View source for Fall Of The Republic - The Presidency Of Barack H Obama
by [[by::Alex Jones]] Last week, the head of the country's central bank floated the idea of dumping the greenback as the world's reserve currency, replacing it with an international currency. Thousands of people gathered to hear Barack Obama deliver key foreign policy speech on his current European tour. His vision for America's place in a New World Order... Returning vets could be a risk to our nation. We've gotta give them a stake in creating the kind of world order that I think all of us would like to see. ...and one of the ways it will drive the change is through global governance. I think the New World Order is emerging. This is a hoax and a scam which is designed to transfer wealth and power from the private sector to the government sector and from the government of the United States to a world government. And those people who have been yelling, "Oh, the UN's gonna take over global government... " [Conspiracy theorists.] They're conspiracy... They've been crazy, but now, they're right. And who got the money? Hundreds and hundreds of banks. Any bank or.. that has, access to the US Federal Reserve system. Can you tell us who they are? No. ...you know, financial terrorism. They have the ability to tweak the knob. I am proposing that the Federal Reserve be granted new authority. The ultimate goal of the carbon tax and the cap-and-trade is to destroy production. This energy tax is the largest tax increase in American history. We're actually creating a global warming police. So number one, they can come in, the Federal Government can come in, and inspect your house and send you the bill. We're setting up a global warming gestapo... One of the things, that if you talk to our generals, they are desperate for, is a civilian counterpart to our military forces. I am fierce. And this... is what I wear. Senator Barack Obama's presidential campaign is asking Missouri law enforcement to target anyone who lies or runs a misleading television ad. I've now been in 57 states. I think one left to go. The President, when he was in Europe last week, he met with the King of Saudi Arabia. He appeared to bow. President Obama today proposed something new, something called "prolonged detention." Pre-crime is where people are arrested and incarcerated to prevent crimes that they have not yet committed. Fall of the Republic The Presidency of Barack Obama It's the World Wrestling Federation. It's the Washington Wrestling Federation. They put on this show that they're bitter rivalries, you know, villains, and they really don't like each other. But behind closed doors, they buddy up for a drink and make deals. Both the Republican and Democratic Parties are owned by the same global elites. And on issues that matter to those global elites, they act as one. They wrap themselves in the American flag and they've talked about preserving American heritage and principals and all the while they're working to merge us into a New World Order where our sovereignty will be destroyed. We'll lose all connection with our American heritage. With Bush, you knew exactly what you were getting. It was... There was no iron fist in a velvet glove. It was just the iron fist, whereas with Obama you've got the velvet glove and the iron fist. ...you know, a very sharp guy, very smooth, knows exactly what he's doing. For that reason, far more dangerous than Bush. Ha, Ha, Ha. Well, at the end of last year I was willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt. I thought it was premature to write this guy off. But now that he's been in office for a while, it's obvious that he is very tight with the Goldman Sachs and JP Morgans on Wall Street. And he is extremely compliant and pliant to the wishes of the large banks going back to the... what we saw with Robert Rubin under the Clinton administration, changing laws in favor of the banks. And he's not doing anything to stop the banks. He's helping the banks continue to do what they were doing under Bush. So in fact, he's just a continuation of Bush on the subject of markets and finance, which is the most important part of his policy right now. People who voted for Obama wanted real change and are getting platitudes. They're getting a lot of nice talk. But nothing in the way of concrete change is taking place. In this town, business as usual. There's one puppet master that controls the left, and there's a... The same puppet master controls the right. They control the Republican Party and they control the Democratic Party. This is not a party issue. This is not a left-right issue. The question is, "Who should government serve?" And it should serve the people. In fact, government is just a tool of a dominant minority that uses economics and government law to enforce upon the public various mandates. The right-left paradigm in the US, in US politics, is taken directly from the commercial world or the corporate world. In the business world you have Coke-Pepsi; you have McDonald's-Burger King; you've got AT&T and Verizon; you know, you've got duopolies. And a duopoly gives the illusion of there being some competition and some choice. And it looks a little bit better than a monopoly. So, for example in communist Russia, if they had communist Russia red and communist Russia chartreuse, there would have been the illusion of choice and something akin to democracy in Russia. But they simply said, "Forget it. We're just gonna go with red." In the US, they have this left-right paradigm which, unfortunately, it doesn't take them out of the, the hard, cold fact that there is no choice. There's no social justice. There's only one choice, which is to supply more rent to the rent-seekers who have now taken the whole system hostage. We've seen the limitations on government whittled away. We have seen this erosion to the point where today it seems like nobody does care and right now in Washington, DC, we have seen a fall of the Republic. If the United States doesn't have its Bill of Rights and Constitution, it doesn't exist anymore. It's just more real estate, more dirt. And that's what these global corporatists want. They want to completely dismantle the Bill of Rights and Constitution and they're doing that right now. This is the fall of the Republic. Our nation is dying. "We The People" that live in this fine country need to stand up, get involved, and take the system back. It's the Bill of Rights and Constitution that we owe allegiance to, not to a political party and not to politicians that wrap themselves in the red, white and blue, while at the same time they destroy everything that that sacred flag stands for. So in the old days you used to have this globe that... with 180-some-odd countries, and a few of those countries had a lot of power, like the Soviet Union, and the United Kingdom and the United States at various times. But today you might better look at that globe and say that it's surrounded by huge clouds swirling around the planet. They know no national boundaries. They don't follow any specific sets of laws. And these are the big corporations. They basically control politicians around the world because they have all the money, and politicians always need money to get elected or to run their governments if they're... if they're not democratically elected politicians. They control the mainstream press either through outright ownership or advertising budgets. They have massive amounts of lobbyists in Washington that have tremendous influence on our President and, and Congress. And they really are calling the shots. They form partnerships with the Chinese and the Taiwanese and the Tibetans, or with the Israelis and Arab nations, with Brazilians and Indians, with whatever country and whatever group of people has resources that they covet. And they... So for the first time in history we really have this new form of a... of an empire. Barack Obama is a puppet of the New World Order to bring in a World Bank, to destroy the economy of this country, and to bring in global governance. And no matter how likable the fellow is, we