The Sanders and Trump Phenomenon: Inconsistencies, Misplaced Anger and False Opposition
by Sean Jobst
14 April 2016
Although they appear to be polar opposites, Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump represent disenchanted masses of Americans who may not be the most knowledgeable or consistent in their political views, but are disenchanted with the political system of both parties enough to fall behind anyone the media casts as an "outsider." This is even while they wouldn't even be aware of their candidates if not for the attention given to them by the media, which however ignores actual political choices outside the two-party corporatist duopoly.
Such supporters will in the end witness the epic fail of their misplaced hopes, exactly due to their ignorance of economics, foreign policy and the ways both intersect with the same political establishment their candidates claim to oppose. The uniting factor is anger, which leaves them blind to their candidate's inconsistencies and false opposition.
Both Sanders and Trump capitalize on some legitimate grievances held by working-class and other disenfranchised people who have felt decades of betrayal, lies and broken promises by the Republican and Democratic political elites. The problem is lying candidates have seized upon these grievances to misdirect their anger toward ends that do not consistently or properly address the grievances. They are promoted by the elites as phony opposition figures, designed to be ringleaders - gathering all this support which will ultimately be misdirected toward objectives harmless to the establishment.
Economic Illiterates "Feel the Bern"
There are good people I know who have supported Sanders for good reasons, but my research into his actual proposals forces me to call out the faults of Sanders as any real choice. Sanders supporters are generally economic illiterates, fascinated by his mix of vague socialist rhetoric and cultural Marxist trendiness. They presume that merely hearing his rhetoric against certain corporations and money in politics mitigates his consistent enabling of that very thing he speaks against, due to his defense of the Federal Reserve debt-based economic system built upon usury, which has risen the cost of basic living, student loans, driven down work wages, etc..
His half-hearted calls for "reform" of the Federal Reserve are designed to merely make some cosmetic changes, without changing the overall structure which is the fact that private banking interests control the currency. Without that fundamental change of the entire financial system - not merely some phony "reforms" - then nothing proposed by Sanders on an economic level will ever come to fruition. This is because the Federal Reserve guarantees the structure of loans and debt which continues to cripple American workers and students, driving up the costs of those same loans.
Economics cannot be properly and consistently understood if one doesn't recognize the true nature of the State and the Corporate structure. On the one hand, neo-Marxists and the same type of "progressive" Democratic Socialists galvanized by Sanders view more government control as the solution to corporate control; while on the other hand, Capitalists who confuse the actual free-market with capitalism, and "conservative" apologists who speak against certain government control in some aspects, have no problem enabling their favored big corporations to control the State.
The fact is that Big Government and Big Corporations have merged to such an extent - and both are animated by Big Banking - that talking about using one to break the dominance of the other is nothing but hallowed rhetoric that will be of no use exactly because it ignores that one has merely become the other. This is why at this point, we should be wary of the same tired old slogans of "left" and "right" which have been used by the State to control various sectors of the population while mind-controlling every single one of us into being good obedient domesticated consumer debt-slaves!
"The real division is not between conservatives and revolutionaries but between authoritarians and libertarians." - George Orwell
Trump's "Making America Great Again": Vague Economic Dribble
Donald Trump has made a career out of personal enrichment, making deals with foreign interests at the expense of other Americans if it meant his own business would flourish. Like other political elites, his super-patriotic rhetoric is mere rhetoric to deceive American workers into cheerleading the latest government expansions, so long as its couched against "them" and not against "us", although it will really be the State vs. ALL.
The reality is that as one of the leading real-estate moguls in the United States, as one who hobnobs with the same bankers and big corporate war-profiteers who have profited from the looted taxes and labor of the American people, he has made deals with the very same economic interests who have driven up the massive "national" debt and he personally profited from government policies at the expense of the masses.
What has Trump actually proposed in the way of concrete policies? He has done nothing but vague rhetoric with only the most general economic proposals, more often than not simply using slogans like "we will make America great again" mixed in with the same egoism "I" which seems to be the "favorite" word of such an alleged advocate for the nation over personal interests! I challenge every single one of his supporters to answer with his actual proposals, not just with his general rhetoric about putting Americans "back to work".
His pitting Americans against groups of "the other" - whether it be Mexicans or Muslims - not giving them the facts and the true picture about foreign policy, leads Trump supporters into an ignorant, narrow-minded lashing-out against entire groups of "others" about whom one can say any outrageous hyperbole no matter how untrue it is for the majority of such groups, while disavowing any sort of personal responsibility for one's own actions.
When you dig deeper behind feel-good slogans such as "Make America Great Again," there is really NOTHING concrete about an economic program aside from the repetitive general rhetoric as any one who listens to Trump media circuses can attest. A hypothetical Trump presidency would ensure the same status quo as we see now. His supporters are mostly workers who fail to see he has no actual economic proposals, and often proclaim to be "conservative" even while expecting a Trump-led government to be their savior!
The Arrogance of Cultural Marxism
A large segment of Sanders supporters - certainly the most vocal and active among them - are galvanized by the ideology of cultural Marxism. Sanders holds to this cultural Marxism, combined with his support for the Federal Reserve debt-enslavement of the very same "proletariat" he claims to support. This is because the focal point of Marxist activism has tended to shift toward students and artists, rather than workers. Marxist rhetoric in the past about workers has more than served its purpose and after 1945 it was determined to try other means to do so; rather, it was decided then was the time to drop the mask since it was the non-working classes actually in control of Marxism from its very inception.
The Frankfurt School after 1945 really did more than any other force or institution to insidiously promote cultural Marxism in the West. A compromise was reached where such Marxist policies in the social and cultural realm - already long perpetuated by the Trotskyite school of Communism dominated by rootless, internationalist Jews - were merged with pro-banking economic policies used to loot the working masses for the benefit of banking interests and to make it easier for society to be controlled by a handful of primarily-Jewish elitist social-engineers who perceived themselves as superior to the rest of Western society.
Sanders' cultural Marxist supporters generally like to think they're on to something "deep", even while mindlessly eating up all the latest social and cultural trends in a "feel-good" frenzy tinged with a consumerism which conveniently benefits the very same Big Business interests their anointed hero claims to oppose. This can best be illustrated by the pro-Sanders protest groups which rioted against a Trump rally in Chicago and other protests throughout the country at Trump rallies.
I like to see one group of brainwashed partisans putting another group of brainwashed partisans in their place, but I point out the hypocrisy of those who may speak about "free speech" but will still crash anything which goes against their own set of dogmatic presumptions about society. This is not to say that these Trump rallies are paragons of free speech, as exhibited by the tyrannical attitude of "Might Makes Right" exhibited in a Trump persona that has been supportive of mass-surveillance and eroding of civil liberties and a Trump constituency that openly wants to use the State to erode the liberties of entire groups different from them.
At the heart of the pro-Sanders protest groups was a self-professed "civil disobedience" group called Democracy Spring, which happens to be backed by NGOs directly funded by that Hungarian-Jewish bankster-par-excellence George Soros, who made his fortune looting entire countries, such as his activities in southeast Asia and Greece, and buying up dominance in the West in an interesting blend of cultural Marxism and Neoliberal economics.
As an alleged "liberal", George Soros has no problem maintaining close connections with the "conservative" George Bush, Sr. through the war-profiteering company Carlyle Group - yet another instance of the deep connections between the alleged "liberal" and "conservative" interventionists, united in their war-profiteering. Soros' Quantum Fund committee includes two former Rothschild-linked investment bankers, Richard Katz and Nils Taube.
One of the groups backing Democracy Spring - conveniently named in the tradition of the phony CIA-orchestrated "color revolutions" designed to undermine anti-Globalist and anti-Zionist governments, not surprising given Soros' links with former CIA spooks and the active role of his "Open Society" networks - is the infamous MoveOn.org, whose board president Eli Pariser happens to be co-founder of the Soros-funded Avaaz.org, well-known for promoting "humanitarian" interventions. It was this group which beat the drums of war in Libya and is also closely linked with the White Helmets NGO which is a mouthpiece of Syrian rebel groups, and a clearing house of anti-Assad propaganda it feeds to the Zionist media only too eager to whip up more wars for Israeli interests.
Such groups are filled with a disproportionate number of Jews whose foremost loyalty is Israel although aligned with Labor Zionism and not Likud, as well as an assortment of paternalistic "do-gooders" who actually care nothing for the "third world" except as a new area to economically and culturally exploit. Their banking and corporate interests want to exploit the natural resources of the "third world," while their cultural Marxism - tinged with a Talmudic style "light unto the goyim" "chosen people" superiority - means they want to change the indigenous cultures of the "third world" and turn all people into carbon-copy consumers and debt-slaves.
What about Political Correctness?
The forces of Cultural Marxism in our society have pushed society so much toward one extreme, that it has created a backlash from another extreme which claims to be against "Political Correctness," but that identifies the wrong things which are actually not taboo in our society, while refusing to challenge those things which are truly taboo and obviously political suicide. Similar to the trendiness of the Sanders supporters, Trump supporters likewise assume they're "on to something" by merely lashing out against anything they perceive as "Politically Correct".
In his general pronouncements against Political Correctness, Trump has been playing the role of an entertainer who can galvanize the discontent of a large segment of the population and misdirect their anger into directions that would ultimately be a groundswell for policies that would ensure the continued status quo. At the heart of this "politically incorrect" faux-machismo is sounding tough against the vulnerable "others" of society who are victims of the very same foreign policy of the establishment Trump supporters claim oppose their candidate, while not even touching those issues that are really political suicide or not even discussed by the media, such as the stranglehold of AIPAC or the debt-based Federal Reserve system of private bankers controlling our economy.
A Word About Trump Supporters
In the debate about the type of supporters attracted by Trump, there is much condescending elitism displayed by many of his opponents. I am a Trump opponent too, but I equally oppose the other candidates and see much of the criticism of Trump as hypocritical. Their chosen candidates are guilty of evil policies they have actually voted for or supported, so they have no room to talk about mere rhetoric.
Whereas Sanders attracts many students faced with crippling student loans and voters angry at the vulturous role of money within the political process, Trump has attracted many white "blue-collar" voters frustrated with the excess of Political Correctness and other Cultural Marxist policies pushed by the elites against their own interests.
This is certainly true about Appalachia and the Deep South, a region I actually come from and have seen the sort of discontent tapped into by the Trump campaign. This does not however excuse some of the ideas continuously embraced politically by this same class, such as jingoistic foreign policies, blaming "the other" and not the elites for their poverty, and blind support for Police State surveillance laws, just as it doesn't excuse the cultural Marxism and Statism embraced politically by many Sanders supporters.
Its both simplistic and false for these same elitists to reject all of their concerns and dismiss them as "racist" without considering that they have also been left behind by a political system where only a small elite has benefitted off the backs of all the masses, regardless of race or political spectrum. The purpose of the two parties is simply to polarize their chosen group of voters, while continuing to betray them once in power, yet demonizing the "other side" enough to ensure they support their own Party time and time again despite being continuously betrayed.
"Unlike registered independents who are socially liberal and fiscally conservative," noted one interesting analysis of the Trump phenomenon. "America's non-voters tended to be poorer, less educated citizens who are fiscally liberal and socially conservative. Neither party listened to them, let alone represented this populist center, until Trump gave them a voice.
"America will survive Trump's campaign, and the temptations of protectionism and xenophobia he offers. But in the aftermath that follows, both political parties must start prioritizing the working-class for a change. And that starts by listening to Trump's forgotten America."
Thursday, April 14, 2016
An Open Letter to Truth Movement Supporters of Donald Trump
An Open Letter to Truth Movement Supporters of Donald Trump
by Sean Jobst
14 April 2016
The Truth movement refers to the alternative media that has exposed truths about certain false flag operations, chief among them being 9/11, and the power of Zionism over the governments and societies of the Western countries. Increasingly within the Truth movement, there has also been greater awareness about the disproportionate influence Jews have within the governments, media and banking houses - and its related matrixes of control - of the West and global power centers.
Hence, it goes beyond simple general criticisms of how governments and media lie to the masses, into a consistent exploration of the concrete interests behind those policies, to identify the broader reasons behind these government and media lies. There are several voices within alternative media who are controlled opposition, not even touching anything remotely connected to the Jewish question or even Zionism - blaming everyone else under the sun but pussyfooting around anything not "kosher", even when all the signs point to the inevitable conclusion of the disproportionate role of Zionist Jews.
It is with that in mind that I have noticed an increasing trend among many "Jew-wise" websites and individuals to somehow view the presidential campaign of Donald J. Trump as favorable to American interests and "secretly" against Zionist interests, even while all his rhetoric consistently indicates he is as much Zionist as all the other candidates who are (rightly) rejected by the Truth movement. Why then the naivete and myopia concerning Trump?
Especially since I am aligned with the Truth movement and have been open to the Truth ever since the very day 9/11 occurred, when I could sense the lies being shoved down our throats by the government and media, that I have to speak out against some strange false hopes by some within the movement. I have seen time and time again that many are susceptible to certain figures around whom hope is raised, but explaining away their more unsavory aspects that show them to be part and parcel of Zionist control, such as Vladimir Putin or Donald Trump, despite some aspects here and there which may be minor political disputes not affecting the major Zionist status quo.
