Friday, October 26, 2007

Goodbye dollar, hello inflation

Finance Trends Matter
Friday October 26, 2007

The dollar is no longer the world's reserve currency. This is the statement you heard twice in one day if you were checking out the news on Bloomberg over the past 24 hours.

First, we heard it from economist Clifford Bennett of Sonray Capital, who said the Euro was the world's new reserve currency and that this idea was now universally recognized.

Next we heard it from investor Jim Rogers, who has been bearish on the dollar and the state of the US economy/fiscal outlook for quite some time.

What's notable about Rogers' latest call on the dollar is that he's once again backed his convictions with his actions; yesterday, Rogers announced that he is shifting his personal assets out of the dollar and into the Chinese renminbi.

Here's an excerpt from, "Jim Rogers Shifts Assets Out of Dollars to Buy Yuan".

"Jim Rogers, chairman of Beeland Interests Inc., said he is shifting all his assets out of the dollar and buying Chinese yuan because the Federal Reserve has eroded the value of the U.S. currency.

``I'm in the process of -- I hope in the next few months -- getting all of my assets out of U.S. dollars,'' said Rogers, 65, who correctly predicted the commodities rally in 1999. ``I'm that pessimistic about what's happening in the U.S.''

Rogers, delivering a presentation late yesterday at an investors' meeting organized by ABN Amro Markets in Amsterdam, said he expects the Chinese currency to quadruple in the next decade and that he is holding on to commodities such as platinum, gold, silver and palladium."


If you'd like to listen to an excerpt from Rogers' presentation to investors in Amsterdam, it is reproduced here courtesy of Bloomberg.

What's the rationale behind these calls for the dollar's eventual demise?

As Marc Faber recently noted in a lengthy interview with Bloomberg (and in seperate interviews with CNBC), the recent widespread bearishness might represent a contrarian buy signal for the dollar in the short-term, but this does not exactly cancel out the US currency's long-term problems.

In summary, expect continued deterioration in the dollar's purchasing power and increases in inflation over the longer term. Inflation will not be confined to the US; it has appeared and will continue to appear in countries across the globe.

Every government will try their damnedest to paper over their monetary inflation with ridiculous explanations and reconfigured price indexes which purport to show "low inflation". Still, worldwide inflation is here and it is only a question of which fiat currency will depreciate at the fastest rate against relatively hard currencies and gold.

For more on inflation and government statistics, see FSN Broadcast of October 13, 2007 with guest John Williams of Shadow Government Statistics.

Keep reading Finance Trends Matter for more news and commentary.

Australian Treasurer Warns Of Global Financial "Tsunami"

Darryl Mason
The Orstrahyun
Friday October 26, 2007

Treasurer Peter Costello knows that if his government loses the coming federal election, he can kiss goodbye his dream of one day becoming prime minister. But that's not all he will lose. Come the day after the election, if Costello is no longer the treasurer for the next three to four years, he will have disappointed his many local and international masters.

As we count down to election day, and the Howard government faces near certain defeat, Costello is getting grimly desperate. He is now lashing out out at the banks, the Reserve Bank in particular, the Labor Party in general but now also the global financial system.

The Australian economy, and the global economy in general, is weak and fragile he now tells us.

If his government loses the election, recession will descend. Few economists agree with Costello, but that won't shut him up.

Costello wants Australians to be terrified of daring to vote Labor. Think of your mortgage, think of your stock portfolio. His verbal terror campaign will grow only more shrill, and dangerous, as the election draws closer.

Labor will destroy, or at minimum thoroughly damage, the Australian economy, claims Costello. He may as well be standing on a street corner, with dried vomit on his shoes, a wine cask under his arm shouting, "You're all doomed! Doomed I tells ya!"

But even all that cheap talk fear-mongering doesn't fully explain his incredible statement on how the world markets are now facing a global financial "tsunami". It's his first missile in a coming volley, and he will inform us in coming days how the "tsunami" will affect the Australian economy, and in turn, the pockets of every Australian.

Mr Costello predicted the US economy would weaken in the wake of its subprime mortgage meltdown, and said the breakneck pace of Chinese growth could not continue.

At some stage, likely to coincide with a move to a floating exchange rate, the Chinese economy would unleash even greater instability on global markets than the US had.

"That will be a wild ride when that happens," he said. "That will set off a huge tsunami that will go through world financial markets."

Figures released yesterday show the Chinese economy grew at an annual rate of 11.5 per cent. Inflation has run above 6 per cent.

China's fixed exchange rate, widely seen as undervalued, has been blamed for the growing trade imbalance with the US, because it keeps the price of Chinese products artificially low.

"All flows of capital they have been sending to the US might reverse, and you will get a major realignment on major currency markets," Mr Costello said. "China is very strong but you can't just grow an economy in double figures on a long-term basis."

So Costello is saying that if China wanted to, they could utterly devastate the already staggering American economy. Is he admitting the American economy, and the world economy in general, is now at the mercy of China?

China now holds more than $1.3 trillion in US debt, that is the "flows of capital" Costello is talking about. Americans, on average, spend more than they earn and rely on Asian financial giants, like China, to buy up their debts. But China has been showing signs of preparing to dump some of that American debt, even if it means massive losses. American debt, in the form of Treasury bonds, are quickly becoming next to worthless on world markets, and China won't let itself be left holding that much in dead money. Also, more and more countries are now choosing to dump the American dollar as the international trading currency of choice, and the US dollar is losing its standing as the 'oil currency' on world markets. The Euro is now starting to take its place, for Iran, for Russia and, soon enough, probably for Japan as well.

Local, and international markets, play close attention to the words of the Australian treasurer. Costello is going to have to be very careful with his claims between now and election day.

Unless, of course, Costello's plan is to try and start stock market brush fires in the next month, in the hope that a fast storm of bad economic news, and plunging local share markets, will frighten Australians into voting the Howard government back into office.

As we've said before, there are many powerful, very wealthy people in this country, and internationally, who will suffer if the Howard government loses office, as they most surely will if things don't change dramatically in the next few weeks.

