It's actually much, much worse that this.A new article at American Interest by Ben Judah titled How Offshore Finance Sank Western Soft Power makes a forceful case that unbridled finance, specifically, the nexus between tax havens and looting plutocrats, has undermined one of the West’s most important assets, its claim to have a more virtuous political and economic model. I strongly suggest you read the article in full.
Why do Russians call democracy "dermokratsia" (English translation = shitocracy)?
Capitalism and democracy are antithetical.
Actually, as Yves explains, it's even worse than that. Mix capitalism with criminality. This post is an eye-opener even for those who know how bad the deal is.
Oh, and Larry Summers is right at the heart of it, so even though it is a neoliberal thing, it's also Democratic neoliberalism. The GOP has no corner on neoliberalism. It's thoroughly bipartisan.
The upshot? Global instability as US soft power erodes in a sea of corruption and the emerging world loses confidence in the American model of democratic capitalism.
But as Ed Luce of the Financial Times has pointed out, the alternative to the weakening of US power isn’t to accelerate the rise of a replacement, but to usher in more instability.Naked Capitalism
Has America’s Use of Finance as a Foreign Policy Tool Backfired?
Yves Smith
29 comments:
@Tom
Without wishing to impose on you, if you have the time would you kindly comment on this article. It seems that this is what a great majority feels is happening, and it seemed to be that there has to be a wholesale "conceptual cleansing" to understand what is really urgent troubling and what is simply misperception. I find it lamentable that the editors at Counterpunch are so entirely clueless when it comes to economics--no discernment at all.
Thanks!
===================
The Great Deceiver — The Federal Reserve
Is the Fed “tapering”? Did the Fed really cut its bond purchases during the three month period November 2013 through January 2014? Apparently not if foreign holders of Treasuries are unloading them.
From November 2013 through January 2014 Belgium with a GDP of $480 billion purchased $141.2 billion of US Treasury bonds. Somehow Belgium came up with enough money to allocate during a 3-month period 29 percent of its annual GDP to the purchase of US Treasury bonds.
Certainly Belgium did not have a budget surplus of $141.2 billion. Was Belgium running a trade surplus during a 3-month period equal to 29 percent of Belgium GDP?
No, Belgium’s trade and current accounts are in deficit.
Did Belgium’s central bank print $141.2 billion worth of euros in order to make the purchase?
No, Belgium is a member of the euro system, and its central bank cannot increase the money supply.
So where did the $141.2 billion come from?
There is only one source. The money came from the US Federal Reserve, and the purchase was laundered through Belgium in order to hide the fact that actual Federal Reserve bond purchases during November 2013 through January 2014 were $112 billion per month.
The rest here:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/05/13/the-federal-reserve-and-an-unsustainable-empire/
Fantasy. Zero Hedge stuff drawing conclusions from "unexplained data."
PCR apparently thinks he is smarter than the bond market and the world is being fooled by a desperate Fed and doesn't realize that the USD is about to implode.
Conspiracy theory.
Right, I got that he is wrong. But merely saying the man is deluded isn't plausible. He may be wrong, but he is rational, after all; it is therefore his assumptions that are at fault. One would like to see a real argument against his argument.
One thing that caught my attention was that he says only the Fed could have the supplier of means for the purchase, but after all the European Central bank can also "print" money. So this was an interesting observation:
"We know that there was a withdrawal, a sale, a drop in the Federal Reserve’s “Securities held in Custody for Foreign Official and International Accounts,” an inexplicable rise in Belgium’s holdings, and then the bonds reappear in the Federal Reserve’s custodial accounts."
Now, we understand that QE is just an asset swap and a kind of tax--although one that does benefit some parties as opposed to the public. The question is, do government officials correctly perceive the nature of QE and do they know what they are doing when they resort to it, or do they view it like PCR?
MMT people like to pooh pooh the idea that being the world reserve currency is no big deal, we can lose that status or not--besides, it is a kind of favor towards the world and a kind of disfavor to the US. But clearly, most of the world does not hold that view.
