Majority EU Citizens don't want EU Anymore
4 September 2010, by Mary Ellen Synon (Zonnewind)
(google trans from Dutch) http://tinyurl.com/35m4eeo
http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.zonnewind.be%2Feu%2Fpropaganda%2Fbarroso-de-stalker.shtml&sl=nl&tl=en&hl=&ie=UTF-8
4 September 2010, by Mary Ellen Synon (Zonnewind)
(google trans from Dutch) http://tinyurl.com/35m4eeo
http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.zonnewind.be%2Feu%2Fpropaganda%2Fbarroso-de-stalker.shtml&sl=nl&tl=en&hl=&ie=UTF-8
 | « on: Today at 08:55:31 PM » |  Quote |
Let's make this a sticky and a compilation of posts that illustrate all the insane ways in which cybernetics is planning to exert its control over people.
First up is a prominent cyberneticist called Marshall McLuhan (long since deceased by now - where does the God of Cybernetics decide to send you after this lifetime? That is a question only McLuhan knows by now I suppose). This is an interview with him published in Playboy Magazine, March 1969. You just have to step back and stand in awe at the sheer audacity of this man to go in front of a semi-educated general public (in comparison to today, at least) and basically state that computers are going to LITERALLY program entire populations, and that this is just an inevitable thing that is going to happen, and that people should refrain from engaging in their backward luddite ways.
Marshall McLuhan
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Marshall_McLuhan
http://www.nextnature.net/2009/12/the-playboy-interview-marshall-mcluhan/
http://www.cs.ucdavis.edu/~rogaway/classes/188/spring07/mcluhan.pdf
Let's just skip to the good stuff...
“The Playboy Interview: Marshall McLuhan”, Playboy Magazine, March 1969. © Playboy
"Carefully orchestrated programming of whole populations"
"How is this not Pavlovian brainwashing?"
PLAYBOY: How does such environmental programing, however enlightened in intent, differ from Pavlovian brainwashing?
McLUHAN Your question reflects the usual panic of people confronted with unexplored technologies. I’m not saying such panic isn’t justified, or that such environmental programing couldn’t be brainwashing, or far worse — merely that such reactions are useless and distracting. Though I think the programing of societies could actually be conducted quite constructively and humanistically, I don’t want to be in the position of a Hiroshima physicist extolling the potential of nuclear energy in the first days of August 1945. But an understanding of media’s effects constitutes a civil defense against media fallout.
The alarm of so many people, however, at the prospect of corporate programing’s creation of a complete service environment on this planet is rather like fearing that a municipal lighting system will deprive the individual of the right to adjust each light to his own favorite level of intensity. Computer technology can — and doubtless will — program entire environments to fulfill the social needs and sensory preferences of communities and nations. The content of that programing, however, depends on the nature of future societies — but that is in our own hands. (My note: Oh? Is it not in the hands of oligarchies/elites instead?)
"The cybernetic state will happen, get used to it"
I see no possibility of a worldwide Luddite rebellion that will smash all machinery to bits, so we might as well sit back and see what is happening and what will happen to us in a cybernetic world. Resenting a new technology will not halt its progress.
"Man becomes the sex organ of machines"
By consistently embracing all these technologies, we inevitably relate ourselves to them as servomechanisms. Thus, in order to make use of them at all, we must serve them as we do gods. The Eskimo is a servomechanism of his kayak, the cowboy of his horse, the businessman of his clock, the cyberneticist — and soon the entire world — of his computer (My note: Wow - talk about putting it out there as if it is a foregone conclusion - back in 1969, understand - when most ordinary people had not even been introduced yet to a computer). In other words, to the spoils belongs the victor.
This continuous modification of man by his own technology stimulates him to find continuous means of modifying it; man thus becomes the sex organs of the machine world just as the bee is of the plant world, permitting it to reproduce and constantly evolve to higher forms. The machine world reciprocates man’s devotion by rewarding him with goods and services and bounty. Man’s relationship with his machinery is thus inherently symbiotic. This has always been the case; it’s only in the electric age that man has an opportunity to recognize this marriage to his own technology. Electric technology is a qualitative extension of this age-old man-machine relationship; 20th Century man’s relationship to the computer is not by nature very different from prehistoric man’s relationship to his boat or to his wheel — with the important difference that all previous technologies or extensions of man were partial and fragmentary, whereas the electric is total and inclusive. Now man is beginning to wear his brain outside his skull and his nerves outside his skin; new technology breeds new man. A recent cartoon portrayed a little boy telling his nonplused mother: “I’m going to be a computer when I grow up.” Humor is often prophecy.
It goes on for about 23 pages. There's some misdirection here, some interjected optimism to disguise the not-too-well-disguised tyrannical implications of said control over entire populations, but all this serves as an interlude into the true insanity that is the Zeitgeist manifesto document.
Jacques Freso
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Jacques_Fresco
What do we know about Jacques, other than that he is a firm believer of cybernetics?
http://www.raelpress.org/print.php?news.117
This is a well-researched blog post that elaborates on Jacque Fresco's ties to cybernetics and technocratic institutions going back all the way to the heady days of the Great Depression....
http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/Blog/?p=1258
A couple of things have become apparent by now. Now we all know the guy's a Marxist - fair enough, some great critical thinkers like Jacques Ellul were also of the Marxist stamp - there are some Marxists with great criticism of the technological system. However, there is the issue with Technocracy, Inc. being a decidedly pro-corporatist (meaning fascist) institute. We also see the eastern religion school rearing its head again - which, I presume, made way for him being given the title Honorary Priest by Raelian cult leader Rael.
BTW, I wanted to go back to this 'one-worldness' that crept up during that Raelian press release. Here is what the Raelians think of the 'truth movement' on the Net:
Raelian cult thinks globalization is 'a wonderful trend', leading to 'the only way to save humanity: a world government'
'Globalization' is 'a wonderful trend', which 'will lead us to the only way to save humanity, a world government ending nationalism'. GTFO! My, you don't say - Raelian cult leader turns out to be a pusher of one-world government? Theosophy Society much? A new Aleister Crowley for the brokeback 21st century Generation X/Generation Y?
But all of this is not even the most incriminating. Where things really become scary, is when you start to read the 'Manifesto' - the Zeitgeist 'Movement Guide', as they call it themselves. To be continued...
First up is a prominent cyberneticist called Marshall McLuhan (long since deceased by now - where does the God of Cybernetics decide to send you after this lifetime? That is a question only McLuhan knows by now I suppose). This is an interview with him published in Playboy Magazine, March 1969. You just have to step back and stand in awe at the sheer audacity of this man to go in front of a semi-educated general public (in comparison to today, at least) and basically state that computers are going to LITERALLY program entire populations, and that this is just an inevitable thing that is going to happen, and that people should refrain from engaging in their backward luddite ways.
Marshall McLuhan
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Marshall_McLuhan
http://www.nextnature.net/2009/12/the-playboy-interview-marshall-mcluhan/
http://www.cs.ucdavis.edu/~rogaway/classes/188/spring07/mcluhan.pdf
Let's just skip to the good stuff...
“The Playboy Interview: Marshall McLuhan”, Playboy Magazine, March 1969. © Playboy
"Carefully orchestrated programming of whole populations"
Quote
PLAYBOY: How do you program an entire society — beneficially or otherwise?
McLUHAN: There’s nothing at all difficult about putting computers in the position where they will be able to conduct carefully orchestrated programing of the sensory life of whole populations. I know it sounds rather science-fictional, but if you understood cybernetics you’d realize we could do it today. The computer could program the media to determine the given messages a people should hear in terms of their over-all needs, creating a total media experience absorbed and patterned by all the senses. We could program five hours less of TV in Italy to promote the reading of newspapers during an election, or lay on an additional 25 hours of TV in Venezuela to cool down the tribal temperature raised by radio the preceding month. By such orchestrated interplay of all media, whole cultures could now be programed in order to improve and stabilize their emotional climate, just as we are beginning to learn how to maintain equilibrium among the world’s competing economies.
McLUHAN: There’s nothing at all difficult about putting computers in the position where they will be able to conduct carefully orchestrated programing of the sensory life of whole populations. I know it sounds rather science-fictional, but if you understood cybernetics you’d realize we could do it today. The computer could program the media to determine the given messages a people should hear in terms of their over-all needs, creating a total media experience absorbed and patterned by all the senses. We could program five hours less of TV in Italy to promote the reading of newspapers during an election, or lay on an additional 25 hours of TV in Venezuela to cool down the tribal temperature raised by radio the preceding month. By such orchestrated interplay of all media, whole cultures could now be programed in order to improve and stabilize their emotional climate, just as we are beginning to learn how to maintain equilibrium among the world’s competing economies.
"How is this not Pavlovian brainwashing?"
Quote
PLAYBOY: How does such environmental programing, however enlightened in intent, differ from Pavlovian brainwashing?
McLUHAN Your question reflects the usual panic of people confronted with unexplored technologies. I’m not saying such panic isn’t justified, or that such environmental programing couldn’t be brainwashing, or far worse — merely that such reactions are useless and distracting. Though I think the programing of societies could actually be conducted quite constructively and humanistically, I don’t want to be in the position of a Hiroshima physicist extolling the potential of nuclear energy in the first days of August 1945. But an understanding of media’s effects constitutes a civil defense against media fallout.
The alarm of so many people, however, at the prospect of corporate programing’s creation of a complete service environment on this planet is rather like fearing that a municipal lighting system will deprive the individual of the right to adjust each light to his own favorite level of intensity. Computer technology can — and doubtless will — program entire environments to fulfill the social needs and sensory preferences of communities and nations. The content of that programing, however, depends on the nature of future societies — but that is in our own hands. (My note: Oh? Is it not in the hands of oligarchies/elites instead?)
"The cybernetic state will happen, get used to it"
Quote
I see no possibility of a worldwide Luddite rebellion that will smash all machinery to bits, so we might as well sit back and see what is happening and what will happen to us in a cybernetic world. Resenting a new technology will not halt its progress.
"Man becomes the sex organ of machines"
Quote
By consistently embracing all these technologies, we inevitably relate ourselves to them as servomechanisms. Thus, in order to make use of them at all, we must serve them as we do gods. The Eskimo is a servomechanism of his kayak, the cowboy of his horse, the businessman of his clock, the cyberneticist — and soon the entire world — of his computer (My note: Wow - talk about putting it out there as if it is a foregone conclusion - back in 1969, understand - when most ordinary people had not even been introduced yet to a computer). In other words, to the spoils belongs the victor.