Let's look at the facts: His supporters within the Truth movement point out that Trump has been opposed by a vast array of elites - the mainstream media, the "liberal" elites but also the Republican leadership; that he has allegedly been opposed also by the leading Neocons, and also that he has not taken the money of big bankers and big-money Jewish donors such as Sheldon Adelson, which fund other candidates such as Ted Cruz, or the equivalent donors on the Democratic Party side.
The fact that he has funded his own campaign should actually make the Truth movement question him even further, exactly because he still issues the typical platitudes about being "100% pro-Israel" and his slavish speech before the AIPAC puppet-masters. It certainly did not stop him from being the marshal of the "Israel Independence Day" parade in New York City, since as a big-time businessman and real estate broker he knows which side the bread would be buttered**.
It is telling that despite all the mainstream media and the political establishment being against him, with him funding his own campaign and not the donations of big-money donors, and with him galvanizing the support of millions of voters who would support him for the economic and other proposals he has been making, he would have absolutely nothing to lose by taking an independent line that doesn't cave in to Zionist interests....yet he has continued to make pro-Zionist statements and went out of his way to appear like a typical political lapdog before AIPAC, even when Bernie Sanders did not appear at the convention and he's certainly not anti-Zionist*.
Aside from the frequent fealties of being "100% pro-Israel," Trump has also praised Netanyahu and like a true disinformation agent, has criticized the Obama administration for not being sufficiently pro-Israel, despite the spigot of billions of taxpayer's money still being given to Israel and the White House consistently supporting all Israeli terrorist bombings of Gaza. Trump has also openly deferred particular policy proposals towards Israel to his two staunchly-Zionist Jewish advisors, Jason D. Greenblatt and David M. Friedman.
Donald Trump and 9/11 Truth
The Truth movement really got its start with the 9/11 false-flag, with those of us who rejected the establishment's bullshit version of 9/11. The wiser among the Truth movement further follow all the obvious leads - who benefited from the attacks, the preconceived plans of Zionist-Jewish leaders of the Neocon think-tanks which were and have been followed as script in the foreign policies since 9/11 designed to serve Israeli objectives, and leads about Mossad agents and their history of "By Way of Deception" - are inevitably forced to conclude that Zionist interests were behind 9/11 and the policies followed since then, whether in the various Neocon wars in the Middle East or the Patriot Act/NDAA Police State laws which follow the training given by Israeli "security" firms and consultants.
We in the Truth movement KNOW this reality. We also know about the five Israelis caught filming the World Trade Center burning live from a rooftop across the river in New Jersey, five Israelis which were later unveiled as Mossad agents once safely in Israel and in a story which was quickly buried in the mainstream media. So for Trump to vocally speak about "thousands of Muslims" allegedly "celebrating" the 9/11 attacks, shows he is nothing more than what we would call a DISINFORMATION AGENT.
On the contrary, he went beyond the false narrative pushed by the Zionist media, which recycled old footage of Palestinian wedding celebrations and passed them off as 9/11 celebrations in an attempt to follow the proposal of one Israeli political leader, who openly said that after 9/11 the "whole world has now to start a world war against the enemies of Israel."
So Trump went FURTHER than even the Zionist media narrative, by first claiming thousands of Muslims within New York and New Jersey were allegedly celebrating it, but then admitted he was a liar when he admitted it was hyperbole and not even "thousands" who celebrated it, but still holding to a narrative which - if anyone else aside from Trump would've been promoting it - would have been rejected as DISINFORMATION by his supporters within the Truth movement.
These same supporters speak about the ways that the mainstream media has been lying openly to the masses, feeding them all sorts of myths and propaganda, yet they somehow ignore or dismiss when their own anointed Donald Trump promotes these very same lies. Trump has even admitted his own lies, by saying he speaks through hyperbole, using outrageous language to get a reaction from the same media which allegedly opposes him yet gives him all the attention he craves.
He admitted this even in his book "The Art of the Deal," so we have it straight from Trump's own mouth that he has no problem with lying. And as documented by the pioneering revisionist historian and investigative journalist Michael A. Hoffman, II, this sort of lying through other means is a Talmudic device accepted by many such as Trump who have obviously been exposed to many Jewish power-brokers.
Similarly, when he confronted Jeb Bush during the debates about his brother, former President George W. Bush's role during 9/11, he held to a politically correct general line criticizing the government's handling of 9/11, but not questioning it being a false-flag from the very beginning. This sort of false opposition reasoning is certainly not taboo, and is completely within the bounds of what's acceptable among the "mainstream".
Whether its "progressive" false opposition agents as Michael Moore who blame only certain corporate figure-heads like Bush and Cheney, or false "truth-seeking" opposition figures like Alex Jones who run away from anything even remotely connected to the Zionist role within 9/11, or similar "Truth movement" false agents who have general criticism of Neocons while strangely ignoring how its almost entirely Jews openly serving the interests of Israel, or even this new narrative pushed by Trump against the Republican establishment, its ALL false "truth" to MISDIRECT people from the actual Truth.
ISIS and the Zionist Agenda in the Middle East
The Truth movement recognizes that ISIS is the latest false-flag operation within the Middle East, a suspicious group connected by the "deep state" of intelligence agencies and banking interests that are the real puppeteers behind this seeming group that has NEVER fired a shot at Israel even while it has been murdering opponents of Israel left and right.
Yet, his supporters within the Truth movement should be mystified to explain away why Trump has been holding to the politically correct line about ISIS that has been promoted by the Zionist media. Why is he not mentioning all the facts the alternative media has exposed about ISIS? Why is he still deceiving the masses with the myths, if indeed he is allegedly some crusader against Political Correctness?!
If he is indeed concerned about the Truth, and given the two facts - again - that he is self-funded and is opposed by so many people that he would have nothing to lose by exposing the facts, why does he promote the Zionist disinformation about ISIS?! This indicates two facts: Either that he knows the truth but is still hiding it and deceiving the people, which makes him the classic definition of a disinformation agent. Or, he does not know the Truth at all in which case I definitely don't understand the appeal he has to some gullible people within the Truth movement - he would still be nothing less than another puppet like other politicians.
Trump's flip-flopping on the Zionist wars in Iraq and Libya
Many of his supporters point out Trump's vocal criticism of the wars in Iraq and Libya which we know were driven primarily by Zionist interests. For example, he said the Middle East would be "much better off" if Saddam Hussein and Muammar al-Qadhafi were still alive and in power. They also point out that he has criticized the U.S. government's support for the Syrian rebels and their drive to overthrow the government of President Bashar al-Assad.
The reality though, true to form given his track-record as cited in this current article, is that he has flip-flopped like just about any other politician and public figure. This is certainly true about both Iraq and Libya. Coming out against the Iraq war is something no longer taboo, and has been excused by squirmy politicians as "knowing what we now know", even while they were part and parcel of the propaganda effort from the beginning.
So its easy for Trump to now claim he opposed the Iraq war, since its not politically suicidal to say so and would score him actual positive attention, but what are the facts? Certainly, when the Bush administration was on the eve of bombing and invading Iraq, Trump went live on the sleazy Howard Stern radio show on 11 September 2002. When asked, "Are you for invading Iraq?," Trump answered: "Yeah, I guess so. I wish the first time it was done correctly." Any opposition after that was very guarded and vaguely-worded, concerned solely about if the Iraq war was good for his business or not.
In a public video-blog published by Trump in 2011, he regurgitated all the same propaganda used by advocates of intervention on both the Neocon and the Neoliberal side, and pushed by the Zionist media, to justify NATO bombing of Libya and its support for murderous rebel groups - many linked to the same "Al-Qa'ida" allegedly being fought in the so-called "War on Terror" - in their overthrow of Qadhafi. His statements back during the war are a matter of public record, and certainly show its easy to pretend to be against a policy in retrospect - but this still doesn't change the fact that he pushed for it at the same time that being vocally against it would have actually counted!
In his words which harken back to the Neocons' wet-dreams about "being greeted by flowers" in Iraq, or the crocodile tears about human rights pushed by Neoliberal interventionists such as George Soros and his Avaaz NGO to justify what is pure and simple NAKED aggression against the sovereign leader of a sovereign country, in a bombing campaign which killed thousands of the very same Libyans its advocates were claiming to be "protecting", Trump said:
"Gaddafi, in Libya, is killing thousands of people. Nobody knows how bad it is and we’re sitting around. We have soldiers all over the Middle East and we’re not bringing them in to stop this horrible carnage. And that’s what it is, it’s a carnage.
“Now we should go in. We should stop this guy which would be very easy and very quick. We could do it surgically, stop him from doing it and save these lives. This is absolute nuts. We don’t want to get involved and you’re going to end up with something like you’ve never seen before. Now, ultimately the people will appreciate it and they’re going to end up taking over the country eventually.
"But the people will appreciate it and they should pay us back***. But we have to go in to save these lives. These people are being slaughtered like animals. We should, on a humanitarian basis, immediately go into Libya, knock this guy out very quickly, very surgically, very effectively, and save the lives."
On 21 March 2011, Trump appeared on Fox News Monday morning gloating about his Zionist-friendly treatment of Qadhafi: "I dealt with Gaddafi. I rented him a piece of land. He paid me more for one night than the land was worth for two years, and then I didn't let him use the land. That's what we should be doing. I don't want to use the word 'screwed,' but I screwed him. That's what we should be doing."
Trump's Support for the Patriot Act and NSA Surveillance State
The Truth movement opposes the encroachment of the government with its Police State legislation, including the Patriot Act and NDAA, the continuous erosion of civil liberties, the militarization of the police, and the NSA surveillance of the American people. Yet, his naive supporters within the Truth movement are oblivious in how to explain why Trump has consistently supported all of this, as documented in his open statements throughout 2015 - which he has since repeated during the Republican debates on live TV.
In summer 2015, Trump supported NSA spying on the American people: "I support legislation which allows the NSA to hold the bulk metadata. For oversight, I propose that a court, which is available any time on any day, is created to issue individual rulings on when this metadata can be accessed." This was well before his later excuse of the Paris attacks, when he then justified it with "I err on the side of security." In a December 2015 interview on the Hugh Hewitt Show, Trump was asked about restoring the Patriot Act, to which he responded: "I think that would be fine. As far as I'm concerned, that would be fine."
Conclusion
A man is to be judged by his actions and his statements, not by how one may perceive or "hope" them to be. One does not continuously excuse such a person, using standards other than what are used toward others who would be rejected by those same standards. Anyone who considers these facts and still support Donald Trump, certainly I question their involvement with the Truth movement and whether they are just more gullible goyim, falling for the latest Zionist disinformation agent promoted by the media to give the American people the false illusion of an independent choice other than the whims of AIPAC, Jewish moneyed-interests and the Zionist agenda.
Notes:
* Bernie Sanders did reject a personal invitation to appear at the AIPAC convention, because he was then campaigning in Utah, but he still requested that AIPAC allow him to speak in a live feed - a request that was rejected. His intention therefore still exists that he wanted to do the customary AIPAC lapdog convention like the other political candidates.
** Trump's fortunes are certainly intertwined with the powerful New York Jewish real estate dynasty of the Kushners, such that his daughter Ivanka married Jared Kushner. The Kushners were and have been very vocal supporters of Israel and Zionism.
*** This theme of "they will pay us back," has been used by Trump to call for the building of his border wall in Mexico - general rhetoric designed to allay the fears of an American populace already overburdened with the trillions of dollars in debt produced by the government borrowing from private bankers and then passing along the costs to every single American like it's "their" debt. This theme is similar to other worm-words used by Trump to sleaze his way out of explaining his actual proposals, keeping them as general and vague as possible while continuing to deceive his own supporters. Mark my words, though: in a hypothetical Trump presidency, he would simply pass along the costs of his policy proposals to the American people just like every other lying politician!
by Sean Jobst
14 April 2016
The Truth movement refers to the alternative media that has exposed truths about certain false flag operations, chief among them being 9/11, and the power of Zionism over the governments and societies of the Western countries. Increasingly within the Truth movement, there has also been greater awareness about the disproportionate influence Jews have within the governments, media and banking houses - and its related matrixes of control - of the West and global power centers.
Hence, it goes beyond simple general criticisms of how governments and media lie to the masses, into a consistent exploration of the concrete interests behind those policies, to identify the broader reasons behind these government and media lies. There are several voices within alternative media who are controlled opposition, not even touching anything remotely connected to the Jewish question or even Zionism - blaming everyone else under the sun but pussyfooting around anything not "kosher", even when all the signs point to the inevitable conclusion of the disproportionate role of Zionist Jews.
It is with that in mind that I have noticed an increasing trend among many "Jew-wise" websites and individuals to somehow view the presidential campaign of Donald J. Trump as favorable to American interests and "secretly" against Zionist interests, even while all his rhetoric consistently indicates he is as much Zionist as all the other candidates who are (rightly) rejected by the Truth movement. Why then the naivete and myopia concerning Trump?
Especially since I am aligned with the Truth movement and have been open to the Truth ever since the very day 9/11 occurred, when I could sense the lies being shoved down our throats by the government and media, that I have to speak out against some strange false hopes by some within the movement. I have seen time and time again that many are susceptible to certain figures around whom hope is raised, but explaining away their more unsavory aspects that show them to be part and parcel of Zionist control, such as Vladimir Putin or Donald Trump, despite some aspects here and there which may be minor political disputes not affecting the major Zionist status quo.
