odd and counterproductive satire?

[C.Rich]

Sail away with me on a voyage of my mind. Let’s play a game. It’s kinda like “Where’s  Waldo,” but in this case, it will be common sense and logic we search for. Let us for a moment imagine what it would be like if I was a banker being blamed for the destruction of America’s economy.

Okay, here we go…  Now I’m a banker just going through life minding my own business doing my banking things in the world of finance. One day there is a knock at my door and it’s President Jimmy Carter. He tells me that from now on he wants me to take a small percentage of the money I loan out and give to poor people and minorities who don’t fit the criteria of a loan applicant and give them loans. The President tells me that there is a disproportionate number of minorities and poor people who do not have access to “The American Dream” and deserve, like other Americans, the opportunity...

[Read More http://americaspeaksink.com/2009/02/the-banks-it-is-not-their-fault/...]

[nedc]

Now lets imagine that I, the banker, use the value of these loans (that I know are more likely to default than the average loan) as my collateral for lending up to ten times the amount.  I then use the value of the new loans as my collateral for lending up to ten times the amount. etc, etc, etc.

Now I, the banker, bundle up the bad loans into these complex financial instruments and bribe financial rating services to rate them as a great investments to get people to buy them.  Now I use the value as my collateral again for lending up to ten times the amount.  etc, etc, etc.

Now I, the banker, let investors gamble on the whole pile of debt as to whether the value will go up or down.  Now I use this money as my collateral again for lending up to ten times the amount.  etc, etc, etc.

Everyone's gambling.  I'm making commissions every step of the way.  Life is GREAT!

Then the bubble pops!  The house of cards falls.  Don't blame me.  How was I supposed to foresee that?  It's not my fault!

I'll be over here counting my money.

Now, go away little troll.

[Vipercat]

When you live in a cheap apartment with the heat turned off in the middle of winter, or drive anything cheaper than a rolls royce, or do anything by yourself or actually earn your money, maybe then I will have sympathy for you. If it is not your fault then why are you taking our money and giving us nothing in return? You are a failed business model and the government needs to stop stealing from us to prop up your lame fraudulant schemes and let you either succeed or fail on your own. It's not your fault though, you just love money and don't want to give it back or spend it responsibly.

[C.Rich]

Well nedc, a very good extension of the voyage through my mind through your eyes. Can't argue with much of that. It all seems grounded in common sense and logic. Instead of looking at it like I'm an apologist for the banks, understand that it is the origin of all of this that I'm trying to get to. The banks and the corrupt culture that ensued is just a symptom of the original problem. You have to remember these things that are going on in the banking industry right now, at one time, were completely against the law. What made any of this possible is government's involvement in the free market and in this particular case, the financial industry.

The genesis from all of this madness is left-wing, liberal theology. It is the "good intentions" crowd. The crowd that is so full of good intentions that every time that they impose it, it falls apart in practicality. Some people believe that the greatest threat to America is extreme Muslim behavior. I'd like to take issue with the fact that maybe even more destructive is the "good intentions" crowd. None of this would have been possible at all until the government tried some social experience with banking, imposing themselves in a free market structure and asking them to give out loans to people that can't pay them. Nothing could screw up the world faster than people with good intentions and it is that crowd, that theology that started all of this. So, it's hard for me to just focus on the greed of the banks and their felonious behavior when I realize that they couldn't have even started any of this if it weren't for our liberal government intervention into the free market.

Thanks for reading!

C. Rich

[nedc]

Instead of looking at it like I'm an apologist for the banks, understand that it is the origin of all of this that I'm trying to get to.

I appreciate that.

The only problems I have with your analysis is that you ignore the inherent danger of our fractional reserve system, and you write of "the bankers" and "wall street" as if they are two different entities.

I agree that the government's involvement in the free market and the financial industry contributed greatly to the current crises.  But, even with a mandated percentage of mortgages going to people that should not have been qualified, the damages would have been limited without a fractional reserve banking system.  That is the true origin that we need to get to.  That is what should be against the law.

To say that "wall street" did something and it therefore isn't "the bankers" fault is doublespeak.  They are one and the same.

Your quote, "left-wing, liberal theology" shows that you are still stuck in the "left vs. right" paradigm.  If that were true, Reagan would have undone Carter's mistake and George W. would have undone Clinton's mistake.  Neither did because "they" (the left and right) are both working towards the same goal.  Until you see past that, you will always be arguing about distractions that they hope you will argue about instead of getting to the true origin of all the problems.

[C.Rich]

Certainly with the large banks the distinction of their identity is more blurred, however, I just don't see a small neighborhood community bank identifying themselves with Wall Street. The distinction or non-distinction of banks and wall street was even more blurred when wall street changed the definition of whether they were a bank or not a bank to qualify for the bailout money.

