Andrea Williams comments on halal labelling (+playlist)

Central Bankers To Cover Up The Economic Collapse With WAR

A German report was released stating that the sanctions on Russia will result in irreparable damage to Germany. Housing permits are up but not for single family homes. Rentals are on the rise and permits for single family homes are down. Obamacare premiums are going up next year. McCain wants weapons shipped into Ukraine. John Kerry’s adviser and friend is now on the board of the Burisma gas company in Ukraine. Kiev now reports all people in Donetsk and Lugansk regions are part of a terrorist organizations. The US and other countries are now making their move to strike Assad in Syria. Be prepared for an event. Read more at http://investmentwatchblog.com/central-bankers-are-maneuvering-to-cover-up-the-economic-collapse-with-war/#zVWqeiA73u27s8GW.99

Epigenetic Political Hostilities Exposed! - Peter Schiff Radio Show May ...

Stalin, Hitler And The 5-Year Plans Of Banksters Conspiracy

Stalin, Hitler And The 5-Year Plans Of Banksters

 by jeffdebob

The 2008-2013 Plan

Hjalmar Schacht

Stalin’s infamous five-year plans started with a “trial version” in late 1928. By “trial version” this meant his plans already included show trials of political enemies with frequent death sentences. Designed and executed for Hitler, the German banker Hjalmar Schacht’s five-year plan of 1934-1938 directly applied Keynesian “remedies” for the economy and public finances. Schacht’s plan was called a “groundbreaking fiscal stimulus program”, creating work by rebuilding the nation’s worn infrastructures, jettisoning the gold standard, imposing capital controls, and increasing State debt, after “diluting” the State’s previous debt.

Keynes, whose ‘General Theory’ did not appear until 1936 was upstaged by both Stalin and Hitler. Keynes himself claimed to “detest Hitler as a person” but admired the Schacht plan. In both cases, they applied mega-planning by a Leviathan State, exactly as Keynes said was necessary. Both were disasters – sooner or later – in the Stalin case from his initial “trial version”, which even surprised Stalin by the orgy of violence it triggered.

Keynes said many times that a government big enough and powerful enough to control or manipulate aggregate demand is obligatory. The State must be all-powerful. He meant the central bankers.

The key basic component of setting the future by decree, the idea of State planning is as we might expect heavily present in the actions and foibles of the “liberal market capitalist” (end of quote) central banker clique. Headed by the US Fed, the ECB, BOJ, BOE, China’s central bank, and others, these Defenders of Capitalism stoutly maintain they are totally opposed to economic planning and welcome the anarchy of the capitalist consumer society – driven only by egoism and greed. In fact they are five-year plans to reward the central banksters and encourage political tyranny.

For 2008-2013 we have an easily-measured and analyzed, full 5-year plan of the central banker clique. Taking only the US, its probable total of public + private debt in April 2014 now stands at about $160 trillion. China’s debt total has grown at least 10-fold since year 2000 and is now out of control.

Can this ever be repaid? No way.

Getting People Back to Work
Lenin can be identified as the real “father of five-year planning”. His self-styled role as the champion of the people and above all his fiery oratory enabled him to win full Soviet Peoples Praesidium support on its first lecture, February 21st 1920, for his Goelro plan targeting the total electrification of the not-yet-founded USSR. The symbol was “The Lamp of Ilyich”, a lightbulb, using Lenin’s second name – Vladimir Ilyich Lenin.

Stalin founded the USSR in 1922. Lenin’s Goelro “electric power infrastructure” plan was dumped in 1931. From later that year it was officially replaced and superceded by Stalin’s infamous plans.

The irrelevance of the always-stated goal of “full employment” in Keynesian State economic planning, for the central bankers, is ultra clear. Their only goal is the repudiation of previous State debt, by their selected Tyrant, and the creation of new and larger State debt. The process can take a variable amount of time, before mayhem ensues – but it always comes.

