DEMOCRACY PRIVATIZED! Occupy Wall Street Will Expose That The 1% Have Occupied Our Governments

Democracy Is A Sham   It takes millions of dollars to get elected as president. Through campaign donations, the wealthy elites play the elections like a game of poker.  In the 2008 US election, McCain was financed by the senior (Lord!) Jacob Rothschild.   Senator Joe Lieberman took him to a fundraiser at Jacob Rothschild’s house in London.   Hilary was bankrolled by  Lynn  Forester de Rothschild (who later shifted her bet to McCain also).   And most deceptively, Obama was backed by George Soros.  Soros has a close historical relationship with the Rothschilds—his long-time investing buddy was James Goldsmith, a close cousin to the Rothschilds (their families lived as neighbors for centuries).

The 2012 election will be decided by whom THEY choose to finance with their millions.
Obama at fund-raiser at Steven and Judy Gluckstern’s home, April 9, 2007. George Soros is seated to the right of the stairs.

Politicians become their puppets (wittingly or unwittingly).  After Obama was elected, many of the people he chose for key positions were people who had helped cause the collapse of the world economy or other international problems.    To ensure the narrow interests of the ultra-rich are enshrined in legislation, they employ hordes of lobbyists to stalk politicians.  Everyone knows this, but no one does anything about it.  Most people accept it as an inevitable part of democracy and they are distracted by the emotions of the endless partisan puppet show—the two-party façade that produces the illusion of democracy.

With the automation of industry and services, productivity has increased exponentially, but the new wealth has gone to the 1%.   They have not shared with the rest of us.  They are able to do this because they control the economy, the politicians and the media.

More money in the pockets of the middle class would mean more consumer activity and a big boost for the economy.  The game of the ultra-rich is to use the accelerating Chinese and Indian consumer markets rather than the already exploited, North American market.

Financial Control

In a similar way, for decades the people of the world were unaware that their government finances had been privatized.

Someone actually has to create money out of thin air and circulate it for people to use. Historically, the creation of money and the control of domestic economies was the domain of sovereign governments  who simply created money as an asset.  They didn’t need to borrow the money and pay interest on it.   This was subject to natural controls:  if any government created too much money, it would lead to inflation and the devaluation of their currency with respect to other currencies undermining their foreign trade.

But in the USA in 1913, a group of international bankers got a bill passed on Christmas Eve when most congressmen were at home. The bill ceded the ability of the government to create its own currency and to regulate its own economy to a cartel of domestic and international bankers who were closely associated with the Rothschilds.  The Federal Reserve was created as a privately owned bank. The US government bank had been privatized.  This was nothing less than an economic coup.

Since then the privately-owned Federal Reserve has controlled the economy of the US and issued its own currency (Federal Reserve Notes).   These notes are issued as debt to the US government.   In order to pay these debts, it was necessary for the US government to introduce income tax.   Before this the infrastructure of the US (railroads, highways,  bridges, etc) and the waging of wars had been paid for by trade tariffs the government collected.

The core of the international web of bankers (and their puppets) that control the economies of the world are the Rothschilds whose descendents now occupy many European countries.  The Rothschild’s  nexus of control is The City of London.

Privatized federal banks are called central banks.  Presently,  all countries of the world have relinquished control of their economic destinies to privatized central banks except for Iran, Syria, North Korea, and Cuba.  These countries presently suffer under US sanctions.

Recent History of the Privatizing of Government Banks

In 1990, only 8 countries in the world did not have privatized central banks.  In the 1990s, the US produced a list of countries they labeled as “rogue states”. Compare these two lists:

No  Central Bank in 1990 Iraq    Afghanistan Libya Yugoslavia Iran Cuba North Korea Syria
Rogue States (US, 1990s) Iraq Afghanistan Libya Yugoslavia Iran Cuba North Korea Syria
Central Bank by 2011? Yes, in 2004, US invasion Yes, in 2002, US  invasion Yes, Mar 19, 2011, NATO (US) air invasion Yes, NATO (US)  invasion No No No No
The central banks of the world control the issuing of money as debt to the citizens of the world, they control the interest rates at which the debt will be repaid, they control the interest rates for borrowing all money from them, so they now control the whole economy.  And they also control our(?) politicians.

