The Bank of International Settlements; The Shadow Government of Central Banks

The article below is an excellent summary of modern central banking and it's involvement with economic wars.  It leaves out some very important facts about its origins, which go back to Hjalmar Schacht, President of the Reichsbank and Minister of Economics under Adolph Hitler.  The BIS was used to handle all the gold and assets stolen from pillaged countries, but I digress.

Written by Bruno de Landevoisin of  the STEALTHFLATION blog.

The Bank for International Settlements, otherwise known as the BIS, should more aptly be named the Bank for International division and domination.  It's clearly an institution with global reach, whose hidden covert purpose is to impose the financial globalist's agenda on all sovereign nation states.  The luminous photo below is of their luxurious Headquarters.

Ten times a year, once a month except in August and October, a small group of well dressed men arrives in Basel, Switzerland. Carrying elegant overnight bags and stylish brief cases, they discreetly check into the Euler Hotel, across from the railroad station.  They come to this quiet city from places as disparate as Tokyo, Paris, Brasília, London, and Washington, D.C., for the regular meeting of the most exclusive, secretive, and powerful supranational club in the world.

Each visiting member has his own office at the club, with secure telephone lines to his home country.  These elite international bankers are fully serviced by a permanent staff of about 300, including chauffeurs, chefs, guards, messengers, translators, stenographers, secretaries, and researchers. Also at their disposal are a brilliant research unit, well equipped medical facility and deep underground bunker, as well as a secluded country club with tennis courts and a swimming pool, a few kilometers outside of Basel.

Undoubtedly, we have all heard of this all important international organization, but how many of us really know much about it, or even understand its intended purpose.  The only thing that I knew about this powerful global entity was that it is often described as the Central Bank of Central Banks.  Clearly, we all need to know more, let's constructively begin with some benign elementary historical background transcribed from Investopedia, and also lay out the venerable institution's specific functions & mission statement, directly from the BIS website itself.

Founding and brief History of the BIS:

 Founded in 1930, the Bank for International Settlements is the oldest global financial institution and operates under the auspices of international law. But from its inception to the present day, the role of the BIS has been ever-changing, as it adapts to the dynamic global financial community and its needs. The BIS was created out of the Hague Agreements of 1930 and took over the job of the Agent General for Repatriation in Berlin. When established, the BIS was responsible for the collection, administration and distribution of reparations from Germany - as agreed upon in the Treaty of Versailles.

After World War II, the BIS turned its focus to the defense and implementation of the World Bank's Bretton Woods System. Between the 1970s and 1980s, the BIS monitored cross-border capital flows in the wake of the oil and debt crises, which in turn led to the development of regulatory supervision of internationally active banks. More recently, it has concentrated its efforts on the global financial stability and capital reserve requirement accords. The BIS has also emerged as an emergency "funder" to nations in trouble, coming to the aid of countries such as Mexico and Brazil during their debt crises in 1982 and 1998, respectively. In cases like these, where the International Monetary Fund is already in the country, emergency funding is provided through the IMF structured program.

The BIS has also functioned as trustee and agent. For example, from 1979 to 1994, the BIS was the agent for the European Monetary System, which is the administration that paved the way for a single European currency. Today, the BIS has become the central bank of central banks. The Bank now represents the interests of nearly all of the world's central bank institutions, and manages a significant share of their reserves, including gold holdings. The organization now serves and presides over 60 central banks worldwide. Accordingly the BIS requires the capital/asset ratio of central banks to be above a prescribed minimum international standard, for the protection of all central banks involved.

In broad outline, the BIS pursues its mission by:

• Promoting discussion and facilitating collaboration among central banks.
• Supporting dialogue with other authorities that are responsible for promoting financial stability.
• Conducting research on policy issues confronting central banks and financial supervisory authorities.
• Acting as a prime counterparty for central banks in their financial transactions.
• Serving as an agent or trustee in connection with international financial operations.   

Now that we are up to speed on the BIS's alleged "raison d'etre", and fully indoctrinated in the organization's whitewashed history, self proclaimed mission statement and assumed functions, let's expose the true nature of this supposedly benign bastion of banking balance.  Trust me, they are anything but the modest measured men of monetary moderation and management they purport to be.  This odious institution is nothing but a conceited cunning cabal of carnivorous cannibals bent on global financial domination, who deftly deploy dreaded debt disbursements the world over. They will stop at nothing to achieve their ends, absolutely nothing.

To fully comprehend the self-serving nature of the BIS, one has to understand that it is an autocratic institution run by a very select group of the highest ranking bankers on the planet, representing both private banking interests, as well as those of the vast worldwide network of central banks that are ultimately owned by those same private commercial & financial interests.  It is important to note that these top flight international bankers have intentionally organized themselves, so as not to be directed by their own national governments for the crucial decisions and actions they take.  In effect, they are a supranational organization, controlled by an elite group of men, who preside over most of the world's financial and monetary systems of exchange which regulate and facilitate most of the globe's commerce.

The supreme inner club is made up of the half-dozen powerful central bankers at the apex of a privately devised international monetary system.  Their dictate, which enshrines the inner club from the rest of the lessor BIS members, is the firm belief that central banks should act independently of their home governments.  Their controlling organization is at the epicenter of global finance, and has inherently become increasingly connected and indispensable over time by design.  A glaring early example of their self-serving grandiosity can be found in their despicable double dealings before the outbreak and during the hostilities of the World Wars.

The following passage, by well-respected financial historian Adam LeBor, details the nefarious activities of Thomas McKittrick, a former president of the BIS:

The BIS was founded in Basel in 1930, where it is still headquartered today. Ostensibly set up as part of the Young Plan to administer German reparations payments for WWI, its real purpose was detailed in its statutes: to “promote the cooperation of central banks and provide additional facilities for international financial operations.” The establishment of the BIS was the culmination of the central bankers’ decades-old dream to have their own bank powerful, independent, and free from interfering politicians and nosy reporters.

Under the terms of the founding treaty, the bank’s assets could never be seized, even in times of war. Most felicitous of all, the BIS was self-financing and would be in perpetuity. Its clients were its own founders and shareholders, the central banks. The BIS, boasted Gates McGarrah, an American banker who served as its first president, was “completely removed from any government or political control.” McKittrick’s involvement with the BIS began in 1931, when he joined the German Credits Arbitration Committee, which adjudicated disputes involving German commercial banks. One of the other two members was Marcus Wallenberg, of Sweden’s Enskilda Bank, who taught McKittrick about the intricacies of international finance. Marcus and his brother Jacob were two of the most powerful bankers in the world. During the war, the Wallenberg brothers used Enskilda Bank to play both sides and harvest enormous profits.