[Geolibertarian]

Let us for a moment imagine what it would be like if I was a banker being blamed for the destruction of America’s economy.

And all the while, let's pay no attention to those banker-created derivatives behind the curtain. 

Okay, here we go…  Now I’m a banker just going through life minding my own business doing my banking things in the world of finance.

Like lending "money" you don't even have and charging interest on it (the ultimate "something for nothing" scam):

       http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9050474362583451279

You might euphemistically call that doing your own "banking things" in the world of "finance." I call it doing your own economic free-riding in the world of privilege.
 

One day there is a knock at my door and it’s President Jimmy Carter. He tells me that from now on he wants me to take a small percentage of the money I loan out and give to poor people and minorities who don’t fit the criteria of a loan applicant and give them loans. The President tells me that there is a disproportionate number of minorities and poor people who do not have access to “The American Dream” and deserve, like other Americans, the opportunity...

Let's have a reality check, shall we?

In 2008, total mortgage debt in the U.S. was roughly fourteen trillion, while total derivatives debt was over a thousand trillion.

The financial meltdown has FAR more to do with the quadrillion-plus derivatives bubble than with the housing bubble:

--------------------------------------------

IT’S THE DERIVATIVES, STUPID!
WHY FANNIE, FREDDIE AND AIG ALL HAD TO BE BAILED OUT

Ellen Brown, September 18, 2008
www.webofdebt.com/articles/its_the_derivatives.php

“I can calculate the movement of the stars, but not the madness of men.”
– Sir Isaac Newton, after losing a fortune in the South Sea bubble


Something extraordinary is going on with these government bailouts.  In March 2008, the Federal Reserve extended a $55 billion loan to JPMorgan to “rescue” investment bank Bear Stearns from bankruptcy, a highly controversial move that tested the limits of the Federal Reserve Act.  On September 7, 2008, the U.S. government seized private mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and imposed a conservatorship, a form of bankruptcy; but rather than let the bankruptcy court sort out the assets among the claimants, the Treasury extended an unlimited credit line to the insolvent corporations and said it would exercise its authority to buy their stock, effectively nationalizing them.  Now the Federal Reserve has announced that it is giving an $85 billion loan to American International Group (AIG), the world’s largest insurance company, in exchange for a nearly 80% stake in the insurer . . . .

The Fed is buying an insurance company?  Where exactly is that covered in the Federal Reserve Act?  The Associated Press calls it a “government takeover,” but this is not your ordinary “nationalization” like the purchase of Fannie/Freddie stock by the U.S. Treasury.  The Federal Reserve has the power to print the national money supply, but it is not actually a part of the U.S. government.  It is a private banking corporation owned by a consortium of private banks.  The banking industry just bought the world’s largest insurance company, and they used federal money to do it.  Yahoo Finance reported on September 17:

“The Treasury is setting up a temporary financing program at the Fed’s request. The program will auction Treasury bills to raise cash for the Fed’s use. The initiative aims to help the Fed manage its balance sheet following its efforts to enhance its liquidity facilities over the previous few quarters.”

Treasury bills are the I.O.U.s of the federal government.  We the taxpayers are on the hook for the Fed’s “enhanced liquidity facilities,” meaning the loans it has been making to everyone in sight, bank or non-bank, exercising obscure provisions in the Federal Reserve Act that may or may not say they can do it.  What’s going on here?  Why not let the free market work?  Bankruptcy courts know how to sort out assets and reorganize companies so they can operate again.  Why the extraordinary measures for Fannie, Freddie and AIG? 

The answer may have less to do with saving the insurance business, the housing market, or the Chinese investors clamoring for a bailout than with the greatest Ponzi scheme in history, one that is holding up the entire private global banking system.  What had to be saved at all costs was not housing or the dollar but the financial derivatives industry; and the precipice from which it had to be saved was an “event of default” that could have collapsed a quadrillion dollar derivatives bubble, a collapse that could take the entire global banking system down with it.

The Anatomy of a Bubble

Until recently, most people had never even heard of derivatives; but in terms of money traded, these investments represent the biggest financial market in the world.  Derivatives are financial instruments that have no intrinsic value but derive their value from something else.  Basically, they are just bets.  You can “hedge your bet” that something you own will go up by placing a side bet that it will go down.  “Hedge funds” hedge bets in the derivatives market.  Bets can be placed on anything, from the price of tea in China to the movements of specific markets. 

