www.Bilderberg.org latest: Buy Plutonium on the
Black Market; Masonic mass murders in Dunblane (1996) & Norway (2011)
10 minutes ago
follow me on twitter - http://twitter.com/#!/TonyGosling
S&P And The BilderBergers: All Part of The Plan?
http://www.nationofchange.org/sp-and-bilderbergers-all-part-plan-1313943964
What just happened in the stock market? Last
week, the Dow Jones Industrial Average rose or
fell by at least 400 points for four straight days, a stock market first.
The worst drop was on Monday, 8-8-11, when the
Dow plunged 624 points. Monday was the first day
of trading after US Treasury bonds were
downgraded from AAA to AA+ by Standard and Poor’s.
But the roller coaster actually began on Tuesday,
8-2-11, the day after the last-minute deal to
raise the U.S. debt ceiling -- a deal that was
supposed to avoid the downgrade that happened
anyway five days later. The Dow changed
directions for eight consecutive trading sessions after that, another first.
The volatility was unprecedented, leaving
analysts at a loss to explain it. High frequency
program trading no doubt added to the wild
swings, but why the daily reversals? Why didn’t
the market head down and just keep going, as it did in September 2008?
The plunge on 8-8-11 was the worst since 2008 and
the sixth largest stock market crash ever.
According to Der Spiegel, one of the most widely read periodicals in Europe:
Many economists have been pointing out that last
week's panic resembled the fear that swept
financial markets after the collapse of US
investment bank Lehman Brothers in September 2008.
Then as now, banks stopped lending each other
money. Then as now, banks' cash deposits at the
central bank doubled within days.
On Tuesday, August 9, however, the market gained
more points from its low than it lost on Monday.
Why? A tug of war seemed to be going on between
two titanic forces, one bent on crashing the
market, the other on propping it up.
The Dubious S&P Downgrade
Many commentators questioned the validity of the
downgrade that threatened to collapse the market.
Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for
Economic and Policy Research, said in a statement:
"The Treasury Department revealed that S&P’s
decision was initially based on a $2 trillion
error in accounting. However, even after this
enormous error was corrected, S&P went ahead with
the downgrade. This suggests that S&P had made
the decision to downgrade independent of the evidence. [Emphasis added.]
Paul Krugman, writing in the New York Times, was also skeptical, stating:
[E]verything I’ve heard about S&P’s demands
suggests that it’s talking nonsense about the US
fiscal situation. The agency has suggested that
the downgrade depended on the size of agreed
deficit reduction over the next decade, with $4
trillion apparently the magic number. Yet US
solvency depends hardly at all on what happens in
the near or even medium term: an extra trillion
in debt adds only a fraction of a percent of GDP
to future interest costs . . . .
In short, S&P is just making stuff up — and after
the mortgage debacle, they really don’t have that right.
In an illuminating expose posted on Firedoglake
on August 5, Jane Hamsher concluded:
NationofChange fights back with one simple but
powerful weapon: the truth. Can you donate $5 to help us?
It’s becoming more and more obvious that Standard
and Poor’s has a political agenda riding on the
notion that the US is at risk of default on its
debt based on some arbitrary limit to the
debt-to-GDP ratio. There is no sound basis for
that limit, or for S&P’s insistence on at least a
$4 trillion down payment on debt reduction, any
more than there is for the crackpot notion that a
non-crazy US can be forced to default on its debt. . . .
It’s time the media and Congress started asking
Standard and Poors what their political agenda is and whom it serves.
Who Drove the S&P Agenda?
Jason Schwarz shed light on this question in an
article on Seeking Alpha titled “The Rise of Financial Terrorism”. He wrote:
[A]fter the market close on Friday August 5th, we
received word that S&P CEO Deven Sharma had taken
control of the ratings agency and personally led
the push for a U.S. downgrade. There is a lot of
evidence that he has deliberately tried to trash
the U.S. economy. Even after discovering that the
S&P debt calculations were off by $2 trillion,
Sharma made the decision to go ahead with the
unethical downgrade. This is a guy who was a key
contributor at the 2009 Bilderberg Summit that
organized 120 of the world's richest men and
women to push for an end to the dollar as the global reserve currency.
[T]hrough his writings on “competitive strategy”
S&P CEO Sharma considers the United States the
PROBLEM in today’s world, operating with what he
implies is an unfair and reckless advantage. The
brutal reality is that for "globalization" to
succeed the United States must be torn asunder . . .
Also named by Schwarz as a suspect in the market
manipulations was Michel Barnier, head of
European Regulation. Barnier triggered an
alarming 513-point drop in the Dow on August 4,
when he blocked the plan of Hans Hoogervorst,
newly appointed Chairman of the International
Accounting Standards Board, to save Europe by
adopting a new rule called IFRS 9. The rule would
have eliminated mark-to-market accounting of
sovereign debt from European bank balance sheets. Schwarz writes:
We all should be experts on the dangers of
mark-to-market accounting after observing the
U.S. banking crisis of 2008/2009 and the Great
Depression in the 1930s. Mark-to-market was
repealed at 8:45 a.m on April 2, 2009, which
finally put a stop to the short term liquidity
crisis and at the same time ushered in a stock
market recovery. Banks no longer had to raise
capital as long term stability was brought back
to the system. The exact same scenario would have
happened in 2011 Europe under Hoogervorst's plan.
Without the threat of failure by those banks who
hold high amounts of euro sovereign debt,
investors would be free to move on from the
European crisis and the stock market could resume its fundamental course.
Schwarz notes that Barnier, like Sharma, was a
confirmed attendee at past Bilderberger
conferences. What, then, is the agenda of the Bilderbergers?
The One World Company
Daniel Estulin, noted expert on the
Bilderbergers, describes that secretive
globalist group as “a medium of bringing together
financial institutions which are the world’s
most powerful and most predatory financial
interests.” Writing in June 2011, he said:
Bilderberg isn’t a secret society. . . . It’s a
meeting of people who represent a certain
ideology. . . . Not OWG [One World Government] or
NWO [New World Order] as too many people
mistakenly believe. Rather, the ideology is of a ONE WORLD COMPANY LIMITED.
It seems the Bilderbergers are less interested in
governing the world than in owning the world. The
“world company” was a term first used at a
Bilderberger meeting in Canada in 1968 by George
Ball, U.S. Undersecretary of State for Economic
Affairs and a managing director of banking
giants Lehman Brothers and Kuhn Loeb. The world
company was to be a new form of colonialism, in
which global assets would be acquired by economic
rather than military coercion. The company would
extend across national boundaries, aggressively
engaging in mergers and acquisitions until the
assets of the world were subsumed under one
privately-owned corporation, with nation-states
subservient to a private international central banking system.
Estulin continues:
The idea behind each and every Bilderberg meeting
is to create what they themselves call THE
ARISTOCRACY OF PURPOSE between European and
North American elites on the best way to manage
the planet. In other words, the creation of a
global network of giant cartels, more powerful
than any nation on Earth, destined to control the
necessities of life of the rest of humanity.
. . . This explains what George Ball . . . said
back in 1968, at a Bilderberg meeting in Canada:
“Where does one find a legitimate base for the
power of corporate management to make decisions
that can profoundly affect the economic life of
nations to whose governments they have only limited responsibility?”
That base of power was found in the private
global banking system. Estulin goes on:
The problem with today’s system is that the world
is run by monetary systems, not by national
credit systems. . . . [Y]ou don’t want a monetary
system to run the world. You want sovereign
nation-states to have their own credit systems,
which is the system of their currency. . . .
[T]he possibility of productive, non-inflationary
credit creation by the state, which is firmly
stated in the US Constitution, was excluded by
Maastricht [the Treaty of the European Union] as
a method of determining economic and financial policy.
The world company acquires assets by preventing
governments from issuing their own currencies and
credit. Money is created instead by banks as
loans at interest. The debts inexorably grow,
since more money is always owed back than was
created in the original loans. (For more on
this, see here.) If currencies are not allowed to
expand to meet increased costs and growth, the
inevitable result is a wave of bankruptcies,
foreclosures, and sales of assets at firesale
prices. Sales to whom? To the “world company.”
Battle of the Titans
If that was the plan behind the market assaults
on August 4 and August 8, however, it evidently
failed. What turned the market around, according
to Der Spiegel, was the European Central Bank,
which saved the day by embarking on a program of
buying Spanish and Italian bonds. Sidestepping
the Maastricht Treaty, the ECB said it would
engage in the equivalent of “quantitative
easing,” purchasing bonds with money created
with accounting entries on its books. It had done
this earlier with Greek and Irish sovereign debt
but had resisted doing it with Spanish and
Italian bonds, which were much larger
obligations. On Tuesday, August 16, the ECB
announced that it was engaging in a record $32
billion bond-buying spree in an attempt to
appease the markets and save the Eurozone from collapse.
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke was also
expected to come through with another round of
quantitative easing, but his speech on August 9
made no mention of QE3. As blogger Jesse
Livermore summarized the market’s response:
. . . [T]he markets sold off rather rapidly as no
announcement was made about QE3. . . . It wasn’t
until . . . the last 75 min of market activity
[that] the DJIA gained 639 pts to close at a day
high of 11,242. That begs the question, where did
that injection of capital come from? The
President’s Working Group on Financial Markets?
Or did the “policy tools” to promote price
stability by any chance include the next round of
Quantitative Easing unannounced?
Was that QE3 Incognito, Ben?
Titanic Battle or Insider Trading?
There could be another explanation for the
suspicious downgrade that was announced despite
the fact that the government had just made major
concessions to avoid default, and despite the
embarrassing revelation that S&P’s figures were
off by $2 trillion. On August 12, MSN.?Money
reported that the downgrade “wasn't much of a surprise”:
Wall Street had heard a rumor early on that the
downgrade was coming. News sites reported the rumor all day.
Unless it was all a huge coincidence, it's likely
that someone in the know leaked the information.
The questions are who and whether the leak led to early insider trading.
The Daily Mail had the story of someone placing
an $850 million bet in the futures market on the
prospects of a US debt downgrade:
The latest bet was made on July 21 on trades of
5,370 ten-year Treasury futures and 3,100
Treasury bond futures, reported ETF Daily News.
Now the investor’s gamble seems to have paid off
after Standard and Poor’s issued a credit rating
downgrade from AAA to AA+ last Friday.
Whoever it is stands to earn a 1,000 per cent
return on their money, with the expectation that
interest rates will be going up after the downgrade.
The Securities Exchange Commission announced on
August 8 that it is investigating the downgrade.
According to the Financial Times, the move is
part of a preliminary examination into potential insider trading.
Whatever was going on in the market in the first
two weeks of August, it was unprecedented,
unnatural, and bears close observation.
http://www.nationofchange.org/sp-and-bilderbergers-all-part-plan-1313943964
+44 (0)7786 952037
http://groups.google.com/group/uk-911-truth
http://www.youtube.com/user/PublicEnquiry
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Diggers350/
http://www.thisweek.org.uk/
http://www.911forum.org.uk/
"Capitalism is institutionalised bribery."
_________________
www.abolishwar.org.uk
<http://www.elementary.org.uk>www.elementary.org.uk
www.public-interest.co.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/series/Bristol+Broadband+Co-operative
<http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf>http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic
poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
<https://217.72.179.7/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/>https://217.72.179.7/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
--
Please consider seriously the reason why these elite institutions are not discussed in the mainstream press despite the immense financial and political power they wield?
There are sick and evil occultists running the Western World. They are power mad lunatics like something from a kids cartoon with their fingers on the nuclear button! Armageddon is closer than you thought. Only God can save our souls from their clutches, at least that's my considered opinion - Tony
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"PEPIS" group. Please feel free to forward it to anyone who might be interested
particularly your political representatives, journalists and spiritual leaders/dudes.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pepis?hl=en