This continuous modification of man by his own technology stimulates him to find continuous means of modifying it; man thus becomes the sex organs of the machine world just as the bee is of the plant world, permitting it to reproduce and constantly evolve to higher forms. The machine world reciprocates man’s devotion by rewarding him with goods and services and bounty. Man’s relationship with his machinery is thus inherently symbiotic. This has always been the case; it’s only in the electric age that man has an opportunity to recognize this marriage to his own technology. Electric technology is a qualitative extension of this age-old man-machine relationship; 20th Century man’s relationship to the computer is not by nature very different from prehistoric man’s relationship to his boat or to his wheel — with the important difference that all previous technologies or extensions of man were partial and fragmentary, whereas the electric is total and inclusive. Now man is beginning to wear his brain outside his skull and his nerves outside his skin; new technology breeds new man. A recent cartoon portrayed a little boy telling his nonplused mother: “I’m going to be a computer when I grow up.” Humor is often prophecy.
It goes on for about 23 pages. There's some misdirection here, some interjected optimism to disguise the not-too-well-disguised tyrannical implications of said control over entire populations, but all this serves as an interlude into the true insanity that is the Zeitgeist manifesto document.
Jacques Freso
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Jacques_Fresco
What do we know about Jacques, other than that he is a firm believer of cybernetics?
http://www.raelpress.org/print.php?news.117
Quote
News Item: Rael Awards Title of Honorary Priest to Jacques Fresco
(Category: Press Release)
Posted by thomas
Friday 24 October 2008
Las Vegas, October 24, 2008 - Rael, founder of the International Raelian Movement (www.rael.org) has bestowed the title of Honorary Guide (AKA Honorary Priest) of the Raelian Movement to Jacques Fresco, now 92 and well known by all futurists of the world for his works like The Venus Project. He is a self-taught scientist, architect and inventor who has also been deeply committed his whole life to investigation into human behavior and humanity’s future.
"For the Prophet Rael to name Jacques an Honorary Guide (aka Honorary Priest) of the Raelian Movement means that Jacques has dedicated his life to the betterment of Humanity as a whole. Not just one country, one race, one religion, but the whole of humanity." (My note: Recognize the stench of 'one worldness, world government', right there? To be continued) declared Dr. Brigitte Boisselier, spokesperson of the Raelian Movement.
She added: "Raelians fully relate to Jacques' brilliant insight into the workings of society. Many of his proposals to redesign culture and to rebuild the world in its architecture, travel or, most importantly, society, fits with the world we contribute to build."
Mr. Fresco has researched, observed nature as well as society and has either proven or explained many things which are in complete harmony with what the Prophet Rael has been teaching for 35 years. Among these things are the notions that science should be placed at the service of humanity as a whole instead of only the rich and powerful, that competition in the world is very dangerous and comparing this to the human body by making the analogy that one organ in the body is not more important than another. One example he makes is; what if the heart were to start thinking it were the most important organ? What if the liver were to decide that it was the most important one and wanted the body to start doing things differently? Or the kidneys? If this were to happen, the body and mind would die very quickly. In other words, the body only works well when all organs operate in harmony with one another – just as all people and countries on the Earth should do in order to ensure harmony and health.
Boisselier went on to say "Maybe most importantly are his observations that human behavior is totally subjective to one’s environment and not upon one universal value system. For example, if a child is raised as a Hindu, they will have a very different value system than a child who is raised as a Christian in the US – and both children would see the world quite different from a child raised as a Muslim in the Middle East. What is considered “right and normal” for an individual is true for this individual for the reason that he or she was raised in that particular value system. This is how a few men felt very justified in flying airplanes into buildings and how Bush and some Americans felt justified in exacting revenge for such an act – even if it was disguised as “self defense”. Politicians, through the manipulation of the media and the colorization of facts, constantly capitalize on their own domestic value system in order to maintain power and wealth. Unfortunately, very few realize they are doing it.
However it is possible to change one’s value system despite the politicians and religious leaders' refined manipulation. To choose one's own system value is exactly what Rael teaches at his Raelian Seminars that now attract thousands around the world."
(Category: Press Release)
Posted by thomas
Friday 24 October 2008
Las Vegas, October 24, 2008 - Rael, founder of the International Raelian Movement (www.rael.org) has bestowed the title of Honorary Guide (AKA Honorary Priest) of the Raelian Movement to Jacques Fresco, now 92 and well known by all futurists of the world for his works like The Venus Project. He is a self-taught scientist, architect and inventor who has also been deeply committed his whole life to investigation into human behavior and humanity’s future.
"For the Prophet Rael to name Jacques an Honorary Guide (aka Honorary Priest) of the Raelian Movement means that Jacques has dedicated his life to the betterment of Humanity as a whole. Not just one country, one race, one religion, but the whole of humanity." (My note: Recognize the stench of 'one worldness, world government', right there? To be continued) declared Dr. Brigitte Boisselier, spokesperson of the Raelian Movement.
She added: "Raelians fully relate to Jacques' brilliant insight into the workings of society. Many of his proposals to redesign culture and to rebuild the world in its architecture, travel or, most importantly, society, fits with the world we contribute to build."
Mr. Fresco has researched, observed nature as well as society and has either proven or explained many things which are in complete harmony with what the Prophet Rael has been teaching for 35 years. Among these things are the notions that science should be placed at the service of humanity as a whole instead of only the rich and powerful, that competition in the world is very dangerous and comparing this to the human body by making the analogy that one organ in the body is not more important than another. One example he makes is; what if the heart were to start thinking it were the most important organ? What if the liver were to decide that it was the most important one and wanted the body to start doing things differently? Or the kidneys? If this were to happen, the body and mind would die very quickly. In other words, the body only works well when all organs operate in harmony with one another – just as all people and countries on the Earth should do in order to ensure harmony and health.
Boisselier went on to say "Maybe most importantly are his observations that human behavior is totally subjective to one’s environment and not upon one universal value system. For example, if a child is raised as a Hindu, they will have a very different value system than a child who is raised as a Christian in the US – and both children would see the world quite different from a child raised as a Muslim in the Middle East. What is considered “right and normal” for an individual is true for this individual for the reason that he or she was raised in that particular value system. This is how a few men felt very justified in flying airplanes into buildings and how Bush and some Americans felt justified in exacting revenge for such an act – even if it was disguised as “self defense”. Politicians, through the manipulation of the media and the colorization of facts, constantly capitalize on their own domestic value system in order to maintain power and wealth. Unfortunately, very few realize they are doing it.
However it is possible to change one’s value system despite the politicians and religious leaders' refined manipulation. To choose one's own system value is exactly what Rael teaches at his Raelian Seminars that now attract thousands around the world."
This is a well-researched blog post that elaborates on Jacque Fresco's ties to cybernetics and technocratic institutions going back all the way to the heady days of the Great Depression....
http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/Blog/?p=1258
Quote
“Things were so bad [during the depression] and I had no way of looking at it. And I thought the rules of the game were somehow screwed up. I went to many different meetings: communist meetings, socialist meetings, fascist meetings, Mankind United, Technocracy - to see what the world was teaching, including eastern philosophy.”
- Jacque Fresco, in “Future by Design” (0:11:43 to 0:12:06)
- Jacque Fresco, in “Future by Design” (0:11:43 to 0:12:06)
A couple of things have become apparent by now. Now we all know the guy's a Marxist - fair enough, some great critical thinkers like Jacques Ellul were also of the Marxist stamp - there are some Marxists with great criticism of the technological system. However, there is the issue with Technocracy, Inc. being a decidedly pro-corporatist (meaning fascist) institute. We also see the eastern religion school rearing its head again - which, I presume, made way for him being given the title Honorary Priest by Raelian cult leader Rael.
BTW, I wanted to go back to this 'one-worldness' that crept up during that Raelian press release. Here is what the Raelians think of the 'truth movement' on the Net:
Raelian cult thinks globalization is 'a wonderful trend', leading to 'the only way to save humanity: a world government'
Quote
“Space Brothers” cult leader, Rael, doesn’t like tall-tales about the “Illuminati,” or “myths …distilled through the internet [that might] … reverse the wonderful trend of globalization, which will lead us to the only way to save humanity: a world government ending nationalism.” The “anti-globalization fanatics,” he says, through free speech on the internet, exacerbate nationalistic fervour - e.g. good ‘ole patriotism.
'Globalization' is 'a wonderful trend', which 'will lead us to the only way to save humanity, a world government ending nationalism'. GTFO! My, you don't say - Raelian cult leader turns out to be a pusher of one-world government? Theosophy Society much? A new Aleister Crowley for the brokeback 21st century Generation X/Generation Y?
But all of this is not even the most incriminating. Where things really become scary, is when you start to read the 'Manifesto' - the Zeitgeist 'Movement Guide', as they call it themselves. To be continued...
Machete: Race War Propaganda Under the Cover of a Mexploitation Film
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
September 4, 2010
Robert Rodriguez’s Machete lives up to its trailer released earlier this year. “This is Machete with a special Cinco de Mayo message … to Arizona,” the star of the grindhouse movie, played by Danny Trejo, growls at the start of the trailer. He then engages in bloody mayhem and mass murder.
World War One propaganda poster depicting Germans as baby killers. Rodriguez’s film portrays the border Minutemen in much the same light.
On Friday night, Alex Jones took his crew to see Machete at a theater here in Austin, Texas. The movie lived up to and even exceeded expectations.
Critics have mostly panned the movie as trashy, campy, and rife with senseless and gratuitous violence. Daniel B. Wood, writing for the Christian Science Monitor, says the film has a sub-theme — immigration and “reverse racism.” Wood quotes Barbara O’Connor, director of the Institute for the Study of Politics and Media at California State University, who warns that some people may have “negative reactions” after watching the film. “Yes, this movie is goofily violent, but it’s also dealing with issues that are largely visceral,” she tells Wood. “I don’t know that people in the middle of the debate will view it as satire.”
Machete is not satire. It is propaganda under the cover of an exploitation film. It is designed to stir up “visceral” reactions to the very serious issue of illegal immigration. It strives to demonize Americans outraged over an open border and the influx of millions of illegal aliens every year.
Machete portrays members of the Minuteman Project — an activist organization founded in 2005 by James Gilchrist — as racist thugs and serial murderers. The Minutemen are not directly named. Instead, the border patrol group calls itself the “Vigilantes,” but the comparison in unavoidable.
Alex Jones reviews the Machete script.
A few minutes into the film, the border Vigilantes — including a corrupt Texas politician played by Robert De Niro — murder a pregnant illegal woman as she crosses the border. The scene is an example of classic war propaganda.
“A handy rule for arousing hate,” noted political scientist and communications expert Harold Lasswell, “is, if at first they do not enrage, use an atrocity. It has been employed with unvarying success in every conflict known to man.”
