Posts Tagged ‘obama’
Written by David Wilcock
Even a year ago, weeks could go by between major Disclosure events. Now there are multiple signals per week. Are they trying to tell us something? Does a bear sit in the woods?
BUILDING UP TO SOMETHING
In the last few months, things have gotten really wonderful for the Disclosure crowd — to the point where I don’t even have enough time to try to track and write about all of it, while juggling my other responsibilities. This includes:
- Multiple, blatant UFO sightings, some of which shut down entire airports;
- Major press conferences with multiple eyewitnesses announcing that nuclear missile installations have been powered down by ‘flying saucers’ which otherwise were not aggressive, and may in fact have our best interests in mind;
- A huge number of “life is highly abundant in the universe” scientific articles;
- A raft of movies and television shows either already released or in production, which are dealing with the subject — both from the present day as well as “Ancient Aliens” who happened to enjoy building massive stone structures.
This is definitely not ‘smoke and mirrors.’ This is a clear, deliberate and concerted effort. And it’s building up to something.
“THE EVENT”
Among all of these various elements, the NBC television show “The Event” stands out as particularly provocative. Here you have a television show about a black President — who looks and sounds just like Obama — stumbling into the truth of human ETs soon after he takes office.
In this story, some 97 human-looking ETs crashed in a spaceship in Alaska in the 1940s, and were held hostage at ‘Camp Inostranka’ ever since. The president learns this truth, meets the people and plans an open Disclosure in a live national press conference.
Right before he discloses these secrets to humanity, he suffers a 9/11-style attack by a hijacked passenger airliner. The plane then pops through a wormhole right before it hits the ground and ends up in a remote desert, apparently by ET influence.
All the passengers onboard the plane initially survive, but they then end up dying — or so we think. The analysis of the bodies at the crash site shows that they appeared to have been running from something — perhaps a beam weapon.
The government plans on ‘distressing’ the bodies to make it look like they all died in a fiery crash, which they intend to fabricate for a cover-up.
THE WEIRD VIRUS
Then, in very disturbing zombie-like fashion, the bodies all end up re-animating in a secret military bunker. At first they seem to be fine, but then they all start hemorrhaging blood from their noses and mouths.
We learn that they have a weird virus, which they were given by the ET opposition leader — and they will be dead within 24 hours unless the President frees all the ET detainees at Inostranka, in exchange for the vaccine.
Fighting for the lives of the survivors, the president wrestles with the opposition leader, who claims he will use this same weapon on whole cities of Americans if the 97 detainees are not freed.
The president ends up getting the antidote by threatening to execute all of the ETs if the opposition leader does not produce the serum first.
THE MEDIUM IS THE MESSAGE
This Monday night’s show effectively picks up at this point in the storyline — and I’m leaving quite a bit out of it here. Though it is a bit clumsy at certain points, and I don’t find the portrayal of the president and his entourage particularly believable, the overall execution is quite good.
There does appear to be a lot of fear-mongering about human-looking ETs in this show, such as their apparent willingness to use terrorist tactics to get their way.
Nonetheless, it also seems clear that we are being given a message that they are not all bad people — only a small number of them.
Furthermore, the seemingly positive female leader of the ETs (who is obviously cast to look and sound very similar to the heroic female president in Battlestar Galactica) alludes to an upcoming ‘Event’ without elaboration at this point in the story.
WHAT’S IN A NAME?
In the title, the second “E” in “Event” is reversed. This highlights the ‘V’ in the middle — as in the previous show ‘V’, which was also about human-looking ETs. It also encourages us to pick out the word ‘EVE.’
Remember that this is all part of a Processed Release of Information (PRI) program, and the underlying body of information to be disclosed has been in place for thousands of years. I discuss this in my radio show with William Henry, linked below.
I feel it is safe to assume that in this TV series, “The Event” will involve a certain amount of cataclysmic activity on the Earth. It should also upgrade our DNA at the same time — leading to a new humanity.
