Activist Post

Law Professors Cast Doubt on ACTA's Constitutionality - State Department Confirms No ACTA Pre-Review

2012-05-17T09:51:00.003-07:00

Gwen Hinze
EFF

Fifty leading U.S. legal scholars cast fresh doubt on the constitutionality of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement in an open letter to the Senate Finance Committee today. (Press Release). At issue is whether the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) had authority to enter into the controversial IP enforcement agreement on behalf of the United States when the Deputy U.S. Trade Ambassador signed ACTA in October 2011.

The law professors say no, and call on the Senators to “exercise your constitutional responsibility to ensure that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) is submitted to the Senate for approval as an Article II treaty, or to the Congress as an ex-post Congressional-Executive Agreement.”

We, too, have wondered about the USTR’s authority to enter into this agreement. That’s why we made a request under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act to the State Department in February for key documents that set out the State Department’s analysis of the constitutional basis for ACTA – the “Circular 175” memorandum, and the accompanying Memorandum of Law.

As the State Department’s website states, the Circular 175 procedure is the way that the State Department “seeks to confirm that the making of treaties and other international agreements by the United States is carried out within constitutional and other legal limitations, with due consideration of the agreement's foreign policy implications, and with appropriate involvement by the State Department.” Circular 175 memoranda must be accompanied by a Memorandum of Law prepared by the Office of the Legal Advisor in the State Department, which generally includes a discussion of the appropriate legal analysis underlying implementation of the treaty at issue.

The State Department is required to prepare these documents for all treaties and other international instruments that bind the United States as a matter of international law under 22 CFR Part 181. No agencies can conclude an international agreement in the name of the United States without first consulting with the State Department, and the determination of whether an agreement is an international agreement for this purpose must be made by the Office of the Legal Advisor to the State Department.

We have now received the State Department’s response. It’s short: the State Department has not created a Circular 175 memorandum and accompanying Memorandum of Law for ACTA:

Based on the subject matter of your request, we consulted with subject matter experts in the Office of the Legal Advisor. These officials advised us that no Circular 175 Memorandum or Memorandum of Law were ever issued for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement. The officials also told us that USTR has lead within the U.S. Government for this issue.

This suggests that ACTA was not submitted to the normal State Department review process to determine its constitutionality before it was signed by the Deputy Trade Ambassador.

Since the State Department’s Legal Office must decide whether a proposed instrument is an “international agreement” for this process, it’s possible that the State Department was consulted but decided that ACTA was not an “international agreement”.

If so, where is the Memorandum explaining why ACTA should not be considered an “international agreement” despite all appearances to the contrary?

Given that, the FOIA response appears to confirm what we’ve long suspected – that USTR was acting on a folly when it negotiated and signed ACTA, in the absence of Trade Promotion Authority which had expired on July 1, 2007, and without consulting the US government agency that is entrusted with ensuring that international agreements abide by appropriate constitutional process.

It is important to understand that the way that ACTA was negotiated and subsequently signed by the USTR raises fundamental questions about the separation of powers set out in the U.S. Constitution. ACTA deals with powers over subject matter – intellectual property and foreign trade –that the Constitution’s Article I gives exclusively to Congress. Specifically, there are three ways that the U.S. can bind itself to international agreements dealing with Article 1 subject matter. First, an agreement can be ratified under the Treaty Clause, which requires a vote by two-thirds of the Senate. Second, Congress can pass a law that authorizes the negotiation of an international agreement (ex ante authorization). Third, Congress can approve an agreement that has been negotiated by the Executive Branch after the fact, or “ex post”, bypassing the agreement, subject to amendment, through both houses of Congress and having the President sign it into law. These agreements are known as ex-post Congressional-Executive Agreements.

As we’ve reported before, during the ACTA negotiations, the USTR consistently maintained that it was a Sole Executive Agreement dealing with matters delegated to the President and, on that basis, did not need Congressional review and approval. Then, in a surprising about-face, the Executive changed its explanation of the constitutional basis for ACTA. In a letter responding to a request from the Chair of the Senate Finance Committee's Trade Subcommittee, Senator Wyden, the Legal Advisor to the State Department, Howard Koh, implied that Congress had authorized the Executive to negotiate ACTA in response to the 2008 Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property Act (PRO-IP Act). On March 7, the U.S. Trade Ambassador followed that line, and testified in a Senate hearing that ACTA was negotiated with the authorization of Congress, quoting directly from Koh’s letter.

As we noted at the time, it seemed implausible that Congressional authorization was granted in legislation that was enacted the year after ACTA negotiations were announced, on October 23, 2007. In addition, as the legal scholars’ letter notes, the provision cited in the State Department Legal Advisor’s letter – section 8113(a)(6) of the PRO-IP Act – does not actually direct the USTR to negotiate an international agreement, let alone one with ACTA’s far-reaching characteristics. ACTA requires creation of an unelected ACTA Committee that has the final say on ACTA implementation in U.S. law, ousting any role for Congress.

If Congress had intended to grant ex ante authorization to the USTR to negotiate an international agreement that would limit Congress’ role and impede its ability to legislate, it seems more likely that it would have chosen to do so expressly.

The legal scholars conclude that:

..the Administration currently lacks a means to constitutionally enter ACTA without ex post Congressional approval. The present issue reaches far beyond the topical matters covered by ACTA, into the fundamental Constitutional issue of separation of powers. If Congress allows the executive to claim that ACTA was authorized by language that clearly does not authorize the agreement, it will be ceding unprecedented power to the executive.

We agree.

The legal scholars also call on the members of the Senate Finance Committee to act, noting that:

Remedying this state of affairs is uniquely within Congress’s province. Congress, and specifically the Senate as the Constitutionally recognized chamber with responsibilities for the approval of treaties, should secure from the administration a public pledge to send ACTA to the Senate as a treaty, or to the Congress as an ex-post Congressional-executive Agreement. Absent a pledge to this effect, we encourage the Committee to hold hearings and to pass legislation that would prevent the United States from binding itself to ACTA without express Congressional consent.

Now it’s up to the members of the Senate Finance Committee to rectify this unconstitutional power grab by an unaccountable Executive Branch agency, and protect the fundamental separation of powers embodied in the U.S. Constitution.

Meanwhile, the process of ratifying ACTA has noticeably slowed down in the rest of the world. As Sean Flynn from American University’s Program on Information Justice and the Public Interest notes, the fresh doubt about ACTA’s constitutionality under U.S. law is “one component of the larger context casting increasing doubt that ACTA can ever go into force.”

In recent months we’ve witnessed growing concerns about ACTA’s impact that have led to delays in the signing and ratification of ACTA in the EU, Switzerland, Mexico, Australia, and New Zealand. Let's hope that the members of the Senate Finance Committee heed the law professors' call to action and ensure that the U.S. undertakes the same rigorous public process that is underway in other countries.

BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW

Is Greece the First Domino Toward Widespread Banking Panic and Currency Controls?

2012-05-17T08:43:00.003-07:00

image source

Michael Snyder, Contributor
Activist Post

Money is being pulled out of Greek banks at an alarming rate, and if something dramatic is not done quickly Greek banks are going to start dropping like flies. As I detailed yesterday, people do not want to be stuck with euros in Greek banks when Greece leaves the euro and converts back to the drachma.

The fear is that all existing euros in Greek banks would be converted over to drachmas which would then rapidly lose value after the transition. So right now euros are being pulled out of Greek banks at a staggering pace. According to MSNBC, Greeks withdrew $894 million from Greek banks on Monday alone and a similar amount was withdrawn on Tuesday. But this is just an acceleration of a trend that has been going on for a couple of years. It has been reported that approximately a third of all Greek bank deposits were withdrawn between January 2010 and March 2012.

