Archive for the ‘JFK’ Category


May 9, 2011 Leave a comment

Σχετικά με Κέννεντυ εδω και την fed εδω

Categories: fed, JFK, Kennedy, USA


April 29, 2011 Leave a comment

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
Joseph Goebbels

Επειδή πολύς λόγος γίνεται τελευταία απο τους παροικούντες και τους πάσης φύσης κερδοσκόπους διαδρομιστές στο μέγαρο Μαξίμου για τους “κουκουλοφόρους του διαδικτύου”, τους “άναρχους μπλόγκερς”, και την πραγματική ελευθερία του λόγου πέρα απο τα καθεστωτικά και διαπλεκόμενα ΜΜΕ μέσω των εργαλείων της παγκόσμιας κοινωνικής δικτύωσης (μπλόγκς, facebook, twitter, κλπ, κλπ.), παραθέτουμε αποσπάσματα απο την ομιλία του αγρίως δολοφονηθέντος προέδρου των ΗΠΑ Τζων Κέννεντυ πρός τους εκπροσώπους των ΜΜΕ  για την ενημέρωσή τους και ιδεοληψία σε σχέση με τα εξεταζόμενα σχέδια καταστολής, φίμωσης και “άγριου κυνηγητού απο άκρου σε άκρο της επικράτειας” των δικτύων έκφρασης των ελευθέρων πολιτών αυτής της χώρας.

Πέρα από το δεδομένο τεχνολογικό αδιέξοδο και ατελέσφορο μιας τέτοιας κίνησης, η κυβέρνηση εκτίθεται πολλαπλά στην Ιστορία…

“An error does not become a mistake until you refuse to 
correct it.”


…without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed and no Republic can survive. 
That is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy.
…αnd that is why our press was protected by the First Amendment– the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution–not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and the sentimental, not to simply “give the public what it wants”–but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold, educate and sometimes even anger public opinion. This means greater coverage and analysis of international news–for it is no longer far away and foreign but close at hand and local. It means greater attention to improved understanding of the news as well as improved transmission (!-ed)…

…Η λέξη μυστικότητα είναι αποκρουστική σε μια ελεύθερη και ανοικτή κοινωνία και είμαστε ως άνθρωποι φύση-θέση και ιστορικά αντίθετοι στις «μυστικές εταιρείες», στους «μυστικούς σκοπούς» και στα «μυστικά σχέδια». Γιατί αντιτασσόμαστε παντού, σε όλο τον κόσμο, σε κάθε απόλυτη και άσπλαχνη συνωμοσία που στηρίζεται πρώτιστα στη συγκάλυψη επεκτείνοντας την σφαίρα επιρροής της, στο συγκεκαλυμένο αντί του ξεκάθαρου, στην ανατροπή αντι των εκλογών, στο εκφοβισμό αντί της ελεύθερης επιλογής. Είναι ένα σύστημα που έχει επιστρατευμένους πολλούς ανθρώπους και εφόδια στενά δεμένα μεταξύ τους, μια ιδιαίτερα αποδοτική μηχανή που συνδυάζει στρατιωτικές, διπλωματικές, διανοουμενίστικες, οικονομικές, επιστημονικές και πολιτικές διαδικασίες.
Οι προετοιμασίες της κρύβονται, δεν δημοσιεύονται.
Τα λάθη της θάβονται, δεν ανακοινώνονται.
Οι αποστάτες της εξαφανίζονται, δεν εγκωμιάζονται.
Καμιά δαπάνη δεν εξετάζεται, κανένα μυστικό δεν αποκαλύπτεται.
Για αυτό ο Αθηναίος νομοθέτης Σόλων, θέσπισε ως έγκλημα, για οποιοδήποτε πολίτη τη μη συμμετοχή του στα κοινά.
 Είμαι βέβαιος πως με την βοήθειά σας, ο άνθρωπος θα μείνει αυτό που γεννήθηκε να είναι:


the full speech “the President AND the Press”

President John F. Kennedy
Waldorf-Astoria Hotel
New York City, April 27, 1961

Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen:

I appreciate very much your generous invitation to be here tonight.