A new Eve.
This would then allow the show to go in the direction of “Heroes” and other such programs where people begin developing ‘powers’.
If that’s really where this is going, then “The Event” may well be the most blatant, in-your-face, one-stop-shop Disclosure mechanism ever put out by the media — at least thus far.
The Pentagon plans to expand its global network of drones and special-operations bases in a fundamental realignment meant to project U.S. power even as it cuts back conventional forces.
The plan, to be unveiled by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta on Thursday and in budget documents next month, calls for a 30% increase in the U.S. fleet of armed unmanned aircraft in the coming years, defense officials said. It also foresees the deployment of more special-operations teams at a growing number of small “lily pad” bases across the globe where they can mentor local allies and launch missions.
The utility of such tools was evident on Wednesday after an elite team—including members of Navy SEAL Team Six, the unit that killed Osama bin Laden—parachuted into Somalia and freed an American woman and Danish man held hostage for months.
The strategy reflects the Obama administration’s increasing focus on small, secret operations in place of larger wars. The shift follows the U.S. troop pullout from Iraq in December, and comes alongside the gradual U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, where a troop-intensive strategy is giving way to an emphasis on training Afghan forces and on hunt-and-kill missions.
Defense officials said the U.S. Army plans to eliminate at least eight brigades while reducing the size of the active duty Army from 570,000 to 490,000, cuts that are likely to hit armored and heavy infantry units the hardest. But drone and special-operations deployments would continue to grow as they have in recent years.
At the same time, the Army aims to accentuate the importance of special operations by preserving light, rapidly deployable units such as the 82nd and the 101st Airborne divisions.
“What we really want is to see the Army adopt the mentality of special forces,” said a military officer who advises Pentagon leaders.
The new strategy would assign specific U.S.-based Army brigades and Marine Expeditionary units to different regions of the world, where they would travel regularly for joint exercises and other missions, using permanent facilities and the forward-staging bases that some advisers call lily pads.
Marines, for example, will use a new base in Darwin, Australia, as a launch pad for Southeast Asia, while the U.S. is in talks to expand the U.S. presence in the Philippines—potential signals to China that the U.S. has quick-response capability in its backyard, defense officials said.
Yet many of the proposed bases will be secret and could temporarily house small commando teams, the officials said.
There are going to be times when action is called upon, like Tuesday night, when it will be clearly advantageous to be forward deployed,” a military official said, referring to the Somalia operation. “On the other hand, most of the time it will help you to be there to develop host nation or regional security.”
Republican presidential contenders have seized on planned cuts to accuse President Barack Obama of weakening the U.S. military. While national-security issues aren’t seen as a weakness for Mr. Obama in the coming presidential campaign, lawmakers could try to block his proposals on Capitol Hill.
Mr. Obama often emphasizes the value of special-operations raids like the one that killed bin Laden to fend off criticism.
The Pentagon, meanwhile, sees the bases and drones as part of an effort to offset cutbacks that some critics say will undercut the U.S.’s global dominance. The Pentagon says it will have more than enough force to fight at least one major troop-intensive ground war.
The Pentagon still will invest in some big-ticket items, including the F-35 stealth fighter, as a counterweight to rising powers, including China—although the department is poised to announce this week that it is going to slow procurement of the new plane, said defense officials.
Many Obama administration officials see last year’s international military intervention in Libya as a model for future conflicts, with the U.S. using its air power up front while also relying on its allies, and on local forces to fight on the ground.
“You are looking at the military try to find new ways to stay globally engaged. When you are smaller, you have to be smarter,” said a U.S. official.
Mr. Panetta alluded in a speech on Friday to plans to invest more heavily in drones and special forces, saying the U.S. wanted to develop an “innovative rotational presence” in Latin America, Africa and elsewhere.
Mr. Panetta is scheduled to outline elements of the department’s $525 billion budget for fiscal 2013, including the first of $487 billion in cuts over 10 years, at the Pentagon Thursday.