“The point everyone misses,” wrote economist Robert Chapman a decade ago, “is that buying derivatives is not investing.  It is gambling, insurance and high stakes bookmaking.  Derivatives create nothing.”  They not only create nothing, but they serve to enrich non-producers at the expense of the people who do create real goods and services.  In congressional hearings in the early 1990s, derivatives trading was challenged as being an illegal form of gambling.  But the practice was legitimized by Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan, who not only lent legal and regulatory support to the trade but actively promoted derivatives as a way to improve “risk management.”  Partly, this was to boost the flagging profits of the banks; and at the larger banks and dealers, it worked.  But the cost was an increase in risk to the financial system as a whole.

Since then, derivative trades have grown exponentially, until now they are larger than the entire global economy.  The Bank for International Settlements recently reported that total derivatives trades exceeded one quadrillion dollars – that’s 1,000 trillion dollars.  How is that figure even possible?  The gross domestic product of all the countries in the world is only about 60 trillion dollars.  The answer is that gamblers can bet as much as they want.  They can bet money they don’t have, and that is where the huge increase in risk comes in.   

Credit default swaps (CDS) are the most widely traded form of credit derivative.  CDS are bets between two parties on whether or not a company will default on its bonds.  In a typical default swap, the “protection buyer” gets a large payoff from the “protection seller” if the company defaults within a certain period of time, while the “protection seller” collects periodic payments from the “protection buyer” for assuming the risk of default.  CDS thus resemble insurance policies, but there is no requirement to actually hold any asset or suffer any loss, so CDS are widely used just to increase profits by gambling on market changes.  In one blogger’s example, a hedge fund could sit back and collect $320,000 a year in premiums just for selling “protection” on a risky BBB junk bond. The premiums are “free” money – free until the bond actually goes into default, when the hedge fund could be on the hook for $100 million in claims. 

And there’s the catch: what if the hedge fund doesn’t have the $100 million?  The fund’s corporate shell or limited partnership is put into bankruptcy; but both parties are claiming the derivative as an asset on their books, which they now have to write down.  Players who have “hedged their bets” by betting both ways cannot collect on their winning bets; and that means they cannot afford to pay their losing bets, causing other players to also default on their bets. 

The dominos go down in a cascade of cross-defaults that infects the whole banking industry and jeopardizes the global pyramid scheme.  The potential for this sort of nuclear reaction was what prompted billionaire investor Warren Buffett to call derivatives “weapons of financial mass destruction.”  It is also why the banking system cannot let a major derivatives player go down, and it is the banking system that calls the shots.  The Federal Reserve is literally owned by a conglomerate of banks; and Hank Paulson, who heads the U.S. Treasury, entered that position through the revolving door of investment bank Goldman Sachs, where he was formerly CEO. 

[Continued...]

--------------------------------------------


But since derivatives are entirely the creation of Wall St. casino gamblers -- and therefore not attributable to any of the unwise borrowing decisions that cash-strapped wage-earners may have made -- people who are in the habit of scapegoating the poor for the crimes of the rich prefer to not even mention the word derivatives, and to focus instead on the comparatively small "housing" bubble, since that allows them to pretend that the working poor ("minorities" especially) are more to blame for this mess than criminal scan artists such as Henry Paulson and Bernard Madoff. In reality, the latter are far more to blame than the former.

Another key fact that many right-wing ideologues love to ignore is that Wall St. casino gamblers could never have created the derivatives bubble in the first place had the Glass-Steagall Act -- a form of "government intervention" -- not been repealed in 1999 (by a Democratic President and, yes, a Republican Congress):

       http://www.counterpunch.org/kaufman09192008.html
       http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10588

[Revolt426]

The BANKS - IT IS THEIR FAULT:
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=86631.0


Re: Tarpley on the 13th "Fight or Die"

The point of the broadcast was essentially "We are going to die if we let the economy correct itself" and it was dead on balls accurate.

This is not a natural "CORRECTION" to all who believe the Economies invisible hand always swoops down and saves it....... This is an orchestrated collapse.

The point of this broadcast was, the ideology that we should inject more cash into the banking system to save the physical economy when the banks are bankrupt is STUPID . The Markets are NOT fixing themselves - i am sorry to all who think that they will but they will NOT.

He used an excellent metaphore , a "Dracula" metaphore. Suppose Dracula (The BANKS) are sucking the blood out of a victim (The economy). Do we give Dracula a blood transfusion and hope the blood reaches the victim, OR do we take Dracula, rip him off the victim, drive a stake through his heart and give the VICTIM a Transfusion.

[C.Rich]

Nothing silences the way out, left wing, protesting fringe groups like a democrat presidency. Oh yeah, these obstreperous groups protesting everything under the sun seem to go back under the rock they crawled out from when there is a democrat in office. We all remember the thundering silence from anti-war groups when it was President Clinton blowing the arms off little babies with his Nintendo War from the sky over...

[Read More http://americaspeaksink.com/2009/02/obama-administration-silences-human-rights-groups/ ...]