I think the US is essentially a hollow entity, aside from its armaments industry and technology, and ultimately its ability to deliver nuclear threats. I think the day will come, and not too far off, when this entity will suddenly collapse quite unexpectedly.
By the way, I don't read Zero Hedge, and am unfamiliar with what Zero Hedge "stuff" would be. I also detest absolutely the rejoinder of "conspiracy theory" as a means of silencing a discussion. This is supposed to pass for sophisticated intelligence. Conspiracies of every stripe exist and have always existed--the question is their scope and their identity. Any attentive reader of history would know that. The accusation seems to be peculiarly American specialty above all.
This is the conspiracy theory stuff. Pick out some fact that not accounted for and connect it with something else that is apparently not accounted for and claim causal connection with no actual evidence.
The whole idea of Europe saving America by buying bonds through the back door is just completely implausible. It's like the idea that Russia will or China will break the dollar by unloading US Treasuries.
People conclude that the US must be in trouble because it cannot exit from QE without destroying the dollar and then make up all kinds of crap to show how this is unfolding.
If you look into PCR economics, he is a fiscal conservative and thinks that "printing money" invariably causes inflation and so soaring interest rates are just around the corner.
Here's PCR"
Why did the Federal Reserve have to purchase so many bonds above the announced amounts and why did the Fed have to launder and hide the purchase?
Some country or countries, unknown at this time, for reasons we do not know dumped $104 billion in Treasuries in one week.
Another curious aspect of the sale and purchase laundered through Belgium is that the sale was not executed and cleared via the Fed’s own National Book-Entry System (NBES), which was designed to facilitate the sale and ownership transfer of securities for Fed custodial customers. Instead, The foreign owner(s) of the Treasuries removed them from the Federal Reserve’s custodial holdings and sold them through the Euroclear securities clearing system, which is based in Brussels, Belgium.
We do not know why or who. We know that there was a withdrawal, a sale, a drop in the Federal Reserve’s “Securities held in Custody for Foreign Official and International Accounts,” an inexplicable rise in Belgium’s holdings, and then the bonds reappear in the Federal Reserve’s custodial accounts.
What are the reasons for this deception by the Federal Reserve?
He just from "who we do not know" who to "the reasons for the deception."
Typical conspiracy theory.
What is the reason for the deception"
The Fed realized that its policy of Quantitative Easing initiated in order to support the balance sheets of “banks too big to fail” and to lower the Treasury’s borrowing cost was putting pressure on the US dollar’s value. Tapering was a way of reassuring holders of dollars and dollar-denominated financial instruments that the Fed was going to reduce and eventually end the printing of new dollars with which to support financial markets.The image of foreign governments bailing out of Treasuries could unsettle the markets that the Fed was attempting to sooth by tapering.
First, US policy is a weaker dollar against the net exports, UZ, Japan, and China, to benefit exports. Secondly, if US interest rates rise, that would tend to strengthen the dollar.
PCR is a dollar fetishist, just like the Hedgies.
Very interesting comment, Tom, at least for me. I am new to this MMT theory.
Why is Roberts wrong about being worried that China or Russia will dump Treasuries? Why is he so wrong about QE? I see that his views are completely mainstreamand it is MMT trying to swim upstream--not that that means it is wrong, of course. I remember someone as highly placed as Lawrence Wilkerson warning that we are heavily indebted to the Japanese for roughly the same reasons--debt owed. It was the Japanese who were supposedly bolstering the credit economy of the US. There is something seemingly crazy about countries being willing to sell stuff to the US for their paper, which after all can't buy much of value from the US except armaments. Maybe that's the whole key: just as the dollar ultimately is accepted because if you don't pay taxes you go to jail, similarly, the dollar system is ultimately backed by punishing sanctions, CIA "regime changes" a la "economic hitman," or Victoria Nuland style formented uprisings, or outright invasion by this very predatory hegemon.