The plan, however, envisions a 10% increase in special-operations forces over the next four years, from 63,750 this year to 70,000 by 2015, U.S. officials said. Mr. Panetta also will announce a buildup in the drone fleet in the coming years, U.S. officials said, following growth under predecessor Robert Gates.
The Air Force now operates 61 drone combat air patrols around the clock, with up to four drones in each patrol. Mr. Panetta’s plan calls for the military to have enough drones to comfortably operate 65 combat air patrols constantly with the ability to temporarily surge to 85 combat air patrols, officials said.
The new emphasis represents a victory for Vice President Joe Biden and others in the White House who argued for reducing troops in Afghanistan and relying more on special-operations forces and local allies.
The strategy is similar to ideas that circulated through the military in the years before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and were championed by former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. Mr. Rumsfeld advocated building facilities in Eastern Europe and other locations as he pushed to remake the Army into a lighter, more expeditionary force. Mr. Rumsfeld declined a request for an interview.
The use of secretive commando teams and small, low-profile bases is appealing to the Obama administration because of the reduced costs, said a U.S. official briefed on the plans. They also risk less apprehension by host governments.
Military leaders are looking into the creation of new special-operations bases in Turkey and eastern Jordan, near the border with Iraq. U.S. officials said. Those will supplement a network of airstrips and other facilities in the region that house drones and operatives used for missions in Yemen, Somalia and beyond.
Write to Adam Entous at adam.entous@wsj.com and Siobhan Gorman atsiobhan.gorman@wsj.com
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204624204577183234216799116.html
~there are some implications here I’m not to thrilled about however our chances of reparation seem slim to none at this time…But… I’m never quite sure of France’s intentions, however it looks like Germany favors it also and I do admire Merkel….would this end up only taxing the middle class yet again??? The TPB is very good of robbing us ( ~jude…
With U.S. media obsessing on the fight here at home among conservatives vying to become president, most of them
Image via Wikipedia
missed some big news about France, which already has a conservative president. This week, French President Nicolas Sarkozy announced that he would take the lead — even go it alone within Europe, if need be — in introducing and pushing a Financial Transaction Tax in his country.
That’s right — the conservative president of France wants to tax the financial traders and speculators.
Referring to the tax as a “moral issue” and blaming deregulation and speculation for the global economic meltdown, Sarkozy has said that traders must “repay for the damage they have caused.”
What does it tell us about U.S. politics that the conservative president of France – on this issue and others — is way to the left of President Obama? The U.S. president has not publicly promoted a Wall Street transaction tax (even though U.S. financial institutions, not the French, were largely responsible for the global crisis).
Sometimes called a “Robin Hood tax,” a Financial Transaction Tax is endorsed worldwide by everyone from conservative European leaders to the Pope and Archbishop of Canterbury to Bill Gates and Ralph Nader. The tax is tiny per transaction and would barely be felt by middle-class investors or their pensions or 401(k)’s, but it could raise big bucks from high-volume investors and impose a brake on the kind of speculation that tanked the world’s economy.
French President Sarkozy keeps explaining to the people of France and Europe that a small transaction tax raises billions for countries facing deficits.
Wouldn’t it be something if President Obama went to the American people with such a deficit proposal, instead of putting Medicare on the chopping block?
President Sarkozy invokes the “moral issue“ of financial institutions repairing the damage they caused. What a shock it would be to see President Obama aiming the “moral issue” at Wall Street profiteers and demanding repair of damage, instead of rewarding them with top White House jobs.
After failing to get resistant allies among European countries to join him, Sarkozy is going forward on his own – declaring yesterday: “If France waits for others to tax finance, then finance will never be taxed.”
Can you imagine Obama standing up to a resistant Congress on a Wall Street transaction tax? He can’t even stand up to his own advisers on the issue, according to Ron Suskind’s insider book on the Obama White House, “Confidence Men.” Suskind reports that Obama briefly embraced the tax and declared at one meeting: “We are going to do this!” But after Obama’s top economic adviser (and Wall Streeter) Larry Summers criticized the tax, the idea was buried at the White House.