Ukraine is an excellent, bad-good example of 5-year plans. Until the “Maidan Flash Mob Moment” the five-year plans were alive, if not well in Ukraine. Placed under various disguises of newspeak terminology, including neoliberal newspeak, they stacked up an orgy of violence for a little while later, further down the You Tube.

Stalin hastened and deepened his plans for Soviet 5-year plans, in concertation with Lenin before probably poisoning him (historians and journalists still discuss the subject), following capitalist Germany’s hyperinflation nightmare of 1922-1923. While it suited him, which was not for long, Stalin defended “sound money”.

Stalin was also soon able to peddle his plans as a National Security surrogate in a young USSR menaced by hostile scheming capitalists. Having an uber-powerful and deadly secret police, and the cult of semi-random violence using “disappearance in the night”, helped him a lot. The world’s central bankers who heavily invested both in Stalin, and in Hitler, helped even more. Major private bankers were of course also on board from the start. One famous example is the grandfather of George W. Bush who before, during and after the 1941 termination of the Hitler-Stalin pact, and declaration of war between Nazi Germany and the USSR, and between the US and Germany, continued to invest in both!

In Germany, the hyperinflation “interlude” among other things reignited the Spartakists and their attempt to create an ideal socialist society. This did not “get the people back to work”. The 1919-20 Spartakist Revolt led by Rosa Luxemburg was destroyed by street fighting – nothing like the uprisings of Kiev’s Maidan Square or Cairo’s Tahrir Square. Destroying the Spartakist Revolt, by the Kaiser German army using heavy artillery, probably cost 250 000 German lives through 1919-24.

The Weimar liberal-bourgeois Republic starting in 1920 and ending in 1932 ensued from this. It was so corrupt and ineffective – and quickly shunned by the banksters – that it was a sitting duck for Adolf Hitler to overthrow by the ballot box and install Nazism, made popular by “Keynesian economic miracle”.

Don’t Count The Collateral Debt
Neither Stalin nor Hitler counted the collateral dead. Being mentally-unhinged Tyrants such things were unimportant to them. Central banksters idem.

Stalin had no interest at all in the body count needed to ram through his State planning fantasy. Lenin and the early revolutionary communists had already shredded and repudiated all Russian debt from the previous Czars. Stalin’s five-year plans had no need for logic, rhyme or reason. There was no point making even the mildest criticism of them – the firing squad sufficed. Apart from show trial victims killed for Defective Ideology – measured in the thousands – the collateral economic war body count was measured in millions.

In fact, in Stalin’s case, the favored method of eliminating defective ideology was mass starvation. It was simple but very effective.

The major point is that debts run up by both of these “grand economic experiments” of the time, were however vastly smaller than debts run up since 2008, by exactly the same bankster clique, but the Debt Forgiveness process will be the same. Absorbing and shuffling the debt bubbles created by born-to-fail economic, financial and monetary planning needs war, and can only lead to war, sooner or later.

After that, “the counters are set back to zero”. Taking one quite recent example, during the run-up to the 2003 Iraq war government-friendly Western media was stuffed with learned, elite-vetted and approved economists sincerely explaining that massive bombing of Iraq would enable a huge postwar reconstruction boom, using Iraq’s oil as collateral for extreme new borrowing by the New Approved Iraq. What could be nicer? We can call this War Keynesianism.

At least as important, this is a Universal Paradigm so why should it be different for other countries? Certainly including the West’s “liberal market capitalist” (end of quote) economies and societies.

The “New Ukraine Plan”, as far as we can surmise at this time, is a classic example featuring the same basic ingredients. First the country is destroyed by civil war or international war, and its old debts – mostly to Russia – disappear. Ukraine’s collateral may be somewhat thin on the ground (if not underground – it has huge domestic gas and coal resources, for example), but this is only a trifling detail for the bankster clique, who will very likely first predate all private savings in whatever Rump State emerges, to huge applause from the Western glove puppet media. As we know, at this time, the related and classic trick of the banksters is under way – they have ordered FX brokers and traders to completely shred the national currency. Using economic terror, Stalin-style, the peoples’ savings can then be swallowed whole by the banksters with only a few blowback street demonstrations, needing “firm action by the authorities”. What could be nicer?

