Los Cuatro Jinetes de la Banca Mundial

Si a usted le es difícil entender que es el Nuevo Orden Mundial -en realidad es el antiguo orden mundial- y quienes lo componen, este es el artículo para aclarar sus dudas.

Por Dean Henderson
Traducción Luis R. Miranda
27 de mayo, 2011

Si quieres saber dónde está el centro de poder real del mundo, sigue el dinero – cui bono. Según la revista Global Finance, a partir de 2010 los más poderosos bancos se encuentran en los feudos de Rothschild en el Reino Unido y Francia.

Ellos son los franceses BNP ($ 3 trillones de dólares en activos), Royal Bank of Scotland ($ 2,7 trillones de dólares en activos), el HSBC Holdings con sede en el Reino Unido ($ 2,4 trillones de dólares en activos), el francés Credit Agricole (2,2 trillones de dólares en activos) y el Barclays británico (2,2 trillones en activos).

En los EE.UU., una combinación de desregulación y la manía de las fusiones bancárias ha dejado a cuatro mega-bancos como jefes del sistema financiero. Según Global Finance, a partir de 2010 son Bank of America (2,2 trillones de dólares), JP Morgan Chase ($ 2 trillones de dólares), Citigroup ($ 1.9 trillones de dólares) y Wells Fargo ($ 1.25 trillones). Los he llamado los Cuatro Jinetes de la banca de EE.UU. La consolidación del Poder del Dinero.

En septiembre de 2000 el matrimonio que creó JP Morgan-Chase fue la más grande concentración en un frenesí de consolidación bancaria que se llevó a cabo a lo largo de la década de 1990. La manía de concentraciones fue alimentada por una desregulación masiva de la industria bancaria como la revocación de la Ley Glass Steagal de 1933, que fue promulgada después de la Gran Depresión para frenar los monopolios bancarios que habían causado el crack bursátil de 1929 y que precipitó la Gran Depresión.

En julio de 1929 Goldman Sachs lanzó dos fondos de inversión llamado Shenandoah y el Blue Ridge. Durante agosto y septiembre de ese año, los bancos promocionaron estos fideicomisos al público, la venta de cientos de millones de dólares en acciones a través de Goldman Sachs Trading Corporation a $ 104 dólares cada acción. Los inversionistas de Goldman Sachs fueron rescatados en el mercado de valores. En el otoño de 1934 las acciones tenían un valor de $ 1.75 dólares cada una. Un director de Shenandoah y Blue Ridge y abogado de Sullivan & Cromwell, era John Foster Dulles. [1]

John Merrill, fundador de Merrill Lynch, salió del mercado de valores en 1928, al igual que lo hicieron inversionistas de Lehman Brothers. El presidente de Chase Manhattan, Alfred Wiggin tuvo una “corazonada”, al formar la Corporación Shermar en 1929, para atacar las acciones de su propia compañía. A raíz de la crisis de 1929, el presidente de Citibank, Charles Mitchell, fue encarcelado por evasión de impuestos. [2]

En febrero de 1995 el presidente Bill Clinton anunció sus planes para acabar con Glass Steagal y la Ley Bank Holding Company de 1956 – que prohibía a los bancos poseer compañías de seguros y otras entidades financieras. Ese día el comerciante de opio y esclavos, Barings, quebró después de que uno de sus operadores con sede en Singapur llamado Nicholas Gleason quedó atrapado en el lado equivocado de miles de millones de dólares en operaciones de derivativos. [3]

La advertencia no fue escuchada. En 1991, los contribuyentes de EE.UU., que ya habían tenido que pagar más de $ 500 mil millones de dólares al S & L, tuvieron que pagar otros 70 mil millones de dólares para rescatar a la FDIC, y poco después pagaron la factura de un rescate secreto dos años y medio de Citibank, que fue al borde del colapso después de la crisis de deuda en América Latina. Con sus cuentas ya pagadas por los contribuyentes de EE.UU. y la desregulación bancaria dada por un hecho, el escenario estaba listo para una gran cantidad de fusiones bancarias como el mundo nunca había visto.

El subsecretario del Tesoro de Reagan, George Gould ha afirmado que la concentración de la banca en cinco a diez bancos gigantes era necesario para la economía de los EE.UU. La visión de Gould estaba a punto de hacerse realidad.

En 1992, Bank of America compró a su rival más grande de la costa oeste, Security Pacific, para después tragarse al Banco Continental de Illinois. Bank of America más tarde adquirió una participación del 34% del banco Black Rock (Barclays posee el 20% de Black Rock) y una participación del 11% en China Construction Bank, haciendola la segunda mayor compañía bancaria del país, con activos de $ 214 mil millones de dólares. Citibank controlados 249 mil millones dólares. [4]

Ambos bancos han incrementado sus activos a alrededor de 2 trillones dólares cada uno.