That was back in 2009. But the idea is still alive on Capitol Hill. A couple months ago, Sen. Tom Harkin and Rep. Peter DeFazio introduced a Financial Transaction Tax bill in Congress that would easily raise $350 billion over 10 years. Rep. John Conyers introduced a similar bill last year — it would tax Wall Street to fund federal jobs programs.
A Wall Street transaction tax is backed by National Nurses United and other unions. It’s popular with the U.S. public, and would be even more popular if Obama were to campaign for it in 2012.
RootsAction.org has gained 50,000 signatures in support of the tax.
You can add your name here to those pushing Obama to (re)embrace the Wall Street tax.
And don’t get me wrong about President Sarkozy of France. He’s no great humanitarian. But he is facing an uphill reelection battle this year and the conservative president understands how popular a financial tax is with voters.
Facing reelection this year, maybe it’s time President Obama came to that same understanding.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-cohen/obama-sarkozy-and-taxing-_b_1199317.html
Jeff Cohen is co-founder of RootsAction.org, author of “Cable News Confidential ,” and founder of the media watch group FAIR.
Taibbi: Obama And Geithner Are Acting Like Lehman Executives Before The Crash
Strongly recommend this piece at theHuffington Post by Jeff Connaughton, a former aide to Senator Ted Kaufman. Jeff 
is one of the smartest guys on the Hill and is particularly strong on issues surrounding Wall Street and the regulatory system. In this piece, he takes apart the oft-stated mantra that what Wall Street firms did during and after the crisis was maybe unethical, but not illegal.
He takes particular aim at Barack Obama, who recently tossed that line out on 60 Minutes in what I thought was one of the real low moments of his presidency. Here’s Jeff’s take:
Speaking in Kansas on December 6, [Obama] said, “Too often, we’ve seen Wall Street firms violating major anti-fraud laws because the penalties are too weak and there’s no price for being a repeat offender.” Just five days later on 60 Minutes, he said, “Some of the least ethical behavior on Wall Street wasn’t illegal.” Which is it? Have there been no prosecutions because Wall Street acted legally (albeit unethically)? Or did Wall Street repeatedly violate major anti-fraud laws (and should thus find itself in the dock)?
The President is confusing “legal” with “difficult to prosecute successfully.”
The notion that what Wall Street firms did was merely unethical and not illegal is not just mistaken but preposterous: most everyone who works in the financial services industry understands that fraud right now is not just pervasive but epidemic, with many of the biggest banks committing entire departments to the routine commission of fraud and perjury – every single one of the major banks, for instance, devotes significant manpower to robosigning affidavits for foreclosures and credit card judgments, acts which are openly and inarguably criminal.
Banks and hedge funds routinely withhold derogatory information about the instruments they sell, they routinely trade on insider information or ahead of their own clients’ orders, and corrupt accounting is so rampant now that industry analysts have begun to figure in estimated levels of fraud in their examinations of the public disclosures of major financial companies.
Beyond that, as Jeff points out, Obama is simply not telling the truth about the supposedly insufficient penalties available to regulators. Employing the famous “mistakes were made” use of the passive tense, Obama copped out in his December 6 speech by saying that “penalties are too weak.” As Jeff points out, what Obama should have said is that “the penalties my own regulators chose to dish out were too weak”:
Moreover, the President is misleading us when he says that Wall Street firms violate anti-fraud law because the penalties are too weak. Repeat financial fraudsters don’t pay relatively paltry — and therefore painless — penalties because of statutory caps on such penalties. Rather, regulatory officials, appointed by Obama, negotiated these comparatively trifling fines. This week, the F.D.I.C. settled a suit against Washington Mutual officials for just $64 million, an amount that will be covered mostly by insurance policies WaMu took out on behalf of executives, who themselves will pay just $400,000. And recently a federal judge rejected the S.E.C.’s latest settlement with Citigroup, an action even the Wall Street Journal called “a rebuke of the cozy relationship between regulators and the regulated that too often leaves justice as an orphan.”
