Issuu on Google+

Bankster Globalists Are the Real “True Alpha Males” by Kurt Nimmo | | May 27, 2014

Blaming "white privilege" for mass shootings ignores threat of real enemy -- a predatory financial elite Over the weekend the usual venues pushing the progressive agenda took the Elliot Rodger shooting to the next level and concluded the root cause for this sort of violence is white privilege and misogyny. Liberal commentators have devised a new term, “aggrieved entitlement,” to explain what normally would be characterized as psychopathy. “At the risk of getting too existentialist, I’d like to propose a very simple and elegant explanation for not only school shootings but a host of other barbaric acts in recent years: White men are having a crisis of both aggrievement and entitlement,” writes William Hamby. As a prime example of this theory, Hamby points to the scripted media sideshow the establishment passes off as political life in America. “One need only look at the 2012 election season to see less brutal but equally mind-numbing examples of white men going mad because they are losing their power,” he writes. White men, Hamby explains, turn to violence when “they are no longer the kings of their own private castles, rulers of all they survey.” He offers Adam Lanza as an example. Lanza is a figure sketchy as the blurry and grainy photos of him published by the media following the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary. Lanza, if we can believe the official narrative, suffered from serious mental illness. His alleged shooting spree had nothing to do with a politically charged sense of aggrievement, loss of social status, racism, sexism or misogyny. The Washington Post reported “we still know next to nothing about” Lanza, a young man few if any knew, who might have “been a ghost” who

“lived on a screen, in the cloud.” He did not write a manifesto or espouse political beliefs. As to be expected, we can find even no shortage of ludicrous political theories on mass murder at Daily Kos, a forum created by a known CIA operative. Chauncey de Vega (not his real name) wrote over the weekend that “white privilege” is in fact a “white pathology” endangering society. “Like Adam Lanza, this would appear to be a case of aggrieved white male entitlement syndrome, one which has led to a murderous and tragic outcome” de Vega explained

after the shooting attributed to Elliot Rodger, the son of a Hollywood director. After Sandy Hook, the anonymous purveyor of the We Are Respectable Negroes blog expanded his racial distillation on violence, which is essentially a modified Marxian theory on class:

Once more the luxury of being white in the United States is the freedom to have your violent deeds be a reflection of a personal failing, as opposed to a cultural or racial one. On a practical level, White privilege is a set of taken for granted and unearned advantages in life. On an abstract level, white privilege also removes certain questions from consideration regarding such matters as social deviancy and crime. As we saw with James Holmes, and now today with Adam Lanza, an unwillingness to ask those hard questions about gun violence, white masculinity, and crime will only continue to hurt all of us across the colorline. In order to maintain the current level of demagoguery and push a political agenda predicated on race and gender, the left is compelled to exploit isolated instances of societal violence. Connecting mass shooting incidents to mental illness – obvious in the case of Elliot Rodger and, from the small amount of information at our disposal, Adam Lanza – is unacceptable for the left because it undermines its ideological approach to societal issues. Chauncey de Vega dismisses the mental illness explanation because it is counterproductive to the theory that most social problems are the result of racism and sexism and the illusory claim skin color affords privilege as it did when W. E. B. Du Bois made his argument in 1935. Minus this outdated or similar predicate, the left is unable to call for further government intervention in social affairs and the creation of preferred classes of people who receive transferred wealth through confiscation at gunpoint. It is unfortunate the left and, conversely, the right do not fully understand the real source of societal violence, violence beyond the reach of mentally ill college students – the predation of an international financial class. Rodger targeted a handful of students. Wall Street, the City of London and the global financial elite, on the other hand, target entire populations, not strictly with guns but primarily through financial manipulation. Poverty, misery, disease and death are engineered by banks through debt. The IMF and World Bank, through loan sharking operations designed to prop up corrupt regimes and control and liquidate valuable natural resources have killed millions through so-called structural adjustment programs. Most of the victims are from the third world and the predators primarily from Europe and the United States. Chauncey de Vega and the race and gender left, however, do not seem to be interested in calling out the crimes of the financial class, and for good reason — much of the left is on the payroll. “More than fifty years ago the [J.P.] Morgan firm decided to infiltrate the Left-wing political movements in the United States,” Carroll Quigley wrote in his book Tragedy and Hope. “This was relatively easy to do, since these groups were starved for funds and eager for a voice to reach the people. Wall Street supplied both. The purpose was not to destroy… or take over but was really threefold: (1) to keep informed about the thinking of Left-wing or liberal groups; (2) to provide them with a mouthpiece so that they could ‘blow off steam,’ and (3) to have a final veto on their publicity and possibly on their actions, if they ever went ‘radical.’” The race and gender left is now “blowing off steam” and may eventually succeed in dismantling the Second Amendment and also institute new schemes to shame and confiscate wealth from middle class white males who are perceived to enjoy “privilege” at the expense of others.