En 1993, Chemical Bank absorbió el Commerce Bank de Texas para convertirse en el tercer mayor banco comercial con $ 170 mil millones de dólares en activos. Chemical Bank se había fusionado ya con Manufacturers Hanover Trust en 1990.

North Carolina National Bank y Sovran C & S se fusionaron y formaron el Nation Bank, para convertirse en la cuarta mayor compañía bancaria de EE.UU. con 169 mil millones de dólares en sus arcas. Fleet Norstar compró el Banco de Nueva Inglaterra, mientras que Norwest compró Bancos Unidos de Colorado.

A lo largo de este período los activos bancarios de estas empresas batieron récords cada trimestre. El año 1995 batió todos los récords anteriores desde las fusiones bancarias. Negocios entre bancos ‘produjeron’ un total de 389 mil millones de dólares. [5]

Los Cinco Grandes Bancos de Inversión, que acababan de ganar toneladas de dinero direccionando negociaciones de la deuda de América Latina, multiplicaron sus ganancias a través de la interminable lista fusiones entre 1980 y 1990.

De acuerdo con Standard & Poors los más poderosos bancos de inversión eran Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley Dean Witter, Salomon Smith Barney y Lehman Brothers. Un acuerdo que fracasó en 1995 fue una propuesta de fusión entre el mayor banco de inversión de Londres, SG Warburg y Morgan Stanley Dean Witter. Warburg eligió Union Bank de Suiza como su pretendiente en su lugar, y de ahí surgió UBS Warburg como la sexta fuerza en la banca de inversión.

Después del frenesí de 1995, los bancos se movilizaron agresivamente hacia el Oriente Medio, y establecieron operaciones en Tel Aviv, Beirut y Bahrein, donde la flota de bancos de EE.UU. se instaló. Las privatizaciones del Banco en Egipto, Marruecos, Túnez e Israel abrió la puerta a los mega-bancos a esas naciones. Chase y Citibank, pidió dinero prestado a Royal Dutch Shell y Petroquímica de Arabia, mientras que JP Morgan asesoró al consorcio liderado por Qatargas Exxon Mobil. [6]

La industria mundial de seguros también tenía un caso de manía por las fusiones. En 1995, Traveler’s Group había comprado Aetna, y Berkshire Hathaway -una empresa de Warren Buffet- había absorbido Geico, Zurich Seguros absorbió Kemper Corporation, CNA Financial había comprado Continental Companies y General Re Corporation había hundido sus dientes en Colonia Konzern AG.

A finales de 1998 el coloso Citibank se fusionó con Travelers Group para convertirse en Citigroup, la creación de un gigante de un valor de $ 700 mil millones que se jactaba de tener 163.000 empleados en más de 100 países que incluía a las empresas de Salomon Smith Barney (una empresa conjunta con Morgan Stanley), crédito comercial, Primerica Financial Services, Shearson Lehman, Barclays América, Aetna y Financial Pacific Segurities. [7]

Ese mismo año, Bankers Trust y U.S. Investment Bank Alex Brown fueron adquiridos por Deutsche Bank, que había comprado también Morgan Grenfell de Londres en 1989. La compra hecha por Deutsche Bank el mayor banco del mundo en ese momento con activos de $ 882 mil millones de dólares. En enero de 2002, el japonés Mitsubishi y Sumitomo Operations se combinaron para crear Mitsubishi Sumitomo Bank, que superó a Deutsche Bank, con activos de US $ 905 mil millones de dólares. [8]

En 2004 HSBC se había convertido en el segundo mayor banco del mundo. Seis años más tarde, los tres gigantes habían sido eclipsados por BNP y Royal Bank of Scotland.

En los EE.UU., la pesadilla de George Gould llegó a su punto más alto justo a tiempo para el nuevo milenio, cuando el Chase Manhattan absorbió Chemical Bank. Bechtel Wells Fargo compró Norwest Bank, mientras que Bank of America absorbió Nations Bank. El golpe de gracia llegó cuando la reunificación de la Casa de Morgan anunció que se fusionaría con el Chase Manhattan Bank de Rockefeller/Chemical Bank/Manufacturers Hanover.

Cuatro bancos gigantes emergieron para reinar en el mercado financiero de Estados Unidos. JP Morgan Chase y Citigroup fueron los reyes del capital de la Costa Este. En conjunto, estos dos bancos controlaban 52,86% de la Reserva Federal de Nueva York [9] mientras Bank of America y Wells Fargo reinaban en la Costa Oeste.

Durante la crisis bancaria de 2008 estas empresas crecieron aún más, recibiendo casi $ 1 trillón de dólares cortesía del gobierno de Bush y el secretario del Tesoro y ex de Goldman Sachs, Henry Paulsen, mientras que silenciosamente compraban activos por centávos de dólar.