The Australian corporate elite have probably never had a cosier relationship with an Australian government in history, and that relationship will go through a process of transformation under Labor. To a point, anyway. But it's the kind of change the poisonously greedy don't want to undergo. They don't want to renegotiate, with a new government. They want the cosy relationship to stay the same.

The Australian people are not the only masters Costello serves. You shouldn't put any act of desperation beyond the reach of these people, or Costello himself, between now and election day.

They have so much to lose if the Howard government is swept from power.

We are unlikely to see a calm, and orderly, change of government.

Dollar drops to record low against euro

Peter Garnham
Financial Times
Friday October 26, 2007

The dollar fell to a record low against the euro on Friday as a recent run of weak US economic data heightened fears over the prospects for the world’s largest economy.

Analysts said poor housing market and durable goods figures from the US on Thursday had offered further evidence of economic slowdown that was very likely to prompt the Federal Reserve to cut US interest rates at its meeting October 31.

Derek Halpenny, senior currency economist at Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, said the chances of US economic contraction in the fourth quarter could not be ruled out.

“With that prospect in store for the US, the dollar will continue to slide,” he said.

The dollar dropped 0.3 per cent to a record low of $1.4377 against the euro, fell 0.2 per cent to a three-month low of $2.0550 against the pound and lost 0.1 per cent to SFr1.1645 against the Swiss franc.

Surging oil prices, which powered to fresh record highs, also hurt the dollar and boosted the currencies of oil producing countries.

The dollar fell 0.6 per cent to a 33-year low of C$0.9605 against the Canadian dollar and dropped 0.3 per cent to NKr5.3690 against the Norwegian krone.

Full article here.

2 Million Americans Face Losing Their Home

Short News
Friday October 26, 2007

An influential congressional committee warned yesterday that 2 million US families face losing their homes in a "tidal wave" of repossessions with an estimated cost of $71bn.

The figures are far greater than those estimated by the White House and are likely to heighten concern that America is slipping into recession pushed by a housing slump.

Democratic senator Charles Schumer told the committee "From New York to California, we are headed for billions in lost wealth, property values and tax revenues. The current tidal wave of foreclosures will soon turn into a tsunami”.

Source: business.guardian.co.uk

Iran warns: we're ready for war after US sanctions

Duncan Hooper
London Telegraph
Friday October 26, 2007

Iran has responded fiercely to the United States' unilateral imposition of sanctions, declaring that the measures are doomed to fail.

The head of the Revolutionary Guards, singled out by Washington as a "supporter of terrorism", insisted that his troops are more than ever ready to defend the ideals of the revolution, according to the BBC.

Foreign ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini declared: "The hostile American policies towards the respectable people of Iran and the country's legal institutions are contrary to international law, without value and - as in the past - doomed to failure."

The sanctions, the most severe action taken against Iran since the aftermath of 1979 revolution, are designed to cut international financial support to Teheran's theocratic regime and target the Revolutionary Guards in particular.

Announcing the decision, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice insisted that a "diplomatic solution" to the differences between Iran and the West was still possible but described the actions as part of a decision "to confront the threatening behaviour of the Iranians".

However, the move has deepened the rift within the international community over how to deal with Teheran.

Russian President Vladimir Putin indicated that the action was ill-thought out. "You can run around like mad people wielding razor blades," he said. "But it is not the best way to resolve the problem."

Growing frustration within the Bush administration at the blocking strategy of Moscow and Beijing against any United Nations measures on Iran is becoming increasingly evident.

Nicholas Burns, US Assistant Secretary of State, suggested that Russia and China are propping up President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's regime.

"The Russian government should stop selling arms to Iran and the Chinese government should stop investing in Iran," he told the BBC.

Family Members and Scientists File NIST Appeal

Reuters
Friday October 26, 2007

On April 11th, 2007, family members Bill Doyle and Bob McIlvaine, scientists Steven Jones and Kevin Ryan, architect Richard Gage and the group Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice filed a petition with NIST demanding that it correct its erroneous methods and findings.

On September 27th, NIST finally replied.

Messieurs McIlvaine, Jones, Ryan and Gage and the group Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice have now filed an appeal to NIST's reply.

A redacted version of the appeal can be read here.

"Thought Crime Bill" Could Ensnare Peaceful Activists

Fears that government could define "Internet radicalization" and criticism as terrorism mount, violent comments left on messageboards by trolls could be exploited to entrap peaceful 9/11 truthers

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Friday, October 26, 2007

A new bill that recently passed the House and is headed for Senate approval has online activists worried that the vague definitions used for defining the Internet's contribution to radicalization of potential terrorists could lead to a government crackdown on talk radio, free speech and the 9/11 truth movement.

The bill is H.R. 1955: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 and passed Congress after a bipartisan vote on October 23rd.

Ostensibly, the bill targets United States citizens because of its constant reference to basic Constitutional protections, but this has led some to fear that it is intended to shut down free speech on the Internet and stifle patriot and alternative talk radio networks.

The bill defines "violent radicalization" as "The process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change."

It further defines "homegrown terrorism" as "The use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States to intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives."

The term "planned use" has caused concerns that "thinking about violence," ie thought crime, could be considered a terrorist act. But since to plan violence must involve some form of planning, whether that be drawing up bomb diagrams or making violent statements, the real threat seems to have been overlooked.

A disturbing trend in recent months has been the proliferation of violent postings on messageboards of websites affiliated with peaceful 9/11 truth organizations.

These messages are being posted by shameless trolls, COINTELPRO operatives and their stooges in a clear effort to discredit the 9/11 truth movement by making us all appear to be crazy nutcases who plan to commit terrorist acts.

Establishment media hacks like Glenn Beck have then seized upon the idea to spew propaganda about how the next Timothy McVeigh will come from the truth movement, despite the fact that the leadership of the truth movement have practiced what they preach all along, by engaging in completely peaceful protests and other forms of non-violent educational activism.

The bill's reference to how "The Internet has aided in facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process in the United States by providing access to broad and constant streams of terrorist-related propaganda to United States citizens," is shocking.