Federal Reserve Admits Truth In Internal Memo: “Prices Continue To Rise Between 3% And 33% by Zero Hedge | May 25, 2014

Memo: "Over the past five years, many of you may have experience product price increases in grocery stores" We are confused: on one hand the Fed is injecting hundreds of billions of liquidity into the market, boosting the S&P to all time highs and making the rich richer (Piketty taking Excel lessons from Rogoff notwithstanding) while the economy remains stagnant because, according to the BLS, inflation is too low, and as everyone knows the biggest lament of the impoverished middle class is that “the value of my dollar isn’t being destroyed fast enough for me to feel confident about the future.” On the other hand, the very same Federal Reserve Bank (of Chicago), just announced that as a result of “prices continuing to increase between 3% and 33%” (!), beginning May 27 it is hiking the prices in its cafeteria. So, clearly prices are rising at a 33% clip due to, how does the IMF put it, lowflation, right? Oh, and harsh weather. From the Chicago Fed, highlights ours Subject: Reserve Center Cafe changes coming Reserve CenterTM Tenants, Due to rising product prices in the past several years, The Reserve Center will increase its prices in the cafeteria effective May 27. Over the past five years, many of you may have experience product price increases in grocery stores. Prices continue to rise between 3% – 33%. For the past eight years, The Reserve Center has been

absorbing these increases. The last overall price increase in The Reserve Center cafeteria took place in 2006, followed by a limited increase on sugar-based products in 2012. For the upcoming price increase, a thorough review of cafÊ items was conducted and, while some prices will remain flat, others will increase to recognize these market increases. The price increase will help The Reserve Center cafeteria continue to maintain high standards and service levels by providing quality products. Another change includes the introduction of new menu program changes to provide greater variety as we continue to refresh the cafeteria menu offerings. In the following months, we will be distributing a survey to obtain feedback on these new menu changes, as well as your food preferences so that we can continue to tailor menu offerings based on input we receive from our customers. Lastly, we’ve reviewed feedback and in response The Reserve Center cafeteria will now close at 1:30 p.m. on Fridays. However, July 11 tahrough Aug. 29 we will close at 1 p.m. as the traffic is lighter due to vacations. Thank you for your continued support of The Reserve Center cafeteria. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago The good news (for Fed employees): as we reported last year, the average annual increase in the salaries of Federal Reserve workers over the past year has been around 13%, so a price hike should be bearable.

There’s No Volatility In The Economy — And That Could Be A Problem by Business Insider | May 23, 2014

A decade ago, the business cycle was an endangered species. Recessions in the rich world had become rare, shallow and short; inflation was predictably low and boring. Economists dubbed this the "Great Moderation" and gave credit for it to deft macroeconomic management by central banks. Such talk, naturally, ended abruptly with the financial crisis. But obituaries of the Great Moderation may have been premature. Since America emerged from recession in 2009, its growth, although low, has been as stable as during the Great Moderation’s heyday, from the early 1980s to 2007, judging by the volatility of quarterly gross domestic product (see chart) and monthly job creation. That, in turn, has pushed the gyrations of stock and bond prices to their lowest levels since 2007. The trend is less pronounced outside America, but economists at Goldman Sachs nonetheless find that precrisis levels of tranquillity have returned in Germany, Japan and Britain. It is the absolute level of growth that has been disappointing. In America it has averaged a little over 2% for the past four years, and fell almost to zero in the first quarter of this year. This looks like a temporary setback due to bad weather, but the Federal Reserve’s hopes for an acceleration to nearly 3% seem likely to be dashed once again. The euro zone, meanwhile, grew by just 0.8% in the first quarter (on an annualised basis), half the pace economists had predicted, but perfectly in line with the average of the previous nine months.

