The Elite globalists are campaigning for a “shift”, but not the kind of “SHIFT” in People’s consciousness that aware social media embraces.
When a ponzi economy collapses what do the elite criminals and the money masters do?
Why of course they manipulate a world war and afterwards consolidate greater power and wealth into fewer hands, forgive most debts for the victors, and enforce the next ponzi economy in another region on Earth.
To insure full compliance why not mandate a cashless society as well, for wouldn’t this digital computerized money, control and track all financial and commercial transactions more precisely?
IMAGINE: Tax policy changes, no longer would individual’s compliance and permission be required, simply have the computer debit and record the mandatory activity to the account without delay. Afterwards simply send a message to the citizen that his bank account or paycheck has been debited the correct amount to conform to new policy requirements.
If the central planners and the money cartel wanted to shift public opinion from supporting Western Bloc hegemony to a emerging Eastern Bloc hegemony this is how it could be accomplished.
A past example may be found in the Hitler led Nazi Germany’s rise to a world threat. Not only was ethnic/cultural diversity threatened, but more immediately The GREAT threat was to the fractional reserve banking monetary system. As Germany issued its own money (as President Lincoln did in the American war between the States…) That sovereign ability to finance themselves was a REAL Threat to the banking cartel…
After WWII, the world’s reserve currency migrated from London to New York, the money masters and their banking cartel survived with Fractional Reserve Banking centered in a new secure region of New York with the Federal Reserve System’s debt note currency issued as the U.S. Dollar. The Dollar was constructed to be the new world reserve currency, replacing the Sterling.
Think there is no plan for the collapse of the Dollar? Then think again.
Where will the world’s next banking center be?
Beijing, or Shanghai perhaps?
Today, the rise of the BRICS and Russia‘s Rift with the West’s G7 and strengthening ties with China are forming the perfect contrast to manipulate public opinion in a controlled opposition strategy.
Without jumping on any bandwagons, please examine the institutions that steer international monetary policies.
Then see the monetary trends, monetary policy changes, and their likely monetary plans will unfold.
The plans they do not talk about in public, even after they have been codified and legislated for enforcement.
WEST vs EAST &
DOLLAR vs NON–DOLLAR
What does the WEST, the EAST, the G7, G20, G77, SCO, NAM, and BRICS ALL have in COMMON?
Be aware of the increased military spending by nations other than the United States at a time when the dollar is losing value and support…
Also be keen on the fact that the banking and governing institutions all protect the current “Fractional Reserve Banking” model.
The global debt-slavery system.
DO YOU NEED PERMISSION TO TRADE WITH RUSSIA?
Ecuador: We don’t need a permission to trade with Russia
Ecuador doesn’t need anybody’s permission to export agricultural products to Russia, which now has a big gap that needs to be filled after it banned supplies from a number of western countries, said President Rafael Correa.
“I want to immediately say that we don’t need to get anybody’s permission to sell products to friendly countries: as far as we know Latin America isn’t a part of the European Union,” as RIA cites Correa’s Tuesday comments to the Andes press agency.
His comments come a day after the Financial Times said the EU was going to persuade Latin American countries not to replace its agricultural exports to Russia.
READ MORE: EU to urge Latin America not to export food to Russia
“Let’s wait for the official complaint from [from the EU] and we’ll give a response to that,” Correa said.
At present, bananas, cut flowers, coffee, and tea are the key goods exported by Ecuador to Russia. Data from the country’s embassy in Moscow says that revenue from sale of bananas and roses are the second biggest outside of oil. In the first five months of 2014 Ecuador exported 580,000 tons of bananas and 9,300 tons of roses.
READ MORE: Russia’s import ban means big business for Latin America
Russia, India to bolster trade ties amid Western sanctions
August 12, 2014 http://en.itar-tass.com/russia/744704
MOSCOW, Russia and India are planning to diversify trade ties, at a time when the United States and the European Union are imposing economic sanctions on Russia over the crisis in Ukraine.
Prospects for further cooperation were discussed by Russian and Indian experts at a Moscow-New Delhi teleconference on Tuesday.
“Our countries are strategic partners. The Indian side understands what is happening [in view of the situation in Ukraine] and has not joined sanctions against Russia,” said Tatyana Shaumyan, head of the Center of Indian Research at the Russian Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Oriental Studies.
She said it was especially important for Russia to cooperate within the BRICS developing-nation assembly of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa as Europe and the United States were trying to escalate economic pressure on Moscow.
Boris Volokhonsky of the Russian Institute for Strategic Studies said: “Russia and India have a number of long-term projects which can be implemented.”