So where has all of the cash for these withdrawals been coming from? Well, the European Central Bank has been providing liquidity for Greek banks, but on Tuesday it was reported that the ECB is going to stop providing liquidity to some Greek banks. It was not announced which Greek banks are being cut off. For now, the Greek Central Bank will continue to provide euros to those banks, but the Greek Central Bank will not be able to funnel euros into insolvent banks indefinitely. This is a major move by the European Central Bank, and it is going to shake confidence in the Greek banking system even more.

There are already rumors that the Greek government is considering placing limits on bank withdrawals, and many Greeks will be tempted to go grab their money while they still can.

Once strict currency controls are put in place, the population is likely to respond very angrily. If people can't get their money there is no telling what they might do.

We are reaching a critical moment. Many fear that a full-blown "bank panic" could happen at any time. The following is from a recent Forbes article....

The pressing problem isn't a splintered legislature that may balk at delivering the reforms that the IMF and European Community are demanding in exchange for the next tranche of bailout money. It's a disastrous, old-fashioned run-on-the bank. 'For a year, Greeks have been sending their savings from Greek banks to foreign banks,' says Robert Aliber, retired professor of international economics from the University of Chicago. 'Now, the flood has reached a crescendo.' Indeed on Monday alone, outflows from the Greek banks reached almost $900 million.

These banks would have collapsed already if not for the support of the European Central Bank and the Greek Central Bank. This was described in a recent blog post by Paul Krugman of the New York Times....

But where are the euros coming from? Basically, banks are borrowing them from the Greek central bank, which in turn must borrow them from the European Central Bank. The question then becomes how far the ECB is willing to go here; is it willing, in effect, to lend enough money to buy up the entire balance sheet of the Greek banking sector, given the likelihood that this sector will be left insolvent by Greek default?

Yet if the ECB says no more, Greek banks stop operating — and it’s hard to see how they can be restored to operation except by ditching the euro and using something else.

That is why the announcement on Tuesday was so dramatic. The ECB is starting to pull back and that is a very bad sign for the Greek banking system.

For the moment, the Greek Central Bank is continuing to support the Greek banks that the European Central Bank is no longer providing liquidity for. A Reuters article explained how this works....

The ECB only conducts its refinancing operations with solvent banks. Banks which fail to meet strict ECB rules but are deemed solvent by the national central bank (NCB) concerned can nonetheless go to their NCB for emergency liquidity assistance (ELA).

But this emergency liquidity assistance is not intended to be a long-term solution as a recent Wall Street Journal article noted....

The ECB's emergency-lending facility isn't intended as a long-term fix. National central banks must get approval each month that they want to let their banks access the facility from the ECB's governing council, which can veto use of the program.

If Greece installs an antibailout government that reneges on its austerity promises, it would almost certainly be cut off from ECB funding.

The truth is that we are heading for a financial tragedy in Greece. If the flow of money out of Greek banks intensifies, the Greek banking system might not even be able to make it to the next election in June. This point was underscored in an article that was published on Tuesday that was authored by renowned financial journalist Ambrose Evans-Pritchard....

Steen Jakobsen from Danske Bank said outflows are becoming unstoppable, not helped by open talk in EU circles of 'technical' plans for Greek withdrawal.

'This has a self-fulfilling prophecy built into it and I don’t think we can get to June. The fuse is burning and the only two options now are a controlled explosion where Germany steps in to ensure an orderly exit, or an uncontrolled explosion,' he said.

So what should we expect to see next?

Well, James Carney of CNBC says that he believes that it is inevitable that Greece is going to have to implement currency controls in order to slow the bleeding....

It looks increasingly likely that Greece will have to implement controls to prevent capital flight and a banking collapse. To my mind, the only real question is when this will occur.

The widespread talk about Greece possibly leaving the euro zone is likely to trigger withdrawal of bank deposits and other financial assets, by those who fear they might be redenominated into a drachma that would be worth far less than the euro.

The Greek government may soon announce a limit on the amount of money that can be withdrawn on a single day.

The Greek government may also soon announce a limit on the amount of money that can be moved out of the country.

Those would be dramatic steps to take, but if nothing is done we are likely to watch the Greek banking system die right in front of our eyes.

A Greek exit from the euro seems more likely with each passing day. Such an exit would have a devastating impact on the Greek economy, but it would also dramatically affect the rest of the globe as well. The following is from a recent article by Louise Armitstead....

The Institute of International Finance has estimated that the global cost of a Greek exit could hit €1trillion. When Argentina defaulted in 2001, foreign debtors lost around 70pc of their investments.

That is a big hit for such a little country.

So what would it cost the globe if Spain or Italy left the eurozone?

That is something to think about.

Meanwhile, the United States continues to steamroll down the same road that Greece has gone. According to the Republican Senate Budget Committee, the U.S. government is currently spending more money per person than Greece, Portugal, Italy or Spain does.

We are spending ourselves into oblivion, and we are heading for a national financial disaster.

Unfortunately, most Americans are totally oblivious to all of this.

Instead of getting educated about the horrific financial crisis heading our way, most Americans would rather read about why Jennifer Lopez is leaving American Idol.

But those who are listening to the warnings will be prepared when the storm hits.

Things in Europe look really, really bad.

You better get prepared while you still can.

This article first appeared here at the Economic Collapse. Michael Snyder is a writer, speaker and activist who writes and edits his own blogs The American Dream and Economic Collapse Blog. Follow him on Twitter here.

BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW

How The U.S. Dollar Will Be Replaced

2012-05-17T08:43:00.002-07:00

Brandon Smith, Contributor
Activist Post

After being immersed in the world of alternative economic analysis for several years, it sometimes becomes easy to forget that most people do not track forex markets, or debt to GDP ratio, or true unemployment, or hunch over IMF white-papers highlighting subsections which expose the trappings of the globalist ideology. Sometimes, you just assume the average person knows what the heck you are talking about. This is, of course, a mistake. However, it is a mistake that is borne from the inadequacy of our age and our culture, and is not necessarily a product of weak character, either of the analyst, or the casual reader.

The great frustration of being actively involved in the Liberty Movement is the fact that many people are rarely on the same page (or even the same book) during political and economic discussion. Where we see the nature of the false left/right paradigm, they see “free democracy”. Where we see a tidal wave of destructive debt, they see a “responsible government” printing and spending in order to protect our “best interests”. Where we see totalitarianism, they see “safety”. Where we see dollar devaluation, they see dollar strength and longevity. Ultimately, because the average unaware citizen is stricken by the disease of normalcy bias and living within the doldrums of a statistical fantasy world, they simply have no point of reference by which to grasp the truth when exposed to it. It’s like trying to explain the concept of ‘color’ to a man who has been blind since birth.

Americans in particular are prone to reactionary dismissal when exposed to facts that disrupt their misconceptions. Our culture has experienced a particularly prosperous age, not necessarily free from all trouble, but generally spared from widespread mass tragedy for a generous length of time. This tends to breed within societies an overt and unreasonable expectation of ease. It generates apathy, and laziness. A crushing blubberous slothful cynicism subservient to the establishment and the status quo. Even the most striking of truths struggle to penetrate this smoky forcefield of duplicitous funk.

In recent articles, I have outlined the very immediate dangers of several potential economic events that are likely to take place this year, including the exit of peripheral countries from the European Union, the conflict between austerity and socialist spending in France and Germany, the developing bilateral trade agreements between China and numerous other countries which cut out their reliance on the U.S. dollar, and the likelihood that the Federal Reserve will announce QE3 before the end of 2012. All of these elements are leading in one very particular direction: the end of the Greenback as the world reserve currency.

In response to these assertions I have received letters from some people (some of them indignant) questioning how it would be even remotely possible that the dollar could be replaced at all. The concept is so outside their narrow world view that many cannot fathom it.

To be sure, the question is a viable one. How could the dollar be unseated? That said, a few hours of light research would easily produce the answer, but this tends to be too much work for the fly-by-night financial skeptic. Sometimes, the job of the alternative analyst is to make the obvious even more obvious.