The murder of a defenseless pregnant woman in the film is designed to elicit a visceral and emotional response on the part of the audience. It far surpasses the “ravishing” of maidens by evil Huns portrayed in pro-war posters during the First World War. It ranks right up there with photos published in newspapers prior to the Second World War showing sadistic Japanese soldiers skewering Chinese babies with bayonets. Such images were instrumental in convincing the American people they should support entry into the war.
Rodriguez’s message is clear — if you oppose illegal immigration, support the activism of the Minutemen, and agree that states should adopt laws like Arizona in response to illegal immigration, you also support shooting pregnant Mexican women.
Polls reveal that most Americans by large margins support the Arizona law. “A solid majority of Americans back Arizona’s tough crackdown on illegal immigrants,” Reuters reported in May. Eight in 10 Americans are concerned that illegal immigrants burden schools, hospitals and other government services, and 77% worry that they drive down wages, according to a USA TODAY/Gallup poll, also conducted in May.
Despite its obvious cliches and racial stereotypes, a climatic scene near the end of the movie calls for a bloody revolution against the Vigilantes, aka the Minutemen and their supporters, or for that matter Americans who want to deal with illegal immigration in a lawful manner. During the scene, we see a large number of Mexican laborers using the implements of their trade to attack the Vigilantes.
The scene has an ominous parallel — in April, the Americans for Legal Immigration PAC released a video showing an illegal alien supporter in Arizona claiming that shovels and axes will be used against Americans. “We will not stop! We will take up our shovels and pickaxes and we… will use them against you! Believe that!” screams an opponent of Arizona’s tough new bill addressing illegal immigration in the video.
Following charges that he was attempting to stir up a race war with the release of his “Cinco de Mayo” trailer, director Rodriguez promised to tone down incendiary aspects of his film. After Alex Jones received the Machete script and pointed out the race war elements, Rodriguez said his critics have jumped to conclusions.
“They may have read a script that wasn’t finished and jumped to conclusions about its content and tone,” he toldurl=http://www.aintitcool.com/node/45169]Ain’t It Cool[/url]. “Any filmmaker will tell you, there are three movies that you make: the one you write, the one you shoot and the one you edit.”
The theatrical version of Machete is true to the leaked script, with one notable exception at the end of the film.
“I don’t really believe in protests, rallies or marches,” Rodriguez told Ain’t It Cool, and then encouraged supporters of illegal immigration to “register and vote because what we need is serious, comprehensive immigration reform,” in other words voter should force the government to legalize tens of millions of illegal immigrants. “You can feel people’s frustration [over Arizona] and yet it’s difficult for them to have a clear opinion on the matter because there’s such a mess of misinformation.”
Robert Rodriguez’s Machete is an obnoxious exercise in misinformation. It calls for a violent response to the political activism of Americans — including Hispanic Americans — opposed to wide open and lawless borders and the assertion by many Mexicans that the American Southwest was stolen from them by the United States.
Machete is primarily about illegal immigration — specifically framed by the “Cinco de Mayo” trailer — and is Rodriguez’s answer to the acrimonious debate over Arizona’s effort to stem the tide of illegal immigrants bankrupting the state.
Rodriguez has cynically shrouded his message — violence in response to border “vigilantes” is not only acceptable, but preferable — under the cover of a Mexploitation film. It remains to be seen if the film, now showing in theaters around the country, will result in violence.
Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke issues the warning. Asian nations, China and India first, are no longer willing to purchase securities issued by the US Treasury, which this year has about US$ two trillion short-term debt to refinance. Beijing is buying gold instead.
Milan (AsiaNews) – For at least four years, AsiaNews has sounded the alarm bells against the risks due to the huge size reached by speculative finance[1]. In 2008, we said that the attempt to save US banks could push the US debt beyond the point of solvency (see Maurizio d’Orlando, “US debt approaches insolvency . . .,” in AsiaNews 19 December 2008) [2]. Back them it could appear a bit overblown, but now even US Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S Bernanke is warning the US Congress about the danger. In a statement before the House Financial Services Committee,[3] he said that the US public debt might no longer be sustainable very soon. Financial jargon aside, the subtitle of an article by The Washington Times—Stage is set in U.S. for a Greek tragedy—says it all. Interviewed for the article, Bernanke says the United States is likely to face a debt crisis like the one in Greece sooner than later, “not something that is 10 years away”.
In 2008, the size of the debt was such that it was quite clear that it was not sustainable. Now we have a timeframe to measure the likelihood of insolvency for the US public debt, and it is this year. The reason for that is described in an article whose title needs no explanation: “The bankruptcy of the United States is now certain”.[4]
The abyss of debt
By the end of 2010, the US Treasury will have to refinance US$ 2 trillion in short-term debt, plus additional deficit spending for this year, estimated to be around US$ 1.5 trillion (US$ 1.6 trillion today two months after the original article was published). Together, the US Treasury will need to borrow US$ 3.5 trillion (US$ 3.6 according to this writer) in just one year.
In 1999, two well-known economists—Alan Greenspan and Pablo Guidotti—published a formula in an academic paper. Kept secret for a long time, it is designed to predict with precision when a country’s public debt will lead it to be insolvent. Called the Greenspan-Guidotti rule, it says that to avoid a default, countries should maintain hard currency reserves equal to at least 100 per cent of their short-term foreign debt maturities.
http://www.asianews.it/news-en/This-year,-US-public-debt-could-reach-end-game-17781.html
After the "underwear bomber" incident on Christmas Day, President Obama accelerated the deployment of new airport scanners that look beneath travelers' clothes to spot any weapons or explosives.
Fifty-two of these state-of-the-art machines are already scanning passengers at 23 U.S. airports. By the end of 2011, there will be 1,000 machines and two out of every three passengers will be asked to step into one of the new machines for a six-second head-to-toe scan before boarding.
About half of these machines will be so-called X-ray back-scatter scanners. They use low-energy X-rays to peer beneath passengers' clothing. That has some scientists worried.
'Potential Risk'
"Many people will approach this as, 'Oh, it must be safe, the government has thought about this and I'll just submit to it,'" says David Agard, a biochemist and biophysicist at the University of California, San Francisco. "But there really is no threshold of low dose being OK. Any dose of X-rays produces some potential risk."
Agard and several of his UCSF colleagues recently wrote a letter to John Holdren the president's science adviser, asking for a more thorough look at the risks of exposing all those airline passengers to X-rays. The other signers are John Sedat, a molecular biologist and the group's leader; Marc Shuman, a cancer specialist; and Robert Stroud, a biochemist and biophysicist.
"Ionizing radiation such as the X-rays used in these scanners have the potential to induce chromosome damage, and that can lead to cancer," Agard says.
The San Francisco group thinks both the machine's manufacturer, Rapiscan, and government officials have miscalculated the dose that the X-ray scanners deliver to the skin — where nearly all the radiation is concentrated.
The stated dose — about .02 microsieverts, a medical unit of radiation — is averaged over the whole body, members of the UCSF group said in interviews. But they maintain that if the dose is calculated as what gets deposited in the skin, the number would be higher, though how much higher is unclear....
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126833083
The third largest gold nugget in the world
1 September 2010, (Jeroen van Bergeijk)
http://www.vanbergeijk.com/2010/09/01/the-third-largest-gold-nugget-in-the-world/
Excerpt:
A Perth-based goldbuyer bought and sold the worlds third largest nugget here recently. These things are EXTREMELY rare. This thing weighed 23 kg (gold value alone around 860.000 US dollars). There's only two in the world that are heavier. This particular nugget was sold privately to an undisclosed buyer in the US within 24 hrs.
The nugget had been found a couple of weeks ago with a metal detector somewhere in the goldfields around here. Through various tests it had been established that the thing has a 92% purity.
LOST GOLD OF TSARS ‘FOUND IN THE WORLD’S DEEPEST LAKE’
1 september 2010, by Will Stewart in Moscow (Express.UK)
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/196784/Lost-gold-of-Tsars-found-in-the-world-s-deepest-lake-
Excerpt:
A RUSSIAN mini-submarine may have found billions of pounds worth of lost gold in a Siberian lake, it was revealed yesterday.
Explorers have long searched for lost Tsarist treasures dating from the Bolshevik Revolution, when forces loyal to the deposed royal family fled the advancing Red Army.
Legend has it that 1,600 tons of gold – which could now be worth billions of pounds – was lost when anti-Communist commander Admiral Alexander Kolchak’s train plunged into Lake Baikal, the world’s oldest and deepest freshwater lake.
Last year, parts of a train and ammunition boxes were found.
And in recent days, the Mir-2 submersible has discovered “shiny metal objects” 1,200 feet below the surface at Cape Tolstoy. “Deep-sea vehicles found rectangular blocks with a metallic gleam, like gold,” said one source.
Explorers attempted to grab hold of the blocks with a manipulator arm but failed because of loose gravel on the bottom of the lake. Sources say that the submariners know the exact spot and are planning a new mission to determine if they have found the gold.
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
September 4, 2010
Robert Rodriguez’s Machete lives up to its trailer released earlier this year. “This is Machete with a special Cinco de Mayo message … to Arizona,” the star of the grindhouse movie, played by Danny Trejo, growls at the start of the trailer. He then engages in bloody mayhem and mass murder.
World War One propaganda poster depicting Germans as baby killers. Rodriguez’s film portrays the border Minutemen in much the same light.
On Friday night, Alex Jones took his crew to see Machete at a theater here in Austin, Texas. The movie lived up to and even exceeded expectations.
Critics have mostly panned the movie as trashy, campy, and rife with senseless and gratuitous violence. Daniel B. Wood, writing for the Christian Science Monitor, says the film has a sub-theme — immigration and “reverse racism.” Wood quotes Barbara O’Connor, director of the Institute for the Study of Politics and Media at California State University, who warns that some people may have “negative reactions” after watching the film. “Yes, this movie is goofily violent, but it’s also dealing with issues that are largely visceral,” she tells Wood. “I don’t know that people in the middle of the debate will view it as satire.”
Machete is not satire. It is propaganda under the cover of an exploitation film. It is designed to stir up “visceral” reactions to the very serious issue of illegal immigration. It strives to demonize Americans outraged over an open border and the influx of millions of illegal aliens every year.
Machete portrays members of the Minuteman Project — an activist organization founded in 2005 by James Gilchrist — as racist thugs and serial murderers. The Minutemen are not directly named. Instead, the border patrol group calls itself the “Vigilantes,” but the comparison in unavoidable.
Alex Jones reviews the Machete script.
A few minutes into the film, the border Vigilantes — including a corrupt Texas politician played by Robert De Niro — murder a pregnant illegal woman as she crosses the border. The scene is an example of classic war propaganda.
“A handy rule for arousing hate,” noted political scientist and communications expert Harold Lasswell, “is, if at first they do not enrage, use an atrocity. It has been employed with unvarying success in every conflict known to man.”