Remember, the bill is not aimed at "Al-Qaeda" websites or arabic forums that post alleged Bin Laden video tapes, it is aimed at American citizens using American based websites, like the very one you're reading now.

The opportunity for the state to seize upon violent posts left by trolls and use them to entrap peaceful 9/11 truthers under the guise that they "promoted violence" should be a major concern for us all.

Our message is simply this - don't even try it.

We have preached a doctrine of absolute non-violence from the very beginning and we will continue to do so. Anyone who calls for violence in a messageboard post is either a Fed, a Mom's basement dwelling troll who spends their entire day attempting to debunk the 9/11 truth movement, or a completely deluded moron who is unrepresentative of the vast majority of the 9/11 truth movement.

Those individuals who advocate violence should be sought out and investigated individually. Any plans to try and entrap prominent 9/11 truth movement figures using guilt by association should be abandoned immediately and we will ceaselessly emphasize this point until this current wave of propaganda subsides.

Professor Predicts Human Race Will "split into two different species"

One race will be rich, beautiful, intelligent elite, the other will be goblin like underclass

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Fri
day, Oct 26, 2007

An evolutionary theorist from the London School of Economics has caused controversy by suggesting that the human race will reach its physical peak by the year 3000 and will then split into two different species, one perfect elite race and one regressed race of small ugly goblin like creatures.

Oliver Curry has forwarded his theory, the Bravo Evolution Report, based on sexual selection and an increasing move to use technology to enhance physical attributes and life expectancy.

Curry suggests that much like in HG Wells' novel The Time Machine, in 100,000 years a genetically perfected ruling elite will dominate the planet and be served by a dumbed down animalistic version of humanity.

The Daily Mail reports:

These humans will be between 6ft and 7ft tall and they will live up to 120 years.

"Physical features will be driven by indicators of health, youth and fertility that men and women have evolved to look for in potential mates," says the report, which suggests that advances in cosmetic surgery and other body modifying techniques will effectively homogenise our appearance.

Men will have symmetrical facial features, deeper voices and bigger penises, according to Curry in in a report commissioned for men's satellite TV channel Bravo.

Women will all have glossy hair, smooth hairless skin, large eyes and pert breasts, according to Curry.

Racial differences will be a thing of the past as interbreeding produces a single coffee-coloured skin tone.

The theory closely mirrors that of many proponents of the eugenics movement who have long promoted the idea of creating a kind of Nazi super-race, where the attractive and physically strong are genetically manufactured under laboratory conditions.

Throughout the 20th and into the 21st century eugenics has become a driving force in the push for a world government, a system of micro-managing race and subjugating the masses to elite control.

From Social Darwinism to Hitler's Third Reich to a future that will be impacted by neo-eugenics and the quest for human development, the movement continues to espouse a disgusting creed of racial and genetic purity.

Last week former head of the Human Genome Project until 1992, James Watson, fled the UK after causing outrage by suggesting that some humans, in particular ones with darker skin, are inherently less intelligent than others.

The geneticist explores this racist ideology further in his new book, writing, "there is no firm reason to anticipate that the intellectual capacities of peoples geographically separated in their evolution should prove to have evolved identically".

"Our wanting to reserve equal powers of reason as some universal heritage of humanity will not be enough to make it so," he says.

Alex Jones' new film Endgame explores the dark history of the eugenics movement and it's continuing influence upon our world today. The documentary exposes the agenda to divide and conquer the human race by the means of state-enforced eugenics, a mindset embraced by a large body of elite minds in government, science and academia today.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pentagon Holds ‘Bloggers Roundtables’ To Cater To Right-Wing Noise Machine

Think Progress
Friday October 26, 2007

Today, Glenn Greenwald observes that the military has become “rapidly politicized, fully incorporated into…the model of the Republican right-wing noise machine.” Since January, the Pentagon has sought advice from “political hacks” like Bush/Cheney ‘04 aide Steve Schmidt who recently “went over to Iraq to look at the communications capabilities” of the military.

Another aspect of this politicization is the budding ties between the right-wing blogosphere and the military. Last October, the Pentagon announced that it was “starting an operation akin to a political campaign war room” in order to “set the record straight” on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. New teams were to “develop messages” focusing “on newer media, such as blogs.”

In February, the Pentagon began holding Bloggers Roundtables to “provide source material for stories in the blogosphere concerning the DoD and the Global War on Terrorism.” But at these roundtables, the Pentagon has reserved space almost exclusively for conservatives and military bloggers. Some examples of the bloggers on the roundtables just this month:

Wizbang
Weekly Standard
Threats Watch
Qando.net
U.S. Cavalry On Point
Griff Jenkins (Fox News anchor)
Air Force Pundit
Military.com
Defense Technology International
Austin Bay

When the program was started in February, the calls occurred approximately once a week; since September, the Defense Department PR team has surged the roundtables’ frequency to nearly every day. Many of these conservative bloggers regularly appear on the calls, receiving unfettered access to military strategy in Iraq and Afghanistan. One military official explained the real intent:

[W]e’re trying to do as many of these type of blogger calls as possible to let folks know what is really going on out there and to provide the opportunity for people to hear and write about it.

Despite the regular frequency of the “Blogger Roundtables,” progressive bloggers or anti-war military bloggers are rarely featured. Furthermore, small blogs like that of Fox News anchor Griff Jenkins are featured on the calls while more prominent progressive blogs are not.

Bipartisan Consensus: Iraq, Many More Years of War

Jack A. Smith
Global Research
October 24, 2007

After a few skirmishes, congressional Democrats have fled the field of battle with the Republicans over the matter of withdrawing some U.S. troops from Iraq. Ending the war itself was never a serious part of the several-month debate, although many Americans thought it was.

A consensus seems to be building in Washington that views a long term U.S. military presence in Iraq as a valuable geostrategic asset in the quest for regional and global hegemony. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates is now talking about an occupation of an unlimited number of years with a minimum of 40,000 U.S. troops. The Democratic Party and the majority of its politicians in Congress are expected to go along with this.