Barclays se hizo cargo de Lehman Brothers. JP Morgan Chase se tragó a Bear Stearns y Washington Mutual. Bank of America tomó a Merrill Lynch y Countrywide. Wells Fargo se apoderó del quinto más grande banco del país, Wachovia.

Los mismos bancos controlados por las mismas ocho familias que durante décadas habían galopado sus Cuatro Jinetes del petróleo por el Golfo Pérsico son ahora más poderosas que en cualquier otro momento de la historia. Son los Cuatro Jinetes del Sistema Bancario Mundial.

Fuentes:

[1] The Great Crash of 1929. John Kenneth Galbraith. Houghton, Mifflin Company. Boston. 1979. p.148

[2] Ibid

[3] Evening Edition. National Public Radio. 2-27-95

[4] “Bank of America will Purchase Chicago Bank”. The Register-Guard. Eugene, OR. 1-29-94

[5] “Big-time Bankers Profit from M&A Fever”. Knight-Ridder News Service. 12-30-95

[6] “US Banks find New Opportunities in the Middle East”. Amy Dockser Marcus. Wall Street Journal. 10-12-95

[7] “Making a Money Machine”. Daniel Kadlec. Time. 4-20-98. p.44

[8] BBC World News. 1-20-02

[9] Rule by Secrecy: The Hidden History that Connects the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons and the Great Pyramids”. Jim Marrs. HarperCollins Publishers. New York. 2000. p.74

Consolidating US Money Power: The Four Horsemen of Global Banking

By Dean Henderson
Global Research
May 25, 2011

If you want to know where the true power center of the world lies, follow the money – cui bono.  According to Global Finance magazine, as of 2010 the world’s five biggest banks are all based in Rothschild fiefdoms UK and France.

They are the French BNP ($3 trillion in assets), Royal Bank of Scotland ($2.7 trillion), the UK-based HSBC Holdings ($2.4 trillion), the French Credit Agricole ($2.2 trillion) and the British Barclays ($2.2 trillion).

In the US, a combination of deregulation and merger-mania has left four mega-banks ruling the financial roost.  According to Global Finance, as of 2010 they are Bank of America ($2.2 trillion), JP Morgan Chase ($2 trillion), Citigroup ($1.9 trillion) and Wells Fargo ($1.25 trillion).  I have dubbed them the Four Horsemen of US banking Consolidating the Money Power.

The September 2000 marriage which created JP Morgan Chase was the grandest merger in a frenzy of bank consolidation that took place throughout the 1990’s.  Merger mania was fed by a massive deregulation of the banking industry including revocation of the Glass Steagal Act of 1933, which was enacted after the Great Depression to curb the banking monopolies which had caused the 1929 stock market crash and precipitated the Great Depression.

In July 1929 Goldman Sachs launched two investment trusts called Shenandoah and Blue Ridge.  Through August and September they touted these trusts to the public, selling hundreds of millions of dollars worth of shares through the Goldman Sachs Trading Corporation at $104/share.  Goldman Sachs insiders were bailing out of the stock market.  By the fall of 1934 the trust shares were worth $1.75 each.  One director at both Shenandoah and Blue Ridge was Sullivan & Cromwell lawyer John Foster Dulles. [1]

John Merrill, founder of Merrill Lynch, exited the stock market in 1928, as did insiders at Lehman Brothers.  Chase Manhattan Chairman Alfred Wiggin took his “hunch” to the next level, forming Shermar Corporation in 1929 to short the stock of his own company.  Following the Crash of 1929, Citibank President Charles Mitchell was jailed for tax evasion. [2]

In February 1995 President Bill Clinton announced plans to wipe out both Glass Steagal and the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956- which barred banks from owning insurance companies and other financial entities. That day the old opium and slave trader Barings went belly up after one of its Singapore-based traders named Nicholas Gleason got caught on the wrong side of billions of dollars in derivative currency trades. [3]

The warning went unheeded.  In 1991 US taxpayers, already billed over $500 billion dollars for the S&L looting, were charged another $70 billion to bail out the FDIC, then footed the bill for a secret 2 1/2-year rescue of Citibank, which was close to collapse after the Latin American debt crunch hit home.  With their bill’s paid by US taxpayers and bank deregulation a done deal, the stage was set for a slew of bank mergers like none the world had ever seen.

Reagan Undersecretary of Treasury George Gould had stated that concentration of banking into five to ten giant banks was what the US economy needed.  Gould’s nightmare vision was about to come true.

In 1992 Bank of America bought its biggest West Coast rival Security Pacific, then swallowed up the looted Continental Bank of Illinois for cheap.  Bank of America later took a 34% stake in Black Rock (Barclays owns 20% of Black Rock) and an 11% share in China Construction Bank, making it the nation’s second largest bank holding company with assets of $214 billion.  Citibank controlled $249 billion. [4]

Both banks have since increase their assets to around $2 trillion each.