The murder of a defenseless pregnant woman in the film is designed to elicit a visceral and emotional response on the part of the audience. It far surpasses the “ravishing” of maidens by evil Huns portrayed in pro-war posters during the First World War. It ranks right up there with photos published in newspapers prior to the Second World War showing sadistic Japanese soldiers skewering Chinese babies with bayonets. Such images were instrumental in convincing the American people they should support entry into the war.
Rodriguez’s message is clear — if you oppose illegal immigration, support the activism of the Minutemen, and agree that states should adopt laws like Arizona in response to illegal immigration, you also support shooting pregnant Mexican women.
Polls reveal that most Americans by large margins support the Arizona law. “A solid majority of Americans back Arizona’s tough crackdown on illegal immigrants,” Reuters reported in May. Eight in 10 Americans are concerned that illegal immigrants burden schools, hospitals and other government services, and 77% worry that they drive down wages, according to a USA TODAY/Gallup poll, also conducted in May.
Despite its obvious cliches and racial stereotypes, a climatic scene near the end of the movie calls for a bloody revolution against the Vigilantes, aka the Minutemen and their supporters, or for that matter Americans who want to deal with illegal immigration in a lawful manner. During the scene, we see a large number of Mexican laborers using the implements of their trade to attack the Vigilantes.
The scene has an ominous parallel — in April, the Americans for Legal Immigration PAC released a video showing an illegal alien supporter in Arizona claiming that shovels and axes will be used against Americans. “We will not stop! We will take up our shovels and pickaxes and we… will use them against you! Believe that!” screams an opponent of Arizona’s tough new bill addressing illegal immigration in the video.
Following charges that he was attempting to stir up a race war with the release of his “Cinco de Mayo” trailer, director Rodriguez promised to tone down incendiary aspects of his film. After Alex Jones received the Machete script and pointed out the race war elements, Rodriguez said his critics have jumped to conclusions.
“They may have read a script that wasn’t finished and jumped to conclusions about its content and tone,” he toldurl=http://www.aintitcool.com/node/45169]Ain’t It Cool[/url]. “Any filmmaker will tell you, there are three movies that you make: the one you write, the one you shoot and the one you edit.”
The theatrical version of Machete is true to the leaked script, with one notable exception at the end of the film.
“I don’t really believe in protests, rallies or marches,” Rodriguez told Ain’t It Cool, and then encouraged supporters of illegal immigration to “register and vote because what we need is serious, comprehensive immigration reform,” in other words voter should force the government to legalize tens of millions of illegal immigrants. “You can feel people’s frustration [over Arizona] and yet it’s difficult for them to have a clear opinion on the matter because there’s such a mess of misinformation.”
Robert Rodriguez’s Machete is an obnoxious exercise in misinformation. It calls for a violent response to the political activism of Americans — including Hispanic Americans — opposed to wide open and lawless borders and the assertion by many Mexicans that the American Southwest was stolen from them by the United States.
Machete is primarily about illegal immigration — specifically framed by the “Cinco de Mayo” trailer — and is Rodriguez’s answer to the acrimonious debate over Arizona’s effort to stem the tide of illegal immigrants bankrupting the state.
Rodriguez has cynically shrouded his message — violence in response to border “vigilantes” is not only acceptable, but preferable — under the cover of a Mexploitation film. It remains to be seen if the film, now showing in theaters around the country, will result in violence.
| « on: Today at 06:28:20 PM » | Quote |
Bernanke issues the warning: This year, US public debt could reach end game
Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke issues the warning. Asian nations, China and India first, are no longer willing to purchase securities issued by the US Treasury, which this year has about US$ two trillion short-term debt to refinance. Beijing is buying gold instead.
Milan (AsiaNews) – For at least four years, AsiaNews has sounded the alarm bells against the risks due to the huge size reached by speculative finance[1]. In 2008, we said that the attempt to save US banks could push the US debt beyond the point of solvency (see Maurizio d’Orlando, “US debt approaches insolvency . . .,” in AsiaNews 19 December 2008) [2]. Back them it could appear a bit overblown, but now even US Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S Bernanke is warning the US Congress about the danger. In a statement before the House Financial Services Committee,[3] he said that the US public debt might no longer be sustainable very soon. Financial jargon aside, the subtitle of an article by The Washington Times—Stage is set in U.S. for a Greek tragedy—says it all. Interviewed for the article, Bernanke says the United States is likely to face a debt crisis like the one in Greece sooner than later, “not something that is 10 years away”.
In 2008, the size of the debt was such that it was quite clear that it was not sustainable. Now we have a timeframe to measure the likelihood of insolvency for the US public debt, and it is this year. The reason for that is described in an article whose title needs no explanation: “The bankruptcy of the United States is now certain”.[4]
The abyss of debt
By the end of 2010, the US Treasury will have to refinance US$ 2 trillion in short-term debt, plus additional deficit spending for this year, estimated to be around US$ 1.5 trillion (US$ 1.6 trillion today two months after the original article was published). Together, the US Treasury will need to borrow US$ 3.5 trillion (US$ 3.6 according to this writer) in just one year.
In 1999, two well-known economists—Alan Greenspan and Pablo Guidotti—published a formula in an academic paper. Kept secret for a long time, it is designed to predict with precision when a country’s public debt will lead it to be insolvent. Called the Greenspan-Guidotti rule, it says that to avoid a default, countries should maintain hard currency reserves equal to at least 100 per cent of their short-term foreign debt maturities.
http://www.asianews.it/news-en/This-year,-US-public-debt-could-reach-end-game-17781.html
After the "underwear bomber" incident on Christmas Day, President Obama accelerated the deployment of new airport scanners that look beneath travelers' clothes to spot any weapons or explosives.
Fifty-two of these state-of-the-art machines are already scanning passengers at 23 U.S. airports. By the end of 2011, there will be 1,000 machines and two out of every three passengers will be asked to step into one of the new machines for a six-second head-to-toe scan before boarding.
About half of these machines will be so-called X-ray back-scatter scanners. They use low-energy X-rays to peer beneath passengers' clothing. That has some scientists worried.
'Potential Risk'
"Many people will approach this as, 'Oh, it must be safe, the government has thought about this and I'll just submit to it,'" says David Agard, a biochemist and biophysicist at the University of California, San Francisco. "But there really is no threshold of low dose being OK. Any dose of X-rays produces some potential risk."
Agard and several of his UCSF colleagues recently wrote a letter to John Holdren the president's science adviser, asking for a more thorough look at the risks of exposing all those airline passengers to X-rays. The other signers are John Sedat, a molecular biologist and the group's leader; Marc Shuman, a cancer specialist; and Robert Stroud, a biochemist and biophysicist.
"Ionizing radiation such as the X-rays used in these scanners have the potential to induce chromosome damage, and that can lead to cancer," Agard says.
The San Francisco group thinks both the machine's manufacturer, Rapiscan, and government officials have miscalculated the dose that the X-ray scanners deliver to the skin — where nearly all the radiation is concentrated.
The stated dose — about .02 microsieverts, a medical unit of radiation — is averaged over the whole body, members of the UCSF group said in interviews. But they maintain that if the dose is calculated as what gets deposited in the skin, the number would be higher, though how much higher is unclear....
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126833083
| « on: August 29, 2010, 07:17:51 PM » | Quote |
The Bank of Japan will hold an emergency board meeting today as the yen’s surge to a 15-year high forces policy makers to find ways to support the nation’s slowing expansion.
Governor Masaaki Shirakawa and his board will gather at 9 a.m. “to discuss monetary control matters based on recent economic and financial developments,” the central bank said in a statement today. Shirakawa returned to Tokyo yesterday, cutting short a U.S. trip by one day after Prime Minister Naoto Kan said he expected the bank to implement policy “swiftly.”
The yen slipped after the announcement backed speculation the BOJ will step up injections of liquidity to sustain a weakening recovery. The bank’s meeting follows signs that its U.S. counterpart is also open to further monetary stimulus, with Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke saying three days ago that he has the tools to prevent another recession.
“The BOJ’s first choice will be to expand its credit program to lenders,” said Junko Nishioka, chief economist at RBS Securities Japan Ltd. in Tokyo. “It’s hard to say whether such measures will halt the yen’s gains and stock declines because markets have been shaken by the U.S.’s outlook.”
The central bank will probably expand its 20-trillion yen ($234 billion) bank-loan program and extend the term for the credit from three months, Nishioka said.
Temporary Impact
“BOJ monetary policy alone will only stop the yen’s advance temporarily,” said Mari Iwashita, chief market economist at Nikko Cordial Securities in Tokyo, said before today’s announcement. Iwashita also forecasts the central bank will bolster the lending facility.
Shirakawa will speak to reporters about the decision at 2:30 p.m. in Tokyo today, the central bank said.
Kan is forecast to unveil his first stimulus package tomorrow. The prime minister has been meeting with his ministers to discuss the economy, while stopping short of outlining any specific measures to prop up the expansion. Growth has been supported by incentives to buy cars and electronics, with most of those measurers due to expire this year.
Government reports released Aug. 27 showed deflation persisted in July while the labor market improved. Consumer prices excluding fresh food slid 1.1 percent from a year earlier, the 17th straight drop. The unemployment rate fell to 5.2 percent, the first decline in six months.
Japan’s currency was at 85.58 per dollar at 8:42 a.m. in Tokyo. The yen’s 10 percent gain against the dollar this year threatens to erode profits of exporters from Toyota Motor Corp. to Sony Corp.
Since 2004
The Ministry of Finance, which is responsible for currency policy, hasn’t ordered an intervention in the foreign-exchange market to weaken the yen since 2004.
Lawmakers from Kan’s ruling Democratic Party of Japan have called on the central bank to do more, saying last week the bank should “speedily take further steps” to support the economy.
Shirakawa hasn’t spoken publicly about the yen since the last policy meeting. He said on Aug. 10 that policy makers were “well aware” that a strong yen would dampen corporate confidence and hurt economic growth. He also indicated Japanese companies have become resilient to the yen’s gains compared with late last year when the yen was surging.
“The BOJ has probably been reluctant to take further easing measures before finding clear evidence of economic deterioration,” said Yasunari Ueno, chief market economist at Mizuho Securities Co. in Tokyo. “The bank is being forced to make a painful choice.”
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-29/boj-to-hold-emergency-meeting-today-as-rising-yen-threatens-japan-s-growth.html
Governor Masaaki Shirakawa and his board will gather at 9 a.m. “to discuss monetary control matters based on recent economic and financial developments,” the central bank said in a statement today. Shirakawa returned to Tokyo yesterday, cutting short a U.S. trip by one day after Prime Minister Naoto Kan said he expected the bank to implement policy “swiftly.”