as citizens of this country need to stand up and say, "No." We have to stand up to preserve a Republic here and rule of law, which is under dire threat. We don't want to live under a world government of the corporations, by the corporations and for the corporations. I don't want to believe it and that's probably what holds me back on it. But I'm certainly seeing enough indication that it could be true. Absolutely, because they're always talking about Mexico and the United States and Canada ending up like Europe. And there's things done politically that seem to take us in that direction. And so I think it's incumbent upon all of us as American citizens to pay attention. This move to world government is not about roses, and happiness, and peace and a better life. It's about enslavement. They said in their own writings from the earliest times to the present, the world they're bringing in is to be a world where everyone who is born, or will be allowed to be born, would be born to serve the state. That would be their sole function. That's if they had a job for you to fulfill or a need for you. July 4th, 2009. Across the United States citizens gathered to celebrate the Republic's founding, 233 years before. Most people in the crowds were aware that America was going in the wrong direction, that things were changing for the worse. But few could grasp the sheer magnitude of corruption and looting running rampant like a disease through the heart of the nation. The engine of America's greatness is not just its liberties but the people's willingness to fight to keep them. Hundreds of other nations have had much larger populations and greater resources, but have never produced one-tenth of the wealth, science and art that the United States has. Why? In America, you had an amazing situation because you had, you had the Founding Fathers who figured out that they could deconstruct the Monarchy in such a way... and then reproduce it with the three primary branches of government, in a way that would create checks and balances and separation of powers. So you could have room, therefore, for individuals to work within the context of a cooperative, which is a democratic system of government, but it would still have enough room for individuals to rise up and become profitable and self-sustaining and rich in the... in the pursuit of happiness, without becoming dictatorial. But unfortunately, over the years, since all of those separation of powers have been cut away and all of the... the beautiful design by the Founding Fathers has been co-opted by one corporate entity, one communist corporate entity, you don't have that anymore. So what we have... We're back to where we were before the revolution. You have one monolithic state. For the first hundred years or so of the United States, after the 1700s when we freed ourselves from British rule, no corporation was permitted... was given a charter in the United States, unless it served the public good. It had to prove that. And then its charter only lasted for 10 years or sometimes as long as the project to build a bridge or a canal or something lasted. But it... it had to be up for review and it could only get chartered if it was... if it was shown that it was serving the public interest. That changed, primarily because John D. Rockefeller kind of bribed Delaware and New Jersey, to begin with, into accepting a different system where he said, "Listen. If I pay you lots of money in terms of taxes, etc., I want to be licensed to not have to serve the public good. I want to be able to get around the law." And, state after state after state changed at that point. In the United States, our Constitution and Bill of Rights recognizes that individuals have innate freedoms that can never be taken away by any government. For the first time in history, the people were unbound to reach for their full potential, producing and out-competing every other nation on earth. The rights of free speech, self-defense, private property, due process of law and many others, ignited a revolution in human development that threaten the despotic rule of monarchs and tyrants worldwide. But, the corrupt elites had studied history. They knew that great civilizations could only fall from within. They know from previous experience and history that civilizations come and go, and dwindle. They know the reasons why they come and go. Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about? --Maurice Strong, founder of the U.N. Environment Programme, from his Opening Speech, Rio Earth Summit, 1992. Maurice Strong is the man who said that they would never allow another country to rise up as powerful as America. It will never be allowed to happen again. And he said, "The best thing we can do is to tear down all the factories, all the top commerce of the United States, and level it and give it back to Nature." That... so that was the advice from this character, who has tremendous power at the United Nations, and was picked up and groomed by Rockefeller himself. Over the past decade, since the Kennedy assassination, approximately, you've had an ongoing oligarchical transformation of virtually every country in the world. And in the United States, it's taken the form of an oligarchical counterrevolution against the reforms of the 1930s with the Wall Street interest asserting itself as more and more dominant. And once bankers and oligarchs have power, the things that they do, you could call them a policy, you could call it something like a tropism, it's like the way a plant responds. Naturally, since they're oligarchs, they're gonna try to downgrade the standard of living of the vast majority of the population. They're gonna claim that the world is overpopulated, that industrialization, industrial pollution, and overpopulation are the main problems that face the world. And they're generally going to try to crush and mortify any kind of popular democracy or mass movements with any kind of progressive content. Nations rise and fall. They knew how debt could never be recuperated. They knew that disease or prolonged war could wipe out the population and the future populations that pay off debt. So these guys all work together. That's why it's no surprise that today you have Lord Rothschild coming out pushing the latest scam or religion that we must all believe in, which is global warming; which his personal bank, his family's bank in Switzerland, will be in charge of. They've run the system, the whole economic system of the world, for the last two-and-a-half hundred years, so why shouldn't they also run the economic system for the next few hundred years. The question of a ruling class, oligarchy as a ruling class, is posed by Plato in The Republic, where we find that oligarchy is a constitution full of many evils, where the rich dominate the government by buying it, and the average individual or the poor count for absolutely nothing. Oligarchy is a frame of mind. In other words, if you're a banker, this is already a world view. It's a world outlook, and it implies the policies that have got us here, right, Malthusian policies, zero-growth policies, driving down the standard of living, attempts to wipe out all kinds of mass institutions that might be a countervailing force. This is a scientific dictatorship which Bertrand Russell said, and the Huxleys said, both Aldous and Julian Huxley said, they would bring in the scientifically-controlled society. It's not just family planning, which really means abortion and so on. It's global planning, which is... which is, literally, sterilization and abortion, worldwide for the ideal reduced society, and not just... across the board through genetics, through the genome projects, through the constant IQ testing... Globalization has economically destroyed the world. You've got at least 40 to 50,000 people who die every day worldwide, from starvation, malnutrition and diseases which can be cured for pennies, such as diarrhea. And if you ask one of these Malthusian oligarchs, "Don't you think that something should be done to raise the standard of living in Africa or South