In 1993 Chemical Bank gobbled up Texas Commerce to become the third largest bank holding company with $170 billion in assets.  Chemical Bank had already merged with Manufacturers Hanover Trust in 1990.

North Carolina National Bank and C&S Sovran merged into Nation’s Bank, then the fourth largest US bank holding company, with $169 billion in its war chest.  Fleet Norstar bought Bank of New England, while Norwest bought United Banks of Colorado.

Throughout this period US bank profits were soaring, breaking records with each new quarter.  The year 1995 broke all previous records for bank mergers.  Deals totaling $389 billion occurred that year. [5]

The Big Five investment banks, who had just made boatloads of money steering Latin American debt negotiations, now made a killing steering the bank and industrial merger- mania of the 1980’s and 1990’s.

According to Standard & Poors the top five investment banks were Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley Dean Witter, Salomon Smith Barney and Lehman Brothers.  One deal that fell through in 1995 was a proposed merger between London’s biggest investment bank S. G. Warburg and Morgan Stanley Dean Witter.  Warburg chose Union Bank of Switzerland as its suitor instead, creating UBS Warburg as a sixth force in investment banking.

After the 1995 feeding frenzy, the money center banks moved aggressively into the Middle East, establishing operations in Tel Aviv, Beirut and Bahrain- where the US 5th Fleet was setting up shop.  Bank privatizations in Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia and Israel opened the door to the mega-banks in those nations.  Chase and Citibank lent money to Royal Dutch/Shell and Saudi Petrochemical, while JP Morgan advised the Qatargas consortium led by Exxon Mobil. [6]

The global insurance industry had a case of merger mania as well.  By 1995 Traveler’s Group had bought Aetna, Warren Buffet’s Berkshire Hathaway had eaten up Geico, Zurich Insurance had swallowed Kemper Corporation, CNA Financial had purchased Continental Companies and General RE Corporation had sunk its teeth into Colonia Konzern AG.

In late 1998 the Citibank colossus merged with Travelers Group to become Citigroup, creating a behemoth worth $700 billion that boasted 163,000 employees in over 100 countries and included the firms of Salomon Smith Barney (a joint venture with Morgan Stanley), Commercial Credit, Primerica Financial Services, Shearson Lehman, Barclays America, Aetna and Security Pacific Financial. [7]

That same year Bankers Trust and US investment bank Alex Brown were swooped up by Deutsche Bank, which had also purchased Morgan Grenfell of London in 1989.  The purchase made Deutsche Bank the world’s largest bank at the time with assets of $882 billion.  In January 2002, Japanese titans Mitsubishi and Sumitomo combined operations to create Mitsubishi Sumitomo Bank, which surpassed Deutsche Bank with assets of $905 billion. [8]

By 2004 HSBC had become the world’s second largest bank.  Six years later all three behemoths had been eclipsed by both BNP and Royal Bank of Scotland.

In the US, the George Gould nightmare reached its ugly nadir just in time for the new millennium when Chase Manhattan swallowed up Chemical Bank.  Bechtel banker Wells Fargo bought Norwest Bank, while Bank of America absorbed Nations Bank. The coup de grace came when the reunified House of Morgan announced that it would merge with the Rockefeller Chase Manhattan/Chemical Bank/ Manufacturers Hanover machine.

Four giant banks emerged to rule the US financial roost.  JP Morgan Chase and Citigroup were kings of capital on the East Coast.  Together they control 52.86% of the New York Federal Reserve Bank. [9]  Bank of America and Wells Fargo reigned supreme on the West Coast.

During the 2008 banking crisis these firms got much larger, receiving a nearly $1 trillion government bailout compliments of Bush Treasury Secretary and Goldman Sachs alumni Henry Paulsen; while quietly taking over distressed assets for pennies on the dollar.

Barclays took over Lehman Brothers.  JP Morgan Chase got Washington Mutual and Bear Stearns.  Bank of America was handed Merrill Lynch and Countrywide.  Wells Fargo swallowed up the nation’s 5th biggest bank- Wachovia.

The same Eight Families-controlled banks which for decades had galloped their Four Horsemen of oil roughshod through the Persian Gulf oil patch are now more powerful than at any time in history.  They are the Four Horsemen of US banking.