@ Jorge
All economists agree that exports are real costs — losing real stuff with embedded labor, and imports are real benefits — gaining real stuff with embedded labor, and imports are real benefits. That made some sense under a monetary system with gold convertibility when armies were paid it gold and mercantilism was the basis of imperialism and colonialism. That is no longer the case under the present monetary system. Being a net exporter and saving in other countries currencies conveys no real benefits other than allowing the net exporter to run full employment, but with home workers working for foreigners. Net exporting only benefits the ownership class of the exporting country by making them financially wealthier but the country poorer in real terms.
Yves Smith looks at it in this post that I am putting up separately. Here's an excerpt in which she makes reference to PCR.
The exporter can become a stealth colonizer or attain influence over the other country through holding so much in the way of its assets, right? Again, it’s not so simple in practice. For instance, it’s been a staple in certain corners of the financial blogosphere that China can tank the US any time it wants to by dumping Treasuries. But that would send the renminbi to the moon, the last thing the Chinese want. And the Fed could simply soak them up if it wanted to, as some parties [PCR] argue the Fed did with a recent large sale of Treasuries by Belgium.
Yves Smith, The Chronic Exporters’ Curse?
The fiscal conservatives are concerned about the USD being devalued and domestic inflation/hyperinflation ensuing from loose policy like ZIRP and QE, as well as fiscal deficits. They want sound finance and a strong dollar, which they think will make America strong. They equate US economic and military power with a strong dollar so it can acquire resources cheaply. It's basically imperialistic and colonial thinking. Conversely, the US is in recovery and just about everyone else running more austerity is floundering in comparison.
Actually, the Fed is fighting the possibility of deflation and just treading water. Moreover, the US has been talking a strong dollar for years while trying to devalue it against net exporters to close the trade gap. The net exporters are China, Japan, and the EZ, in that the EZ is really Germany and the euro is the new DM. A major purpose of the euro from Germany's POV was weakening an overly strong DM to drive exports.
PCR, the Hedgies, and most economists are still thinking in terms of gold and don't understand how the current monetary system works. Mike Norman shows how one can profit from this MMT understanding in the forex market, since many traders read the news backwards. And he has a record to show it. Conversely, the "experts" like Bill Gross got their clocks cleaned shorting treasuries when QE was announced, thinking that rates would shoot up and bonds would tank. That's matter of record, too, and PIMCO lost a lot of clients over it.
Thank you very much, Tom. I propose you write some article on this very misunderstood subject. Most material presupposes some economic knowledge. There is very little out there that really educates the layman starting from scratch and also taking into account their faulty assumptions. On the other hand, the "hard money" people and the libertarians are very good at that.
Okay, Tom, we agree that PCR is out of paradigm. My question is this: is he wrong about the fact that Belgium bought the equivalent of over 25% of its GDP in T-Bonds? If it did, how was that possible? Second, a buyer requires a seller. Who sold the bonds? Third, since the world does not follow the MMT paradigm, how would the world have interpreted that a presumably large country was selling that large an amount of bonds? Apparently, the buying and the selling and the quantities bought and sold are fact, not "conspiracy theory." The conspiracy part comes in with the speculation that the US funded the deal, for reasons given by PCR, and which may very well reflect the way government thinks--MMT is always criticizing the ignorance of government officials regarding money operations and their significance, after all. The miserably low growth reports of the economy seem to lend credence to the idea of a weak economy--which in fact is pretty lousy, hence it is easy for the media and most experts to extrapolate that the dollar is similarly weak. And the ridiculous prices for just about everything, houses and cars above all, and rising costs of energy, also lend credence to the idea of inflation, not deflation, at least in the mind of the public, despite lack of credit, lack of jobs, closing of retail outlets, and the like. MMT'ers sort of live in a bubble it seems to me at times, in that they are insensitive to the way people actually think--are manipulated to think--and thus tend to preach a lot to the choir and perhaps a few receptive other ears.