[C.Rich]

With breathless anticipation and baited breath the world finally has been given the order and rankings of American Presidents. Yes, the baby boomers have thought it out and now know how to rank every American President and place their importance in history according to “their perception” of history. I know. I know. We have been waiting for a long time. We just couldn’t be sure of the importance of each and every President without the unclouded and unbiased views of the aging American baby boomers. I’m sure that with their omniscient view of America and their Presidents, there could be no mistake that only ‘they’ could give such an unbiased way of looking at history.

I’m sure JFK would never be on top of their list, with the very little time he was “actually” an American President. I mean that would be the total “unveiling” ...

[Read More... http://americaspeaksink.com/2009/02/the-baby-boomers-have-ranked-every-american-president/ ]

[C.Rich]

Recently, I went to Orlando, Florida where a friend was having a baby. The experience of going to this maternity ward was somewhat of a shock to me. It’s been many years since I have been in a maternity ward to see a newborn. What caught me off guard was the security that surrounded this hospital and the realization that our children are being born in a fortress.

This was a woman’s hospital that was named after the golfer, Arnold Palmer’s wife’s name, Winnie. I have never seen anything like this. When you walk into the place you have to immediately report to the guards and produce a photo ID. Then, they take your ID and take a picture...

[Read More   http://americaspeaksink.com/2009/02/our-children-are-born-in-a-fortress/  ...]

 

[C.Rich]

With the American economy in a free fall and nothing but socialist solutions are on the table or even being considered, wouldn't this be the perfect time to do an experiment? Every economist on the left and right has said that nothing will get any better for this year, 2009. Not one single economist is saying we "will" turn this around this year.

Since both sides have surrendered to defeat and have written off this entire year, why not try "The Fair Tax?" If we are screwed anyway, why not  try something bold? For one year, a year that's shot anyway, try "The Fair Tax" and see if it works and sets off the American economy. If it doesn't spark the financial world, bring money home to the US, bring jobs back to the homeland, bring the manufacturing base back to America and increase revenue to the treasury, then...

[Read More  http://americaspeaksink.com/2009/02/perfect-time-for-the-fair-tax/  ...]

[Letsbereal]

A Fair Tax only will not save they economy it could be something to think about later.

The problem now is that depth is financed with depth which definitely is not the way to go as you see the catastrophe unfolding now before your eyes as we speak.

The only sane solution is what Peter Schiff has been saying for a long time now.

- First default
- Less government spending so no more very very expensive Bailouts and Wars
- Smaller government
- Bring the Market back without all the government interference

They won't do this so this crises will go on for years now before the lesson is learned and people finally awaken from their Coulée drinking.

[whatawonderfulworld]

Nothing silences the way out, left wing, protesting fringe groups like a democrat presidency. Oh yeah, these obstreperous groups protesting everything under the sun seem to go back under the rock they crawled out from when there is a democrat in office. We all remember the thundering silence from anti-war groups when it was President Clinton blowing the arms off little babies with his Nintendo War from the sky over...

[Read More http://americaspeaksink.com/2009/02/obama-administration-silences-human-rights-groups/ ...]


libs suck

they dont care aout how usa bombed serbs

[nedc]

Left / Right = Divide and conquer

At the top, they are one and the same.

[C.Rich]

There are a few elements that are starting to diverge at the same time and spark a domino effect. The first spark would be the fact that Iran has now crossed what is called “The Red Line” and has enough plutonium to have a nuclear bomb. This is the line that the United States and the rest of the world said could never be crossed or allowed to happen. Well with all that said, Iran has the bomb.

The second spark with a timely arrival, was the Israeli election and return to power of Benjamin Netanyahu and his no nonsense way of governing. Make no mistake about it, Netanyahu will not put up with anything from Muslims. He is the toughest leader Israel has...

[Read More  http://americaspeaksink.com/2009/02/three-sparks-till-another-world-war/ ...]

[Boubear]

Netanyahu, is a warmonger, and is itching to go to war, make no mistake about that.  Iran doesn't have the bomb, this is all propaganda, so they have a reason to attack them!!

[grapecrusher1]

Netanyahu, is a warmonger, and is itching to go to war, make no mistake about that.  Iran doesn't have the bomb, this is all propaganda, so they have a reason to attack them!!

Precisely -- the IAEA has said Iran was 4 years at least from making a weapon.  Show us a reputable source that says they have one.  BTW i have heard all the rhetoric as well.

[TheGoodFight1984]

What Boubear said. The very idea of a nuke is repulsive to the Shia religion..

Why do people buy this shit after it's been in the news for the last however many years that saddam hussein had no WMD's and it was all a fabrication.

Some really do not notice when history repeats itself.