We don’t live in a democracy—we live in a plutocracy (rule by the ultra-rich).   Until the 99% do something about it, the plutocracy will thrive and the interests of the average people will be eroded, neglected.  The people’s history books of the future (if they are not written by the plutocracy) will record these times as dark ages of economic serfdom.   This will be the legacy YOU leave your children.

 

Regaining Control Of Our Destiny

Their system of economic control is so ubiquitous . . . it is presented to us as the inevitable consequence of modernization and uncontrollable economic forces (i.e. globalization).  But this is not true . . .economic forces are the way they are by human design.  Bytheir design.

Follow the money.    Get the money out!    Get the money out of institutions of economic control and out of the political system.  Key goals should be to:

1)      Nationalize the Federal Reserve (and other privately-owned central banks in other countries)

2)      End campaign finance by the rich

3)      End lobbying by the rich

Their plutocratic network is so pervasive that half-measures are doomed to be assimilated.   . . . then, in time, undermined and eventually defeated.

It remains to be seen if non-violent methods can dislodge these parasites.  Be forewarned:  those behind the world’s plutocracy are arrogant with entitlement and will stop at nothing to maintain their power over us.  Nothing.

Yet, we have the power.  People can refuse to cooperate with an unfair economic system.  We can shut down the whole system, bring it to a halt.   Anonymous (hacktivists) can shut down their Internet activity–take down their websites.  WE have the power.

If we can only educate ourselves and see through the distracting puppet show to see the strings attached by the puppet masters–that is the biggest challenge.

Rothschilds Stage Revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt To Kill Islamic Banks In Emerging North African Markets

Tunisia has undergone increasing economic liberalization over the last decade: In the 2010-2011 World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Report, it was ranked as the most competitive country in Africa, as well as the 32nd most economically competitive country globally. North Africa’s large Muslim populations are a vast business opportunity for Islamic banking and other businesses.
Jacob Rothschild, senior member of the British branch of the Rothschild dynasty
Jacob Rothschild, senior member of the British branch of the Rothschild dynasty
Contrary to popular belief, the world’s finances are controlled by privately-owned “central banks” masquerading as federal government banks in nearly every country in the world [The U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, ruled that The Federal Reserve (U.S.’ central bank) was privately owned in 680 F.2d 1239, LEWIS v. UNITED STATES of America, No. 80-5905].
Though it is a carefully guarded secret, the Rothschilds and their associates own most the shares in the central banks (Federal Reserve Directors: A Study of Corporate and Banking Influence, Committee on Banking, Currency and Housing, House of Representatives, 1976, Charts 1-5) (Mullins, Eustice Secrets of the Federal Reserve 1983). With extremely little government input, the economies of Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Jordan, and Algeria are strictly controlled by the Rothschild’s central banks and their International Monetary Fund.

THE MOTIVE: FOLLOW THE MONEY
Islamic banks have been eating into Rothschild profits in the Middle East because: they don’t charge interest (Shariah Law), they are growing very rapidly among the world’s exploding Muslim populations, and (in these catastrophic economic times) they are more stable than western banks.
While it is a very good thing that people are freed from the tyranny of dictators, they also need to be freed from the tyranny of economic control and serfdom. The relevant moral question is: Do the means justify the end?.

Ben Ali’s son-in-law El Materi at the opening of his Zitouna Bank, North Africa’s first Islamic bank, last May
Deposed Tunisian President Ben Ali’s son-in-law, Sakher El Materi, opened Tunisia’s first Islamic bank, Zitouna Bank, on May 26, 2010. Zitouna Bank is the first Islamic bank in the Maghreb region [North Africa]. The bank was a first step toward Ben Ali’s new program of extensive reforms, “Tunisia, a Pole for Banking Services and a Regional Financial Centre”, which would have undermined the power and the profits of the Central Bank of Tunisia (privately-owned by the Rothschilds and their associates).