Asia?" They'll say, "No, we can to do that. That would ruin the planet. That would oppress Mother Earth." So that's oligarchy. Class consciousness, in this sense, is absolutely essential. If you think that bankers are the same as you, you're wrong. F. Scott Fitzgerald once told Hemingway, "You know, the rich are different from us." And Hemingway said, "Yeah, they have more money." And F. Scott Fitzgerald replied, "No, it's something much deeper." It's a whole different world. To be an oligarch, to be a Rockefeller or something of this sort means that you're in a completely different world with values which are the reverse of human values. Now, if you allow the oligarchs to continue to dominate, the destruction of world civilization is a matter of a few decades at the very, very most. So, choose. To force their agenda through, the elites are employing one of their favorite tools: artificial crisis creation, also known as the Hegelian dialectic of problem-reaction-solution. You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that: it's an opportunity to do things that you'd think that you could not do before. The earth's ruling elite are first and foremost monopoly men. The founder of the Rockefeller Clan summed it up simply when he said, "Competition is a sin." Rockefeller himself said that competition was a sin. And people quipped at that, thinking it was one of his little jokes. He made many jokes about saving pennies and stuff like this. But in reality he was telling you a truth; that competition, to a man like him, who worked for a much larger organization, competition truly was a sin. And, the cartels have been formed ever since, have become much bigger, more powerful; cartels which can literally command governments, sometimes to go to war on their behalf, have occurred. The economic crash of 2008 and 2009 was an engineered crisis designed to cripple sovereign nations globally to make away for a world currency and a new Bank of the World. China's holding, what, $1.5 trillion worth? All over the world they're holding US currencies. They want to get out of them in a way where they're not going to lose on there investments. There's going to be a world currency. There's going to be a new reserve currency. They're going to push it through the IMF. That's going to be the banksters that are going to be in charge of it. It's going to happen and it's going to happen sooner rather than later. There was also a question to Geithner, "Do you think that the US dollar ought to be replaced?" And he... he blew it. He had a moment of, of candor where he said, "Yeah, we're, we're considering that." So on that day the dollar went down one percent within a couple of minutes. ...a Chinese government proposal about a... about a global currency and about the IMF regulations. The new IMF idea about, you know, the general agreements to borrow and then having a faster, ability to disburse to the margin markets. As I understand this proposal, it's a proposal designed to increase the use of the IMF's special drawing rights. And, we're actually quite open to that suggestion. Timothy Geithner's comment about the global currency's not off the table because, it's not off the table and it's going to come. The whole world is ready to bail out of bucks. They just wanna do it in a way where they're not gonna lose on their investments. That's all that's going on. All the people around the world, the Japanese who have a trillion, the Chinese who have a trillion, the Saudis have a trillion, the Europeans something something similar; they're all gonna dump it at the same time. The rush for the exits. And that will then create hyperinflation. When America finishes supplying the manpower and the military for standardization of the world into the one system -- and they want a secular world society, with a hint of greening and Gaea worship for sustainability reasons -- America, as they're finishing off this agenda, they'll be pulling the rug from underneath Americans at home at same time towards the latter stages. When the dollar starts to slide -- and this was always the nightmare of Paul Adolph Volker, who is now sitting in the Obama White House -- once the dollar starts to go, there's nothing to stop it. There's no useful way you that can stop it once it begins to gather momentum. So I think we're facing the probability of some form of dollar panic combined with hyperinflation some time during the Obama presidency. They're now pulling the rug away from under the feet of the people. They're becoming rapidly a non-manufacturing country. Any country that can't manufacture its own goods even for self-defense, therefore is no... no longer sovereign, independent and is able to sustain itself; which tells you that this is all part of their plan. It started with the very beginning when you establish that there was a Federal Reserve system given the power of the state to create money out of nothing and to do so without any regard to will of the people, without any regard to what's behind the money system; in other words, strictly political and economic motives for the bankers and the politicians. Once you've granted that power to a group -- the Federal Reserve system -- the economic crisis was inevitable. This has happened before. Every time in history when the government was given the power -- or a group of banks in conjunction with the government -- was given the power to expand the money supply at will, those economic systems always wound up in crisis and always collapsed. So there's no reason to believe that the United States was given some kind of a "get out of jail free" card, an exemption from the processes of history. So the economic crisis began at the very beginning and, as a matter of fact, when the founders of the Federal Reserve system met on Jekyll Island back in 1910, and were drafting the... the Federal Reserve Act, one of the things they discussed was how to pass on the inevitable losses to the taxpayers. They knew that inevitably something like this would happen and they knew that there had to be some way to... to get out of it without destroying the banks, of course, because they were the banks, and they said, "Aha, we'll go into partnership with the government. We'll take our cartel agreement and pass it into law -- call it the Federal Reserve Act -- and we'll make the taxpayer come online and be responsible to bail us out if and when, when the failure finally comes." Who's gonna soak up the derivatives. Who's gonna soak up the debt, and who's gonna be penalized. And right now it looks like Wall Street's getting bailed out and the little guy in the middle of Main Street America are all going to, pay... pay the penalty. Can the economy be turning around here? Are happy days here again? And can we actually have growth without jobs? Is this an oxymoron: jobless recovery? We're going into the greatest depression. There will be no job growth. Unemployment will continue to escalate. Along with it so too will crime, poverty, kidnappings, boss-nappings. And the more things spin out of control, the harder the hammer's going to come down by the federal government to keep everyone in control. Power is much, much more important to them than money is. Money is only a ways to the means. Power is the end result. The elites' main goal is to destroy national sovereignty and individual independence. To consolidate their grip on power, the banksters create artificial debt bubbles that are mathematically impossible to pay back. These are those sinister toxic assets, the complex financial instruments that they talk about, but never really name. They're paper based on paper. They're credit default swaps, collateralized debt obligations, mortgaged-backed securities, asset-backed securities, structured investment vehicles, auction rate securities, and so on down the line. It's an immense mass of cancerous, fictitious, speculative paper, bloated in value, impossible to bail out. Triage the derivatives on their books. There's no way to bail out a 1.5 quadrillion dollar black hole of derivatives, but nevertheless they tried. The Wall Street