Hey Harlem NY dudes, not all Western and South American leaders are on LSD. Look at what Pres. Fernandez of Argentine is up to. In two separate speeches in Cannes, one to the official G-20 gathering and one to the "B-20" business forum, Argentine President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner delivered a useful attack on the global financial system's rampant speculative practices, and slammed the insane austerity measures now being imposed on Greece. She also highlighted the role that rating agencies had played in recent years, in creating the "fiction" that Greece was able to pay its debt, while "punishing" Argentina for not playing by their rules.
Other than backing for a financial transactions tax, provided that it be global in nature, she didn't propose specific solutions, but argued that there must be "regulation of those who provoked the problem in the first place."
Why are we trying to impose "adjustment" on countries, and control their spending, she asked, when the real source of the problem is the world financial system itself? Rather than trying to calm the markets, she added, we must address the needs of people, of real human beings, and create jobs and ensure consumption. Speaking to the B-20 forum, Fernandez called for a return to "serious capitalism" instead of the "anarchistic capitalism" which rules the world today. Today, financial markets are involved in commodities, but "tomorrow they'll be into oil...and maybe the next day, into the candy market, if they think they can make one more peso without working, without producting or investing, in order to perfectly speculate."
"Are we going to continue financing the brokers who only produce financial derivatives, or are we going to finance those who produce food, goods and services? This is key," the Argentine President said to the business gathering.
Fernandez said she knew full well where decisions on monetary policy are made. "I know who runs the world... but they don't offer clear and concrete solutions to the system of financial regulation if they only continue to focus on what each country spends, but don't control what each investment bank does, or each rating agency, or each movement of the stock markets." What have world leaders been doing, Fernandez asked. It has been three years, and the situation grows worse due to the failure to act. The only "medicine" offered is the "billions of dollars and euros injected into the financial system!"
The Argentine leader warned that there is not a lot of time left to make necessary changes. To the business conference, she warned that the situation is such that, should viable solutions not be put on the table, the world — and Europe in particular — could see the emergence of totalitarian governments, as populations begin to question democracy's fundamental principles. "I think there's still time, and a way to establish solutions, but they must be solutions that have to do with the regulation of those who provoked the problem" in the first place.
Saturday, November 5, 2011
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Now Demands to Occupy Wall St
Hey Harlem NY and Bronx NY dudes, we have some demands to Occupy Wall St (OWS) as well. Let's say it's truth to power:
Jobs for ALL – A Massive Public Works
and Public Service Program
Preamble:
“Power concedes nothing without a demand. It
never did and it never will.”
–Frederick Douglass
We retain the right to make multiple and/or continuous demands of
ourselves, our society, and our government, as there are numerous
and varied problems to be addressed by our peoples’ movement. We
reject the insinuation of connecting these demands to an
endorsement of any one political party. Demands are only one
integral part of an already successful movement.
Many of us wish to effect a dramatic transformation of our society
and economy, in order that the 99% can control their workplaces,
local communities, job creation, and the global economy and
environment. This is offered to the GA as an initial, transitional
demand, in the hope that others will follow, and to help us build
alliances with workers, the homeless, the unemployed and the
undocumented. We expect that as the movement grows we will
make new demands on our society, our government, and ourselves.
Our movement is just beginning. The demands we make and will
make are just one of the ways we will take collective control over
our common world and common future.
Demand:
We demand a massive, democratically controlled public works and
public service program, with direct government employment, to
create 25 million new jobs at good union wages.
This is to be paid for by new taxes on the wealth and income of the
rich, financial transactions, and corporate profits, and reinstatement
of the Glass-Steagall Act – as well as by ending all U.S. wars,
disbanding mercenaries, ending aid to authoritarian regimes, and
closing military bases.
The new jobs will aim to radically expand access to education,
healthcare, housing, mass transit, and clean energy – and are to be
open to all, regardless of immigration status or criminal record.