Tunis Financial Harbour opened last October 19. Its the first offshore finance centre in North Africa.
The Telegraph (October 19 2010) reported on the opening of the megaproject Tunis Financial Harbour –President Ben Ali’s bid to make Tunisia the regional financial centre of North Africa and beyond: “Islamic investment bank Gulf Finance House (GFH) and the Tunisian government have created the first offshore finance centre in North Africa. The centre will be part of Tunis Financial Harbour, a $3 billion waterfront development in Tunis . . . GFH, which is based in Bahrain, hopes the centre will allow Tunisia to take advantage of its strategic position on the Mediterranean sea, and operate as a bridge between the EU and the rapidly growing economies of North Africa [and subSaharan Africa].”

“However, despite the current poor climate, the potential for Islamic banking in Egypt is huge, and one should expect more moves from Abu Dhabi Islamic Bank into Egypt, possibly in the form of a buyout,” Executive Magazine (Feb 8 2011) reports, “A recent Middle East Business Intelligence report said it best, when it opined, ‘If Abu Dhabi Islamic Bank can make a success of offering Islamic products, the whole market will open up. We have already seen some of the local banks start to advertise their Islamic products in view of the competition for customers they see about to begin.’
“Clearly Islamic banks in the Gulf are already anticipating the day when their home markets are saturated. And it appears that Egypt will be on the next front-line in the development of regional Islamic banking and finance.”
“African countries such as Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Morocco, Tunisia and Sudan are keen on future sukuk exercises (issuing Islamic bonds). Gambia debuted with a US$166m sukuk deal, privately sold in the US in 2006.” [International Finance Review (Reuters), 2008]
The New York Times article “Islamic banking rises on oil wealth, drawing non-Muslims” ( November 22, 2007) reported: “Rising oil wealth is lifting Islamic banking – which adheres to the laws of the Koran and its prohibition against charging interest – into the financial mainstream. . . . In addition to Islamic loans, there are Islamic bonds, Islamic credit cards . . . Loans and bonds that conform to the Koran are already available in the United States. . . .
“’This is an industry on its way from a niche industry to becoming a truly global industry,’ said Khawaja Mohammad Salman Younis, the managing director for operations in Malaysia for Kuwait Finance House, the world’s second-largest Islamic bank. ‘In the next three to five years you’ll see Islamic banks coming out in Australia, China, Japan and other parts of the world.’
“In Islamic banking, financiers are required to share borrowers’ risks, meaning that depositors are treated more like shareholders, earning a portion of profits. Financing deals resemble lease-to-own arrangements, layaway plans, joint purchase and sale agreements, or partnerships.
“The stampede into Islamic finance is mostly an effort to tap an estimated $1.5 trillion of funds sloshing around the Middle East, largely from higher oil prices. . . .Those investments have helped ignite an economic revival throughout the Muslim world at a time of increasing religious conservatism among Islam’s 1.6 billion faithful. A result is expanding demand for financial services that adhere to Islamic law . . .
“And while the biggest Islamic banks are in the wealthy Gulf states, the most attractive potential markets are in Turkey and North Africa (emphasis added) and among European Muslims. . . .
“. . . even non-Muslims are taking advantage of a growing range of Islamic products offering competitive returns. For instance, David Ong-Yeoh, a public relations executive tired of fretting over the rising interest rate on his adjustable rate mortgage, refinanced to a 30-year fixed loan from an Islamic financial institution. Now, he pays regular installments that include a predetermined profit margin for the bank.
“’The terms are better than on conventional loans,’ said Ong-Yeoh, 41.
“Islamic finance also avoids other prohibited practices. Shariah-compliant bankers cannot receive or provide funds for anything involving alcohol, gambling, pornography, tobacco, weapons or pork. Proponents of Islamic banking say these are limits any socially conscious investor can support, Muslim or not. They also envision wider appeal for Islamic banking’s ban on interest, which stems from the Koran’s prohibition against usury.
“This is a view that has a long religious and historical tradition. Interest is repeatedly condemned in the Bible. Aristotle denounced it, the Romans limited it, and the early Christian church prohibited it. . . .
“The belief that all interest charges are unjust now underpins Islamic finance. . . .Hoarding is frowned upon in the Koran, so savings earn no return unless put to productive use.
“’Money should be used for creating better value in the country or the economy,’ Maraj said. ‘Money cannot generate money.’
“Nor can Islamic banks simply trade money. ‘In the Islamic finance model, the banks are supposed to mobilize funds through a fund management concept,’ said Rafe Haneef, head of Islamic banking in Asia for Citigroup.
“Indeed, Islamic banking is supposed to function more like private equity firms than conventional banking. ‘Private equity is an Islamic concept,’ Haneef said.
“Industry proponents say this risk-sharing requirement helps reduce the kind of abuses that led to the subprime mortgage mess in the United States. Scholars consider it un-Islamic to overload a customer with debt or invest in a company with excessive debt.”
The Washington Post, “Islamic Banking: Steady In Shaky Times” (Oct 31 2008), reported: “As big Western financial institutions have teetered one after the other in the crisis of recent weeks, another financial sector is gaining new confidence: Islamic banking. Proponents of the ancient practice, which looks to sharia law for guidance and bans interest and trading in debt, have been promoting Islamic finance as a cure for the global financial meltdown.