So, let’s begin…

The Dollar A Safe Haven?

This ongoing lunacy is based on multiple biases. For some, the dollar represents America, and a collapse of the currency would suggest a failure of the republic, and thus, a failure by them as individual Americans who live vicariously through the exploits of their government. By extension, it becomes “patriotic” to defend the dollar’s honor and deny any information that might suggest it is on a downward spiral.

Others see how the investment world clings to the dollar as a kind of panic room; a protected place where one’s saving will be insulated from crisis. However, just because a majority of day trading investors are gullible enough to overlook the Greenback’s pitfalls does not mean those dangerous weaknesses disappear.

There is only one factor that shields the dollar from implosion, and that is its position as the world reserve currency. Without this exalted status, the currency’s value vanishes. Backed by nothing but massive and unpayable debt, it sits frighteningly idle, like a time bomb, waiting for the moment of ignition.

The horrifying nature of the dollar is that it is only valuable so long as foreign investors believe that we will pay back the considerable debts that we (the American taxpayer at the behest of our criminally run Treasury) owe, and that we will not hyperinflate in the process. If they EVER begin to see their purchases of dollars and treasuries as a gamble instead of an investment, the façade falls away. Yet again this year Congress and the Executive Branch are “at odds” over the expansion of the debt ceiling, which has been raised to levels beyond the 100% of GDP mark:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/17/us/politics/obama-presses-congress-to-act-on-his-priorities.html

Barack Obama has made claims that increases in the debt ceiling are “normal”, and that most presidents are prone to hiking the barrier every once in a while. Yet, back in 2006, when George W. Bush increased debt limits, Obama had this to say:

The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can't pay its own bills…Instead of reducing the deficit, as some people claimed, the fiscal policies of this administration and its allies in Congress will add more than $600 million in debt for each of the next five years…Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that 'the buck stops here.' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.

For once, Barack and I agree on something. Too bad the man changes his rhetoric whenever it’s to his advantage.

Today, Obama now asserts that raising the debt ceiling is not an opening for more government spending, but an allowance for the government to pay bills it has already accrued. This is disingenuous and hypocritical prattle. Obama is well aware as are many in Congress that as long as the Federal Government is able to raise the debt ceiling whenever it suits them, they can increase spending with wild abandon. It’s like handing someone a credit card with no maximum limit. For most men, the temptation would be irresistible. Therefore, one can predict with 100% certainty that U.S. spending will never truly be reduced, and that our national debt will mount in tandem until we self destruct.

How has this trend been able to continue for so long? Our private central bank has created the fiat machine by which all economic depravity is possible. Currently, the Federal Reserve is the number one holder of U.S. debt. The Federal Reserve creates its own capital. It prints its wealth from thin air. The dollar, thus, has become its own lynchpin. The secretive institution which has never been subject to a full audit is now monetizing endless debt mechanisms with paper promises. What value would any intelligent investor put on such a fraudulent economic system?

The epic dysfunction of the dollar is rooted in its reliance on perception rather than tangible wealth or strong fundamentals. It is, indeed, like any other fiat mechanism, with all the inevitable pitfalls built into its structure.

Ironically, the value of the Dollar Index is measured not by its intrinsic buying power, or its historical buying power, but its arbitrary buying power in comparison with other collapsing fiat currencies.

The argument I hear most often when pointing out the calamitous path of the dollar is that it is the go-to safe haven in response to the crisis in Europe. What the financially inept don’t seem to grasp is that the shifting of savings back and forth between the euro and the dollar is just as irrelevant to our currency’s survival as it is to Europe’s. BOTH currencies are in decline, and this is evident by the growing inflationary pressures on both sides of the Atlantic. Ask any consumer in Greece, Spain, France, or the UK how shelf prices have changed in the past four years, and they will say the exact same thing as any consumer in the U.S.; costs have gone way up. Therefore, it makes sense to compare the dollar’s value not to the euro, or to the Yen, but something more practical, like the dollar of the past….

In 1972, just as Nixon was removing the dollar from the last vestiges of the gold standard, a new car cost an average of $4500. A home cost around $40,000. A gallon of gas was .36 cents. A loaf of bread was .25 cents. A visit to the doctor’s office was $25. Wages were certainly lower, but they kept much better pace with the prices of the era. Today, the gap between wages and inflation is insurmountable. The average family is unable to keep up with the flashflood of rising prices.

According to the historic buying power of the dollar, the currency is a poor safe haven investment. With the advent of bailout efforts and debt monetization through quantitative easing, its devaluation has been expedited dramatically. The Fed has left the door open for what I believe will be a final destructive round of publicly announced QE, weakening the dollar to near death:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/16/us-usa-fed-idUSBRE84F12320120516

The question then arises; why do foreign countries continue to buy in on the greenback?

The Dollar Dump Has Already Begun

One of my favorite arguments by those defending the dollar is the assertion that no foreign country would dare to dump the currency because they are all too dependent on U.S. trade. To answer the question above, the reality is that foreign countries ARE already calmly and quietly dumping the dollar as a global trade instrument.

To those people who consistently claim that the dollar will never be dropped, my response is, it already has been dropped! China, in tandem with other BRIC nations, has been covertly removing the greenback as the primary trade unit through bilateral deals since 2010. First with Russia, and now with the whole of the ASEAN trading bloc and numerous other markets, including Japan. China in particular has been preparing for this eventuality since 2005, when they introduced the first Yuan denominated bonds. The bonds were considered a strange novelty back then, especially because China had so much surplus savings that it seemed outlandish for them to take on treasury debt. Today, the move makes a whole lot more sense. China and the BRIC nations today openly call for a worldwide shift away from the dollar:

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/indepth/2011-08/06/c_131032986.htm

With the global proliferation of the Yuan, and the conversion of the Chinese economy away from dependence on exports (especially to the West) towards a more consumer based system, the Chinese have effectively decoupled from their reliance on U.S. markets. Would a collapse in the U.S. hurt China’s economy? Yes. Would they still survive? Oh yes. Far better than America would, at least…

In 2008, I warned of this development and was attacked on all sides by more mainstream economists and Keynesian proponents who stated that such a development was impossible. Today, it’s common knowledge that our primary creditors are “diversifying” away from the dollar, though MSM talking heads and those who parrot them still claim that this is not a threat to our economy.

To be clear, the true threat to the dollar’s supremacy is not only due to the constant printing by the private Federal Reserve (though that is a nightmare in the making), but the loss of faith in our currency as a whole. The Fed does not need to throw dollars from helicopters to annihilate our currency; all they have to do is create doubt in its viability.

The bottom line? A dollar collapse is not “theory” but undeniable fact in motion at this moment, driven by concrete actions on the part of the very nations that have until recently propped up our debt obligations. It is only a matter of time before the dollar diminishes and fades away. All signs point to a loss of reserve status in the near term.

What Will Replace The Dollar?

My next favorite argument in defense of the Greenback is the assertion that there is “no currency in a position to take the dollar’s place if it falls”. First of all, this is based on a very naïve assumption that the dollar will not fall unless there is another currency to replace it. I’m not sure who made that rule up, but the dollar is perfectly able to be flushed without a replacement in the wings. Economic collapse does not follow logical guidelines or the personal pet peeves of random man-child economists.

Though, to be fair, and to educate those unaware, there IS a replacement already conveniently ready to roll forward. The IMF has for a couple of years now openly called for the retirement of the dollar as the world reserve currency, to be supplanted by the elitist organization’s very own “Special Drawing Rights” (SDR’s):

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/feb/10/imf-boss-calls-for-world-currency

The SDR is a paper mechanism created in the early 1970’s to replace gold as the primary means of international trade between foreign governments. Today, it has morphed into a basket of currencies which is recognized by almost every country in the world and is in a prime position to take the dollar’s place in the event that it loses reserve status. This is not theory. This is cold hard reality. For those who claim that the SDR is not considered a “real currency”, they should probably warn the U.S. Post Office, which now uses conversion tables that denominate costs in SDR’s:

http://pe.usps.com/text/imm/immc3_007.htm

So, now that we know a replacement for the dollar is ready to go, the next obvious question would be:

Why would global elites destroy a useful monetary tool like the dollar? Why kill the goose that "lays the golden eggs"?