Let's look at the facts: His supporters within the Truth movement point out that Trump has been opposed by a vast array of elites - the mainstream media, the "liberal" elites but also the Republican leadership; that he has allegedly been opposed also by the leading Neocons, and also that he has not taken the money of big bankers and big-money Jewish donors such as Sheldon Adelson, which fund other candidates such as Ted Cruz, or the equivalent donors on the Democratic Party side.
The fact that he has funded his own campaign should actually make the Truth movement question him even further, exactly because he still issues the typical platitudes about being "100% pro-Israel" and his slavish speech before the AIPAC puppet-masters. It certainly did not stop him from being the marshal of the "Israel Independence Day" parade in New York City, since as a big-time businessman and real estate broker he knows which side the bread would be buttered**.
It is telling that despite all the mainstream media and the political establishment being against him, with him funding his own campaign and not the donations of big-money donors, and with him galvanizing the support of millions of voters who would support him for the economic and other proposals he has been making, he would have absolutely nothing to lose by taking an independent line that doesn't cave in to Zionist interests....yet he has continued to make pro-Zionist statements and went out of his way to appear like a typical political lapdog before AIPAC, even when Bernie Sanders did not appear at the convention and he's certainly not anti-Zionist*.
Aside from the frequent fealties of being "100% pro-Israel," Trump has also praised Netanyahu and like a true disinformation agent, has criticized the Obama administration for not being sufficiently pro-Israel, despite the spigot of billions of taxpayer's money still being given to Israel and the White House consistently supporting all Israeli terrorist bombings of Gaza. Trump has also openly deferred particular policy proposals towards Israel to his two staunchly-Zionist Jewish advisors, Jason D. Greenblatt and David M. Friedman.
Donald Trump and 9/11 Truth
The Truth movement really got its start with the 9/11 false-flag, with those of us who rejected the establishment's bullshit version of 9/11. The wiser among the Truth movement further follow all the obvious leads - who benefited from the attacks, the preconceived plans of Zionist-Jewish leaders of the Neocon think-tanks which were and have been followed as script in the foreign policies since 9/11 designed to serve Israeli objectives, and leads about Mossad agents and their history of "By Way of Deception" - are inevitably forced to conclude that Zionist interests were behind 9/11 and the policies followed since then, whether in the various Neocon wars in the Middle East or the Patriot Act/NDAA Police State laws which follow the training given by Israeli "security" firms and consultants.
We in the Truth movement KNOW this reality. We also know about the five Israelis caught filming the World Trade Center burning live from a rooftop across the river in New Jersey, five Israelis which were later unveiled as Mossad agents once safely in Israel and in a story which was quickly buried in the mainstream media. So for Trump to vocally speak about "thousands of Muslims" allegedly "celebrating" the 9/11 attacks, shows he is nothing more than what we would call a DISINFORMATION AGENT.
On the contrary, he went beyond the false narrative pushed by the Zionist media, which recycled old footage of Palestinian wedding celebrations and passed them off as 9/11 celebrations in an attempt to follow the proposal of one Israeli political leader, who openly said that after 9/11 the "whole world has now to start a world war against the enemies of Israel."
So Trump went FURTHER than even the Zionist media narrative, by first claiming thousands of Muslims within New York and New Jersey were allegedly celebrating it, but then admitted he was a liar when he admitted it was hyperbole and not even "thousands" who celebrated it, but still holding to a narrative which - if anyone else aside from Trump would've been promoting it - would have been rejected as DISINFORMATION by his supporters within the Truth movement.
These same supporters speak about the ways that the mainstream media has been lying openly to the masses, feeding them all sorts of myths and propaganda, yet they somehow ignore or dismiss when their own anointed Donald Trump promotes these very same lies. Trump has even admitted his own lies, by saying he speaks through hyperbole, using outrageous language to get a reaction from the same media which allegedly opposes him yet gives him all the attention he craves.
He admitted this even in his book "The Art of the Deal," so we have it straight from Trump's own mouth that he has no problem with lying. And as documented by the pioneering revisionist historian and investigative journalist Michael A. Hoffman, II, this sort of lying through other means is a Talmudic device accepted by many such as Trump who have obviously been exposed to many Jewish power-brokers.
Similarly, when he confronted Jeb Bush during the debates about his brother, former President George W. Bush's role during 9/11, he held to a politically correct general line criticizing the government's handling of 9/11, but not questioning it being a false-flag from the very beginning. This sort of false opposition reasoning is certainly not taboo, and is completely within the bounds of what's acceptable among the "mainstream".
Whether its "progressive" false opposition agents as Michael Moore who blame only certain corporate figure-heads like Bush and Cheney, or false "truth-seeking" opposition figures like Alex Jones who run away from anything even remotely connected to the Zionist role within 9/11, or similar "Truth movement" false agents who have general criticism of Neocons while strangely ignoring how its almost entirely Jews openly serving the interests of Israel, or even this new narrative pushed by Trump against the Republican establishment, its ALL false "truth" to MISDIRECT people from the actual Truth.
ISIS and the Zionist Agenda in the Middle East
The Truth movement recognizes that ISIS is the latest false-flag operation within the Middle East, a suspicious group connected by the "deep state" of intelligence agencies and banking interests that are the real puppeteers behind this seeming group that has NEVER fired a shot at Israel even while it has been murdering opponents of Israel left and right.
Yet, his supporters within the Truth movement should be mystified to explain away why Trump has been holding to the politically correct line about ISIS that has been promoted by the Zionist media. Why is he not mentioning all the facts the alternative media has exposed about ISIS? Why is he still deceiving the masses with the myths, if indeed he is allegedly some crusader against Political Correctness?!
If he is indeed concerned about the Truth, and given the two facts - again - that he is self-funded and is opposed by so many people that he would have nothing to lose by exposing the facts, why does he promote the Zionist disinformation about ISIS?! This indicates two facts: Either that he knows the truth but is still hiding it and deceiving the people, which makes him the classic definition of a disinformation agent. Or, he does not know the Truth at all in which case I definitely don't understand the appeal he has to some gullible people within the Truth movement - he would still be nothing less than another puppet like other politicians.
Trump's flip-flopping on the Zionist wars in Iraq and Libya
Many of his supporters point out Trump's vocal criticism of the wars in Iraq and Libya which we know were driven primarily by Zionist interests. For example, he said the Middle East would be "much better off" if Saddam Hussein and Muammar al-Qadhafi were still alive and in power. They also point out that he has criticized the U.S. government's support for the Syrian rebels and their drive to overthrow the government of President Bashar al-Assad.
The reality though, true to form given his track-record as cited in this current article, is that he has flip-flopped like just about any other politician and public figure. This is certainly true about both Iraq and Libya. Coming out against the Iraq war is something no longer taboo, and has been excused by squirmy politicians as "knowing what we now know", even while they were part and parcel of the propaganda effort from the beginning.
So its easy for Trump to now claim he opposed the Iraq war, since its not politically suicidal to say so and would score him actual positive attention, but what are the facts? Certainly, when the Bush administration was on the eve of bombing and invading Iraq, Trump went live on the sleazy Howard Stern radio show on 11 September 2002. When asked, "Are you for invading Iraq?," Trump answered: "Yeah, I guess so. I wish the first time it was done correctly." Any opposition after that was very guarded and vaguely-worded, concerned solely about if the Iraq war was good for his business or not.
In a public video-blog published by Trump in 2011, he regurgitated all the same propaganda used by advocates of intervention on both the Neocon and the Neoliberal side, and pushed by the Zionist media, to justify NATO bombing of Libya and its support for murderous rebel groups - many linked to the same "Al-Qa'ida" allegedly being fought in the so-called "War on Terror" - in their overthrow of Qadhafi. His statements back during the war are a matter of public record, and certainly show its easy to pretend to be against a policy in retrospect - but this still doesn't change the fact that he pushed for it at the same time that being vocally against it would have actually counted!
In his words which harken back to the Neocons' wet-dreams about "being greeted by flowers" in Iraq, or the crocodile tears about human rights pushed by Neoliberal interventionists such as George Soros and his Avaaz NGO to justify what is pure and simple NAKED aggression against the sovereign leader of a sovereign country, in a bombing campaign which killed thousands of the very same Libyans its advocates were claiming to be "protecting", Trump said:
"Gaddafi, in Libya, is killing thousands of people. Nobody knows how bad it is and we’re sitting around. We have soldiers all over the Middle East and we’re not bringing them in to stop this horrible carnage. And that’s what it is, it’s a carnage.
“Now we should go in. We should stop this guy which would be very easy and very quick. We could do it surgically, stop him from doing it and save these lives. This is absolute nuts. We don’t want to get involved and you’re going to end up with something like you’ve never seen before. Now, ultimately the people will appreciate it and they’re going to end up taking over the country eventually.
"But the people will appreciate it and they should pay us back***. But we have to go in to save these lives. These people are being slaughtered like animals. We should, on a humanitarian basis, immediately go into Libya, knock this guy out very quickly, very surgically, very effectively, and save the lives."
On 21 March 2011, Trump appeared on Fox News Monday morning gloating about his Zionist-friendly treatment of Qadhafi: "I dealt with Gaddafi. I rented him a piece of land. He paid me more for one night than the land was worth for two years, and then I didn't let him use the land. That's what we should be doing. I don't want to use the word 'screwed,' but I screwed him. That's what we should be doing."
Trump's Support for the Patriot Act and NSA Surveillance State
The Truth movement opposes the encroachment of the government with its Police State legislation, including the Patriot Act and NDAA, the continuous erosion of civil liberties, the militarization of the police, and the NSA surveillance of the American people. Yet, his naive supporters within the Truth movement are oblivious in how to explain why Trump has consistently supported all of this, as documented in his open statements throughout 2015 - which he has since repeated during the Republican debates on live TV.
In summer 2015, Trump supported NSA spying on the American people: "I support legislation which allows the NSA to hold the bulk metadata. For oversight, I propose that a court, which is available any time on any day, is created to issue individual rulings on when this metadata can be accessed." This was well before his later excuse of the Paris attacks, when he then justified it with "I err on the side of security." In a December 2015 interview on the Hugh Hewitt Show, Trump was asked about restoring the Patriot Act, to which he responded: "I think that would be fine. As far as I'm concerned, that would be fine."
Conclusion
A man is to be judged by his actions and his statements, not by how one may perceive or "hope" them to be. One does not continuously excuse such a person, using standards other than what are used toward others who would be rejected by those same standards. Anyone who considers these facts and still support Donald Trump, certainly I question their involvement with the Truth movement and whether they are just more gullible goyim, falling for the latest Zionist disinformation agent promoted by the media to give the American people the false illusion of an independent choice other than the whims of AIPAC, Jewish moneyed-interests and the Zionist agenda.
Notes:
* Bernie Sanders did reject a personal invitation to appear at the AIPAC convention, because he was then campaigning in Utah, but he still requested that AIPAC allow him to speak in a live feed - a request that was rejected. His intention therefore still exists that he wanted to do the customary AIPAC lapdog convention like the other political candidates.
** Trump's fortunes are certainly intertwined with the powerful New York Jewish real estate dynasty of the Kushners, such that his daughter Ivanka married Jared Kushner. The Kushners were and have been very vocal supporters of Israel and Zionism.
*** This theme of "they will pay us back," has been used by Trump to call for the building of his border wall in Mexico - general rhetoric designed to allay the fears of an American populace already overburdened with the trillions of dollars in debt produced by the government borrowing from private bankers and then passing along the costs to every single American like it's "their" debt. This theme is similar to other worm-words used by Trump to sleaze his way out of explaining his actual proposals, keeping them as general and vague as possible while continuing to deceive his own supporters. Mark my words, though: in a hypothetical Trump presidency, he would simply pass along the costs of his policy proposals to the American people just like every other lying politician!
Sunday, May 31, 2015
Greek Tragedy, Bankster's Paradise: A Detailed Analysis of the Greek Economic Crisis (Part 4)
Greek Tragedy, Bankster's Paradise: A Detailed Analysis of the Greek Economic Crisis (Part 4)
by Sean Jobst
May 31, 2015
On the American side, there have certainly been fears about the Euro from the currency's inception. "On the other side of the Atlantic the Euro is increasingly perceived as a serious competition to the Dollar." (Die Welt, 13 July 2001, p. 8) "The systematic undermining of the European Union by America is unacceptable....This attack on Europe's foundations by the American politics of menace towards everyone, has already been imposed in a dangerous way." (Süddeutsche Zeitung, 4 October, 2002, p. 12)
This is not to say the Eurozone's woes are solely the result of foreign powers, as there were serious internal flaws which were continuously ignored and hidden until the Greek crisis forced them to the surface: "The Greek tragedy reveals a serious lack in the fundamental structure of the EU. Whitewashing these defects by continually creating new institutions jeopardizes the European peace process." (Neue Zürcher Zeitung, 25 June 2011, p. 1) "The Euro, which supposedly was going to unify Europe for ever has become the greatest threat of the continent's future." (Der Spiegel, no. 25, 2001, p. 41)
The calls by many international bankers for a new, vague "international financial authority" would merely be giving a new face to the same banking order of the banker dynasties. These calls betray the intersection of globalist think-tanks with private banking institutions. One advocate of reducing the Euro into "pulp" (einstampfen) is Hans Olaf Henkel, member of the elitist Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and former lobbyist for Bank of America (despite its name, a private institution).