cronies are crooks. If you leave the vault to the bank open, these people are gonna help themselves. The job of the government is to make sure there's somebody there to make sure the vault is closed and very few people have the combination. I'm William K. Black, Associate Professor of Economics and Law at the University of Missouri, Kansas City. I was a senior regulator in a number of different positions during the heart of the savings and loan crisis. On a staff level, I led the re-regulation of the savings and loan industry. The purpose of regulation and effective criminal prosecution is to make sure that cheaters don't prosper, that honest manufacturers win in competition. The primary driver of the current crisis is accounting control fraud. These are frauds led by the CEOs of the major lending institutions and major banks and institutional buyers of toxic waste product. How did it start? It started with mortgages, particularly non-prime mortgages. In September of 2004, the FBI warned that there was an epidemic of mortgage fraud -- their words -- and that this epidemic of mortgage fraud would cause an economic crisis at least as large as the savings and loan debacle, if it wasn't stopped. The FBI found that 80% of the mortgage fraud was being induced by the lenders, not by the borrowers. You know, much of the rage has been... been against the borrowers. But if you want rage, it should be at the CEOs who became fabulously wealthy by following a strategy based on fraud. The Wall Street people and their friends here at the Federal Reserve and at the US Treasury and down... down the Washington Mall here at the US Capitol, that's where the damage was done; and if people want to vent their anger, they need to vent it against these people. Between the Bush-Paulson administration and the Obama-Summers-Geithner-Volker administration, there's really a total continuity of economic and financial policy. Geithner was on board at the Fed, the New York Fed, dealing with all these institutions. He didn't get it. And then we had this fellow who came up afterward, Mr. Friedman. He was on the Goldman Sachs Board and he didn't last too long as a Fed Chairman. Why? Because he had a conflict of interest. Is it possible that there's so much conflict of interest here that all you folks don't even realize that you're helping people that you're associated with and you should be recusing yourself for America's, ethics? I, you know, I behaved with the... with the... You don't think you should have recused yourself when you asked Lehman to go into bankruptcy you didn't put Bear Stearns in bankruptcy and then you folded Merrill Lynch? And, I mean, isn't there some point where you gotta say, "Hey, I gotta conflict of interest here?" You don't feel any kind of scintilla of ethics on this thing at all? Totally. I... I operated very consistently within the ethic guidelines I had as Secretary of the Treasury and when it became... when it became clear that... that we had some very significant issues with Goldman Sachs and with... with... Why didn't you recuse yourself then? ...with... with Morgan Stanley. What I did then... It would have been very wrong for me to recuse myself. What I did was I went and got a waiver from the ethics agreement because when we had concerns... Who is in charge of the ethics agreement? What? Who is in charge of the ethics agreement that you got a waiver? We... we... we have... we have a office of... of ethics at Treasury and we have a White House ethics office. So you got it from the legal counsel from the White House? We... we... we got it from the... the... the government ethics office. So we had Snow, we had Paulson, now we have Geithner; all these people cut from the same bolt of cloth. These are not independent Treasury Secretaries. They're part of the problem, not part of any solution, and it would have been nice to see President Obama effect some change in Treasury, but he... of course he went and got a Wall Street insider as his Treasury Secretary. Everything that's speculative, parasitical, cancerous, bloated, from all these administrations going back to Carter and even beyond, comes together in the Obama administration. With Volker, with Summers, who's part of the economic crimes under Clinton: the guy who brought you derivatives and the abolition of the Glass-Steagall firewall. You could not have gotten a more perfect setup for a takeover from a previous government, the Bush regime and then the Obama regime. Now there are some authors out there already saying that it's the same bunch, and it's true. It's... it's the same bankers who put the same boys forward. Obama, far from helping the public and giving them something new, or giving them more power and say over their own affairs, has actually sided immediately with the bankers who, once again... once again have robbed the public blind and now they must get bailed out by your tax money. Obama does it all with left cover. He makes you think that he's somehow different from Bush, that this is somehow benevolent, that he cares about the poor. And in reality, this is the cruelest hoax and the most bogus sham. Obama is 1,000% devoted to Wall Street interests. When Wall Street says, "Jump," Obama jumps. And again, it's about 30 to 40 dollars for the bankers for every dollar that ever reaches an unemployed person or somebody who's on food stamps or some infrastructure building for highways. The hope with the Obama administration was that it would move us beyond this. But, unfortunately, what we're seeing more and more is that Obama has brought in many of the economists who bought into this system in the past that... Larry Summers is a... is a very good example. And... and... and... and so many of his economists, many of the people there; you can really almost, at this point, relate Obama to Hoover, who did something similar in his presidency, as opposed to Franklin Roosevelt, for example, who brought in a very fresh team. So, the concern here now is that Obama's falling into this trap of bringing in the same people who put us in the position that we're in today and other people who buy into the same theories that brought us here: this mutant form of capitalism. Presumably, what most politicians want to come in and say, "Hey, the problems of the past? They're due to the old guy, and I'm cleaning house and I'm gonna bring in a new team, and don't blame us for the things we've inherited." Can't say, "You know, those policies of the past, that came before were insane," because you've got the guy that was one of the key architects of those policies. People need to stop having allegiance to their political party. They need to have allegiance to the Bill of Rights, the Constitution, and what has made our Republic so special: the basic human rights and dignity that every citizen of this country inherently has. Not because it's some right given to us by government, but because our Bill of Rights, our Constitution, enshrines that these are inalienable rights given to us by God, that we inherently have as sentient, free, conscious beings. But instead the public cheers on the Republicans as they win or cheers on the Democrats as they defeat the Republicans. It's an endless, staged, gladiatorial event. Special interests own both parties and they project this false left-right paradigm up as like a movie screen and behind that, behind the throne the establishment is able to control our society and engineer it into this high-tech police state. If you try to let the finance oligarchs who created the crisis turn around and say they're the doctors who are gonna get you out of the crisis, they will dig you deeper and deeper into the bottomless abyss of world economic depression, financial collapse, and disintegration. The Democrats have really done more to destabilize the American economy and to help the big banks on Wall Street than the Republicans have done. I would imagine that the Republicans know a little bit more about finance and markets; enough that when someone like Goldman Sachs asks the Congress to change laws as they did in the 90s to do