People who ask this question are simply unable to see outside the fiscal box they have been placed in. For global bankers, a paper currency is not important. It is expendable. Like a layer of snake skin; as the snake grows, it sheds the old and dawns the new.

At bottom, men who promote the philosophies of globalization greatly desire the exaltation of a global currency. The dollar, though a creation of a central bank, is still a semi-sovereign monetary unit. It is an element that is getting in the way of the application of the global currency dynamic. I find it rather convenient (at least for those who subscribe too globalism) that the dollar is now in the midst of a perfect storm of decline just as the IMF is ready to introduce its latest fiat concoction in the form of the SDR. I find the blind faith in the dollar’s lifespan to be rife with delusion. It is not a matter of opinion or desire, but a matter of fact that currencies in such tenuous positions fall, and are in the end replaced. I believe that the evidence shows that this is not random chance, but a deliberate process, leading towards the globalist ideal; total centralization of the world under an unaccountable governing body which operates a global monetary system utterly devoid of transparency and responsibility.

The dollar was a median step towards a newer and more corrupt ideal. Its time is nearly over. This is open, it is admitted, and it is being activated as you read this. The speed at which this disaster occurs is really dependent on the speed at which our government along with our central bank decides to expedite doubt. Doubt in a currency is a furious omen, costing not just investors, but an entire society. America is at the very edge of such a moment. The naysayers can scratch and bark all they like, but the financial life of a country serves no person’s emphatic hope. It burns like a fire. Left unwatched and unchecked, it grows uncontrollable and wild, until finally, there is nothing left to fuel its hunger, and it finally chokes in a haze of confusion and dread…

Brandon Smith is the founder of Alt-Market is an organization designed to help you find like-minded activists and preppers in your local area so that you can network and construct communities for mutual aid and defense. Join Alt-Market.com today and learn what it means to step away from the system and build something better or contribute to their Safe Haven Project. You can contact Brandon Smith at: brandon@alt-market.com

BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW

What is the Average American Diet? – Infographic

2012-05-17T08:00:00.002-07:00

Dees Illustration

Mike Barrett
Activist Post

Unfortunately, Americans have some of the worst diets in the world, and everyone else knows it.

With the average American consuming 24 lbs of artificial sweeteners, 29 lbs of french fries, and over 600 lbs of dairy per year, the average American is in a state of crisis. The average American diet is heavily responsible for the escalating obesity rates and is ultimately contributing to the development of illness and diseases.

According to the below infographic, the average American consumes about 1 gallon of soda per week, which equates to more than 18 fluid ounces, or 1.5 sodas per day. These sodas are loaded with sugar, with a 12oz can containing 35-45 grams – an amount that exceeds the recommended daily intake of 15 grams. What’s more, these sugars are typically in the form of high-fructose corn syrup; one of the cheapest, and most health-hazardous forms of sugar that can be used.

Another concerning number in the average American diet is the amount of artificial sweeteners consumed.

Those consumed include substances like aspartame, Splenda, Sweet N’ Low, and Equal. None of these artificial sweeteners are healthy, and are even having a negative impact on your health.

One study found that 67% of female rats exposed to aspartame developed tumors roughly the size of golf balls or larger.

Is Splenda safe? This toxic sweetener also has many dangers. Some effects associated with Splenda are shortness of breath, joint pains, eye irritation, swelling of facial muscles, ski breaking out into hives or rashes, and more.

Saccharin, best known as Sweet ‘N Low has been shown to have carcinogenic links. During the 1960s, studies on rats indicated saccharin was related to bladder cancer, but the FDA has allowed saccharin to remain as a food additive.

Needless to say, there are many more problems associated with the average American diet. While consumption of food shown in weight (as the inforgraphic shows) isn’t the absolute best way to pinpoint the issues with any diet, the numbers do give us a representation and idea of how much we’re eating.

If you want to compare generalizations between nations around the world, take a look at what the world eats.

Check out the infographic below for some startling statistics.

This article first appeared at Natural Society, an excellent resource for health news and vaccine information.

BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW

JPMorgan Shareholders File Suit Against Dimon in NY Federal Court

2012-05-17T07:45:00.002-07:00

Susanne Posel, Contributor
Activist Post

Jamie Dimon has come out publicly to downplay the severity of his bank’s recent $2 billion loss.

The Central Investment Unit (CIU) utilized a different value risk calculation (VaR), which gave them greater leniency in the assessment of their trades. The purpose of the CIU was to covertly set up risky positions within the firm.

This CIU reported to Dimon directly and were given special privilege and separate risk management during their trades. The inception of this distinctive CIU goes back to 2005.

Because of the pressure and publicity of this incident, as well as the flippant demeanor of Dimon, the shareholders of JPMorgan Chase & co. have filed suit against Dimon in a New York Federal Court. They cite the $2 billion loss as the purpose of their legal action.

In the Congress, the Volcker Rule is being proposed by Senator Carl Levin. It would forbid banks from making risky trades for their own profit. This federal proposal would severely restrict Dimon from conducting his “business as usual” which results in damage to our financial markets.

The Voldemort trader that began this media circus was a JPMorgan trader based in London. He is a derivatives expert, and placed bets that corporate debt was becoming less of a risk under the false supposition that corporations are becoming financially stronger. Based on a lie, this trader would benefit from any movement on the index. The result was a substantial loss for JPMorgan.

Dimon says that new rules requiring banking firms to retain more capital in reserve would put a “nail in our coffin of big American banks”. Dimon is referring to the practice of banks to lend out 90% of their actual cash stores. If they were regulated to lend what they actually have, the banking system would fail. Dimon is cleverly trying to blame regulators and not standard banking practices for future monetary losses.

Restricting and imposing a new stringent regulation on banking is what Dimon want to avoid by downplaying the financial loss. The fact that Dimon is trying to classify this instance as an “out-of-the-blue mistake” shows that when bankers misappropriate funds in a scheme to commit fraud, the public should pay attention.

Susanne Posel is the Chief Editor of Occupy Corporatism. Our alternative news site is dedicated to reporting the news as it actually happens; not as it is spun by the corporately funded mainstream media. You can find us on our Facebook page .

BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW

19 Things That All High School Students Should Be Told Before They Go To College

2012-05-17T07:19:00.003-07:00

Michael Snyder, Contributor
Activist Post

Don't you wish that someone had told you the truth before you went to college? Don't you wish that someone had told you that college has become a giant money-making scam that is designed to drain as much money out of students and parents as possible?

Yes, college can be a profitable endeavor if you pick your field of study wisely, if you can get someone else to pay for at least some of it, and if you can actually get a good job in that field when you graduate. But most high school students are never told to weigh the pros and the cons before they run off to college. The typical high school student is simply told to get into the "best school" that he or she can and to take out whatever loans are "necessary" to pay for that education. Our high school students are assured that those student loans will be paid back easily once they get "good jobs" following graduation.

But the truth is that there are some other things that high school students should be told before they go off to college as well. They should be told that student loan debt can cripple them financially for decades. They should be told that the quality of education at most U.S. colleges and universities is a total joke. They should be told that most college graduates do not get a "good job" once they graduate these days. They should be told that after they receive their diplomas they are likely to end up flat broke, waiting tables and living with their parents.

If we would just be honest with our high school students ahead of time, it would save many of them a whole lot of pain later.

Higher education is not necessarily a bad thing. But these days when it comes to higher education the goal should be to get as much for your money as you possibly can. You don't want to end up spending four years of your life and paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for a degree in "art history" or "political science".

