reorganise our economy and update our social sphere. We do not intend to pass up this chance. Our country must emerge from the crisis renewed, stronger and more competitive.

* * *

Separately, I would like to comment on problems that go beyond the purely economic agenda, but nevertheless are very topical in present-day conditions.

Unfortunately, we are increasingly hearing the argument that the build-up of military spending could solve today's social and economic problems. The logic is simple enough. Additional military allocations create new jobs.

At a glance, this sounds like a good way of fighting the crisis and unemployment. This policy might even be quite effective in the short term. But in the longer run, militarisation won't solve the problem but will rather quell it temporarily. What it will do is squeeze huge financial and other resources from the economy instead of finding better and wiser uses for them.

My conviction is that reasonable restraint in military spending, especially coupled with efforts to enhance global stability and security, will certainly bring significant economic dividends.

I hope that this viewpoint will eventually dominate globally. On our part, we are geared to intensive work on discussing further disarmament.

I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the economic crisis could aggravate the current negative trends in global politics.

The world has lately come to face an unheard-of surge of violence and other aggressive actions, such as Georgia's adventurous sortie in the Caucasus, recent terrorist attacks in India, and escalation of violence in Gaza Strip. Although not apparently linked directly, these developments still have common features.

First of all, I am referring to the existing international organisations' inability to provide any constructive solutions to regional conflicts, or any effective proposals for interethnic and interstate settlement. Multilateral political mechanisms have proved as ineffective as global financial and economic regulators.

Frankly speaking, we all know that provoking military and political instability, regional and other conflicts is a helpful means of distracting the public from growing social and economic problems. Such attempts cannot be ruled out, unfortunately.

To prevent this scenario, we need to improve the system of international relations, making it more effective, safe and stable.

There are a lot of important issues on the global agenda in which most countries have shared interests. These include anti-crisis policies, joint efforts to reform international financial institutions, to improve regulatory mechanisms, ensure energy security and mitigate the global food crisis, which is an extremely pressing issue today.

Russia is willing to contribute to dealing with international priority issues. We expect all our partners in Europe, Asia and America, including the new US administration, to show interest in further constructive cooperation in dealing with all these issues and more. We wish the new team success.


Ladies and gentlemen, the international community is facing a host of extremely complicated problems, which might seem overpowering at times. But, a journey of thousand miles begins with a single step, as the proverb goes.

We must seek foothold relying on the moral values that have ensured the progress of our civilisation. Integrity and hard work, responsibility and self-confidence will eventually lead us to success.

We should not despair. This crisis can and must be fought, also by pooling our intellectual, moral and material resources.

This kind of consolidation of effort is impossible without mutual trust, not only between business operators, but primarily between nations.

Therefore, finding this mutual trust is a key goal we should concentrate on now.

Trust and solidarity are key to overcoming the current problems and avoiding more shocks, to reaching prosperity and welfare in this new century.

Thank you.