The Democratic leadership has declared it now seeks compromise with the Bush Administration and Republicans in Congress, and isn¹t willing to force the issue of troop withdrawal. Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama and John Edwards ‹ leading candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination ‹ have all been quoted as suggesting that the war will not end for at least five-and-a-half more years (the end of the new presidential term). According to a Sept. 29 article in the Washington Post, the important question for these candidates “is no longer whether U.S. forces will remain in Iraq but what size, mission and length a post-buildup [post-surge], post-Bush force would take on.”

It also appears that the centrist majority of the Democratic delegation in the House and Senate is committed to keeping a large contingent of American troops in Iraq at least as long as Clinton, Obama and Edwards predict. Public opinion polls in September showed that only 5% of the American people want the troops to remain that long, but they will be ignored unless a great deal more pressure is exerted by the American people and the U.S. peace movement.

Democratic leaders will make efforts to convince the voters throughout the year leading to the 2008 elections that they are doing their best to bring U.S. troops home. But it will be for show, in order to propel a Democrat into the White House on the basis of antiwar opinion.

Democratic House and Senate leaders, Rep. Nancy Pelosi and Sen. Harry Reid, claim that the threat of a Republican filibuster and a veto from President George W. Bush constitute a double whammy preventing the Democratic majority in both houses of Congress from passing legislation to withdraw the U.S. Army of Occupation from Iraq.

At best, this argument is disingenuous. All the Democrats in Congress need do is exercise their constitutional right to withhold funds to continue the war, allocating monies only for the swift withdrawal of all American troops. A majority can do it. In the Senate, if the Democrats can¹t accumulate 51 votes, all they¹d need is 41 to mount a filibuster which would prevent the funding bill from being called for a vote. The refusal to attempt such action is an indication that the Democrats have other plans in mind. The Democratic congressional leadership insists de-funding would be unpopular with the voters and may cost them the election. But that is misleading.

Once the March 2003 invasion began, the Democratic Party has been as committed as the Republicans to winning the Iraq war, despite the antiwar views of a small minority of legislators within its ranks. Democratic leaders think they can conduct the war better than the blundering Bush Administration. Winning in Iraq was their position in the 2004 election with John Kerry and it is their position now. The difference is that Democratic leaders said it openly then and conceal it now because public opinion has changed.

The “peace party,” as the Dems have positioned themselves in the election, talks about withdrawal but the fact is that its most extreme proposal has been for a gradual and partial withdrawal that would keep up to 50,000 American troops in Iraq for many years. With them would be a huge number of mercenaries and tens of thousands of civilians now providing services that the military used to handle just a decade ago.

The U.S. will wind up spending some $2 trillion dollars on the Iraq project if it ends in a couple of years, and much more if it lasts a decade or so, as seems likely. Washington will not simply walk away from an investment of this size. There is too much at stake, including control over one of the largest reserves of petroleum under the Earth, and America¹s domination of the entire Middle East.

Here, in our view, is the Democratic leadership¹s simultaneous two-stage prescription for “victory” in Iraq:

1. After a Democrat becomes the next president, they will begin the process of partial withdrawal over several years. This will reduce popular opposition, even as hostilities continue. After a year or two, as Iraqi troops play more of a front-line role, the number of US. casualities will drop considerably, further eroding the demand for an end to the war.

2. During this time, the U.S. will fund, train, field and control the huge Iraqi army so that it does most of the fighting. The Pentagon will back it up with tens of thousands of U.S. Special Forces and other troops stationed in impregnable bases and supported by a vast expansion of American air power. Buy off as much of the opposition as possible. Promise to invest in rebuilding part of the infrastructure. Create an informal but effective separation of Iraq into three parts ‹ Kurd, Shia, Sunni ‹ to reduce communal strife. Maintain control over whatever Iraq government it is convenient to put in power and direct affairs, as now, from Washington. Bring in the UN as cover.

There are other aspects to Washington¹s triumph in an unjust war, but these are key. If it works, the U.S. military will remain in Iraq for many years. How many? How about 10 to 50 years?

The U.S. has stationed almost 40,000 troops, missiles, bombers and nuclear weapons in South Korea for over a half century, and they are not about to leave despite the so-called “shortage” of American troops in Iraq. “Protecting” South Korea is not the reason. The existence of substantial U.S. military power an hour or two away from China, Russia and Japan is a major forward thrust in the geostrategic drive for world hegemony.

Maintaining a powerful military force in the client state of Iraq for decades will be an even more important geostrategic maneuver, if it works out. One reason, as former Federal Reserve boss Alan Greenspan let slip in his new book, is that ‘the Iraq war is largely about oil.² Of course it is, but there¹s more.

The U.S. seeks to become so powerfully entrenched in Iraq that it is given first grabs at the oil for a reasonable price, plus influence over who else gets the oil. This is why the Congress and the White House are demanding that Baghdad agree to the ‘benchmark’ about de-nationalizing the oil fields and allowing U.S. companies to earn super profits for extracting and delivering this strategic commodity. When the corporations get in and the oil starts flowing, naturally they will have to be protected by reliable American forces.

The geostrategic reason for Washington to remain a politically and militarily dominant force in Iraq is to facilitate the extension of U.S. hegemony throughout the Middle East, with Russia and China very much in mind.

The U.S. is engaged in am undeclared new cold war with both China and the revived, Putin-era Russia. The principal area of contention between Beijing and Moscow on the one hand, and Washington on the other, is that both China and Russia are aligned in opposing the concept of a unipolar world order wherein the United States operates as the dominating superpower and world cop, as it has done since the Soviet downfall.