The yen slipped after the announcement backed speculation the BOJ will step up injections of liquidity to sustain a weakening recovery. The bank’s meeting follows signs that its U.S. counterpart is also open to further monetary stimulus, with Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke saying three days ago that he has the tools to prevent another recession.
“The BOJ’s first choice will be to expand its credit program to lenders,” said Junko Nishioka, chief economist at RBS Securities Japan Ltd. in Tokyo. “It’s hard to say whether such measures will halt the yen’s gains and stock declines because markets have been shaken by the U.S.’s outlook.”
The central bank will probably expand its 20-trillion yen ($234 billion) bank-loan program and extend the term for the credit from three months, Nishioka said.
Temporary Impact
“BOJ monetary policy alone will only stop the yen’s advance temporarily,” said Mari Iwashita, chief market economist at Nikko Cordial Securities in Tokyo, said before today’s announcement. Iwashita also forecasts the central bank will bolster the lending facility.
Shirakawa will speak to reporters about the decision at 2:30 p.m. in Tokyo today, the central bank said.
Kan is forecast to unveil his first stimulus package tomorrow. The prime minister has been meeting with his ministers to discuss the economy, while stopping short of outlining any specific measures to prop up the expansion. Growth has been supported by incentives to buy cars and electronics, with most of those measurers due to expire this year.
Government reports released Aug. 27 showed deflation persisted in July while the labor market improved. Consumer prices excluding fresh food slid 1.1 percent from a year earlier, the 17th straight drop. The unemployment rate fell to 5.2 percent, the first decline in six months.
Japan’s currency was at 85.58 per dollar at 8:42 a.m. in Tokyo. The yen’s 10 percent gain against the dollar this year threatens to erode profits of exporters from Toyota Motor Corp. to Sony Corp.
Since 2004
The Ministry of Finance, which is responsible for currency policy, hasn’t ordered an intervention in the foreign-exchange market to weaken the yen since 2004.
Lawmakers from Kan’s ruling Democratic Party of Japan have called on the central bank to do more, saying last week the bank should “speedily take further steps” to support the economy.
Shirakawa hasn’t spoken publicly about the yen since the last policy meeting. He said on Aug. 10 that policy makers were “well aware” that a strong yen would dampen corporate confidence and hurt economic growth. He also indicated Japanese companies have become resilient to the yen’s gains compared with late last year when the yen was surging.
“The BOJ has probably been reluctant to take further easing measures before finding clear evidence of economic deterioration,” said Yasunari Ueno, chief market economist at Mizuho Securities Co. in Tokyo. “The bank is being forced to make a painful choice.”
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-29/boj-to-hold-emergency-meeting-today-as-rising-yen-threatens-japan-s-growth.html
BOJ Holds Emergency Meeting as Surging Yen Threatens Growth
30 August 2010, by Mayumi Otsuma (Bloomberg)
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-29/boj-to-hold-emergency-meeting-today-as-rising-yen-threatens-japan-s-growth.html
Some Important highlights:
The central bank will probably expand its 20-trillion yen ($234 billion) bank-loan program and extend the term for the credit from three months, Nishioka said.
“BOJ monetary policy alone will only stop the yen’s advance temporarily,” said Mari Iwashita ...
... policy makers were “well aware” that a strong yen would dampen corporate confidence and hurt economic growth.
See Also:
Japan Plunges Even Deeper Into Deflation
27 august 2010, by Vincent Fernando (Business Insider)
http://www.businessinsider.com/japan-plunges-even-deeper-into-deflation-2010-8
CNBC Video: Japanese Deflation Persists http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1575918269&play=1
Yen Advances on Concern BOJ Steps Won't Be Enough to Curb Gains
30 August 2010, by Bo Nielsen (Bloomberg)
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-30/yen-pares-loss-on-concern-boj-s-steps-not-enough-to-curb-currency-s-gains.html
The yen rose against the dollar on speculation the Bank of Japan’s decision to increase credit- easing measures won’t be enough to weaken the nation’s currency from almost its highest level in 15 years.
BOJ's Policy Action `Too Little, Too Late', Ex-Board Member Nakahara Says
30 august 2010, by Yasuhiko Seki (Bloomberg)
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-30/boj-s-policy-action-too-little-too-late-ex-board-member-nakahara-says.html
Excerpt:
The Bank of Japan’s decision to expand a bank-loan program was "too little and too late" as a means of halting the yen’s advance, according to former central bank policy board member Nobuyuki Nakahara.
The BOJ will boost the amount of funds in the facility by 10 trillion yen ($116 billion) to a total of 30 trillion yen, it said today after an emergency meeting in Tokyo. Governor Masaaki Shirakawa said in a press briefing that the bank is ready to take more action if necessary, and cited risks to its view that the economy will remain on a recovery track.
“The announced measures were meaningless and can’t stop the yen’s advance,” Nakahara, who served as a policy board member between 1998 and 2002 under the regime of Governor Masaru Hayami, said in an interview after the central bank’s meeting. “The action therefore was too little and too late.”
----
“Unless the BOJ lowers the policy rate to zero, interest rate differentials between Japan and the U.S. will continue to narrow and weigh on the dollar-yen rate," said Nakahara, who now runs a research and consulting firm called Nakahara & Co. "Lowering the policy rate to zero is a must to stem the yen’s gains.”
Yen rises after Bank of Japan's easing proves disappointing - Dollar trades mostly higher but retraces below 85-yen mark
30 august 2010, by Deborah Levine and Lisa Twaronite (MarketWatch)
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/yen-rises-after-bojs-special-easing-disappoints-2010-08-30
Excerpt:
The dollar advanced against the euro and most other major currencies Monday as U.S. stocks extended losses, failing to derive any support from economic data on consumer spending and personal incomes or from merger news.
The Japanese yen registered broad gains, erasing early weakness after an emergency easing by the Bank of Japan failed to dampen the currency's recent strength.
----
The Bank of Japan held an emergency meeting and said it would expand its current ¥20 trillion quantitative-easing program to six months from its current three-month time frame. It also increased the amount of funds available by ¥10 trillion. Read more on Bank of Japan.
"The market is clearly viewing these policy moves as actions that are too little too late as the BOJ continues to fight rear-guard action," said Boris Schlossberg, director of currency research at GFT.
Fed Sees Limited Policy Options
Unlike Greenspan years, central bank can no longer talk investors into changing sentiment, Barrons.com's Bob O'Brien suggests.
Speculators, he said in a note to clients, "may now continue to sell the [dollar/yen] pair with impunity."
Global investors reportedly buying Yen again
2 September 2010, by John Letzing (MarketWatch)
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/global-investors-reportedly-buying-yen-again-2010-09-01
Japan Said to View U.S. Opposition as Yen Intervention Obstacle
3 september 2010, by Toru Fujioka and Kyoko Shimodoi (Bloomberg)
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-09-02/japan-said-to-view-likely-american-opposition-as-yen-intervention-obstacle.html
Excerpt:
Japan views probable U.S. opposition to currency intervention as an obstacle to selling the yen, according to three Japanese government officials.
Yen sales without U.S. backing would be a challenge, the officials said on condition of anonymity because the government discussions are private. Two of them also said volatility, rather than the current level, would be a more likely trigger for an end to the policy of refraining from sales of the currency, which last week hit a 15-year high against the dollar.
Noda Says `Difficult' for Japan to Win Coordination on Yen Intervention
4 September 2010, by Keiko Ujikane (Bloomberg)
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-09-04/japan-finance-minister-noda-says-coordinating-yen-intervention-difficult-.html
Excerpt:
The yen’s advance to a 15-year high against the dollar threatens earnings at companies from Sony Corp. to Toyota Motor Corp.
Sony Chief Executive Officer Howard Stringer said this week that the currency’s appreciation is a “huge handicap for us.” About half of Japan’s manufacturers say the yen’s recent gains are hurting their sales, according to a survey published yesterday by credit research agency Teikoku Data Ltd.
----
Japan hasn’t stepped into the foreign-exchange market since 2004, when the yen was around 109 per dollar, and may not succeed in curbing the yen’s gains on its own.
While coordinated intervention helped set a floor for the euro in 2000 and the dollar in 1995, solo sales of yen in 2003 and early 2004 failed to arrest the advance.
Developed economies abroad are weaker than when Japan last intervened, and are themselves looking to boost exports, making it tougher for Japan to go it alone.
Japan views probable U.S. opposition to currency intervention as an obstacle to selling the yen, according to three Japanese government officials.
Sales without U.S. backing would be a challenge, the officials said on condition of anonymity because the government discussions are private.
Two of them also said volatility, rather than the current level, would be a more likely trigger for an end to the policy of refraining from sales of the currency, which last week hit a 15-year high at 83.60 against the dollar.
30 August 2010, by Mayumi Otsuma (Bloomberg)
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-29/boj-to-hold-emergency-meeting-today-as-rising-yen-threatens-japan-s-growth.html
Some Important highlights:
The central bank will probably expand its 20-trillion yen ($234 billion) bank-loan program and extend the term for the credit from three months, Nishioka said.
“BOJ monetary policy alone will only stop the yen’s advance temporarily,” said Mari Iwashita ...
... policy makers were “well aware” that a strong yen would dampen corporate confidence and hurt economic growth.
See Also:
Japan Plunges Even Deeper Into Deflation
27 august 2010, by Vincent Fernando (Business Insider)
http://www.businessinsider.com/japan-plunges-even-deeper-into-deflation-2010-8
CNBC Video: Japanese Deflation Persists http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1575918269&play=1
BoJ Decision Disappoints, Yen Surges On No FX Intervention Announcement The BoJ just released a decision to extend the 3 month lending program to 6 months, to expand the 6 month fixed rate facility to 30 trillion yen from 20 trillion, extended the maturity of QE, and kept the benchmark rate at 0.1%: in essence a nothingburger extension of QE, which has done miracles for the past 20 years. The key item, however, is that there was no direct mention of FX intervention by the BoJ, which was the silver bullet many had hoped for. As a result, the Yen is currently surging. More... http://www.zerohedge.com/article/boj-decision-disappoints-yen-surges-no-fx-intervention-announcement |
Yen Advances on Concern BOJ Steps Won't Be Enough to Curb Gains
30 August 2010, by Bo Nielsen (Bloomberg)
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-30/yen-pares-loss-on-concern-boj-s-steps-not-enough-to-curb-currency-s-gains.html
The yen rose against the dollar on speculation the Bank of Japan’s decision to increase credit- easing measures won’t be enough to weaken the nation’s currency from almost its highest level in 15 years.