You bear heavy responsibilities these days and an article I read some time ago reminded me of how particularly heavily the burdens of present day events bear upon your profession.

You may remember that in 1851 the New York Herald Tribune under the sponsorship and publishing of Horace Greeley, employed as its London correspondent an obscure journalist by the name of Karl Marx.

We are told that foreign correspondent Marx, stone broke, and with a family ill and undernourished, constantly appealed to Greeley and managing editor Charles Dana for an increase in his munificent salary of $5 per installment, a salary which he and Engels ungratefully labeled as the “lousiest petty bourgeois cheating.”

But when all his financial appeals were refused, Marx looked around for other means of livelihood and fame, eventually terminating his relationship with the Tribune and devoting his talents full time to the cause that would bequeath the world the seeds of Leninism, Stalinism, revolution and the cold war.

If only this capitalistic New York newspaper had treated him more kindly; if only Marx had remained a foreign correspondent, history might have been different. And I hope all publishers will bear this lesson in mind the next time they receive a poverty-stricken appeal for a small increase in the expense account from an obscure newspaper man.

I have selected as the title of my remarks tonight “The President and the Press.” Some may suggest that this would be more naturally worded “The President Versus the Press.” But those are not my sentiments tonight.

It is true, however, that when a well-known diplomat from another country demanded recently that our State Department repudiate certain newspaper attacks on his colleague it was unnecessary for us to reply that this Administration was not responsible for the press, for the press had already made it clear that it was not responsible for this Administration.

Nevertheless, my purpose here tonight is not to deliver the usual assault on the so-called one party press. On the contrary, in recent months I have rarely heard any complaints about political bias in the press except from a few Republicans. Nor is it my purpose tonight to discuss or defend the televising of Presidential press conferences. I think it is highly beneficial to have some 20,000,000 Americans regularly sit in on these conferences to observe, if I may say so, the incisive, the intelligent and the courteous qualities displayed by your Washington correspondents.

Nor, finally, are these remarks intended to examine the proper degree of privacy which the press should allow to any President and his family.

If in the last few months your White House reporters and photographers have been attending church services with regularity, that has surely done them no harm.

On the other hand, I realize that your staff and wire service photographers may be complaining that they do not enjoy the same green privileges at the local golf courses that they once did.

It is true that my predecessor did not object as I do to pictures of one’s golfing skill in action. But neither on the other hand did he ever bean a Secret Service man.

My topic tonight is a more sober one of concern to publishers as well as editors.

I want to talk about our common responsibilities in the face of a common danger. The events of recent weeks may have helped to illuminate that challenge for some; but the dimensions of its threat have loomed large on the horizon for many years. Whatever our hopes may be for the future–for reducing this threat or living with it–there is no escaping either the gravity or the totality of its challenge to our survival and to our security–a challenge that confronts us in unaccustomed ways in every sphere of human activity.

This deadly challenge imposes upon our society two requirements of direct concern both to the press and to the President–two requirements that may seem almost contradictory in tone, but which must be reconciled and fulfilled if we are to meet this national peril. I refer, first, to the need for a far greater public information; and, second, to the need for far greater official secrecy.


The very word “secrecy” is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know.

But I do ask every publisher, every editor, and every newsman in the nation to reexamine his own standards, and to recognize the nature of our country’s peril. In time of war, the government and the press have customarily joined in an effort based largely on self-discipline, to prevent unauthorized disclosures to the enemy. In time of “clear and present danger,” the courts have held that even the privileged rights of the First Amendment must yield to the public’s need for national security.

Today no war has been declared–and however fierce the struggle may be, it may never be declared in the traditional fashion. Our way of life is under attack. Those who make themselves our enemy are advancing around the globe. The survival of our friends is in danger. And yet no war has been declared, no borders have been crossed by marching troops, no missiles have been fired.