Roberts also gives an in-depth interview today here:
http://usawatchdog.com/fed-laundering-treasury-purchases-in-belgium-to-disguise-whats-happening-paul-craig-roberts/
I am not saying he is right or wrong only that his apparent claim or at least strong insinuation that the Fed "laundered" the deal with Belgium is unsubstantiated.
Have you gotten into any conspiracy theory, like the 9/11 Truthers? The evidence seems compelling on the surface until one starts digging in to it. Same with all conspiracy theories.
I am just saying that PCR's claim in this regard reads like conspiracy theory. It is unsubstantiated and leaves the reader to fill in the blanks. There is no evidence establishing the key links.
It is also implausible. Why would the Fed "launder" a deal through just one relatively small country if it wanted to conceal its tracks. It would much more likely have been done through London and involved piecing out to countries like the UK, Germany, Japan, Saudi Arabia that have a stake in USD stability. Tens of billions apiece is not a great deal for these countries.
On the other hand, it's possible that Russia decided to dump 100 billion in tsys and the US just arranged with Belgium to pick them up for reasons as yet unknown. Even if this happened to be true, so what? IT's common knowledge that central banks work together to preserve currency stability. The US did large collar swaps with Europe during the crisis to provide USD where dollar liquidity was needed.
The rest of PCR's story and assumptions about the dollar betray ignorance of the current monetary system and how a floating rate system works, especially in a unipolar world in which everyone else catches cold and some contract pneumonia when the US sneezes. A falling dollar would tank global exports and make US exports much cheaper, driving the ROW out of business. Net exporters especially have a huge stake in the USD not getting much cheaper against their currencies. It would wreck their business plan.
As I said PCR is a dollar fetishist, and he is fixated on gold.
MMT'ers sort of live in a bubble it seems to me at times, in that they are insensitive to the way people actually think--are manipulated to think--and thus tend to preach a lot to the choir and perhaps a few receptive other ears.
Unfortunately, MMT economists and proponents don't have much media access. I would be nice if it were different, but it is not, and it is not for lack of trying.
Heterodox economists in general are shut out, and MMT economists and allies are just a small subset of heterodox.
Even someone as well-known as James K. Galbraith doesn't make much of a dent in the noise machine, and even a so-called liberal spokesperson like Paul Krugman has a running feud with him.
This is a loaded game and the playing field is tilted.
Anyway, it's not like this is new. Keynes said much of it, and Kalecki, Lerner, Robinson, etc, filled it in. Marriner Eccles and Beardsley Ruml explained it. the knowledge has been out there for a long while. It is being ignored and suppressed.
Just watch how the Establishment spins Piketty, whose work is not actually new either, but it's the first to slip through the filter and "make news."
The other issue — the elephant in the room, really — is that the US has morphed into a fascist state, which one would not probably would not realize without doing a lot of reading of counter-propaganda. The US got so obsessed with fighting totalitarian communism it became its alter ego, fascism. This was then transferred to militant Islam, and now it being transferred to Russia and China again since the are rival superpowers militarily, with nuclear arsenals and delivery systems comparable to the US. Fascism needs an enemy, so it arranges for endless war.
When one sees through the veil of propaganda, then one also realizes that Americans are in a situation similar to the Germans under Hitler. You don't let yourself realize what's going on, and you aren't likely to look deeply either, because then you'd be responsible. so America gets caught up in celebrity instead. Speaking out could be dangerous, when files are kept indefinitely and no communication is private.
This is the value of people like Daniel Ellsberg, Chelsea (formerly Bradley) Manning, Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, and others. They lifted the veil enough that now it cannot be ignored.
Re: Have you gotten into any conspiracy theory, like the 9/11 Truthers? The evidence seems compelling on the surface until one starts digging in to it. Same with all conspiracy theories.
Huh? Please don't tell me you swallow the official government version! Or that it's really the Saudis fault.