He said that the two countries were engaged in active negotiations about extending the Altai gas pipeline from Russia through China to the Indian border, and about building a pipeline to carry Turkmen natural gas across Afghanistan to Pakistan and India, known as the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) gas pipeline project.
India is interested in developing energy cooperation with Russia while the sanctions imposed by the United States and the European Union can give a new impetus to these relations, said Professor Arun Mohanty of the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU).
“Besides energy, we can cooperate in industry, pharmaceuticals and diamond processing, and we should not forget about prospects in military and technical cooperation,” he said.
“India supplies agricultural products to many countries,” the professor added. “We can supply them to Russia as well, particularly fruit.
Increased Brazil-Russia Trade Could Antagonize the West
Topic: Sanctions Against Russia
Washington, August 13 (RIA Novosti) – The opportunity, created for BRICS group of emerging economies’ member Brazil to increase its food exports to Russia, following the ban imposed by Moscow on the United States and European Union food products, could put Brazil at odds with Washington, the head of the DC-based Brazil Institute told RIA Novosti.
Despite this, Brazilian media reports indicate a strong willingness by Brazilian companies to fill the gap left by the food embargo, with Brazil’s Association of Meat Exporters saying on Tuesday that beef exports to Russia were $692 million in July, a 19-percent increase from 2013.
Read More: en.ria.ru
RBI Governor Warns of Global Market Crash
Reserve Bank of India (RBI) governor Dr Raghuram Rajan says global markets are at risk of a “crash” should investors start bailing out of risky assets created by the loose monetary policies of developed economies.
The comments, carried in an interview with Central Banking Journal, reiterate Dr Rajan’s previous warnings that emerging markets were especially vulnerable to big shifts in capital flows brought on by the unprecedented monetary accommodation in rich nations.
The former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund compared the current global markets to the 1930s – a period marked by the Great Depression.
Dr Rajan said back then countries were engaged in a period of competitive devaluation, in a similar way to central banks now being engaged in ever more accommodative policies.
Dr Rajan warned that India will be at risk if industrial countries start raising rates. Higher interest rates in the U.S. may lead to a reversal of portfolio flows from India, which could adversely impact the rupee, stocks and property prices.
Russian Air Force to get first T-50 fifth generation jets 2016 — commander-in-chief
AKHTUBINSK, August 14. /ITAR-TASS/. Russia’s Air Force will get the fifth generation frontline jet T-50 in two years from now, the Air Force commander-in-chief has said.“I believe that we shall get the first planes of this type in 2016, just as it was originally planned,” Colonel-General Viktor Bondarev told the media at the inauguration of a new runway of the airdrome in Akhtubinsk on Thursday.
He said pilots at the Defense Ministry’s Chkalov flight test centre in Akhtubinsk had mastered the technique of flying the new generation jet and were now proceeding with the test program. Then they will present their final opinion whether the plane is fit for batch production.
Read More: rt
Japan’s defense plans raise tensions in China
Japan scrambled jets 400 times last year in response to Chinese military flights — up from about 300 a year earlier.
JAPAN justified increased defence spending today as necessary to combat the “military threat” of China.
The Defence Ministry’s annual report, released after approval by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s cabinet, said that China’s growing airspace and maritime activities have escalated tension.
Japan’s military budget grew 2.2 per cent to 4.8 trillion yen (£27.7 billion) for 2014 over the previous year — the second successive year of increase since Mr Abe took office, after more than a decade of reductions.
Mr Abe’s government approved a reinterpretation of Japan’s war-renouncing constitution in July to let the military play a larger international role.
It adopted a new defence strategy last December, laying down a 5 per cent increase in military spending over five years.
Read More: morningstaronline.co.uk
It’s quite sad to think that 50 years ago, Americans knew more about the fractional reserve system than they do now. When I was in junior high, there was something in my math textbook about “demand deposits” being one way money was created. Of course, my teacher couldn’t explain what that meant. But at least it was there. Since then, all mention of demand deposits and fractional reserve lending has been removed from all school and university textbooks. People can graduate with a degree in economics and still have no idea what this is!
Thank you for sharing your comments, and indeed it is very sad that groups of people are so bent, to intentionally practice cultural-engineering, genocide, eugenics, and human experiments on the kids placed in their care, and then do the same to adults that place their Trust in their institutions.
Cosmic Apology and Healing
However this meme of control and authority doesn’t stop at the U.S.; it is global.
Watching this awareness and mass awakening spread around the world is awesome.