“This week, Kuwait’s commerce minister, Ahmad Baqer, was quoted as saying that the global crisis will prompt more countries to use Islamic principles in running their economies. U.S. Deputy Treasury Secretary Robert M. Kimmet, visiting Jiddah, said experts at his agency have been learning the features of Islamic banking.
“Though the trillion-dollar Islamic banking industry faces challenges with the slump in real estate and stock prices, advocates say the system has built-in protection from the kind of runaway collapse that has afflicted so many institutions. For one thing, the use of financial instruments such as derivatives, blamed for the downfall of banking, insurance and investment giants, is banned. So is excessive risk-taking.
“’The beauty of Islamic banking and the reason it can be used as a replacement for the current market is that you only promise what you own [contrast to western banks fractional reserve system]. Islamic banks are not protected if the economy goes down — they suffer — but you don’t lose your shirt,’ said Majed al-Refaie, who heads Bahrain-based Unicorn Investment Bank.
“The theological underpinning of Islamic banking is scripture that declares that collection of interest is a form of usury, which is banned in Islam. In the modern world, that translates into an attitude toward money that is different from that found in the West: Money cannot just sit and generate more money. To grow, it must be invested in productive enterprises.
“’In Islamic finance you cannot make money out of thin air,’ said Amr al-Faisal, a board member of Dar al-Mal al-Islami, a holding company that owns several Islamic banks and financial institutions. ‘Our dealings have to be tied to actual economic activity, like an asset or a service. You cannot make money off of money. You have to have a building that was actually purchased, a service actually rendered, or a good that was actually sold.’
“Islamic bankers describe depositors as akin to partners — their money is invested, and they share in the profits or, theoretically, the losses that result. (In interviews, bankers couldn’t recall a case in which depositors actually lost money; this shows that banks put such funds only in very low-risk investments, they said.)”
It is easy to see why the Rothschilds and their network of conventional western banks would be threatened by competition from the more appealing, more conservative Islamic banks.
Late in 2008, French Finance Minister Christine Lagarde announced France’s intention to make Paris “the capital of Islamic finance” and said several Islamic banks would open branches in the French capital in 2009. French sources estimate this area of the financial market is worth from 500 to 600 billion dollars and could grow by an average 11 percent a year.
John Sandwick, managing director of Swiss asset management firm Encore Management, characterized the opening of several Swiss Islamic banks as, “the race to control the rich prize: which today is worth hundreds of billions, but in the future will be trillions of dollars of Islamic wealth.”
“According to Standard and Poor’s, Islamic banking assets reached about $400 billion throughout the world in 2009. In November 2010, The Banker published its latest authoritative list of the Top 500 Islamic Finance Institutions with Iran topping the list. Seven out of ten top Islamic banks in the world are Iranian according to the list.” (iStockAnalyst, Feb 8, 2011)
BEN ALI’S SON OPENS FIRST ISLAMIC BANK IN ATTRACTIVE NORTH AFRICAN MARKET
Commenting on the opening of Zitouna (Islamic) Bank, International Business Times (May 28 2010) reported, “North Africa has begun to embrace Islamic finance after years watching from the sidelines, partly to channel more Arab Gulf petrodollars into the region. . . .Tunisia has one of the most open economies in the region and attracts substantial investment from the European Union, something that is expected to accelerate after 2014, when the government has said it will make the currency (the Tunisian dinar) fully convertible.”
Global Islamic Finance News (May 31, 2010) reported, “Zitouna Bank also seeks to impart a regional dimension on its activities, particularly in the Maghreb region [North Africa], all the more so that it is the first specialised bank not belonging to a foreign banking group,” and went on to add, “The Bank will also seek to forge strong relations with the Maghreb and Mediterranean banks to ensure needed flow of financial operations for its customers. The bank officials stressed that the financial institution has established relations with 12 Islamic banks in collaboration with the Institute of Islamic banks in Bahrain.
Zitouna bank’s formation had been announced earlier in the Official Gazette of the Republic of Tunisia on 10 September 2009. Tunisia and Morocco authorized Islamic finance in 2007, partly to channel more investment into their fast-growing tourism and real estate industries.
Due to his being the son-in-law of President Ben Ali, El Materi’s Zitouna Bank was expanding in Tunisia to the level of monopoly. El Materi had built a powerful business empire: he ran businesses in News and Media, Banking and Financial Services, Automotive, Shipping and Cruises, Real Estate and Agriculture, Pharmaceuticals and last November 22 he bought a 50% stake in Orascom Telecom for 0.2 billion.
The newly-opened Tunis Financial Harbour was on the brink of becoming the regional financial centre of North Africa and, with its strategic position on the Mediterranean sea, becoming a bridge between the EU and the rapidly growing economies of North Africa and subSaharan Africa.
On January 20 2011, ZItouna Bank, Tunisia’s first Islamic bank was seized by the Central Bank of Tunisia (Rothschilds). The bank owned by Sakher El Materi, the thirty-year-old son-in-law of deposed Tunisian leader Zine El Abidine Ben Ali has been placed under “the control” of the central bank. Materi is presently in Dubai. The move came a day after 33 of Ben Ali’s clan were arrested for crimes against the nation. State television showed what it said was seized gold and jewellery. Switzerland has also frozen Ben Ali’s family assets.