Who are the banking elites?
We should call it as we see it, and go wherever the facts lead us. And the facts in this case, are that the bankers who have been the cause of the Greek plight - not to mention all the other manipulations of the global economy - are disproportionately Jewish. Even some of the names of the companies involved in these schemes - Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers, etc. - betray their unmistakably Jewish origin.
I am a Gentile, so my detractors may hurl the accusation of "anti-Semite" at me for merely stating the FACT that there's an abundance of Jewish names and personalities within the global banking elite. So to forestall such accusations, I cite a very informative article written by a Jewish-American writer named Larry Derfner, in which he observed the rising tide of populist governments in South America and what it means for Jews:
"World Jewry has changed, in Israel and everywhere else. Today its voice is the voice of wealth and power. The strongest Jewish reaction to what's happening in South America - to the extent that influential Jews know what's happening there - is alarm. Fear. Fear that this poor people's movement could spread to other parts of the world, and endanger the wealth and power of all the Jews whose attitude toward the poor is more or less the same as the Bush administration's....
"This week, with the city's subway workers going on strike, the dominant voice of New York Jewry seems to be that of Republican billionaire Mayor Michael Bloomberg. 'This selfish strike is illegal,' he warned. 'We live in a country of laws where there can be severe consequences for those who break them. Union members are no different.' And in South America, the only Jews who might gain the sympathy of world Jewry are the prosperous, those who would stand to lose some of their wealth, even if only by higher taxes, in the new economic order....
"Today Diaspora Jews and Israelis are of like minds, all going for the gelt, all looking out for No. 1, all agreed that the poor will always be with us, so let's maybe throw them a bone (and put up a plaque). Most important, we are all agreed that the world is divided into the haves and have-nots, and we - Jews of the Diaspora and Israel together - have become the natural allies of the haves, and the natural enemies of the mobilized have-nots.
"And it's not just the Palestinian issue or radical Islam that divides world Jewry from the Third World. It's also the assimilation of American Jewry into the conservative economic and political establishment of their country, and Israeli Jewry's identification and connection with it. You can add the Russian Jewish oligarchs to the mix. You can also throw in the leadership of Jewish organizations across the Diaspora, which are basically plutocracies - societies ruled by the rich. Together, we are the voice of world Jewry. And as the saying goes, where you stand depends on where you sit. We're grown alienated from desperate poor people and striking workers everywhere - in South America, in New York City, and, of course, in Israel." (Larry Derfner, "Rattling the Cage: Decline of Jewish social conscience," The Jerusalem Post, December 22, 2005)
Tel Aviv, Global Money-Laundering Center
As we have already seen, Germany was not primarily to blame for the Greek crisis, as even their economic system was dominated by non-German elements. One of the main financial groups there is Hypo Real Estate (HRE), headed by Bernd Knobloch, son of Charlotte Knobloch, chairwoman of the Central Council of Jews in Germany (Zentralrat der Juden in Deutschland) - notice the title "Jews in Germany" and not "German Jews", admitting they constitute a foreign element - who then served as Vice President of the European Jewish Congress and the World Jewish Congress.
While the German Federal Government was backing HRE to the tune of 120 billion Euros, Knobloch was transferring the main business office of HRE to Tel Aviv! He was able to do so with the banking welfare tribute given to him by the German government, while pocketing money and running off to Israel. On June 25, 2011, German journalist Lars Schall interviewed American financial observer Max Keiser on Global Plutonomy. As Keiser observed: "Tel Aviv has become the biggest money laundering center in the world now, after Switzerland got shut down by the FEDS. So, that all has moved to Tel Aviv. You see, the Shekel is doing quite well as a result of it."
Zionist links
Aside from its mostly Jewish leadership, Goldman Sachs developed close links with Israel - joining the Israeli venture capital fund Jerusalem Venture Capital in injecting $40 million into the Israeli Cyber Ark Software. With all of these links, it should be little wonder that "In Greece there are an increasingly large number, on both sides of the political divide, who lay the blame for the economic crisis at the feet of 'Israel' and the 'Jewish lobby,' or even 'World Jewry.' 'Hitler had stopped them. I admire his strength,' said a man of about 60 years of age, who would not give his name. Some still find Hitler good, while for 80 percent of Greeks, Mrs. Merkel has meanwhile become appalling, according to the polls." (Die Welt, 21 June 2011, p. 4)
One of the other figures involved in the Greek bailout that was dictated by the German government and forced upon German taxpayers, was then head of Deutsche Bank Joseph Ackermann, a member of the Steering Committee of Bilderberg and exercised control over the EU through the International Institute of Finance (IIF) lobbying group.
A press review of the German Embassy in Tel Aviv said about Ackermann on October 28, 2008: "This is how e.g., Deutsche Bank Chief Joseph Ackermann, one of the most outstanding Jews in the German financial sector, including the entire management of the bank announced they will relinquish their bonus for the year 2000."
Greece and the NWO?
In 2010, Greek Finance Minister George Papaconstantinou predicted a cashless economy, where Greece served as the staging ground: "Greece is an experimental laboratory. As the Americans say, the present crisis is too good to be allowed to go to waste, and the statutes of the European Central Bank are not adequate for the task before it." (Die Welt, 22 February 2010, p. 6)
The banking elites have made the nature of money artificial. Contrary to Aristotle and countless other philosophers and indeed faith traditions, they have perpetuated this fraud called usury upon humanity; it certainly has crippled Greece. At first, currency has been paper not backed by any real commodities but solely based on the manipulation by those who control the money supply. We have now reached the next stage of their plan, which is a new cashless electronic currency.
With the abolition of currency, the bankers not only seek to forestall the inflationary collapse, but also as Orwellian Big Brother achieve total control over the population. They will collect the EU's obligations to the banksters through emergency taxes. The speculative operations have been merely numerical deceptions created out of thin air to crush the whole world through the financial elite's gigantic political interest machine. Many thinkers from various nations have had the foresight to see what is actually going on, and some Greek sages have also warned their nation (and, by default, humanity) of the looming plans.
Warnings of Elder Paisios
Elder Paisios was one of the leading Greek Orthodox monks on Mount Athos. In 1992, he gave a series of lengthy warnings to visitors, about what he saw as the coming rise of the Antichrist system and its role within the EU. He referred to the Mark of the Beast as the supercomputer, a new global electronic currency, and the disproportionate role of Jewish bankers behind this system:
"The mark will be an image which will first be placed on all products, and then people will be compelled to wear it on their hand or forehead. Little by little, after the introduction of ID cards with the three sixes, after the creation of a personal dossier, they'll use cunning to introduce the mark. In Brussels a whole palace with three sixes has been built to house a central computer. This computer can keep track of billions of people. The Jews today are planning to control the world economy. They will have the ability to do this with the Brussels super-computer. They will be able to monitor each one of us, monitoring all our information and all our finances. The world economy will eventually be in the Jews' hands."
After his death in 1994, Elder Paisios' warning that Greece would experience "great disruption and confusion," followed by hunger and political turmoil, took on new significance during the economic crisis. This translated into more pilgrimages to his grave, books about his life and predictions, his image adorning devotional banners and cards, and newspapers carrying his words.
"Figures like Paisios represent the shaman, the magician of the tribe. They are the incarnation of a transcendental, invisible power," observes Alexandra Koronaiou, sociologist at Panteion University of Social and Political Sciences in Athens. (Gordon Fairclough, "Greeks Seek Strength in the Powers of a Revered Monk to Predict Events," The Wall Street Journal, December 3, 2012)
Greek resilience uncovers new politics of collective and individual responsibility
Steeped in a rich tradition of anarchism, Greek culture is well-suited for the interesting combination of a non-statist individual responsibility with a collective mutualism. Austerity meant the services were no longer being provided to people, so the gap was filled by individuals stepping up to provide these services on their own in a concerted effort for their fellow Greeks.
"The only real way out of this crisis is people doing it for themselves," says Theano Fotiou, member of Syriza's central committee. "If people don't participate, we will be lost as a country. This is practice, not theory, a new social ideology, a new paradigm - the opposite of the old passive, dependent, consumerist, individualist model. And the solidarity projects we have now are its incubators."
Among the measures has been medical doctors providing healthcare pro bono, food solidarity centers, social kitchens, cooperatives, "without middlemen" distribution networks for fresh produce, and legal aid hubs. Lawyers have also been giving their legal services to families being foreclosed. So if there is any good that has come from what has befallen Greece, it is this - a redefinition of what politics actually is, beyond the rhetoric that doesn't match the reality.
Adversity has a way of making people turn inwardly, finding out things about themselves that they don't know. This is more than true of Hellenic resilience. "This whole thing," notes lawyer and Syriza member Katerina Knitou, "has made a lot of people very aware, not just of what they face, but also of what they can - and must - do....It's up to us, all of us, to change things. And honestly? This feels like a good start."
by Sean Jobst
May 31, 2015
On the American side, there have certainly been fears about the Euro from the currency's inception. "On the other side of the Atlantic the Euro is increasingly perceived as a serious competition to the Dollar." (Die Welt, 13 July 2001, p. 8) "The systematic undermining of the European Union by America is unacceptable....This attack on Europe's foundations by the American politics of menace towards everyone, has already been imposed in a dangerous way." (Süddeutsche Zeitung, 4 October, 2002, p. 12)
This is not to say the Eurozone's woes are solely the result of foreign powers, as there were serious internal flaws which were continuously ignored and hidden until the Greek crisis forced them to the surface: "The Greek tragedy reveals a serious lack in the fundamental structure of the EU. Whitewashing these defects by continually creating new institutions jeopardizes the European peace process." (Neue Zürcher Zeitung, 25 June 2011, p. 1) "The Euro, which supposedly was going to unify Europe for ever has become the greatest threat of the continent's future." (Der Spiegel, no. 25, 2001, p. 41)
The calls by many international bankers for a new, vague "international financial authority" would merely be giving a new face to the same banking order of the banker dynasties. These calls betray the intersection of globalist think-tanks with private banking institutions. One advocate of reducing the Euro into "pulp" (einstampfen) is Hans Olaf Henkel, member of the elitist Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and former lobbyist for Bank of America (despite its name, a private institution).
Who are the banking elites?
We should call it as we see it, and go wherever the facts lead us. And the facts in this case, are that the bankers who have been the cause of the Greek plight - not to mention all the other manipulations of the global economy - are disproportionately Jewish. Even some of the names of the companies involved in these schemes - Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers, etc. - betray their unmistakably Jewish origin.
I am a Gentile, so my detractors may hurl the accusation of "anti-Semite" at me for merely stating the FACT that there's an abundance of Jewish names and personalities within the global banking elite. So to forestall such accusations, I cite a very informative article written by a Jewish-American writer named Larry Derfner, in which he observed the rising tide of populist governments in South America and what it means for Jews:
"World Jewry has changed, in Israel and everywhere else. Today its voice is the voice of wealth and power. The strongest Jewish reaction to what's happening in South America - to the extent that influential Jews know what's happening there - is alarm. Fear. Fear that this poor people's movement could spread to other parts of the world, and endanger the wealth and power of all the Jews whose attitude toward the poor is more or less the same as the Bush administration's....
"This week, with the city's subway workers going on strike, the dominant voice of New York Jewry seems to be that of Republican billionaire Mayor Michael Bloomberg. 'This selfish strike is illegal,' he warned. 'We live in a country of laws where there can be severe consequences for those who break them. Union members are no different.' And in South America, the only Jews who might gain the sympathy of world Jewry are the prosperous, those who would stand to lose some of their wealth, even if only by higher taxes, in the new economic order....
"Today Diaspora Jews and Israelis are of like minds, all going for the gelt, all looking out for No. 1, all agreed that the poor will always be with us, so let's maybe throw them a bone (and put up a plaque). Most important, we are all agreed that the world is divided into the haves and have-nots, and we - Jews of the Diaspora and Israel together - have become the natural allies of the haves, and the natural enemies of the mobilized have-nots.
"And it's not just the Palestinian issue or radical Islam that divides world Jewry from the Third World. It's also the assimilation of American Jewry into the conservative economic and political establishment of their country, and Israeli Jewry's identification and connection with it. You can add the Russian Jewish oligarchs to the mix. You can also throw in the leadership of Jewish organizations across the Diaspora, which are basically plutocracies - societies ruled by the rich. Together, we are the voice of world Jewry. And as the saying goes, where you stand depends on where you sit. We're grown alienated from desperate poor people and striking workers everywhere - in South America, in New York City, and, of course, in Israel." (Larry Derfner, "Rattling the Cage: Decline of Jewish social conscience," The Jerusalem Post, December 22, 2005)
Tel Aviv, Global Money-Laundering Center
As we have already seen, Germany was not primarily to blame for the Greek crisis, as even their economic system was dominated by non-German elements. One of the main financial groups there is Hypo Real Estate (HRE), headed by Bernd Knobloch, son of Charlotte Knobloch, chairwoman of the Central Council of Jews in Germany (Zentralrat der Juden in Deutschland) - notice the title "Jews in Germany" and not "German Jews", admitting they constitute a foreign element - who then served as Vice President of the European Jewish Congress and the World Jewish Congress.