Notes

[1] The Great Crash of 1929. John Kenneth Galbraith. Houghton, Mifflin Company. Boston. 1979. p.148

[2] Ibid

[3] Evening Edition. National Public Radio. 2-27-95

[4] “Bank of America will Purchase Chicago Bank”. The Register-Guard. Eugene, OR. 1-29-94

[5] “Big-time Bankers Profit from M&A Fever”. Knight-Ridder News Service. 12-30-95

[6] “US Banks find New Opportunities in the Middle East”. Amy Dockser Marcus. Wall Street Journal. 10-12-95

[7] “Making a Money Machine”. Daniel Kadlec. Time. 4-20-98. p.44

[8] BBC World News. 1-20-02

[9] Rule by Secrecy: The Hidden History that Connects the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons and the Great Pyramids”. Jim Marrs. HarperCollins Publishers. New York. 2000. p.74

 Dean Henderson is the author of Big Oil & Their Bankers in the Persian Gulf: Four Horsemen, Eight Families & Their Global Intelligence, Narcotics & Terror Network and The Grateful Unrich: Revolution in 50 Countries.  His Left Hook blog is at  www.deanhenderson.wordpress.com

North American Union 101

Call it What You Want. If Everything Goes Business as Usual, Mexico, Canada and the United States Will Become One

By Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
May 5, 2010

Rome was not built in one day. In order to become the Empire it was, Rome went through years and years of progress until it becamNAUe the structure we know today. Democracy did not appear one morning with the rise of the sun.  The United States was not founded over a summer to become what it is today; it took a civil war to produce independence from Britain, an anti-slavery movement, a period of reconstruction and industrialization and two world wars. Local, National and Global structures of power are created one block at the time. The latest example of a superstructure in its works is the North American Union.

Known also by its NAU abbreviation, this new power structure emulates in many regards the European Union, EU, which came about as an economical organization, which sought to facilitate the trade between countries in the old continent. One thing the two structures have in common is its supranational nature, that is, its authority goes beyond the power of any of its member-partner governments. Just as its European equal, the North American Union and its roots were planted by non-governmental institutions, mainly the Council in Foreign Relations or CFR a branch of a globalist movement that seeks to unify the world under a one-world government. In Europe, the main contributors to the creation of the EU were the European Commission, the Council of the European Union, the European Council, the European Central Bank, the European Court of Justice, and the European Parliament, all of which represented no government in particular, but which represented the interests of national and regional corporations.
The European Union is today one single market with a common trade and political policy. It introduced a single currency, the euro, adopted by 13 member states. The EU initiated a limited Common Foreign and Security Policy, and a limited Police and Judicial Co-operation in Criminal Matters. Another feature the EU and the NAU have in common is that those who are put in power are not elected by the people in every nation member, precisely because when a country is admitted into the EU, that nation ceases to exist. Everything from the security to the economy, to the politics, to the management of welfare and the military is then directed by unelected persons who raise to power once a country’s president or prime minister signs what in North America is the Security and Prosperity Partnership, SPP. Once the SPP is signed, most laws that previously governed such a country go into retirement, and the newly unelected parliament begins their never-ending governance.

Another similarity between the EU and NAU, is the authorization to let in millions of foreigners who are free to move within the borders of the union to live and work with zero restrictions. The newest push by the United States president and most congressmen to allow between 12 and 30 million illegal immigrants to remain in the United States soil regardless of their violations of immigration laws, is a clear sign, critics say, that there is a path being paved to lure people into coming to North America. The newest bill, which apparently counts with the blessing of George W. Bush, includes a renewable Z VISA, which will permit illegals to remain in the country for 4 years in a row. During that period, illegals will pay around $5,000 in fees and penalties, which will enable them to apply for a Green Card. At some point in the process, the head of the household, the bill says, will have to leave the United States to his country of origin in order to obtain a legal admittance into the US. Although most parts of the bill are kept secret by its writers and most congressmen, it’s been reported that the bill will allow illegals to bring into the US up to eleven relatives after the former obtain their green cards. This will not only make the immigration problem more serious, but also will turn the immigration debate more sour, because the bill does not account for how the country or the work market will cope with the increase in the population this measure will spur.

“The ultimate goal of any White House policy ought to be a North American economic and political alliance similar in scope and ambitions to the European Union.” So, whom are the ones pushing for the North American Union in the United States? Well, for starters Mr. Robert Pastor, from the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), who said in the journal of the CFR: “NAFTA was merely the first draft of an economic constitution for North America.” Then, there is Zbigniew Brzezinski, former National Security Advisor who in 1995 said, “We cannot leap into world government in one quick step…the precondition for eventual globalization is progressive regionalization.” Last but not least, Mr. David Rockefeller, who said in his memoirs, “…Some believe we are part of a global cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure- one world. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”

In March, 2005, president Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Martin and former Mexican president Vicente Fox signed the SPP, which again was written by Robert Pastor and other members of the CFR, who met with its Mexican and Canadian colleagues before the trilateral meeting featuring the three heads of state. The goal in that meeting was to create and establish a North American Community by 2010. Although Robert Pastor maintains the intention of the CFR is not to create anything like to European Union, the truth is that in its early stages the SPP look just like the plan the EU had when it was in its beginnings. First, it was shown as an economical alliance, to facilitate the circulation of goods from country to country and to find common ground on economic and trade policies. But the EU soon turned into a continental body that evolved into political unions. In 2005, after Bush signed the SPP, a proto-parliament called the North American Competitiveness Council was created, a prototype for what in Europe is today the European Parliament. The highlight of this section is that in the event a severe state of emergency hits the region, the SPP has plans for a continuity of government, which many call a shadow government.