Lenin’s Flat Cap Economics
The bankster program of “planned economic recovery”, as we know, only concerns keeping a tiny wealthy elite high up the greasy pole, next to the political tyrants who execute the bankster plan. Way down on the ground, in the so-called “real economy”, times can only be dire. Food shortage is always a classic lever of economic terror, but oil and electricity shortage are two new elite favorites.

By turning food and energy into rare commodities this makes them “collateralizable”, in other words you can bank on that – if you are a bankster and have the political glove puppets well under control. Encouraging these puppets to imagine they are Tyrants, or to become Tyrants, also helps. Being mad, they are easier to manipulate. The money printing presses can then whirr yet more frenetically, new debts can be racked up to replace the ones that were dishonored, and using the chaos of war – any kind, civil or international – the game can play along for quite some while. But of course not forever.

Lenin’s early revolutionary communists, at least in print and in speeches, wanted to avoid this. They had the theory of Marx and Engels to orate with, but they were however quickly drawn, like moths to a lamp in the night or flies drawn to you-know-what, by the exciting idea, for them, of planning everything in a Super State. This put them straight into the banksters’ trap. Both Marx and Engels had heavily described and analyzed the workings of Capital, and why it runs on an ever-declining, ever shrinking time fuze inevitably resulting in periodic or cyclic Crises of Capitalism.

For Stalin, the capitalist crises of German hyperinflation and the 1929 Wall Street crash were all he needed to pursue his megalomaniac-paranoid fantasies. Hitler, with his uber-classic “Keynesian remedies”, used exactly the same rationales and conclusions. Being mentally ill, neither of them could avoid the banksters’ trap, which is always set and always primed for sucking suckers into it.

Rothschild: Things never chage

For the banksters and the Tyrants, small is not beautiful – and nor is peace. No bankster wants to live with small-sized, truly democratic, humanist governments or nations, because their collateral is usually small, the people are not cowed and terrorized, and the ability of these small-is-beautiful economies and societies to cook up wars, is low.

Throwing away the baby of Marxism with the dirty bath water of Stalin is however a mistake. The Marxist analysis can help, to be sure with corrections for what has happened since the late 19th century, but today however, you need very few corrections or updates. The banksters have cooked up a Crisis of Capitalism straight out of the 19th century, so unfortunately we will have “epic events”, probably rather somber.

Written by Andrew McKillop and published by Market Oracle, Apr 27, 2014.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www. law. cornell. edu/uscode/17/107. shtml“

The Rule of Law is a Myth

What Are They Thinking?

Gerald Celente - Trends In The News - "Global Responsibilities!?" - (5/7...

005: Taxation Without Consideration

'Jews For Jesus' Hypes The Holocaust

EUROPEANS GROW WEARY OF EU EXPERIMENT

SOURCE: TESTOSTERONE PIT

BY DON QUIJONES, FREELANCE WRITER AND TRANSLATOR IN BARCELONA, SPAIN.RAGING BULL-SHIT IS HIS MODEST ATTEMPT TO CHALLENGE THE WISHFUL THINKING AND SCRUB AWAY THE LATHERS OF SOFT SOAP PEDDLED BY OUR POLITICAL AND BUSINESS LEADERS AND THEIR LOYAL MAINSTREAM MEDIA. 