While the German Federal Government was backing HRE to the tune of 120 billion Euros, Knobloch was transferring the main business office of HRE to Tel Aviv! He was able to do so with the banking welfare tribute given to him by the German government, while pocketing money and running off to Israel. On June 25, 2011, German journalist Lars Schall interviewed American financial observer Max Keiser on Global Plutonomy. As Keiser observed: "Tel Aviv has become the biggest money laundering center in the world now, after Switzerland got shut down by the FEDS. So, that all has moved to Tel Aviv. You see, the Shekel is doing quite well as a result of it."
Zionist links
Aside from its mostly Jewish leadership, Goldman Sachs developed close links with Israel - joining the Israeli venture capital fund Jerusalem Venture Capital in injecting $40 million into the Israeli Cyber Ark Software. With all of these links, it should be little wonder that "In Greece there are an increasingly large number, on both sides of the political divide, who lay the blame for the economic crisis at the feet of 'Israel' and the 'Jewish lobby,' or even 'World Jewry.' 'Hitler had stopped them. I admire his strength,' said a man of about 60 years of age, who would not give his name. Some still find Hitler good, while for 80 percent of Greeks, Mrs. Merkel has meanwhile become appalling, according to the polls." (Die Welt, 21 June 2011, p. 4)
One of the other figures involved in the Greek bailout that was dictated by the German government and forced upon German taxpayers, was then head of Deutsche Bank Joseph Ackermann, a member of the Steering Committee of Bilderberg and exercised control over the EU through the International Institute of Finance (IIF) lobbying group.
A press review of the German Embassy in Tel Aviv said about Ackermann on October 28, 2008: "This is how e.g., Deutsche Bank Chief Joseph Ackermann, one of the most outstanding Jews in the German financial sector, including the entire management of the bank announced they will relinquish their bonus for the year 2000."
Greece and the NWO?
In 2010, Greek Finance Minister George Papaconstantinou predicted a cashless economy, where Greece served as the staging ground: "Greece is an experimental laboratory. As the Americans say, the present crisis is too good to be allowed to go to waste, and the statutes of the European Central Bank are not adequate for the task before it." (Die Welt, 22 February 2010, p. 6)
The banking elites have made the nature of money artificial. Contrary to Aristotle and countless other philosophers and indeed faith traditions, they have perpetuated this fraud called usury upon humanity; it certainly has crippled Greece. At first, currency has been paper not backed by any real commodities but solely based on the manipulation by those who control the money supply. We have now reached the next stage of their plan, which is a new cashless electronic currency.
With the abolition of currency, the bankers not only seek to forestall the inflationary collapse, but also as Orwellian Big Brother achieve total control over the population. They will collect the EU's obligations to the banksters through emergency taxes. The speculative operations have been merely numerical deceptions created out of thin air to crush the whole world through the financial elite's gigantic political interest machine. Many thinkers from various nations have had the foresight to see what is actually going on, and some Greek sages have also warned their nation (and, by default, humanity) of the looming plans.
Warnings of Elder Paisios
Elder Paisios was one of the leading Greek Orthodox monks on Mount Athos. In 1992, he gave a series of lengthy warnings to visitors, about what he saw as the coming rise of the Antichrist system and its role within the EU. He referred to the Mark of the Beast as the supercomputer, a new global electronic currency, and the disproportionate role of Jewish bankers behind this system:
"The mark will be an image which will first be placed on all products, and then people will be compelled to wear it on their hand or forehead. Little by little, after the introduction of ID cards with the three sixes, after the creation of a personal dossier, they'll use cunning to introduce the mark. In Brussels a whole palace with three sixes has been built to house a central computer. This computer can keep track of billions of people. The Jews today are planning to control the world economy. They will have the ability to do this with the Brussels super-computer. They will be able to monitor each one of us, monitoring all our information and all our finances. The world economy will eventually be in the Jews' hands."
 |
| Elder Paisios |
After his death in 1994, Elder Paisios' warning that Greece would experience "great disruption and confusion," followed by hunger and political turmoil, took on new significance during the economic crisis. This translated into more pilgrimages to his grave, books about his life and predictions, his image adorning devotional banners and cards, and newspapers carrying his words.
"Figures like Paisios represent the shaman, the magician of the tribe. They are the incarnation of a transcendental, invisible power," observes Alexandra Koronaiou, sociologist at Panteion University of Social and Political Sciences in Athens. (Gordon Fairclough, "Greeks Seek Strength in the Powers of a Revered Monk to Predict Events," The Wall Street Journal, December 3, 2012)
Greek resilience uncovers new politics of collective and individual responsibility
Steeped in a rich tradition of anarchism, Greek culture is well-suited for the interesting combination of a non-statist individual responsibility with a collective mutualism. Austerity meant the services were no longer being provided to people, so the gap was filled by individuals stepping up to provide these services on their own in a concerted effort for their fellow Greeks.
"The only real way out of this crisis is people doing it for themselves," says Theano Fotiou, member of Syriza's central committee. "If people don't participate, we will be lost as a country. This is practice, not theory, a new social ideology, a new paradigm - the opposite of the old passive, dependent, consumerist, individualist model. And the solidarity projects we have now are its incubators."
Among the measures has been medical doctors providing healthcare pro bono, food solidarity centers, social kitchens, cooperatives, "without middlemen" distribution networks for fresh produce, and legal aid hubs. Lawyers have also been giving their legal services to families being foreclosed. So if there is any good that has come from what has befallen Greece, it is this - a redefinition of what politics actually is, beyond the rhetoric that doesn't match the reality.
Adversity has a way of making people turn inwardly, finding out things about themselves that they don't know. This is more than true of Hellenic resilience. "This whole thing," notes lawyer and Syriza member Katerina Knitou, "has made a lot of people very aware, not just of what they face, but also of what they can - and must - do....It's up to us, all of us, to change things. And honestly? This feels like a good start."
Greek Tragedy, Bankster's Paradise: A Detailed Analysis of the Greek Economic Crisis (Part 3)
Greek Tragedy, Bankster's Paradise: A Detailed Analysis of the Greek Economic Crisis (Part 3)
by Sean Jobst
May 31, 2015
In the previous two articles, I examined the historical development of the banking crisis in Greece, as well as the economic factors behind it. We cannot look at the economic situation without looking at the current political structure of both Greece and the Eurozone. The anger of the Greek people against the bankers coalesced into their election of the Syriza government on January 26, 2015.
Greece is an example of a nation where the pressures of globalism rendered obsolete the old conventional labels of "left" and "right." Syriza could not obtain an absolute majority, so it formed a coalition government with ANEL. On the surface, the two parties appear rigidly entrenched in the old political spectrum: the "far-left" Syriza is secularist; the "far-right" ANEL is nationalistic, anti-immigration and pro-Church. However, they are united around the mandate upon which this government was elected by the Greek people. The real division is Populism vs. Globalism.
Both parties are Eurosceptic and both were founded after splits from the two traditional parties, in protest over their accepting the banking policies. Syriza was founded in 2004 as an umbrella coalition of various "far-left" groups opposed to the establishment PASOK's banking policies. The current Greek Minister of Defense, Panos Kammenos, founded ANEL in 2012 after he was ousted from the ruling New Democracy Party for refusing to vote for the memorandum signed with Greece's foreign lenders. They have openly declared most of the IMF "bailout" went to profits for Greece's creditors and did not benefit Greece at all.
Syriza, a true alternative or lesser evil?
Syriza generally advocates a Marxist-leaning ideology, envisioning an interventionist role of the State in the economy. Leaning toward a left-libertarian position, I am firmly skeptical of government's role in the economy - central State planning leads to crises and this is certainly true in the case of Greece, where the private agreement between the government with bankers was imposed on the entire nation and the economy carved up for the benefit of banking interests. The case of Greece actually underscores the true nature of the neo-liberal capitalist economic system.
The capitalist State is a service industry of the banks, with the politicians serving as the legislative face of the financial powers who underwrite the loans, whose costs are then passed on to the people who had absolutely nothing to do with the secret backdoor arrangements in the first place. This fiction that capitalism is anything but State interventionism in the economy, must be broken in people's minds if we are to attain a clear picture free from the very same ideology that destroys "free market" in the false name of "the market"!
The proposals of Syriza are certainly statist, but being at the national level and not the Global Statist level of the banksters, to me its clearly a lesser evil that is a direct response of a more sinister form of statism. "I guess for the right-wing 'free market' establishment, statism is more statist when it helps poor people instead of the rich," as Kevin Carson, from the left-libertarian Center for a Stateless Society, writes. "When one alternative is clearly a lesser evil, it's better to take it. In the end, it probably doesn't do much good or harm either way to vote."
There is no more blatant statism than the service industry run for the banksters. While profiting immensely from the deal, the bankers' statist stewards saddled Greek taxpayers with interest-bearing debt, giving it the fiction of being "public" so that the Greek people were given the responsibility of "paying off" a debt which is actually designed to exist in perpetuity. The purpose of the "bailout" was never to benefit the nation in any way, but merely to prop up the value of the bad assets. The austerity cuts and "privatization" are designed to prevent deflation from marking down these bad assets to real market value, so the owners of the assets may then loan some of it back to the public at an interest which they can never fully pay off.
Knowing banking realities means transcending politics
We have reached a stage where the activities of the global economic system are "hidden" in plain sight - shrouded in secrecy and carried out in cloak and dagger fashion between the bankers and their political servants no doubt, but still blatant enough for anyone to discern the reality. Although some hold onto the fiction of national sovereignty, the fact is that governments worldwide have become nothing but tools of the global central banking system. Their activities are at the behest of global financial institutions accountable only to themselves, and seemingly above the law!
Transcending the political limitations which continue to trap the masses into these plots, means to clearly state the fundamental flaw of both the so-called left or right parties when it comes to the central banking system. One of those who understands is a French thinker whose activities have spanned both, Alain Soral, who has spoken on the topic of virtual money and the takeover of the government by the banksters:
"No political party, extreme left or extreme right, dares to bring up this fundamental issue which is the sovereign power of the state which is to issue currency, and to borrow from itself at zero interest and make productive investments, which is the condition of the welfare state, and of an equitable social policy. Nobody questions this thing, which would be the very foundation of a turn to the real political left."
Soral then provided an analysis of France that can also be applied to Greece and other countries, certainly in the geopolitical core if not in the peripheral: "Why the end of the welfare state in France? Why the disparities and the hyper-debt in France? Only because France, as other European countries, used to borrow, for its own investments, from itself at zero interest, and it was compensated by creation of added value and economic dynamism.
"Today it is obligated by traitorous laws, that is the treason of our elite, to borrow on private markets from private banks which collect interest. And this difference which in itself is fundamental, makes it so we shift from a policy of sharing, a social policy, to a policy of impoverishment and inequality. And you'll never see the extreme left bring this up."
Soral concluded forcefully and succinctly: "It's the key to understanding exploitation and the creation of misery, and of course this gigantic worldwide scam, where people create virtual money, that we have to borrow from them. What's real is the interest you will pay back with the sweat of your brow, and just like exploitation in the ancien regime, where people said 'God gave me this land; you may work it for me if you give me this much, so I can keep doing nothing.'
"So we went from fiduciary exploitation, land-based, theologically justified, to something that's called from the power of nobility to the power of banking. It's exactly the same violence, the same scam. It's the supreme political issue, and indeed it is never brought up by anyone - not the center, not the extreme left....This seizing of power by the banks in the western world, by people who create something that didn't exist, paper money, but who have the right, a political privilege granted by themselves, to extort money from the entire world through interest."
Is Germany Really To Blame?
There is a tendency among many Greeks to blame Germany for the economic crisis which has befallen the Greek nation within the Eurozone. Such would be a crucial error which actually ignores the root of the problem and the real identity of the guilty parties who continue to profit from a crisis which was their making. The banksters have been working overtime behind the scenes, wrecking both the German and Greek economies, while encouraging the Greeks to blame the German "Nazis" for the political crisis.
Of course, the German leadership have been willing participants looting schemes. You do not understand anything about the role of Germany, if you do not know that the current Federal Government is an occupied government, installed by the Allied victors after World War II and enslaved to pressures from world Jewish groups and organizations, which milk Germany out of countless billions in "reparations" and forces the leaders to continuously apologize for being German.
