Remember when I said...

The Muslims are coming! The Muslims are coming!

I had a pretty good lead-in to the above comment when I posted "When you finish your homework get ready for battle... (link)" back in August of 2010, almost four years ago, and if you scour the Internet I'm sure you will find similar warnings of the impending terror.  But who's paying attention?  American citizens (including our politicians!) are so out of touch with reality I think it would take a beheading of their next door neighbor before they woke up...and even that may be considered just a neighborhood disturbance or workplace violence soon to be forgotten after the 6 o'clock news.  Well instead of bloggers like myself shouting the warnings do you think if the Muslims sent out a message directly to U.S. citizens stating that they're going to kill, would such a message vindicate my message?  Apparently they have done just that!  Earlier today a Muslim who goes by the name, Alanbari Daysam, posted a dire warning on a Twitter account... And guess what?  No alarms going off with any of the main stream media, the White House or the Congress, so I guess until the head-chopping party begins we can take these warnings with a grain of salt.  ~ Norman E. Hooben

The following from: Weasel Zippers (images may not appear here as they did there)

 click on images ↓ to enlarge

 

ISIS members are preparing “an event to warn the U.S” to not involve themselves in Iraq.

A person identifying himself as “Alanbari Daysam” has posted a series of threats to the United States homeland via Twitter today.

Calling for ISIS members to attack the United States, Dayaam posts pictures of suicide vests and instructs followers to “enter U.S. cities and marketplaces with these vests and detonate them, killing American citizens”

In other Tweets, “Daysam” advocates advice from Osama Bin Laden telling Muslims not to ask before committing Jihad against America and to poison American drinking water.

_______________________________________________________

After you have consumed the above, digest this ↓

_________________

 

 ...and if the Muslims do not worry you, the Chinese should!

Is there a Jekyll Island in China?

Forward by Norman E. Hooben

“Quite frankly it does not matter who is president as far as the Fed is concerned. There are no other agencies that can overrule the action we take.” ~ Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan (Listen starting at approximately counter 7:50 in the video at the bottom of this page)

It has been said that no American can fully understand the financial reality of our time without the extensive knowledge offered by the author of ‘The Creature from Jekyll Island’, by G. Edward Griffin.  For those who have not read the book, today it would be safe to say that very few Americans know next to nothing concerning this financial mini-tome (608 pages) or for that matter, most of the world’s population is ignorant of such matters.  The ignoramus factor was intentionally built into the creature by the founders who met on the island.  They were very clever to disguise their venture by the use of such titles as ‘The Federal Reserve’ which is neither federal nor reserve.  I don’t want to go off in a tirade as what I think of this private banking cartel because it could get messy.  So with that said, anytime you are dealing with a bank or financial institution you should be leery that the entire empire can come crumbling down at any moment…even as we speak, that empire is devising more schemes to extend their immoral lives on the backs of little peons who have no clue where our money comes from or where it goes.  Even I, your humble blogger, had no idea of their latest scam which according to Ellen Brown* is ‘Out of Control’… Here’s Ellen’s latest commentary:

Out-of-Control Central Banks on a Corporate Buying Spree
by Ellen Brown @ TruthDig.com


The front of the European Central Bank.
 Photo by Atanas Kumbarov (CC BY-SA 2.0)

This piece first appeared at Web of Debt.
Finance is the new form of warfare – without the expense of a military overhead and an occupation against unwilling hosts. It is a competition in credit creation to buy foreign resources, real estate, public and privatized infrastructure, bonds and corporate stock ownership. Who needs an army when you can obtain the usual objective (monetary wealth and asset appropriation) simply by financial means? —Dr. Michael Hudson, Counterpunch, October 2010
When the US Federal Reserve bought an 80% stake in American International Group (AIG) in September 2008, the unprecedented $85 billion outlay was justified as necessary to bail out the world’s largest insurance company. Today, however, central banks are on a global corporate buying spree not to bail out bankrupt corporations but simply as an investment, to compensate for the loss of bond income due to record-low interest rates. Indeed, central banks have become some of the world’s largest stock investors.
Central banks have the power to create national currencies with accounting entries, and they are traditionally very secretive. We are not allowed to peer into their books. It took a major lawsuit by Reuters and a congressional investigation to get the Fed to reveal the $16-plus trillion in loans it made to bail out giant banks and corporations after 2008.
What is to stop a foreign bank from simply printing its own currency and trading it on the currency market for dollars, to be invested in the US stock market or US real estate market? What is to stop central banks from printing up money competitively, in a mad rush to own the world’s largest companies?
Apparently not much. Central banks are for the most part unregulated, even by their own governments. As the Federal Reserve observes on its website: 

[The Fed] is considered an independent central bank because its monetary policy decisions do not have to be approved by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branches of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by the Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms.