The people of Europe are finally pushing back against the European Super State, if recent polls are anything to go by. Having grown weary of being treated as lab rats in an increasingly dysfunctional economic and political experiment, a large minority of Europeans seem intent on voting for euroskeptic parties in the upcoming European elections.
The prospect is causing jitters not only among the big wigs in Brussels but also among many of Europe’s mainstream political parties, whose oligopoly on political power faces a serious threat for the first time in decades. Calculations by the Open Europe think tank suggest that hardline sceptics could take as many as 218 of the 751 seats available in the European Parliament.
In the UK, poll research shows that the most pro-European Westminster grouping – the Liberal Democrats – is about to have its European Parliamentary representation completely decimated. Indeed, so threatened do the three establishment parties in the UK feel by Nigel Farage’s UK Independence Party (UKip) that they hit back this week with a cross-party campaign to condemn it as “Euracist”, an ingenious combination of the two words “Europe” and “Racist”.
The episode serves as a timely reminder of just how dumbed down the inhabitants of Westminster have become. For not only does their latest sound bite imply that Europeans are now a common, unified race – anthropology clearly not being the UK political caste’s strong point – but it also suggests that Farage’s party is actually “racist” towards all members of this new race, including, one would assume, Britons themselves.
Put simply, the act reeks of ruthless desperation. And nowhere is the stench stronger than in Ten Downing Street whose incumbent, David Cameron, has even suggested he would resign if he failed to deliver on his pledge to hold a referendum on Britain’s membership after the next general election. He accepted voters might be “skeptical” about his promise but insisted: “I would not continue as Prime Minister unless it can be absolutely guaranteed this referendum will go ahead on an in-out basis.”
The problem for Cameron and, by extension, his party, is that most people – even many dyed-in-the-wool Tory voters – no longer believe him. Once-bitten, twice-shy voters still remember his “cast-iron” pledge, while in opposition, to hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty – a pledge that turned out to be not-quite-so-cast-iron once in government. In short, an increasing number of UK voters no longer believe that any of the three mainstream parties offer any real protection against the EU’s plans for full-spectral dominance of the continent. And it’s not just in Britain: across the continent, voters are looking to the fringes for alternatives to Brussels’ authoritarian, technocratic model of governance.
“Populists”, “Extremists” and “Euracists”
In France, Marie Le Pen’s Front National is on course to humiliate Francois Hollande’s socialists in the European elections, with the latest polls suggesting that her party could gain as much as 24 percent of votes – four percentage points more than Hollande’s champagne-and-caviar socialists. In the Netherlands Gert Wilders’ Dutch Freedom Party is expected to perform just as well, setting the stage for a far-Right parliamentary bloc of 38 MEPs from at least seven countries, with the Austrian Freedom Party, Belgian Vlaams Belang, Italian Lega Nord, Slovak National Party and Sweden Democrats making up the numbers.
As for Europe’s radical leftist parties, they also expect to secure a larger presence in the European Parliament – primarily through big gains in austerity-hit Southern Europe. Leading the charge is Alex Tsipras’ Syriza party which is currently leading Greek polls. In Portugal, polls predict a 20 percent haul for far-left of centre parties, while in Spain Plural Left, of which the largest component is the communist-led United Left coalition, is hoping to garner over 10 percent of seats in the May 25 elections.
These are the so-called “populists”, “extremists” and “euracists” that will be joining the fray in Brussels once the dust has settled after the elections – and some fray it promises to be! On the one side will be an unruly coalition of far-right and nationalist groups who would like nothing better than to torpedo the European frigate once and for all – while no doubt enjoying the expenses-paid junkets that come with a political life in Brussels. On the other side of the aisle will be a motley crew of leftist parties determined to put an end to the EU’s fetish for austerity measures and bank bailouts.
Tower of Babble
Naturally, all of this will make for more entertaining political theatre in Brussels, as the EU’s stunted Tower of Babel becomes even more of a Tower of Babble. But will it actually make any significant difference in governance terms? Unfortunately, the answer is probably no — for the simple reason that the European Parliament had very limited power or influence.