In May 1939 McKittrick was offered the position of president of the BIS, which he readily accepted. As head of the BIS, headquartered in Basel, from 1940 to 1946, McKittrick played a crucial role in abetting Hitler’s war—and, at the same time, in revealing details about his Nazi colleagues to his friends in Washington, D.C. On McKittrick’s watch, the BIS willingly accepted looted Nazi gold, carried out foreign exchange deals for the Reichsbank, and recognized the Nazi invasion and annexation of conquered countries. By doing so, it also legitimized the role of the national banks in the occupied countries in appropriating Jewish-owned assets. Indeed, the BIS was so indispensable to the overall Nazi project that the vice-president of the Reichsbank, Emil Puhl, who was later tried for war crimes, once referred to the BIS as the Reichsbank’s only “foreign branch.” In the closing months of the war, as American GIs fought their way across Europe, McKittrick was arranging deals with Nazi industrialists to guarantee their profits after the Allied victory.

Additionally, the following indictment from Wikipedia:

As a result of Nazi collaboration allegations, at the Bretton Woods Conference held in July 1944, Norway proposed the "liquidation of the Bank for International Settlements at the earliest possible moment". This resulted in the BIS being the subject of a disagreement between the American and British delegations. The liquidation of the bank was supported by other European delegates, as well as the United States (including Harry Dexter White, Secretary of the Treasury, and Henry Morgenthau),[6] but opposed by John Maynard Keynes, head of the British delegation. Fearing that the BIS would be dissolved by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Keynes went to Morgenthau hoping to prevent the dissolution, or have it postponed, but the next day the dissolution of the BIS was approved. However, the liquidation of the bank was never actually undertaken.[7] In April 1945, the new U.S. president Harry S. Truman and the British government suspended the dissolution, and the decision to liquidate the BIS was officially reversed in 1948.

Fast forward to Today.  Would the very same elite banking interests not be behind the destabilization and financing of multiple military conflicts sprouting up all over the globe?  After all, the U.S. just finished squandering over $3 trillion endlessly tussling with a fanatical bunch of burka wearing nomads in the sparse mountains of Afghanistan for well over a decade.  In the end, what, and who the hell was all of that money really for?  Might it be supranational bank financing concerns funneling their central bank issued easy money government treasury funding directly into the military industrial complex.

MENA, after years of relative calm imposed by despotic regimes often legitimized by Western commercial interests, suddenly, all at once, seemingly out of nowhere, rose up in a spontaneous combustion of political awareness, the so called Arab Spring, which has brought as much disillusionment as promise.  What was really behind this?  While Syria, on the other hand, has been in a perpetual state of war due to ISIS insurgents supported by the U.S., Saudi Arabia, and Israel.  Iraq is on the verge of complete disintegration as the same western organized ISIS move in on Baghdad.  Libya is erupting, with American, British and French embassy's being swiftly evacuated.  What gives?  Are all of these simultaneous regional conflicts simply a sheer coincidence? Further war financing requirements perhaps.

The Hamas / Israel connection has certainly duped many, even though it is historical fact that the creation of Hamas itself was funded and supported by covert elements of the Israel government.  Why did Israel put money and arms at the disposal of Muslim extremist groups like Hamas and ISIS, only to enter into brutal conflict with them later?  Again, are the international bankers involved here as well?  Why bother with inflation when you can create DeathFlation!

The Ukraine crisis is only further intensifying after the attack on Malaysian flight MH17. In just the past week, the EU has instituted serious economic and financial sanctions, fighting has become even more fierce in the ethnic Russian speaking regions, and Russia itself has been accused of firing heavy artillery into the war zone. Moreover, the U.S. now claims that Russia has demonstrably violated the terms of the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces treaty.  Astonishingly, assistant Secretary of State, Victoria Nuland recently proudly trumpeted that U.S. sponsored NGOs (Non Governmental Organizations) had spent over $5 billion fomenting political protest on the ground in Kiev, in order to destabilize and ultimately overthrow the former president of Ukraine, Victor Yanukovych.  Again, who or what institution actually facilitated the financing of such an excessive amount of funds, and why?

Is it simply the usual bane of proxy war profiteering which is underway, or is something more sinister also a foot here.  Is the western central bank hegemonic monetary system attempting to further assert itself on the arising and defiant BRICS?  Moreover, since all out military conflict is no longer a viable option, due to assured mutual destruction from imposing nuclear arsenals, another most effective avenue for global domination would be via strategic financial and economic power.  Is this what the international banking cabal is now seizing upon?

A significant example of a BIS sponsored strategic global economic initiative, orchestrated by its self-serving megalomaniac banking power brokers, was its behind the scene’s role in devising and pushing forward the concept for a European Union with a single common currency.   It established a new role for itself in the postwar world, first as the financial mechanism for American efforts to rebuild Europe, and then for the accelerating project of European unification.  Some believe that the trans-national vision of a modern Europe ruled by mandarins in Brussels and Basel was originally hatched and concocted in a secret meeting held at the Bank for International Settlements.

Clearly, the driving force behind the financial engineering ambitions of the elite global bankers at the BIS has always been the same.  Namely; to further establish themselves as the indispensable international financial body, whose ultimate authority supersedes any national jurisdiction, thereby interminably dismantling and diminishing the sovereignty of the individual nation states.  In other words, they consolidate their subjugation of the local citizenry by championing the benefits of economies of scale which only globalization can achieve, and, of course, that only their financial frameworks can administer.

The UN, EU, NAU, IMF, WBC, CFR, NATO, WTO, OECD, WHO, and a myriad other IGOs (Intergovernmental organizations), all use much the same modus operandi as the BIS to expand their dominion.  In the end, it's mostly about their self-seeking interests, entitled importance and institutional aggrandizement.  Throughout history, elite groups of men have always attempted to subjugate the masses, this is no different.  The once magnificent self determined Republic of the United States, for the people of the people, must stop these globalists dead in their tracks, before their self-serving hubris and unrelenting drive for hegemony brings unsuspecting Americans down to their knees.

