This Month
| December 2008 |
| Sun |
Mon |
Tue |
Wed |
Thu |
Fri |
Sat |
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
Check Email
Domains, Hosting, & Blogging service from
Dot Secret Domains
|
Thursday, December 25
THE ONE PARTY SYSTEM..THE ZIONIST JEW PARTY
by
Contra 666
on Thu 25 Dec 2008 06:24 AM PST
[Yeah, CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN] 23 Dec 2008 Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has asked most Bush administration political appointees except those targeted for dismissal to stay on in the Pentagon until replaced by the Obama administration in the coming months. Geoff Morrell, Pentagon press secretary, confirmed that Mr. Gates wants to retain most political appointees. He said the policy of keeping so many holdover officials is unusual for a transition from a Republican to Democratic administration.
And the winner is ... the JEW lobby !!! They're all here - and they're all ready to party. Barack Obama and his Mossad Zionist JEW handler Rhom Emanuel and the new Jew crew awaiting their part in running the country for Israel.House speaker Nancy Pelosi. Most US senators and virtually half of the US Congress. Vice President Dick Cheney's wife, Lynne. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Embattled Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. And a host of Jewish and non-Jewish political and academic heavy-hitters among the 7,000 participants. Such star power wattage, a Washington version of the Oscars, is the stock in trade of AIPAC - the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the crucial player in what is generally known as the Israel lobby and which holds its annual Policy Conference this week in Washington at which most of the heavyweights will deliver lectures. Few books in recent years have been as explosive or controversial as The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy, written by Stephen Walt from Harvard University and John Mearsheimer from the University of Chicago, published in 2007. In it, professors Walt and Mearsheimer argued the case of the Israeli lobby not as "a cabal or conspiracy that 'controls' US foreign policy", but as an extremely powerful interest group made up of Jews and non-Jews, a "loose coalition of individuals and organizations tirelessly working to move US foreign policy in Israel's direction". Walt and Mearsheimer also made the key point that "anyone who criticizes Israeli actions or says that pro-Israel groups have significant influence over US Middle East policy stands a good chance of being labeled an anti-Semite". Anyone for that matter who "says that there is an Israeli lobby" also runs the risk of being charged with anti-Semitism. All the candidates in the House say yeah Republican presidential candidate McCain is opening this year's AIPAC jamboree; Clinton and Obama are closing it on Wednesday. Walt and Mearsheimer's verdict on the dangerous liaisons between presidential candidates and AIPAC remains unimpeachable: "None of the candidates is likely to criticize Israel in any significant way or suggest that the US ought to pursue a more evenhanded policy in the region. And those who do will probably fall by the wayside." Take what Clinton said in February at an AIPAC meeting in New York: "Israel is a beacon of what's right in a neighborhood overshadowed by the wrongs of radicalism, extremism, despotism and terrorism." A year before, Clinton was in favor of sitting and talking to Iran's leadership. And take what Obama said in March at an AIPAC meeting in Chicago; no reference at all to Palestinian "suffering", as he had done on the campaign trail in March 2007. Obama also made it clear he would do nothing to alter the US-Israeli relationship. No wonder AIPAC is considered by most members of the US Congress as more powerful than the National Rifle Association or the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations. AIPAC has explicit Zionist roots. The founder, "Si" Kenen, was head of the American Zionist Council in 1951. The body was reorganized as a US lobby - the American Zionist Committee for Public Affairs - in 1953-4, and then renamed AIPAC in 1959. Under Tom Dine, in the 1970s, it was turned into a mass organization with more than 150 employees and a budget of up to US$60 million today. Dine was later ousted because he was considered not hawkish enough. The top leadership - mostly former AIPAC presidents - is always more hawkish on the Middle East