Like a court eunuch, the Parliament was effectively neutered at birth. Put simply, its main mission in life is to give the wildly misleading impression that democracy actually exists in the EU. In reality, the Parliament cannot overrule the EU Commission nor can it even amend its budget on a line by line basis. Indeed, it cannot initiate legislation and it has no say whatsoever in foreign policy.
The European Parliament has no power to even hold individual members of the Commission to account. At best, it can overturn the entire executive branch, which it has done only once in its lifetime – back in 1999 when, thanks to leaks by commission-insider Paul Van Boetenin, the Parliament learnt of the irregularities, fraud and mismanagement within the Commission.
The real power in Brussels resides in the European Commission, the European Council of national leaders and the Eurogroup of Finance Ministers – three unelected institutions that are subject to virtually no democratic checks or balances.
A New Parliament, A New Commission
The first test the new parliament will likely face is to select the president of the European Commission. The EU’s executive body will for the first time be chosen under the provisions of the 2009 Lisbon Treaty, which states  that the European Council of EU leaders nominates the candidate “taking account of the elections of the European Parliament and after having held the appropriate consultations”. This does not by any means guarantee that the elected “representatives” of the people will actually have a direct say in the selection.
But even if they do, the chances are that the choices available will not offer any kind of meaningful change in the direction of EU policy. Indeed, the list of candidates reads like a Who’s Who of European establishment politics and bureaucracy. The two favourites for the position are Martin Schultz, the bearded, table-thumping German social democrat who currently serves as president of the European Parliament; and Jean-Claude Juncker, the former prime-minister of Luxembourg who in 2011, as president of the Eurogroup, famously said “when things get serious you have to lie.”
Also on the list is the current IMF chief Christine Lagarde, two failed Italian prime-ministers (Mario Monti and Enrico Letta), Spain’s current Minister of the Economy (and former Lehman Brothers’ banker) Luis de Guindos, and former Spanish premier José Luis Zapatero. Granted, the list does include a sprinkling of less compromised individuals, such as Alexis Tsipras and the Swedish Pirate Party’s 27-year-old representative Amelia Andersdotter. However, as the EU’s own website notes, their chances of being selected are pathetically slim.
If there’s one thing that the last five years of European crisis management (if that’s what you can call it) has shown, it is that the EU, like the late Maggie T, is not for turning. As current Commission President José Manuel Barroso has repeated time and again, there is no plan B in Brussels’ agenda. As such, one can expect any changes that do occur to be at best cosmetic in nature. And while there may be more bluster, blather and drama in Parliament and the ferocious rubber stamping of new EU laws and regulations may be slowed somewhat, the real power will remain in the same hands, and the owners of those hands are determined that the experiment will continue — damned the consequences!
As I wrote in “Death by a Thousand Cuts: The Silent Assassination of European Democracy”, the European elite has thus far masterfully exploited Europe’s economic decline and crisis of nation-state democracy and the resultant voter disaffection and apathy to enshrine a new system of rule by bureaucrats, bankers, technocrats and lobbyists. If anything, we can expect this trend to accelerate in 2014 as the Eurocrats seek to consolidate their power grab through the imposition of EU-wide banking and fiscal union. Once that’s done, the quest for the holy grail of full-blown political union will begin in earnest.
However, whatever the eurocrats might believe, it is by no means a fait accompli. The European Dream is one of modern history’s most ambitious (and most deeply flawed) experiments in political, social and economic re-engineering, and for it to work it needs, at least for just a little longer, the continued passive compliance of a majority of the experiment’s subjects – that is, the 500 million-or-so European lab rats whose lives it seeks to transform beyond all recognition — and certainly not for the better.
But the rats are finally wising up to the mad scientists’ devious plans for them, and growing ranks of them are mounting a mutiny in the laboratory. This May’s elections are just the beginning. By Don Quijones, Raging Bull-Shit
With more back channels and revolving doors to governments around the world, Monsanto is used to getting its way. But now it faces an outright rebellion. Read.... Seed Wars: Latin America Strikes Back Against Monsanto

You might like:

Perfidious WWIII Plans

People burn alive and suffocated in Odessa Ukraine and British Liberal media SILENT!

 DOZENS OF PEOPLE HAVE BEEN BURNED ALIVE BY USA AND UK GOVT NAZI GROUPS IN ODESSA UKRAINE. AND THE BRITISH MEDIA REMAINS SILENT.ONCE AGAIN JUST SERVING UP ROYAL BABY STORIES AND TRIVA. 


IT SHOWS ONCE AGAIN THAT WHOREASPONDENTS OF THE MAIN STREAM  MEDIA  PREFER A MONTHLY PAY CHEQUE THAN FOLLOWING A TRUE VOCATION. 

LIKE THE PRESSTITUTES THESE ANIMALS ARE BURNING PEOPLE ALIVE AND THEN BEATING AND MURDERING THE SURVIVORS ARE BACKED BY THE ZIONIST CONTROLLED BANKSTERS.AND THERE USA AND UK PUPPET GOVTS.  WHO HAVE LENT MONEY TO THE UKRAINE UNLAWFUL COUP GOVT ON CONDITION THAT THEY DO SUCH THINGS. 

SHAME! ON YOU SO CALLED LIBERAL JOURNALISTS. YOU ARE SUPPORTERS OF EVIL AND ENEMIES OF THE TRUTH!

Under The New World Order

The Religion Of The Future

There Has Been A Jewish War On Russia For Over A 100 Years - Morris

World Bank Want Water Privatised

Humans can survive weeks without food, but only days without water — in some conditions, only hours. It may sound clichéd, but it’s no hyperbole: Water is life. So what happens when private companies control the spigot? Evidence from water privatization projects around the world paints a pretty clear picture — public health is at stake.

In the run-up to its annual spring meeting this month, the World Bank Group, which offers loans, advice and other resources to developing countries, held four days of dialogues in Washington, D.C. Civil society groups from around the world and World Bank Group staff convened to discuss many topics. Water was high on the list.

It’s hard to think of a more important topic. We face a global water crisis, made worse by the warming temperatures of climate change. A quarter of the world’s people don’t have sufficient access to clean drinking water, and more people die every year from waterborne illnesses — such as cholera and typhoid fever — than from all forms of violence, including war, combined. Every hour, the United Nations estimates, 240 babies die from unsafe water.

The World Bank Group pushes privatization as a key solution to the water crisis. It is the largest funder of water management in the developing world, with loans and financing channeled through the group’s International Finance Corporation (IFC). Since the 1980s, the IFC has been promoting these water projects as part of a broader set of privatization policies, with loans and financing tied to enacting austerity measures designed to shrink the state, from the telecom industry to water utilities.

But international advocacy and civil society groups point to the pockmarked record of private-sector water projects and are calling on the World Bank Group to end support for private water.

In the decades since the IFC’s initial push, we have seen the results of water privatization: It doesn’t work. Water is not like telecommunications or transportation. You could tolerate crappy phone service, but have faulty pipes connecting to your municipal water and you’re in real trouble. Water is exceptional.

Private sector priorities

“Water is a public good,” Shayda Naficy, the director of the International Water Campaign at Corporate Accountability International (CAI), told me, “for which inequality has to fall within a certain range — or it means life and death.” When the private sector engages in water provision, greater disparities in access and cost follow.

Water is also different because it requires such huge, and ongoing, infrastructure investments. An estimated 75 percent of the costs of running a water utility are for infrastructure alone.

The track record of publicly funded private water projects shows that the private sector doesn’t find it profitable to invest in the infrastructure really needed to ensure that communities have access to clean and affordable water. “Water companies have found that their niche is seeking efficiency solutions through hiking prices and cutting spending on infrastructure investment,” Naficy told me.

Even as the World Bank Group continues to promote water privatization, its own data reveal that a high percentage of its private water projects are in distress. Its project database for private participation in infrastructure documents a 34 percent failure rate for all private water and sewerage contracts entered into between 2000 and 2010, compared with a failure rate of just 6 percent for energy, 3 percent for telecommunications and 7 percent for transportation, during the same period. 