The alternative is a multipolar system where several countries or regions operate as essentially equal powers, with the UN playing a larger role. Washington rejects, and suggests it will fight against, any erosion in its dominant unipolar position. This contradiction will be resolved in the next decades, one way or the other. In an important speech Oct. 15, Chinese President Hu Jintao declared that the ‘trend toward a multipolar world is irreversible.²

The U.S. will be empowered significantly in this geostrategic struggle if it can sufficiently control the oil-rich states of the Middle East to the point of influencing which outside states can and cannot purchase or drill for the region¹s oil. With influence such as this, first in Iraq and then the region, the U.S. will guarantee itself abundant supplies of this vital but diminishing energy resource for many decades to come. In the process this will reduce its own dependence on certain politically problematic sources such as Venezuela.

Washington believes that its European allies are becoming too dependant on oil and natural gas from Russia. Should America¹s plans for the Middle East succeed, enough oil could be made available to the European Union/NATO countries at attractive prices to draw them away from Moscow. Naturally such a circumstance would make the Europeans more dependent on America in exchange.

China comes into the picture because of a desperate need for energy resources to continue its role as the world¹s manufacturing resource, as well as a requirement to satisfy the domestic needs of a population four times larger than the United States. With decisive influence over the disposition of the world¹s largest oil fields, Washington could threaten to prevent China¹s access to Middle East oil should push come to shove over Beijing¹s economic power and the unipolar issue. China seeks Russian oil, but would be reluctant to become principally dependent on Moscow¹s energy supplies. Each is a proud and important nation seeking an independent place in the sun, and wary of falling under the other¹s shadow.

A large, permanent garrison in Iraq will transport Washington closer to its geopolitical goals. A presence of this magnitude will allow the U.S. to militarily threaten Iran, Syria, and Lebanon whenever “necessary” It will further bolster Israel, and enhance U.S. control of the region while extending its reach closer to southern Russia.

These are the main reasons we believe Washington¹s intention is a long occupation in Iraq and why there will be little real opposition from the Democratic or Republican parties. The war has been bipartisan from the day it began and, aside from salvos of unpleasant rhetoric, probably will remain so under a somewhat different configuration with a Democratic president in the White House.

Washington may never attain its long range objectives, of course. The Pentagon¹s Army of Occupation and it¹s creation, the ‘Iraqi² army, may never be able to ’stabilize² Iraq, and the situation will continue to worsen. The American people, already sick of the war, may see through the phased, partial withdrawal scheme, and recognize it for what it is: a mechanism for continuing the war for years to come.

The U.S. antiwar movement, in combination with pubic opinion, may be able to frustrate the plans for a long occupation. But its many components will have to be far more politically savvy, united in action, independent of the two ruling parties, and willing to escalate its confrontation with whoever the powers may be. At this stage it appears that a large sector of the peace forces, While still calling for withdrawal, will mainly spend next year seeking to elect Democrats in the 2008 elections.

A New Era of Unrestrained Mercantilism

The International Forecaster
October 15 2007

If there are no borders or tariffs, transnational conglomerates, banks and central banks, etc. would be able to operate at will and impoverish just about everyone. It is the old British mercantilism on the loose again. The major banks of the world think they control the world presently and to a great extent that is about to come to an end. The financial system worldwide is now out of control and there is no way to regain control. All the elitists can do is stop a crash landing. This is in part why we have mercenary armies on our soil and under contract to government. They will be used to control the public under Martial law. These elitist conglomerates even have their own intelligence sections and they employ those mercenary outfits to provide security.

The latest blast from the White House was to prepare for terror. This is the call for states and cities to make contracts with private security companies to hire mercenaries to guard companies and even communities against the phantom ravages of terrorism. Better yet, it is a step along the road to Martial law. We are hearing stories of entire communities being put behind walls and barbed wire with mercenaries guarding the complexes 24/7 to assure safety. We read 36 publications a day in 5 languages, most American publications, and we cannot believe the crime we see. Their precautions are not just against crime, they are being pushed against communities by Washington and the likes of Blackwater to fend off terrorists. Private armies are in vogue and that is not good, because there forces could as well quickly become the enemy at the command of government. The then against us mentality is beginning to show its face in wealthy communities and among elitists. What the elitists are attempting won’t work if for no other reason than there are too many have-nots, and as they found out in the French Revolution you cannot kill them all, there are just too many of them. These multinational, transnational types may have their private armies but in the final analysis it won’t give them protection they seek. People are going to be very mad when they finally realize what has been done to them, and they won’t be taking any prisoners. You might say Mad Max lives.

The Wall Street Journal says that despite the seeming easing of the credit crisis in the wake of last month’s aggressive easing by the Fed, banks are still sitting on hundreds of billions of buyout loans. The paper adds that unless the pace of sales picks up, the banks will be stuck with $400 to $800 billion in toxic loans for sometime to come, and a scenario that will prove problematic if the economy slows, which it will, and corporate profits head south, which they will.

Only the highest quality tranches are finding takers, the paper is being sold at discounted levels. Only $30 billion of $310 billion of North American LBO loans has been sold so far, with $100 billion in debt expected to hit the market in just the next month. On Tuesday, the big Tocom shorts cut their net shorts by 3,370 contracts to 42,195, as Goldman increased their shorts by 27 contracts to 12,531. Silver shorts were cut by 182 contracts to 2,008.

Only a little more than a year is left before George and the neocons leave office and they have issued a new Homeland Security strategy calling on citizens and governments to develop a “culture of preparedness” to deal with natural disasters and terrorism. The 53-word document emphasizes an all-hazards approach to disasters.

First is the focus on al Qaeda’s desire to obtain weapons of mass destruction. Then there is the spread of improvised explosive devices from battlefields in Iraq and Afghanistan to America. The policy is ludicrous. It is more fear mongering to create an enemy that doesn’t exist to keep the American populace in fear. This is also an effort to assure that Congress gives the president authority to eavesdrop on suspected terrorists in order to build a more perfect police state. We are being prepared for something that doesn’t exist, or exists only in the diseased minds of the administration.