Carroll Quigley, the renown academic historian, in his monumental tome Tragedy and Hope published in 1966, clearly identified the underlying scheme of this scourge.  Having studied the rise and fall of civilizations, Quigley found the explanation of disintegration in the gradual transformation of social "instruments" into "institutions", that is, transformation of social arrangements functioning to meet real social needs into social institutions serving their own purposes regardless of real social needs.

Many discerning Americans are certainly aware of the prevalence of the false Left/Right paradigm in American politics which is clearly driven by the buying off of politicians via an army of private lobbyists on behalf of avaricious corporate institutions and demanding special interest groups.  There is also a solid case to be made that our multinational banking institutions directly serve to promote this debilitating duplicitous demagoguery.  The once esteemed news networks have also degenerated into a cronyism cesspool of unabashed corporatism, no longer reporting news, but rather dishing out distilled disinformation and various valueless vicissitudes. Institutional disintegration indeed, Mr. Quigley was flat out dead right back in 66'!

Professor Carroll Quigley directed his poignant prescient prose specifically at the Bank for International Settlements:

"The Power of financial capitalism had a far reaching plan, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalistic fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks, which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank sought to dominate its government by its ability to control treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence co-operative politicians by subsequent rewards in the business world."

The ominous premise of this lengthy piece is precisely why the United States should become increasingly alarmed as these globalists continue to extend their supremacy.  Just as the once proud independent self governing sovereign nation states of Europe have become subservient to an autocratic international banking class, which promptly imposed a common currency, and is now actively crafting a fiscal union to complete its ascendancy and authority, the United States also is a prime target in the cross hairs of these very same avaricious financial oligarchs.

Make no mistake, the likes of the BIS, IMF, IFC, OECD and the World Bank are on a maniacal maraudering mission to subvert the existing U.S. monetary system, via a crafty and cunning central bank, in our very own complicit Federal Reserve.

In my view, this is the only valid explanation as to why we are systematically being driven off a fiscal and monetary cliff, almost as if we were preforming a national financial and economic Hari Kari ritual.  At this point, they have mandated a market cataclysm and deliberately determined the dollar's demise. To be sure, the BIS and IMF are waiting in the wings with a new global means of exchange based on an archetype of the presently established SDR mechanism.

Why else would the BIS be stating the following today regarding the FED's current monetary measures?

“The temptation to postpone adjustment can prove irresistible, especially when times are good and financial booms sprinkle the fairy dust of illusory riches. The consequence is a growth model that relies too much on debt, both private and public, and which over time sows the seeds of its own demise. To return to sustainable and balanced growth, policies need to go beyond their traditional focus on the business cycle and take a longer-term perspective – one in which the financial cycle takes centre stage…They need to address head-on the structural deficiencies and resource misallocations masked by strong financial booms and revealed only in the subsequent busts. The only source of lasting prosperity is a stronger supply side. It is essential to move away from debt as the main engine of growth."

Ask yourselves, if Janet Yellen sits on the Board of Directors of the BIS, why have she and all her 21st century predecessors been conducting a brazen, unproven, uncharted and surely precarious monetary policy with complete abandon, that totally contradicts the sage and proven advice, judiciously laid out above, by the very institution which is central to monitoring, regulating and advising on global central bank direction.

Something stinks here, it just doesn't add up. Is our Federal Reserve, whose top leadership also happens to be elite members of the BIS banking cabal club, actually double dealing here?  Setting us up for a great fall, so the financial globalists can come sweeping in to our rescue, installing themselves as our monetary overlords?  Far fetched, you say? Remember, this is well within their past predatory precepts, and typical of their self-serving Modus Operandi!

If  we can't convince you, perhaps the view of billionaire hedge-fund legend Paul Singer will:

We were astounded to learn that the board of the BIS is comprised of none other than the heads of the major central banks of the developed world! Yes – Yellen, Draghi, et al! So, these central bankers are simultaneously failing to tell their respective governments that (1) monetary policy has done enough; (2) monetary policy is causing massive risks and distortions; and (3) political leaders must grab the reins and make structural changes, these same central bankers are authorizing BIS reports that will enable them to say, after the coming multifactor crisis, that they told us about the risks. 

We wonder who from the Fed authorized the report, and why they haven’t shared these harsh views of Fed policy in the FOMC meeting minutes or the endless public speeches by Fed officials. It is duplicitous for the Fed to authorize the views in the BIS report yet keep quiet about them elsewhere. But then, the Fed has never accepted much responsibility for the 2008 crisis, despite its decisions to keep interest rates artificially low for an extended period of time, to do a poor job of regulating the banking system and to abet Fannie and Freddie in their utter irresponsibility. History rhymes. The Fed has created the fuel for another crisis, seems to know it judging by the BIS report, and yet is covering itself with an "I told you so" report from the BIS rather than changing course.

In closing, the following list identifies the current Board of Directors who preside over the Bank for International Settlements today, see if you recognize any of these supranational scoundrels.

The BIS Board of Directors:

Chairman: Christian Noyer, Paris Mark Carney, London Agustín Carstens, Mexico City Luc Coene, Brussels Jon Cunliffe, London Andreas Dombret, Frankfurt am Main Mario Draghi, Frankfurt am Main William C Dudley, New York Stefan Ingves, Stockholm Thomas Jordan, Zurich Klaas Knot, Amsterdam Haruhiko Kuroda, Tokyo Ann Le Lorier, Paris Stephen S Poloz, Ottawa Raghuram Rajan, Mumbai Jan Smets, Brussels Alexandre A Tombini, Brasília Ignazio Visco, Rome Jens Weidmann, Frankfurt am Main Janet L Yellen, Washington Zhou Xiaochuan, Beijing

  The Globalists are indeed on the move...............

The Buttonwood Gathering 2015, Planning for #InclusiveCapitalism

Prince Charles, former US president Bill Clinton, the Bank of England governor Mark Carney and fund managers representing one third of the world’s investable income descended on London on Tuesday on a mission to try to solve capitalism’s current problems.

They will join 250 delegates from 37 countries and 35 business sectors representing assets under management of about $30 trillion (£18 trillion) at the Conference on Inclusive Capitalism, at the Mansion House and Guildhall.

Keynote speaker Lagarde told the conference: "In the past, economists have underestimated the importance of inequality. They have focused on economic growth, on the size of the pie rather than its distribution. Today, we are more keenly aware of the damage done by inequality.