If the press is awaiting a declaration of war before it imposes the self-discipline of combat conditions, then I can only say that no war ever posed a greater threat to our security. If you are awaiting a finding of “clear and present danger,” then I can only say that the danger has never been more clear and its presence has never been more imminent.

It requires a change in outlook, a change in tactics, a change in missions–by the government, by the people, by every businessman or labor leader, and by every newspaper. For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence–on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.

Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. It conducts the Cold War, in short, with a war-time discipline no democracy would ever hope or wish to match.

Nevertheless, every democracy recognizes the necessary restraints of national security–and the question remains whether those restraints need to be more strictly observed if we are to oppose this kind of attack as well as outright invasion.

For the facts of the matter are that this nation’s foes have openly boasted of acquiring through our newspapers information they would otherwise hire agents to acquire through theft, bribery or espionage; that details of this nation’s covert preparations to counter the enemy’s covert operations have been available to every newspaper reader, friend and foe alike; that the size, the strength, the location and the nature of our forces and weapons, and our plans and strategy for their use, have all been pinpointed in the press and other news media to a degree sufficient to satisfy any foreign power; and that, in at least in one case, the publication of details concerning a secret mechanism whereby satellites were followed required its alteration at the expense of considerable time and money.

The newspapers which printed these stories were loyal, patriotic, responsible and well-meaning. Had we been engaged in open warfare, they undoubtedly would not have published such items. But in the absence of open warfare, they recognized only the tests of journalism and not the tests of national security. And my question tonight is whether additional tests should not now be adopted.

The question is for you alone to answer. No public official should answer it for you. No governmental plan should impose its restraints against your will. But I would be failing in my duty to the nation, in considering all of the responsibilities that we now bear and all of the means at hand to meet those responsibilities, if I did not commend this problem to your attention, and urge its thoughtful consideration.

On many earlier occasions, I have said–and your newspapers have constantly said–that these are times that appeal to every citizen’s sense of sacrifice and self-discipline. They call out to every citizen to weigh his rights and comforts against his obligations to the common good. I cannot now believe that those citizens who serve in the newspaper business consider themselves exempt from that appeal.

I have no intention of establishing a new Office of War Information to govern the flow of news. I am not suggesting any new forms of censorship or any new types of security classifications. I have no easy answer to the dilemma that I have posed, and would not seek to impose it if I had one. But I am asking the members of the newspaper profession and the industry in this country to reexamine their own responsibilities, to consider the degree and the nature of the present danger, and to heed the duty of self-restraint which that danger imposes upon us all.

Every newspaper now asks itself, with respect to every story: “Is it news?” All I suggest is that you add the question: “Is it in the interest of the national security?” And I hope that every group in America–unions and businessmen and public officials at every level– will ask the same question of their endeavors, and subject their actions to the same exacting tests.

And should the press of America consider and recommend the voluntary assumption of specific new steps or machinery, I can assure you that we will cooperate whole-heartedly with those recommendations.

Perhaps there will be no recommendations. Perhaps there is no answer to the dilemma faced by a free and open society in a cold and secret war. In times of peace, any discussion of this subject, and any action that results, are both painful and without precedent. But this is a time of peace and peril which knows no precedent in history.


It is the unprecedented nature of this challenge that also gives rise to your second obligation–an obligation which I share. And that is our obligation to inform and alert the American people–to make certain that they possess all the facts that they need, and understand them as well–the perils, the prospects, the purposes of our program and the choices that we face.

No President should fear public scrutiny of his program. For from that scrutiny comes understanding; and from that understanding comes support or opposition. And both are necessary. I am not asking your newspapers to support the Administration, but I am asking your help in the tremendous task of informing and alerting the American people. For I have complete confidence in the response and dedication of our citizens whenever they are fully informed.

I not only could not stifle controversy among your readers–I welcome it. This Administration intends to be candid about its errors; for as a wise man once said: “An error does not become a mistake until you refuse to correct it.” We intend to accept full responsibility for our errors; and we expect you to point them out when we miss them.

Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed–and no republic can survive. 
That is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy. 
And that is why our press was protected by the First Amendment– the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution- –not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and the sentimental, not to simply “give the public what it wants”–but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold, educate and sometimes even anger public opinion.

This means greater coverage and analysis of international news–for it is no longer far away and foreign but close at hand and local. It means greater attention to improved understanding of the news as well as improved transmission. And it means, finally, that government at all levels, must meet its obligation to provide you with the fullest possible information outside the narrowest limits of national security–and we intend to do it.


It was early in the Seventeenth Century that Francis Bacon remarked on three recent inventions already transforming the world: the compass, gunpowder and the printing press. Now the links between the nations first forged by the compass have made us all citizens of the world, the hopes and threats of one becoming the hopes and threats of us all. In that one world’s efforts to live together, the evolution of gunpowder to its ultimate limit has warned mankind of the terrible consequences of failure.

And so it is to the printing press–to the recorder of man’s deeds, the keeper of his conscience, the courier of his news–that we look for strength and assistance, confident that with your help man will be what he was born to be: free and independent.


December 4, 2010 Leave a comment

Enemy of the State???
Μάχη επιβίωσης δίνει η ιστοσελίδα WikiLeaks την ώρα που ο καταζητούμενος ιδρυτής της, ο Τζούλιαν Ασάνζ, «αγνώστου διαμονής», δήλωνε χθες ότι «μια υπερδύναμη θέλει να με δολοφονήσει».

Παλεύοντας «από σέρβερ σε σέρβερ», οι συνεργάτες του ενοχλητικού Αυστραλού ο οποίος επιμένει να δημοσιοποιεί κάθε είδους αρχεία επιχειρούν να αποκρούσουν τις αλλεπάλληλες συντονισμένες επιθέσεις από κυβερνήσεις, μυστικές υπηρεσίες και επιχειρήσεις. Εντάλματα σύλληψης, διακοπή διαδικτυακών παροχών, ακόμη και απειλές κατά της ζωής του συμπληρώνουν το παζλ μιας υπόθεσης που εξελίσσεται στον μεγαλύτερο κυβερνοπόλεμο που ξέσπασε ποτέ στην ιστορία του Διαδικτύου.

Σε online συνέντευξη που παραχώρησε στους επισκέπτες της ιστοσελίδας της εφημερίδας «Τhe Guardian» ο Ασάνζ δήλωσε ότι κινδυνεύει, «φωτογραφίζοντας» ως πηγή των απειλών τις Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες. «Οι απειλές κατά της ζωής μας είναι γνωστές στο κοινό. Παίρνουμε ωστόσο τα κατάλληλα προληπτικά μέτρα στον βαθμό που μπορούμε, δεδομένου ότι έχουμε να αντιμετωπίσουμε μια υπερδύναμη» έγραψε απαντώντας σε σχετικές ερωτήσεις. Ο πιο διάσημος πλέον φυγάς του κόσμου καταζητείται από την Ιnterpol για μια μυστηριώδη υπόθεση βιασμού, την οποία ο ίδιος χαρακτηρίζει «σκευωρία». Η WikiLeaks υφίσταται ασφυκτική διαδικτυακή πολιορκία, αφού ο ένας μετά τον άλλον οι διακομιστές διακόπτουν την παροχή υπηρεσιών προς την περιβόητη ιστοσελίδα

Διαβάστε περισσότερα στο Βήμα εδω

Επίσης απο την Γκάρντιαν εδω

WikiLeaks went offline for the third time in a week.
The US opened new fronts in its fight against WikiLeaks today as civil rights groups accused the authorities of censorship.

The whistleblower’s website went offline for the third time in a week this morning – the biggest threat to its online presence so far. The site re-emerged later on a Swiss domain.

France joined international calls for WikiLeaks to be closed down, warning that it was “unacceptable” for a “criminal” site to be hosted in the country.

The moves came only days after Amazon pulled the WikiLeaks site from its servers after political pressure from Joe Lieberman, chairman of the Senate homeland security committee.