EGYPT’S ISLAMIC BANKS THREATENED BY ROTHSCHILD REVOLUTION: OLD MAN POTTER VS HARRY BAILEY

A still from the film “It’s A Wonderful Life”
The following scenario is right out of the 1946, Frank Capra film It’s a Wonderful Life with Old Man Potter (Rothschild) creating a run on Harry Bailey’s traditional Savings and Loans (Islamic bank):
Islamic (halal) banking products have not made significant inroads in North Africa yet, except in Egypt. “. . . There are several Islamic banks operating in Egypt: Faisal Islamic Bank, Al Baraka Egypt (Al Ahram Bank) and Abu Dhabi Islamic Bank NBD . . . There may be others as well,” says Blake Goud, an expert on Islamic Finance (The Review – Middle East, Jan 31 2011), “. . . and the risks of a run on the bank should concern those interested in Islamic banking around the world because it could provide a test of how resilient Islamic banks really are to crisis.
“What I mean is that the Egyptian situation, which could be a fantastic opportunity for the Egyptian people, could expose a weakness within the Islamic banking industry if it is problematic. The main risk to any bank is that there is a run and the bank cannot meet depositor withdrawals with the cash available on hand. This forces the bank to raise cash from other means. In most cases, it can either get an inter-bank loan from another bank overnight that allows it to handle withdrawals. If other banks are hesitant to lend to a given bank because of fears of asset quality, then the bank will usually have access to an overnight borrowing facility with the central bank, which operates as the lender of last resort.
“The key for Islamic banks is that they are not able to take advantage of the inter-bank lending market, nor are they able to borrow from (or lend to) the central bank (emphasis added) because those loans are interest-bearing. The only alternative is to find other banks (mostly Islamic banks) willing to extend Shari’ah-compliant, bilateral loans often using commodity murabaha. In a country like Egypt where the Islamic banking industry is a small portion of the total banking system, it does not create a systemic risk if Islamic banks fail, but it does matter a lot to the depositors of other Islamic banks in the country and globally. If there is the potential that a run on an Islamic bank will not be stopped by someone; whether that is a foreign bank, a multi-lateral bank like the Islamic Development Bank or the central bank of Egypt (through emergency measures), then it could hurt confidence in Islamic banks.
“If neither of these options are available, the bank will have to try to raise funds by selling its assets, most of which (loans) are illiquid in the short run. It will have to take a loss on the sale to realize the cash it needs to meet withdrawals. If this continues and the bank sells enough assets at a discount to the value they are held on the balance sheet, the bank’s equity will be negative (the value of assets minus liabilities) and it will become insolvent (having earlier only been illiquid). This is the fundamental danger in banking from a financial stability perspective. If enough banks face runs and have to sell assets, the run could become self-sustaining and contagious. Even a healthy bank facing a run can become insolvent.
“The loss of confidence is more than just a reputational hit and a hit on the egos of Islamic bankers. It would make it more difficult for Islamic banks to attract and retain depositors and it could raise the cost at which it can attract depositors. This would make the bank, all other things equal, less profitable (it makes profit of the spread between the return on invested funds and the cost of funds borrowed from depositors). Lower profitability will lower the attractiveness of Islamic banks to equity investors limiting their ability to increase capital through equity offerings (or at least increasing the dilution to current shareholders). It will lower the amount available to supplement capital as well as pay dividends to its shareholders.