"The recognition of this fact by the conference on inclusive capitalism is incredibly important for the long term prosperous future of all."

Prince Charles, Mr Clinton and Mr Carney will make speeches, along with the managing director of the International Monetary Fund, Christine Lagarde, and Larry Summers, the former US Treasury secretary, who is now a Harvard professor.

Here is part 1:

Financial Capitalism, Bretton Woods II, and George Soros

Sunday, June 22, 2014: Valentin Katasonov, The 4th Media

“The goal is world power”

The expression «Bretton Woods II» is becoming more popular, and everyone has their own understanding of this vague formula. Some are nostalgic for the gold standard, while others would like to return to John Keynes’ idea of creating and introducing a supranational currency like the ‘bancor’, or using the special drawing rights issued in small amounts by the IMF in 1970 for the same purpose.

There are also those who believe that Bretton Woods II will be fundamentally different from the American and British projects discussed in 1944, and that the world should consist of several regional currency zones.

The expert community introduced the idea of a Bretton Woods II at the end of the 20th century. The Reinventing Bretton Woods Committee, headed by a certain Marc Uzan, was set up in 1994 on the back of the conference’s 50 year anniversary.

At an official level, the idea of a Bretton Woods II was first expressed by the Italian Senator Oskar Peterlini. At the height of the 2009 financial crisis, Peterlini officially presented a «Motion for the reorganisation of the international currency system: the new Bretton Woods» to the Italian Senate. The document was approved by a large number of deputies in the upper house.

Although the document mentioned nothing about a return to gold, it pointed out the need to control the issue of money, and the need to link it to real assets and commodities rather than financial assets. Attention was also focused on the fact that the world needs a financial system with fixed (constant) exchange rates and restrictions on the free cross-border movement of venture capital.

At the G20 meetings in Washington in November 2008 and London in April 2009, where ways out of the global financial crisis were discussed, the expression «Bretton Woods II» was also heard more than once.

In the midst of the financial crisis, radical proposals were put forward at G20, G8, G7 and other similar forums on the restructuring of the global monetary and financial system.

There was also talk of the need to convene a global «New Bretton Woods» conference at the UN, where it was expected that a number of important international agreements would be entered into, including: 1) a Global Economic Charter based on the proposals of German Chancellor Angela Merkel; 2) a Global Energy Charter put forward by the leaders of net energy-exporting countries; and 3) major amendments to the UN Charter, including the establishment of a Financial Security Council.

As soon as the threat of the global financial crisis had passed, however, political leaders immediately forgot about the «New Bretton Woods» projects.

At the end of the 20th century, the illusion emerged that the world might become unipolar and be controlled by Washington, and Pax Americana was built under the guise of globalisation. Today, however, Washington is losing its influence in the world, and chances are there will be no repetition of Bretton Woods.

George Soros’ New Bretton Woods

At the same time, it is possible to talk about a new Bretton Woods as the resuscitation of the project put forward by John Keynes 70 years ago that gained little support from those present. The most well-known and open supporter of this Bretton Woods alternative is financial speculator George Soros.

Back in November 2009, at the peak of the global financial crisis, the billionaire announced the preparation of a «New Bretton Woods» conference, and in April 2011, Soros made sure the conference took place. Details about it are few and far between.

Soros paid $50 million to assemble around 200 academics, businessmen and state leaders in New Hampshire under the aegis of his Institute of New Economic Thinking (INET).

The meeting included such well-known figures as the former chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System Paul Volcker, former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, Nobel Laureate and a former vice president of the World Bank Joseph Stiglitz, and renowned economist and director of The Earth InstituteJeffrey Sachs.

Soros’ event at Bretton Woods was as secret as the meeting of the Bilderberg Group. It is known, however, that the event took place under the catchword of Keynesian economics.

The particular role of China as a pole of the world economy and global politics was discussed, along with the need to move to a supranational currency, establish a global emission centre (global central bank), and restructure the global financial system.

George Soros as a mouthpiece of the Rothschild clan

It is well known that George Soros is a protégé of the Rothschilds, their mouthpiece. Through the public statements and actions of this financial speculator, renowned for his scandalous behaviour, it is possible to put together some idea of his bosses.

The Rothschilds are absolute cosmopolitans, they do not hold on to any kind of national identity, unlike the Rockefellers whom America needs, because the printing press and military-industrial complex it is called upon to protect are located in America.

In terms of Soros’ understanding of a global currency, therefore, then it is more likely a combination of a supranational currency and gold.

Soros has repeatedly declared that he sees China as the model for a new global financial order in place of the US. Soros has referred to the US as a burden on the global economy because of the falling dollar, noting the need for a new global currency in the form of the IMF’s special drawing rights.

Soros is sometimes regarded as an advocate of John Keynes’ ideas, but this misguided thinking arises from the fact that Soros is a critic of the market, believing it cannot be a self-regulating mechanism. In truth, Soros is against the state and state regulation.

He is an advocate of regulating the economy by means of major corporations and banks. Such regulation may be supplemented by regulation from supranational bodies. The institutes of the European Union, which Soros also had a hand in creating, may serve as examples of such bodies.

Soros does not like the European Central Bank, the European Commission and other bodies of European integration because they provide some kind of economic efficiency and improve people’s lives; he likes them because they are bringing the death of nation states closer, thus clearing a space for monopolies and banks.

George Soros makes no secret of the fact that he does not like America. Not because it wages destructive wars around the world, or because of the country’s huge social polarisation, or because its prisons contin more than two million people, with a further four or five millions American who were sentenced to imprisonment currently at large because the country does not have enough prisons, or because the US organised an all-out surveillance of every telephone conversation in America.

Soros does not like America because it still retains far too many attributes of a state. This is why Soros was one of Obama’s main sponsors during the pre-election presidential campaign. This also explains what initially seem to be certain illogical decisions and acts of the White House’s current occupant that are troubling the real patriots of America…

Properly speaking, Soros is an advocate of financial capitalism. Exactly the same capitalism that Austrian socialist Rudolf Hilferding, who took financial capitalism to mean bankocracy, or the dictatorship of banks, wrote about a century ago. This model of society is extremely reminiscent of a concentration camp.

While on the subject of Soros, one more Rothschild figure comes to mind – former IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn. Like Soros, he also dislikes America and the American dollar, and is working on reducing the role of the green paper.