than most Jewish Americans. AIPAC only dropped its opposition to a Palestinian state - without endorsing it - when Ehud Barak became Israeli prime minister in 1999. AIPAC keeps a very close relationship with an array of influential think-tanks, like the American Enterprise Institute, the Center for Security Policy, the Hudson Institute, the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, the Middle East Forum, the The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) and the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Sprinkled neo-cons in these think-tanks can be regarded as a microcosm of the larger Israel lobby - Jews and non-Jews (It's important to remember that Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, David Wurmser and five other neo-cons drafted the infamous "A Clean Break" document to Benjamin Netanyahu in 1996 - the ultimate road map for hardcore regime change all over the Middle East.) The house that AIPAC built AIPAC in the US Congress is a rough beast indeed. Former president Bill Clinton defined it as "stunningly effective". Former speaker of the House of Representatives Newt Gingrich called it "the most effective general-interest group across the entire planet". The New York Times as "the most important organization affecting America's relationship with Israel". Embattled Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, before his involvement in a corruption scandal, said. "Thank God we have AIPAC, the greatest supporter and friend we have in the whole world." AIPAC maintains a virtual stranglehold over the US Congress. Critics of the Israel lobby other than Walt and Mearsheimer also contend that AIPAC essentially prevents any possibility of open debate on US policy towards Israel. Compare it with a 2004 report by the Pentagon's Defense Science Board, according to which "Muslims do not hate our freedom, but rather they hate our policies". AIPAC should not be crossed. It rewards those who support its agenda, and punishes those who don't. In the end, it's all about money - specifically campaign contributions. From 2000 to 2004, according to the Washington Post, AIPAC honchos contributed an average of $72,000 each to campaigns and political committees. For pro-AIPAC politicians, money simply pours from all over the US. Every member of the US Congress receives AIPAC's bi-weekly newsletter, the Near East Report. Walt and Mearsheimer stress that Congressmen and their staff "usually turn to AIPAC when they need info; AIPAC is called upon to draft speeches, work on legislation, advise on tactics, research, collect co-sponsors and marshal votes". Hillary Clinton has learned long ago she should not cross AIPAC. Clinton used to support a Palestinian state in 1998. She even embraced Suha Arafat, Yasser's wife, in 1999. After much scolding, she suddenly became a vigorous defender of Israel, and years later wholeheartedly supported the 2006 Israeli war against Hezbollah in Lebanon. Clinton may have gotten the bulk of Jewish American donations for her 2008 presidential campaign. Rice also learned about facts on the ground. She tried to restart the eternally moribund "peace process" when visiting the Middle East in March 2007. Before the trip, she got an AIPAC letter signed by no less than 79 US senators telling her not to talk to the new Palestinian unity government until it "recognized Israel, renounced terror and agreed to abide by Palestinian-Israeli agreements". AIPAC and Iraq It has become relatively fashionable for some members of the Israeli lobby to deny any involvement in the build-up towards the war on Iraq. But few remember what AIPAC executive director Howard Kohr told the New York Sun in January 2003: "Quietly lobbying Congress to approve the use of force in Iraq was one of AIPAC's successes over the past year." And in a New Yorker profile of Steven Rosen, AIPAC's policy director during the run-up to the war on Iraqi, it was stated that "AIPAC lobbied Congress in favor of the Iraqi war". Compare it with a 2007 Gallup study based on 13 different polls, according to which 77% of American Jews were opposed to the Iraq war, compared to 52% of Americans. Walt and Mearsheimer contend "the war was due in large part to the lobby's influence, and especially its neo-con wing. The lobby is not always representative of the larger community for which it often claims to speak." AIPAC and Iran Now it is Iran time. Walt and Mearsheimer contend "the lobby is fighting