As former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan quipped, “Quite frankly it does not matter who is president as far as the Fed is concerned. There are no other agencies that can overrule the action we take.”

The Central Bank Buying Spree

That is how “independent” central banks operate, but it evidently not the US central bank that is gambling in the stock market. After extensive quantitative easing, the Fed has a $4.5 trillion balance sheet; but this sum is accounted for as being invested conservatively in Treasuries and agency debt (although QE may have allowed Wall Street banks to invest the proceeds in the stock market by devious means).

Which central banks, then, are investing in stocks? The biggest player turns out to be the People’s Bank of China (PBoC), the Chinese central bank.

According to a June 15th article in USA Today:

Evidence of equity-buying by central banks and other public sector investors has emerged from a large-scale survey compiled by Official Monetary and Financial Institutions Forum (OMFIF), a global research and advisory group. The OMFIF research publication Global Public Investor (GPI) 2014, launched on June 17 is the first comprehensive survey of $29.1 trillion worth of investments held by 400 public sector institutions in 162 countries. The report focuses on investments by 157 central banks, 156 public pension funds and 87 sovereign funds, underlines growing similarities among different categories of public entities owning assets equivalent to 40% of world output.
The assets of these 400 Global Public Investors comprise $13.2 trillion (including gold) at central banks, $9.4 trillion at public pension funds and $6.5 trillion at sovereign wealth funds.

Public pension funds and sovereign wealth funds are well known to be large holders of shares on international stock markets. But it seems they now have rivals from unexpected sources:

One is China’s State Administration of Foreign Exchange (SAFE), part of the People’s Bank of China, the biggest overall public sector investor, with $3.9 trillion under management, well ahead of the Bank of Japan and Japan’s Government Pension Investment Fund (GPIF), each with $1.3 trillion.
SAFE’s investments include significant holdings in Europe. The PBoC itself has been directly buying minority equity stakes in important European companies.
Another large public sector equity owner is Swiss National Bank, with $480 billion under management. The Swiss central bank had 15% of its foreign exchange assets – or $72 billion – in equities at the end of 2013.

Public pension funds and sovereign wealth funds invest their pension contributions and exchange reserves earned in foreign trade, which is fair enough. The justification for central banks to be playing the stock market is less obvious. Their stock purchases are justified as compensating for lost revenue caused by sharp drops in interest rates. But those drops were driven by central banks themselves; and the broad powers delegated to central banks were supposed to be for conducting “monetary policy,” not for generating investment returns. According to the OMFIF, central banks collectively now have $13.2 trillion in assets (including gold). That is nearly 20% of the value of all of the stock markets in the world, which comes to $62 trillion.

From Monetary Policy to Asset Grabs

Central banks are allowed to create money out of nothing in order to conduct the monetary policies necessary to “regulate the value of the currency” and “maintain price stability.” Traditionally, this has been done with “open market operations,” in which money was either created by the central bank and used to buy federal securities (thereby adding money to the money supply) or federal securities were sold in exchange for currency (shrinking the money supply).

“Quantitative easing” is open market operations on steroids, to the tune of trillions of dollars. But the purpose is allegedly the same—to augment a money supply that shrank by trillions of dollars when the shadow banking system collapsed after 2008. The purpose is not supposed to be to earn an income for the central bank itself. Indeed, the U.S. central bank is required to return the interest earned on federal securities to the federal government, which paid the interest in the first place.

Further, as noted earlier, it is not the US Federal Reserve that has been massively investing in the stock market. It is the PBoC, which arguably is in a different position than the US Fed. It cannot print dollars or Euros. Rather, it acquires them from local merchants who have earned them legitimately in foreign trade.

However, the PBoC has done nothing to earn these dollars or Euros beyond printing yuan. It trades the yuan for the dollars earned by Chinese sellers, who need local currency to pay their workers and suppliers. The money involved in these transactions has thus doubled. The merchants have been paid in yuan and the central bank has an equivalent sum in dollars or Euros. That means the Chinese central bank’s holdings are created out of thin air no less than the Federal Reserve’s dollars are.