I rather suppose that before you noticed that the US has "morphed" into a fascist state, those who noted that fact well in advance were probably "conspiracy theorists." 1200 architects and engineers are wrong, firemen hearing explosions go off are wrong; thorium in the metal debris is bullshit; building 7 really wasn't controlled demolition, and neither were the others--planes really do knock down such skyscrapers and the fires really did melt steel. A group of Arabs who can't fly flew expertly, a plane really flew into the Pentagon, and on and on and on, including the paralysis of the entire air security system. Very plausible. Anyway, I give up. You know it all. Even more than people who spent years in the government. Meher Baba has given you a kind of "deformacion professionelle" which I suppose is incurable. Enjoy your certitudes.
My view is that the truth is presently unknown and that there are still many questions to be answered. Same with JFK's assassination. Etc.
There are clearly issues with the official narrative, but I also don't buy that any of the other accounts are definitive either.
"Enjoy your certitudes."
Who has the cerititudes here?
Your view is comfortable. Of course the truth of the matter if unknown--duh! The point is that one who rejects the official view is not for that reason a "conspiracy theorist". And the glaringly obvious fact that the gov't cannot and will not come clean is already very telling. The problem, Tom, is that like so many "intellectuals", you lack courage--something that the 911 Truth movement has. They too have not arrived at a final truth, they are pointing out the many omissions and lies of the government. That the government lies, and lies continually is evident. If we are now in the grip of a fascist state, in other words, if the US has experienced what amounts to a coup d'etat, that should have implications......
If you are talking about demanding an accounting, I agree. But I am not into jumping to conclusions about responsibility without evidence.
Take PCR's account of the tsys showing up on the Belgian books. Without being able to show any link, he concludes that only the Fed could have provided the funds and then talks about Fed "deception." Jump in logic.
Same with some people on 9/11, where there are unanswered questions, but some jump to the conclusion it was a false flag operation.
Interesting that the Fed hasn't denied the charge, which has now gone viral.
By the way, a Bloomberg story covered Fed laundering money to North Korea, back in 2007, but allegedly at the suggestion of the US State Dept., and of course with the best intention of bypassing illegal laundering operations.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aILkCVkk1tHY
One can tell your background is the academy, Tom. You seem very naive as to what really goes on and can go in government on the part of bureaucrats and pols, in cahoots with those who fund their campaigns, have powerful influence and interests, and are in dead earnest, and are often altogether lacking scruple.
Just one fairly well-known caper, look up Gladio. Read ex-CIA writings, and the like. Cognitive dissonance is very much not a monopoly of non-intellectuals, to say the least of it, don't feel too badly (intellectuals are very proud of not being naive in their estimation).
The difference between allegations and evidence. Only claim what you can show.
Of course, weighing allegations and their plausibility is part of most people's method of forming opinions and there is nothing wring with that.
But one has to distinguish between substantiating fact and forming opinion.
Police and prosecutors run into this frequently. They are pretty convinced about who perpetrated a crime but they can't mount a convincing case on admissible evidence.
Same with academics. I have opinions but I don't put them forward unless I can back them up with convincing evidence. I have many opinions about historical matters in my field, but I only put out stuff as fact I can reasonably defend with evidence. However, I also put forward interpretations as plausible but not yet established as definitive. However, this generally doesn't have to do with fact but rather an author's intention regarding meaning.
Politics is inherently contentious and one can spend a lot of time arguing opinions and chasing conspiracies. I prefer to leave opinion writing to the pundits and chasing down elusive evidence to investigative reporters.
I think that there is also a danger in getting lost in the weeds instead of focusing on matters that can actually be established as settled. As I tell my conspiracy theory friends, there's enough hard evidence available to build a convincing case about things that really important. You have to pick your fights carefully.
Sorry to put it so bluntly, Tom, but you are very good at avoiding what people are really trying to tell you.
Anyway, regarding 911, here are two stories:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/14/arts/design/sept-11-memorial-museum-at-ground-zero-prepares-for-opening.html?_r=1
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/05/14/nyregion/sept-11-museum-artifacts-videos.html
You might want to have a vomit bag handy while you read. This is a monument to ghoulish pornographic sentimentalism in the service of propaganda whitewashing designed to reinforce for good the official narrative, so full of blatant lies and holes, and so pathetically passed over by an entire nation that has been royally screwed.