Lieberman is not finished with Amazon, and is planning to write to the organisation within the next 24 hours asking for details of its relationship with WikiLeaks. The issue is fast turning into a row over freedom of speech, as Democratic and Republican politicians joined calls for action against WikiLeaks, including emergency legislation for legal challenge.

Liberal activists saw echoes of the row involving China and Google earlier this year, censorship the Obama administration decried at the time.

The US civil rights group Human Rights First wrote to Amazon saying that its decision to cease hosting WikiLeaks raised serious concerns and asked the book group to consider this before responding to Lieberman’s request for more information.

Rainey Reitman and Marcia Hofmann, of the Electronic Freedom Foundation, which campaigns for internet freedom, writing on the organisation’s site, said it was “unfortunate that Amazon caved in to unofficial government pressure to squelch core political speech. Amazon had an opportunity to stand up for its customer’s right to free expression. Instead, Amazon ran away with its tail between its legs“.

There have been calls on blogsites for a boycott of Amazon.

Leslie Phillips, communications director for the Senate homeland security committee, disputed any parallel with China’s censorship of the internet. “It is not at all the same,” she said. “In China, there is a fiat from above.”

Lieberman, she said, does not have the authority to shut down Amazon or tell it who its clients should be….συνέχεια εδω

Enemy of the State???


August 6, 2010 Leave a comment
Eleven Lessons from the Life of Robert S McNamara 
((June 9, 1916 – July 6, 2009)

Robert S. Mcnamera’s own words about everything from 2nd world war, JFK, Vietnam and the Tonkin bay incident, the cold war and the Cuba crises.
A must see for everyone interested in history, and war history in particular.

Directed by Errol Morris, 2003

The eleven lessons explored in the documentary are:

1. Empathise with your enemy
2. Rationality will not save us
3. There’s something beyond oneself
4. Maximise efficiency
5. Proportionality should be a guideline in war
6. Get the data
7. Belief and seeing are both often wrong
8. Be prepared to reexamine your reasoning
9. In order to do good, you may have to engage in evil
10. Never say never
11. You can’t change human nature.


November 22, 2009 Leave a comment

Ντοκυμανταίρ διαρκείας 90 λεπτών για την δολοφονία του προέδρου Τζων Κέννεντυ στο Ντάλλας στις 22 Νοεμβρίου 1963, παραγωγής 2007.
Το αίμα του προέδρου, αλλά και η γενεοκτονία της υπόλοιπης οικογένειας των Κέννεντυ που ακολούθησε, ακόμα στοιχειώνουν μετά 46 χρόνια την ψυχή του Αμερικανικού έθνους κι όχι μόνον…

Σχετικές αναφορές εδω


November 21, 2009 Leave a comment

46 χρόνια ακριβώς (22 Νοεμβρίου 1963) μετά την ανεξιχνίαστη δολοφονία του προέδρου Τζών Κέννεντυ, και μετά απο πολύμηνες μάχες σε όλα τα επίπεδα στην Ουάσιγκτον, η ομάδα των Αμερικανών πολιτικών (και οχι μόνον) που πίεζε για εξονυχιστικό και βαθύ λογιστικό έλεγχο της Ομοσπονδιακής Τράπεζας -ιδιωτικής- FED, κέρδισε την πρώτη ιδιαίτερης σημασίας νίκη της. Παρά τις αυξημένες αρμοδιότητες που εκχώρησε ο πρόεδρος Ομπάμα στον Διοικητή της FED κ.Μπέν Μπερνάνκε πρίν λίγους μήνες και την πρόσφατη ανανέωση της θητείας του, η κατάσταση φαίνεται να παίρνει πλέον μια τελείως διαφορετική τροπή μετά την ψήφιση του H.R.1207.
Η αλλαγή αυτή στην εκατονταετή ειδική σχέση της Αμερικανικής Διοίκησης και της Ομοσπονδιακής Τράπεζας -ιδιωτικής- FED, εαν φυσικά ολοκληρωθεί και εφαρμοστεί, προβλέπεται να φέρει τα ανω κάτω στις ισορροπίες (και ανισορροπίες) της Αμερικανικής μακροοικονομικής εσωτερικής και εξωτερικής πολιτικής καθώς και της παγκόσμιας γεωστρατηγικής μεθοδολογίας. Οι εξελίξεις έχουν ήδη δρομολογηθεί, και το αποτέλεσμα της διαμάχης θα είναι καθοριστικό για το μέλλον του παγκόσμιου οικονομικού και τραπεζικού μηχανισμού, της Αμερικής ως ιστορικού κυρίαρχου έθνους σε βαθειά κρίση, και εν τέλει του μέλλοντος του ανθρώπινου είδους.
Με την Ευρωπαική Κεντρική Τράπεζα και τον γνωστό μας κ.Τρυσέ και την Τράπεζα της Αγγλίας να έχουν στενότατες και πολυεπίπεδες σχέσεις με την FED, μάλλον πλησιάζει η ώρα που θα περάσουν μοιραία οι ελεγχτές και απο αυτήν την πλευρά του Ατλαντικού για μία αντίστοιχη διαδικασία. Οι Βρυξέλλες και το Λονδίνο δεν θα μπορέσουν να μείνουν στο απυρόβλητο, η βλάβη ειναι ενιαία και συστημική. Το παγκόσμιο καζίνο της Wall Street “έσπασε την μπάνκα”…