Battle of the Central Banks?

Western central banks have generally worked this scheme discreetly. Not so much the Chinese, whose blatant gaming of the system points up its flaws for all to see.

Georgetown University historian Professor Carroll Quigley styled himself the librarian of the international bankers. In his 1966 book Tragedy and Hope, he wrote that their aim was “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 feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert by secret agreements,” central banks that “were themselves private corporations.”

It may be the Chinese, not acting in concert, who break up this cartel. The PBoC is no more transparent than the US Fed, but it is not an “independent” central bank. It is a government agency accountable to the Chinese government and acting on its behalf.

The Chinese have evidently figured out the game of the “independent” central bankers, and to be using it to their own advantage. If the Fed can do quantitative easing, so can the Chinese – and buy up our assets with the proceeds. Owning our corporations rather than our Treasuries helps the Chinese break up US dollar hegemony.

Whatever power plays are going on behind the scenes, it is increasingly clear that they are not serving we-the-people. Banks should not be the exclusive creators of money. We the people, through our representative governments, need to be issuing the national money supply directly, as was done in America under President Abraham Lincoln and in colonial times.

*Ellen Brown is an attorney, founder of the Public Banking Institute and the author of twelve books, including the best-selling Web of Debt. Her latest book, The Public Bank Solution, explores successful public banking models historically and globally.

________________________________

 

Have you ever wondered why America is in deep trouble?

This ↓ should give you some of the answer:

 

And if you're not worried, you should be...

 

Hear Allen Greenspan comment starting at 7:50 ↓ 

How To Put A Stop To Obama ...Arrest him!

I was prompted to write another story about the EPA and other Obama illegalities but got side-tracked by other revelations so I just included both...enjoy! ~ NEH

There's a story (H-T to T. Hilla) over at Western Journalism that sums it up in it's headline "What Obama Is Doing Is Illegal And Will Destroy People On Fixed Incomes."  You can watch the video there but for brevity I'll just include the narrative here:

Murray Energy CEO Robert Murray says Obama is illegally using the EPA and the Clean Air Act to take over the US Electric Power Grid–and in the process, destroying low-cost energy.

According to Murray, “Coal is a four cents per kilowatt hour energy, and wind and solar are a 22 cents per kilowatt hour energy…And that’s if the wind is blowing and the sun is shining.”

Murray would later in the interview go on to say, “this is a very dangerous situation and I don’t know if the average American, whose electric rates are already going up, will [know] it will go up a whole lot more with this.”

“The people who are on fixed incomes or are poor, poverty stricken people are gonna be hurt the worst,” Murray added. “And [they] better be scared to death about what Mr. Obama and his EPA are doing.”

“It can’t be done, it’s unachievable, and it’s illegal!”

This is just another example in which Obama is continuing his illegal actions and policies.

Well that story and more like it are ubiquitous all over the Internet...not just the illegal claims, but the lying and foreign policy fiascoes that are pulling this government down the proverbial slope of no return.  My one big gripe about the press coverage centers mostly on the right...the left simply does not report.  When I hear the professional pundits (this includes everybody from O'Reilly, Hume, Hannity, Wilcow, or whomever) state that Obama makes poor decisions or does not know what it is he is doing, they got it all wrong.  Obama knows exactly what he is doing!  He's destroying the country! ...and intentionally! 
Most of us can agree that Obama lies among other wrong doings but nobody seems to know what to do about it.  Some cry for impeachment...and I say no, arrest the wrongdoer and get him off the streets before he can do more harm, then if you want to start impeachment proceedings have at it.   The United States Constitution may outline the impeachment process but says nothing about arresting a dangerous person...and if you don't believe Obama is dangerous you have a very big problem.  He can be arrested for lying; says so right here:

Title 18 of the U.S. Code Section 1001, states that: “(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any judicial matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully (1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact; (2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or (3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or entry shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years or both.”

When one reads the above Title 18, thoughts of the recent IRS scandals come to mind but my thoughts are, "Get the guy that's in charge...the guy causing all the trouble."  Certainly Obama is behind the schemes that are currently in place to destroy this country.  He actually admitted to these plans before he was ever elected when he said, "I will surround myself with like-minded people."  Every one of Obama's appointees have Communist or other anti-American ties.  But lets keep to the lies angle.  The following, although a bit lengthy, is excerpted from Pepperdine University's Graziadia Business Review, Lying is a Crime :

American history is replete with cautionary tales about the importance of telling the truth. President George Washington is alleged to have said, “I cannot tell a lie,” about cutting down his father’s cherry tree, and even though this event may not have literally happened, it is a story often repeated to highlight the importance of telling the truth. President Abraham Lincoln was often fondly referred to as “Honest Abe.” However, some of our recent presidents have not exhibited such a high regard for telling the truth. For example, President Richard Nixon was threatened with articles of impeachment in the 1970s and resigned from office when it was clear that the House of Representatives was going to impeach him for lying about the Watergate break-in. The result was different, however, in the 1990s. President Clinton was charged with lying under oath and impeached by the House of Representatives, but the Senate did not convict him and he remained in office.

Businesspersons need to know that the rules regarding lying in business in the U.S. are currently being vigorously enforced. Contrary to the belief of all too many executives, the rules regarding lying are not confused and unclear—at least in the minds of today’s prosecutors. Recently, in case after case, scandal after scandal, American federal law enforcement officials have clearly shown by their indictments and prosecutions that there is no confusion in their minds—lying is a crime.

Lying Alone is Enough to Send You to Jail

After the conviction of Martha Stewart, the former CEO of Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia, Inc., numerous articles and editorials were written bemoaning the trial and her conviction. The arguments castigating the prosecutors for bringing the criminal case against her went something like this: (1) since Stewart was not in the final analysis being prosecuted for the underlying crime of securities fraud, it was not “right” for the prosecutors to go after her for simply lying to federal investigators, and (2) it was not “fair” for Stewart to be prosecuted for lying when so many other CEOs and top officers behaved so much more atrociously, enriched themselves so much more outrageously, and caused so much more damage to others than Stewart did.

Let’s take a closer look at the first argument—whether or not lying alone is a crime in America. When a witness takes the stand in a judicial proceeding in the United States, the witness is first asked to take the following oath: “Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?” Only after answering yes is the witness allowed to give testimony in a judicial proceeding. After taking this oath, a person who testifies willfully and falsely in a matter material to an issue involved in the proceeding will be guilty of the crime of perjury.[1] Any attempt to influence a witness’ testimony corruptly by promises, threats, or the like is committing the criminal offense of witness tampering.[2] Furthermore, anyone who attempts to prevent or impede the lawful process will be guilty of the crime of obstruction of justice.[3] In each of these crimes, there is no requirement that the person charged and convicted of such crimes first be convicted of some other “underlying crime.” Simply put, lying itself is a crime, punishable with serious jail time. Stewart is not being singled out for special treatment by being convicted solely of lying.

Let’s examine the second argument raised regarding whether it is “unfair” for Stewart to be sent to jail for lying. After all, what she did was not as serious and damaging as the behaviors of other senior executives involved in some of the more notorious scandals (Adelphia, Tyco, Enron, etc.). Again, one who makes this argument may not be thinking through the full impact of accepting lying within our judicial proceedings. If lying were suddenly to become acceptable, why would anyone tell the truth if it meant harmful consequences to themselves? Surely we are not so naïve as to believe that it is human nature to testify against our own interests and that we would automatically do so even if there were not swift, serious, and painful consequences for not telling the truth.

Lying is a crime because those who lie in a judicial proceeding are destroying the essential fabric of the “rule of law,” which has enabled capitalism to be so successful in the United States. Lying is and must be a crime in a judicial proceeding—and must be enforced against everyone—whether he or she is the President of the United States, the president of a Fortune 500 multinational organization, or the janitor. Stewart’s crime of lying must be viewed not only in terms of how it may have impacted her own company and shareholders,[4] but must also be viewed in light of the potential damage to our entire economy if lying were suddenly to be tolerated in our judicial proceedings. After all, if it is okay for Stewart to lie, then how can we complain about accountants who lie about a company’s financial audits, executives who lie about their company’s sales and revenues, or analysts who lie about their stock recommendations? What then makes us think that anyone will continue to invest their money in the American stock market, which has been the driving force of our brand of successful capitalism during the second half of the 20th century?

Now why can't Congress  put a stop to Obama?  Because they don't have the guts!

Norman E. Hooben

Nutcase story of the day...if only China would have outlawed nutty people this would not have happened.

Note: China outlawed guns in 1957 but not axes and nutty people.  The following statement surely must qualify for the nutcase category:

"I am still alive. If I could be released, I would never do the same again. I would stay at home and take care of my parents." ~ Captured attacker Murzahti

Assailant apologizes for Xinjiang axe attack
Source:Xinhua Published: 2014-6-22 16:51:13 via Global Times

A teenager from Hotan in southern Xinjiang Autonomous Region has apologized for attacking people with an axe, in an exclusive interview with China Central Television (CCTV) on Sunday.
Murzahti, 19, entered a games room in Hotan on June 14 intent on attacking innocent people.
His two accomplices Abduzahir and Abdughappar died from serious injuries after civilians fought back. According to the narrator of the news piece Abduzahir was the ringleader.
Murzahti, who holds temporary jobs, told CCTV that Abduzahir said to him "those who wage a holy war and die for it will not be judged after his death and will go directly to heaven."
He said Abduzahir told him to hack at whoever he saw.
CCTV showed video footage of Murzahti waving an axe towards a woman in the games room.
Murzahti told CCTV that he and his accomplices surveyed the games room from the outside for about 90 seconds before staging the attack. "We thought it was an easy target to kill and run," he said. "I was scared when people fought back. I didn't expect them to fight back. They hit us with desks and chairs in the room..."
He added, "When we tried to run, more people ran towards us with sticks. I thought we had no chance to escape."
The three kept hacking at people with their axes but were eventually brought under control by police and members of the public.
Four civilians were injured but not seriously, according to police.
Abduzahir and Abdughappar died in hospital after treatment failed.
Murzahti told CCTV he was sorry for carrying out the attack. "I am still alive. If I could be released, I would never do the same again. I would stay at home and take care of my parents."

Hillary Connected To Murder...naah, it can't be true

Found this over at FaceBook...

There's a link to some interesting stories that would make for a great television mini-series but even if they implicated Hillary Clinton, her followers would give her a pass just as Ted Kennedy was given a pass for the murder of Mary Jo Kopechne. One of the more interesting cases that I find intriguing is as follows:

Mary Mahoney, White House Intern

An attractive 25-year-old woman, Mary was a former White House Intern for Bill Clinton working as the Assistant Manager at a Starbuck's Coffee shop in Georgetown

In the pre-trial publicity surrounding Paula Jones lawsuit Mike Isikoff had dropped hints that a "former White House staffer" with the initial "M" was about to go public with her story of sexual harassment at 1600 Pennsylvania. Just days later, gunmen entered the Starbuck's while the crew was cleaning up after closing. Mary's two associates, Aaron Goodrich, 18 and Emory Evans, 25, were taken to a room and shot. Mary herself had five bullets in her, from at least two different guns, most likely with silencers. A total of ten shots were fired; none of them heard by neighbors in the densely populated Georgetown section. Mary was shot in the chest, her face, and in the back of the head. Someone wanted her very dead. Or to send a message. Even though more than $4000 remained in the store, the police have categorized the triple murder as a robber, even as they acknowledge the "execution style" killings. There was no sign of forced entry, which means that either Mary of one of the employees let the killers in (at least one hour after closing). That means that the killers included at least one person known to the victims. One report is that the Starbuck's was still locked when the bodies were found the next morning. Robbers don't bother locking doors. George Stephenopolis, Monica Lewinsky, and Chelsea Clinton were all regulars at the Starbuck's. UPDATE: On August 1, 1998, yet another young female government intern with the initial "M", Christine M. Mirzayan, was murdered, beaten to death with a heavy object near Georgetown University. Eventually, Mike Isikoff's "former White House staffer" has finally surfaced and its NOT Mary Mahoney, but Monica Lewinsky. If the killing of Mary Mahoney was to silence a "bimbo eruption", they got the wrong woman! (Just how many of the interns was Clinton getting oral sex from anyway??) Carl Cooper, the man charged with the Starbuck's murders on the basis of a confession has now recanted that confession, claiming that it was obtained under coercion (not unlike that of James Earl Ray). UPDATE: A recent affidavit filed by NOAA's Sonya Stewert, confirms that the Department of Commerce was selling trade mission seats in exchange for campaign donatations, and illegally blocking FOIA requests. Named in the affidavit as the White House staffer directly connected to this obstruction is Doris Matsui. Doris's assigned intern during this period was Mary Mahoney. The Washington Weekly continues to investigate this case. Anyone with information on the case is encouraged to contact the Washington Weekly by email at editor@dolphin.gulf.net . Confidentiality is assured.

This and other stories posted here: The Clinton Body Count

____________________________________

Meet The Clintons