Occupy Wall St and Your Mind, Harlem
Hey Harlem dudes, Harlem and the Bronx, before you Occupy Wall St (OWS) remember to occupy your mind with something useful. Now, with the Euro going down, the only real response of the British and their puppet, Pres. Obama, is to get endless wars in the name of "democracy" or other excuses like "anti-terrorism." These will lead to some type of world war, with possible fighting against nations like Russia and China that could easily be the allies of the United States in the building of economic infrastrucure. You can't build a railroad over the Bering Straits to Siberia, Russia, if you want to play endless war games. That is my message to Occupy Wall St (OWS), the Tea Party crowd, and everyone else.
Friday, October 21, 2011
Occupy Wall St. and Alternet.org
Picture from Oct. 20th, 2011. Union guys including IBEW, Teamsters and SEIU join Occupy Wall St., NYC, NY
A 12-page Alternet.org expose dated Oct. 19, "Which Bank is the Worst for America? 5 Behemoths That Hold Our Political System Hostage," will help our drive to force through Glass-Steagall before it becomes too late. The "5 behemoths" are Bank of America, JP MorganChase, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, and Goldman Sachs. The very title, backed up as it is by extensive documentation on the pernicious influence of these five, buttresses LaRouche's point: contrary to the lies from Wall Street and Obama, Glass-Steagall will not "shut down the banks." Rather, it will shut down about six banks which are nothing but Wall Street predators, as Alternet proves, which we will be better off without. It will leave thousands of functioning commercial banks in the U.S.
The article opens with an unusually competent sketch of how we got to where we are — i.e., through the process of repeal of Glass-Steagall.
"The giant mortgage bubble and the irresponsible and corrupt practices that caused the catastrophic economic crash didn't emerge out of thin air. They were a consequence of decades of pay-to-play politics rife with conflicts of interest; a political system awash in cash and legal pay-offs, designed to undermine the checks and balances that could have prevented the meltdown.
"Many of these checks and balances were implemented during the Great Depression. How they were eroded and eventually abandoned is the story of a small group of banks, financial companies and elites involved in major conflicts of interest, revolving-door politics and backroom deal-making — all to protect the interests of the global elite at the expense of the American public.
"Big Finance has a long history of working hard to deregulate the American economic system on behalf of global capitalism run amok. One of its biggest coups was the overturning of the Glass-Steagall Act, a Depression-era law that created a firewall between investment banking and the commercial banks that hold deposits and make loans.
"The first victory in the quest to overturn this major protection came in 1986. Under intense pressure from Wall Street, the Federal Reserve reinterpreted a key section of Glass-Steagall, deciding that commercial banks could make up to 5 percent of their gross revenues from investment banking. After the board heard arguments from Citicorp, J.P. Morgan and Bankers Trust, it loosened the restrictions further: in 1989, the limit was raised to 10 percent of revenues, and in 1996, they hiked it up to 25 percent....
"The following year, after 12 unsuccessful attempts, Glass-Steagall, which would have made the crash of 2007-2009 impossible, was finally repealed. And it was only then that the explosion of shaky mortgage-backed securities began. Subprime loans, which made the mortgage system so vulnerable, made up 5 percent of all mortgages in the U.S. the year before repeal, but had skyrocketed to 30 percent of the total at the time of the crash."
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
Harlem Dudes Want Glass Steagall
What is the use of democracy and Occupy Wall St, if you are going to die anyway. It is time to pull the trigger and get Glass Steagall and Obama be damned. In view of the fact that the world financial system is at a point of no return, American statesman and economist Lyndon LaRouche said today, "there is no other issue on the table, that means anything in terms of the survival of this nation and the people in it, than Glass-Steagall. If it's not enacted, you are doomed, period."
But, he added, "Glass-Steagall alone does not contain the remedy, in and of itself, to save this economy." Once Glass-Steagall is enacted, we must move forward to a credit system, along the lines of the Hamiltonian system embedded in our Constitution. "What I'm proposing is a return to the policy of the Founders of the United States."
Presently, there is a bill before the U.S. House of Representatives (H.R. 1489) to restore FDR's Glass-Steagall, which has 47 cosponsors, plus sponsor Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-OH). No Senators have yet introduced a companion bill. As of yet, there is not the political support needed to ram the bill through in time.