Meanwhile, Chancellor Angela Merkel and other Bundesrepublik leaders are too busy with their constant tirades against German history and sickening groveling which forces Germany to remain the milked cash-cow and convenient scapegoats for the plundering policies of their banker masters. Merkel's clueless rhetoric certainly does Germany's reputation no favor. "German politicians last year [2010] advocated that Greece should sell its islands, even the Acropolis. That increased the anger of the Greek people." (The Telegraph, 26 June 2011)
Their plan is working like a charm, due to Merkel's rhetorical self-sacrifice of German reputation: "The Athenian newspaper ELEFTHEROSTYPOS presented a photomontage of the victory goddess on the Brandenburg Gate holding aloft a swastika. The accompanying text reads, 'Financial Nazism is threatening Europe. We have had enough of Germany's slandering Greece.'" (Die Welt, 24 February 2010, p. 5)
But Merkel's policies are carried out for the bankers' benefit, not for the German nation. "Chancellor Merkel comes to the rescue of the banks. 'The Federal Government declares itself ready, if necessary, to enforce such a capitalization for the banks.'" (Die Welt, 5 October 2011) She sold out Deutschland to the big banks: "In case of a complete collapse of the Euro zone, it is Germany who is responsible for the various guarantees and aids." (Der Spiegel, no. 25, 2011, p. 43)
Even with the current efforts to address Greece's crisis, Merkel is faithfully serving the interests of the bankers, preparing a document for a meeting of eurozone finance officials on February 4, 2015, which "noted that the new administration must not roll back any cutbacks or reforms made by previous governments. Greek government sources immediately rejected such a prospect." ("ECB fires warning shot by refusing to accept Greek gov't bonds as collateral," ekathimerini.com, February 4, 2015)
Germany's Role in the Eurozone
Germany clearly does not profit or benefit from the Eurozone, but shoulders the burdens which are already heavy through enforced so-called "reparations" to Israel and world Jewish organizations. Despite the current crisis which has harmed Germany's reputation among many Greeks, Germany actually has many things in common with Greece. Both their governments have produced debts, which profited private banking interests while the burden of paying off the debt was forced upon the people who were never party to the secret arrangement.
The Euro was established by the Maastricht Treaty, signed by Chancellor Helmut Kohl in even more far-reaching terms of humiliation for Deutschland: "The Maastricht-Treaty threatens Germany to be deeper encumbered by reparation payments than the Versailles-Treaty that had been imposed on us after World War I. But Versailles was a dictate whilst Maastricht was voluntarily taken on by the [Kohl] government." (WirtschaftsWoche, no. 42, 9 October 1992, p. 3)
Goldman Sachs also looted the German economy, Lloyd Blankfein persuading the German state banks to back billions in so-called "investments" by third parties such as John Paulson's Paulson & Company Hedge Fund; all the while, Goldman Sachs was wagering on the collapse of these same investments! Similarly, under its Jewish head Richard Fuld, Lehman Brothers defrauded thousands of elderly and retired Germans. Rather than standing up for the people and demanding accountability and justice, the treasonous Federal government and court rejected all the claims of these defrauded Germans for compensation!
As for Germany's role within the Eurozone, it could very well be that the German government is a willing participant in the implosion of the Eurozone. Germany is forced to loan money to insolvent nations, and as Varoufakis has noted the issue of insolvency has been ignored since to address it would mean the bankers could no longer profit through the loans. Both Germany and Greece lose out, shoring up the loan process as part of the Eurozone self-maintenance apparatus. The masses - both Germans and Greeks - are enslaved through these debts which they will never be able to pay off.
Defending German history to the Greeks
To address Germany's worsening reputation among the Greeks, I believe it is necessary to be honest and unapologetic about German history. Jewish bankers have been instigating the Syriza government to demand war-time "reparations" from Germany, part of their own financial war against Germany. If there were patriotic Germans governing the nation, they would point out that yes, Germans occupied Greece during World War II - but Britain was not entirely innocent of its own designs upon Greece and certainly the Soviet Union revealed its own intrigues in Greece as soon as the war ended.
One of those who currently stands up for German historical honor and defends its reputation is the French revisionist historian and political prisoner Robert Faurisson. Citing official documents from the Nuremberg Trials (vol. X, p. 119, vol. XI, pp. 428-432), he quotes what former Reich Foreign Secretary Baron von Steengracht said before the court on March 27, 1946:
"The basic attitude towards France and all occupied territories was that under all circumstances their currency was to be preserved as far as possible, or rather should be preserved by all means. That is why we often sent gold to Greece in order to attempt to maintain the value of the currency there to some extent.
"By sending gold to Greece we lowered the rate of exchange of foreign currencies. Thus the Greek merchants who had hoarded food to a large extent, became frightened and threw the food on the market, and in this way it was made available to the Greek population again." (IMT, Vol. X, p. 119)
Testifying on 15 April 1946, Hermann Neubacher, the leading Reich foreign ministry official for the Balkans (including Greece), said: "Regarding the economic events in Greece, I can give you information based on my own observations only, starting with October 1942. At that time, when I first came to Athens, the Greek currency had already been considerably devaluated, and the circulation of banknotes had increased by something like 3,000 percent.
"Greece also suffered an economic set-back due to the fact that, in addition to a progressing inflation, an attempt had been made to introduce in Greece a planned economy with ceiling prices along German lines. The result was, of course, that the merchants selling Greek goods suffered losses when they were paid later. On the other hand, when I arrived there the importers of German goods made tremendous profits, because they paid Reichsmark at the rate of 60 on the clearing and resold the goods at a rate of about 30,000. This chaos, due to the inflation in connection with the attempt of introducing a planned economy on the German pattern, could be remedied only by transforming the black market in Greece into a completely free market. The two experts of the Axis Powers introduced this measure with considerable success at the end of October 1942. Within a few weeks all shops and markets were full of goods and foodstuffs; the prices of food dropped to one-fifth and prices of manufactured products to one-tenth. This success could be maintained for 4 months in spite of increasing inflation.... (ibid., Vol. XI, p. 430)
"Reich Minister Funk, with whom I discussed the difficulties of my task, and I both fully agreed that a maximum of goods should be transported to Greece, and certainly not only food. I secured not only 60,000 tons of food at that time but also German export goods, since it was hopeless to try to stop an inflation or the effects of an inflation on the prices, if there were no supplies. Reich Minister Funk supported exports to Greece with the view to a restoration of normal market conditions with every means at his disposal.
"In 1943, when shipping in Greek waters had completely stopped for us, because all ships had been torpedoed and the railroads had become the object of incessant acts of sabotage and dynamiting, I, with the help of the Swedish Minister, Alar, who directed the International Relief for Greece, applied for British navicerts [a form of passport permitting a neutral ship to pass through a blockade in wartime] for food transports to Greece. The British granted this application, and when our own means of transport had ceased to exist, the Swedish boat Halaren went from Trieste or Venice to the Piraeus once a month, loaded with German food supplies for Greece." (ibid., p. 431)
Svengalian George Soros intrigues in Greece
Despite being one of the world's leading bankers, barely any place on earth not touched by his political intrigues, the Hungarian-Jewish financier George Soros has poured money into Syriza, as a way of promoting secularism and weakening the Church's influence in Greece; Tsipras is openly an atheist and was the first Greek Prime Minister sworn in a civil and not religious ceremony. The traditionalist Greek Orthodox Church remains a bulwark against usury and the rule of the bankers, both theologically and socially. It is also known for their staunch position against Zionism, hence on several counts Soros and his ilk have a vested personal interest limiting the power of the Greek Church.
I corresponded via email with Professor Dimitri Kitsikis, a Greek professor of International Relations and Geopolitics at the University of Ottawa in Canada. He is the leading advocate and theorist of Hellenoturkism (Ἑλληνοτουρκισμός), which upholds the deep historical, political and cultural ties between Greece and Turkey, a perspective I generally endorse as a traveler to both countries and student of history. Kitsikis is careful to stress how Hellenoturkism transcends politics, not tied to a specific political party.
Looking from a geopolitical standpoint, Kitsikis identified Tsipras and Syriza as representing a pro-American line. This can certainly be seen in the way Tsipras was visiting the U.S. and meeting with politicians at least as early in 2013. His coalition partners, Kammenos and ANEL, on the other hand have more of a pro-Russian stance and Kammenos ran afoul of world Jewish leaders when he said the Greek Orthodox Church pays more taxes than other religious groups, when Jewish leaders were seeking special privileges under Simitis. At the time being, there seems to be an understanding for Syriza to handle the economy while ANEL has defense and foreign policy.
According to the British newspaper The Guardian, Soros offered donations to Greek institutions to buy heating oil and other services, but parents' associations across Greece refused his donations because they were suspicious of the motives behind his "philanthrophy." As noted by the German business weekly WirtschaftsWoche in a 2013 editorial, Soros arranged Tsipras' visit to the U.S., personally introducing him to many influential figures within the political establishment.
The editorial went on to suggest Soros was using Syriza to put pressure on Germany, playing upon anti-German rhetoric about World War II. The editorial then concluded: "Why is Soros funding such anti-capitalist instigators like Tsipras with his tirades against Germany? No one talks aloud about this out of fear before the powerful billionaire. But one manager confidentially supposed that 'Soros wants to revenge against Germany.'"
by Sean Jobst
May 31, 2015
In the previous two articles, I examined the historical development of the banking crisis in Greece, as well as the economic factors behind it. We cannot look at the economic situation without looking at the current political structure of both Greece and the Eurozone. The anger of the Greek people against the bankers coalesced into their election of the Syriza government on January 26, 2015.
Greece is an example of a nation where the pressures of globalism rendered obsolete the old conventional labels of "left" and "right." Syriza could not obtain an absolute majority, so it formed a coalition government with ANEL. On the surface, the two parties appear rigidly entrenched in the old political spectrum: the "far-left" Syriza is secularist; the "far-right" ANEL is nationalistic, anti-immigration and pro-Church. However, they are united around the mandate upon which this government was elected by the Greek people. The real division is Populism vs. Globalism.
Both parties are Eurosceptic and both were founded after splits from the two traditional parties, in protest over their accepting the banking policies. Syriza was founded in 2004 as an umbrella coalition of various "far-left" groups opposed to the establishment PASOK's banking policies. The current Greek Minister of Defense, Panos Kammenos, founded ANEL in 2012 after he was ousted from the ruling New Democracy Party for refusing to vote for the memorandum signed with Greece's foreign lenders. They have openly declared most of the IMF "bailout" went to profits for Greece's creditors and did not benefit Greece at all.
Syriza, a true alternative or lesser evil?
Syriza generally advocates a Marxist-leaning ideology, envisioning an interventionist role of the State in the economy. Leaning toward a left-libertarian position, I am firmly skeptical of government's role in the economy - central State planning leads to crises and this is certainly true in the case of Greece, where the private agreement between the government with bankers was imposed on the entire nation and the economy carved up for the benefit of banking interests. The case of Greece actually underscores the true nature of the neo-liberal capitalist economic system.
The capitalist State is a service industry of the banks, with the politicians serving as the legislative face of the financial powers who underwrite the loans, whose costs are then passed on to the people who had absolutely nothing to do with the secret backdoor arrangements in the first place. This fiction that capitalism is anything but State interventionism in the economy, must be broken in people's minds if we are to attain a clear picture free from the very same ideology that destroys "free market" in the false name of "the market"!
The proposals of Syriza are certainly statist, but being at the national level and not the Global Statist level of the banksters, to me its clearly a lesser evil that is a direct response of a more sinister form of statism. "I guess for the right-wing 'free market' establishment, statism is more statist when it helps poor people instead of the rich," as Kevin Carson, from the left-libertarian Center for a Stateless Society, writes. "When one alternative is clearly a lesser evil, it's better to take it. In the end, it probably doesn't do much good or harm either way to vote."
There is no more blatant statism than the service industry run for the banksters. While profiting immensely from the deal, the bankers' statist stewards saddled Greek taxpayers with interest-bearing debt, giving it the fiction of being "public" so that the Greek people were given the responsibility of "paying off" a debt which is actually designed to exist in perpetuity. The purpose of the "bailout" was never to benefit the nation in any way, but merely to prop up the value of the bad assets. The austerity cuts and "privatization" are designed to prevent deflation from marking down these bad assets to real market value, so the owners of the assets may then loan some of it back to the public at an interest which they can never fully pay off.
Knowing banking realities means transcending politics
We have reached a stage where the activities of the global economic system are "hidden" in plain sight - shrouded in secrecy and carried out in cloak and dagger fashion between the bankers and their political servants no doubt, but still blatant enough for anyone to discern the reality. Although some hold onto the fiction of national sovereignty, the fact is that governments worldwide have become nothing but tools of the global central banking system. Their activities are at the behest of global financial institutions accountable only to themselves, and seemingly above the law!
Transcending the political limitations which continue to trap the masses into these plots, means to clearly state the fundamental flaw of both the so-called left or right parties when it comes to the central banking system. One of those who understands is a French thinker whose activities have spanned both, Alain Soral, who has spoken on the topic of virtual money and the takeover of the government by the banksters:
"No political party, extreme left or extreme right, dares to bring up this fundamental issue which is the sovereign power of the state which is to issue currency, and to borrow from itself at zero interest and make productive investments, which is the condition of the welfare state, and of an equitable social policy. Nobody questions this thing, which would be the very foundation of a turn to the real political left."
Soral then provided an analysis of France that can also be applied to Greece and other countries, certainly in the geopolitical core if not in the peripheral: "Why the end of the welfare state in France? Why the disparities and the hyper-debt in France? Only because France, as other European countries, used to borrow, for its own investments, from itself at zero interest, and it was compensated by creation of added value and economic dynamism.
"Today it is obligated by traitorous laws, that is the treason of our elite, to borrow on private markets from private banks which collect interest. And this difference which in itself is fundamental, makes it so we shift from a policy of sharing, a social policy, to a policy of impoverishment and inequality. And you'll never see the extreme left bring this up."
Soral concluded forcefully and succinctly: "It's the key to understanding exploitation and the creation of misery, and of course this gigantic worldwide scam, where people create virtual money, that we have to borrow from them. What's real is the interest you will pay back with the sweat of your brow, and just like exploitation in the ancien regime, where people said 'God gave me this land; you may work it for me if you give me this much, so I can keep doing nothing.'