The NAFTA Highways
But in order for a North American block to prosper, there is more that needs to happen. In order to open the borders, immigration laws need to change. A new transportation system needs to be constructed. Once trade limits are set aside, the path seems to point to a free circulation of products from Mexico into the US and to Canada. The North American Free Trade Agreement signed by Bill Clinton in 1993, opened the door for massive exchange of goods across the borders of Mexico, the United States and Canada. In order to have that massive movement of people and products a new highway system which will connect the three countries. The NAFTA highways will begin down on the border between Mexico and the US and spread to Florida, New York, Toronto, Oklahoma, Calgary and Vancouver. All in all, there will be four sections: an Atlantic, Pacific, Central Eastern and Central Western corridors. All this is possible due to the massive sell of local and regional highway systems to international corporations such as Spain’s Cintra and Zachry Construction. The lobbying of banks like Goldman Sachs and other companies like Merryl Lynch in Washington and the poor management of resources at the state level have sparked the sell of Parkways, Turnpikes and other highway systems which were built with taxpayers’ money and that now, opposing groups say, it being handed to foreigners for periods as long as 99 years.

The Amero
So, once there is a common government, a common trade policy and a common transportation system, there are two more things needed to complete the picture, one is a common currency and another is a regional database. According to Professor and Journalist, Jerome Corsi, one of the key issues is the use of a regional currency. “Robert Pastor has also called for the creation of the “Amero” that would replace the US Dollar, the Canadian Dollar and the Mexican Peso”, says Corsi. “This follows in virtual lock step with what the European Union has accomplished for the once-totally independent nations across the Atlantic. Most of them have discarded their own currencies in favor of the Euro.” Either due to currency devaluation or the push of the CFR for the Amero, it is clear that the fact the United States is part of this regional body and that the government borrows 3 billion dollars a day to maintain its operations, will eventually erode the dollar as a currency. Another thing that would precipitate the fall of the dollar and the rise of the Amero is the fact that China holds most of the US debt, which puts in their hands the future of the dollar as a currency. If China decides to dump the dollar as their trade currency and go for the Euro or the Pound, the United States will suffer an economic catastrophe much worse than that suffered during the depression of 1929. A devalued currency and a week economy, says Corsi, would open the doors for a new currency, the Amero.

The RFID
So where does the Radio Frequency Identification system fall into place? Questioned by pro-privacy groups as the greatest violation yet to the citizens private lives, the RFID appears as the best instrument to control the influx of dangerous individuals and to know everything about who enters the country, their origin and destination. In a world tainted by terrorism, it seems like a good idea to know who is here and why, the problem is that it will not only affect immigrants or tourists who come to the US or the North American Union for that matter. Every American citizen will be mandated to carry one of these ID’s as well. Although it was first promoted as a way to prevent the spread of animal disease from getting into the food chain, it soon turned into a tool to control the free movement of individuals across the region. The National Security theme doesn’t seem to be flying well among the population. Several states around the country have formally filed requests to reject the National ID Act, while some states have already totally rejected it. According to critics, the National RFID is an ineffective solution to a problem that can be addressed in less intrusive ways. In practice, it has been demonstrated that hackers can drain information from an RFID card from 160 feet away. Because the information on the ID is biometric the information could be stolen or changed. The ID system would track the card, not the person. What the ID will do it seems, is to create barriers as to where people can go. Those who do not hold an RFID will not be permitted to board planes, enter public buildings or banks, or to collect social security benefits. Organizations like the Liberty Coalition make clear that the RFID is the precursor for what is to come; the implantation of a chip under people’s skins as a way to avoid and end the tampering the RFID will be subject to. The implanted chip says the Liberty Coalition in a recent newsletter is what they are really after. In fact, hospitals and clinics around the country already use chips to store medical information, which is then retrieved with a scanner. Institutions like the Hackensack University Medical Center in Hackensack New Jersey, already offers this possibility to its clients.

The United Nations
In its official charter, the United Nations makes it clear, that its main function is to initiate studies and make recommendations for the purpose of promoting international co-operation in the political field and encouraging the progressive development of international law and its codification. It also says in article 28 that the Security Council shall be so organized as to be able to function continuously. In article 29, itsays the Security Council may establish such subsidiary organs, as it deems necessary for the performance of its functions. In article 30, it says the Security Council shall adopt its own rules of procedure, including the method of selecting its President. Probably the most controversial of the articles is where it establishes that, permanent members form the Security Council with the right to vote and veto. The members of that Council are The Communist Republic of China, France, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States of America. The rest of the members are non-permanent and are elected to sit for periods of two years. Note that two of the permanent members are the USSR, which hasn’t been changed to Russia, and China, communism’s last standing. This fact is of great concern for those who see the United Nations as the precursor for a one-world government due what they call dictatorial rules and regulations. The link between the UN and the EU and the NAU is that these blocks are also previews of what will become a global regulator organ. It seems the North American Union is another step towards formalizing this initiative. In fact the very United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights in its article 28 says: “Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.” Do critics have a point? Later, on Article 29 section 3, it says: “These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.” Article 30 and last says: “Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein. So in other words, taking into consideration the last three articles of the Declaration of Human Rights, anyone has the right to a social and international order. No one can use the rights given in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights if they are considered to be exercised against the UN and no one can act in orderto overcome the UN as a governing body. Since this is a news piece, I let you draw your own conclusions.