A look at projects deemed successes (PDF) by the World Bank Group shows they are not experienced that way on the ground. An IFC-funded private water project in central India’s largest city, Nagpur, for example, is the country’s first “full city” public-private partnership and has raised serious concerns among local residents. Worries range from high prices to project delays to unequal water distribution and service shutdowns. Allegations of corruption and illegal activity have led residents to protest, and city officials have called for investigations of contract violations. “In the last three years, the cost of operation and maintenance of the system has increased drastically and the price of water has increased manyfold,” Jammu Anand of the Nagpur Municipal Corporation Employees Union said in a statement released by CAI. (CAI details other examples like this one from Nagpur in its 2012 report “Shutting the Spigot on Private Water: The Case for the World Bank to Divest.” Full disclosure: I am a strategic adviser to CAI.)

What advocates, including Naficy and Anand, are reminding the IFC today is that significant and steady infrastructure investment is the only way to foster safe, affordable and dependable water supplies. And that is done more effectively by the public sector than by private corporations. Water systems need treatment facilities and a mechanism to channel water from its source in a stable way, usually through pumps, piping to households and individual connections from main pipes to households. According to Naficy, “There is no end run around building a strong public sector and building strong public oversight.”

In addition, financing by the IFC, which is both investor and adviser on these projects, poses a conflict of interest. On the one hand, the IFC is advising governments to privatize the sector; on the other, it’s investing in the corporations getting those contracts. “It’s self-dealing: setting up a project that it’s in a position to profit from,” Naficy told me. When the IFC was established in 1956, it was expressly prohibited from purchasing corporate equity to avoid this sort of conflict, but the board amended this rule a few years later, allowing these kinds of deals. The IFC insists there are interior barriers to such conflicts of interest, even as its own annual report touts “client solutions that integrate investment and advice.” 

Opening up the spigot

Independent water advocates, from CAI to Anand’s group in India and others including the Focus on the Global Southnetwork, point to India today as evidence that privatized systems lead to underfunded infrastructure and unpredictable, often high prices. The IFC defends the private sector by claiming that these companies offer efficiency gains (PDF). But those gains come at the expense of lower-income households, advocates such as Naficy point out, as companies increase rates to subsidize their own profitability.  

There’s a growing backlash against these projects. In 2000, headlines around the globe documented protests in Bolivia’s third-largest city in response to the privatization of the city’s municipal water supply and against the multinational water giant Bechtel, eventually pushing the company out of the country. The IFC’s own complaint mechanism reports that 40 percent of all global cases from last year were about water, even though water projects are only a small fraction of what the IFC funds. In 2013, CAI and 70 advocates from around the globe released an open letter (PDF) to the World Bank Group calling for “an end of all support for private water, beginning with IFC divestment from all equity positions in water corporations.”

“Corporations don’t have a social or development mission,” Naficy told me. “Right now we’re funding development to prop up private projects, instead of putting the decisions for funding in the hands of governments that are accountable to people.”  

Clean and affordable water is the basis of life. Skyrocketing water prices, unsafe supply, failing infrastructure — these problems fall disproportionately on the most vulnerable among us. This is why public institutions, not private corporations, must lead the development of water systems and delivery. The World Bank Group is uniquely positioned to increase access to clean water for the billions who need it. Instead of using its position to line the pockets of water companies, it should support what is most needed: affordable, clean — and public — water for all. 

Source:http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/4/water-managementprivatizationworldbankgroupifc.html

THE WRH BANKER ARTICLES: ALL IN ONE CHUNK

THE WRH BANKER ARTICLES: ALL IN ONE CHUNK

by Michael Rivero

I have received many emails regarding the various articles I have written about the problems with the current economic system of being forced to borrow all currency at interest from a privately-owned central bank. This is, of course, the very system of banking the United States fought a revolution to be free of, only to be sold back into said banker slavery not just once, but three times by corrupted congresses and corrupted presidents.