"So we went from fiduciary exploitation, land-based, theologically justified, to something that's called from the power of nobility to the power of banking. It's exactly the same violence, the same scam. It's the supreme political issue, and indeed it is never brought up by anyone - not the center, not the extreme left....This seizing of power by the banks in the western world, by people who create something that didn't exist, paper money, but who have the right, a political privilege granted by themselves, to extort money from the entire world through interest."
Is Germany Really To Blame?
There is a tendency among many Greeks to blame Germany for the economic crisis which has befallen the Greek nation within the Eurozone. Such would be a crucial error which actually ignores the root of the problem and the real identity of the guilty parties who continue to profit from a crisis which was their making. The banksters have been working overtime behind the scenes, wrecking both the German and Greek economies, while encouraging the Greeks to blame the German "Nazis" for the political crisis.
Of course, the German leadership have been willing participants looting schemes. You do not understand anything about the role of Germany, if you do not know that the current Federal Government is an occupied government, installed by the Allied victors after World War II and enslaved to pressures from world Jewish groups and organizations, which milk Germany out of countless billions in "reparations" and forces the leaders to continuously apologize for being German.
 |
| Totentanz Angela Merkel |
Meanwhile, Chancellor Angela Merkel and other Bundesrepublik leaders are too busy with their constant tirades against German history and sickening groveling which forces Germany to remain the milked cash-cow and convenient scapegoats for the plundering policies of their banker masters. Merkel's clueless rhetoric certainly does Germany's reputation no favor. "German politicians last year [2010] advocated that Greece should sell its islands, even the Acropolis. That increased the anger of the Greek people." (The Telegraph, 26 June 2011)
Their plan is working like a charm, due to Merkel's rhetorical self-sacrifice of German reputation: "The Athenian newspaper ELEFTHEROSTYPOS presented a photomontage of the victory goddess on the Brandenburg Gate holding aloft a swastika. The accompanying text reads, 'Financial Nazism is threatening Europe. We have had enough of Germany's slandering Greece.'" (Die Welt, 24 February 2010, p. 5)
But Merkel's policies are carried out for the bankers' benefit, not for the German nation. "Chancellor Merkel comes to the rescue of the banks. 'The Federal Government declares itself ready, if necessary, to enforce such a capitalization for the banks.'" (Die Welt, 5 October 2011) She sold out Deutschland to the big banks: "In case of a complete collapse of the Euro zone, it is Germany who is responsible for the various guarantees and aids." (Der Spiegel, no. 25, 2011, p. 43)
Even with the current efforts to address Greece's crisis, Merkel is faithfully serving the interests of the bankers, preparing a document for a meeting of eurozone finance officials on February 4, 2015, which "noted that the new administration must not roll back any cutbacks or reforms made by previous governments. Greek government sources immediately rejected such a prospect." ("ECB fires warning shot by refusing to accept Greek gov't bonds as collateral," ekathimerini.com, February 4, 2015)
Germany's Role in the Eurozone
Germany clearly does not profit or benefit from the Eurozone, but shoulders the burdens which are already heavy through enforced so-called "reparations" to Israel and world Jewish organizations. Despite the current crisis which has harmed Germany's reputation among many Greeks, Germany actually has many things in common with Greece. Both their governments have produced debts, which profited private banking interests while the burden of paying off the debt was forced upon the people who were never party to the secret arrangement.
The Euro was established by the Maastricht Treaty, signed by Chancellor Helmut Kohl in even more far-reaching terms of humiliation for Deutschland: "The Maastricht-Treaty threatens Germany to be deeper encumbered by reparation payments than the Versailles-Treaty that had been imposed on us after World War I. But Versailles was a dictate whilst Maastricht was voluntarily taken on by the [Kohl] government." (WirtschaftsWoche, no. 42, 9 October 1992, p. 3)
Goldman Sachs also looted the German economy, Lloyd Blankfein persuading the German state banks to back billions in so-called "investments" by third parties such as John Paulson's Paulson & Company Hedge Fund; all the while, Goldman Sachs was wagering on the collapse of these same investments! Similarly, under its Jewish head Richard Fuld, Lehman Brothers defrauded thousands of elderly and retired Germans. Rather than standing up for the people and demanding accountability and justice, the treasonous Federal government and court rejected all the claims of these defrauded Germans for compensation!
As for Germany's role within the Eurozone, it could very well be that the German government is a willing participant in the implosion of the Eurozone. Germany is forced to loan money to insolvent nations, and as Varoufakis has noted the issue of insolvency has been ignored since to address it would mean the bankers could no longer profit through the loans. Both Germany and Greece lose out, shoring up the loan process as part of the Eurozone self-maintenance apparatus. The masses - both Germans and Greeks - are enslaved through these debts which they will never be able to pay off.
Defending German history to the Greeks
To address Germany's worsening reputation among the Greeks, I believe it is necessary to be honest and unapologetic about German history. Jewish bankers have been instigating the Syriza government to demand war-time "reparations" from Germany, part of their own financial war against Germany. If there were patriotic Germans governing the nation, they would point out that yes, Germans occupied Greece during World War II - but Britain was not entirely innocent of its own designs upon Greece and certainly the Soviet Union revealed its own intrigues in Greece as soon as the war ended.
One of those who currently stands up for German historical honor and defends its reputation is the French revisionist historian and political prisoner Robert Faurisson. Citing official documents from the Nuremberg Trials (vol. X, p. 119, vol. XI, pp. 428-432), he quotes what former Reich Foreign Secretary Baron von Steengracht said before the court on March 27, 1946:
"The basic attitude towards France and all occupied territories was that under all circumstances their currency was to be preserved as far as possible, or rather should be preserved by all means. That is why we often sent gold to Greece in order to attempt to maintain the value of the currency there to some extent.
"By sending gold to Greece we lowered the rate of exchange of foreign currencies. Thus the Greek merchants who had hoarded food to a large extent, became frightened and threw the food on the market, and in this way it was made available to the Greek population again." (IMT, Vol. X, p. 119)
Testifying on 15 April 1946, Hermann Neubacher, the leading Reich foreign ministry official for the Balkans (including Greece), said: "Regarding the economic events in Greece, I can give you information based on my own observations only, starting with October 1942. At that time, when I first came to Athens, the Greek currency had already been considerably devaluated, and the circulation of banknotes had increased by something like 3,000 percent.
"Greece also suffered an economic set-back due to the fact that, in addition to a progressing inflation, an attempt had been made to introduce in Greece a planned economy with ceiling prices along German lines. The result was, of course, that the merchants selling Greek goods suffered losses when they were paid later. On the other hand, when I arrived there the importers of German goods made tremendous profits, because they paid Reichsmark at the rate of 60 on the clearing and resold the goods at a rate of about 30,000. This chaos, due to the inflation in connection with the attempt of introducing a planned economy on the German pattern, could be remedied only by transforming the black market in Greece into a completely free market. The two experts of the Axis Powers introduced this measure with considerable success at the end of October 1942. Within a few weeks all shops and markets were full of goods and foodstuffs; the prices of food dropped to one-fifth and prices of manufactured products to one-tenth. This success could be maintained for 4 months in spite of increasing inflation.... (ibid., Vol. XI, p. 430)
"Reich Minister Funk, with whom I discussed the difficulties of my task, and I both fully agreed that a maximum of goods should be transported to Greece, and certainly not only food. I secured not only 60,000 tons of food at that time but also German export goods, since it was hopeless to try to stop an inflation or the effects of an inflation on the prices, if there were no supplies. Reich Minister Funk supported exports to Greece with the view to a restoration of normal market conditions with every means at his disposal.
"In 1943, when shipping in Greek waters had completely stopped for us, because all ships had been torpedoed and the railroads had become the object of incessant acts of sabotage and dynamiting, I, with the help of the Swedish Minister, Alar, who directed the International Relief for Greece, applied for British navicerts [a form of passport permitting a neutral ship to pass through a blockade in wartime] for food transports to Greece. The British granted this application, and when our own means of transport had ceased to exist, the Swedish boat Halaren went from Trieste or Venice to the Piraeus once a month, loaded with German food supplies for Greece." (ibid., p. 431)
Svengalian George Soros intrigues in Greece
Despite being one of the world's leading bankers, barely any place on earth not touched by his political intrigues, the Hungarian-Jewish financier George Soros has poured money into Syriza, as a way of promoting secularism and weakening the Church's influence in Greece; Tsipras is openly an atheist and was the first Greek Prime Minister sworn in a civil and not religious ceremony. The traditionalist Greek Orthodox Church remains a bulwark against usury and the rule of the bankers, both theologically and socially. It is also known for their staunch position against Zionism, hence on several counts Soros and his ilk have a vested personal interest limiting the power of the Greek Church.
I corresponded via email with Professor Dimitri Kitsikis, a Greek professor of International Relations and Geopolitics at the University of Ottawa in Canada. He is the leading advocate and theorist of Hellenoturkism (Ἑλληνοτουρκισμός), which upholds the deep historical, political and cultural ties between Greece and Turkey, a perspective I generally endorse as a traveler to both countries and student of history. Kitsikis is careful to stress how Hellenoturkism transcends politics, not tied to a specific political party.
Looking from a geopolitical standpoint, Kitsikis identified Tsipras and Syriza as representing a pro-American line. This can certainly be seen in the way Tsipras was visiting the U.S. and meeting with politicians at least as early in 2013. His coalition partners, Kammenos and ANEL, on the other hand have more of a pro-Russian stance and Kammenos ran afoul of world Jewish leaders when he said the Greek Orthodox Church pays more taxes than other religious groups, when Jewish leaders were seeking special privileges under Simitis. At the time being, there seems to be an understanding for Syriza to handle the economy while ANEL has defense and foreign policy.
According to the British newspaper The Guardian, Soros offered donations to Greek institutions to buy heating oil and other services, but parents' associations across Greece refused his donations because they were suspicious of the motives behind his "philanthrophy." As noted by the German business weekly WirtschaftsWoche in a 2013 editorial, Soros arranged Tsipras' visit to the U.S., personally introducing him to many influential figures within the political establishment.
The editorial went on to suggest Soros was using Syriza to put pressure on Germany, playing upon anti-German rhetoric about World War II. The editorial then concluded: "Why is Soros funding such anti-capitalist instigators like Tsipras with his tirades against Germany? No one talks aloud about this out of fear before the powerful billionaire. But one manager confidentially supposed that 'Soros wants to revenge against Germany.'"
Tuesday, May 26, 2015
Greek Tragedy, Bankster's Paradise: A Detailed Analysis of the Greek Economic Crisis (Part 2)
Greek Tragedy, Bankster's Paradise: A Detailed Analysis of the Greek Economic Crisis (Part 2)
by Sean Jobst
May 26, 2015
Through Credit Default Swaps (CDS), Goldman Sachs helped the Greek government - I believe it essential here to highlight the corrupt government, not the Greek nation or people who were never party to the agreement - keep billions of dollars worth of debt off their balance sheet. This "helped create a debt bubble that would later explode and bring about the current economic crisis that's drowning the entire continent," writes economic observer Mark Weisbrot. "Goldman Sachs, however, using its insider knowledge of its Greek client, protected itself from this debt bubble by betting against Greek bonds, expecting that they would eventually fail."
In February 2010, six banks and investment firms - including Goldman Sachs and Deutsche Bank - granted the Greek government a loan in the amount of €8 billion. Corrupt Greek politicians were treasonous when they sold CDSs from the Greek Postal Bank, to the current speculators. These CDSs were then flipped a few months later for $27 billion, most of which was quickly pocketed by these currency vultures and a handful of corrupt politicians. The Greek people were never party to this secret contract, yet they were the ones who were being held responsible for the inevitable crisis. The loans to Greece were bailouts of creditors and not to the people!
The credit debts were insured through the scheme of credit deficit swaps. The banksters lend out cost-free government guarantees they create out of thin air, insuring them for billions and trillions, for which they receive billions more in "premiums". The banksters pocketed the insurance for these amounts created from thin air - amplified a hundredfold. They then get credit for state guarantees backed by taxpayer money.
"Wall Street institutions made a profit of 500 percent within three months through CDS papers in the beginning of the Greek crisis." (Spiegel.de, 5 May 2010) In October 2011, the bankers demanded two trillion Euros. They successfully hoodwinked Greece into giving up its own currency - the drachma - which had existed for 2,700 years, which was like destroying their identity.
Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein boasted before the U.S. Congress that his company sold non-existing wealth to governments and public institutions alike, completely out of thin air. He boasted how Goldman Sachs kept 90% of all monies from bailouts and investments. Blankfein knew the risks for the Greek nation, but him and his ilk did not care, because they wanted to turn a huge profit. The Greek people suffered, while Blankfein and his cabal of robber-baron bankers are living it up!
In the case of Greece, over 90% of the sales revenue of these "investments" went to the firm's salary and bonuses, with most of the remaining 10% going for "administrative costs." Obviously, the bankers profited immensely from the bailout which did not benefit Greece - and certainly not the Greek people themselves, who suffered from this swindle.