to prevent the US from reversing course and seeking a rapprochement with Tehran. They continue to promote an increasingly confrontational and counterproductive policy instead". Not much different from the embattled Olmert, who told Germany's Focus magazine in April 2007 that "it would take 10 days ... and 1,000 Tomahawk cruise missiles" to set back Iran's nuclear program. A measure of Walt and Mearsheimer's power to rattle reputations is that the Zionist establishment had to bring out all its big guns to refute their argument, again and again. Walt and Mearsheimer are no ideologues. They are realpolitik practitioners - very much at ease in the top circles of US foreign policy establishment. Perhaps the most fascinating aspect of their book is that they argued four points that the establishment never mentions in public. Essentially these are: # The US has already won its major wars in the Middle East, against Arab secular nationalism and against communism, and does not need Israel quite as much. # Israel is now so much more powerful than all Arab nations combined that it can take care of itself. # The unconditional support for Israel, regardless of its outrageous deeds, does harm US interests, destabilizes pro-US regimes like Hosi Mubarak's Egypt and King Abdullah's Jordan, and plays into the hands of Salafi-jihadi radicals. # Fighting Israel's wars on its behalf is the surefire way to lead to the collapse of US power in the Middle East. Walt and Mearsheimer also seem not to accept that oil, and rivalry with Russia and China, have also played a crucial part in why the US went to war in Iraq and may attack Iran in the near future. Anyway only insiders as themselves - with unassailable establishment credentials - could have started, at the highest levels of public debate, a serious discussion of extreme pro-Zionism in the public and political life of the US. Meanwhile, the power of the lobby seems unassailable. In March 2007, the US Congress was trying to attach a provision to a Pentagon spending bill that would have required President George W Bush to get congressional approval before attacking Iran. AIPAC was strongly against it - because it viewed the legislation as taking the military option "off the table". The provision was killed. Congressman Dennis Kucinich said this was due to AIPAC. AIPAC made a lot of waves in 2002, when the theme of the annual meeting was "America and Israel standing against terror". Everyone bashed Arafat, Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, the Taliban, Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran and Syria at the same time - just as in PNAC's letter to Bush in April 2002 claiming that Israel was also fighting an "axis of evil" alongside the US. During AIPAC's jamboree in 2004, Bush received 23 standing ovations defending his Iraq policy. Last year, the star was Cheney, making the case for the troop "surge" in Iraq. Pelosi was dutifully present. But it was pastor John Hagee, whose endorsement McCain recently refused, who really made a killing - even though Hagee maintains that "anti-Semitism is the result of the Jews' rebellion against God". On Iran, Hagee definitely set the tone: "It is 1938; Iran is Germany and [President Mahmud] Ahmadinejad is the new [Adolf] Hitler. We must stop Iran's nuclear threat and stand boldly with Israel."
Sunday, December 14
THE JEW SCHEME
by
Contra 666
on Sun 14 Dec 2008 09:47 PM PST
 IT'S A JEW SCHEME PURE AND SIMPLE!! FIRST THEY STEAL 50 BILLION + DOLLARS THEN A JEW JUDGE REFUNDS THE VERY SAME JEW WHO INVESTED IN THAT SAME SCHEME AN ADDITIONAL 50 BILLION + TAX DOLLARS. NOW IF THAT'S NOT THE THEFT OF 100 BILLION TAX DOLLARS THIS ONE WANTS TO KNOW WHAT IS. MAKE NO MISTAKE THE JEW INVESTORS ARE JUST AS GUILTY AS THE LEAD NASDAQ JEW. THE JUDGE SHOULD HAVE HAD THE INVESTORS ARRESTED AS ACCESSORIES TO DEFRAUDING THE AMERICAN TAX PAYER OUT OF FIFTY BILLION DOLLARS. THERE IS NO GUARENTEE OF SUPPORTING GAMBLERS aka WELFARE FOR WALL STREET GAMBLERS!! IT'S TIME WE PLACE OUR FOOT ON THE THROATS OF THIS EVIL RACE OF GREED, CORRUPT CRIMINAL FOR ONCE AND ALL TIME! ADOLPH HITLER WAS ABSOLUTELY CORRECT IN HIS WORDS,ASSESSEMENT, AND ACTIONS CONCERNING THISA VILE RACE......THE JEW! THEIR PLAN SINCE 1897 IS ONGOING TODAY ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THE HOST COUNTRY....UNITED STATES! IT'S TIME WE DEPORT THIS ELEMENT OF CRIME, THIS ELEMENT OF USURY THAT JESUS CHRIST CALLED THE SONS AND DAUGHTERS OF LUCIFER!