away with position limits on the futures contracts, the Republicans would have said, "No way. That's completely inconsistent with any notion of a fair market." But the Democrats, I have a feeling, are just not financially literate enough to say, "No." And I think that Goldman has very shrewdly positioned themselves with the Democrats because the Democrats typically, like in many NGOs that I've run into, they seem to have a... a complete inability to comprehend these issues of markets and finance and how it relates to social justice. So under the Democrats we also saw the repeal of Glass-Steagall. Glass-Steagall said there's an inherent conflict of interest between the commercial banking side, which is the lending side, and the investment banking side, which is taking an ownership position. And we have to end this conflict of interest by separating these two entities. You can have investment banks and you can have commercial banks, but they have to be separate. Do you think that the repeal of Glass-Steagall was a tragic mistake? No, I don't think so. You could be a commercial bank like Chase Manhattan or you could be an investment house like JP Morgan. Or, a bank like Bank of America or an investment house like Merrill Lynch. But you couldn't be both. And as the 90s went on the... the screaming hyenas of Wall Street were demanding that this prohibition, this regulation, be abolished. This was an illegal and inappropriate form of casino. The derivatives were being used and they were being unregulated and the people were getting 30:1, 40:1, 50:1 and sometimes 100:1 profits on the way up. And remember, derivatives are a zero-sum game, so there's nothing there. It's not like a piece of stock in, in General Electric or Ford or something like that, where there's supposed to be some value. Derivatives have no value. But the very people: Summers, and... and... and Geithner, and all the people at... at Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan who created these things made not millions or billions, but trillions on the way up, and now that these things are crashing, the very same folks, the very same folks are now put in charge of regulating these things and in charge of the bailout and they are giving money to the very rascals that created this problem, took the profits. The problem cannot be fixed. And this is on Obama's watch, right now. You have so many different schemes and mechanisms at play. It's sort of like after there's a blackout. You know, people in some parts of the country have been known to loot the local stores. You know, they go in, they grab the televisions and they grab the stereos. And basically, that's what the Wall Street gang has done. They've just engaged in this massive looting of... of... of money from their own companies and... and now from the US Treasury. There was a lady called Brooksley Born. She was the head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission under Clinton. And she said, "Look, we have these derivatives. Why don't we at least make them reportable? So we know how many there are and where they're... where they are." And she writes in a biographical account: she said, "I picked up the phone and Larry Summers was screaming at me that I was interfering with the wonderful inventiveness and ingenuity of Wall Street and their ability to come up with new financial products such as these derivatives." Brooksley Born was the chair of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), which regulates many financial derivatives. And she said there's a grave danger out there in the form of these credit default swaps. And credit default swaps are a exotic financial derivative or moderately exotic financial derivative that were sold on a bright shining lie that they were supposed to make markets more efficient. In fact they allow utterly insane gambles and they're really great devices for accounting fraud as well. She actually says, "I'm thinking of adopting this regulation." The Clinton administration goes berserk, and in particular Larry Summers, but also Rubin. Now behind Larry Summers there's another layer: Bob Rubin of Goldman Sachs, the Clinton administration and Citibank. And he also thought that derivatives were a wonderful thing for the US economy and he made sure that they were never regulated. Also, we can't forget Alan Greenspan over at the Federal Reserve. Now, you look at Summers. He is sitting in the White House today making policy for Obama. Summers tells Obama what to do. Summers tells Geithner what to do. He's also got some of his hatchet people in the administration. Mary Schapiro runs the Securities and Exchange Commission. She refuses to ban naked short selling and other market manipulations. You've also another guy called Gensler over at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission today. He is an acolyte and a supporter of the derivatives bubble. We made the new CFTC chair a guy who had helped to kill Brooksley Born's reform initiatives, and... and we just did this under the Obama administration. This was a preregistered, preorganised, predetermined event. Anybody who knows that if you allow the banks to become unregulated financial institutes with tsunami-like, weapons-of-mass-destruction-like financial instruments like derivatives; to allow that to run up to levels that are fifty, a hundred, two hundred times the gross domestic product, with no value, they know that they are taking the profits on going up; but they also know that the end result is the destruction and gutting of this economy. The scam is simple. The insiders by hard assets and political influence as the fiat bubbles expand. And then, at a time of their choosing, they purposefully implode the bubble. You've got a very small group of people and the Federal Reserve and the global central banking system and the Bank for International Settlements in Switzerland who are purposefully managing the boom and bust, credit supply, credit contraction, money supply growth, money supply contraction, to create artificial roller coasters and artificial volatility that they can trade around without taking any risk. It doesn't cost them any money. And if they do make a mistake because they're, as George Bush said, "Oh, the bankers on Wall Street are drunk." Yes, I'm certain. There's no question about it. Wall Street got drunk. That's one of the reasons I asked you to turn off your TV cameras. Let's say they walk in one day and they push the wrong button and they loose the bank a billion or 5 billion or 100 billion, they can appeal to the government to bail them out. It's a totally asymmetric relationship between bankers and the rest of the economy. If they make a mistake, they get bailed out. If everyone else makes a mistake, they get put in jail, called a terrorist, and we never hear from them again. But it's a more sophisticated form of slavery, and we are going through it today. We see that taxation is going up all the time with a... with a supposed crash of the banks that was not happening out of the blue. It was set up for this time. They could have kept it going for a another few years, if it suited them, and then crashed all the bubbles. But now is the time. As they say in their own writings, now is the time. One of the great benefits of an economic model from an economist's standpoint is you can basically get whatever results you want. You can manipulate the inputs to make that happen. And that makes it a very easy tool to use to hoodwink other people. These manufactured, these engineered financial catastrophes are the result of a central banking system that has ability to add and subtract credit, add and... add and subtract dollars and money at will to create this roller coaster effect, because, unlike most people, the banks are able to make profits as easily on the way down as they can on the way up in any given situation. Volatility is great for banks and professionals. Volatility is not great for the... the... most... most average people. Their operatives in government and media then hold the economy hostage by issuing the ultimatum: give us