Dictatorship by Credit Agencies
The rating agencies helped perpetuate the fraud, pretending that their price was valued correctly, masking the reality that these ratings were all artificially-designed to give profits to these private rating agencies. In 2006, the agencies rated Greece as "extremely good." In 2010, the Greek economy fell by 4.5% and then another 4% in 2011. As soon as a country falls below a certain "rating limit" artificially set by these agencies, the CDSs increase - and both are set up in such a way that the "debt" is never ending, with interest upon interest perpetually!
The so-called "ratings" of these private investment firms has led to a "dictatorship by rating grade allocation. The rating agencies have unprecedented power. Half of Europe trembles at their verdict. The politicians have made them powerful." (Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 18 June 2011) This was evident on June 17, 2011, when German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy met in Berlin to announce the terms for a new Greek "bailout", but dutifully invited the rating agency Finch, which proved its political clout by negotiating with the politicians the terms which they would accept for not giving a negative rating for Greece - blackmail, pure and simple!
In May 2010, Greece was "saved" with €110 billion, including no less than 85 billion for CDS "bets." In June 2011, the agencies rated Greece in the "red" to the tune of €330 billion, which increased to "around 350 billion Euros" only two weeks later. (Die Welt, 17 June 2011, p. 4) To drive up the settlement price - and thus their profits - Greece was downgraded by the rating agencies.
While issuing credit to EU countries at up to 30% interest, the European Central Bank made the money available to the private bankers at only 1% interest! The ECB then repurchased their own money at exorbitant interest rates. "The ECB has capital of only 82 billion Euros, yet it has 1,900 billion Euros in paper on its books. These are mainly Greek junk bonds." (Die Welt, 25 June 2011, p. 17)
The Austerity Swindle
The Greek economy was further ruined by newly-invented "austerity" measures, which forced the nation to hand over its national assets to the private international bankers/"investors", in a process code-named "privatization." At the moment these "austerity" measures are accepted, yet another lowering of the nation's "creditworthiness" is announced. The agencies then increase their loans without any limit being imposed.
Spain was another test example: "The financial world demanded that Spain initiate a policy of austerity and cost-cutting; but as soon as Spain began to seriously comply with their demand, they lowered Spain's credit rating. The Finch agency changed its evaluation of Spain's creditworthiness, saying that the austerity program would choke off its growth." (Stern.de, 29 May 2010)
One of those instrumental in wrecking the economies of the southern European countries was the New York-based banker Bill Lipschutz was the foreign exchange market trader who directed the Portfolio Department at Hathersage Capital Management, which specialized in G-10 currencies, including the Euro:
"Every morning Lipschutz gets up at two or three o'clock to see what the markets in Europe are doing....Nobody knows whether the Greeks will be able to solve their problems. Nobody knows whether the other countries will come to their assistance. Nobody knows whether the crisis can be contained in Greece or will spread like wildfire among 'the PIIGS' (Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain) and the European currency will finally disintegrate. These represent shining opportunities for currency speculators, they can place bets on the fall of the Euro." (Der Spiegel, No. 8, 2010, p. 64)
A measure of austerity is achieving an keeping a primary surplus, which is what a government earns in taxes every year, minus what it spends on everything else except interest payments on its own debt. This becomes part of the Gross Domestic Product. Under its four-year-old bailout program, Greece dragged itself from a 10% deficit to a 3% surplus, at great cost in employment rates. The terms of the recent bailout demand Greece reach a surplus of 4.5% and hold it for the length of the program, but few countries have even been able to maintain a 3% surplus, much less 4.5%. (Brendan Greeley, "Why Greece Won't Ever Be Able to Pay Off Its Debts With Austerity," Bloomberg Business Week, February 19, 2015)
The insolvency of the banks
The anti-austerity protests happened because the people got tired with being held responsible for the secret deals between private bankers and investors with corrupt governments and politicians. As the Greek finance minister Yanis Varoufakis - one of the few Marxists I respect and admire completely - has said repeatedly, the Greek economic crisis is essentially an insolvency problem, not a liquidity issue that requires bailing out failed banks or giving out more loans.
Varoufakis connected this to the issue of the banks, observing how they want to sell off their own bank debt by selling off Greece's assets. Thus we see the root of the problem is to focus on insolvency, but the international bankers and their media and political whores insist on obfuscating the real root of the crisis, advocating phony "solutions" which can only lead to more profits for the bankers and more heartache for the Greek people. On the February 2nd episode of Russia Today's "Keiser Report", banking analyst Frances Coppola was quoted as saying:
"Everyone knows Greece is insolvent, of course, but no-one has ever stated it officially. The Troika's [EU, ECB, IMF] position is that Greece's problem is a temporary liquidity shortfall: lending it more money so it can meet current debt service obligations is justified because structural reforms will lead to renewed growth and increased income, enabling it to meet its obligations (including those for the new loans) in the future. But Varoufakis disagrees with this interpretation. His view is that while things remain as they are, Greece will never recover. The bailout program locks it into a debt deflationary spiral which simultaneously reduces its income and increases its debt burden. Continuing to accept more loans in order to meet debt service obligations only makes matters worse."
by Sean Jobst
May 26, 2015
Through Credit Default Swaps (CDS), Goldman Sachs helped the Greek government - I believe it essential here to highlight the corrupt government, not the Greek nation or people who were never party to the agreement - keep billions of dollars worth of debt off their balance sheet. This "helped create a debt bubble that would later explode and bring about the current economic crisis that's drowning the entire continent," writes economic observer Mark Weisbrot. "Goldman Sachs, however, using its insider knowledge of its Greek client, protected itself from this debt bubble by betting against Greek bonds, expecting that they would eventually fail."
In February 2010, six banks and investment firms - including Goldman Sachs and Deutsche Bank - granted the Greek government a loan in the amount of €8 billion. Corrupt Greek politicians were treasonous when they sold CDSs from the Greek Postal Bank, to the current speculators. These CDSs were then flipped a few months later for $27 billion, most of which was quickly pocketed by these currency vultures and a handful of corrupt politicians. The Greek people were never party to this secret contract, yet they were the ones who were being held responsible for the inevitable crisis. The loans to Greece were bailouts of creditors and not to the people!
The credit debts were insured through the scheme of credit deficit swaps. The banksters lend out cost-free government guarantees they create out of thin air, insuring them for billions and trillions, for which they receive billions more in "premiums". The banksters pocketed the insurance for these amounts created from thin air - amplified a hundredfold. They then get credit for state guarantees backed by taxpayer money.
"Wall Street institutions made a profit of 500 percent within three months through CDS papers in the beginning of the Greek crisis." (Spiegel.de, 5 May 2010) In October 2011, the bankers demanded two trillion Euros. They successfully hoodwinked Greece into giving up its own currency - the drachma - which had existed for 2,700 years, which was like destroying their identity.
Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein boasted before the U.S. Congress that his company sold non-existing wealth to governments and public institutions alike, completely out of thin air. He boasted how Goldman Sachs kept 90% of all monies from bailouts and investments. Blankfein knew the risks for the Greek nation, but him and his ilk did not care, because they wanted to turn a huge profit. The Greek people suffered, while Blankfein and his cabal of robber-baron bankers are living it up!
In the case of Greece, over 90% of the sales revenue of these "investments" went to the firm's salary and bonuses, with most of the remaining 10% going for "administrative costs." Obviously, the bankers profited immensely from the bailout which did not benefit Greece - and certainly not the Greek people themselves, who suffered from this swindle.
Dictatorship by Credit Agencies
The rating agencies helped perpetuate the fraud, pretending that their price was valued correctly, masking the reality that these ratings were all artificially-designed to give profits to these private rating agencies. In 2006, the agencies rated Greece as "extremely good." In 2010, the Greek economy fell by 4.5% and then another 4% in 2011. As soon as a country falls below a certain "rating limit" artificially set by these agencies, the CDSs increase - and both are set up in such a way that the "debt" is never ending, with interest upon interest perpetually!
The so-called "ratings" of these private investment firms has led to a "dictatorship by rating grade allocation. The rating agencies have unprecedented power. Half of Europe trembles at their verdict. The politicians have made them powerful." (Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 18 June 2011) This was evident on June 17, 2011, when German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy met in Berlin to announce the terms for a new Greek "bailout", but dutifully invited the rating agency Finch, which proved its political clout by negotiating with the politicians the terms which they would accept for not giving a negative rating for Greece - blackmail, pure and simple!
In May 2010, Greece was "saved" with €110 billion, including no less than 85 billion for CDS "bets." In June 2011, the agencies rated Greece in the "red" to the tune of €330 billion, which increased to "around 350 billion Euros" only two weeks later. (Die Welt, 17 June 2011, p. 4) To drive up the settlement price - and thus their profits - Greece was downgraded by the rating agencies.
While issuing credit to EU countries at up to 30% interest, the European Central Bank made the money available to the private bankers at only 1% interest! The ECB then repurchased their own money at exorbitant interest rates. "The ECB has capital of only 82 billion Euros, yet it has 1,900 billion Euros in paper on its books. These are mainly Greek junk bonds." (Die Welt, 25 June 2011, p. 17)
The Austerity Swindle
The Greek economy was further ruined by newly-invented "austerity" measures, which forced the nation to hand over its national assets to the private international bankers/"investors", in a process code-named "privatization." At the moment these "austerity" measures are accepted, yet another lowering of the nation's "creditworthiness" is announced. The agencies then increase their loans without any limit being imposed.
Spain was another test example: "The financial world demanded that Spain initiate a policy of austerity and cost-cutting; but as soon as Spain began to seriously comply with their demand, they lowered Spain's credit rating. The Finch agency changed its evaluation of Spain's creditworthiness, saying that the austerity program would choke off its growth." (Stern.de, 29 May 2010)
One of those instrumental in wrecking the economies of the southern European countries was the New York-based banker Bill Lipschutz was the foreign exchange market trader who directed the Portfolio Department at Hathersage Capital Management, which specialized in G-10 currencies, including the Euro:
"Every morning Lipschutz gets up at two or three o'clock to see what the markets in Europe are doing....Nobody knows whether the Greeks will be able to solve their problems. Nobody knows whether the other countries will come to their assistance. Nobody knows whether the crisis can be contained in Greece or will spread like wildfire among 'the PIIGS' (Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain) and the European currency will finally disintegrate. These represent shining opportunities for currency speculators, they can place bets on the fall of the Euro." (Der Spiegel, No. 8, 2010, p. 64)
A measure of austerity is achieving an keeping a primary surplus, which is what a government earns in taxes every year, minus what it spends on everything else except interest payments on its own debt. This becomes part of the Gross Domestic Product. Under its four-year-old bailout program, Greece dragged itself from a 10% deficit to a 3% surplus, at great cost in employment rates. The terms of the recent bailout demand Greece reach a surplus of 4.5% and hold it for the length of the program, but few countries have even been able to maintain a 3% surplus, much less 4.5%. (Brendan Greeley, "Why Greece Won't Ever Be Able to Pay Off Its Debts With Austerity," Bloomberg Business Week, February 19, 2015)
The insolvency of the banks
The anti-austerity protests happened because the people got tired with being held responsible for the secret deals between private bankers and investors with corrupt governments and politicians. As the Greek finance minister Yanis Varoufakis - one of the few Marxists I respect and admire completely - has said repeatedly, the Greek economic crisis is essentially an insolvency problem, not a liquidity issue that requires bailing out failed banks or giving out more loans.
Varoufakis connected this to the issue of the banks, observing how they want to sell off their own bank debt by selling off Greece's assets. Thus we see the root of the problem is to focus on insolvency, but the international bankers and their media and political whores insist on obfuscating the real root of the crisis, advocating phony "solutions" which can only lead to more profits for the bankers and more heartache for the Greek people. On the February 2nd episode of Russia Today's "Keiser Report", banking analyst Frances Coppola was quoted as saying:
"Everyone knows Greece is insolvent, of course, but no-one has ever stated it officially. The Troika's [EU, ECB, IMF] position is that Greece's problem is a temporary liquidity shortfall: lending it more money so it can meet current debt service obligations is justified because structural reforms will lead to renewed growth and increased income, enabling it to meet its obligations (including those for the new loans) in the future. But Varoufakis disagrees with this interpretation. His view is that while things remain as they are, Greece will never recover. The bailout program locks it into a debt deflationary spiral which simultaneously reduces its income and increases its debt burden. Continuing to accept more loans in order to meet debt service obligations only makes matters worse."
Syriza and the Road Ahead
In an interview with British Channel 4 News, Varoufakis said he has three main objectives: First, deal with the humanitarian crisis in Greece. Second, reform the country in such a way that it addresses the root cause - what he called the "triangle of sin." He defined this triangle as the procurement aspects of the State, the bankrupt bankers, and the mass media. He described the "unholy alliance" between bankrupt bankers, developers and media owners who become the voice of those who want to sponge off the people's productive efforts. Finally, to renegotiate the loan agreements which he correctly said have been destructive to Europe as a whole, not only to Greece.
The Syriza government has announced if there is no deal, they might return to the Drachma. "They want us to impose capital controls and cause a credit crunch, until the government becomes so unpopular that it falls," one Greek official stated. "They want to make an example of us, and demonstrate that no government in the eurozone has a right to have a mind of its own. They don't believe that we will walk away, or that the Greek people will back us, and they are wrong on both counts." There is already discontent within Greece that the government will cave into EU pressure to extend its bailout and the austerity that comes with it, fears that have led to many protests.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)