Why Are the Bankers and Ex-Intel Types Running For Their Lives? (Confirmed for MONTHS by my vanishing sources)

[GoodETxSG]

Speaking of my former employer... Their wonderful tactics never cease to amaze either. Any guesses where they borrow their tactics? The consolidation of power and agencies in the various "Act's" and "Order's" that are bantered to protect the homeland by protecting its economy are nothing more than a consolidation of power over the public... to exercise at will. Every single law and Presidential Order has been carefully planned for decades by the Council on Foreign Relations.
==============
http://www.infowars.com/the-stuka-ho...ou-to-believe/

“The Stuka” – How The Fed Manipulates You Into Believing What It Wants You To Believe

W. Ben Hunt
zerohedge.com
December 10, 2013



Up to the walls of Jericho
With sword drawn in his hand
Go blow them horns, cried Joshua
The battle is in my hands
– “Joshua Fit the Battle of Jericho”, traditional African-American spiritual
At the outset of World War II, the German Luftwaffe attached an ear-splitting siren – the Jericho Trumpet – to the Junker Ju-87 dive-bomber, commonly called the Stuka. Dive-bombers are wonderful tactical aircraft if you have control of the skies, highly effective against tanks, vehicles of all sorts, even smaller ships, but they simply don’t carry enough ordnance to be a strategic weapon. They can certainly help you win a battle, but they’re unlikely to help you win a war. By attaching the Jericho Trumpet, however, the Stuka became a psychological weapon as much as a physical weapon, striking fear in a much wider swath than the actual bombs. During the early Blitzkrieg days of the war, the Stuka had exactly this sort of strategic effect, crushing the morale of the Polish army in particular.
Because it was a propeller-driven siren, the Jericho Trumpet actually made the Stuka a less effective dive-bomber, slowing its air speed and making it an easier target to hit. This was a trade-off that the German High Command was happy to make so long as the Stuka maintained its mystique as a terrifying harbinger of death from above, but that mystique was shattered once the Royal Air Force started shooting them down by the dozens in the Battle of Britain. By the end of 1940 the Stuka was almost entirely redeployed from the Western Front to the East, and those planes that remained had their sirens removed. As Churchill famously said of the RAF, “never was so much owed by so many to so few,” and it’s the psychological dimension of this victory that is so striking to me. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the military tides of World War II shifted in the West at exactly the same moment that the Luftwaffe took off the Jericho Trumpet and the Stuka lost its mojo.
Today the financial media – and the WSJ’s Jon Hilsenrath in particular – is the Fed’s Jericho Trumpet. Unlike the Luftwaffe, the Fed is not trying to inspire terror, but they are similarly trying to turn a powerful tactical weapon into a strategic weapon through psychological means. The Fed is now embracing the use of communication as a policy tool in a totally separate manner from whatever concrete actions the communication is ostensibly about, and they use Hilsenrath (and a few others) as a modern-day Joshua to blow the horn. The Fed is now playing the Common Knowledge game openly and directly, making public statements through their media intermediaries to tell you how ALL market participants perceive reality, even though in fact NO market participant has a clear view of reality. In the Common Knowledge game – whether it’s the Island of the Green-Eyed Tribe that modern game theorists write about, the Newspaper Beauty Contest that Keynes wrote about in the 1930’s, or the Emperor’s New Clothes that Hans Christian Andersen wrote about in the 1830’s – the strong public statement of what “everyone knows” creates a reality where it is rational behavior for everyone to act as if they, too, see this reality … even if they privately don’t see it at all.
Here’s the money quote from Hilsenrath’s article last Friday after the November jobs report, titled (self-referentially enough) “Hilsenrath’s Five Takeaways on What the Jobs Report Means for the Fed”:
MARKETS BELIEVE TAPERING ISN’T TIGHTENING: Markets are positioned more to the Fed’s liking today than they were in September, when it put off reducing, or “tapering,” the monthly bond purchases. Most notably, the Fed’s message is sinking in that a wind down of the program won’t mean it’s in a hurry to raise short-term interest rates. Futures markets place a very low probability on Fed rate increases before 2015, in contrast to September, when fed funds futures markets indicated rate increases were expected by the end of 2014. The Fed has been trying to drive home the idea that “tapering is not tightening” for months and is likely to feel comforted that investors believe it as a pullback gets serious consideration.
In truth, the shift in the implied futures market expectations of short-term rate hikes from late 2014 into early 2015 says nothing about what “The Market” believes about tapering. It says a lot about the enormous effort that the Fed is putting into its forward guidance on rates, as a communications policy replacement for its prior reliance on forward guidance and linkage of unemployment rates and QE (a mistake that I wrote extensively about at the time and is now universally seen as a policy error). The Fed, through Hilsenrath, is trying to tell you how you should think about tapering. Not by giving you a substantive argument, but simply by announcing to you in a very authoritative voice what everyone else thinks about tapering.
Hey, don’t worry about tapering. No one else is worried about tapering. You are totally out of step with all the smart people if you’re worried about tapering. It’s duration of ZIRP that matters, not QE. Don’t you know that? Everyone else knows that. Maybe you’re just not very smart if you can’t see that, too. Can you see it now? Ah, good.
This is game-playing in an almost pure form. It’s smart and it’s effective. The siren from above is starting to wail: if you react negatively in your investment decisions to tapering, you are Fighting the Fed.
The bombs are going to drop – increased forward guidance on rates and decreased direct bond purchases – but these policies in and of themselves are just tactical. What’s really at stake is the strategic meaning of these policies, the belief system that takes hold (or doesn’t) around the power of the Fed to create market outcomes.
Over the next three or four months we’re going to see quite a battle for the hearts and minds of investors, with both “sides” employing the Narrative of Don’t Fight the Fed. On the one hand you will have the Fed, with their Jericho Trumpet of Hilsenrath et al shrieking at you a new interpretation of the Narrative: ZIRP is the source of the Fed’s power, not QE, so tapering is no big deal. On the other hand you also have the Fed, but the Fed of the past several years and the way it has trained the market to believe that the portfolio rebalancing effect … i.e., the behavioral impact of QE that Bernanke has directly credited with driving up the stock market … is what really matters. And if that’s your reality, then tapering is a big deal, indeed. I’ll be monitoring all this closely at Epsilon Theory in the weeks ahead.
Importantly, this psychological battle is taking place entirely within the larger Narrative of Central Bank Omnipotence. If the QE meme wins the day and tapering ends up hitting the markets hard … well, it’s Fed balance sheet operations that determine market outcomes. If the ZIRP meme wins the day and tapering is a non-event … well, it’s Fed forward guidance on rates that determines market outcomes. Either way, it’s a Fed-centric universe. Forever and ever, amen.
This article was posted: Tuesday, December 10, 2013 at 1:29 pm

[GoodETxSG]

One little... Two little... Thee little Civil Rights... Four little... Five little... Constitutional Rights... Notice a pattern here? I will not label the ideology behind it but we see exactly HOW this President is Fundamentally Changing the United States of America!!!