unlimited bailout money or the economy dies. What's being used is what I call -- to try to get the money -- is what I call the suicide threat where, you know, if anybody has ever seen the movie Blazing Saddles, the sheriff is surrounded by hostile town folks, he takes out his gun, points it at his head and says, you know, "Don't move or I'll shoot." Well, that's what the big banks are saying, you know, "Give us unlimited cash or we'll die. And if we die, you'll die because we're too big to fail." It is a false flag attack because Hank Paulson will get up in front of Congress and say, "We need 700 billion dollars because that thing, that existential threat, the market, is attacking us and we need this handout to fight Mr. Market. Mr. Market is out there. We need to fight Mr. Market. It's an existential threat." Meanwhile he's the one... He is Mr. Market. He's the one causing the problem. We had Paulson, a representative of Goldman Sachs, who happened to be running the US Treasury, came forward with a hysterical briefing for the Congress saying, "We, the Wall Street bankers, demand 700 billion dollars in bailouts." So they say, "Yes, we'll give you all the money you need." Well, why don't, you know...? These are arsonists: Paulson, Tim... Tim Geithner, Bernanke. They're arsonists. They're asking for more matches. And the Congress is saying, "Who do we make the check out to? Who do we sell these matches to? Who do, who do, well who do we sell these matches to? Is a ton of matches enough? Can we send you some gasoline to go with those matches?" Like, "Yes please!" "Don't change our management. Don't pay us what assets are worth. Pay us way more than what our assets are really worth. Don't make us use honest accounting. Allow us to lie." We've just, under congressional pressure, changed the accounting rules for the express purpose of making sure that the big banks don't have to report honest losses. The only way they can pass this bill is by creating and sustaining a panic atmosphere. That atmosphere is not justified. Many of us were told in private conversations that if we voted against this bill on Monday, that the sky would fall, the market would drop two or three thousand points the first day, another couple thousand the second day. And a few members were even told that there would be martial law in America if we voted, "No." That's what I call fear mongering. We have, you know, people in the government threatening martial law or things to... to get their way in the Executive branch against Congress. You know... you know, if you put all these signs together it doesn't look good at all. To the extent we are a democracy we're sort of a hair breadth's away from a police state. Congress aided the bankers in carrying out the biggest heist in history with the so called banker bailout of 2008. The bailout money, the 13 trillion or so dollars that have been given to the banks, is sitting on the balance sheet of the banks, and that is incurring interest costs and that's going to precipitate the need to flush the system with more cash. And at some point the dam will break and you're gonna have very high inflation, some predict hyperinflation. You can not print phantom money out of thin air, backed by nothing, and producing practically nothing, without destroying the world economy. So unless we cut out the toxic funds, the toxic elements of this economy, every time we put in money on this bailout, it's just feeding the fire. It's not making things better. What should have happened is that those banks and investment banks should have been seized. They should have been seized by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Those are zombie banks. The Chase Manhattan, JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Citibank, Wells Fargo, Wachovia, so on down the line to AIG and the insurance realm. These are zombie institutions, insolvent, bankrupt. The only thing to do with them is to seize them, put them them through Chapter 11 bankruptcy. That'll probably turn into Chapter 7 bankruptcy, liquidation. And above all, triage the derivatives on their books. There's no way to bailout a 1.5 quadrillion dollar black hole of derivatives. But nevertheless, they tried. They will, of course, try to regain some of this money back, but the debts, unlike any other period in history, are now a quantum size bigger than the entire global GDP by a factor of 50 to 100. It's... it's almost infinite amount of debt. If you really look at the numbers, because of the massive, massive debt... And right now, total debt in this country is about 375% of the Gross Domestic Product, and that's not including derivatives. If you put the derivatives in, it's probably 20 to 30 times Gross Domestic Product. It's beyond what anybody has ever even considered. While they were looting North America into the ground, the international banking syndicate was simultaneously executing the same scam in over 100 other nations. So, who got the money? ...to financial institutions in Europe and other countries. Which ones? I don't know. Half-a-trillion dollars and you don't know who got the money? Well, Obama's got one difficulty with this Congress: it's the number of freshmen Democrats that got elected. Many of these people know that they got their seats from... and... and... many of which got seats in... in... the Senate and Congress from long-held Republican seats. They know that the the people back in their states and in... in their constituencies will not tolerate this any longer. So, up against the Republicans and the blue dog Democrats are these freshmen congressmen, Democratic congressmen and senators, and they're not... They don't seem like they want to go along with that program. So, if there's any hope it'll come from these freshmen. The Constitution says, "No money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in consequence of appropriations made by law." Do you think...? This money is not drawn from the Treasury. Well, let's talk about that. Do you think its consistent with the spirit of that provision of the Constitution for a group like the FOMC to hand out a half-a-trillion dollars to foreigners, without any action by this Congress? Congress approved it in the Federal Reserve Act. When was that? Quite a long time ago. I don't know the exact date. I think 19... The original Act is 1914, I believe. I don't know whether this provision was in 1914 or not, but the Federal Reserve Act was in 1913. Alright, and at that time the entire Gross National Product of this country was well under half-a-trillion dollars, wasn't it? I don't know. Is it safe to say that nobody in 1913 contemplated that your small little group of people would decide to hand out half-a-trillion dollars to foreigners? What the bailout legislation really did was give a blank check backed up by US taxpayers to offshore megabanks. Of course, Congress has oversight. If you read the Constitution, our founders were very clear. Anything to do with taxes and money is put into the hands of both houses of Congress together. Both houses of Congress together must approve it because it's a "buck", because that's why we fought the Revolution. Taxation without representation was part of it. Foreign banks: Soci?t? G?n?rale of France, about 10 billion for a French bank; Deutsche Bank of Germany... Did Deutsche Bank need the money? How much did did they get from the bailout? Well, they told us they got 12 billion from the bailout. ...and Barclay's Bank of Britain, 10 billion. So, you're up to almost 50 billion dollars to bail out a series of foreign banks that were derivatives counterparties of AIG, plus Goldman Sachs. This is the biggest swindle -- not only in the history of the United States -- this is the biggest swindle and transfer of wealth in the history of the western countries. ...and we've seen all these cronies from Wall Street, with the combination to the vaults around the country and they've just looted the Treasury and the banks and, and the securities industry dry. This is, by probably an order of magnitude, the biggest fraud in... in history. Over the next 10 months, 23.7 trillion was stolen from the US Treasury. The gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. McHenry. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and the tune of 23 trillion, 700 billion dollars worth of taxpayer exposure for the bailouts is quite striking. The calculation right now is that with Obama, we've got 24 trillion dollars as a line of credit available only to Wall Street banks, insurance companies, credit cards, mutual fund companies and others, but only financial institutions. 24 trillion dollars of money from the Federal Reserve, from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and from the Treasury in the form of the bailout of October, 2008. The Federal Reserve, the private holding company for the offshore banks, arrogantly told Congress and the American people that it was none of their business what the private banks did with the people's money. One very interestingly exchange: Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont asking Bernanke, "We have given upwards of two trillion dollars to various financial institutions. You've gotta tell me, where did the money go?" And Bernanke simply stonewalls and says, "I won't tell you." And who got the money? Hundreds and hundreds of banks; any bank or... that has access to the US Federal Reserve system. Can you tell us who they are? No. Do you have to be a large, greedy, reckless financial institution to apply for these monies? There is no subsidy. There is no capital involved. There is no gift involved. It is a collateralized, short-term liquid loan that is both over-collateralized and is recourse to the company itself. We have never lost a penny doing it. And how can other institutions make..., get... get... those loans as well? According to the law, we are supposed to be lending to depository institutions... Let me just say this, Mr. Chairman, I have a hard time understanding how you have put 2.2 trillion dollars at risk without making those names available, those institutions public, and we're gonna introduce legislation today, by the way, to demand that you do that. It is unacceptable to me that that goes on. Behind me the Federal Reserve is probably the least transparent agency in the federal government. One could even argue that the Central Intelligence Agency is more transparent than the Federal Reserve. The fact is, is that the American people want to know more of the "secrets of the temple", as the book was, before you were born: The Secrets of the Temple. The Fed, as you know, is just a monopoly by the bankers. This is simply putting the foxes in charge of the hen house. Personally, I'd be in favor of Congress just nationalizing the Fed. And... and getting the bankers out of there. They're... they're, you know, they're just stealing from the American people. Put it directly in the hands of Congress and... and let Congress decide rather than this cabal of bankers deciding their own rates of profit at the expense of the American people. Since the Federal Reserve's creation in 1913, patriots have labored tirelessly to alert the American people to the true nature of the Federal Reserve. Throughout its 90-plus year history, most Americans falsely believed that the Federal Reserve was a government agency. But today, scientific opinion polls show the vast majority of the public is aware of the fact that the Federal Reserve is a front company for an offshore private banking cartel that dominates, not just the United States, but almost every other nation on earth. It's never been written about in any book that I've found as to who gave these guys the authority or permission to be the international bankers for the world. Why would you even need international bankers? Why would any government agree to... to use them? Why would you need to use them? Why can't any country create its own money? That tells you there was already an existing superstructure, already in exist... in existence may be two, three hundred years ago to give these guys permission to somehow be the overlords of all money for all countries. Polls also reveal that 75% of Americans demand a public audit of the secretive organization. By the summer of 2009, Congressman Ron Paul's bill to audit the Fed had gained more than 280 sponsors in the House. But the private Fed's high-powered lobbyists were able to block a vote on the bill in the Senate. That only piqued the public's interest. I have another amendment to... I have been informed by the... that the majority plans to block consideration of this amendment, which is number 1367 regarding the transparency at the Federal Reserve. Madame President, I'd like to call up amendment 1367. Without objection, the clerk will report. The senator from South Carolina, Mr. DeMint, proposes amendment number 1367. Senator from Nebraska. I make a point of order against the DeMint amendment, that it's legislation on appropriations. Madame President? The point of order is well taken. The amendment... I... I regret the objection. The amendment falls. The people began asking themselves, "Why couldn't there be an audit of the Federal Reserve?" The Fed has never once been audited in the whole period of time, in the almost 90-some-odd years that the Fed has been around; the most powerful agency and... independent agency, it is never once been audited. This is an absolute crime against the freedoms of this country. Do you think it would cause problems for the Fed or for the economy if... if that legislation was to pass? My concern about the legislation is that if the GAO is auditing, not only the operational aspects of our programs and the details of the programs, but is making judgments about our policy decisions that would effectively be a takeover of monetary policy by the Congress. Is that your position, that this bill, if it were to be passed, would interfere directly with interest rates... setting interest rates? If we were to raise interest rates at a meeting, and someone in the Congress didn't like that, and said, "I want the GAO to audit that decision," wouldn't that be viewed as an interference? I would... I wouldn't think so. This is just reviewing it and you can do what you want. The Federal Reserve has never been subjected to an outside audit. And if you audit them, it's very likely that Greenspan, Bernanke and Volker might all go to jail. It was announced today, earlier today, that there will be a hearing on HR 1207, the bill to audit the Federal Reserve Bank. This will be the first independent audit in the Federal Reserve's 96 year history, and it's long overdue. Months ago, I asked the Vice-Chairman of the Federal Reserve, "Who received the one trillion dollars in funds that the Federal Reserve has handed out to domestic institutions?" He said, "I'm not gonna tell you." And then more recently the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, I asked him, "Who received the half-trillion?" -- we're talking about 500 billion dollars that the Federal Reserve handed over to foreign central banks -- "Who did they disseminate that money to?" And he said, "I don't know." Half-a-trillion dollars and he doesn't know. It's long overdue. We need to audit the Federal Reserve and I'm happy to say that that's... we're gonna have a hearing on that very soon. The only way, really, America can get out of the current mess is, you've got to shut the Fed down completely! Get rid of the Fed. You've gotta put the money printing mechanism back under the roof of the federal government instead of outsourcing it to the Fed. Why were the banks' front men Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke all over the news saying that they were above the law? What is the proper relationship? What should be the proper relationship between a chairman of the Fed and a president of the United States? There is no a... other agency of government which can overrule actions that we take. What the relationships are don't frankly matter. A grass roots movement demanding that the private Federal Reserve be nationalized, exploded in size across the country. The momentum had shifted. Now the arrogant