Reference Material:

United Nations Reference Manuals.

United Nations Charter.

The New American Magazine.

United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights

www.JonesReport.com

Lou Dobbs Tonight Transcripts

www.spp.gov

Bankrupt, United States ‘sells’ its Infrastructure

Danish, Australian and Spanish Companies Pay Pennies on the Dollar for Infrastructure

By Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
April 27, 2007

If you are a commuter who drives in and out of New York City, or maybe on Indiana highways chances are you’ve heard about local Infrastructurebanking enterprises advising state and local governments on selling their transportation
system to foreign conglomerates and making a buck in the process. Well, let’s imagine you are a daily commuter who drives through the Holland Tunnel every morning and back out every evening. If Goldman Sachs or Morgan Stanley had their saying, you would be paying somewhere around $185 instead of what you pay now. See, the irresponsibility of local, state and federal governments has driven the country into bankruptcy, with a dollar that plunges deeper and deeper against foreign currencies, states that supposedly do not have money to maintain local roads or highway systems so they have to be sold to Spanish, Danish and Australian companies which pay a miserable price for the country’s infrastructure, but obtain lavish tax exemptions and little oversight.

As I mentioned earlier, these foreign companies cannot do it themselves, so they have the support of some of the biggest and more influential financial companies in the United States. The most prominent, Goldman Sachs. The smart pants bankers work hard to “advice” the governments to privatize their roads for which they receive juicy fees. While that is going on, they also pay lobbyist companies like Hillco Partners through J. McCartt -a former aide to Texas governor Rick Perry- to press local and state governments to sell their highways to companies like Cintra, Transurban and Zachry Construction or lobby the legislators themselves. If this wasn’t enough, the bankers also raise funds among parties who are interested in participating and getting a piece of the pie. These funds, of course, are not taxed thanks to the changes made to the tax code, which now allows bankers like Merryl Lynch and Morgan Stanley to come up with a cash box to invest in road projects, something only governments were able to do not too long ago.

This movement of privatizing everything seen as a burden started more or less during the Reagan years and has found a safe heaven during Bush’s seven years in Washington. It is the same type of behavior that allowed congressman Don Young to build his bridge to nowhere. But before I continue into the highway selling deals, let me put it in prospective. Why are local and state governments lacking the money to maintain the roads? Well, they certainly have money to spend in an illegal war, in law enforcement… the Pentagon even lost 12 billion dollars in a money transfer to Iraq! So how come, if everyone pays taxes, do we not have funds to finance the maintenance of our roads? Well, local and state officials waste the money you and I pay and then claim there aren’t enough funds to sustain the typical repays a road needs. Or better even, the cities and states do have enough money, but officials still promote privatization because they will make a buck or two in the process. This is the case of Texas governor, Rick Perry, who competes neck to neck with Indiana’s governor Mitch Daniels to see who provides more support to the project known as the NAFTA Superhighway, a project which includes the privatization of roads across the country in order to favor the commands of the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) and the extensions of the North American Union (NAU) which president Bush signed into law in 2005. The NAU is an initiative supported by mainly by private groups like the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and its similars in Mexico and Canada. Their goal is to merge the North American block into a single political and economical beast through which people would be able to circulate without borders. In other words, the US, Mexico and Canada would lose their sovereignity as independent nations. Among other things, the initiative would require a highway system like the NAFTA Superhighway and policies which were written by non-governmental groups; better known as corporate tycoons.

Throughout the country there are projects to privatize everything. From the New Jersey, Ohio and Pennsylvania Turnpikes, the New York Thruway, highways and bridges in Alabama and Alaska, and of course Texas and Indiana. Let’s look at Indiana. The state received $3.8 billion from CINTRA and Macquaire Infrastructure Group (MIG) to lease the Indiana Toll Road for the next 75 years. The companies not only would be able to manage and raise the tolls at their discretion, but they also are exempt from taxes at the local and state levels. And if this wasn’t enough, calculations tell us that the companies would get a return of $11 billion. In Texas, the state transportation commission permitted a $1.3 billion deal so CINTRA could own and operate a 40 mile toll road out of Austin. In the meantime, Transurban paid around $500 million to lease Virginia’s Pocahontas Parkway for 99 years.