BOJ's Policy Action `Too Little, Too Late', Ex-Board Member Nakahara Says
30 august 2010, by Yasuhiko Seki (Bloomberg)
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-30/boj-s-policy-action-too-little-too-late-ex-board-member-nakahara-says.html
Excerpt:
The Bank of Japan’s decision to expand a bank-loan program was "too little and too late" as a means of halting the yen’s advance, according to former central bank policy board member Nobuyuki Nakahara.
The BOJ will boost the amount of funds in the facility by 10 trillion yen ($116 billion) to a total of 30 trillion yen, it said today after an emergency meeting in Tokyo. Governor Masaaki Shirakawa said in a press briefing that the bank is ready to take more action if necessary, and cited risks to its view that the economy will remain on a recovery track.
“The announced measures were meaningless and can’t stop the yen’s advance,” Nakahara, who served as a policy board member between 1998 and 2002 under the regime of Governor Masaru Hayami, said in an interview after the central bank’s meeting. “The action therefore was too little and too late.”
----
“Unless the BOJ lowers the policy rate to zero, interest rate differentials between Japan and the U.S. will continue to narrow and weigh on the dollar-yen rate," said Nakahara, who now runs a research and consulting firm called Nakahara & Co. "Lowering the policy rate to zero is a must to stem the yen’s gains.”
Yen rises after Bank of Japan's easing proves disappointing - Dollar trades mostly higher but retraces below 85-yen mark
30 august 2010, by Deborah Levine and Lisa Twaronite (MarketWatch)
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/yen-rises-after-bojs-special-easing-disappoints-2010-08-30
Excerpt:
The dollar advanced against the euro and most other major currencies Monday as U.S. stocks extended losses, failing to derive any support from economic data on consumer spending and personal incomes or from merger news.
The Japanese yen registered broad gains, erasing early weakness after an emergency easing by the Bank of Japan failed to dampen the currency's recent strength.
----
The Bank of Japan held an emergency meeting and said it would expand its current ¥20 trillion quantitative-easing program to six months from its current three-month time frame. It also increased the amount of funds available by ¥10 trillion. Read more on Bank of Japan.
"The market is clearly viewing these policy moves as actions that are too little too late as the BOJ continues to fight rear-guard action," said Boris Schlossberg, director of currency research at GFT.
Fed Sees Limited Policy Options
Unlike Greenspan years, central bank can no longer talk investors into changing sentiment, Barrons.com's Bob O'Brien suggests.
Speculators, he said in a note to clients, "may now continue to sell the [dollar/yen] pair with impunity."
Global investors reportedly buying Yen again
2 September 2010, by John Letzing (MarketWatch)
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/global-investors-reportedly-buying-yen-again-2010-09-01
Japan Said to View U.S. Opposition as Yen Intervention Obstacle
3 september 2010, by Toru Fujioka and Kyoko Shimodoi (Bloomberg)
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-09-02/japan-said-to-view-likely-american-opposition-as-yen-intervention-obstacle.html
Excerpt:
Japan views probable U.S. opposition to currency intervention as an obstacle to selling the yen, according to three Japanese government officials.
Yen sales without U.S. backing would be a challenge, the officials said on condition of anonymity because the government discussions are private. Two of them also said volatility, rather than the current level, would be a more likely trigger for an end to the policy of refraining from sales of the currency, which last week hit a 15-year high against the dollar.
Noda Says `Difficult' for Japan to Win Coordination on Yen Intervention
4 September 2010, by Keiko Ujikane (Bloomberg)
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-09-04/japan-finance-minister-noda-says-coordinating-yen-intervention-difficult-.html
Excerpt:
The yen’s advance to a 15-year high against the dollar threatens earnings at companies from Sony Corp. to Toyota Motor Corp.
Sony Chief Executive Officer Howard Stringer said this week that the currency’s appreciation is a “huge handicap for us.” About half of Japan’s manufacturers say the yen’s recent gains are hurting their sales, according to a survey published yesterday by credit research agency Teikoku Data Ltd.
----
Japan hasn’t stepped into the foreign-exchange market since 2004, when the yen was around 109 per dollar, and may not succeed in curbing the yen’s gains on its own.
While coordinated intervention helped set a floor for the euro in 2000 and the dollar in 1995, solo sales of yen in 2003 and early 2004 failed to arrest the advance.
Developed economies abroad are weaker than when Japan last intervened, and are themselves looking to boost exports, making it tougher for Japan to go it alone.
Japan views probable U.S. opposition to currency intervention as an obstacle to selling the yen, according to three Japanese government officials.
Sales without U.S. backing would be a challenge, the officials said on condition of anonymity because the government discussions are private.
Two of them also said volatility, rather than the current level, would be a more likely trigger for an end to the policy of refraining from sales of the currency, which last week hit a 15-year high at 83.60 against the dollar.
| « on: September 03, 2010, 11:05:33 PM » | Quote |
http://www.westpointgradsagainstthewar.org/military-industrial%20complex%20speech%20(farewell)%20ike.htm
My fellow Americans:
Three days from now, after half a century in the service of our country, I shall lay down the responsibilities of office as, in traditional and solemn ceremony, the authority of the Presidency is vested in my successor.
This evening I come to you with a message of leave-taking and farewell, and to share a few final thoughts with you, my countrymen. Like every other citizen, I wish the new President, and all who will labor with him, Godspeed. I pray that the coming years will be blessed with peace and prosperity for all.
Our people expect their President and the Congress to find essential agreement on issues of great moment, the wise resolution of which will better shape the future of the Nation.
My own relations with the Congress, which began on a remote and tenuous basis when, long ago, a member of the Senate appointed me to West Point, have since ranged to the intimate during the war and immediate post-war period, and, finally, to the mutually interdependent during these past eight years.
In this final relationship, the Congress and the Administration have, on most vital issues, cooperated well, to serve the national good rather than mere partisanship, and so have assured that the business of the Nation should go forward. So, my official relationship with the Congress ends in a feeling, on my part, of gratitude that we have been able to do so much together.
II
We now stand ten years past the midpoint of a century that has witnessed four major wars among great nations. Three of these involved our own country. Despite these holocausts America is today the strongest, the most influential and most productive nation in the world. Understandably proud of this pre-eminence, we yet realize that America's leadership and prestige depend, not merely upon our unmatched material progress, riches and military strength, but on how we use our power in the interests of world peace and human betterment.
III
Throughout America's adventure in free government, our basic purposes have been to keep the peace; to foster progress in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity and integrity among people and among nations. To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure traceable to arrogance, or our lack of comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us grievous hurt both at home and abroad.
Progress toward these noble goals is persistently threatened by the conflict now engulfing the world. It commands our whole attention, absorbs our very beings. We face a hostile ideology, global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose, and insidious in method. Unhappily the danger it poses promises to be of indefinite duration. To meet it successfully, there is called for, not so much the emotional and transitory sacrifices of crisis, but rather those which enable us to carry forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and complex struggle-with liberty at stake. Only thus shall we remain, despite every provocation, on our charted course toward permanent peace and human betterment.
Crises there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small, there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. A huge increase in newer elements of our defense; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research-these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we wish to travel.
But each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs. balance between the private and the public economy, balance between cost and hoped for advantage, balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable; balance between our essential requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual; balance between action of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress; lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration.
The record of many decades stands as proof that our people and their government have, in the main, understood these truths and have responded to them well, in the face of stress and threat. But threats, new in kind or degree, constantly arise. I mention two only.
IV
A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.
Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peace time, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.
Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence, economic, political, even spiritual, is felt in every city, every state house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been over shadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should,
we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.
It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system-ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.
V
Another factor in maintaining balance involves the element of time. As we peer into society's future, we, you and I, and our government, must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.
VI
Down the long lane of the history yet to be written America knows that this world of ours, ever growing smaller, must avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate, and be, instead, a proud confederation of mutual trust and respect.
Such a confederation must be one of equals. The weakest must come to the conference table with the same confidence as do we, protected as we are by our moral, economic, and military strength. That table, though scarred by many past frustrations, cannot be abandoned for the certain agony of the battlefield.
Disarmament, with mutual honor and confidence, is a continuing imperative. Together we must learn how to compose difference, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose. Because this need is so sharp and apparent I confess that I lay down my official responsibilities in this field with a definite sense of disappointment. As one who has witnessed the horror and the lingering sadness of war-as one who knows that another war could utterly destroy this civilization which has been so slowly and painfully built over thousands of years-I wish I could say tonight that a lasting peace is in sight.
Happily, I can say that war has been avoided. Steady progress toward our ultimate goal has been made. But, so much remains to be done. As a private citizen, I shall never cease to do what little I can to help the world advance along that road.
VII
So, in this my last good night to you as your President, I thank you for the many opportunities you have given me for public service in war and peace. I trust that in that service you find some things worthy; as for the rest of it, I know you will find ways to improve performance in the future.
You and I, my fellow citizens, need to be strong in our faith that all nations, under God, will reach the goal of peace with justice. May we be ever unswerving in devotion to principle, confident but humble with power, diligent in pursuit of the Nation's great goals.
To all the peoples of the world, I once more give expression to America's prayerful and continuing inspiration:
We pray that peoples of all faiths, all races, all nations, may have their great human needs satisfied; that those now denied opportunity shall come to enjoy it to the full; that all who yearn for freedom may experience its spiritual blessings; that those who have freedom will understand, also, its heavy responsibilities; that all who are insensitive to the needs of others will learn charity; that the scourges of poverty, disease and ignorance will be made to disappear from the earth, and that, in the goodness of time, all peoples will come to live together in a peace guaranteed by the binding force of mutual respect and love.
Radio-Television Address: January 17, 1961
Pope John Paul 2's New World Order Speech at Gandhi's Memorial
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clyNzkTy7TI
Benedict
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6mVTDFwlPI
Never saw these before, but its old.
My fellow Americans:
Three days from now, after half a century in the service of our country, I shall lay down the responsibilities of office as, in traditional and solemn ceremony, the authority of the Presidency is vested in my successor.
This evening I come to you with a message of leave-taking and farewell, and to share a few final thoughts with you, my countrymen. Like every other citizen, I wish the new President, and all who will labor with him, Godspeed. I pray that the coming years will be blessed with peace and prosperity for all.
Our people expect their President and the Congress to find essential agreement on issues of great moment, the wise resolution of which will better shape the future of the Nation.
My own relations with the Congress, which began on a remote and tenuous basis when, long ago, a member of the Senate appointed me to West Point, have since ranged to the intimate during the war and immediate post-war period, and, finally, to the mutually interdependent during these past eight years.
In this final relationship, the Congress and the Administration have, on most vital issues, cooperated well, to serve the national good rather than mere partisanship, and so have assured that the business of the Nation should go forward. So, my official relationship with the Congress ends in a feeling, on my part, of gratitude that we have been able to do so much together.