What makes Obama’s statements so dangerous is that they suggest an ongoing strategy of covering up the Wall Street crimewave. There is ample evidence out there that the Obama administration has eased up on prosecutions of Wall Street as part of a conscious strategy to prevent a collapse of confidence in our financial system, with the expected 50-state foreclosure settlement being the landmark effort in the cover-up, intended mainly to bury a generation of fraud. Here’s how Jeff puts it:
In Ron Suskind’s book, Confidence Men, he quotes Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner as saying, “The confidence in the system is so fragile still… a disclosure of a fraud… could result in a run, just like Lehman.” The Obama Administration is pushinghard for a 50-state settlement with the major banks for their fraudulent foreclosure practices, even though several state attorneys general have rejected this approach because, in their view, it would shield too much wrongdoing. Regrettably, Obama’s top officials and lawyers seem more eager to restore the financial sector to health than establish criminal accountability among the executives who were in charge.
In other words, Geithner and Obama are behaving like Lehman executives before the crash of Lehman, not disclosing the full extent of the internal problem in order to keep investors from fleeing and creditors from calling in their chits. It’s worth noting that this kind of behavior – knowingly hiding the derogatory truth from the outside world in order to prevent a run on the bank – is, itself, fraud!
This is exactly the mindset that led Lehman to the abuses of the ”Repo 105″ accounting trick, in which loans were disguised as revenues in order to prevent the outside world from knowing the dire state of the bank’s balance sheet.
Now Obama and Geithner are engaged in the same sort of activity, only they’re trying to prevent a run not on an individual bank, but the entire American financial services sector. Geithner seems really to believe that if fraud were aggressively policed, and the world made aware of the incredible extent of the illegality in our markets, that international confidence in the American financial sector would plummet and our economy would suffer – and suffer, incidentally, on Barack Obama’s watch.
Better, apparently, the Band-Aid the problem now, and let the real mess happen later on, on someone else’s watch, or at least in a second term, when there’s no need to worry about re-election.
Of course, this is exactly the wrong way to go about things. If Geithner and Obama really wanted to convince the world that America’s markets weren’t broken, they would effectively police fraud, and by extension prove to everybody that at the very least, our regulatory system is not broken.
But by taking a dive on fraud, and orchestrating mass cover-ups like the coming foreclosure settlement fiasco, what they’re doing instead is signaling to the world that not only are our financial markets corrupt, but our government is broken as well.
The problem with companies like Lehman and Enron is that their executives always think they can paper over illegalities by committing more crimes, when in fact all they’re usually doing is snowballing the problem so completely out of control that there’s no longer any chance of fixing things, thereby killing the only chance for survival they ever had.
This is exactly what Obama and Geithner are doing now. By continually lying about the extent of the country’s corruption problems, they’re adding fraud to fraud and raising such a great bonfire of lies that they probably won’t ever be able to fix the underlying mess.
If they looked at the world like public servants, and not like corporate executives, they’d understand that the only way out is to come clean. That they don’t look at things that way should tell people quite a lot.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/obama-and-geithner-government-enron-style-20111220#ixzz1hCJtsRzA
by THE ASSOCIATED PRESS http://www.npr.org/2011/11/13/142278409/pacific-trade-pact-
Image by Père Ubu via Flickr
gains-but-not-without-friction?
~no pictures of current chief of staff in China? They don’t need the TPP that have the China Silk Road~jude
November 13, 2011
A further step toward a U.S.-backed free trade bloc handed Asia-Pacific leaders a rare tangible achievement from their annual summit, but highlighted growing competition with China for influence in the fast rising region.
Asia’s increasingly vital role as a driver of global growth has added urgency to the campaign to remove barriers and bottlenecks that slow trade and business — the original mission of the 21-member Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum, whose 21 members join economies huge and tiny, rich and poor.