I have been asked to collect all those articles into a single page to make it easier for people to send to their friends, and this collection is the result.

ALL WARS ARE BANKERS' WARS!
This article and the video made from it set out the history of the last 260 years showing the effects of efforts by private bankers to impose their system of slavery on the world. To keep their schemes going, these modern-day slavers do and have resorted to assassination and war to force the world to conduct all commerce only using bank notes borrowed at interest from the bankers. This is a mafia-like practice of taking a "piece of the action" of all economic activity in exchange for little more than ink and paper (and the correct bribes to the correct officials). The Federal Reserve act forced that system on the American people, while the post-WW2 Bretton-Woods agreement forced it onto the rest of the world. Since this article was written I have received a lot of email from people saying that for the first time in their lives, the history of the US makes perfect sense!

THE ELEVENTH MARBLE
This article reduces to easy-to-understand imagery the fatal design flaw of the Private Central Banking system, whether it is the federal Reserve, the ECB, the IMF, the World Bank, or any of their hideously mutated clones around the world. by design these banks create more debt than money with which to pay that debt. The moment that first pretty-printed piece of paper goes into circulation, more money is owed to that private central bank than actually exists, which means the debt can never be paid off. The bankers use that accumulating debt to control all of society. Then-head of the Rothschild banking empire Nathan Meyer Rothschild put it simply when he stated, "Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who makes the laws." Over time, that artificially created debt accumulates until servicing that debt and its interest overwhelms the rest of the economy and brings it crashing down, as it is in the midst of doing right now. As a side note, after this article went viral, some economic "experts", including a PhD, wrote counter-articles attempting to explain why that eleventh marble was really there, and failing to convince anyone, denounced all doubters of the Private Central Banking system as completely ignorant of how modern economics works. We are not ignorant. We see how modern economics works when we walk through our towns and see the homeless and hungry, the shuttered businesses, the dilapidated streets and utilities, and the obvious decline in the American lifestyles for those who are not part of the government and banking cliques.

THE FATAL FLAWS IN WALL STREET'S ECONOMIC THEORY
Today we hear many economists, even Allen Greenspan, admitting the economic system has problems, although they scrupulously avoid any discussions regarding the eleventh marble. They hide the truth behind euphemisms like "flawed theories" and "serious misjudgment." But there are problems with the way the financial system operates over and above the eleventh marble, and here are a few of them.

HOW YOU BECAME A SLAVE TO THE BANKERS!
The United States was started with the concept of the public currency being a public utility; created and issued by the government to serve commerce and the community, without accruing interest to a private central bank. This article shows how the current system transformed the public currency from public utility to private for-profit operation to enrich the bankers.

Awaken slaves! - How The Private Central Bank Ponzi Scheme Trapped And Destroyed America
I wrote this article because a lot of people did not see the mechanism by which real wealth is transferred from the workers whose labor creates that wealth, to the private central bank.

MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES FRAUD 4 DUMMIES! (aka the Cliff Notes version)
The corporate media attempted to pin the blame for the 2008 crash onto ordinary Americans. The truth is somewhat different.

BANKERS GONE WILD - HOW THE US GOVERNMENT HELPED WALL STREET GANG-RAPE AMERICA'S MIDDLE CLASS (AND MOST OF EUROPE)
This was the first of the articles about money and banking, providing an overview of how private central banks do not exist to serve the community, but only to serve themselves.

The United States Is In Deep Doodoo!
Originally written in 1998, this article sounded a warning about the debt-based economic system, and made some sadly accurate predictions about the draconian steps the government would take to prolong its rule over the land and the people.

INTRODUCING - THE LECTRO!!
A proposal for a new value-based currency that cannot be hoarded or manipulated.

Forbidden Knowledge - History of the Khazar Empire - Lecture by Jack Otto