CONTRA666.COM 1/5/09
HOW DO AMERICANS COMPETE WITH SLAVE LABOR AND THIRD WORLD WAGES??THINK ABOUT WHAT THE RULING CLASS HAS IN STORE FOR OUR CHILDREN A HARVARD DEGREE ISN'T REQUIRED ONLY COMMON SENSE!!!
BANKRUPT YOUR COUNTRY ENSLAVE THE CITIZENS AS THESE NO GOOD WEALTHY BASTARDS ARE DOING HERE IN AMERICA AT THIS VERY MOMENT!
JUST LOOK AT THE 3 MILLION FORCLOSURES THIS PAST MONTH!!
NOW ...Define a Terrorist!!! Show me or tell me of the next TERRORIST act here in the U.S. of Israel! Is a TERRORIST one who sits with his Cigar in mouth speculating on OIL stocks driving the Gas pump prices out of reach of most Americans? Is a TERRORIST one who.. with Malice exposes a covert American CIA operation of 5000? Is a TERRORIST one who steals American secrets and sells those secrets to RED CHINA and RUSSIA for a PROFIT? Is a TERRORIST one who corners a product like RICE then makes a HUGH profit at the expense of those who can lease afford the Increase.. So the Cavair Crowd can afford Golden Truffels with their Swiss Chocolate?Tell us ignorant Patriotic Americans what is or what makes one a TERRORIST!
(AP)
CFTC Charges Optiver Holding BV, Two Subsidiaries, and High-Ranking Employees with Manipulation of NYMEX Crude Oil, Heating Oil, and Gasoline Futures Contracts
Defendant Caught on Tape and in Email Saying He Would Bully the Market
Washington, DC The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) announced today its case against Optiver Holding BV, two of its subsidiaries, and three employees, charging them with manipulation and attempted manipulation of New York Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX) Light Sweet Crude Oil, New York Harbor Heating Oil, and New York Harbor Gasoline futures contracts during March 2007.
The CFTC filed the civil enforcement action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against Optiver Holding BV, a global proprietary trading fund headquartered in the Netherlands, and two subsidiaries Optiver US, LLC (Optiver), a Chicago-based corporation, and Optiver VOF, a Dutch company. The complaint also names defendants Christopher Dowson (head trader of Optiver), Randal Meijer (head of trading and supervisor of Optiver and Optiver VOF) and Bastiaan van Kempen (Chief Executive Officer of Optiver).
The complaint charges all defendants with 19 separate instances of attempted manipulation involving the aforementioned energy futures contracts on 11 days in March 2007. The complaint further alleges that in at least five of those 19 attempts, defendants successfully manipulated certain of these energy futures contracts, causing artificial prices. In three of those instances, defendants forced futures prices lower, and in two instances, defendants forced futures prices higher. The complaint alleges that defendants profited by approximately $1 million from their manipulative scheme.
According to the complaint, the defendants employed a manipulative scheme commonly known as banging or marking the close. Banging the close refers to the practice of acquiring a substantial position leading up to the closing period, followed by offsetting the position before the end of the close of trading for the purpose of attempting to manipulate prices.
The complaint further charges Optiver and van Kempen with concealing the manipulative scheme and making false statements in response to an inquiry from NYMEX.