σχετικά δημοσιεύματα εδω, εδω, εδω, εδω,εδω, εδω

House Financial Services Committee approves Bill to Audit the Fed (Rejecting Watt’s Fake Alternate) and Votes to Rein In Foreign Currency Swaps
Congressman Watt tried to de-rail the bill to audit the Federal Reserve (H.R. 1207) with a fake alternate bill. Fortunately, the House Financial Services Committee approved H.R. 1207 by 43-26, and rejected Watt’s bill.
In addition, Congressmen Grayson and Paul’s bill requiring written concurrence by the Treasury Secretary prior to the Federal Reserve engaging in a foreign currency swap passed the House Financial Services Committee by a voice vote today.

The list of voters

AL-06 Rep. Spencer Bachus yay, CA-12 Rep. Jackie Speier yay, CA-22 Rep. Kevin McCarthy yay, CA-27 Rep. Brad Sherman yay, CA-35 Rep. Maxine Waters nay, CA-40 Rep. Edward R. Royce yay, CA-42 Rep. Gary G. Miller nay, CA-43 Rep. Joe Baca nay, CA-48 Rep. John Campbell yay, CO-07 Rep. Ed Perlmutter yay, CT-04 Rep. Jim Himes nay,
DE-01 Rep. Michael N. Castle yay, FL-08 Rep. Alan Grayson yay, FL-12 Rep. Adam Putnam yay, FL-15 Rep. Bill Posey yay, FL-22 Rep. Ron Klein nay, FL-24 Rep. Suzanne Kosmas, GA-06 Rep. Tom Price yay, GA-13 Rep. David Scott yay, ID-01 Rep. Walt Minnick yay, IL-04 Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez nay, IL-08 Rep. Melissa L. Bean nay, IL-13 Rep. Judy Biggert yay, IL-14 Rep. Bill Foster nay, IL-16 Rep. Donald A. Manzullo yay,
IN-02 Rep. Joe Donnelly nay, IN-07 Rep. Andre Carson nay, KS-02 Rep. Lynn Jenkins yay, KS-03 Rep. Dennis Moore nay, MA-04 Rep. Barney Frank nay, MA-08 Rep. Michael E. Capuano nay, MA-09 Rep. Stephen F. Lynch nay, MI-09 Rep. Gary Peters yay, MI-11 Rep. Thaddeus McCotter yay, MN-03 Rep. Erik Paulsen yay, MN-05 Rep. Keith Ellison nay, MN-06 Rep. Michele Bachmann yay, MO-01 Rep. William Lacy Clay yay, MO-05 Rep. Emanuel Cleaver nay, MS-01 Rep. Travis Childers yay, NC-03 Rep. Walter B. Jones yay, NC-10 Rep. Patrick T. McHenry yay, NC-12 Rep. Melvin L. Watt nay, NC-13 Rep. Brad Miller nay, NH-02 Rep. Paul W. Hodes yay, NJ-03 Rep. John Adler yay, NJ-05 Rep. Scott Garrett yay, NJ-07 Rep. Leonard Lance yay, NY-03 Rep. Peter King yay, NY-04 Rep. Carolyn McCarthy yay, NY-05 Rep. Gary L. Ackerman nay, NY-06 Rep. Gregory W. Meeks nay, NY-12 Rep. Nydia M. Velázquez yay, NY-14 Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney nay, NY-25 Rep. Dan Maffei yay, NY-26 Rep. Christopher Lee yay, OH-01 Rep. Steve Driehaus yay,
OH-06 Rep. Charles Wilson nay, OH-15 Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy nay, OK-03 Rep. Frank D. Lucas yay, PA-06 Rep. Jim Gerlach yay, PA-11 Rep. Paul E. Kanjorski, SC-03 Rep. J. Gresham Barrett yay, TX-05 Rep. Jeb Hensarling yay, TX-09 Rep. Al Green nay, TX-14 Rep. Ron Paul yay, TX-15 Rep. Rubén Hinojosa yay, TX-19 Rep. Randy Neugebauer yay,
TX-24 Rep. Kenny Marchant yay, WI-04 Rep. Gwen Moore nay, WV-02 Rep. Shelley Moore Capito nay