Among other things, it is well known that just before military action began against Libya in 2011, Strauss-Kahn met with Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi and gave his support to the idea of introducing a regional currency – the gold dinar.

This naturally displeased those in charge of the Federal Reserve System’s printing presses and served as the reason for the scandalous resignation of Strauss-Kahn and, slightly later, NATO aggression against Libya.

The new world financial order «in a broad cultural context»

The Rothchilds do not like national currencies, which they see as an anachronism of the 20th century; they interfere with the creation of a world government.

In order to get rid of national currencies more quickly, the nation state needs to be destroyed, and to accomplish this, every cultural and moral foundation of society must be undermined as much as possible.

Observing Soros is evidence that the billionaire is promoting the cultural degeneration of mankind. Soros supports the rights of the «oppressed minorities» to abortion, atheism, the legalisation of drugs, sexual enlightenment, euthanasia, feminism, single-sex marriages and so on.

He is in favour of globalisation in all its manifestations, mass immigration, and birth control. He promotes these ideas around the world through his Open Society Institute, which has branches in 60 countries (total expenditure on the institute’s activities is nearly $600 million a year).

There are many other political, financial and media veterans who help Soros with his propaganda work, including the former president of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD),Jacques Attali. The striking similarity between the philosophies of Soros and Attali is astonishing.

Both are cosmopolitans to the core, both put their trust in the organisational role of banks, both fiercely attack what there is left of culture and religion, both talk about the need for a global central bank, a global armed forces and so forth. It feels as if they have a common boss and client.

I do not know whether the conversations that took place at the Mount Washington hotel in April 2011 went beyond the usual agenda of global financial forums, but there is no doubt that the ‘broad-minded’ Soros focussed on destroying the foundations of traditional society.

In his opinion piece published six months before the New Bretton Woods conference, Soros wrote: «Reorganising the world order will need to extend beyond the financial system.»

The billionaire is expressing the world view of his bosses for whom money, finance, exchange rates, gold fixing, securities, loans, derivatives, exchanges and other attributes of the modern financial system are just the means, not the goal.

The goal is world power

Did the CIA and/or IMF Assassinate Kirchner As Threat to All Debtor Nations? #PIGS

I would like to know what the Argentinian people think! Was there an investigation into his death? It could be a coincidence that the IMF had motive and the CIA has a track record.  These things need to be worked out.

Hmm. So far the IMF has failed with Chavez, Morales, and Castro. Need more help?

 The CIA took out the democratically elected leader of Iran and replaced him with a tyrant - the shaw http://www.iranchamber.com/history/coup53/coup53p1.php

 The CIA took out Torrijos in Panama and put in Noriega until he became a liability.http://www.wattpad.com/1240590-cia-hit-list-omar-torrijos-supreme-chief-of-panama?p=1

 The CIA setup Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, traded weapons with Iran with money from the cocaine trade in Latin America (Iran Contra)

And many more...

http://www.trutv.com/conspiracy/assassinations/cia-hits-misses/gallery.html?curPhoto=18

Amplify’d from readersupportednews.org

The Assassination of Nestor Kirchner by the IMF

Wednesday, 05 January 2011 01:08

Kirchner became the President of Argentina in 2002. He stood up to the IMF and refused to impose austerity measures on his people in order to repay the IMF. Because of the effectiveness of his non-austere economic policies, last month, Argentina finished paying off the last of the debt. Kirchner told Oliver Stone the bankers threatened constantly ("siempre") to kill him. People in Spain, Greece, and Ireland were calling on their governments to follow Kirchner's lead, and reject "austerity". There is every reason to think that the IMF bankers also threatened to murder the Prime Ministers of these countries, all off whom knuckled under to the IMF in the days after Kirchner's sudden and unexpected death from a "heart attack". Did the IMF finally follow through on their threats to murder Kirchner, in order to give credence to their threats against the Euro-peons? There is every reason to think so. The video ... shows Kirchner describing the threats as constant ("siempre") ... shows European populists calling on the people to support following Kirchner's example ... shows the head of the CIA, William Colby, describing a CIA pistol that shoots an ice-dart that leaves the target dead from heart attack, with "no evidence to indicate that the target was hit." Read more at readersupportednews.org

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a175s2

Pemex At Lowest Levels Ever while Carstens Makes a Bid for IMF #peakoil #collapse #dsk

You can be sure that Carlos Slim is heavily invested in PEMEX bonds which essentially is privatizing without public support

Clipped from www.bloomberg.com

Pemex Oil Output Declines at Fastest Rate Since World War II

Jan. 20 (Bloomberg) -- Petroleos Mexicanos, Mexico’s state oil company, will probably report its fastest drop in production since 1942, eroding revenue as plunging crude prices limit the amount of cash available to drill for new reserves.

Pemex last year likely extracted 2.8 million barrels a day, down about 9 percent from the 3.08 million a day pumped in 2007, representing a total of $20 billion in lost sales, according to data compiled by the government and Bloomberg. The Mexico City- based company, which had revenue of $104 billion in 2007, plans to report annual production figures tomorrow.

“The fall in oil prices and lower production is going to make expensive exploration projects less attractive now.”

Pemex’s “biggest problems have yet to come,” said Alejandro Schtulmann, head of research at Empra, a political- risk consulting firm in Mexico City, in an interview. “The fall in oil prices and lower production is going to make expensive exploration projects less attractive now.” Read more at www.bloomberg.com

 

In the coming global economic #collapse, the USA wont be 1st #CDS #global #economy #IMF contributes #transition #peakoil

Its happening. The fallout of the financial crisis of 2008 is finally unfolding around the world. Expect to see 3-10 EU nations default by December 2011

Clipped from www.bloomberg.com

Default Swaps Trading on U.S. Debt Doubles on Deficit Wrangling

A total of 819 contracts covering a net notional $4 billion of debt were outstanding as of May 20, up from 449 contracts covering $2 billion a year ago, according to the Depository Trust & Clearing Corp. Average daily trading volume surged to $490 million last week from $10 million the week before, making the U.S. the fourth most active among 1,000 contracts tracked by DTCC, up from 633rd.

“In a way, it’s worse than in Greece because no one can bail out the U.S.,” said Georg Grodzki, the London-based head of credit research at Legal & General Investment Management, which oversees $580 billion of assets. “Complete political paralysis is OK if your deficit is 3 percent, but not if it’s 10 percent.”