If you are going to get a college degree, choose a field that will actually advance your career and try to spend as little as you can. Unless you have wealthy parents who can pay for it all, the goal should be to make as big of a profit on your education as possible.

Unfortunately, most young Americans are not told the truth and they end up falling for the scam and many of them end up as debt slaves for decades.

The following are 19 things that all high school students should be told before they go to college....

#1 A college education has become insanely expensive. Over the past 30 years, the cost of college tuition in the United States has tripled. One father down in Texas says that he will spend a total of about 1.5 million dollars on college expenses for his five daughters before it is all said and done.

#2 As costs have risen, so has student borrowing. Sadly, U.S. college students are now borrowing about twice as much money as they did a decade ago after adjusting for inflation.

#3 Unless you have a wealthy parent, there are some schools that should be avoided like the plague. In the United States today, there are dozens of schools where tuition, room and board total more than $50,000 a year, and only a handful of those schools provide a top notch education.

#4 Our parents and our grandparents paid far less for their college educations than we do today. Back in 1952, a full year of tuition at Harvard was only $600. Today, it is over $35,000.

#5 The college textbook industry has become a gigantic money-making scam. It is now common for many college textbooks to be priced well above $100, and overall the cost of college textbooks has tripled over the past decade.

#6 At the end of your education, your diploma will likely come with a debt burden which will hang around your neck for many years to come. In 2010, the average student loan debt burden at graduation was $25,250.

#7 Student loan debt is one of the greatest debt bubbles the U.S. has ever seen. In fact, student loan debt in America has grown by 511 percent since 1999.

#8 Americans now owe more on their student loans than they do on their credit cards. In fact, the total amount of student loan debt in the United States recently surpassed the one trillion dollar mark.

#9 People that pursue advanced degrees can pile up absolutely enormous amounts of student loan debt. According to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, approximately 167,000 Americans currently have more than $200,000 of student loan debt.

#10 The student loan default rate in the U.S. is rising to unprecedented heights. In fact, the student loan default rate has nearly doubled since 2005.

#11 All over America, websites are connecting young college students desperate for college cash with "sugar daddies" that are willing to make a "contribution" to college education in exchange for some "companionship". The following is from a Huffington Post article about this disturbing trend....

On a Sunday morning in late May, Taylor left her Harlem apartment and boarded a train for Greenwich, Conn. She planned on spending the day with a man she had met online, but not in person.

Taylor, a 22-year-old student at Hunter College, had confided in her roommate about the trip and they agreed to swap text messages during the day to make sure she was safe.

Once in Greenwich, a man who appeared significantly older than his advertised age of 42 greeted Taylor at the train station and then drove her to the largest house she had ever seen. He changed into his swimming trunks, she put on a skimpy bathing suit, and then, by the side of his pool, she rubbed sunscreen into the folds of his sagging back -- bracing herself to endure an afternoon of sex with someone she suspected was actually about 30 years her senior.

#12 Once you start college, there is a very good chance that you will not finish. Federal statistics reveal that only 36 percent of the full-time students who began college in 2001 received a bachelor's degree within four years.

#13 At most U.S. colleges and universities, the quality of the education that you will receive is rather poor. Just check out some numbers about the quality of college education in the United States from an article that appeared in USA Today....

-After two years in college, 45% of students showed no significant gains in learning; after four years, 36% showed little change.

-Students also spent 50% less time studying compared with students a few decades ago

-35% of students report spending five or fewer hours per week studying alone.

-50% said they never took a class in a typical semester where they wrote more than 20 pages.

-32% never took a course in a typical semester where they read more than 40 pages per week.

#14 The good news is that you will have more free time in college than you have ever had before. One survey found that U.S. college students spend 24% of their time sleeping, 51% of their time socializing and 7% of their time studying.

#15 You are probably not going to be able to find a good job when you graduate. Last year, a staggering 53 percent of all U.S. college graduates under the age of 25 were either unemployed or underemployed.

#16 After you leave college, you are much more likely to get a crappy job than you are to get a good paying professional job. The following is an excerpt from a recent CNBC article....

In the last year, they were more likely to be employed as waiters, waitresses, bartenders and food-service helpers than as engineers, physicists, chemists and mathematicians combined (100,000 versus 90,000). There were more working in office-related jobs such as receptionist or payroll clerk than in all computer professional jobs (163,000 versus 100,000). More also were employed as cashiers, retail clerks and customer representatives than engineers (125,000 versus 80,000).

#17 If you think that you will be able to "beat the odds" and land the job of your dreams once you graduate from college, perhaps you should consider these numbers....

-In the United States today, approximately 365,000 cashiers have college degrees.

-In the United States today, 317,000 waiters and waitresses have college degrees.

-In the United States today, there are more than 100,000 janitors that have college degrees.

#18 College does a very poor job of preparing people for the "real world". In fact, one poll found that 70% of all college graduates wish that they had spent more time preparing for the "real world" while they were still in school.

#19 Once you graduate from college, there is a really good chance that you will be moving back home with Mom and Dad. One recent poll discovered that 29 percent of all Americans in the 25 to 34 year old age bracket are still living with their parents.

So what do you think about the state of college education in America? Please feel free to post your thoughts below....

This article first appeared here at the American Dream. Michael Snyder is a writer, speaker and activist who writes and edits his own blogs The American Dream and Economic Collapse Blog. Follow him on Twitter here.

BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW

Leading Antibiotic Linked to Sudden Death

2012-05-17T06:54:00.001-07:00

Anthony Gucciardi
Activist Post

Following the news that drugs like Tylenol can actually lead to death when taken correctly in low dose form, new information has found that one of the most widely used antibiotics also has a very concerning death link. The pharmaceutical, known as azithromycin, has been linked to an increased likelihood of sudden death in adults — especially those with heart disease or a high risk for the condition.

Of course heart disease is rampant among the population, meaning that a large percentage of individuals therefore have an increased risk of sudden death when taking this popular drug to treat infection. While the odds of sudden death affecting the patient are not very high, the findings led researchers to urge doctors to reconsider prescribing the drug.

What the doctors may not be aware of is the fact that natural alternatives to antibiotics do exist that are both highly effective as well as exceptionally safe.

Peer-reviewed research has shown that garlic, which is also beneficial to improved immunity and wellness, is even more effective than antibiotics in fighting common illness.

When also considering the fact that antibiotics have been linked to serious conditions like mental illness, heavily drug-resistant superbugs, and obesity, the threat of antibiotic overuse becomes even more apparent. Amazingly, the issue of widespread antibiotic use has been continually recognized as a major threat to public health by health professionals and political legislators alike.

It was the threat of resistant superbugs as a result of antibiotics used in the food supply that led a United States judge to order the FDA to remove them from the animal feed supply. The FDA’s response? After ignoring calls to remove antibiotics from the feed stemming back to 1977, the agency finally stated that they would partially remove them from the feed supply over the next few years.

It is clear that there is a serious problem with the over-prescription of antibiotics, and the subsequent results are hampered health and serious side effects. In some cases, it could even be death.

Additional Sources:
The New York Times

Explore More:
Breaking: Fluoride Linked to #1 Cause of Death in New Research
Needless Diabetes-Linked Antibiotic Prescriptions Cost NHS $10 Million Per Year
The Hepatitis B Vaccine is Linked to Infant Death, Multiple Sclerosis and Autoimmune Disorders
Organic Farms Have Lower Levels of Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria
Drug-Resistant Superbugs Found in ‘Antibiotic-Free’ Meat Products
Flashback: The Hepatitis B Vaccine is Linked to Infant Death, Multiple Sclerosis and Autoimmune Disorders

This article first appeared at Natural Society, an excellent resource for health news and vaccine information.

BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW

Pathway to Complete Cannabis Legalizaion

2012-05-17T03:59:00.001-07:00

Youtube

BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW

Occupy Bilderberg 2012

2012-05-17T03:14:00.001-07:00

Press For Truth

BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW

Welcome to Life After The Singularity ... Ruined by Legislation (Satire)

2012-05-16T17:16:00.001-07:00

Activist Post

What will "life" be like after The Singularity is reached and the human mind can be uploaded to the Internet within a framework dominated by new copyright laws and cybersecurity measures? This video presents a humorous look at the consequences. Although, as we face legislation like CISPA, which effectively will merge all of the draconian elements of the War on Piracy seen in SOPA and PIPA with the power of the Pentagon and NSA to conduct surveillance and wage the War on Terror over the Internet, any laughter is likely to take on a nervous tone.

H/T - Singularity Hub

BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW

Not in My Backyard: Neocons Worried About Drones?

2012-05-16T16:59:00.001-07:00

Nicholas West
Activist Post

After Congress decided to formerly welcome drones to America, the FAA has announced that it will begin to integrate drones into American skies. Corporate media is finally beginning to address the unprecedented dangers of bringing drone tech into America.

In the first video, arch Neocon Charles Krauthammer espouses decidedly Libertarian concerns. He even invokes the Founding Fathers' warning about having standing armies on American soil. Compare his comments with those of a constitutionalist like Judge Andrew Napolitano in the second video. The two make a point of agreeing that the first American who shoots a drone out of the sky will become a hero. We know that DHS has turned its focus from Al Qaeda to homegrown extremists, and would probably relish such an act of "domestic terror." Is this a clever way for Neocons to incite a situation where the wider use of drones would become acceptable under an Executive Order issued during a "time of rebellion" as Napolitano alludes to? Or is this genuine concern that their militarism is spiraling out of control? Or something else entirely? Please leave your comments below.

BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW

US Officially Arming Extremists in Syria

2012-05-16T14:45:00.003-07:00

Denied no longer, US officials admit US-Saudi cash & logistical support arming terrorists in Syria.

image source

Tony Cartalucci, Contributor
Activist Post

Recently reported in "Brookings Announces Next Move in Syria: War," it was stated that "by the US policy think-tank Brookings Institution's own admission, the Kofi Annan six-point peace plan in Syria was merely a ploy to buy time to reorganize NATO's ineffective terrorist proxies and provide them the pretext necessary for establishing NATO protected safe havens from which to carry out their terrorism from." It was also examined in detail, how in 2007, US, Saudi, and Israeli officials admitted they were creating a militant front of extremists for the sole purpose of causing the destabilization of Syria we see today, and ultimately overthrowing the Syrian government.

It was noted how these extremist militants had direct ties to Al Qaeda.

Now it is fully admitted that weapons, cash, and logistical support is indeed being provided to terrorist forces in Syria by the United States, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and other Gulf States. This, despite a current UN ceasefire the West has continuously berated the Syrian government for violating, indicates that indeed reorganizing, rearming, and redeploying NATO's terrorist proxies is complete, and another round of destructive violence has begun.

In the Washington Post's article, "Syrian rebels get influx of arms with gulf neighbors’ money, U.S. coordination," not only is this admitted, but claims made by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad have been confirmed that Syria's historically violent Muslim Brotherhood, stated in 2007 by Seymour Hersh as being a direct proxy of US-Saudi-Israeli funding and support, is also directly arming and funding contingents of extremists committing acts of terror across Syria.

Areas across Syria that have until now been portrayed as centers for "pro-democracy" protests, racked by violence depicted as "repression" by Syrian troops, are now admitted by the Washington Post to be areas where "material is being stockpiled." This includes the flashpoint city of Idlib on the Turkish-Syrian border, in the suburbs of Damascus, and along Syria's border with Lebanon. And again, in 2007, Seymour Hersh revealed that the US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia had planned to array extremists along Syria's border to commit the very violence now being admitted by the Post today.

The Washington Post openly admits that these weapons, supplies, cash and support, provided by the US and Saudi Arabia are directly responsible for the increased violence in Syria, in the midst of a ceasefire the West has attempted to disingenuously use to defame the Syrian government, hamper its ability to restore order, and indeed, rearm, reorganize, and redeploy their terrorist proxies to begin another attempt at violent foreign-backed regime change:

The effect of the new arms appeared evident in Monday’s clash between opposition and government forces over control of the rebel-held city of Rastan, near Homs. The Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said rebel forces who overran a government base had killed 23 Syrian soldiers. -Washington Post, May 16, 2012

The Post also admitted that Washington, again, in the midst of a UN ceasefire, was attempting to trigger yet more violence, this time in areas controlled by Syria's Kurds who have remained out of the predominately foreign-backed conflict.

Paradoxically, the US and Gulf State military support being funneled into Syria to purposefully flare violence in the midst of a UN ceasefire, is continuing even after the Pentagon has admitted Al Qaeda is present and active in Syria, this after terrorist groups claimed responsibility for a series of bombings that have killed mostly civilians.

And in the midst of this admitted attempt to increase violence and chaos, the Washington Post also declared that NATO-member Turkey would be pressured to invoke Article IV of the NATO Charter, allowing NATO to militarily intervene to "stop" violence they openly admit they are creating. Unlike previous conflicts - the US' admission is not a ham-handed obfuscation of the their intentions, but an open declaration of intent to provoke a war of aggression - a Nuremberg offense for all involved. In fact, direct parallels between Adolf Hitler's September 1938 campaign of destabilization in Czechoslovakia, and NATO's current destabilization of Syria have been made by noted geopolitical analysts.

Images: The "Henry Jackson Society" and the "Brookings Institution" are just two of many similar "think-tanks" with identical members and identical corporate sponsors. These are the authors of NATO's increasingly long list of war crimes, including those authorized by US President George W. Bush, now officially a convicted war criminal. While Bush's conviction currently lacks a realistic means of arresting and sentencing him, if we know the corporations and institutions that craft the policies used by Bush to commit his crimes, we the people, ourselves, can start by "imposing sanctions" on these special interests with boycotts. (click images to enlarge)

A historical conviction handed down by the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission, finding former-US President George W. Bush guilty of war crimes, sets a precedent to be used against those committing war crimes today, and of course a model to be expanded upon, including methods and official calls to impose sanctions on organizations and institutions supporting leaders committing war crimes, including both the policy think tanks engineering the war crimes and boycotting and banning the corporations and institutions funding these think-tanks. This does not require an act by the UN, or your national government. You can begin boycotting these corporations today and thus begin undermining the authority and impunity from which they operate.

Tony Cartalucci's articles have appeared on many alternative media websites, including his own at Land Destroyer Report. Read other contributed articles by Tony Cartalucci here.

BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW

Former President Bush and Administration Guilty of War Crimes

2012-05-16T10:42:00.001-07:00

Dees Illustration

Susanne Posel, Contributor
Activist Post

Last week, in a trial held in Kuala Lumpur, former US President George W. Bush and several of his key administration members were convicted of war crimes.

The tribunal was led by retired Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad. After the guilty verdict reached by five senior judges was delivered, Mahathir Mohamad said: “Powerful countries are getting away with murder.”

After a week filled with testimony, personal statements and deliberations, the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission, a five-person panel announced their guilty verdict. This verdict will be filed with the Commission’s Register of War Criminals to be made public record.

Among George W. Bush were named:

• Dick Cheney, former Vice President
• Donald Rumsfeld, former Secretary of Defense
• Legal advisors: Alberto Gonzales, David Addington, William Haynes, Jay Bybee and John Yoo

During the trial, witnesses gave accounts of torture carried out by US soldiers and contracted mercenaries in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Moazzam, ex-Guantanamo detainee and Abbas Hameedi, an Iraqi woman testified as to the torture they personally endured at Abu Ghraib.