[CANADIAN-guerilla]

The second spark with a timely arrival, was the Israeli election and return to power of Benjamin Netanyahu and his no nonsense way of governing. Make no mistake about it, Netanyahu will not put up with anything from Muslims. He is the toughest leader Israel has...

you're sounding like an Israeli-firster and hoping for a war with Iran . . .

[IridiumKEPfactor]

I would not be surprised if an attack on Iran will be the distracting event that would rally people around the flag and will provide cover for a worsening crisis. China is one of the firewalls the the U.S. is trying to brake through. Hillary's visit was basically to beg and threaten China to finance our the "2nd stimulus" and to finance our potential involvement with supporting Israel against Iran.

[Avers]

Netanyahu is not in power yet, although I do not doubt that he will be able speed up such a process. But I think Israel can be safely compared to the US (and probably a lot of other nations as well) in the sense that policy is not being decided by those who are publicly in power, but dictated by those behind the screens. And those people have had Iran in their sights for a while now. So yes, no question that action will eventually be taken, but not because of Netanyahu gaining power (which is not even certain he will).

Second, it is very important to note that Iran does NOT have enough material to build a nuclear bomb. It is reported that Iran has enough low grade material which could eventually be spinned-up to a higher grade, which could then be used for a nuclear bomb. But Iran currently does not have the capabilities to do that yet and possibly never will, depending on which piece of propaganda you're inclined to believe. All this is stated in the original IAEA report but has either been pushed to the background or not mentioned at all to create a nice propaganda piece to scare the general public, very much like the 'IRAQ has WMD' message in 2002/3.

Thirdly, I do not see any benefit financially for the US. If Israel is going to take action it will be a precision strike, not a full out war. Sure they may use a few US made bunker busters which will then have to be replaced, but it is not going to be like Iraq or Afghanistan where US companies are currently earning billions of dollars from the death and misery of others. Only in the unlikely case that such an action will result in a regional conflict very quickly, will the US, and most likely a large postion of NATO as well, be pulled in. Personally I think that it is not yet time for such a conflict, although the upcoming precision strike from Israel on Iran should be seen as the lighting of a very long, slow burning fuse (and a nice distraction for the US public from the economic issues to boot) which will reach its destination somewhere in the fall of this year, or early 2010.

[C.Rich]

Great Reply!   Thanks for following.

[Spark of Truth Inc.]

So I decided to keep track of the CFR and downloaded their free app for the iPhone. (reports, summaries, anlysis, interviews).

On Friday, 20th Feb. there was an interview concerning the Iranian program.

A gentleman by the name David Albright, founder of the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) - nice Egyptian reference right here - and onboard of the National Security Council in the White House, a physist from George Mason University, Virginia and a long term expert on Iran's nuclear program says:

"Iran will probably accumulate enough low-enriched uranium this year (2009) to reach the first level of breakout capability, namely enough low-enriched uranium to make one nuclear weapon"

Link:
www.isis-online.org/about/staff/dalbright.html

Israel will be cornered to act upon this development, it's the tipping point, as it seems to me to divide religions and conquer them all by debt.

And Pakistan is broke as well.

East Europe bankrott and Austrian & Swiss banks heavily exposed to defaulting east european credits and currencies.

Mass movement of angry folks through open borders towards western europe.
Switzerland takes the €, UK takes the €.

Civil unrest, tax revolts during a recession in the US.

Failing crops all over the world.

Holy macro, that's the perfect storm. Bring it on, let's sort this out once and for all.

[C.Rich]

Another great reply. I see there are some thinking people out there !---Thanks for following.

[Letsbereal]

With so many lies and propaganda around I don't know what to believe anymore?

CFR certainly can not be trusted that's also a big problem.

Half year ago I heard they are at least 11 years away of a nuclear bomb and today I hear they have the Nuke 

It's merely depending on the plans that the CFR have set out and they decide what we have to take as real while non of it really is.

What I don't understand is why a country with such enrichments of cheap oil like Iran needs nuclear reactors for which have very nasty byproducts?

To sel even more oil? The people of Iran live in poverty so they didn't get much of the very easy made oil money.

Why don't they invest their easy made oil money in SOLAR PANELS they have lots of sun hours?

In contrary to the Germans who do invest massively in SOLAR POWER?

[Letsbereal]

Before reading this story it is maybe useful to know that Russia also made an oil deal with Iran recently.

Maybe Russia is also providing Iran with weapons secretly which would be the ultimate revenge against the U.S. of helping the Talibans when Russia was in Afghanistan.

I already wondered why they not provide the Talibans with Russian equivalent of the Stinger so successfully used by the Talibans against the Russians

But now I understand why, the revenge will be helping Iran.

China also has an oil deal with Iran.

This will make things more complicated for the U.S. and Israel.