- Expose Wall Street's Lie -
Right now, there is a campaign by Wall Street to intimidate people into opposing the drive for Glass-Steagall, said LaRouche, using the outright lie that enacting Glass-Steagall will close every bank in the United States. "This is a damned lie, and only damned fools believe in it." And LPAC intends to destroy this lie.
LaRouche: "Because Glass-Steagall will not sink all the banks. It will sink about six, big fat banks which ought not to be banks, at all! And the sooner they're wiped out, the better! That's good for you!"
"The fact is, you're going to have thousands of other banks, which are not these merchant banks! And what we're going to do is two things: We're going to eliminate the obligations of those banks, those honest banks which are real banks, to this kind of illegal kind of obligation! We're essentially going to exterminate the merchant banking system, in the present form it exists! Not by going out and exterminating, but simply by taking away all the pleasure of their money."
- Organize a Credit System -
"Now, as a result, we're going to have banks which will still exist! Of commercial banks, and commercial banking institutions, or things like commercial banking institutions, under similar law; we're going to have them. But what are we going to do? Well, the Federal government is going to put this whole system through a bankruptcy reorganization, and two measures will be taken: First of all, we will protect banks which may be insolvent, but are still viable as banks. We're going to keep them alive. We're going to supply, under the Hamilton rule, of the Constitution, we're going to go back and supplement the present financial system, with a banking system, which is a Federally guaranteed banking system." As for the Federal Reserve, "we're going to replace that by going back to a Hamilton National Banking System, based on a credit system, which is the U.S. system."
"Under that system, the Federal government will utter authorization for Federal credit, both to banks, which are solvent banks, competent banks, and for projects which are in the national interest, especially productive employment projects. NAWAPA is one of the most typical of those large projects, which will save the United States. The Act of Glass-Steagall, if followed through, by an Act, a restoration of a Third Bank of the United States, as applied under lessons learned under Franklin Roosevelt, with projects such as NAWAPA, means that the collapse of mercantile banking system, the elimination of that entire system; the obliteration of every one of those so-called banks, will be the greatest bonanza, that the people of the United States has experienced, in practically a century."
- Forget Public Opinion -
Why haven't people already mobilized sufficiently for Glass-Steagall, LaRouche asked. Because they insist on conforming to "democracy" and "public opinion." "They believe that a 'democratic vote' is what determines truth, and the time has come that a democratic vote as such doesn't mean a damned thing."
"If the present trend goes this way, you're all damned doomed fools, however you vote. So therefore, you have to be very serious, about making sure this vote goes the right way when it comes up. And the vote is for Glass-Steagall, without any reforms, any difference with the Roosevelt version earlier. They [the Congress votes that way, or you're doomed!"
But, he added, "Glass-Steagall alone does not contain the remedy, in and of itself, to save this economy." Once Glass-Steagall is enacted, we must move forward to a credit system, along the lines of the Hamiltonian system embedded in our Constitution. "What I'm proposing is a return to the policy of the Founders of the United States."
Presently, there is a bill before the U.S. House of Representatives (H.R. 1489) to restore FDR's Glass-Steagall, which has 47 cosponsors, plus sponsor Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-OH). No Senators have yet introduced a companion bill. As of yet, there is not the political support needed to ram the bill through in time.
- Expose Wall Street's Lie -
Right now, there is a campaign by Wall Street to intimidate people into opposing the drive for Glass-Steagall, said LaRouche, using the outright lie that enacting Glass-Steagall will close every bank in the United States. "This is a damned lie, and only damned fools believe in it." And LPAC intends to destroy this lie.
LaRouche: "Because Glass-Steagall will not sink all the banks. It will sink about six, big fat banks which ought not to be banks, at all! And the sooner they're wiped out, the better! That's good for you!"
"The fact is, you're going to have thousands of other banks, which are not these merchant banks! And what we're going to do is two things: We're going to eliminate the obligations of those banks, those honest banks which are real banks, to this kind of illegal kind of obligation! We're essentially going to exterminate the merchant banking system, in the present form it exists! Not by going out and exterminating, but simply by taking away all the pleasure of their money."