II
We now stand ten years past the midpoint of a century that has witnessed four major wars among great nations. Three of these involved our own country. Despite these holocausts America is today the strongest, the most influential and most productive nation in the world. Understandably proud of this pre-eminence, we yet realize that America's leadership and prestige depend, not merely upon our unmatched material progress, riches and military strength, but on how we use our power in the interests of world peace and human betterment.
III
Throughout America's adventure in free government, our basic purposes have been to keep the peace; to foster progress in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity and integrity among people and among nations. To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure traceable to arrogance, or our lack of comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us grievous hurt both at home and abroad.
Progress toward these noble goals is persistently threatened by the conflict now engulfing the world. It commands our whole attention, absorbs our very beings. We face a hostile ideology, global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose, and insidious in method. Unhappily the danger it poses promises to be of indefinite duration. To meet it successfully, there is called for, not so much the emotional and transitory sacrifices of crisis, but rather those which enable us to carry forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and complex struggle-with liberty at stake. Only thus shall we remain, despite every provocation, on our charted course toward permanent peace and human betterment.
Crises there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small, there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. A huge increase in newer elements of our defense; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research-these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we wish to travel.
But each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs. balance between the private and the public economy, balance between cost and hoped for advantage, balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable; balance between our essential requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual; balance between action of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress; lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration.
The record of many decades stands as proof that our people and their government have, in the main, understood these truths and have responded to them well, in the face of stress and threat. But threats, new in kind or degree, constantly arise. I mention two only.
IV
A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.
Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peace time, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.
Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence, economic, political, even spiritual, is felt in every city, every state house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been over shadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should,
we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.
It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system-ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.
V
Another factor in maintaining balance involves the element of time. As we peer into society's future, we, you and I, and our government, must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.
VI
Down the long lane of the history yet to be written America knows that this world of ours, ever growing smaller, must avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate, and be, instead, a proud confederation of mutual trust and respect.
Such a confederation must be one of equals. The weakest must come to the conference table with the same confidence as do we, protected as we are by our moral, economic, and military strength. That table, though scarred by many past frustrations, cannot be abandoned for the certain agony of the battlefield.
Disarmament, with mutual honor and confidence, is a continuing imperative. Together we must learn how to compose difference, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose. Because this need is so sharp and apparent I confess that I lay down my official responsibilities in this field with a definite sense of disappointment. As one who has witnessed the horror and the lingering sadness of war-as one who knows that another war could utterly destroy this civilization which has been so slowly and painfully built over thousands of years-I wish I could say tonight that a lasting peace is in sight.
Happily, I can say that war has been avoided. Steady progress toward our ultimate goal has been made. But, so much remains to be done. As a private citizen, I shall never cease to do what little I can to help the world advance along that road.
VII
So, in this my last good night to you as your President, I thank you for the many opportunities you have given me for public service in war and peace. I trust that in that service you find some things worthy; as for the rest of it, I know you will find ways to improve performance in the future.
You and I, my fellow citizens, need to be strong in our faith that all nations, under God, will reach the goal of peace with justice. May we be ever unswerving in devotion to principle, confident but humble with power, diligent in pursuit of the Nation's great goals.
To all the peoples of the world, I once more give expression to America's prayerful and continuing inspiration:
We pray that peoples of all faiths, all races, all nations, may have their great human needs satisfied; that those now denied opportunity shall come to enjoy it to the full; that all who yearn for freedom may experience its spiritual blessings; that those who have freedom will understand, also, its heavy responsibilities; that all who are insensitive to the needs of others will learn charity; that the scourges of poverty, disease and ignorance will be made to disappear from the earth, and that, in the goodness of time, all peoples will come to live together in a peace guaranteed by the binding force of mutual respect and love.
Radio-Television Address: January 17, 1961
Pope John Paul 2's New World Order Speech at Gandhi's Memorial
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clyNzkTy7TI
Benedict
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6mVTDFwlPI
Never saw these before, but its old.
1 September 2010, (Jeroen van Bergeijk)
http://www.vanbergeijk.com/2010/09/01/the-third-largest-gold-nugget-in-the-world/
Excerpt:
A Perth-based goldbuyer bought and sold the worlds third largest nugget here recently. These things are EXTREMELY rare. This thing weighed 23 kg (gold value alone around 860.000 US dollars). There's only two in the world that are heavier. This particular nugget was sold privately to an undisclosed buyer in the US within 24 hrs.
The nugget had been found a couple of weeks ago with a metal detector somewhere in the goldfields around here. Through various tests it had been established that the thing has a 92% purity.
LOST GOLD OF TSARS ‘FOUND IN THE WORLD’S DEEPEST LAKE’
1 september 2010, by Will Stewart in Moscow (Express.UK)
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/196784/Lost-gold-of-Tsars-found-in-the-world-s-deepest-lake-
Excerpt:
A RUSSIAN mini-submarine may have found billions of pounds worth of lost gold in a Siberian lake, it was revealed yesterday.
Explorers have long searched for lost Tsarist treasures dating from the Bolshevik Revolution, when forces loyal to the deposed royal family fled the advancing Red Army.
Legend has it that 1,600 tons of gold – which could now be worth billions of pounds – was lost when anti-Communist commander Admiral Alexander Kolchak’s train plunged into Lake Baikal, the world’s oldest and deepest freshwater lake.
Last year, parts of a train and ammunition boxes were found.
And in recent days, the Mir-2 submersible has discovered “shiny metal objects” 1,200 feet below the surface at Cape Tolstoy. “Deep-sea vehicles found rectangular blocks with a metallic gleam, like gold,” said one source.
Explorers attempted to grab hold of the blocks with a manipulator arm but failed because of loose gravel on the bottom of the lake. Sources say that the submariners know the exact spot and are planning a new mission to determine if they have found the gold.
| « on: July 05, 2009, 12:18:45 PM » | Quote |
Below is an excerpt from an interview that Gore Vidal -- a "limousine liberal" if ever there was one -- did with Playboy Magazine.
Notice how shockingly candid he is about his anti-family/pro-eugenics views:
--------------------------------
VIDAL: ...how are we to survive on an overpopulated planet? Even if we fully exploit our food resources--including sea farming--and develop effective and equitable international systems of distribution, it still won't be possible to feed the coming generations. So there will be famine and disorder. Meanwhile, we are destroying our environment. Water, earth and air are being poisoned. Climate is being altered. Yet we go on breeding, creating an economy that demands more and more consumers to buy its products--and endless, self-destructive cycle. But though most thoughtful people are aware of what we are doing to ourselves, nothing is being done to restore the planet's ecological balance, to limit human population, to create social and political and economic institutions capable of coping with--let alone solving--such relatively manageable problems as poverty and racial injustice. Who will tell Detroit that they must abandon the fossil fuel-burning combustion engine? No one. And so the air goes bad, cancers proliferate, climate changes.
PLAYBOY: Do you think drastic reform is likely to be effected by our present system of government?
VIDAL: No. And I find that hard to admit, because for all of my adult life I've generally accepted what we call the democratic process. But it no longer works. Look at Congress. Last year, 81 percent of the people wanted strong gun-control legislation. But 70 percent of the Congress did not, on instructions from the National Rifle Association. Congress, President, courts are not able to keep industry from poisoning Lake Erie, or Detroit from making cars that, aside from the carbon monoxide they create, are murderous weapons. To this degree, at least, the New Left is right: The System cannot be reformed. I part company with them on how it's to be replaced. They are vague. I would like to be specific--"programmatic," to use a word they like even less than "liberal."
PLAYBOY: And what is your program?
VIDAL: I would like to replace our present system with an Authority--with a capital A--that would have total control over environment. And environment means not only air, earth and water but the distribution of services and products, and the limitations of births. Where the Authority would have no jurisdiction would be over the private lives of the citizens. Whatever people said, wrote, ate, drank, made love to--as long as it did no harm to others--would be allowed. This, of course, is the direct reverse of our present system. Traditionally, we have always interfered in the private lives of our citizens while allowing any entrepreneur the right to poison a river in order to make money.
PLAYBOY: Isn't what you're proposing--a dictatorship demanding absolute control over the most vital areas of our lives and yet granting absolute social and political freedom--a contradiction in terms? Isn't it inevitable that the power of your Authority would sooner or later circumscribe the private life of every citizen?
VIDAL: Though the Authority would, in its own sphere, be absolute, it would never be the instrument of any one man. There would be no dictator. The thing should be run like a Swiss hotel, with anonymous specialists going about their business under constant review by a council of scientists, poets, butchers, politicians, teachers--the best group one could assemble. No doubt my Venetian ancestry makes me prone to this sort of government, because the Most Serene Republic was run rather like that and no cult of personality ever disturbed those committees that managed the state with great success. It can be done.
PLAYBOY: Would you explain what you mean when you say the Authority would be able to limit births?
VIDAL: I mean just that. Only certain people would be allowed to have children. Nor is this the hardship that it might at first appear. Most people have no talent for bringing up children and they usually admit it--once the damage is done. Unfortunately, our tribal propaganda makes every woman think her life incomplete unless she has made a replica of herself and her loved one. But tribal propaganda can be changed. One can just as easily convince people that to bring an unwanted child into the world is a social crime as grave as murder. Through propaganda, the Japanese made it unfashionable to have big families after the War and so--alone of the Asian countries--kept their population viable.
PLAYBOY: Your ends may be commendable, but let's discuss the means. What would happen to the citizen who didn't wish to live in your brave new world--to the devout Roman Catholic, for example, who refused to accept your population-control measures?
VIDAL: If he didn't want to emigrate, he'd simply have to accept the Authority's restrictions. The right to unlimited breeding is not a constitutional guarantee. If education and propaganda failed, those who violated the birth-control restrictions would have to pay for their act as for any other criminal offense.
PLAYBOY: With imprisonment?
VIDAL: I don't believe in prisons, but there would have to be some sort of punishment. Incontinent breeding endangers the human race. That is a fact with which we now live. If we don't limit our numbers through planned breeding, they will be limited for us in the natural way: famine and war. I think it more civilized to be unnatural and voluntarily limit population.
PLAYBOY: What would become of the family if only a few people were allowed to have children?
VIDAL: The family is an economic unit, not a biological unit; and once the economic need for it is gone--when women are able to get jobs and support themselves--the unit ceases to have any meaning. In today's cities, it is not possible to maintain the old American idea of the family--which was, essentially, peasant; a tribal group working together to create food. For better or worse, we are now on our own, and attempts to revive the ancient family ideal...will fail. As for the children that we do want, I'd like to see them brought up communally, the way they are in certain of the Israeli kibbutzim. I suspect that eventually, the whole idea of parenthood will vanish, when children are made impersonally by laboratory insemination of ova. To forestall the usual outraged letters declaring that I am against the "normal" sexual act, consider what I'm talking about: the creation of citizens, not sexual pleasure, which will continue, as always. Further, I would favor an intelligent program of eugenics that would decide which genetic types should be continued and which allowed to die off. It's within the range of our science to create, very simply, new people physically healthier and intellectually more competent than ourselves. After all, we do it regularly in agriculture and in the breeding of livestock, so why not with the human race? According to the somber Dr. William Shockley--the Nobel Prize-winning physicist who once contravened liberal doctrine by suggesting that we should look for genetic differences among the races--our preservation, through advanced medicine, of physically and mentally weak strains is now making the race less fit with each generation.