Iran’s Nuclear Ambitions – Western Buffer, Eastern Bulwark
11 February 2005, by Andy Mason London, England
http://www.worldpress.org/Mideast/2027.cfm#down

Photo: President Mohammad Khatami of Iran addresses a crowd at a rally held yesterday to mark the 26th anniversary of the 1979 Islamic Revolution. (Photo: Atta Kenare / AFP-Getty Images)

The powerful European Union trio of Britain, France and Germany has attempted to thwart Iran’s nuclear progress diplomatically. The United States and Israel have threatened pre-emptive strikes against its nuclear sites. Yet still Iran flouts any attempt to nullify its nuclear program. Is this because of a deep-seated disregard for the West or is it due to the ongoing technological and diplomatic support Tehran is receiving from Moscow and Beijing?

The answer to this is, probably both.
Promises and Pacts

In late November 2004, Tehran made promises to Britain, France and Germany to freeze its uranium enrichment processes, under the threat of potential trade sanctions, and with the promise of compliance bringing the antithesis of such an eventuality.

However, Gholam Reza Aghazadeh, Iran’s nuclear chief, has recently authorized the construction of a facility to produce anhydrous hydrogen fluoride, a gas that can be used to produce highly enriched uranium. The plant itself is to be built near the town of Isfahan close to one of Iran’s many (secret) nuclear sites. Although the gas is not classified as a nuclear technology, and thus potentially not a controlled substance, its use to convert uranium tetraflouride to uranium hexaflouride (used in atom bombs) is a contentious point for Foreign Minister Jack Straw of Britain et al., who hammered out the previous agreement with the Islamic Republic.

Iran has constantly deployed delaying tactics in recent months, so as to continue its uranium enrichment processes and has pushed the letter of the deal made with the Union trio to the limit. The accord with the Union trio allowed Iran to finish processing some 37 tonnes of “yellowcake” uranium that it had already been using to “test” the conversion facility at Isfahan, and it may do so until February. However, the conversion of this amount can produce enough highly enriched uranium for five nuclear weapons. This does not inspire much western confidence in Tehran, and thus a further showdown looks set to take place in the coming months, but with the presence of a supportive Russia and China, Iran undoubtedly has a few more cards to play.
Communist Capitalist

Iran’s relationship with China is currently growing exponentially, due to the communist state’s insatiable energy needs. (According to the Washington Post, China’s energy needs climbed nearly 40 percent in the first few months of 2004). Iran is therefore meeting China’s energy needs in return for access to China’s large scale and low-cost manufacturing industry, as well as the obligatory support for nuclear co-operation.

China is currently Iran’s second largest export partner and third largest import partner, and with the contracts that are currently on the table, these positions are soon to be bettered.

In July 2004, Iranian parliamentary speaker Gholam-Ali Haddad Adel was very complimentary of the Sino-Iranian relationship. In particular, he highlighted China’s support for Iran’s nuclear programs. This aside, Iran also has unfettered access to the improving technology being developed and utilised by the People's Liberation Army of China.

According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, China has probably provided nuclear technology to Iran. This fact, coupled with Washington’s need to pressure China not to sell large quantities of anhydrous hydrogen fluoride to Iran in 2000, and rumours that Beijing may have also sold a blueprint for a facility to produce highly enriched uranium to Iran as part of the same deal, raises questions about the Sino-Iranian relationship and the possible future ramifications of continuing nuclear co-operation between China and Iran.
Russia Bears All

China’s nuclear support for Iran may be a well-known secret.

Russia’s transferral of nuclear technology to Iran, however, is no secret. It is well known, continuous and above all, increasing.

The Iranian nuclear plant at Bushehr is being built by the Russian company Atomstroiexport (Russia’s sole exporter of nuclear technology), a company which recently sold a controlling stake to Gazprombank, a subsidiary of the giant state owned gas company, Gazprom. The chairman of Gazprom, Dmitry  Medvedev, also happens to be chief of staff for President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.

Russia’s leaders also have their fingers in other Tehran pies. TVEL, Russia’s sole nuclear trader, which according to Interfax, recently appointed a close aide of Putin’s as its new chairman, is about to agree a deal with Tehran that would supply nuclear fuel to the Bushehr reactor.

Russia, unlike China, could be seen as being quite open in its dealings with Iran.

Although President Mohammad Khatami of Iran recently applauded the relationship between Moscow and Tehran with regard to nuclear energy, calling it “…positive,” Russia is remaining steadfast in its position that, as Iran is part of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, it has every right to pursue nuclear energy for peaceful means. This is fair and true, however, some believe that some of the more benign nuclear exports to Iran have dual-usage.