America’s mortgage crisis is going to get considerably worse because of the level of fraudulent lending by mortgage originators and banks is much higher than previously estimated and we predicted. Defaults on subprime mortgages will continue to soar for another 18 months as unqualified mortgage holders struggle to meet their repayments, and tightening credit markets make ARM resets impossible. Our projection for economic growth in 2007 is 2% and zero to 1% in 2008. Thus, as unemployment rises more panic will ensue. Our big question is if governments tell us there has been so much fraud, why haven’t they brought criminal charges against lenders? The answer is if they do the world will find out that the Fed and our government encouraged the fraudulent lending – that is why. Then we will have to indict the people who approved and sanctioned such actions, such as Sir Alan Greenspan and our President.

In August foreclosures jumped 115% to 243,947 yoy, or one in 510 households of which about 40% end in forced sale or repossession. As this takes place house prices fall exacerbating the situation.

In the Dallas-Ft. Worth area, new housing projects fell 30% during the third quarter yoy and sales of new homes fell 20% with homes under $200,000 seeing the biggest decline. Cargo containers coming into US ports were supposed to set a record this year, but in reality imports are shrinking, off 1.4%.

The average vacancy rate in strip malls stands at 7.3% as of 6/30/07, and is expected to rise to 7.6% by yearend, the highest level since 1935.

The US Treasury 2007 budget deficit reported in at $162.8 billion as of 9/30 and the prior deficit was revised to $248.2 billion from $247.7 billion.

Home foreclosures doubled in September you at 223,538, including default and auction notices and bank repossessions, an 8% decline in August. California led the way with 51,259 and Florida was second with 33,354. That is one for every 557 households.

The Business Council and Conference Board found that 44.3% of 61 top CEO’s forecast economic conditions in their own industry would get worse over the next six months, while 16.4% see improvement. Thirty-nine percent see conditions unchanged; 24.4% saw worsening conditions, while 60% saw conditions staying the same.

Countrywide funded 44% fewer mortgage loans in September, while delinquencies increased and foreclosures doubled. They cut 4,935 jobs last month, leaving them with 55,932. They will cut 12,000 jobs, or 20% by December.

What the public is finally starting to realize is that inflation is a deliberate policy that will go on endlessly. People now looking for a crunch-up boom and soon everyone will want to swap dollars for real goods, no matter whether they need them or not. The idea is to get rid of the fiat currency. This happened to the continental currency of 1781 and to the French mandates territoriaux in 1796, and with the German marks in 1923.

September import price index increases were 1% mom and 5.2% yoy. This is inflationary as our government and the Fed members tell us they see no import price inflation.

FBI Warns Again Of Shoe Bomb Danger

CBS News
October 26, 2007

The joint FBI-Homeland Security bulletin, obtained by CBS News today, bluntly warns that terrorists are still working to use “modified footwear as a concealment method for explosive devices,” CBS News correspondent Bob Orr reports.

The alert follows the discovery of bomb detonators - expertly hidden in the hollowed-out soles of this pair of shoes - found aboard a European bus last month.

Intelligence officials say the shoes were not being worn at the time, but instead were being used, as the document says, “to smuggle electric blasting caps across international borders for use in a terrorist attack.”

“The terrorists have an interest in explosive devices. They are trying to figure out the best way to push them, to move them through the system,” said CBS News counterterrorism analyst Paul Kurtz.

Shoes have been used by terrorists before.

Three months after 9/11, al Qaeda operative Richard Reid tried to blow up an American Airlines jet with a shoe bomb similar to the one shown in this test.

Now at U.S. airports, scanners X-ray all passengers’ shoes and carry on bags, searching for explosives.

Still, experts worry that a team of terrorists could beat security by carrying unassembled parts of a bomb past a checkpoint.

“Where one person will carry component A, the next person will carry component B, and they will meet together past the safety point, past the checkpoint and reassemble,” explained Mike White, the director of training for Michael Stapleton Associates and a former head of the NYPD bomb squad.

Officials say there is no specific intelligence that terrorists are preparing new attacks against America.

But, the threat remains high - and the bulletin warns law enforcement officials not to assume that routine objects, like shoes, are always what they appear to be.

Pandemic test undertaken by financial services paints dire scenario

Patrick Thibodeau
Computerworld
October 24, 2007

If a pandemic strikes the U.S., it will kill about 1.7 million people, hospitalize 9 million, exhaust antiviral medications and reduce basic food supplies, according to a planning scenario developed by financial service firms preparing for such a catastrophe.

This particular disaster occurred only on paper. But those grim numbers are some of the pandemic planning assumptions used by nearly 3,000 banks, insurance companies and security firms in a just-concluded, three-week, paper-based exercise that may have been the largest pandemic test of its kind.

In each week of this drill, participants — some 10,000 people were involved — received an updated scenario and were asked to assess their capability to deliver services as the pandemic deepened and then abated.

“We wanted to look at the impact a pandemic can have on our sector,” said George Hender, chairman of the Financial Services Coordinating Council, in a teleconference Wednesday. “One of the things that we tried to do is put some real stress on the firms.”

During the height of the pandemic, which was estimated to occur midway through the scenario, participants were asked to consider operating with an absentee rate of nearly 50% — above the 35% to 40% rate federal officials believe may actually happen, said Hender. “We deliberately took the rate up much higher to see where their stress points were,” he said.

The financial services groups are now sharing the pandemic flu exercise information, and all the scenarios are available for download.

The U.S. Department of Treasury is also a sponsor of the test, and Valerie Abend, deputy assistant secretary for critical infrastructure protection and compliance at the department, said the financial services industry has been “thinking long and hard about a pandemic.”

“We are one of the most prepared, I would argue, if not the most prepared of the critical infrastructures that are out there,” said Abend.

But the financial services firms won’t really know how prepared they are until the end of the year. The thousands of pages of data collected during the test, which began in the last week of September, are still being analyzed and a final report is due at year’s end. But based on some preliminary feedback from participants, the financial service firms weren’t handing out too many gold stars for readiness.

When asked “based on the lessons learned from the exercise, how effective are your organization’s business continuity plans for a pandemic,” 56% answered “moderately,” the next highest group was “minimally,” at 28%. Only 12% said their business continuity planning was very effective.

The three-week scenario compresses the 12-week period a pandemic wave would likely last. Among the other things that may happen in an actual pandemic are school closings, as well as blackouts or brownouts in major metro areas because of degraded service as a result of absenteeism. Internet service throughput could be reduced by 50% due to congestion, and Web browsing timeouts would become common. Airlines would cut schedules, and garbage would pile up on streets.

Many frustrations would arise. Working ATMs might be scarce, and call centers may not have enough staff to help. Health insurance claim volume would rise 20%. Auto claims are expected to fall 10%, since there would be less traffic on the road. But for those who are driving, gas prices would be high and fuel supplies reduced.

Putin: Bush “Like a Madman with a Razor Blade” On Iran

MIKE ECKEL
Associated Press
Oct 25, 2007

Putin warns against more Iran sanctions

LISBON, Portugal - Russian President Vladimir Putin warned strongly Thursday against imposing new international sanctions on Iran, in words that appeared to be a response to newly announced U.S. measures to punish Tehran.

Putin spoke hours after Washington cut off Iranian military and banking institutions from the American financial system. The U.S. said the sanctions were in response to Iran’s defiance of U.N. demands to curb its nuclear program and its alleged support for terrorism.

Arriving for a summit with European Union leaders, the Russian leader did not make any direct reference to the U.S. announcement., but he said the standoff with Iran will have to be resolved through patient talks.

“Why worsen the situation and bring it to a dead end by threatening sanctions or military action?” Putin asked. “Running around like a madman with a razor blade, waving it around, is not the best way to resolve the situation.”

Russia, which is building Iran’s first nuclear power plant, has opposed a new push for a third round of U.N. sanctions over the Iranian defiance of a Security Council demand that it suspend enriching uranium.

The U.S. and its allies suspect Iran is secretly trying to develop nuclear weapons, a charge that the Tehran regime denies. Iran says it is only working to produce fuel for nuclear reactors to generate electricity and insists it will not give up uranium enrichment.

Speaking at a news conference after talks with Portuguese President Anibal Cavaco Silva, Putin pointed to the long negotiations with North Korea that led to an agreement earlier this year for that communist nation to begin dismantling its nuclear facilities.

“Not long ago it didn’t seem possible to resolve the situation with North Korea’s nuclear program, but we have practically solved it relying on peaceful means,” he said.

Putin has rebuffed Western calls for more sanctions against Iran by saying he has seen no evidence the Iranians are working on atomic weapons. But he said Thursday that when he visited Tehran last week, he reaffirmed Russia’s strong opposition to the spread of such weapons.

On another matter, Putin warned against independence for Kosovo, a predominantly ethnic Albanian province of Serbia that is another difficult issue between Russia and the West.

A Western-backed plan would grant the province internationally supervised independence, but Putin said giving in to independence demands from Kosovo’s Albanians would encourage separatist trends in many European nations and former Soviet states.

“Why keep rocking the foundations of the international law, encourage and develop separatism in Europe and the ex-Soviet space?” he said.

Putin’s annual meeting with EU leaders Friday seemed likely to be one of the most contentious in recent years, with a long-standing series of disagreements standing in the way of any partnership agreement between Russia and the 27-nation bloc.

Their recent summits have seen a steady decline in relations because of disputes over trade, energy, human rights, conflicts in the Balkans and other issues.

Just two minor deals were expected to be announced after Friday’s meeting — one to increase cooperation in fighting drug use and trafficking, the other to boost Russian steel exports to western Europe.

Negotiators were not expected to resolve disagreements over energy, aviation, trade and human rights. The issue of visas for Russians traveling to the EU also is thorny.

Putin lamented that Moscow had good relations with some countries — Romania, for example — but prickly ties with others.

“The fewer barriers there are, including visa, the better,” he said.

Oil Rises to Record Above $91 on Supply Drop, Iran Sanctions

Angela Macdonald-Smith and Christian Schmollinger
Bloomberg
October 26, 2007

Crude oil rose to a record above $91 a barrel in New York on an unexpected drop in U.S. stockpiles and concern that supply from the Middle East may be disrupted.

Inventories last week fell 5.29 million barrels to the lowest since January, the U.S. Energy Department said. New U.S. sanctions against Iran, warnings of a Turkish assault on Kurdish militants in Iraq and a falling dollar helped push prices higher. Brent futures in London reached a record.

“The market has been particularly surprised by that 5 million-barrel drop in crude, that was really one out of left- field,” said Mark Pervan, a commodity strategist at Australia & New Zealand Banking Group Ltd. in Melbourne. “As much as we’re seeing concern about Middle East stability, it’s a dollar-driven story as well. It’s a bit of a perfect storm.”

Crude oil for December delivery rose as much as 64 cents, or 0.7 percent, to $91.10 a barrel in after-hours electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange, the highest since trading began in 1983. It traded at $91.02 at 12:20 p.m. Singapore time. Prices are 51 percent higher than a year ago.

Yesterday the contract jumped $3.36, or 3.9 percent, to $90.46 a barrel, a record close. It was the biggest one-day gain since April 23.

Record oil prices are raising concerns that inflation will rise and lower growth in the global economy. The Group of Seven industrial nations said in a statement last week that high crude levels will moderate growth going forward.

Singapore Airlines

Singapore Airlines Ltd., Southeast Asia’s largest carrier, is concerned about the rising price of jet fuel, Chief Executive Officer Chew Choon Seng said in Sydney today. The airline raised fuel surcharges on Oct. 18 by as much as $6 a ticket because of higher oil prices.

Brent crude oil for December settlement rose as much as $1.32, or 1.5 percent, to a record $88.80 a barrel on the London-based ICE Futures Europe exchange. It was at $88.11 a barrel at 12:18 p.m. Singapore time. The contract, the benchmark for two-thirds of global supplies, closed yesterday up $3.11, or 3.7 percent, at $87.48 a barrel.

The Bush administration yesterday announced new sanctions against Iran that designate the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps as a proliferator of weapons of mass destruction and its Quds force as a supporter of terrorism.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who joined Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson in announcing the sanctions, said the steps were designed “to increase the costs to Iran of its irresponsible behavior.”