This year’s federal budget deficit is projected to reach $1.5 trillion, or 9.8 percent of gross domestic product, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The government will run out of options to avoid a default if the limit is not raised by early August, Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner said May 2.

Greek debt is the world’s most expensive to insure at about 1,400 basis points for five years and more than 2,000 basis points for one year. Swaps on Norway are the world’s least expensive at 17 basis points for five years and 5.5 basis points for one year. Read more at www.bloomberg.com

 

Mexican Economic Miralce? Carstens for #IMFpost #CDS #collapse #global #economy #transition #peakoil #narco

Mexico's financials are about as open as OPEC's reserves statements. Mexico's economy depends greatly on the USA recovery and yet somehow they are magically growing.

Must be the damn drug trade funneling $60B into the economy untaxed.

Clipped from www.bloomberg.com

RT: [eksit101] Is the #ENDTHEFED victories the October surprise? Just all seems fishy. #NWO #RESTORETHEREPUBLIC http://t.co/UXpSahotsE f...
— #New World Order (@nwohashtag) October 1, 2013

IMF Candidate Carstens Winning Over Bond Investors at Home: Mexico Credit

Carstens’s “credibility has been enhanced,” Pablo Cisilino, who helps manage $22 billion in emerging-market debt at Stone Harbor Investment in New York, said in a telephone interview. “Carstens came out and said we’re going to stay put and inflation is not going to pick up, it’s going to come down. Something that you’ve been predicting happens, your credibility gets enhanced.”

“It definitely says that the market is perfectly happy with the way that Carstens is conducting monetary policy,” Kieran Curtis, who helps manage more than $3 billion of emerging-market assets, including peso debt, at Aviva Investors in London, said in a telephone interview. “No change for still a reasonable period of time is quite a reasonable sort of policy outlook to expect.”

“Weak” economic growth is more responsible for the decline in consumer prices in Mexico than Carstens, said Benito Berber, Latin America strategist at Nomura Securities.

Mexico has nominated Carstens, who was deputy managing director at the IMF from 2003 to 2006, to replace Dominique Strauss-Kahn, who resigned as head of the organization last week to defend himself against criminal charges including attempted rape. French Finance Minister Christine Lagarde, who is also seeking the top job at the Washington-based Fund, has won endorsements from European countries including the U.K., Germany and Sweden. Read more at www.bloomberg.com

Stanford and BDO Ponzi Scheme #CDS #collapse #global #economy #IMF contributes #transition #peakoil

Its happening. The fallout of the financial crisis of 2008 is finally unfolding around the world. Expect to see 3-10 EU nations default by December 2011

Clipped from www.bloomberg.com

“BDO’s cozy relationship with the Stanford Financial Group was steeped in conflicts of interest and required ongoing deception and duplicitous manipulation of the facts to enable the Ponzi scheme to grow exponentially for over a decade,” investors said in the complaint. “The result is the loss of thousands of investors’ life savings.”

Stanford Investors Sue Former Auditor BDO US for $10.7 Billion Over Fraud Read more at www.bloomberg.com

 

USA Inc Needs a Bailout? #TBTF

If it wasnt for the Fed printing money and borrowing from every Tom Dick and Harry, we would probably need a bailout like Greece, Ireland, Spain, Italy, etc...

Clipped from www.cnbc.com

Banks Face $3.6 Trillion 'Wall' of Debt: IMF

The world's banks face a $3.6 trillion "wall of maturing debt" in the next two years and must compete with debt-laden governments to secure financing, the IMF warned on Wednesday.

The IMF and European Union bailed out Greece and Ireland, and are in talks with Portugal on a lending program as sovereign borrowing costs surge.

US banks built up capital buffers in 2009, when regulators completed a set of stress tests that revealed some large holes.

It said government debt was generally high and on a worrying upward path in many advanced economies.

It repeated its warning that the United States and Japan faced particularly dangerous debt dynamics. Read more at www.cnbc.com

 

IMF Warns US on Debts? @chrislhayes

Didnt they just tell the Fed it should keep the gas pedal on with QE3, essentially suggesting we should borrow more? WTF?

Who is their puppetmaster?

Clipped from www.cnbc.com

IMF Warns US on Debts, Wants Austerity

The US lacks a “credible strategy” to stabilize its mounting public debt posing a small but significant risk of a new global economic crisis, says the International Monetary Fund.

In an unusually stern rebuke to its largest shareholder, the IMF said the US was the only advanced economy to be increasing its underlying budget deficit in 2011 at a time when its economy was growing fast enough to reduce borrowing. Read more at www.cnbc.com

 

Tax on Speculation Could Reduce Deficit

But the American banks and Federal Reserve would probably not even entertain this idea since they are all in cahoots on their little pyramid scheme.

Clipped from www.guardian.co.uk

World economists urge G20 ministers to accept Robin Hood tax

1,000 number-crunchers have written to policymakers asking them to impose levy on City speculators to help poor

They argue that if a tax were levied on transactions such as currency trading at just 0.05%, it could raise hundreds of billions of dollars to be ploughed into international development and climate change projects. Some of the proceeds could also be retained by governments in the countries where the transactions take place, including the UK, helping to repair the hole in governments' coffers. Read more at www.guardian.co.uk

 

IMF & WORLD BANK: Puppets of Neoliberism

Written nearly 10 years ago, this article has many incredibly valuable lessons for America today.