President Obama, flanked by leaders of eight other nations involved in negotiations on setting up the trading bloc, said he was optimistic the trade pact dubbed the Trans-Pacific Partnership could draft a legal framework by next year.
“It is an ambitious goal, but we are optimistic that we can get it done,” he said on the summit’s sidelines.
The so-called TPP is billed as a building block for eventually forging a free trade zone that encompasses all of Asia and the Pacific. It now includes only four smaller economies — Chile, New Zealand, Brunei and Singapore — but the U.S., Australia, Malaysia, Vietnam and Peru are negotiating to join, and Japan said it hopes to as well.
http://beforeitsnews.com/story/1329/881/Breaking_Going_Viral–The_Crash_Is_Coming:_I_Told_You_So.html
~sighhhhh~jude
Italy, France, and Portugal will go belly up soon. This tragedy will collapse the European Union economy. Riots will go worldwide–if we aren’t there already. Now, this is what will happen in the United States during 2012:
- The unemployment percentage will start rising again and approach 15%.
- The national debt will breeze by $15 trillion and will approach $20 trillion.
- Chrysler Corporation will go belly up.
- Bank of America (BoA) will go belly up because it is run by a bunch of incompetent crooks. They cheated us over 40 years ago, and I’ve never forgotten that. I have a very long memory. So, take your money out of BoA and put it in smaller, local banks and savings and loans. That will help small businesses increase job creation.
- The Stock Market will crash. Get out of the Stock Market, now! Buy precious metals (gold, silver, etc.).
- The economy will collapse because of Obama’s ridiculous, idiotic fiscal policies. A presidential challenge will be made to Obama soon by a patriotic, moderate Democrat. Obama will be railed out of town.
- The Fed will continue to counterfeit (print) funny money not backed by gold, which will start hyperinflation.
- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will go under due to incompetent, criminal management.
- The housing market will get even worse than it currently is.
- Don’t make any large purchases and obtain any long-term repayment loans. Live by cash and carry.
- The U.S. dollar will sink to become worthless.
- A double-dip recession will commence followed by a full-blown recession worse than The Great Depression.
- Major rioting, vandalism, and killings will occur in all major cities across America. Obama will declare martial law.
- A world war will commence.
- The Congressional Super-committee is a bunch of worthless, gutless lawbreakers. They WILL NOT do what is necessary to solve the United States’ fiscal problems. Mark my words. They are all driven by politics, not for the good of the country and “We the People.” Idiots!
What can you do about all of this:
Image via Wikipedia
(AB note: The World Global Settlement Funds, referenced on this page, should not be confused with the SG World Trust. The World Global Settlement Funds have in excess of $47 trillion to disburse to 140 nations across the globe. This due and lawful disbursement has been blocked by the Washington DC private corporation for more than three decades. The SG World Trust is much bigger, and older, than The World Global Settlement Funds.)
On the evening of Thursday 28th July 2011, Barack Obama, the President of the United States, informed the World Court at The Hague that as long as he was President, he would not sign off on the World Global Settlement Funds. More background here (28.07.11).
Obama’s refusal to lawfully execute his responsibilities in this specific followed upon the wide circulation of a letter dated 7th July 2011, from Lindell Bonney to Dana Wilcox (full text here). The financial data set out in this letter showed that the US income taxes expected to be paid to the US Treasury from just four of the World Global Settlement Fund-related recipient-paymasters would amount to a sum in excess of $11 trillion. This would be sufficient to pay off most of the US national deficit and would pump-prime the US Dollar Refunding Program.
Situation updates from Al Clifton Hodges
On Friday 17th June 2011, the 44th President of the United States of America, Kenyan-born Barack Obama, had on his desk in the White House Oval Office primary legislation for a US Tax Provision relating to the Iraqi Dinar Revaluation cash-in within the US. The proposed legislation requested eleven per cent tax. The President refused to sign the document until he received more money in his personal off-shore accounts.