central bankers were the ones running scared. They had planned to use their staged crisis to bring in an all-powerful central Bank of the World. Immediately every country goes into action at the same time. The... the International Monetary Fund is mentioned at the G-20 meeting. It's said that it must be brought to its full power and we need a Bretton Woods part II for world taxation. What is global government? For decades the media denied it existed. But now they are saying, "Oh yes, there's going to be a global government. A new Bank of the World and we're gonna pay our carbon taxes to it." What is it? It's nothing more than a private, hostile, corporate takeover, of every sovereign nation on earth. And then when you look at the philosophy of these global corporate chieftains, it is one of domination of the poor, domination of the population. It is a view that human life just isn't cheap; no, human life is a negative. And so no matter what they do, they have the rationale that it's in the greater interest to get rid of more human lives. They are so arrogant, and, and they are so sure of themselves. They are saying, "Yes, we created the European Union. We created the euro." And these... are from the people of the Bilderberg. "We are going to create a world bank. We're going to create a world government." They're saying it out loud and clearly. Suddenly, across the planet, their regional front banks had been identified by sovereign populations as the illegitimate shadow governments that they are. The controllers had moved too quickly and revealed their hand. Populations around the globe were seeing through the establishment's fa?ade, past the puppet governments, and to the global architects that were pulling their strings. Where are the American people? Why have they lost their dignity? What is stopping them from speaking out? Why have they become little mice that follow pied pipers? How can they look up to these pathetic politicians? Just say, "No." Just say, "No." Just say, "No." Go sit down. I have a question for this young man! He has a right to be represented! I'm his father! And I want to talk to you face-to-face! I'm not a lobbyist with all kinds of money to stuff in your pocket, so that you can cheat the... the citizens of this country. So I'll leave, and you can do whatever the hell you please to do. One day God's gonna stand before you and he's gonna judge you, and the rest of your damned cronies up on the Hill. And then you will your just deserves. As the public begins to awaken to the fact that Barack Obama has cold-bloodedly betrayed the pledges he made to the American people, the establishment media and Democratic leaders have invoked the tactic of divide and conquer. I think they are Astroturf; you be the judge of carrying swastikas and symbols like that to a town meeting on health care. An overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man. Desperate to ram their agenda through, they have played the race and class cards. You start to wonder whether in fact the word "socialist" is becoming a code word, whether or not "socialist" is becoming the new "N" word. When I heard people going after the First Lady and the number of staff people they have, it sounds racist to me. It is essential that the establishment play the population off against each other along the lines of Republican-Democrat, liberal-conservative, black and white. As long as the people are fighting with each other, they can never get together and remove the corporate dictatorship that has criminally seized power through the national security state. Just as George W. Bush betrayed his foolish followers, so must Obama. Because his only allegiance is to his offshore masters. President Obama today nominated Ben Bernanke for a second four-year term as Federal Reserve Chairman. The President called his actions on the global financial crisis, "bold, and out of the box". As an expert on the causes of the Great Depression, I'm sure Ben never imagined that he would be part of a team responsible for preventing another; but because of his background, his temperament, his courage and his creativity, that's exactly what he has helped to achieve. And that is why I am reappointing him to another term as Chairman of the Federal Reserve. So Obama has made it quite clear by his actions, never mind his words, his actions, as to who owns him, who... who he works for, and who he serves. And it's not the American people. It is so obvious to anyone paying attention that the President of the United States is not the real person in control. Whether it is Gerald Ford or Jimmy Carter or Ronald Reagan or... or Clinton or Bush or Bush, Obama is no different. And to think that he is an independent figure is just crazy. And as Franklin Delano Roosevelt said, "Presidents are selected, they are not elected." Obama pledged that he would end NAFTA and GATT and has since fought to expand both of them. Obama promised that he would have the most transparent administration ever, and he is already more secretive than Bush and Cheney ever were, even making it a secret who visits the White House. I can make a firm pledge. If your family earns less than 250,000 dollars a year... If you make less than a quarter million dollars a year... If you are a family making two... less than 250,000 dollars a year... You will not see your taxes increased a single dime. You will not see your taxes go up. You will not see your taxes increase one single dime. ...not your capital gains tax, not your payroll tax, not your income tax, no tax! ...not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes. ...not your payroll tax, not your capital gains tax, not your income tax, no tax! Your taxes will not go up! ...'cause the last thing you need is higher taxes when we're in a recession like this. So you won't get one under an Obama administration. Obama made the centerpiece of his campaign the pledge that taxes would not be raised on anyone making under 125,000 dollars a year. He has since gone back on that promise as well; and has proposed new taxes on payroll, energy, home mortgage deductions, and scores of other taxes. He made a pledge, he said, [I understand] "I'm not gonna raise taxes on anyone making under [I understand] 250. [Um, hmm] Is that pledge still active? Uh, we are going to let the process work its way through. So it's not? So it's not? So it's not? We're going to let the process work its way through. [Laughter.] Alright? The Senate is looking especially at this issue of... of capping the deductions for... for health care that employers and employees now get. That would... would... would be an increase, a tax increase for many families earning under 250,000 dollars. But the President said he was open to it, so that means that the tax pledge he made back in September is not longer operative? Obama said he was going to abolish the Patriot Act; he now vigorously defends it. We saw the same type of flip-flop when it came to warrantless wiretapping of the American people. Look what Obama's done with wiretapping, surveillance. He's brought it to heights even beyond what George Bush... the disgusting levels that he brought it to. So we have more surveillance. Now they are talking about --what is it called-- cybercom? The new Pentagon secret cyber society that's going to be watching over us? To get those terrorists. You gotta get those terrorists. So now they'll be invading our privacy even more. So, I mean, it really... it really almost makes you ask the question, "Would it have been better if we never invented the internet and had to use paper and pencil or whatever." Now Obama is setting up the cyber-security command, which the government admits completely ends the Fourth Amendment and allows President Obama to shut off the internet in the United States whenever he wishes. Indeed, in today's world acts of terror could come, not only from a few extremists in suicide vests, but from a few keystrokes on the computer: a weapon of mass disruption.
Fall Of The Republic - The Presidency Of Barack H Obama
Retrieved from "
What links here
About Truth Transcripts