These charges go to the heart of the CFTCs core mission of detecting and rooting out illegal manipulation of the markets, said CFTC Acting Chairman Walt Lukken. The CFTCs Enforcement Division aggressively pursues and punishes manipulative activity to bring offenders to justice and deter others from attempting to harm the markets. Although this alleged energy trading scheme lasted only several days in March 2007, even short-term distortions of prices will not be tolerated by the Commission.
The men and women of the Division of Enforcement are working tirelessly to pursue every investigative lead involving potential wrongdoing in the commodities markets, including our nations vital energy markets, said Acting Enforcement Director Stephen Jay Obie. We use every resource available to uncover wrongdoing and to make sure that violators of the Commodity Exchange Act are tracked down and brought to justice.
The Energy Futures Contracts Manipulated by Defendants
The defendants manipulative trading scheme involved three futures contracts listed for trading on the NYMEX: the Light Sweet Crude Oil futures contract (Crude Oil, also referred to as West Texas Intermediate (WTI)), the New York Harbor Heating Oil futures contract (Heating Oil), and the New York Harbor Reformulated Gasoline Blendstock futures contract (New York Harbor Gasoline). The settlement price for the Crude Oil, New York Gasoline, and Heating Oil futures contracts is derived by calculating the volume weighted average prices of futures trades conducted during the closing period for the contracts (from 2:28 to 2:30 p.m.). The volume weighted average price is referred to commonly as the VWAP.
The defendants manipulative scheme involved the Trading at Settlement (or TAS) contracts in Crude Oil, Heating Oil, and New York Harbor Gasoline contracts. TAS contracts are futures contracts, except that the parties determine at the initiation of the contract that the price of the TAS contract will be the days settlement price plus or minus an agreed differential. A TAS contract which has been bought or sold can be offset by trading a futures contract in the opposite direction.
The Manipulative Scheme
The manipulative scheme, in defendant Dowsons words, to bully the market, involved trading a significant volume of futures contracts in Crude Oil, Heating Oil, and New York Harbor Gasoline in the opposite direction of the associated TAS position, before and during the close of the contracts. The defendants goal in trading the large volume of futures was to improperly influence and affect the price of futures contracts in Crude Oil, Heating Oil, and New York Harbor Gasoline. The defendants manipulative scheme was, in the words of defendant Meijer, built on the idea that we can control the VWAP.
As alleged in the complaint, the scheme ultimately permitted defendants to profit regardless of the direction of the market move, provided that Optivers futures trading in the close and before the close was in the opposite direction of the TAS position it had accumulated during the trading day.
For further detail on the allegations, please see the complaint and background documents found in Related Links.
The Commission wishes to thank the U.K. Financial Services Authority and the New York Mercantile Exchange for their assistance with this investigation.
The following CFTC Division of Enforcement staff members are responsible for this matter: Manal Sultan, David Acevedo, David MacGregor, Michael Berlowitz, David Oakland, R. Stephen Painter Jr., Eliud Ramirez, Derek Shakabpa, Judith Slowly, Lara Turcik, Lenel Hickson Jr. and Vincent McGonagle. Michael Penick and Andrei Kirilenko from the CFTCs Office of Chief Economist are also responsible for this matter, as well Dr. Young Hwan Byeon, an Economist from the Korean Financial Supervisory Service.
Last Updated: July 24, 2008
Whistleblowers say congressional cap on dirty dealings would force prices down further
By Christopher J. Petherick
Is the price of oil really determined by decreasing supply and increasing demand, or are financial speculators manipulating the markets for their monetary gain? With the early August drop in prices, speculation about speculators gaming the system makes a lot more sense than supply-and-demand dynamics shaping the market.
Evidence of speculators manipulating prices came in the last week of July when the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), the government regulatory body tasked with policing futures markets, charged
Optiver Holding, two of its subsidiaries and three employees with manipulation and attempted manipulation of crude oil.
According to the CFTC, Optiver was attempting to corner the market on crude. It had amassed large trading positions, said a spokesman for the CFTC, then conducted trades in such a way [as] to bully and hammer the markets.