- Organize a Credit System -
"Now, as a result, we're going to have banks which will still exist! Of commercial banks, and commercial banking institutions, or things like commercial banking institutions, under similar law; we're going to have them. But what are we going to do? Well, the Federal government is going to put this whole system through a bankruptcy reorganization, and two measures will be taken: First of all, we will protect banks which may be insolvent, but are still viable as banks. We're going to keep them alive. We're going to supply, under the Hamilton rule, of the Constitution, we're going to go back and supplement the present financial system, with a banking system, which is a Federally guaranteed banking system." As for the Federal Reserve, "we're going to replace that by going back to a Hamilton National Banking System, based on a credit system, which is the U.S. system."
"Under that system, the Federal government will utter authorization for Federal credit, both to banks, which are solvent banks, competent banks, and for projects which are in the national interest, especially productive employment projects. NAWAPA is one of the most typical of those large projects, which will save the United States. The Act of Glass-Steagall, if followed through, by an Act, a restoration of a Third Bank of the United States, as applied under lessons learned under Franklin Roosevelt, with projects such as NAWAPA, means that the collapse of mercantile banking system, the elimination of that entire system; the obliteration of every one of those so-called banks, will be the greatest bonanza, that the people of the United States has experienced, in practically a century."
- Forget Public Opinion -
Why haven't people already mobilized sufficiently for Glass-Steagall, LaRouche asked. Because they insist on conforming to "democracy" and "public opinion." "They believe that a 'democratic vote' is what determines truth, and the time has come that a democratic vote as such doesn't mean a damned thing."
"If the present trend goes this way, you're all damned doomed fools, however you vote. So therefore, you have to be very serious, about making sure this vote goes the right way when it comes up. And the vote is for Glass-Steagall, without any reforms, any difference with the Roosevelt version earlier. They [the Congress votes that way, or you're doomed!"
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Harlem, Here's Your Obama Snuff Movie
Here is your Obama snuff movie, Harlem dudes, but watch out. You may star in the next show.
Obama and the police-state regime he nominally heads may prove to be the ultimate victims of the drone that killed a U.S. citizen, Anwar al-Awlaki, in Yemen.
Dissenting Democrat, a website whose masthead proclaims 'Advocating for Democracy, Not the Democrats—NObama 2012,' issued a release two days ago with the above headline.
The succinct piece states, in full:
"Recently an American-born alleged spokesman for Al Qaeda was killed by a U.S. drone missile.
"This killing without due process of law: no arrest, no evidence, no filed charges, and no trial, was authorized by an executive order of President Obama.
"The recently deceased was selected by a secret court attached to the National Security Council. The proceedings of this court are secret. The membership of this court is secret. The evidence considered by this court is secret.
"The secret court was established by an executive order of President Obama.
"The authority of the President to set up secret courts and to kill selected American citizens was established by an executive order of the President.
"No President in the history of the United States has ever held that he could kill an American citizen without due process of law. There is nothing in the Constitution delegating the President the power to kill American citizens or to establish secret courts. Indeed, a reading of the Constitution based on plain-language and original intent interpretations indicates that such practices are not constitutional.
"The White House announced that it has an opinion from the Justice Department which found that the President did have the power to establish secret courts and kill Americans. This opinion, however, is secret and will not be released to the public. Not only is the opinion a secret but the legal precedents and court opinions, if any, which were relied upon in this opinion are also secret."
Another attack on the killing of al-Awlaki, in the right-wing American Thinker, by Jonathan Kinlay (on faculty at New York University Stern School of Business, also Carnegie-Mellon)—"The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution is unequivocal: no American shall 'be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.' No amount of ducking and diving will evade the inescapable fact that, for the first time, U.S. military officials in an aggressive overreach of constitutional authority deliberately targeted an American citizen for killing. And no amount of legalistic wordplay will alter the reality that al-Awlaki was denied due process. (No, Mr. Gingrich, the signing of a death warrant by an American President does not constitute 'due process,' except perhaps in North Korea or Iran."