The emotional pain is deep for so many People (hundreds of millions, perhaps a Billion if not more internationally and across the generations slavery)…
The human trauma on Earth needs a planetary healing with cosmic apology and forgiveness ♥
Witness apologies (not official state apologies, but personal apologies from the individuals that served in those institutional offices, as well as the military troops that obeyed inhumane orders to kill):
-By Andrew Huszar, also posted at the WSJ. Mr. Huszar, a senior fellow at Rutgers Business School, is a former Morgan Stanley managing director. In 2009-10, he managed the Federal Reserve’s $1.25 trillion agency mortgage-backed security purchase program
Cosmic Apology and Healing
SILVER: the biggest trading anomaly of all
James C. McShirley August 23rd, 2014
Market analyst and GATA consultant James McShirley calls attention today to the almost constant knockdown of the silver futures price upon the 6 p.m. Eastern time opening of the access market.
McShirley writes: “Virtually every evening for the last three years at precisely 6 p.m. ET something very odd has happened: Comex silver offers swamped the bids to the tune of a 3-10 cent decline. For this to happen for three consecutive weeks would be strange. If it were to happen for three straight months it would be bizarre. Only MOAMOPE — Mother of All Management of Perspective Economics — can describe when it occurs for three straight years. …
“Silver has had a near-iron clamp imposed on it commencing with the access trade reopen. How severe is this iron clamp? From September 1, 2011, to the present, 621 out of the 744 6 p.m. access trade opens have been lower. All manipulation denialists take note: That’s an astounding 83.5 percent.”
“I was stunned to stumble on to the biggest trading anomaly of all: the MOAMOPE – the mother of all management of perspective economics.
MOAMOPE is quite simply the stunningly high percentage of lower opens on the 6:00 PM silver access trade open. Perhaps some have noticed the oddity in the form of a Kitco 3 day chart.”
Read more: http://news.goldseek.com/GoldSeek/1408983846.php
Meet BRICS The New Development Bank
the Bank is used as a weapon by the economic hitmen identified by John Perkins and others, directing infrastructure development funds to crony corporations and forcing countries into debt obligations that they will be unable to meet.
August 23 2014, By James Corbett
Last week we attempted to dispel some of the confusion surrounding the World Bank and the IMF, how the two are differentiated, and what the World Bank actually does.
As you’ll recall, Bretton Woods architect John Maynard Keynes admitted that the confusion over the bodies was embedded in their names; the World Bank should rightly be referred to as a fund (for development projects) and the International Monetary Fund as a bank (to help countries cover balance of payment deficits and ensure financial stability). The World Bank itself is a body that ostensibly provides long-term low interest or no interest loans secured on the global bond market to fund sectoral reforms and infrastructure development projects in some of the poorest countries in the world.
As we saw last week, however, the Bank is used as a weapon by the economic hitmen identified by John Perkins and others, directing infrastructure development funds to crony corporations and forcing countries into debt obligations that they will be unable to meet. These impossible debt obligations are then used to give the Bank leverage over the developing world economically and geopolitically. What’s more, both the IMF and the World Bank have historically been controlled by the US and Europe, and clamors for reform in governance from the developing countries have fallen on deaf ears.
It is in the context of this IMF/World Bank stranglehold over the global financial architecture that we have to understand the stunning development that took place at the 6th BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) Summit in Fortaleza, Brazil last month: the creation of a New Development Bank (NDB) to compete with the World Bank in providing funds for infrastructure development to developing nations and the creation of a Contingency Reserve Arrangement (CRA) to compete with the IMF in providing liquidity protection to countries with balance of payment difficulties.
The development was by no means surprising: the idea for a BRICS development bank has been bandied about for years now and was written about in the pages of this newsletter extensively last year. Nor does it represent (at least at this point) a fundamental challenge to the World Bank or IMF’s dominance; neither the NDB’s $50 billion USD in subscribed capital nor the CRA’s $100 billion liquidity pool come close to the World Bank’s $232.8 billion in subscribed capital or the IMF’s $755 billion in liquidity ($1.4 trillion if you include emergency funds). Neither do they have the infrastructure yet in place to coordinate and deploy these funds, nor a track record of working with the world’s poorest countries to ensure that funds reach their intended targets and not the Swiss bank accounts of corrupt politicians and middlemen.
Still, there is something of a revolutionary feel to the obligatory pictures of the smiling BRICS leaders coming out of this year’s summit. This year the smiles do not seem quite as forced. Perhaps they even seem a little self-assured. It may be a baby step, but after all it is a step toward a world where the poorest countries do not have to turn cap in hand to the IMF or World Bank for financial aid.
But what are the implications of this for the developing countries themselves and the prospect of genuine development? What does this development say about the BRICS and their growing ambition on the world geopolitical stage? And where does this fit into the age-old banker quest for global government? To answer these questions, we must first examine the institutions in question.