With Iran’s nuclear pursuit, Russia is not fairing too badly economically. The Bushehr plant brought in $800 million from the Iranians and a contract for a further seven generating units is being planned. A deal that could be worth up to $10 billion to the Russians is a deal that cannot be refused easily even under pressure from Washington.
Russo-Chinese Bulwark

The Chinese have reasons for their pro Iranian stance other than the import of Iranian energy. Politically, they are not pro the westernisation of the Middle East. Diplomatically they are not friends with Iran’s enemies. They have an aggressive stance with the United States regarding Taiwan and they are not best of friends with Israel, which welched on defense contracts. In fact, December saw a large deterioration in diplomatic relations between China and Israel that culminated in China’s deputy prime minister, Tang Jiaxuan, flying to Jerusalem to demand the immediate return of an unspecified number of Israeli-built Harpy unmanned aerial attack vehicles that were sent back to Israel for upgrading, and that have since been confiscated by the Israelis under pressure from Washington. The deputy prime minister even suggested that this episode could prove disastrous for Israeli firms operating in China (including Hong Kong). It is probable that no small amount of pressure from the United States will be sufficient to sway China away from continuing its nuclear co-operation with Iran.

Russia as well may be difficult to dissuade.

During a press conference in October 2004, Russia’s foreign minister, Sergey V. Lavrov, stated that Russia does not support the idea of referring Iran to the United Nations for sanctions and will continue nuclear co-operation with Iran.

Moscow has been seen to pressure Iran on its nuclear activities; however, Britian and the United States see Russia’s pressure as somewhat aesthetic rather than for a means to a peaceful end.

Why is Russia aiding Iran in achieving its nuclear ambitions?

There is the obvious answer that such hugely beneficial contracts aid the Russian economy. But there must be another reason. Is it geopolitical? Would a westernised Iran be detrimental to the Russians? Could a pro West Iranian government drag other Middle East countries towards the West?

Either way the push for a pro West and “democratised” Middle East is not in either Russia’s or China’s best interests. By acting as a bulwark in Iran’s nuclear development, these two powerful states could be seen to be creating a buffer to the United States’ aspirations in the region.


Brent Gregston, December 24, 2008

[Letsbereal]

(Correction Russia and Iran have a nuclear deal - Russia has plenty of oil of course)

The U.S. and Israel are facing great difficulties now cause will an attack on a already finished nuclear facility have Tsjernobyl consequences?

If so, even the Arabic world or even Israel could be contaminated if the wind blows their direction!

So, if they want to attack they have to do it before the facility is finished, if not it will be difficult.

An attack after the facility is finished could even be interpreted as an nuclear attack when you get a nuclear meltdown after the attack.

This will also set the precedent for other nuclear attacks in some form or another.

[Letsbereal]

Official stands by Iran nuke report
Insists Tehran froze program
10 December 2008, Barbara Slavin - The Washington Times
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/dec/10/official-stands-by-iran-nuke-report/

The nation's just-retired No. 2 intelligence official Tuesday defended a controversial year-old estimate on Iran, saying he stood by its conclusion that Iran suspended a nuclear-weapons program in 2003.

Thomas Fingar, who stepped down Dec. 1 from the post of deputy director of national intelligence and as chairman of the National Intelligence Council, said he also believed that Iran has not diverted low-enriched uranium produced at a facility at Natanz, 160 miles south of Tehran, to weapons use.

"I still stand by the judgments in that estimate," Mr. Fingar told a small group of reporters, referring to the November 2007 report.

"We've had other teams look at this. Everyone who has, has affirmed the judgments we made."

He added, however: "I still regard Iran as a dangerous place."

The declassified 2007 estimate began by stating that the U.S. intelligence community judged "with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear-weapons program."

By program, the authors wrote in a footnote, they meant Iran's efforts to design a nuclear warhead and to enrich uranium covertly to weapons grade.

Critics said the way the report was written made it seem as though there was less need to worry about Iran's efforts to master the technology to make fuel for a potential bomb.

Other U.S. intelligence officials, including Mr. Fingar's boss, Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell, later backed away from the report.

Mr. McConnell told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in February that he would have changed the description to focus on Iran's uranium-enrichment program, which has continued.

Iran denies that it is seeking weapons and says that it wants to enrich uranium for civilian power plants.

Mr. Fingar, a former deputy assistant secretary of state for intelligence, said a decision to make a bomb is a political one that he does not think the Iranian government has made.

"We stick with an estimate until we change it," he said.

A member of the intelligence community for 38 years, Mr. Fingar was part of a team at the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) that doubted whether Iraq had a nuclear program before the U.S. invasion in 2003.

"INR got it less wrong" than other U.S. intelligence agencies, he said, but still thought that Iraq had biological and chemical weapons, which have not been found.

"The analysis was flawed, the underlying intelligence was bad, and the tradecraft was bad," he said.