Guess why they are moving on this one? It is for "THE GOOD OF THE PUBLIC", they know what is better for us... Sound Familiar?
---------------------------------------

Obama Abolishes Private Property

http://beforeitsnews.com/obama-birth...rect-b4in.info

Monday, December 9, 2013 20:45
0
(Before It's News)





Private Property

“No power on earth has a right to take our property from us without our consent.”—John Jay, first Chief Justice of the United States

“How ‘secure’ do our homes remain if police, armed with no warrant, can pound on doors at will and … forcibly enter?”—Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the lone dissenter in Kentucky v. King

If the government can tell you what you can and cannot do within the privacy of your home, whether it relates to what you eat, what you smoke or whom you love, you no longer have any rights whatsoever within your home.

If government officials can fine and arrest you for growing vegetables in your front yard, praying with friends in your living room, installing solar panels on your roof, and raising chickens in your backyard, you’re no longer the owner of your property. If school officials can punish your children for what they do or say while at home or in your care, your children are not your own—they are the property of the state.

If government agents can invade your home, break down your doors, kill your dog, damage your furnishings and terrorize your family, your property is no longer private and secure—it belongs to the government. Likewise, if police can forcefully draw your blood, strip search you, and probe you intimately, your body is no longer your own, either.

This is what a world without the Fourth Amendment looks like, where the lines between private and public property have been so blurred that private property is reduced to little more than something the government can use to control, manipulate and harass you to suit its own purposes, and you the homeowner and citizen have been reduced to little more than a tenant or serf in bondage to an inflexible landlord.

Examples of this disregard for the sanctity of private property—whether in the form of one’s home, one’s possessions, or one’s person—abound. Here are just a few.

In San Rafael, California, it is now illegal to smoke a cigarette or other tobacco product inside “apartments, condos, duplexes, and multi-family houses.” Although lawmakers hope the ordinance will be “self-enforcing,” they’re encouraging landlords to threaten tenants with eviction should they run afoul of the law.

In Ohio, it’s illegal to alter one’s car with a hidden compartment if the “intent” is to conceal illegal drugs. Although Norman Gurley had no drugs on his person, nor in his car, nor could it be proven that he intended to conceal drugs, he was still arrested for the “crime” of having a hidden compartment in the trunk of his car.

In Florida and elsewhere throughout the country, home vegetable gardens are being targeted as illegal. For 17 years, Hermine Ricketts and Tom Carroll have tended the vegetable garden in their front yard, relying on it for 80 percent of their food intake, only to be told by city officials that they must get rid of it or face $50 a day in fines. The reason? The vegetable garden is “inconsistent with the city’s aesthetic character.”

In Iowa, a war veteran attempting to wean his family off expensive corporate farm products, GMOs and pesticides has been charged with violating a city ordinance and now faces up to 30 days in jail and a $600 fine for daring to raise chickens in his backyard for his personal use, despite statements of support from his neighbors.

In Virginia, school officials suspended two boys for the remainder of the school year and charged them with possession of a firearm after they were reported to the police for playing with toy airsoft guns in their front yard, while waiting for the morning school bus. At no time did the boys attempt to take the toy guns on the bus or to school.

The most obvious disrespect for property rights comes in the form of the tens of thousands of SWAT team raids that occur across the country on a yearly basis. Usually undertaken under the pretense of serving a drug warrant, these raids involve police arriving at a private residence in SWAT gear, armed to the hilt, kicking down doors, apprehending all persons inside the home, then determining if a crime has been committed. That was Judy Sanchez’s experience when FBI agents investigating gang activity used a chainsaw to cut through her door, then forced Sanchez and her child to the ground. It was only after invading Sanchez’s home and terrorizing her family that agents realized they had targeted the wrong address.

Unfortunately, we in America get so focused on the Fourth Amendment’s requirement of a warrant before government agents can invade our property (a requirement that means little in an age of kangaroo courts and rubberstamped warrant requests) that we fail to properly appreciate the first part of the statement declaring that we have a right to be secure in our “persons, houses, papers, and effects.” What this means is that the Fourth Amendment’s protections were intended to not only follow us wherever we go but also apply to all that is ours—whether you’re talking about our physical bodies, our biometric data, our possessions, our families, or our way of life. However, in an 8-1 ruling in Kentucky v. King (2011), the U.S. Supreme Court sanctioned SWAT teams smashing down doors of homes or apartments without a warrant if they happen to “suspect” you might be doing something illegal in your home.

At a time when the government routinely cites national security as the justification for its endless violations of the Constitution, the idea that a citizen can actually be “secure” or protected against such government overreach seems increasingly implausible, while suggesting that a person take steps to secure his person and property against the government could have one accused of fomenting anti-government sentiment.

Nevertheless, the reality of our age is this: if the government chooses to crash through our doors, listen to our phone calls, read our emails and text messages, fine us for growing vegetables in our front yard, jail us for raising chickens in our backyard, forcibly take our blood and saliva, and probe our vaginas and rectums, there’s little we can do to stop them. At least, not at that particular moment. When you’re face to face with a government agent who is not only armed to the hilt and inclined to shoot first and ask questions later but also woefully ignorant of the fact that he works for you, if you value your life, you don’t talk back.

This sad reality came about as a result of our being asleep at the wheel. We failed to ask questions and hold our representatives accountable to abiding by the Constitution, while the government amassed an amazing amount of power over us, and backed up that power-grab with a terrifying amount of military might and weaponry, and got the courts to sanction their actions every step of the way.

However, once the dust settles and you’ve had a chance to catch your breath, I hope you’ll remember that the Constitution begins with those three beautiful words, “We the people.” In other words, there is no government without us—our sheer numbers, our muscle, our economy, our physical presence in this land. There can also be no police state—no tyranny—no routine violations of our rights without our complicity and collusion—without our turning a blind eye, shrugging our shoulders, allowing ourselves to be distracted and our civic awareness diluted.

So where do we begin? How do we go about wresting back control over our freedoms and our lives in the face of such seemingly insurmountable odds?