In case you haven’t notice anything wrong with this, because all you care is to have well-kept roads, let me make it clear. All these roads were paid for with your tax money and they have been paid in full already. What these companies are doing is paying the states with change, and obtaining absolute power over the country’s transportation system for two, three or four generations. In addition, they will make you pay many times over for infrastructure you already paid for and on top of that, the privatizations themselves are facilitators to forward the agendas of national and foreign corporations which intend to terminate the country as it exists today. By the way, they are way ahead already.

Phyllis Schlafly, a conservative activist, fought and continues to fight projects like the NAFTA Superhighway. “Why the rush to sell our transportation system? Following the money explains it all. Local and state governments pocket the money and get to spend it here and now, so politicians can cover their runaway budget deficits and enjoy the political rewards of spending for new facilities.”

Daniels just screwed the state of Indiana and the people of the state of Indiana. Private companies have the license to print money here. It’s a scam, basically. And you lose control of your transportation system,” says Representative Peter DeFazio, Democrat of Oregon and Chair of the House’s Subcommittee on Highways, Transit and Pipelines. Although Daniels claimed the privatization of the highways in the state as the “freeing of trapped value from an underperforming asset”, the truth is that he failed to appoint an independent financial analysis for the toll road privatization project. The bill Daniels introduced to allow the privatization of the highways, passed through after a strong debate and a complete disregard for what the population had to say. Those who did have much to say and continue to have a saying in these projects are the bankers. In the case of Goldman Sachs, representatives were shipped to at least 35 states to push for the privatization of highways. These banks, with their hundreds of lawyers and executives, and working along with construction companies attend conferences at places like the Waldorf Astoria in New York, where they talk about the trend of infrastructure privatization in the US. Statesmen and local officials also attend these conferences where they are sold the benefits these projects will bring to their local communities.

How do these bankers get so familiar with government officials or their aides? you probably ask. Well, many of these lobbyists are former government staffers or inversely are now former staffers who represent investment bankers in the privatization deals. One case is that of Jon Corzine, the governor of New Jersey, who was one of Goldman Sachs CEO’s and who in September organized a group of people to analize whether the garden state’s infrastructure should be leased or sold to private companies.

But if you thought privatization is only limited to roadways, you are in for a surprise. Everything from Healthcare to Social Security, from who feeds American troops to the operation of entire city halls, from public works to welfare. So why aren’t American companies taking care of our roads, Healthcare or Social Security? I do not have one answer. I believe it is so because they do not have the favor of the government as the foreign companies do. They have experience and know well how to manage government officials. These foreign companies are such experts, that most of the time they even ask for noncompete clauses, which limit government or smaller companies to fix existent roads or to build new ones. This not only gives companies more power to do whatever they want with the roads, but also eliminates the option commuters have to use alternate roads to visit family, friends or to travel between states.

Current roads will be turned into bottle necks which will force everyone to pay a toll no matter where you are driving to or from. Simply put, the privatization of roads and services previously overseen by the government will make this country and its people tenants not landlords, it will drive us all into a new version of feudalism; corporate feudalism. For those of you who think we already live in such a situation, you are right. We are submitted to feudalism through the production and consumption of mass produced goods. We need a new cellphone every year; it doesn’t matter if it fries our brains. We need to buy the 60′ plasma television, although most of the programming offered right now is not offered in HD. We replace our cars every two years, even though we could drive them many more years. Yes, we are part of a control grid that owns us through our consumerist lives. The difference with the massive privatization of roads and basic services is that we will be chained by our necessities; the water we need to drink, the food we do not grow ourselves, the medical care we need, prescription drugs we need -even though they are poison-, and the defense of the land, to cite a few.

One common characteristic the privatization projects have is that the contracts which the companies negotiate with the governments is kept secret. Governor Perry refused to release the details of his negotiations with CINTRA for the road that runs from Austin to Seguin. On the other hand we do know that Perry’s former legislative director, Dan Shelley, worked as a CINTRA consultant, before he became a staff member of Perry’s. This is how former lawyers, executives and lobbyists make their way from corporations to government and vice versa, while their fat pockets get larger and larger.

How do we correct this problem, the problem of corruption, the sale of our assets to foreigners; how do we defeat the control grid? The only peaceful tool we have in our hands is to VOTE. Just remember that in this country, we do not elect our president. We have the option to elect our delegates, who ultimately will have a say on who governs. Although that is bad news I do have good news too. This country was not made out of dust. In fact, that is why it is called the United States of America. The secret is the states. We must rise and take control of our local, regional and state governments. We must bring the government and the power back to the people. We must stop executives and lawyers from corporations from occupying public office, because their only commitment is with their former bosses, not with you or me. We face a new election in 2008. We need to elect delegates who will commit to the people, not to the corporations. Let’s unseat those who have failed us for the past 30 or more years. Let’s take power back!