Mr. Fingar said the reorganization of intelligence agencies following that failure had improved the quality of intelligence collection and analysis by highlighting diverse views and improving standards for sourcing.

He said coordination among the nation's 100,000 intelligence professionals, stretched across 16 agencies, had improved significantly.

"We are not broken, and we don't need to be fixed," he said, while conceding that the structure was still "far from perfect."

With a $48 billion price tag, U.S. intelligence "doesn't cost much money, it's not very sexy and we're mostly right."

John Diamond, author of the "The CIA and the Culture of Failure," said, "It's really difficult for outsiders without clearances to make any judgments on the quality of intelligence. All we get is the tip of the iceberg."

Mr. Diamond said the Iran estimate showed "a willingness to be contrarian, but that's not the same thing as saying that the structure is fine and everything is working."

Mr. Fingar has been advising the transition team of President-elect Barack Obama.

He said he plans to lecture next year at Stanford University, where he received a master's degree and doctorate in political science, and might write a book.

[C.Rich]

How many people did Freddie and Fannie put through their bundling scheme that were not American citizens? How many of the people that we are bailing out are illegal aliens who are here fraudulently? Is there even one?

If we don’t demand the answer to that question and fast, we could be stuck with paying people’s mortgages who shouldn’t even own a home here. Not foreign investors, but Mexicans who live and work here against American laws. Now ask yourself, “Do you want to bailout these people with your tax money?”

We must of course be humane with these...

[Read More  http://americaspeaksink.com/2009/02/illegal-aliens-get-the-mortgage-bailout/  ...]

[C.Rich]

It’s time for some straight talk to conservatives and republicans. Time for some onerous truth about the prospect of it being Bobby Jindal and he being the one to take us out of exile. No one has been a bigger fan of the Governor of Louisiana than I. However, watching him do the republican response after the President’s address to Congress made me come to the heartbreaking truth that this man could never beat Obama in 2012. If we don’t realize that, then we must get prepared for eight years of Obama and socialism.

As smart as Bobby is and all the reasons why we love him,...

[Read More http://americaspeaksink.com/2009/02/bobby-jindal-is-not-the-guy/   ...]

[C.Rich]

President B. Hussein Obama, America’s wartime president, has ordered a “surge” in our troop presence in Afghanistan. Commander and Chief Obama wants more war with Muslims on the other side of the world. The massive escalation of the Afghan war will no doubt mean more American soldiers killed. However, the blood trusty Democrat Party wants their own war and a blood bath they can call their own. Not since Bosnia has the Democrat Party been at the helm of the Air Force bombers and Naval bombing apparatus. They wasted no time ordering the escalation to the Afghan war and sending more American troops into harm in Afghanistan.

Democrats want war and more war is what they are going to get. Even before they could come up with an “exit strategy,” they made...

[Read More  http://americaspeaksink.com/2009/02/obama-the-war-president/ ]

[C.Rich]

In the most brazen bank robbery in the history of the world, the assailants are still at large. Authorities say in what was the biggest heist known to mankind, the United States Treasury was robbed of trillions of dollars. Witnesses say that the bank robbers were wearing masks of presidents and other well know politicians. They say the faces of these robbers looked exactly like our former president George W. Bush and our current president B. Hussein Obama. One eyewitness claimed to see a getaway vehicle, which was a helicopter, heading toward the direction of Crawford, TX.

FBI informants are working an angle that the conspiracy had a cell based in Chicago, IL and that cell ostensibly made their way to Washington, D.C. to perform the heist. Other eyewitnesses state that some of the bank robbers looked like Barney Frank and Christopher Dodd, but were unsure whether that was true or not because the two men were seen looking for the bank robbers themselves and claiming they could fix it all.

Security measures were put in place and...

[Read More  http://americaspeaksink.com/2009/03/bank-robbers-still-at-large/...]

[Letsbereal]

Looks a little bit like this movie Point Break (1991) with Patrick Swayze ; http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0102685/

Funny Advertisement Clip inspired by "Point Break - 1991"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJwqnyQWz34

[C.Rich]

Ya, cool movie!

[C.Rich]

Let me explain to those of you who don't know, The University of Notre Dame is the most Catholic college in the country. No other school even comes close to that claim. Even though there are many more "true catholic" schools in America, Notre Dame is more than just a school. It is a symbol of Catholicism and colleges here in America.

The mistake of allowing President B. Hussein Obama to speak at the school goes beyond the freedom of speech argument or the view of free and open debate. No matter what you or anyone says, Notre Dame's principle of "respect for life" represents something older than the first amendment. It is something older than Notre Dame itself.  This spans beyond the constitution or...

[Read More... http://americaspeaksink.com/2009/04/the-president-will-speak-at-notre-dame/...]