Optiver just happens to be one of dozens of companies the CFTC is currently investigating.
The vigor with which regulatory bodies are checking up on traders stems from calls in Congress to look into commodity trading firms driving up prices. The bottom line is traders at Optiver had done what many suspect is common practice in oil markets todaythey purchased large numbers of oil futures contracts just before markets closed, forcing prices up. They then sold them quickly to push prices down. Ultimately, the traders profited off the difference.
But in reality, its more complicated that that. Investment dollars have figuratively been flooding commodities markets as hedges against the falling dollar and the volatile stock market. An unusual meeting of the minds between airline executives, consumer advocates and oil experts has redirected attention to the uncanny correlation between a fourfold increase in investment dollars in the oil futures market and a fourfold increase in the price of oil.
Experts chalk up some of the confusion over the role speculation plays in determining oil prices to legislation in 2000, which passed after significant lobbying on the part of energy giant Enron. Known as the Enron loophole, this highly questionable measure enacted by Congress allowed energy securities to be traded outside the New York Mercantile Exchange and without any oversight.
These securities now comprise a portion of the estimated $300 trillion in derivatives that are being traded on global markets. Greed governs in these dangerous speculative games, and the recent mortgage meltdown is a shining example of why bankers and global speculators can never operate on the honor system alone.
So who is right? Are speculators to blame, or is it supply and demand?
On July 11, Tyson Slocum, the director of the energy program at Public Citizen, explained it this way to the House Committee on Agriculture:
There is no question that speculators and unregulated energy traders have pushed prices far beyond the supply-demand fundamentals and into an era of a speculative bubble in oil markets.
Slocum pointed to firms like Goldman Sachs, which invest in and acquire significant physical oil assets like refineries and pipelines while holding substantial positions in the futures markets. . . . Controlling these assets affords a companys energy trading affiliates an insiders peek into the physical movements of energy products unavailable to other energy traders.
They can then game the system legally, reaping huge profits for themselves and their clients and sticking the American public with the tab.
So how much of the $100-plus cost of a barrel of oil is directly related to speculative forces? Speculators can buy up large amounts of oil and then sell them to each other again and again. A barrel of oil may trade over 20 times before anyone actually touches it. With each trade, the price goes up.
In an open letter to the public, airline executives placed the speculator effect to as much as $30 to $60 per barrel.
Some whistleblowers say they expect prices to drop significantly if Congress puts a cap on speculation. In testimony before Congress, hedge fund manager Michael Masters said that gasoline prices could fall to $2 a gallon if legislators would simply pass a measure like the one proposed by Germanys leaders, which would curb global trading by speculators.
There are a number of bills pending in Congress which would do such a thing. Rep. Bart Stupak (DMich.) recently introduced an updated version of a bill called the PUMP Act, or Prevent Unfair Manipulation of Prices Act.
The measure would close loopholes that facilitate the manipulation and inflation of the price of energy. By closing all of these loopholes, said Stupak, following the introduction of his bill, CFTC would be better able to monitor trades to prevent manipulation and help eliminate the unreasonable inflation of energy prices, helping protect American consumers.
Christopher Petherick is a journalist and publisher based in Maryland. For more information, see his website at www.brandywinehouse.us or write directly to BRANDYWINE HOUSE BOOKS AND MEDIA, P.O. Box 638, Cheltenham, MD 20623.
According to the New York Times, Financial Times, and others, hedge funds and other investors are buying up farms, farmland, fertilizer, grain elevators, shipping equipment and other necessities for producing food.
Given the meltdown in the housing and financial sectors and the weakness in the U.S. economy, large investors figure that everyone has to eat, and so investing in food production is a sure thing.
That means that speculators will drive up food prices.
By owning structure, they mean centralizing control of food in the hands of financial manipulators who have only one crop in mind: CONTROLLING US AND FAT PROFITS!!
|
|