The U.S. is trying to get Iran to halt uranium enrichment that it suspects is aimed at developing nuclear weapons. Iran, which holds the world’s second-largest oil and natural gas reserves, says it wants to enrich uranium to produce electricity. The dispute has bolstered oil prices since January 2006 because of concern that oil shipments from the country might be cut.

Turkey Warning

Turkey warned of a wider military assault into northern Iraq and called on the U.S. to join the fight as the army shelled suspected militant camps over the Iraqi border.

Turkey won’t stand by after Iraq allowed members of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK, to use bases on Iraqi territory for attacks that left 42 Turks dead this month, President Abdullah Gul said yesterday in Ankara. Shelling by Turkish artillery of the Iraqi side of the border continued yesterday, CNN Turk reported.

“The U.S. sanctions against Iran seem to be pushing things to some sort of confrontation,” said Gavin Wendt, senior resources analyst at Fat Prophets in Sydney. “When you’re talking Iran and Iraq, two of the biggest holders of oil reserves, no wonder markets are nervous.”

Dollar Effect

The dollar approached a record low against the euro after reports showed U.S. orders for durable goods fell unexpectedly and initial jobless claims were higher than forecast, signaling economic growth may weaken. Slower growth supports the argument for the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates next week.

China yesterday said its economy, the biggest contributor to global growth, expanded 11.5 percent in the third quarter from a year earlier.

“The currency is really holding up commodities market generally,” ANZ Bank’s Pervan said. “Dovetailing that with strong Chinese growth yesterday, it’s enough to give oil that extra momentum.”

OPEC ‘Surprising’

The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, supplier of about 40 percent of the world’s oil, doesn’t plan additional output even with record oil prices, Venezuelan Energy Minister Rafael Ramirez told reporters in Caracas yesterday.

“There is enough oil in the market,” Ramirez said. OPEC is “not planning to increase production.”

OPEC’s refusal to consider an increase is surprising, said Gerard Burg, a minerals and energy economist at National Australia Bank Ltd. in Melbourne.

“I wouldn’t have thought that the majority of producers would be happy with prices above $90,” Burg said. “I would have thought that the force of Saudi Arabia and its more dovish supporters might have brought a bit more oil on.”

“There seems to be a consensus view that there’s enough oil in the market, it’s really just concerns that are driving it,” Burg said.

Endgame: How Dare Alex Jones Tell the Truth

Kurt Nimmo
TruthNews

October 25, 2007

Alex Jones’ Endgame is a horror film. It’s creepier than Nosferatu, the German Expressionist film featuring the vampire Count Orlok. Endgame, Blueprint for Global Enslavement, has its own cast of imperial functionaries, although they are not vampires, not exactly. Vampires are preternatural beings, fictional reanimated corpses, the stuff of Bram Stoker novels and low budget movies, whereas the cast of characters revealed in Endgame are flesh and blood, craven yet mundane, although it can be said they shirk the light of day or rather what sunshine announces same as their fictive counterparts.

No, the monsters of Endgame are real, they do not evaporate when the cinema lights go up or the last page is flipped. Endgame’s miscreations are older than the sort of European folklore responsible for the myth of Dracula, more ruthless an supposedly unstoppable than John Carpenter’s Michael Myers.

Eugenics is the horror behind Endgame. Not warm and fuzzy altruism in search of higher IQs and a beneficial reduction of disease, but rather mass extermination, social Darwinism, and the dysgenic dreams of the ruling elite who are determined, as the Georgia Guidestones concede, to reduce the world population to a mere 500,000,000 “in perpetual balance with nature.”

Endgame spells out in chilling detail how the blue-blood, aristocratic, wealthy elite played a central role in the development of eugenics, resulting not only in the Eugenics Record Office in America, located in Cold Spring Harbor in New York, and responsible for mass sterilization, but also responsible for the Kaiser Wilhelm Institutes that ultimately led to the Nazi eugenics program terminating at the end of the rail line in Auschwitz. For as Rockefeller factotum Merton Lambert once averred, “The world has a cancer, and that cancer is man.”

Merton was not talking about his boss, but rather you and me, the commoners, the disease to be cured by the “particularly deadly virus” envisioned by the misanthrope Prince Philip. Hitler’s ultimate failure did not put a damper to eugenics. It is alive and well today in the environmental movement, well oiled by Rockefeller foundations and stealth NGOs.

Like Erin Alfaro, writing for National Expositor, I was kept awake at night after watching Endgame. “Rarely does a documentary stir the mind so much that it keeps you awake at night, plotting your escape from a seemingly unchangeable future,” writes Alfaro.

Of course, the future is not unchangeable, although it may seem that way. Endgame, as a well-produced yet bone-chilling documentary, is just the tool required to foment change, beginning with the startled awareness of what our appointed leaders, more scary than anything George Romero or Stephen King might conjure, have in mind for us.

Just the other day, Bill Clinton—the Rhodes scholar student of New World Order historian Carroll Quigley, groomed for the presidency by the Bilderbergers—admonished a brave handful of 9/11 truthseekers for the crime of speaking up. “How dare you. How dare you,” Clinton imperiously growled as the truthseekers declared 9/11 to be an inside job. “I’ll be glad to talk to you if you shut up and let me talk.”

Naturally, Clinton and his one-world pedigree of hand-picked insiders, determined to cull the masses, are not inclined to let us, the commoners, talk, although they do insist we shut up and let them talk—incessantly and sans meaningful opposition, as aristocrats are perennially accustomed.

How dare Alex Jones tell the truth. How dare he make Endgame, certainly a horror film, and reveal the ghastly master plan designed to not only enslave the planet but reduce its numbers in psychopathic fashion.

Endgame is surely impertinence of the sort the elite not only detest, but decidedly fear same as the cockroach fears and scurries when a light is switched on.

ALEX JONES’ ENDGAME will be released on the WEB OCT. 26 and on DVD on NOV. 1. View High Quality Trailers at www.endgamethemovie.com