Under the terms of the Agreement signed by the BRICS leaders at Fortaleza, the New Development Bank’s mandate is to “mobilize resources for infrastructure and sustainable development projects in BRICS and other emerging economies and developing countries.” To accomplish this goal they will “support public or private projects through loans, guarantees, equity participation and other financial instruments.” The initial subscribed capital of $50 billion will come from initial payments of $10 billion from each of the five BRICS members. Total authorized capital of the Bank will be $100 billion. Membership of the bank will be open to all members of the United Nations and each members’ voting power will be equal to its subscribed shares in the Bank’s capital stock. The Bank will be headquartered in Shanghai and its governance will consist of a Board of Governors, a Board of Directors and a President.
The Contingent Reserve Arrangement, meanwhile, “is a framework for the provision of support through liquidity and precautionary instruments in response to actual or potential short-term balance of payments pressures.” Its initial $100 billion in committed resources will come in tranches: 41% from China, 18% each from Russia, India and Brazil, and 5% from South Africa. Governance of the CRA will consist of a Governing Council including one Governor and one Alternate Governor appointed by each of the five parties and a Standing Committee consisting of one Director and one Alternate Director appointed by each party. The Arrangement’s two main instruments will be a liquidity instrument for providing funds in response to balance of payment problems and a precautionary instrument for permitting access to funds ahead of anticipated balance of payment problems.
A Global Power Struggle?
So what does this all mean? Is this the first salvo in the long-expected economic war between the developed world and the developing world? Does the creation of the NDB and the CRA mark the rise of the BRICS as a force on the world stage? Does it threaten the existing IMF/World Bank empire?
The agreements for both the NDB and the CRA take pains to point out that they are meant as a “complement [to] existing international monetary and financial arrangements” rather than as competition to them. And the World Bank has formally welcomed the announcement of the NDB, with World Bank President Jim Young Kim telling reporters at a recent press conference with Indian Prime Minister Modi “The only competition we have is with poverty” and “Any bank or any group of institutions that try to tackle the problem of infrastructure investment to fight poverty, we welcome.”
But behind the polite words and ‘we’re all working toward the same goal’ rhetoric is the cold fact that the developing world has been increasingly vocal about their interest in World Bank reform in recent years and specific complaints from the BRICS nations themselves over the strings that are inevitably attached to World Bank lending. It is also perhaps significant that all of the BRICS nations except China will be paying more into their capitalization of the NDB than they do to the World Bank.
Although much talk has been made about how the BRICS are attempting to subvert the dollar’s hegemony as the world reserve currency, that is not the case with these institutions, at least not at this point. All of the capitalization payments and fund commitments in the agreements for the NDB and CRA are explicitly denominated in “ the official currency of payment of the United States of America.”
The main competition that many are expecting from the NDB as opposed to the World Bank is that there are expected to be far fewer (if any) conditionalities attached to NDB lending. As we saw last week the Structural Adjustment Programs of the IMF and World Bank require a whole series of political and economic reforms dictated by Washington and its cronies before developing countries can qualify for development funds. Now members of globalist institutions like Matt Ferchen of the Carnegie Tsinghua Center for Global Policy are openly fretting about the possibility that NDB funding will undermine this structure: “China has this rhetoric in terms of its foreign policy and especially as it relates to China’s engagement with other developing countries, that China won’t interfere in other countries’ domestic politics, that China respects the domestic, economic and political systems of other countries, in a way that they want to be seen as different from the World Bank, the IMF, or countries like the United States.”
For those who understand that the IMF/World Bank system is and has been used to subjugate debtor nations and impose the will of the Western powers on those countries, this seems like a potentially transformative moment. Could it be that the BRICS nations are creating a global institution that will truly undermine the Washington consensus stranglehold over the global south? Are the BRICS creating a global institution we can get behind? Should we be happy about this potential NDB/CRA revolution?
‘Good’ Globalization vs. ‘Bad’ Globalization
Like with so many other situations, we must be careful not to fall into the trap of believing that the only alternatives that are being presented to us are the only alternatives that are possible. In this case, it seems that we are being presented with the choice between supporting a development paradigm led by the ‘bad’ globalists of the IMF/World Bank crowd that seek to control other countries through financing and the ‘good’ globalists who are selflessly looking to spur development for the good of humanity. This is just such a false choice.