Was there ever such a clueless population? Intellectuals included.
If Americans only had half the backbone of the Ukrainians in regards to their being bamboozled on 9-11:
http://michael-hudson.com/2014/05/eu-nationalism-a-cover-for-austerity/
or
https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=UUpwvZwUam-URkxB7g4USKpg&v=3paG2cdC8Mg#t=500
For those interested
Wikipedia/9/11 Truth movement
Wikipedia! Por favor!!
--------------
The 11th Anniversary of 9/11 ~ Paul Craig Roberts
September 11, 2012 |
The article below was written for the Journal of 9/11 Studies for the eleventh anniversary of September 11, 2001, the day that terminated accountable government and American liberty. It is posted here with the agreement of the editors.
In order to understand the improbability of the government’s explanation of 9/11, it is not necessary to know anything about what force or forces brought down the three World Trade Center buildings, what hit the Pentagon or caused the explosion, the flying skills or lack thereof of the alleged hijackers, whether the airliner crashed in Pennsylvania or was shot down, whether cell phone calls made at the altitudes could be received, or any other debated aspect of the controversy.
You only have to know two things.
One is that according to the official story, a handful of Arabs, mainly Saudi Arabians, operating independently of any government and competent intelligence service, men without James Bond and V for Vendetta capabilities, outwitted not only the CIA, FBI, and National Security Agency, but all 16 US intelligence agencies, along with all security agencies of America’s NATO allies and Israel’s Mossad. Not only did the entire intelligence forces of the Western world fail, but on the morning of the attack the entire apparatus of the National Security State simultaneously failed. Airport security failed four times in one hour. NORAD failed. Air Traffic Control failed. The US Air Force failed. The National Security Council failed. Dick Cheney failed. Absolutely nothing worked. The world’s only superpower was helpless at the humiliating mercy of a few undistinguished Arabs.
It is hard to image a more far-fetched story–except for the second thing you need to know: The humiliating failure of US National Security did not result in immediate demands from the President of the United States, from Congress, from the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and from the media for an investigation of how such improbable total failure could have occurred. No one was held accountable for the greatest failure of national security in world history. Instead, the White House dragged its feet for a year resisting any investigation until the persistent demands from 9/11 families for accountability forced President George W. Bush to appoint a political commission, devoid of any experts, to hold a pretend investigation.
---------------
A conspiracy theory is not a logical fallacy. Perhaps "hypothesis" would be a better word to use, rather than to go along with the mass media propaganda buzz word that tries to bully people into ignoring what looks suspicious. The proper meaning is "an agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act." The infamous Savings and Loan scandal was certainly a great example, and thousands were convicted and many were jailed, Keating was among those. GATA has shown how the gold price is government manipulated. That is a conspiracy. So was Enron. You can go to Catherine A. Fitts and read about more of these kinds of things in government. Politics is a realm where conspiracies of all kinds flourish. Read prosecutor William Black's book: "The Best Way to Rob a Bank is to Own One." The entire financial debacle depended in part on a tremendous amount of covert criminality regarding the sale of garbage securities. Corporations engage in this all the time--hence the term "control fraud." Politics is a domain that lends itself to conspiracies--covert illegal action involving concerted action not just individual activity--because of the potential rewards and because one acts within frameworks wherein these things can be concealed rather well in many cases. There are all kinds of regulations that strive to prevent criminal collusion--because it is possible and because it happens. Even on a large scale it does not necessarily demand a large number of people "in the know", but just coordinated activity on the part of those who wield power and authority over others. So, a hypothesis of conspiracy in given situations can in principle at least be perfectly plausible and account for the facts. Later on, it may be necessary to revise or jettison that hypothesis, or it may be proven correct and arrests follow; or it may never be proven correct or falsified because the people involved have the power and influence to determine that essential information will not get revealed "for reasons of national security" and the like. The louder people of influence and power accuse people trying to get at the truth with the phrase "conspiracy theory" the more suspect I consider them. They are trying to turn brains off. I speak of reasonable people, not crazy people. Let's not forget, "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."