And under the headline, "Dangerous Precedent," Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul released another statement today denouncing the assassination of two American citizens, Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan, as "an outrage and a criminal act carried out by the President and his administration. If the law protecting us against government-sanctioned assassination can be voided when there is a really bad American, is there any meaning left to the rule of law in the United States? If, as we learned last week, a secret government committee, not subject to congressional oversight or judicial review, can now target certain Americans for assassination, under what moral authority do we presume to lecture the rest of the world about protecting human rights? ... Our outrage against even the obviously guilty is not worth the sacrifice of the rule of law. Al-Awlaki has been outspoken against the United States and we are told he encouraged violence against Americans. We do not know that he actually committed any acts of violence. Ironically, he was once invited to the Pentagon as part of an outreach to moderate Muslims after 9/11. As the U.S. attacks against Muslims in the Middle East and Central Asia expanded, it is said that he became more fervent and radical in his opposition to U.S. foreign policy."
Obama and the police-state regime he nominally heads may prove to be the ultimate victims of the drone that killed a U.S. citizen, Anwar al-Awlaki, in Yemen.
Dissenting Democrat, a website whose masthead proclaims 'Advocating for Democracy, Not the Democrats—NObama 2012,' issued a release two days ago with the above headline.
The succinct piece states, in full:
"Recently an American-born alleged spokesman for Al Qaeda was killed by a U.S. drone missile.
"This killing without due process of law: no arrest, no evidence, no filed charges, and no trial, was authorized by an executive order of President Obama.
"The recently deceased was selected by a secret court attached to the National Security Council. The proceedings of this court are secret. The membership of this court is secret. The evidence considered by this court is secret.
"The secret court was established by an executive order of President Obama.
"The authority of the President to set up secret courts and to kill selected American citizens was established by an executive order of the President.
"No President in the history of the United States has ever held that he could kill an American citizen without due process of law. There is nothing in the Constitution delegating the President the power to kill American citizens or to establish secret courts. Indeed, a reading of the Constitution based on plain-language and original intent interpretations indicates that such practices are not constitutional.
"The White House announced that it has an opinion from the Justice Department which found that the President did have the power to establish secret courts and kill Americans. This opinion, however, is secret and will not be released to the public. Not only is the opinion a secret but the legal precedents and court opinions, if any, which were relied upon in this opinion are also secret."
Another attack on the killing of al-Awlaki, in the right-wing American Thinker, by Jonathan Kinlay (on faculty at New York University Stern School of Business, also Carnegie-Mellon)—"The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution is unequivocal: no American shall 'be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.' No amount of ducking and diving will evade the inescapable fact that, for the first time, U.S. military officials in an aggressive overreach of constitutional authority deliberately targeted an American citizen for killing. And no amount of legalistic wordplay will alter the reality that al-Awlaki was denied due process. (No, Mr. Gingrich, the signing of a death warrant by an American President does not constitute 'due process,' except perhaps in North Korea or Iran."
And under the headline, "Dangerous Precedent," Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul released another statement today denouncing the assassination of two American citizens, Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan, as "an outrage and a criminal act carried out by the President and his administration. If the law protecting us against government-sanctioned assassination can be voided when there is a really bad American, is there any meaning left to the rule of law in the United States? If, as we learned last week, a secret government committee, not subject to congressional oversight or judicial review, can now target certain Americans for assassination, under what moral authority do we presume to lecture the rest of the world about protecting human rights? ... Our outrage against even the obviously guilty is not worth the sacrifice of the rule of law. Al-Awlaki has been outspoken against the United States and we are told he encouraged violence against Americans. We do not know that he actually committed any acts of violence. Ironically, he was once invited to the Pentagon as part of an outreach to moderate Muslims after 9/11. As the U.S. attacks against Muslims in the Middle East and Central Asia expanded, it is said that he became more fervent and radical in his opposition to U.S. foreign policy."
Sunday, September 25, 2011
Bare the Truth at Occupy Wall St, NY, NY
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)