Clipped from www.mit.edu

The IMF and the WORLD BANK: Puppets of the Neoliberal Onslaught Today, September 26, thousands of activists are protesting in Prague, in the Czech Republic, against the policies and institutional structures of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. These protests are the latest action in a growing movement that is highly critical of the neoliberal economic policies being imposed on people all over the world, including those in western countries. As Robert McChesney concisely describes it, neoliberalism “refers to the policies and processes whereby a relative handful of private interests are permitted to control as much as possible of social life in order to maximize their personal profit.” The major beneficiaries of neoliberalism are large trans-national corporations and wealthy investors. The implementation of neoliberal policies came into full force during the eighties under Thatcher and Reagan. Today, the principles of neoliberalism are widely held with near-religious fervor by most major political parties in the US and Britain and are gaining acceptance by those holding power elsewhere. Although the proponents of neoliberalism extol the virtues of free markets, free trade, private enterprise and consumer choice, the effects of neoliberal policies is quite the opposite. In fact, these policies typically result in very protectionist markets dominated by a few trans-national corporations. Many sectors of the economy - ranging from food processing and distribution to the corporate media to aviation - are oligopolies and can be characterized as highly centralized command economies that are only a shade more competitive than the economy of the former Soviet Union. A major theme of neoliberal policies is deregulation and the removal of government interference in the economy. Consistently, such policies are applied in a one sided way, and always in a manner that benefits large trans-national corporations, the most influential entities in policy making. Hence, within neoliberalism as it is actually applied, capital is allowed to roam the world freely with very few restrictions, yet workers are to remain trapped within the borders of their countries. This serves trans-national corporations well, though for some, not well enough. According to Jack Welsh, CEO of GE, he and GE’s shareholders would be best served if factories were on barges so that when workers demand higher wages and better working conditions, the barges could easily be moved to a country with more compliant workers. Another component of neoliberalism is the dismantling of the welfare state. Again, in practice, this policy is applied to the majority of the population, who have to accept cut backs in unemployment benefits and health care, while large corporations continue to receive massive subsidies and tax breaks. The effects of neoliberal policies on people everywhere has been devastating. During the last two to three decades, wealth disparity has increased many fold within countries as well as between countries. In the US, inflation adjusted median wages are lower today than they were in 1973 (when median wages reached their peak) while the wealth of the top 1% of society has soared. One out of every five children in the US lives in a state of poverty characterized by continual hunger, insecurity and lack of adequate health care. This, after almost ten years of a record breaking economic boom. For the poorest people in the world, the situation has become even more desperate. John Gershman and Alec Irwin state in “Dying for growth”: 100 countries have undergone grave economic decline over the past three decades. Per capita income in these 100 countries is now lower than it was 10, 15, 20 or in some cases even 30 years ago. In Africa, the average household consumes 20 percent less today than it did 25 years ago. Worldwide, more than 1 billion people saw their real incomes fall during the period 1980-1993. Meanwhile, according to the United Nations Development Program’s 1998 Human Development Report, the 15 richest people in the world enjoy combined assets that exceed the total annual gross domestic product of sub-Saharan Africa. At the end of the 1990’s, the wealth of the three richest individuals on earth surpassed the combined annual GDP of the 48 least developed countries. The Thistle won’t waste ink on how the wealthy have fared since the mainstream corporate press does a very commendable job in this respect. Neoliberalism has been a disaster for the environment as well. Despite the growing awareness in the late eighties that the rate of fossil fuel consumption at that time would cause global warming and many other forms of unpredictable and dangerous environmental changes, energy consumption has continued to increase at an alarming rate. This has been facilitated by neoliberal deregulation of environmental protections championed by corporate puppets such as Newt Gingrich and Tom Delay. In their continued quest for windfall profits, for example, corporations such as Ford and GM aggressively marketed (and continue to do so) highly polluting sports utility vehicles (SUVs) while ignoring cleaner and more efficient technologies. This was made possible by loop holes in environmental laws allowing SUVs to be sold that do not meet the emission standards imposed on passenger cars. Consumer Reports Magazine (Nov. pg. 54) noted in 1997, that “the growing popularity of SUVs, has helped make the 1997 automotive model year the least fuel-efficient in the last 16 years”. Due to the subservience of government to large corporations, these loop holes are still in place. Today, the qualitative predictions of a decade ago are starting to manifesting themselves. The average temperature of the world has risen over the last decade and for the first time, water has been observed on the polar caps. One industry that has benefited significantly from neoliberal policies is the biotech industry, though not without potentially catastrophic costs for the majority of the population. While large biotech corporations such as Monsanto and Dupont are aiming for massive profits, the environment and our food supply is irreversibly being altered in the process, creating a situation where large portions of the population and all future generations are subjected to potentially severe and unpredictable health risks. As a way to promote the nascent biotech industry, the Bush administration in the early nineties adopted a policy which held that regulations should not be created in such a way as to be a burden on the industry. The Clinton administration has continued this policy, and today approximately 60% of our food is genetically modified. This transformation of our food supply has occurred with scant public knowledge or oversight. And although genes from viruses, bacteria or arctic fish with anti-freeze properties are inserted into crops, the federal regulatory agencies, with heavy industry influence, maintain that genetically modified foods are no different from crops obtained with traditional breeding techniques and therefore do not need to be approved (unless the transported genes are known to induce a human allergen). Studies investigating the long term health and environmental effects of genetically modified crops are not required by any federal agency and are rarely performed. In this atmosphere of deregulation and concentrated corporate control, it is only a matter of time before a serious biological catastrophe occurs. What does the IMF and World Bank have to do with this? The IMF and World Bank were both created at the end of world war II in a political climate the is very different from that of today. Nevertheless, their roles and modalities have been suitably updated to serve the interests of those that benefit from neoliberalism. The institutional structures of the IMF and World Bank were framed at an international conference in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire. Initially, the primary focus of the IMF was to regulate currency exchange rates to facilitate orderly international trade and to be a lender of last resort when a member country experiences balance of payments difficulties and is unable to borrow money from other sources. The original purpose of the World Bank was to lend money to Western European governments to help them rebuild their countries after the war. In later years, the World Bank shifted its attention towards development loans to third world countries. Immediately after world war II, most western countries, including the US, had ‘New Deal’ style social contracts with sufficient welfare provisions to ensure ‘stability’ between labor and capital. It was understood that restrictions on international capital flow were necessary to protect these social contracts. The postwar ‘Bretton Woods’ economic system which lasted until the early seventies, was based on the right and obligation of governments to regulate capital flow and was characterized by rapid economic growth. In the early seventies, the Nixon administration unilaterally abandoned the Bretton Woods system by dropping the gold standard and lifting restrictions on capital flows. The ensuing period has been marked by dramatically increased financial speculation and low growth rates. Although seemingly neutral