The prosecution proved that Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld acted together to methodically torture prisoners as an established standard. Others who were working for the Bush administration included CIA officials, lawyers and military commanders that were following senior advisors orders.

To achieve their goals, the most suffering was inflicted against prisoners captured. The “intelligence” from those tortured was highly suspect and completely unreliable.

Francis Boyle, professor of international law and war crimes expert was in attendance at the trial and part of the prosecution team. Boyle commented: “This is the first conviction of these people anywhere in the world.”

Boyle went on to say that he hoped Bush and Cheney would find themselves in similar trials across the world. “We tried three times to get Bush in Canada but were thwarted by the Canadian Government, then we scared Bush out of going to Switzerland. The Spanish attempt failed because of the government there and the same happened in Germany.”

Boyle made references to the Nuremberg trials, comparing them to the tribunal in Malaysia. Boyle also said that he was nearly certain that the trial was being surveyed by the Pentagon and White House officials.

Professor Gurdial Singh Nijar, who headed the prosecution said: “The tribunal was very careful to adhere scrupulously to the regulations drawn up by the Nuremberg courts and the International Criminal Courts”.

Tan Sri Dato Lamin bin Haji Mohd Yunus Lamin, the president of the tribunal, made the final statements at the end of the trial. Lamin remarked that although the tribunal has no power of enforcement, the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission will submit the verdict to the Chief Prosecutor of the Internaitonal Criminal Court and the UN and their Security Council.

Lamin would like to see the verdict be made public and publicized “accordingly” for the entire world to know.

Moazzam Begg is now the director for a London-based human rights advocacy group called the Cageprisoners. Begg was happy with the verdict and said:

When people talk about Nuremberg you have to remember those tried were all prosecuted after the war. Right now Guantanamo is still open, people are still being held there and are still being tortured there.

Begg remarked about the former and current US presidents that:

If President Bush was the President of extra-judicial torture then US President Barak Obama is the President of extra judicial killing through drone strikes. Our work has only just begun.

RELATED ACTIVIST POST ARTICLES:
America's Torture Doctrine
Another Nuremberg: Intelligence Agencies Employ Physicians to Torture Detainees

Susanne Posel is the Chief Editor of Occupy Corporatism. Our alternative news site is dedicated to reporting the news as it actually happens; not as it is spun by the corporately funded mainstream media. You can find us on our Facebook page .

BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW

World's Prison Capital is Also #1 in For-Profit Prisons

2012-05-16T10:42:00.000-07:00

Joe Wright
Activist Post

The world's prison capital is not the United States, per capita, although it leads the world for its overall prison population. One state far outdoes America itself and incarcerates nearly double the national average.

First among Americans means first in the world. Louisiana's incarceration rate is nearly triple Iran's, seven times China's and 10 times Germany's. (Source)

The U.S. prison business has become the essence of predatory corporatism: it privatizes profits and socializes losses. This combination has led to a situation where correctional facilities have very little incentive to correct the behavior of those who reside within their walls, but every incentive to ensure that new bodies arrive as fast as possible, and keep them in a state of indentured servitude.

Naturally, this is exactly what is happening in Louisiana, as the vast majority of inmates are not housed in state-run prisons, but in those owned by private corporations. The social fallout has been profound.

Corrections Corporation of America has led the charge toward creating a sound business model for those who would profit from crime and punishment since it won the first private prison contract from Tennessee in 1984. CCA has expanded nicely, recently submitting letters to 48 states with an offer to buy their prisons: "In exchange ... for a 20-year management contract, plus an assurance that the prison would remain at least 90 percent full." (Source)

America already holds 25% of the world's prison population, with the number of these prisoners held in private prisons rising dramatically over the past 10 years from 2,000 housed in 5 private prisons, to more than 60,000 housed in 100. It is a number expected to rise to 360,000 prisoners over the next decade. (Source) Moreover, as the economy declines, there has even been a revival in debtors prisons, formally abolished in the early 1800s. Perhaps more troubling is the heightened criminalization of children for behavior which previously was considered merely a nuisance, not something worthy of handcuffs and the big house.

A human product clearly has been created and fostered by a system which values the worth of potential inmates as greater than their worth as free human beings. This has led to a captive population that can be put to work creating goods for a multitude of industries for as little as 25 cents per hour, effectively creating a growing resurgence in open slavery; all while a misinformed majority believe that more people under lock and key translates to safer neighborhoods, towns and cities.

The above trends all have converged in Louisiana, and yet have dispelled the myth that more prisoners leads to more safety for the wider society at large. In a comprehensive article for the Times-Picayune of New Orleans, Cindy Chang writes:

In the past two decades, Louisiana's prison population has doubled, costing taxpayers billions while New Orleans continues to lead the nation in homicides.

This is the exact type of incongruent outcome that has been noted across the board even economically, where the supposed cost-saving measures of a streamlined private enterprise should theoretically trump bloated state government bureaucracy. However, this is only to assume that we are looking at a real free-market system. What we see instead is collusion between state governments that respond to the lobbying efforts of a prison industry dominated by select mega corporations.

The states write the legislation that paves the way for more criminals to be guaranteed lengthier stays within prison walls where corporate profits can be reaped for shareholders. It is the worst of both worlds.

And for those who care about the treatment and rehabilitation of the inmates who are set for release back into society, the belief that private industry can do a better job is a belief that also falls flat. Despite state-run prisons being generally short-staffed, overcrowded, and underfunded, Louisiana's per-day value on its human commodity within the private prison model is $24.39 - far lower than its state-run counterpart. A focus on maximizing profits has led to a bare-bones, near concentration-camp existence where cost cutting is paramount. This has tremendous social implications, as private prison inmates are mostly serving non-life terms for mostly non-violent offenses, whereas state prison inmates are the most violent, often serving life terms:

In a cruel irony, those who could benefit most are unable to better themselves, while men who will die in prison proudly show off fistfuls of educational certificates.

(...)

Their facilities are cramped and airless compared with the spacious grounds of state prisons, where inmates walk along outdoor breezeways and stay busy with jobs or classes.

In addition to the above, the history that Chang documents of how Louisiana became the world's prison capital through the expansion of the for-profit prison network perfectly illustrates the corporatist mindset:

In the early 1990s, when the incarceration rate was half what it is now, Louisiana was at a crossroads. Under a federal court order to reduce overcrowding, the state had two choices: Lock up fewer people or build more prisons.

It achieved the latter, not with new state prisons -- there was no money for that -- but by encouraging sheriffs to foot the construction bills in return for future profits. The financial incentives were so sweet, and the corrections jobs so sought after, that new prisons sprouted up all over rural Louisiana.

The national prison population was expanding at a rapid clip. Louisiana's grew even faster. There was no need to rein in the growth by keeping sentencing laws in line with those of other states or by putting minor offenders in alternative programs. The new sheriffs' beds were ready and waiting. Overcrowding became a thing of the past, even as the inmate population multiplied rapidly.

As we see the nation's prison populations swell, and observe the concurrent swelling of corporate prison bottom lines, we must look at the ramifications to judge if this is a model worth supporting.

With the highest percentage of its citizens locked up in a for-profit system, Louisiana should be a safe, economically prosperous state if this model is effective in aggressively removing all of the bad elements that threaten society. What we see, however, is the exact opposite: Louisiana is one of the most poverty stricken, uneducated, and dangerous states in the union. The next generation is effectively punished as well by having one or both parents locked away, while the funding needed to potentially break the cycle is diverted toward building more lockups:

Louisiana spends about $663 million a year to feed, house, secure and provide medical care to 40,000 inmates. Nearly a third of that money -- $182 million -- goes to for-profit prisons, whether run by sheriffs or private companies.

'Clearly, the more that Louisiana invests in large-scale incarceration, the less money is available for everything from preschools to community policing that could help to reduce the prison population,' said Marc Mauer, executive director of The Sentencing Project, a national criminal justice reform group.