Lars Schall did a couple of pieces for Asia Times, focusing on the insider trading angle:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/ND27Dj02.html
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/NC21Dj05.html
http://911truth.org
May 12, 2013 at 8:09 PM
Unbelievable footage here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6eMq5Rit1w
May 12, 2013 at 9:40 PM
http://www.journalof911studies.com/
In particular, see their "Resources" list.
Niels H. Harrit, et al, Active thermitic material discovered in dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center catastrophe, The Open Chemical Physics Journal, Vol 2, 2009
Kevin R. Ryan, et al, Environmental anomalies at the World Trade Center: evidence for energetic materials, The Environmentalist, Volume 29, Number 1, 2009
Steven E. Jones, et al, Fourteen points of agreement with official government reports on the World Trade Center destruction, The Open Civil Engineering Journal Volume 2, 2008
http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&projects_and_programs=sibelEdmonds
http://www.wanttoknow.info/911information
------------------
Resources/Downloads
http://www.ae911truth.org/en/resources.html
Technical Articles
http://www.ae911truth.org/en/evidence.html
Marc Chandler parses the rise in Belgian holding of US Treasuries in this post at Financial Sense.
Russia’s Dollar Reserves and Putin’s Visit to China
The government’s fantasy story about 9/11 is now being enshrined in a 9/11 Memorial Museum. The only reason a superpower would want to establish a memorial to its incompetence, defeat, and humiliation by a handful of young men acting independently of any government or intelligence service would be to officially consecrate the official conspiracy theory. Consecration of a myth makes it true for most people. The Museum will serve to inculcate the false story into each future generation.
support Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth
PCR (paulcraigroberts.org)
-------------------
http://us1.campaign-archive1.com/?u=d03bf3ffcac549c7dc7888ef5&id=e54fa0c854&e=[UNIQID]
Grand Opening – May 21, 2014:
National September 11 Memorial Museum
History has shown us that in order to maintain an official myth, there must be an official consecration of that myth. Unfortunately, this is what will be taking place at Ground Zero on May 21, 2014.
It's the opening of the 9/11 Memorial Museum, an elaborate, taxpayer-funded, public relations campaign to forever cement the fantastic claims of the official conspiracy theory into the history books. And that is why we are now reaching out to you.
Museum visitors will be presented with a first-rate “Madison Avenue” account of September 11th that has served as the justification for two wars, demolished our national economy, and deprived us of our privacy and civil liberties. This historical revisionism needs to be countered with an all-out effort of the truth of 9/11. By printing thousands of educational flyers and distributing them via teams of AE911Truth volunteers at the memorial grounds entry, we can inform the public as to why the 9/11 Memorial Museum is largely a fraud.
And we can do it with facts – facts that will educate museum visitors enough to ask a few simple questions: “Where are the exhibits of red/gray thermitic chips or the displays showing melted steel? Where are the photographs of the explosive “squibs” – the videos showing WTC 7's seven-second collapse? Where are the archived accounts of elevator rebuilds – the fleeing Ace Elevator mechanics – the wall plaques with quotes of the first responders citing countdowns and explosions?
If we can get the truth in front of the public, we can show the impossibility of the official story and why it has no good place in the world our children will inherit.
We hope to present the truth about 9/11 with a live multimedia speaking engagement with Richard Gage, AIA: “9/11 Blueprint for Truth” on Saturday afternoon, May 24, at 4 PM at the Community Church of New York.
But it can't happen without you. If there ever was a time to jump into the fray, the time is now. Your donation is immensely appreciated and will help us to set the record straight!
And join us if you can in New York on Wednesday, May 21, and Saturday, May 24, for street-level education of the public – and the days in between if possible. We’ll be at the memorial grounds entry at the corner of Greenwich and Liberty streets -- starting at 10 AM. If you can’t join us, you can sponsor someone else to come!
---------
Post a Comment