If you haven’t already seen it, watch Congressman Grayson grill Bernanke about foreign swaps:

Αλαν Γκρέυσον, ελπίδα και ανθρωπιά στην Αμερικανική πολιτική σκηνή. Μέλος της ΦΒΚ (Phi Beta Kappa) (ΦΒΚ, Φιλοσοφία Βίου Κυβερνήτης or philosophia biou kybernētēs)

Αναγκαία βιβλιογραφία :


…here is the indispensable handbook for the present breakdown crisis and disintegration of the world financial, currency, and banking system. Tarpley builds on his prophetic work of 1999, which showed the world heading for a financial cataclysm and economic depression due to deregulated derivatives speculation, the destruction of modern productive industry, the collapse of the US standard of living, and a globalized hot money casino run by a tiny financier oligarchy.
Tarpley calls for a return to the American System of political economy as exemplified by such figures as Hamilton, Clay, Lincoln, FDR, and JFK. Tarpley shows the criminal futility of the Bush-Paulson-Bernanke bailout of the $1.5 quadrillion derivatives bubble, now continued under cynical and demagogic left cover by the Obama-Geither-Summers-Bernanke clique. Obama is exposed as the worst Wall St. puppet in recent US history, an anti-FDR peddling a New Deal in reverse for the benefit of zombie bankers, while the American people get the crumbs.
The book advances a benchmark program for world economic recovery, full employment, scientific and technological progress, third world development, and the defense of our threatened civilization.
Tarpley calls for wiping out derivatives, banning foreclosures, and nationalizing the failed Federal Reserve System.
Cheap no-interest Federal credit for production can build 1,000 hospitals, 100,000 miles of high-speed maglev rail, 100 fourth-generation high-temperature pebble bed nuclear reactors, while rebuilding the interstates and water systems – creating tens of millions of high-paid, capital-intensive modern jobs in the process. Tarpley makes the case for science drivers in exploration, colonization, and industrialization on the moon and Mars; high-energy physics; and biomedical research. A special chapter discusses ways individuals and families can survive the crisis.
If you read one book on economics, let it be this one.

There is only one nation on this planet able to reverse the global human tragedy we all live in. That nation has to have the will to magnify the energy from the eternal flame that is burning over JFK’ grave in Arlington cemetery, has to self correct, self heal, and avert the global catastrophy by providing the peoples of the world the lond awaited antropocentric global geopolitical and exopolitical system and realismus for the 21st century and beyond (-ed)…


November 8, 2009 2 comments

“It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning”.
Henry Ford.