A nation that still purports to be the Land of the Free simply cannot continue to say that slogan with a straight face when it has literally invested in slavery. A predatory system -- even if some believe it only preys on other predators -- can only lead to a ruined social landscape like that of Louisiana; a state which should be more properly viewed as a canary in the coal mine for what lies in wait for the rest of America should it fully embrace the monetary value of a prison society.

You can find Cindy Chang's must-read article with additional graphics here:
http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2012/05/louisiana_is_the_worlds_prison.html

Read other articles by Joe Wright HERE.
You can help support this information by voting on Reddit HERE.

BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW

Money Center Banks and Stricter Financial Oversight

2012-05-16T10:33:00.003-07:00

James Hall, Contributor
Activist Post

Once again, the practices of the "Too Big to Fail" banksters bring the financial money machine to the brink. The J.P. Morgan derivative losses and trading gambles by their "London Whale" demonstrates business as usual in the murky world of risk distortion. Even the vexing progressive Robert Reich makes an accurate assessment for breaking up the big banks and the resurrecting of Glass-Steagall.

Word on the Street is that J.P. Morgan’s exposure is so large that it can’t dump these bad bets without affecting the market and losing even more money. And given its mammoth size and interlinked connections with every other financial institution, anything that shakes J.P. Morgan is likely to rock the rest of the Street.

Since then, J.P. Morgan’s lobbyists and lawyers have done everything in their power to eviscerate the Volcker rule — creating exceptions, exemptions, and loopholes that effectively allow any big bank to go on doing most of the derivative trading it was doing before the near-meltdown.

The prospects for constructive oversight and judicious safeguards on the money center banks; while, desperately needed, are highly unlikely for enactment. The existing administrative regulation is more about process than accountability. The notice - S.E.C. Opens Investigation Into JPMorgan's $2 Billion Loss, admits to a limited scope - "Regulators are investigating potential civil violations".

An important avenue for the S.E.C. investigation, the people said, is the firm's accounting methods relating to the trades. Investigators could take a close look at a measure known as value-at-risk. The company disclosed earlier this year that it changed the way it calculates the metric, which may have masked some of the risk surrounding this trade. On a conference call Thursday, Mr. Dimon said the firm had reverted to the old way of measuring value-at-risk.

The sociable regulatory atmosphere that turns the revolving door relationship of Wall Street and government regulation is so chummy that only insignificant fines are levied, when the major money center banks gets caught with their hands in the cookie jar. Earnest and comprehensive restructuring of the financial system is impossible as long as the banksters dictate economic policy to their favorite legislative protégés. Fox News identifies the inadequate measures of legislation heralded as a response to prevent future bank bailouts.

Enhanced oversight of derivatives was a pillar of the 2010 financial overhaul law, known as Dodd-Frank, but the implementation has been delayed repeatedly and will not take effect until the end of this year at the earliest.

Both Senator Dodd and Congressman Frank took their retirement after the passage of this banker-friendly diversion from reinstating a total separation of commercial banking from speculative investment banking swap instruments.

J.P. Morgan Chase, the dominating financial house behind the Federal Reserve, prescribes a coordinated government policy in every political administration. Goldman Sachs best known for supplying senior treasury officials, as Morgan keeps herd on the Fed’s Open Market Committee.

The Washington Times publishes an article, Avast, Wall Street: At J. P. Morgan, there be whales!, and describes practices in the pirate culture that ignores any reform or institutional restraint.

From 2008 onward, taxpayers have been bailing out Jamie Dimon’s J.P. Morgan, along with Citibank, Bank of America, etc., etc., because they’re 'too big to fail.' And here goes JPM four years later indulging in the same activities with the same abandon that caused at least two of their major peers to fail in 2008.

'The London whale' and his ilk have a distinctly buccaneering attitude out there that should have been tempered by the events of 2008 and the following years. But they haven’t learned a thing, apparently.

Even a casual observer of the unstable international banking environment, knows that the banks game the system at every opportunity. The certified cynic does not need additional proof that the central banks are more important in shaping an unending economic crisis that, favor the "Too Big to Fail" money banks, than governments. If the federal government can enact the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act to close the door on offshore banking accounts, in theory meaningful revamping of commercial and investment banking should be possible.

Notwithstanding, in practice the banks refuse to allow legislation that strips away the risky trading wagers that contribute to obscene short term paper gains, while sticking the taxpayer and government bail outs when losses accrue.

Mr. Reich continues with a valuable insight on just how the fiasco operates.

And now — only a few years after the banking crisis that forced American taxpayers to bail out the Street, caused home values to plunge by more than 30 percent and pushed millions of homeowners underwater, threatened or diminished the savings of millions more, and sent the entire American economy hurtling into the worst downturn since the Great Depression — J.P. Morgan Chase recapitulates the whole debacle with the same kind of errors, sloppiness, bad judgment, excessively risky trades poorly-executed and poorly-monitored, that caused the crisis in the first place.

Is it possible to save the international financial system from its own greed and high-risk betting patterns?

From all empirical evidence and from the best business advice available, chasing the debt bubble in an attempt to make computer-generated returns is a fool’s mission. Presently, profits clear depositing banks because governments devalue their currencies and pump fresh liquidity that add to the balance sheets of money-centered banks, to keep them solvent by increasing accumulative debt.

Breaking up the oversized behemoths because whales are feeding on a red tide of poison is the rational response to continued excess. Simply put, governments are forfeiting their sovereignty to banking ministers who are beholden to the fractional reserve central banking model.

Since it is a matter of time before a financial crisis becomes uncontainable, the judicious alternative is to abandon the entire premise that banking is a debt creation scheme. Any discussion that rejects this axiom is doomed to failure. Coherent oversight means designing a financial system that restricts speculation, leverage and mad risk by requirements of elevated secured capitalization.

Original article archived here

James Hall is a reformed, former political operative. This pundit's formal instruction in History, Philosophy and Political Science served as training for activism, on the staff of several politicians and in many campaigns. A believer in authentic Public Service, independent business interests were pursued in the private sector. Speculation in markets, and international business investments, allowed for extensive travel and a world view for commerce. James Hall is the publisher of BREAKING ALL THE RULES. Contact batr@batr.org

BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW

Dispatches From a Dissident -- Articles From the Infowar

2012-05-16T09:15:00.002-07:00

BUY HERE

Activist Post

Activist Post writer, Brandon Turbeville, has just released his fourth book: Dispatches From a Dissident: Articles From the Infowar, Vol. 1.

Brandon is known for his detailed research in the area of Codex Alimentarius, which was the subject of his first book. His second book, 7 Real Conspiracies presented the documented facts about the overall global agenda of control. In Five Sense Solutions he outlined practical, real-world strategies for maintaining personal freedom and for restoring the Republic.

Now Brandon has issued a collection of more than 50 articles spanning from 2002 to mid-2011, which offers a key insight into the evolution of both a writer and an activist.

The collection begins with Turbeville's very first published article speaking out against the USA PATRIOT Act, and continues to his more recent work published with alternative media outlets such Infowars and Activist Post.

This collection contains a wide range of concepts dealing with the financial collapse, healthcare, war, natural health, world government, civil liberties, and many other topics. Turbeville's work is supported by his trademark heavy research and citation while always keeping the big picture in clear view.

It has been said before that the majority of modern warfare is fought with information. This new book is a collection of dispatches from that war. Articles From the Infowar contains 395 pages of concise documentation and analysis, which makes it the perfect tool to help wake-up friends and family, as well as your local leaders and politicians. It also serves as a reminder to those who are "awake" of how fast the full-spectrum control grid has advanced, and how important it is that we work even harder to oppose all that it represents.

It has never been truer that all it takes for evil to prevail is for good people to do nothing. We are convinced that those with good intentions will be moved to action by Dispatches From a Dissident.

BUY Dispatches From a Dissident HERE ($19.95)

BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW