Vodpod videos no longer available.
|The Daily Star|
TRIPOLI, Lebanon: The Future Movement has yet to participate in demonstrations in the northern city of Tripoli in support of the Syrian people, leaving it to Islamist groups to protest the violent crackdown by Damascus.
Expressing solidarity with the Syrian people has brought together several Islamist movements despite their diversity and significant differences, uniting them in confronting the Syrian government, sources close to the Future Movement said Wednesday.
Though Tripoli is home to Islamist groups such as al-Jamaa al-Islamiya, Hizb ut-Tahrir and the Salafist Movement, the majority of the city’s large Sunni community supports the Future Movement and its former allies turned political foes, including Prime Minister Najib Mikati and Finance Minister Mohammad Safadi.
But despite their relatively small popular base, the Salafist Movement and Hizb ut-Tahrir have succeeded in bringing thousands of people to the streets after evening prayers over the past few weeks, as sheikhs call on believers to express their support for the Syrian people.
The mounting anger of the groups toward the Syrian leadership has also led to increasing tensions with Hezbollah, which maintains its support for President Bashar Assad and his government.
Protesters in Tripoli have shown their hostility toward Hezbollah by burning the party’s flag during demonstrations and other acts that threaten to exacerbate divisions between the country’s Sunni and Shiite communities.
The sources believe that the protests organized by Islamist groups demonstrate Mikati’s failure to lure these groups to his side, leading to more pressure on him and his ministers in his hometown of Tripoli and among the ranks of its Sunni community.
The sources added that Mikati cannot come out against his supporters who are expressing their support for the Syrian people, as it would increase tensions among communities in Tripoli and undermine his popularity among its residents.
But as the protests condemning the Syrian authorities take place on a nearly daily basis, a number of officials who do not belong to Islamist movements have also rallied in solidarity with the Syrian people, the sources said.
Arabi Akkawi is a member of Tripoli’s municipal council who recently called on his supporters “to participate in movements to express solidarity with the Syrian people, particularly since Tripoli experienced the actions of the Syrian regime for several decades.”
The face-off between rival March 8 and March 14 camps over the country’s official position on the growing crisis in Syria has heated up, as Damascus faces growing diplomatic isolation in the region.
The Hezbollah-led March 8 coalition continues to defend the Syrian regime, while the Future Movement-led March 14 alliance maintains its criticism of Syrian authorities, even accusing them of crimes against humanity.
(The Daily Star :: Lebanon News :: http://www.dailystar.com.lb)
British government begins stealing its peoples’ bank deposits ahead of the global financial collapse.
A police officer ordered by the government to rob the people.
It happened before and it is starting again. Government confiscating (stealing) the people’s life savings. Just like in 1929 the British government began its theft of the people’s life savings just before the Great Depression. After an inflationary run-up in prices and asset values, the stock market crashed in 1929, and the economy soon went with the crash. This time the British government is disguising its outright theft by claiming the entire contents of safety deposit banks are owned by criminals and the contents are the proceeds of crimes.
In March of 2011 the British Prime Minister David Cameron ordered British police to execute Operation Rize – raid and seize the entire contents (art, gold ingots, gold dust, jewelery and cash) of nearly 7,000 safety deposit boxes from three vaults in London. The British government simply told Scotland Yard that the safety deposit boxes were used by criminals to store cash, guns and drugs.
The British government instructed the police to arrest anyone who went to the vaults to try and recover the contents of their safety deposit boxes. Those who protested the seizure of the contents of their safety deposit boxes were to be charged with various offenses including pedophilia, money-laundering, drug-dealing and firearms possession.
When word spread about the government raid and theft of the contents of their safety deposit boxes people rushed to the bank vaults. The police arrested 146 and charged 30 (those with the most cash and gold in their safety deposit boxes) with trumped up pedophilia, money-laundering, drug-dealing and firearms charges.
This isn’t the first time the British government ordered the seizure of its people’s deposits. Back in June 2008, 1 year after the global economic crisis began, policearmed with automatic weapons (shown in above image) were ordered by Gordon Brown to seize (to take by force) thousands of deposit boxes, ranging from small book-sized boxes to large walk-in safes in a string of west London raids. Armed robbery is defined as a crime ” involving the use of a weapon in the taking of money or goods in the possession of another, from his or her person or immediate presence“.
The contents of safety deposit boxes were stolen by the British government from Park Lane Safe Depository in Park Street, Hampstead Safe Depository in Finchley Road, and Edgware Safe Depository in High Street, Edgware.
The British government came up with the idea back in 2006. The British government needed new money and the only new and real money was being held by the people in safety deposit boxes. The government can’t tax what is sitting for years in thousands of safety deposit boxes so they decided to confiscate it all. The confiscation of the people’s money was codenamed Operation Rize. Operation Rize being code for Ruse. The ruse is the British government labeling all safety deposit box owners as criminals in order to steal the valuable contents of their safety deposit boxes. Every safety deposit box in the largest vaults in London were ordered raided based entirely on the British government’s assertion that a handful of safety deposit box owners were suspected of being corrupt.
Why is this significant for people in the United States? The U.S. government is preparing to do the same in the United States.
The U.S. government has been stealing its people’s money since 2008 and the only real money ($trillions) left in the United States is being kept in its peoples’ safety deposit boxes. The U.S. government has lost its prized AAA rating and the S&P made it known that it could drop it again in November. Yesterday,Guan Jianzhong, chairman of Dagong Global Credit Rating, said the U.S. currency (the worthless Federal Reserve Note) is being “gradually discarded by the world,” and the “process will be irreversible.” Because of the rating downgrade and foreign governments dropping the worthless Federal Reserve Note, the U.S. government is being forced by the Federal Reserve bankers to make preparations to confiscate the people’s valuable financial assets held in safety deposit boxes across the U.S. by using the same false accusation as the British government – all safety deposit box owners are criminals and the contents of those boxes deemed to be criminal proceeds.
Government confiscation (theft) of its peoples gold dates back to the Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917. In 1917, President Woodrow Wilson was forced by the bankers of the newly formed Federal Reserve to sign the “TWEA” into law, forbidding American individuals and businesses from engaging in trade with “enemy nations.” The world’s functional gold standard, which had overseen tremendous global economic growth in the early years of the twentieth century, was effectively halted by the Federal Reserve bankers and the outbreak of World War I soon followed. With gold no longer being the standard for trade (the worthless counterfeit Federal Reserve Note replaced it) the stage was thus set for the Great Depression and World War II.
Shortly after taking office sixteen years later, Franklin Delano Roosevelt was forced by the Federal Reserve bankers to sign Executive Order 6102 into law, prohibiting the “hoarding” of gold. Under this Federal Reserve order, Americans were prohibited from owning more than $100 worth of gold coins, and all “hoarders” (i.e. people who owned more than $100 worth of gold) were forced, by law, to sell their “excess” gold to the Federal Reserve bankers at the prevailing price of $20.67 per ounce.
Then, once the Federal Reserve bankers had all the gold, FDR revalued the dollar relative to gold so that gold was now worth $35 an ounce. By simple decree, the Federal Reserve bankers had thereby robbed millions of American citizens at a rate of $14.33 per ounce of confiscated gold, which is why most historians agree that the Gold Confiscation of 1933 was the single most draconian economic act in the history of the United States – that is until the Federal Reserve bankers did it again 75 years later.
On November 24, 2008, U.S. Republican Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) wrote, “In bailing out failing companies, they are confiscating money from productive members of the economy and giving it to failing ones. By sustaining companies with obsolete or unsustainable business models, the government prevents their resources from being liquidated and made available to other companies that can put them to better, more productive use. An essential element of a healthy free market, is that both success and failure must be permitted to happen when they are earned. But instead with a bailout, the rewards are reversed – the proceeds from successful entities are given to failing ones. How this is supposed to be good for our economy is beyond me…. It won’t work. It can’t work… It is obvious to most Americans that we need to reject corporate cronyism, and allow the natural regulations and incentives of the free market to pick the winners and losers in our economy, not the whims of bureaucrats and politicians.”
The trigger that apparently caused the market meltdown was the ever-so-slight suggestion from Standard & Poor’s that the US government’s fiscal health might not be all that it is cracked up to be.
This was not a case of the little boy noting the emperor has no clothes. It is more like the little boy suggested that the emperor’s clothes, while beautiful, might have been more carefully tailored to suit the imperial dignity. Hysteria followed, and the entire Obama cult called for the kid to be stoned.
Finally the emperor himself spoke in defense of his rainment. That’s when the market crashed.
But the downgrading of a government’s debt from AAA to AA+ can only have triggered a market avalanche if the truth is in fact much worse, and most everyone knows it.
S&P doesn’t have clean hands, of course. It holds a government monopoly, wants higher taxes, and rated crazed housing bonds AAA. But imagine, for just a moment, that US government debt were rated in the same way that municipal bonds or regular corporate debt are. Imagine that government bonds, like normal bonds, carried a default premium. Imagine, in other words, that the Federal Reserve were not in a position to pay everyone from welfare recipients to banksters with newly created money.
Under such actual market conditions, federal debt would not be rated as AA+. It would be worth even less than junk bonds. In fact, it wouldn’t even qualify for a market rating at all, because it would be utterly worthless and the institution that issued it would be in default and the whole rotten apparatus of the state would be seen to be bankrupt at its very core, in every sense.
We know this for one simple reason: There is no way that the government can fund its debt on taxes alone. There would be a revolution in this country in a heartbeat, and, probably, the entire American empire, domestic and foreign, would come crashing down, along with its banking and monetary systems.
If this actually happened, there would be no more “ongoing negotiations” about the budget and the debt. The cuts would be swift, extreme, gigantic. The federal government would have to behave like state governments, balancing the budget year to year. There would be no more plans for fake cuts in the planned increases, gradually phased in over ten years. The federal government would face actual market discipline. The S&P downgrade is only a slight taste of what would follow.
And let’s not just look at the downside. Hundreds of billions in resources would be freed from government control. The private sector would experience a huge infusion of energy. Interest rates would probably go through the roof, which means that people would actually be rewarded for saving, and saving is exactly what people would do as hundreds of banks went belly-up, large portions of the business sector had their credit lines cut, and merchants of death had to close their bloody doors.
There would be wailing and gnashing of teeth, but there would be no turning back. Within a few months, we would start seeing massive resource shifts and pockets of growth would return. New jobs would be available. New businesses would spring up. New financial firms would displace the old ones. Within a year or 18 months, we would be on a growth path, and this time it would be real and sustainable.
Of course this is not going to happen. Instead, the powers-that-be will continue their long game of “let’s pretend” as the economy sinks deeper and deeper, incomes fall, and the US gradually heads toward 3rd-world basket case status.
It’s not only the government that is bankrupt, of course. It’s the entire ideological apparatus that backs the state and its eternal expansion. TheNew York Times struggled for something to say about the obvious failure of the second stimulus. All they could come up with was: “shift every available resource toward jobs,” “increased investment in infrastructure,” more relief for homeowners, and another extension of unemployment benefits.
The only thing that this asinine editorial left out was the need to lower interest rates. And that’s because interest rates are already 0%, which has killed saving, terminated growth, and denied the public the fundamental freedom to sock away money in time deposits and let it earn something in exchange. The Federal Reserve is completely out of policy options, unless it is ready to embrace the Zimbabwe-Weimar solution.
Of course, the whole theory that the government can stimulate through control and robbery is wrong and counterproductive. It only ends up rewarding government and its friends while the rest of us suffer. If we ever get out of this depression, it will be because government is forced to stop this nonsense, and the economy really stimulated by taking a meat axe to the planning-spending-inflating apparatus.
This is the underlying reality that informed traders understand. The whole system is being propped up by the power to print, and that power alone. No matter how many miracles some people think that paper money can accomplish, there is an underlying realization that the whole system is a hoax.
But don’t take my word for it. Let S&P and many more competitive rating agencies go to town on US bonds and rate them as they would any bond in the private sector or even the public sector not backed by a printing press. Let reality speak, and let us listen.
August 10, 2011
Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. [send him mail], former editorial assistant to Ludwig von Mises and congressional chief of staff to Ron Paul, is founder and chairman of the Mises Institute, executor for the estate of Murray N. Rothbard, and editor of LewRockwell.com. See his books.
Copyright © 2011 by LewRockwell.com
By PETER LEONARD, Associated Press
ALMATY, Kazakhstan (AP) — Authorities in Uzbekistan have blocked dozens of Internet sites in an apparent attempt to further stem the flow of information into the authoritarian Central Asian nation, online media said Thursday.
Uzbekistan-focused independent news portal UzNews.net said that The New York Times and other major Western media outlets have been made unavailable as of this week. It also said that out of 65 Russia-based news websites, at least 29 appear to have been made unavailable to Internet users inside the country. Uzbeks draw most of the news about their country from Russian-language websites.
Central Asian news portal Ferghana and the editor of Uzbekistan-based news service Vesti.uzhave reported a number of domestic sites going offline. Sites operating from neighboring Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan also appear to have been affected.
Uzbekistan has been ruled for more than two decades by President Islam Karimov, who tolerates no dissent and harshly clamps down on all opposition to his regime.
U.S. advocacy group Freedom House gives Uzbekistan its lowest possible ranking for media freedoms. It says authorities have “purged the country of independent media” and continue to harass journalists whose version of events in Uzbekistan challenges the official account.
Authorities have routinely filtered foreign sites that carry detailed news on Uzbekistan for several years.
Reporters for most major international news agencies, including The Associated Press, are routinely refused accreditation to report from Uzbekistan.
A major wave of censorship was enacted in 2005, after government troops violently suppressed an uprising in the eastern town of Andijan. Authorities say 187 people died, but witnesses and rights activists say the real number was much higher.
The websites of the BBC and international German broadcaster Deutsche Welle have been blocked for several years, but UzNews say banned sites now also include those of The New York Times, The Financial Times and Reuters news agency.
The blockage of all new sources of information “bears witness to how worried Uzbek authorities are about the influence of the Internet on social activism,” said Daniil Kislov, editor of Ferghana, which has also long been inaccessible in Uzbekistan.
Kislov says that the Uzbek government is also growing increasingly alarmed at indications that exiled opposition groups are starting to mobilize and at possible incursion from militants in neighboring Afghanistan.
“I have no information that the President of Uzbekistan will attend the summit. Once he talked about the intention to participate in the summit. A few days ago he refused to participate,” Bordyuzha told journalists.
All the rest heads of state will attend the top level meeting. The organization’s member states are not expected to sign any documents, says CSTO head.