There’s an old adage, albeit not a very palatable one, that says “when eating an elephant take one bite at a time.” The point is this: when facing a monumental task, take it one step at a time. In other words, we’re going to have to wage these battles house by house, car by car, and body by body. Most importantly, as I point out in my book A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, we’re going to have to stop the partisan bickering—you can leave that to the yokels in Congress—and recognize that the suffering brought about by a police state will be the great equalizer, applying to all Americans, regardless of their political leanings (the fact that we are all now being targeted for government surveillance is but a foretaste of things to come).

As John Adams rightly noted, “The Revolution was effected before the war commenced. The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people. This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments and affections of the people was the real American Revolution.”

It’s time for a second American Revolution. Not a revolution designed to kill people or tear down and physically destroy society, but a revolution of the minds and souls of human beings—a revolution promulgated to restore the freedoms for which our founders sacrificed their fortunes and their lives.

[gripreaper]

Really?

[araucaria]

Posted by Carmody (here)
I
Semantics are critical here

Discussing the language of a thread is by nature both off-topic and on-topic; there is nowhere else it would completely on-topic. So please bear with me, I will finish my point from my European perspective (and European time) and then leave it. I am not seeking to derail; I am talking about reclaiming the language from Orwellian double-speak, so it definitely is part of the problem.

In non-political English, reactionary, conservative, progressive and revolutionary are points on a single spectrum, which might be termed one’s attitude towards change. A progressive accepts change as natural, inevitable, necessary and desirable: a component of growth in fact. A revolutionary sees the need to hasten things along. On the other hand a conservative is somewhat fearful of change, and puts the brakes on, only accepting it at a very slow rate; while a reactionary wants to go back to some previous state. For them change is a component of loss.

You could see life as a ski run. You can slalom to make the slope less steep, but you might as well straighten those skis, because there is no way you are going back up

These are not labels: on the contrary. They can be used to refine a discussion, and recognize that a single person can be both one thing and another in different circumstances. I, for example, would see myself as something of a revolutionary in the sense that I want to see radical change fairly quickly, and yet as something of a conservative when it comes to language. Words need to have a pretty stable meaning in the short and medium term (although they will still change in the longer term) simply because we need to understand what we are talking about.

Or another example: Stalin was revolutionary in some of his economic policies, and reactionary in his approach to human rights. Mass murder is not progressive: it is a huge part of the status quo that any progressive is in a hurry to change. To suggest otherwise is to wring the neck of the English language to the point where ‘War is peace’ also becomes true.

When I say Avalonians are progressives, I am not placing a label on them. I am merely using the language to say that they are people ready for and actively working towards (big) change. This is the very opposite of hinting that they are closet Stalinists condoning mass murder. That was my point. Such use of English paints us into a corner: there are no words left adequately to describe the victims of what amounts to an ad hominem attack.

[GoodETxSG]

I noticed the most important part of the quote of mine was emitted... But most pertinent. However if you feel better getting that out of your system maybe we can move on and back to topic... I apologize that I bruised any Ego's of those of that Ideology/Religion by bringing up uncomfortable past events. ALL of the "Ism's" have a sorted past and history that current generations try to omit, rewrite or separate ourselves from... Symantec's... word games... Humans really have evolved very little sadly.

As I stated, the people that identified themselves as Progressives and Socialist/Marxists were some of the highest places people I worked w/inside the Government current era here in the U.S.. The info and plans they have for the country that I have reported are according to their local doctrine and probably known to the higher crust of the organizations as how it usually works. Some of them were CFR Members and most of those members identify themselves with the same or similar labels. I am more concerned with how the people with the power label them selves, think of their ideology and its mission to be honest... IMHO.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivism

The Devil is in the details... Symantec's... and vast lexicon of words we use to define things in this 3/4 D existence. If we continue to play word games we will all talk AT each other in circles and never to each other about what is truly important.

That topic is the defeat of the groups that use these definitions and words to separate us into different camps and not sit around the same camp fire and have the important discussions that will lead to our freedom from them.

Ego's must always have that one last flowery worded parting shot... And bait the next one! We have always been our own worst enemies while looking for others to blame. Is there hope for our species as a whole or at the end will it always be an isolated dying human soul seeing the path to source/love through hind sight? It does seem to be a part of our nature that we as a group are far from overcoming.


Moving on to the topic now please...

Posted by araucaria (here)

Posted by Carmody (here)
I
Semantics are critical here

Discussing the language of a thread is by nature both off-topic and on-topic; there is nowhere else it would completely on-topic. So please bear with me, I will finish my point from my European perspective (and European time) and then leave it. I am not seeking to derail; I am talking about reclaiming the language from Orwellian double-speak, so it definitely is part of the problem.

In non-political English, reactionary, conservative, progressive and revolutionary are points on a single spectrum, which might be termed one’s attitude towards change. A progressive accepts change as natural, inevitable, necessary and desirable: a component of growth in fact. A revolutionary sees the need to hasten things along. On the other hand a conservative is somewhat fearful of change, and puts the brakes on, only accepting it at a very slow rate; while a reactionary wants to go back to some previous state. For them change is a component of loss.

You could see life as a ski run. You can slalom to make the slope less steep, but you might as well straighten those skis, because there is no way you are going back up

These are not labels: on the contrary. They can be used to refine a discussion, and recognize that a single person can be both one thing and another in different circumstances. I, for example, would see myself as something of a revolutionary in the sense that I want to see radical change fairly quickly, and yet as something of a conservative when it comes to language. Words need to have a pretty stable meaning in the short and medium term (although they will still change in the longer term) simply because we need to understand what we are talking about.

Or another example: Stalin was revolutionary in some of his economic policies, and reactionary in his approach to human rights. Mass murder is not progressive: it is a huge part of the status quo that any progressive is in a hurry to change. To suggest otherwise is to wring the neck of the English language to the point where ‘War is peace’ also becomes true.

When I say Avalonians are progressives, I am not placing a label on them. I am merely using the language to say that they are people ready for and actively working towards (big) change. This is the very opposite of hinting that they are closet Stalinists condoning mass murder. That was my point. Such use of English paints us into a corner: there are no words left adequately to describe the victims of what amounts to an ad hominem attack.

[GoodETxSG]

Posted by gripreaper (here)
Really?

ABOLISHING THE DHS, THE INFOGRAPHIC

December 10, 2013
ShareThis

SOURCE: SECURITYDEGREEHUB.COM

Abolish the DHS

http://www.securitydegreehub.com/



How a panicked response to 9/11 wastes billions of dollars fighting a minuscule threat.

The DHS was created to fix a problem: 9/11
Or rather, the problems that led to 9/11: communication, coordination.[2]

1.) CIA monitored an al-Qeada planning meeting in Malaysia (2000).

But lost track of two members who made it to Bangkok.

These two terrorists made it to L.A.

And eventually flew American Airlines 77 into the Pentagon.

2.) FBI agent identified hijacked airliners as the weapon al-Qaeada would use.

Agent in Phoenix noted “Usama bin Laden” would attempt to send his men through aviation schools in the U.S.

3.) The Minneapolis FBI field office believed Zacharias Moussaoui, the accused 20th hijacker was planning the hijacking of a plane.

Yet failed to monitor him.

So the DHS was formed. So this wouldn’t happen again.
DHS=
22 agencies
70 buildings in 40 locations in DC
Reporting to 108 Congressional subcommittees and oversight panels.

Great for communication, right?

A cost benefit analysis found that for DHS spending to be worthwhile…
DHS would have to stop 4 otherwise successful car bomb attempts per day.[6]

DHS budget per year:[1]
2002–$13.03 billion
2003–$33.52 billion
2004–$36.2 billion
2005–$40.2 billion
2006–$41.1 billion
2007–$42.7 billion
2008–$46.4 billion
2009–$50.5 billion
2010–$55.11 billion
2011–$56.34 billion
2012–$56.94 billion
2013–$59.03 billion
2014–$59.96 billion

Put in Perspective:
All wheat bought in America, 2012: $7.5 billion
All Corn bought in America, 2012: $23.3 billion
DHS, 2012: $56.94 billion
All brewed beverages bought in America, 2012: $100 billion

Only 17 private American citizens died last year to terrorist attacks.
You have a greater chance of being crushed to death by your own furniture.[3]

17 deaths, vs:
1 million heart disease and cancer deaths
30,000 Gun deaths since Newtown [11/12/13]
And 40,000 suicides.

Is our second largest government agency worth it?

Budgeting without regard for population density, critical infrastructure, or risk assessments creates even more waste.[2]

1.) California: An urban fusion center acquired 55 large screen t.v.’s for training. They forgot to purchase training software. On the day inspectors visited, all 55 t.v.’s were on the same channel.
Price: $74,394
2.) Miami:Commander of Coast Guard District Seven has his stylish 6,200 sq. ft. home leased by tax payers.
Price: $111,600 in lease payments yearly
3.) Mason County Washington: Purchased a hazardous decontamination unit even though they have no hazmat team.
Price:$63,000
4.) Whitetail, Montana: Population 71, received a massive border checkpoint upgrade.
Price: $15,000,000
5.) Westhope, North Dakota: A border checkpoint serving an average of 73 people a day received a massive upgrade.
Price: $15,000,000
6.) Laredo, TX: Border checkpoint serving 55,000 daily and processing $116 billion in goods is nations highest priority. Receives no money.
Price: $0.00
7.) Tanzania: The U.S. Secret Service spent more than the entire country’s economic output for the week the first family was visiting.[8]
Price: $100,000,000
8.) Nationwide: To ensure the original 5 anthrax deaths don’t happen again, automated DNA-testing air sniffers were installed in many public buildings. Allowing testing of air 36 hours later. [9]
Price: $5,700,000,000

“If power companies invested in infrastructure the way DHS and Congress fight terrorism, a New Yorker wouldn’t be able to run a hair dryer, but everyone in Bozeman, Mont., could light up a stadium” ~ Economist Veronique de Rugy[8]

And eroding personal liberties:[7]

Warrantless Wiretapping
National Security Entry/Exit Registration System
the Real ID act
No Fly Lists
Monitoring of peaceful groups
Attacks on Academic freedoms
TSA searches
Domestic Drones
Militarization of the Police

Don’t let an overblown fear support a wasteful police state. Abolish the DHS.

[GoodETxSG]

Cannot think of a SINGLE REASON why our media would scrub such a huge story... Cab you?

CHANGE... YES WE CAN!!! Iceland did!

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=JGwMIlpgR2A

Icelanders Overthrow Government and Rewrite Constitution After Banking Fraud-No Word From US Media

Posted by RustyFeatured, NWOMonday, December 9th, 2013



by Rebecca Savastio on December 2, 2013.
IcelandCan you imagine participating in a protest outside the White House and forcing the entire U.S. government to resign? Can you imagine a group of randomly chosen private citizens rewriting the U.S. constitution to include measures banning corporate fraud? It seems incomprehensible in the U.S., but Icelanders did just that. Icelanders forced their entire government to resign after a banking fraud scandal, overthrowing the ruling party and creating a citizen’s group tasked with writing a new constitution that offered a solution to prevent corporate greed from destroying the country. The constitution of Iceland was scrapped and is being rewritten by private citizens; using a crowd-sourcing technique via social media channels such as Facebook and Twitter. These events have been going on since 2008, yet there’s been no word from the U.S. mainstream media about any of them. In fact, all of the events that unfolded were recorded by international journalists, overseas news bureaus, citizen journalists and bloggers. This has created current accusations of an intentional cover up of the story by mainstream U.S. news sources.
An “iReport” on CNN, written by a private citizen in May 2012, has questioned the reasons why this revolution has not been widely covered in the U.S., suggesting that perhaps the mainstream media is controlled by large corporate interests and thus has been unwilling to report on Iceland’s activities. That report is currently making its way around social media. CNN today placed a statement on its website saying: “We’ve noticed this iReport is being shared widely on Facebook and Twitter. Please note that this article was posted in May 2012. CNN has not yet verified the claims and we’re working to track down the original writer.” It is interesting to note that CNN’s European version, CNN Europe, already covered the story of the protests and the government’s resignation, leading many to question why CNN would now need to “look into” the claims.
Besides CNN Europe’s own coverage of the scandal, the events in Iceland were widely covered by international media and are easily verified by a simple search on Google which leads to a variety of reputable international news sources that ran numerous stories on the Icelandic revolution. A whole documentary has been made on the governmental overthrow called Pots, Pans and Other Solutions, and now, the conversation is focused on whether or not the citizens’ actions actually worked to make Iceland a more equitable nation.