This executive refusal to sign further delayed the due and lawful disbursement of The World Global Settlement Funds ($47 trillion), the implementation of the US Dollar Refunding Project ($10 trillion), the long-agreed global debt jubilee (universal debt forgiveness), and the introduction of the new precious metals-backed international currencies.
The text linked above is a letter dated the 17th June 2011 from Pasadena Attorney Al Clifton Hodges to the Chinese government through the Chinese Ambassador to the United States,
The direct Chinese involvement in the internal finances of the US dates from 2009 when a $47 trillion Lien against the US Treasury and the US Federal Reserve Board was taken out by élite monetary interests in the UK and China. More here (18.06.11).—>
By Keith Harmon Snow
Global Research, March 2, 2011
allthingspass.com
Are events unfolding in Libya, Tunisia and Egypt more about petro-terrorism or about freedom and democracy? How much oil is there in North Africa? Who is in control of that oil? What is the relationship between the West and Muamar Gaddafi? Is he really the terrorist we’ve all been led to believe he is? Who is the Libyan “opposition” and who are the “rebels” we read about?
Presented with this story are petroleum industry concessions maps ** for North Africa that people might want to ponder in between the Western propaganda on Libya. Amidst the full-court press of propaganda presented by the western media and State Department disinformation apparatus we find that Muamar Gaddafi is even accused of committing genocide against his own people. Are there double standards at work?
An original photograph; backside text reads: Al Haji Amin (centre) is introducing military senior officers to his brother Col. Gaddafi, Chairman of the Revolutionary Command of Arab republic of Libya, shortly on arrival at Gulu Airfield [norther Uganda] to perform the official handing over of aircrafts to Uganda Airforce, March 3, 1974.
From the Halls of Montezuma to the Shores of Tripoli
On September 1, 1969 the pro-western regime that had ruled in Libya was overthrown by Colonel Muamar Gaddafi and his officers. At the time, Libya was home to the largest US Air Base (Wheelus Air Base) in North Africa. Agreements between the USA and Libya signed in 1951 and 1954 granted the USAF the use of Wheelus Air Base and its El Watia gunnery range for gunnery and bombing training and for transport and bombing stopovers until 1971. During the Cold War the base was pivotal to expanding US military power under the Strategic Air Command, and an essential base for fighter and reconnaissance missions. The Pentagon also used the base — and the remote Libyan desert — for missile launch testing: the launch area was located 15 miles east of Tripoli. Considered a ‘little America on the shores of the Mediteranean’, the base housed some 4600 US military personnel until its evacuation in 1970.
After the ecstasy of revolution, the Bankers quietly begin carving up Egypt and North Africa
By Richard Eastman
21st Century Wire
Feb 25, 2011
The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) is ready to lend one billion EUROS a year to Egypt for reconstruction and “free-market reform”- even as Egypt’s Minister of Finance Samir Radwan has gone begging to the City of London bankers and the British Ministry of Trade and Investment for relief on debt payments that are about to throw Egypt into bankruptcy.
All this, as Egypt has been such a good boy with regards to privatization and austerity, measures which awarded Egypt its celebrated 7 percent growth rate- mostly in investments that will end up in international hands as ventures fail to pay out with ever diminishing Egyptian domestic purchasing power.
FRESH CYCLES OF DEBT
First EBRD will lend at interest and build what they want backed by Egyptian collateral and the value of the projects themselves. Then when it turns out they can’t make the debt payments because of all the interest we have sucked from them, we take over all of the assets we have developed. That’s freedom and EBRD is really going to give it to them. After all EBRD is experienced at this. In 1991 the EBRD was organized to financially lead Russia and Eastern Europe in their transition from paternalistic socialism to sustainable free-market economies open to international investment.
The U.S. is the EBRD’s largest shareholder, although the combined stakes of European Union nations give that bloc the greatest say in how it operates. EBRD President Thomas Mirow in a speech at Oxford University declared:
« Older Entries