PLAYBOY: Your critics would charge that the utopia you propose is actually a nightmarish world reminiscent of Nazi Germany and of George Orwell's 1984. How would you answer them?
VIDAL: Most things human go wrong. The Authority would probably be no exception. But consider the alternatives. Nuclear war to reduce population. World famine. The coming to power of military dictatorships. The crushing of individual freedom. At least the Authority would guarantee more private freedom to its citizens than they now enjoy.
PLAYBOY: Realistically, do you see any chance of such an "enlightened" dictatorship coming to power?
VIDAL: Dictatorship, no; enlightened, yes. Could it happen? Probably not. It takes too long to change tribal thinking. The majority will always prefer a fiery death, howling tribal slogans. A pity--but then, it is not written in the stars that this peculiar race endure forever. Now may be a good time for us to stop. However, since I believe that one must always act as though our affairs were manageable, I should like to see a Party for Human Survival started on an international scale, to try to persuade people to vote willingly for a life-enhancing as well as life-preserving system.
PLAYBOY: Your detractors, on both right and left, would argue that the proposals you've just made reflect a characteristic Vidal trait: intellectual arrogance and a basic elitist contempt for the people and their ability to govern themselves. Do you think they have a point?
VIDAL: I do not admire "the people," as such. No one really does. Their folk wisdom is usually false, their instincts predatory. Even their sense of survival--so highly developed in the individual--goes berserk in the mass. A crowd is a fool. But then, crowds don't govern. In fact, only in America do we pretend to worship the majority, reverently listening to the herd as it Gallups this way and that. A socialist friend of mine in England, a Labor M.P., once said: "You Americans are mad on the subject of democracy. But we aren't, because we know if the people were given their head, they would bring back hanging, the birch and, of course, they'd kick the niggers out of the country. Fortunately, the Labor Party has no traffic with democracy." I want the people to be happy, but more than that, I want them to be humane--something they are not, as everyone from Jesus to Karl Marx has had occasion to notice.
--------------------------------
Now, at this point some of you are probably wondering: when was the above interview conducted? Five years ago? Ten years ago? Fifteen, perhaps?
Try forty years ago!
It's from the June 1969 issue.
The above excerpt is from pages 80-82 of that issue.
The only difference between then and now is that today's limousine liberals have learned to conceal their true eugenicist colors through the use of euphemism-saturated public relations rhetoric.
Notice how shockingly candid he is about his anti-family/pro-eugenics views:
--------------------------------
VIDAL: ...how are we to survive on an overpopulated planet? Even if we fully exploit our food resources--including sea farming--and develop effective and equitable international systems of distribution, it still won't be possible to feed the coming generations. So there will be famine and disorder. Meanwhile, we are destroying our environment. Water, earth and air are being poisoned. Climate is being altered. Yet we go on breeding, creating an economy that demands more and more consumers to buy its products--and endless, self-destructive cycle. But though most thoughtful people are aware of what we are doing to ourselves, nothing is being done to restore the planet's ecological balance, to limit human population, to create social and political and economic institutions capable of coping with--let alone solving--such relatively manageable problems as poverty and racial injustice. Who will tell Detroit that they must abandon the fossil fuel-burning combustion engine? No one. And so the air goes bad, cancers proliferate, climate changes.
PLAYBOY: Do you think drastic reform is likely to be effected by our present system of government?
VIDAL: No. And I find that hard to admit, because for all of my adult life I've generally accepted what we call the democratic process. But it no longer works. Look at Congress. Last year, 81 percent of the people wanted strong gun-control legislation. But 70 percent of the Congress did not, on instructions from the National Rifle Association. Congress, President, courts are not able to keep industry from poisoning Lake Erie, or Detroit from making cars that, aside from the carbon monoxide they create, are murderous weapons. To this degree, at least, the New Left is right: The System cannot be reformed. I part company with them on how it's to be replaced. They are vague. I would like to be specific--"programmatic," to use a word they like even less than "liberal."
PLAYBOY: And what is your program?
VIDAL: I would like to replace our present system with an Authority--with a capital A--that would have total control over environment. And environment means not only air, earth and water but the distribution of services and products, and the limitations of births. Where the Authority would have no jurisdiction would be over the private lives of the citizens. Whatever people said, wrote, ate, drank, made love to--as long as it did no harm to others--would be allowed. This, of course, is the direct reverse of our present system. Traditionally, we have always interfered in the private lives of our citizens while allowing any entrepreneur the right to poison a river in order to make money.
PLAYBOY: Isn't what you're proposing--a dictatorship demanding absolute control over the most vital areas of our lives and yet granting absolute social and political freedom--a contradiction in terms? Isn't it inevitable that the power of your Authority would sooner or later circumscribe the private life of every citizen?
VIDAL: Though the Authority would, in its own sphere, be absolute, it would never be the instrument of any one man. There would be no dictator. The thing should be run like a Swiss hotel, with anonymous specialists going about their business under constant review by a council of scientists, poets, butchers, politicians, teachers--the best group one could assemble. No doubt my Venetian ancestry makes me prone to this sort of government, because the Most Serene Republic was run rather like that and no cult of personality ever disturbed those committees that managed the state with great success. It can be done.
PLAYBOY: Would you explain what you mean when you say the Authority would be able to limit births?
VIDAL: I mean just that. Only certain people would be allowed to have children. Nor is this the hardship that it might at first appear. Most people have no talent for bringing up children and they usually admit it--once the damage is done. Unfortunately, our tribal propaganda makes every woman think her life incomplete unless she has made a replica of herself and her loved one. But tribal propaganda can be changed. One can just as easily convince people that to bring an unwanted child into the world is a social crime as grave as murder. Through propaganda, the Japanese made it unfashionable to have big families after the War and so--alone of the Asian countries--kept their population viable.
PLAYBOY: Your ends may be commendable, but let's discuss the means. What would happen to the citizen who didn't wish to live in your brave new world--to the devout Roman Catholic, for example, who refused to accept your population-control measures?
VIDAL: If he didn't want to emigrate, he'd simply have to accept the Authority's restrictions. The right to unlimited breeding is not a constitutional guarantee. If education and propaganda failed, those who violated the birth-control restrictions would have to pay for their act as for any other criminal offense.
PLAYBOY: With imprisonment?
VIDAL: I don't believe in prisons, but there would have to be some sort of punishment. Incontinent breeding endangers the human race. That is a fact with which we now live. If we don't limit our numbers through planned breeding, they will be limited for us in the natural way: famine and war. I think it more civilized to be unnatural and voluntarily limit population.
PLAYBOY: What would become of the family if only a few people were allowed to have children?
VIDAL: The family is an economic unit, not a biological unit; and once the economic need for it is gone--when women are able to get jobs and support themselves--the unit ceases to have any meaning. In today's cities, it is not possible to maintain the old American idea of the family--which was, essentially, peasant; a tribal group working together to create food. For better or worse, we are now on our own, and attempts to revive the ancient family ideal...will fail. As for the children that we do want, I'd like to see them brought up communally, the way they are in certain of the Israeli kibbutzim. I suspect that eventually, the whole idea of parenthood will vanish, when children are made impersonally by laboratory insemination of ova. To forestall the usual outraged letters declaring that I am against the "normal" sexual act, consider what I'm talking about: the creation of citizens, not sexual pleasure, which will continue, as always. Further, I would favor an intelligent program of eugenics that would decide which genetic types should be continued and which allowed to die off. It's within the range of our science to create, very simply, new people physically healthier and intellectually more competent than ourselves. After all, we do it regularly in agriculture and in the breeding of livestock, so why not with the human race? According to the somber Dr. William Shockley--the Nobel Prize-winning physicist who once contravened liberal doctrine by suggesting that we should look for genetic differences among the races--our preservation, through advanced medicine, of physically and mentally weak strains is now making the race less fit with each generation.
PLAYBOY: Your critics would charge that the utopia you propose is actually a nightmarish world reminiscent of Nazi Germany and of George Orwell's 1984. How would you answer them?
VIDAL: Most things human go wrong. The Authority would probably be no exception. But consider the alternatives. Nuclear war to reduce population. World famine. The coming to power of military dictatorships. The crushing of individual freedom. At least the Authority would guarantee more private freedom to its citizens than they now enjoy.
PLAYBOY: Realistically, do you see any chance of such an "enlightened" dictatorship coming to power?
VIDAL: Dictatorship, no; enlightened, yes. Could it happen? Probably not. It takes too long to change tribal thinking. The majority will always prefer a fiery death, howling tribal slogans. A pity--but then, it is not written in the stars that this peculiar race endure forever. Now may be a good time for us to stop. However, since I believe that one must always act as though our affairs were manageable, I should like to see a Party for Human Survival started on an international scale, to try to persuade people to vote willingly for a life-enhancing as well as life-preserving system.
PLAYBOY: Your detractors, on both right and left, would argue that the proposals you've just made reflect a characteristic Vidal trait: intellectual arrogance and a basic elitist contempt for the people and their ability to govern themselves. Do you think they have a point?
VIDAL: I do not admire "the people," as such. No one really does. Their folk wisdom is usually false, their instincts predatory. Even their sense of survival--so highly developed in the individual--goes berserk in the mass. A crowd is a fool. But then, crowds don't govern. In fact, only in America do we pretend to worship the majority, reverently listening to the herd as it Gallups this way and that. A socialist friend of mine in England, a Labor M.P., once said: "You Americans are mad on the subject of democracy. But we aren't, because we know if the people were given their head, they would bring back hanging, the birch and, of course, they'd kick the niggers out of the country. Fortunately, the Labor Party has no traffic with democracy." I want the people to be happy, but more than that, I want them to be humane--something they are not, as everyone from Jesus to Karl Marx has had occasion to notice.
--------------------------------
Now, at this point some of you are probably wondering: when was the above interview conducted? Five years ago? Ten years ago? Fifteen, perhaps?
Try forty years ago!
It's from the June 1969 issue.
The above excerpt is from pages 80-82 of that issue.
The only difference between then and now is that today's limousine liberals have learned to conceal their true eugenicist colors through the use of euphemism-saturated public relations rhetoric.
No comments:
Post a Comment