Iceland
To understand the enormity of what happened in Iceland, it’s best to draw parallels between the initial banking fraud that caused Iceland’s economy to collapse and the banking fraud in the U.S. that caused the mortgage crisis six years ago. In Iceland, unscrupulous bankers had inflated the value of Iceland’s banks internationally which in turn caused the “bubble” to eventually burst in 2008 and saw most of Iceland’s banks going bankrupt.
A similar situation happened in the U.S. just one year before the collapse in Iceland, with the mortgage crisis of 2007. Mortgage lenders in the U.S. knowingly lent money to prospective homeowners who could not afford to purchase a home. This, in turn, led to falsely inflated home values and a vicious cycle of too much lending. Just as in Iceland, the bubble burst and many U.S. banks were about to declare bankruptcy. In Iceland, the citizens took to the streets by the thousands, banging pots and pans in what is known as the “pots and pans revolution,” leading to the arrest and prosecution of many unscrupulous bankers responsible for the economic collapse. Icelandic citizens also refused to pay for the sins of the bankers and rejected any measures of taxation to bail them out. In the U.S., the government bailed out the banks and arrested no one.
The pots and pans revolution in Iceland was not covered by mainstream U.S. media. In fact, any information about this revolution is found only on international newspapers, blogs and online documentaries, not on mainstream front-page articles as would be expected from news organizations covering a story of this magnitude. The New York Times published a small handful of piecemeal stories, blogs and opinion pieces, but mostly glossed over the main narrative by saying the 2008 financial collapse in Iceland caused “mayhem far beyond the country’s borders” rather than pointing out that Icelanders took to the streets with pots and pans and forced their entire government to resign.



Iceland
As the saying goes, “there are two sides to every story,” but a more accurate articulation of this phrase would be “in any story, there are multiple sides, viewpoints, opinions and perspectives.” The story in Iceland is no exception. Socialist and Marxist blogs here in the U.S. say that there’s been a massive U.S. news conspiracy and cover up about the revolution in Iceland because the U.S. media is controlled by corporations, including banks, and the “powers that be” don’t want U.S. citizens getting any ideas to stage a revolution of their own. Some conservative Icelandic bloggers claim that while there was, indeed, a revolution, it did not lead to a successful or widely accepted new constitution. They say the situation in Iceland is worse than ever, and that international news reports of an effective democratic uprising leading to a better government are simply myths. Social media commenters are scratching their heads over why they were robbed of the story of Iceland’s pots and pans revolution.
As with most narratives, the truth may lie somewhere in the middle of all of these varying perspectives. One thing is clear, though: it’s nearly impossible to find one mainstream U.S. news report of the pots and pans revolution in Iceland, the resignation of Iceland’s entire government, and the jailing of the bankers responsible for the economic collapse there. Whether or not the revolution led to a more fair government or a workable and effective constitution is irrelevant to the fact that the U.S. media has essentially skipped over this story for the past five years.
Is it possible that mainstream media sources purposely covered up the Iceland story to appease their corporate sponsors? It doesn’t seem likely, and yet, what explanation could be given as to why this news never made it to the front pages of our most trusted media organizations here in the U.S.?
As Iceland struggles to regain its footing with a new government, U.S. citizens may or may not be able to look to Iceland as an example of perfect democracy in action. The real question, though, is why weren’t U.S. citizens given the information about the ousting of the Icelandic government and the jailing of the unscrupulous bankers? Are journalists in control of the mainstream media or is there some truth to accusations that big business may, in fact, be strong-arming reporters to keep quiet about world events that could inspire similar actions here in the U.S.?

[GoodETxSG]

Excellent point... Who could disagree?
All conflicts and Wars are complete B.S.! There is no reason why a truly "Civilized" Race of beings should be handling disagreements with violence. The majority of the casualties are always civilian con-combatants (Women & Children). We end up creating more terrorists than we get rid of by butchering their families and culture. I makes absolutely no sense... It is all about $MONEY$! There is a video out there I will look for on You Tube (If someone had it please post it)... "All Wars Are Banker Wars".

All wars seem to also be started on purpose with false flags or back door agreements. War is a business as is mass murder. They both dovetail nicely into the overall agenda plus yield a nice profit for the sociopaths financing and selling arms to both sides... How vile and murderous us Humans must appear to any other beings passing through that stop to peek in on us. Shame Shame Shame...

Posted by addsub (here)
he next conflict in the Middle East is COMPLETE B.S...

After listening to Brzezinski during tonight's CSIS meeting on Iran, the one worthwhile takeaway was his mention of how the West will engage Iran via Syria in the coming months unless the international community maintains an effective presence that stabilizes the country (paraphrasing here...). Our contacts in D.C. have stated that next to nothing constructive is going on in Syria to help resolve the civil war. That translates to another round of increasing rhetoric and hostility in and around Syria beginning early next year, similar to what we observed this year. The timing is interesting, as this coincides with when other sources are suggesting that the global currency reset is expected to transpire next year. Since the monetary reset cannot appear to have been agreed to behind the scenes, the conflict in Syria and the response by East and West in the Middle East and in financial/currency markets that leads to U.N. intervention will appear to precipitate the monetary reset and 30% devaluation in the U.S. dollar, not the other way around, when in fact the behind-the-scenes agreement to reset currency values relative to each other is already etched in stone. This strategem conceals the existence of the "secret government" NWO machinations. Also, a comprehensive Middle East peace agreement will be inked as a result of these events in the Middle East and financial/currency markets and that locks in the NWO game plan. Checkmate...

It is unlikely that you will find these dots connected anywhere else...look around and see what else may be floating around on the Internet and within your respective circles.

www.wonksmedia.com/555plan.pdf

[GoodETxSG]

Wow... The LIES... The SPIES... The ARROGANCE Coming from American Leaders has destroyed what little credibility we had left. This behavior at this "Head of State's" Funeral is both puzzling and sickening...

If it doesn't make you feel ashamed as an American then we have officially been desensitized to all uncouth behavior of our leadership (AKA "Representatives"... Does this represent You and Your values?). I have seen and heard American's and Europeans stretching to rationalize all kinds of behavior recently... But THIS? Really?

--------------------- Again, I am not the biggest Beck fan but his material has been popping up in Alternative news recently ----------------------------------

Glenn Beck Trashes Obama’s Selfie! ‘Disgusting’(Video)

http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/20...rticalresponse

Wednesday, December 11, 2013 8:14
0
(Before It's News)

By Susan Duclos

Glenn Beck begins by discussing the much-discussed Obama selfie picture, something Michael Savage referred to as Obama acting like a teenage girl, but he had not seen the photo yet, then they show it to him and we get to see Becks utter and total disgust, disdain and contempt for what he is seeing as he trashes Obama for his actions.

I have to agree with Beck… disgusting.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=88-VbSn-4Ng

[GoodETxSG]

I honestly do not see THIS Congress Impeaching their Messiah, Obama or any of his appointed minions... Even the ones that deserve it the most like Eric Holder/DOJ! IF the corrupt Republicans take over the House from the corrupt Democrats I really do not see anything changing.

If articles of Impeachment were introduced after the 2014 mid term elections (MAJOR IF) I am certain the master of distraction would stage something to prevent his legacy from having an Impeachment associated to it. If also the "New" Congress went after all of these scandals and held dozens of his Administration accountable he would just pardon them on his way out of office. IMHO...

I am only posting this video and link because of the possible implications not because I believe there is truth to it/FYI.
-------------------------------

Corsi: False Flag Imminent To Prevent Obama Impeachment (Video)

http://beforeitsnews.com/u-s-politic...&utm_campaign=

Tuesday, December 10, 2013 13:51
0
(Before It's News)

By Susan Duclos

As talk of impeaching Barack Obama heats up, the Alex Jones interview with World Net Daily senior staff reporter Jerome Corsi brings up the possibility that a false flag or staged crisis will be implemented to prevent the impeachment.

Corsi says “Oh, they’ll stage something. There is no doubt they are going to stage something. What’s ready to happen, the next I think false flag or crisis on the horizon is the bursting of the stock bubble. This is another stock market bubble, just like the dot com bubble burst. Then you had the housing market bubble burst. Both manufactured bubbles, both engineered by the private bankers, the central bank.”

Via Raw Story:

“Iran succumb to the international bankers,” he continued. “And again, I think the next crisis we are going to face will be a loss of freedom opportunity. Forget about Obamacare, when everyone is going bankrupt because the dollar tanks, the stock market bubble bursts, that’s I think the kind of major crisis that is in the works for Obama to put back on the agenda a power grab and take off the agenda his impeachment.”

It is a theory but one that many believe, the dollar is on the verge of collapse, Republicans in Congress are talking impeachment more freely, movements seen across the country, in blogs, on forums and talk radio are pushing for it, so it makes sense that should calamity strike imminently that would quiet those voices, the media to be refocused elsewhere.

It is the standard operating procedure, distract the public and politicians with some attack, some manufactured crisis so all eyes are turned away from where they previously were looking.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=m4VGGf8oLV4

[GoodETxSG]

[Redstar Kachina]

..........

[Jeffrey]

Posted by addsub (here)
Attachment 24050

The y-axes are roughly to scale as far as I can ascertain. A picture is worth a thousand words (especially from McClellan).

ADD: Just realize the quoted post was a gif.

[GoodETxSG]

OOPS... On the risk of being labeled ignorant again...

I know I said I was done with this topic with "Labels and Symantec's" but I had to break ranks as these articles forced me to break my own decision to move on...

Like I said, I based my prior statements in the words of the people I worked with who gave themselves these labels...

I now have to digress and post these links and articles because they tie in directly with my original post on the subject. BUT, do they sound familiar?

I realize I am reopening the subject and the sling of arrows and stones will follow. I was compelled to post for obvious reasons... Forgive me for being a flawed human. Yes... I took the bait!

Now I am Native American... This first article even tick's me off... quite a LOT! The RED quotes about WHITE GUILT about the killing and stealing of two Continents away from Native Americans... It is just sick! It pushes past the boundaries of ANYONE'S MORAL'S... I WOULD HOPE!!!

However, I post it none the less... even as my stomach churns on that bit... Like I said, PERSPECTIVE is EVERYTHING...

http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/12/ra...-means-racist/

ANALYSIS

I was mistaken.
I had believed that the primary threat to the Black Community's interests was when a "shooting war" between the "Black Progressive" and the "White Conservative" was the most detrimental to Black community interests.

It turns out that the joint venture between the "White Progressive" and the "Black Progressive" is the scheme that imperils the Black community the most.

Racist Melissa Harris-Perry Claims that Using the Term “Obamacare” means You are a Racist

Posted By Richard Anthony on Dec 11, 2013 in Articles, Racism, Videos | 6 Comments
melissa harris-perry



Every now and them when I’m bored and need a good laugh, I switch-on MSNBC. But just when you think that things on that network couldn’t go lower than they already have, something like this rears its ugly (and incredibly obtuse) head.

Some of you are familiar with the antics of Melissa Harris-Perry. Yes, she’s the one MSNBC trot out when the Reverend Al Sharpton just can’t quite cut it with his race-baiting antics. They bring Melissa in to put the race-baiting icing on the racist cake. You’ve seen her when she wore tampons on her ears (to make a point). Well, here she is delivering a sermon, in her very absolute best “black dialect” to tell you, that if you use the term “Obamacare” you’re a racist.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=0pvDI-vOmpo

As she rails about all of the trials and tribulations that President Obama has had to deal with during his history-making tenure in the White House filled with many hundreds of successful and history making accomplishments, but now this disgusting term created by “rich white men” to demean President Obama in his finest moment, is nothing but racism.
What a crock!

It’s bad enough that I’m supposed to give radical Islam a pass when they rape and murder with impunity. It’s bad enough that I am forced to accept homosexuality as “normal healthy behavior.” It’s also bad enough that I’m supposed to walk around saddled with “white guilt” for something none of my ancestors did to black people 300, 200 or even 50 years ago, even though my mother’s father was a full-blooded Cherokee, born on a reservation at the turn of the 20th century, and prior to that his people never owned a slave and were, in fact, treated worse than black people. Yet, I’m supposed to feel shame and guilt, because our current President is an idiot, who never should have been elected in the first place, and the only reason he was elected, was because of the color of his skin and not because of the content of his character? No, I think the race-card has been played-out.

As far as Melissa Harris-Perry goes, on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the best for real “righteous indignation,” I think I’d give her a minus 5 for her ridiculous little diatribe. Hey Melissa, stick to wearing tampons in your ears!

Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/12/ra...6yKxzrFeHcs.99

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

http://withintheblackcommunity.blogs...-matthews.html

Melissa Harris-Perry And Chris Matthews - "You Are A Racist If Your Support For Obama Weakens But You Can Reform Yourself If You Vote For Obama In 2012"
If someone can tell me that their basic arguments are materially more substantive than this - please prove it.

http://www.mrctv.org/videos/chris-ma...ck-politicians

The only advantage that Perry and Matthews have is that they are highly literate individuals who know how to place the appropriate embellishments around their words to mask the scheme that is being represented.

The Nation Magazine: Melissa Harris-Perry: Double Standard, Black President, Why White Liberals Are Abandoning Obama
MSNBC's Chris Matthews: Whites Hold African American Politicians To A Higher Standard Than They Do White Ones
ANALYSIS

I was mistaken.
I had believed that the primary threat to the Black Community's interests was when a "shooting war" between the "Black Progressive" and the "White Conservative" was the most detrimental to Black community interests.

It turns out that the joint venture between the "White Progressive" and the "Black Progressive" is the scheme that imperils the Black community the most.

When the Embedded Black Fox Confidence Men "take one for the team" and beings a shooting war against the "White Conservative Wolf" (see the CBC recent antics) ...................it is the White Progressive Cheshire Fox that smiles most widely for it is HIS AGENDA that are advanced as his prime enemy and most loyal partner who doesn't ask for much are engaged in battle.


The Shooting War Between The Black Progressive Fundamentalist And The White Conservative
When the Embedded Black Fox Confidence Men and the White Progressive Cheshire Fox team up to keep their Progressive Flock in line with the program - the Black Community is the loser for it is compelled to place its PERMANENT INTERESTS into forbearance.

The Complicit Operations Between The White Progressive And The Black Progressive-Fundamentalist
HTML Tables

The important issue for everyone to understand is that Chris Matthews is not going to look at the Black Community support for Obama which is in the low to mid 80% range and then cross index this - not only against the 16.7% Black Unemployment rate but the "Mission Accomplished" local political districts that have:

Failed to create a job market sufficient to produce "Consumers Of Labor" for Blacks to sell our labor skills to
Failed to create institutions of academic attainment after the Progressive take over
Instead both Matthews and Prof Perry are exceedingly happy that the Black voter is going to invest his 'Equal Black Ballot" in a manner that is favorable to the both of them.

Oh How You White Progressives Have Little Faith, Now You Are Showing Your RACISM!


When Tavis Smiley and Prof Cornel West were stripped of their credentials and beaten upside of the head by the progressive coalition - I stated that I had no sympathies for them. They were prime operatives over the years in participating in these "Progressive-Fundamentalist Flash Mobs".

I stated that I hoped that they learned how it felt to be on the receiving side and that in the future they'd try to inculcate a bit more respect for diverse opinions among Progressives.

I would now like to extend this same model to the White Progressives who are being sanctioned by Prof Melissa Harris-Perry for "disloyalty to Obama". (Oh yeah - because his is BLACK. I forgot that one.

I am convinced that Prof Perry is an intolerant person based upon my observations of her message.
Despite being a vocal advocate for diversity, in truth she merely seeks conformity around the positions that have been sanctioned as "Progressive Approved". Thus the explanation of the term "Progressive-Fundamentalist". Many have asked about this perceived oxymoron. The fact is that a person who believes that "Progressivism" is the cure for everything that ails us and is not able to accept the damage in the Mission Accomplished Zones as being a residue of the forces that now dominate these areas - indeed is a candidate for "progressive-fundamentalism". I believe Prof Perry fits this bill.

To the White Progressives - as you listened to Janeane Garofalo and Bill Maher make attacks upon Black people who dared to not support Obama, concluding that they had self-hatred or some type of psychological disorder - you should ask yourself how it feels to have these toxins thrown upon you as you commit the sin of asking questions about Obama?

The truth is that the reality that engulfs the claim that Obama is being subjected to a massive racist attack because of his color is the scheme that is trying to dismiss the flurry of criticism that any president would receive in a failing economy and instead attribute it to RACISM.

We can only conclude that you (the White Progressive) were RACISTS all along or that the progressive bigots who are not calling you out will say anything to compel you to remain silent about the conditions in America because you don't want to be called a RACIST by them. The second portion points again to your RACISM because - as you note how other Whites have been attacked as "racist" you fear the same fate will be cast upon you.

Why not simplify matters and prevent your progressive-fundamentalist friends from running to the Racial Invective as their first weapon? This weapon that was reserved for conservative opponents can be used on you too, you know. All you need to do is be disloyal to the message.

The indictment of RACIAL MOTIVATIONS that formulate one's negative opinions of Obama is a more powerful club than is the evidence that the BLACK COMMUNITY'S PERMANENT INTERESTS has been molested as the Black Racial Services Machine is compelled to look past them in defense of Obama.

The audio report from Rep Cleaver (D-MO) says it all. The Embedded Confidence men have developed a new strategy to place Black people in a racial defensive - "Protect Obama while Stopping Speaking Truth To Power".

It is mind numbing to hear Progressives - Black and White to hold up (the Superior) WHITE opinion as the index of racism in political discourse. The Black numbers are "defensive" only. Just as I stated previously "Progressivism Is Inorganic". It does not produce ORIGINAL hatred/bigotry/bias (in their view). It only exhibits secondary negatives when the offending conservative compels it to act out as such.

I have stated many times I RESPECT THE ACUMEN OF THE 'EMBEDDED CONFIDENCE MEN'. They know how the body that they suborn influence over thinks. Their job is to erect the necessary narrative that is required for them to achieve the desired outcome.

It is the job of the rank & file to establish the necessary protections to defend against these antics.
================================
EDIT:
I guess I never realized there was such a visceral divide between people who label themselves Conservatives and Progressives (Of the various types). I see where some of the "Hot Responses" (And a very ugly email from one of the posters here) come from now, though I do not fully understand.

I find it kind of bizarre but that is the beauty of the divisive nature of Politics I guess...

[GoodETxSG]

For all of the public fighting and calculating and division when it comes down to it... "IT IS A CLUB, AND WE ARE NOT IN IT!"

We are those who are subjects and statistics on pieces of paper...
==========================================

The most exclusive flight in the world: Behind-the-scenes photos from Air Force One show the Obamas mingling with the Bushes and Hillary on journey to South Africa for Mandela's memorial
George and Laua Bush traveled to the Nelson Mandela memorial with the Obamas, Hillary Clinton, Eric Holder and advisors on Monday
Series of images show the Bushes and Obamas laughing together and looking over the former president's latest artwork on his iPad
Obama gave an emotional tribute to Mandela at the service but came under fire for posing for 'selfies' and shaking the Cuban president's hand
By DAILY MAIL REPORTER
PUBLISHED: 08:40 EST, 11 December 2013 | UPDATED: 13:11 EST, 11 December 2013
649 shares 466 View
comments
A series of intimate behind-the-scenes photos aboard Air Force One have revealed the moment George W. Bush proudly showed off his artwork to Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama - and they look impressed.
Other images reveal him sharing a joke with the president and casually chatting ahead of dinner as they flew to South Africa for Nelson Mandela's memorial service.
The luxury aircraft hosted a political reunion on Monday, as the two Presidents and three first ladies - Laura Bush, Michelle Obama and Hillary Clinton - were on board.
The Obamas retired to the President's office and regular cabin at the front of the plane while former Secretary of State Clinton was given free reign of the senior staff's cabin. Bush and his wife Laura were given the medical suite.


Impressed: Former President Bush shows photos of his paintings to, from left, Michelle Obama, Hillary Clinton, Advisors Valerie Jarrett and Susan E. Rice, Attorney General Eric Holder and Laura Bush on Air Force One
Impressed: Former President Bush shows photos of his paintings to, from left, Michelle Obama, Hillary Clinton, Advisors Valerie Jarrett and Susan E. Rice, Attorney General Eric Holder and Laura Bush on Air Force One


Friendly: Obama jokes with former Bush shortly after boarding Air Force One for their trip to South Africa


Friendly: Obama jokes with former Bush shortly after boarding Air Force One for their trip to South Africa
Dinner time: Obama and Bush talk as ahead of dinner aboard Air Force One with their wives and advisors
Dinner time: Obama and Bush talk as ahead of dinner aboard Air Force One with their wives and advisors
The former president has been perfecting his painting skills since leaving office, famously producing colorful images of horses, dogs and still life scenes after taking lessons from a local artist.
And during the long flight to South Africa, he took the opportunity to show the country's leading ladies his latest work on his iPad.
He is pictured with Michelle Obama, Hillary Clinton, Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett, National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice, Attorney General Eric Holder and former First Lady Laura Bush.

More...
Twitter fury over Dave's selfie with Obama and a flirty Dane: Backlash over leaders' picture at Mandela memorial service that left Michelle VERY unamused
Chelsea Clinton sits front row at Mandela's memorial service while former president Jimmy Carter is relegated to the back
'It is nauseating': Backlash from Congress after Obama shakes hands with Fidel Castro's 'murderer' brother at Nelson Mandela's memorial service
Naomi's tears for Mandela: Supermodel breaks down after seeing ex-president's coffin as thousands of mourners line streets to see it driven to lie in state in the former home of apartheid
Sign language translator at Nelson Mandela's memorial was a FAKE: South Africa's deaf federation confirms his movements had 'no meaning'
COMMENT: Why a trip to South Africa in 2014 would be an appropriate celebration of Mandela's life
Rice looks particularly impressed - gasping as he scrolls through the images - while Clinton grins and Holder leans over the table to get a closer look.
In the images taken by White House photographer Pete Souza, Obama is also pictured grinning alongside Bush as they board the plane for South Africa.
In a more serious photograph, the president is pictured editing his speech for the memorial with Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes.


Catching up: Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton talks with the Obama's and Advisor Ben Rhodes

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz2nHWcjedN
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[Redstar Kachina]

..........

[Hervé]

May be they had a vision of a tsunami due to Icelandic effervescence rising?


Iceland jails former Kaupthing bank bosses

Kaupthing was the largest of the Icelandic banks to go into administration in 2008

Continue reading the main story

Related Stories

• Cash still stuck in Icelandic banks
• Kaupthing collapse inquiry ended

Four former bosses from the Icelandic bank Kaupthing have been sentenced to between three and five years in prison.

They are the former chief executive, the chairman of the board, one of the majority owners and the chief executive of the Luxembourg branch.

They were accused of hiding the fact that a Qatari investor bought a stake in the firm with money lent - illegally - by the bank itself.

Kaupthing collapsed in 2008 under the weight of huge debts.

For years, Kaupthing and other Icelandic banks had aggressively pursued overseas expansion plans, but when they went into administration, they brought the country's economy to its knees.

Just a few weeks before the collapse, Kaupthing announced that Sheikh Mohammed Bin Khalifa Bin Hamad al-Thani had bought a 5.1% stake during the financial crisis in 2008.

The move was seen as a confidence boost for the bank.

Legal costs
Hreidar Mar Sigurdsson, the former chief executive, received five and a half years, while Sigurdur Einarsson, former chairman of the board, was sentenced to five years in jail.

These are the heaviest sentences for financial fraud in Iceland's history.

The court gave Olafur Olafsson, one of the majority owners three years and Magnus Gudmundsson the former chief executive of the Luxembourg branch, three and a half years.

None of them were in court for the decision but it is expected that they will appeal.

The four were also made to pay their own legal costs for the case, which amount to millions of pounds.

The special prosecutor, Olafur Hauksson, said the deal had influenced the bank's share price. He also said the loans provided for the deal were illegal.

Mr Hauksson told the BBC that there was still another, bigger case against Kaupthing Bank ongoing, in which it is accused of market manipulation. It is due to come to court at the end of January.

Deceived
Kaupthing Singer and Friedlander was the UK arm of Kaupthing Bank - the largest of the Icelandic banks that went into administration in October 2008.

According to the Icelandic media, the charges state that the deal was done by first depositing a loan from Kaupthing bank into shell companies in the British Virgin Islands.

The money then went from there to a Cypriot based company called Choice, which was owned by Olafsson, Sheikh al-Thani and al-Thani's adviser.

From there it was moved to another firm called Q Iceland Finance, also owned by al-Thani, and then finally ended up back in the bank to pay for the shares.

It was never publicly stated that the company owned by Olafsson was party to the deal.

Sheikh al-Thani did not testify but he gave a statement to the prosecutors. In it, he said he did not know of any direct involvement by Olafsson to the deal.

Al-Thani's lawyers, who made an agreement with Kaupthing's administrators, said he considered himself to have been deceived.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Paul (here)
appearance of Lindsey

Here's is a transcript of Pastor Lindsey William's December 4, 2013 appearance on Gold Seek Radio: http://www.scribd.com/doc/190285575/...-December-2013

A couple of days later, on December 6, 2013, Pastor Lindsey Williams appeared on a second Internet show, with Kevin Gallagher, repeating his current message:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=HTCTizWwBSc

It does make sense to me that the next step will be for the IMF to announce a world-wide agreement by all nations to submit to IMF control of the foreign exchange rates of their various national and regional currencies, supposedly in line with the resources of each nations (their assets and debts.)

Initially, this will not seem like much to the "man on the street", but it is the explicit subordination of national power to a world-wide organization to determine monetary exchange rates, and it opens the door for the next steps, including within the US

• increased austerity,
• increased prices of goods and energy imported by the US,
• increased recognition of the value of US natural resources as potential exports,
• the theft of retirement funds (federal, state, union, corporate and individual) to "pay down the excessive US debt", and
• (perhaps in 2015) an economic collapse with major bank failures, bank holidays, and loss of bank deposits.

This is the "New World Order", and Obama and the US Federal government will bow before it, as Obama has bowed to so many other political leaders around the world. This "global currency reset" is the formal recognition that the IMF (whoever the frick they are) sets world monetary policy, not individual nations.

I anticipate that this "global currency reset" will occur, as Pastor Williams predicts, within the next three months, and that it will result in lowering the value of the US Dollar (perhaps 30%, relative to other national currencies) and raise the value of the Chinese Yuan (thanks in part to what I expect will be their soon to be announced increased national gold hoard.)

[Redstar Kachina]

..........

[Redstar Kachina]

..........