Strategists at Société Générale, a bank, note that since 1969 the S&P 500 has dropped by 1% or more 27 days a year on average; in the past 12 months, there have been only 19 such days. This docility has increased investors’ appetite for both stocks and bonds, which helps explain why the stockmarket hovers near record highs and yields on Treasuries near historic lows. Many of the causes suggested for the original moderation do not apply to its revival. Just-in-time inventory management had enabled firms to adjust stocks more judiciously. Instead of rising and falling together, inventories and sales moved in opposite directions, tamping down a once significant source of swings in output. But Jason Furman, Barack Obama’s chief economist, notes that since 2008 inventories and sales have been moving in tandem again. Another theory was that easier access to credit, such as through "cashout" refinancing of mortgages, had made it easier for consumers to keep spending even when their incomes dipped. But since 2008, though credit-card debt and cash-out refinancing have plummeted, consumption has remained stable. A final theory invoked good luck: the world had endured fewer shocks since the early 1980s. But Mr Furman points to several shocks since 2008, including the jump in oil prices when Libya’s exports were disrupted in 2011. That leaves monetary policy. In a paper published in 2001, Olivier Blanchard and John Simon noted that both the level and volatility of inflation fell sharply in the 1980s. Stable inflation meant the Fed was less likely to tighten in the face of supply shocks such as higher oil prices and quicker to ease when recession threatened. This seems to explain why, despite the Fed’s failure to prevent the Great Recession, the Great Moderation endures. Although the prices of energy and food have bounced up and down since 2008, inflation expectations and, until recently, core inflation have fluctuated around 2%, giving the Fed no

reason to raise interest rates. Of course, with short-term interest rates stuck at zero, the Fed has also found it harder to stimulate the economy to combat high unemployment. But it has developed substitutes: "quantitative easing" (the purchase of bonds with newly created money) and "forward guidance" (promises to keep rates at zero for a long time) have held down longterm rates. This has provided some spur to spending and taken much of the guesswork out of predicting interest rates, which explains why bond yields are both so low and so stable. Similarly, the European Central Bank’s promise in 2012 to do whatever it takes to save the euro has brought peripheral European bond yields down dramatically. This also points to a dark side to the moderation. Hyman Minsky, an economist who died in 1996, argued that long periods of stability are ultimately destabilising. When assets are less volatile, buying them with borrowed money seems safer. Financial innovation exploits the demand for leverage with products like subprime mortgages. This briefly enhances stability, by enabling consumers to keep spending even when their incomes take a hit. But the build-up of debt raises the risk of a far more violent crisis and recession--especially if, as now, there is little room for central banks to cut interest rates. Thus the deviation of annual growth from its long-run average is close to historic lows, Mr Furman notes, but the deviation of the growth of the past decade, which takes in the financial crisis, is near historic highs. The big question is whether the return of the Great Moderation has also prompted a return of the sort of risk-taking that produced the crisis. There are troubling signs. Issuance of poorly-rated "junk" bonds has risen sharply, as have loans to already highly indebted firms; former pariahs like Greece can now borrow at single-digit rates. Charlie Himmelberg, an author of Goldman’s report, considers the appetite for leveraged assets rational, since the Great Moderation makes borrowing safer. Any threat of a systemic crisis is far off, he says, because new regulations have made it much harder for banks and investors to lever themselves. But even he concedes, "Eventually, this will lead to no good. If leverage wants to come back to the system, it just does." What Is a Gold Standard? VIDEO BELOW Why Not Print More Money? VIDEO BELOW A History of Economic Booms and Busts VIDEO BELOW Money As Debt I VIDEO BELOW


Bankster Globalists Are the Real “True Alpha Males”