First, the underlying assumption that the BRICS countries are doing what they’re doing out of some selfless love of humanity needs to be confronted head on. The BRICS countries in general, and China in particular (which is the strongest proponent of the anti-interventionist stance), have much to gain by offering no strings development loans. This was made clear by Gaddafi when he made the argument that China would beat out the US for control over Africa because it’s non-interventionist foreign policy was better at winning Africans hearts and minds. China is interested in securing African resources. It cannot challenge the US directly at its leverage-and-threats approach to gaining control of those resources, so it plays the good cop in the good cop / bad cop game. This allows it to create deep (and lucrative) ties with precisely those nations, such as Sudan, that the US is most interested in ‘reforming.’ It may be a mutually beneficial relationship, but let’s not kid ourselves that China is interested in building up Sudanese infrastructure out of sheer goodwill. Did China finance the construction of a $1.3 billion railway from Khartoum to Port Sudan because they care about Africans or because they care about establishing the infrastructure to service their 2 million ton oil terminal in the port?
Secondly, the idea that the BRICS are creating a ‘good’ globalist institution rests on the further assumption that, even if the current batch of BRICS leaders are benevolent and altruistic, that the next batch (or the one after that…) will be as well. The World Bank, too, started out as a humble institution making very limited loans for very specific projects. It wasn’t until Robert McNamara took the reigns of the Bank in 1968 that it started to take on the characteristics that we recognize today. Similarly who is to say that the BRICS leaders (or their successors) won’t allow the potential power of being a global financing body go to their heads? Why should we trust that any sprawling globalist institution will act always and forever in the interests of the greater good?
No, the ‘good’ globalization / ‘bad’ globalization here seems like a ruse to further globalization. Whether the world comes to accept a greater reliance on and submission of sovereignty to globalist institutions led by the West or institutions led by the BRICS countries does not seem to be a genuine choice.
So what are the alternatives? Surely it is important to build up the infrastructure of the developing countries, isn’t it? Surely this can’t be accomplished without the massive resources of a World Bank or a New Development Bank, can it?
It should first of all be noted that the urge to assume that developing nations cannot possibly find solutions to their own infrastructure and development problems without the aid of the rich global power players is not only paternalistic and patronizing, but contra-indicated by the evidence at hand. What, precisely, has the last 50 years of World Bank/IMF intervention and “aid” to the developing world achieved, exactly? Is Argentina in a better position than it was before IMF intervention, or a worse one? Has sub-Saharan Africa improved its political and economic clout on the world stage as a result of its World Bank financing, or become even more subservient to the countries that have provided it those loans? Are the success stories of economies that have risen out of poverty like South Korea because of or despite IMF/World Bank meddling? The answers to these questions, all easily enough documentable, speak for themselves.
Also, it shows a profound lack of imagination to believe that funding can only come through mega-grants delivered by bodies with hundreds of billions of dollars at their disposal. In recent decades the concept of microcredit has transformed our understanding of what is possible in terms of funding business and enterprise in the developing world, and it is currently challenging assumptions that infrastructure like affordable housing and sanitation systems can only be provided by the “grant aid lottery” of the World Bank (or NDB). Local communities know best what local needs are and how local manpower, resources and services can be organized to meet those needs. Granting bodies in Washington or Shanghai cannot possibly be expected to have that type of knowledge, or expect that throwing dollars at these problems will achieve the same results as providing small-scale, goal driven aid for specific local projects created and run by local community organizations.
It is not a question of ‘good’ global banks vs. ‘bad’ global banks. It is global banks versus the people, as it always has been, and when we understand the situation from that perspective the sheen comes off of the ballyhoo surrounding the New Development Bank.
Whither the NDB?
Before anyone gets too carried away with speculation about the NDB and the CRA and their likely role on the world stage, it would be good to conduct a brief reality check. There was another announcement of another alternative development bank just a few short years ago that received a similar amount of coverage and hoopla at the time that turned out to be all talk and no action. Remember the Bank of the South? Neither do most of the people who wrote about it at the time, and yet it seemed like a major development when it occurred.
That the BRICS are serious about following through with the NDB and the CRA is not in doubt, but that they can keep these organizations together and working toward a unified vision is very much doubtful at this moment. Internal divisions within the BRICS delayed the creation of the bank for years and even now tensions continue between the members. Brazil and China, for example, remain locked in disputes over China’s economic relation to the South American country; Brazil accuses the rising dragon of plundering their resources and dumping cheap manufactured goods on the country in return. China and India have also butted heads over control of the NDB’s policies and vision, and there is ongoing concern about whether South Africa will be able to live up to its financial obligations in these institutions.
All of this being said, the bank is hoping to make its first loan in 2016. When that happens, there will be no doubt that we will be living in a different world. The question is whether it will be a better one.