institutions, in practice, the IMF and World Bank end up serving powerful interests of western countries. At both institutions, the voting power of a given country is not measured by, for example, population, but by how much capital that country contributes to the institutions and by other political factors reflecting the power the country wields in the world. The G7 plays a dominant role in determining policy, with the US, France, Germany, Japan and Great Britain each having their own director on the institution’s executive board while 19 other directors are elected by the rest of the approximately 150 member countries. The president of the World Bank is traditionally an American citizen and is chosen with US congressional involvement. The managing director of the IMF is traditionally a European. On the IMF board of governors, comprised of treasury secretaries, the G7 have a combined voting power of 46%. The power of the IMF becomes clear when a country gets into financial trouble and needs funds to make payments on private loans. Before the IMF grants a loan, it imposes conditions on that country, requiring it to make structural changes in its economy. These conditions are called ‘Structural Adjustment Programs’ (SAPs) and are designed to increase money flow into the country by promoting exports so that the country can pay off its debts. Not surprisingly, in view of the dominance of the G7 in IMF policy making, the SAPs are highly neoliberal. The effective power of the IMF is often larger than that associated with the size of its loans because private lenders often deem a country credit-worthy based on actions of the IMF. The World Bank plays a qualitatively different role than the IMF, but works tightly within the stringent SAP framework imposed by the IMF. It focuses on development loans for specific projects, such as the building of dams, roads, harbors etc that are considered necessary for ‘economic growth’ in a developing country. Since it is a multilateral institution, the World Bank is less likely than unilateral lending institutions such as the Export Import Bank of the US to offer loans for the purpose of promoting and subsidizing particular corporations. Nevertheless, the conceptions of growth and economic well being within the World Bank are very much molded by western corporate values and rarely take account of local cultural concerns. This is clearly exhibited by the modalities of its projects, such as the ‘Green Revolution’ in agriculture, heavily promoted in the third world by the World Bank in the sixties and seventies. The ‘Green Revolution’ refers to the massive industrialization of agriculture, involving the replacement of a multitude of indigenous crops with a few high-yielding varieties that require expensive investments of chemicals, fertilizers and machinery. In the third world, the ‘Green Revolution’ was often imposed on indigenous populations with reasonably sustainable and self sufficient traditions of rural agriculture. The mechanization of food production in third world countries, which have a large surplus labor pool, has led to the marginalization of many people, disconnecting them from the economy and exacerbating wealth disparity in these countries. Furthermore, excessive chemical agriculture has led to soil desertification and erosion, increasing the occurrence of famines. While the ‘Green Revolution’ was a catastrophe for the poor in third world countries, western chemical corporations such as Monsanto, Dow and Dupont fared very well, cashing in high profits and increasing their control over food production in third world countries. Today, the World Bank is at it again. This time it is promoting the use of genetically modified seeds in the third world and works with governments to solidify patent laws which would grant biotech corporations like Monsanto unprecedented control over food production. The pattern is clear, whether deliberate or nor, the World Bank serves to set the stage for large trans-national corporations to enter third world countries, extract large profits and then leave with carnage in their wake. While the World Bank publicly emphasizes that it aims to alleviate poverty in the world, imperialistic attitudes occasionally emerge from its leading figures. In 1991, then chief economist Lawrence Summers (now US Secretary of the Treasury) wrote in an internal memo that was leaked: Just between you and me, shouldn’t the World Bank be encouraging more migration of the dirty industries to the LDCs [less developed countries]? ... The economic logic behind dumping a load of toxic waste in the lowest wage country is impeccable, and we should face up to that ... Under-populated countries in Africa are vastly under-polluted; their air quality is probably vastly inefficiently low compared to Los Angeles or Mexico City .... The concern over an agent that causes a one-in-a-million chance in the odds of prostate cancer is obviously going to be much higher in a country where people survive to get prostate cancer than in a country where under-five mortality is 200 per thousand. And thistle thought that the World Bank tried to extend lives in developing countries, not take advantage of low life expectancy. How do countries get into financial troubles, the Debt Crisis. The most devastating program imposed by the IMF and the World Bank on third world countries are the Structural Adjustment Programs. The widespread use of SAPs started in the early eighties after a major debt crisis. The debt crisis arose from a combination of (i) reckless lending by western commercial banks to third world countries, (ii) mismanagement within third world countries and (iii) changes in the international economy. During the seventies, rising oil prices generated enormous profits for petrochemical corporations. These profits ended up in large commercial banks which then sought to reinvest the capital. Much of this capital was invested in the form of high risk loans to third world countries, many of which were run by corrupt dictators. Instead of investing the capital in productive projects that would benefit the general population, dictators often diverted the funds to personal Swiss bank accounts or used the them to purchase military equipment for domestic repression. This state of affairs persisted for a while, since commodity prices remained stable and interest rates were relatively low enabling third world countries to adequately service their debts. In 1979, the situation changed, however, when Paul Volker, the new Federal Reserve Chairman, raised interest rates. This dramatically increased the cost of debtor countries’ loans. At the same time, the US was heading into a recession and world commodity prices dropped, tightening cash flows necessary for debt payment. The possibility that many third world countries would default on their debt payments threatened a major financial crisis that would result in large commercial bank failures. To prevent this, powerful countries from the G7 stepped in and actively used the IMF and World Bank to bail out third world countries. Yet the bail-out packages were contingent upon the third world countries introducing major neoliberal policies (i.e. SAPs) to promote exports. Examples of SAP prescriptions include: - an increase in ‘labor flexibility’ which means caps on minimum wages, and policies to weaken trade unions and worker’s bargaining power. - tax increases combined with cuts in social spending such as education and health care, to free up funds for debt repayment. - privatization of public sector enterprises, such as utility companies and public transport - financial liberalization designed to remove restrictions on the flow of international capital in and out of the country coupled with the removal of restrictions on what foreign corporations and banks can buy. Despite almost two decades of Structural Adjustment Programs, many third world countries have not been able to pull themselves out of massive debt. The SAPs have, however, served corporations superbly, offering them new opportunities to exploit workers and natural resources. As Prof. Chomsky often says, the debt crisis is an ideological construct. In a true capitalist society, the third world debt would be wiped out. The Banks who made the risky loans would have to accept the losses, and the dictators and their entourage would have to repay the money they embezzled. The power structure in society however, prevents this from happening. In the west tax payers end up assuming the risk while the large banks run off with the high profits often derived from high risk loans. In the third world, the people end up paying the costs while their elites retire in the French Riviera. It is important to realize that the IMF and World Bank are tools for powerful entities in society such as trans-national corporations and wealthy investors. The Thistle believes that massive world poverty and environmental destruction is the result of the appalling concentration of power in the hands of a small minority whose sights are blinded by dollar signs and whose passions are the aggrandizement of ever more power. The Thistle holds that an equitable and democratic world centered around cooperation and solidarity would be more able to deal with environmental and human crises. Read more at www.mit.edu