“Therefore, it is important that the Islamic banks in Egypt make it through the ‘run’ that is predicted if it materializes, not just for those banks’ shareholders, but also for the Islamic banking industry.”
In contrast, Bloomberg reports, “Egypt’s banks may risk a surge in customer withdrawals when they open for business, placing them among companies worst hit by the nationwide uprising against President Hosni Mubarak. … Central Bank Governor Farouk El-Okdah said in a telephone interview Jan. 29 that his bank has $36 billion in reserves, enough to accommodate investors should they wish to withdraw funds. His deputy, Hisham Ramez, said interbank lending “will function properly” when banks are reopened. He said the security situation will determine when that is possible.
“Asked about the risk of a bank run, Mohamed Barakat, chairman of state-run Banque Misr and head of the country’s banking association, said in a telephone interview that Egyptian lenders are ‘very liquid,’” with average loan-to-deposit ratios of 53 percent. […] “The Egyptian interbank offered rate, the rate banks charge to lend to each other, is at a 16-month high of 8.5 percent.”
THE MEANS: SPONSOR PRO-DEMOCRACY ACTIVISTS
These Rothschild revolutions are done under the pretense of bringing democracy and deposing despots, but the real aim is to initially create chaos and a leadership vacuum, then quickly offer a solution: install a puppet that will do the economic bidding of the Rothschilds. The citizens gain freedom of speech and association, but become economic serfs.
These revolutions are most likely coordinated at the highest levels by the Rothschild’s International Crisis Group. Mohamed ElBaradei is already being touted as a new leader for Egypt. ElBaradei is a trustee of the International Crisis Group. Another board member of this group is Zbigniew Brzezinski. George Soros sits on the executive committee. The later two are ubiquitous front men for the Rothschilds.
The revolutions are from the same playbook as the fairly nonviolent “color revolutions”. These revolutions have been successful in Serbia (especially the Bulldozer Revolution (2000), in Georgia’s Rose Revolution (2003), in Ukraine’s Orange Revolution (2004), in Lebanon’s Cedar Revolution and (though more violent than the previous ones) in Kyrgyzstan’s Tulip Revolution (2005), and Tunisia’s Jasmine Revolution. Iran’s Green Revolution (2009) was unsuccessful.

Liberal billionaire George Soros funded training of activists in North Africa.
The Guardian reported (Nov 26, 2004) that the following were “directly involved” in organizing the colour revolutions: George Soros’ Open Society Foundation, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), the International Republican Institute, and Freedom House. The Washington Post and the New York Times also reported substantial Western involvement in some of these events.
Activists from Otpor in Serbia have said that publications and training they received from the US based Albert Einstein Institution staff have been instrumental in the formation of their strategies. The Albert Einstein Institution is funded by the Soros Foundation and NED. (Wikipedia)
In the article, “Georgia revolt carried mark of Soros” (November 26, 2003), the Globe & Mail reported, “[Soros’ Open Society Institute] sent a 31-year-old Tbilisi activist named Giga Bokeria to Serbia to meet with members of the Otpor (Resistance) movement and learn how they used street demonstrations to topple dictator Slobodan Milosevic. Then, in the summer, Mr. Soros’s foundation paid for a return trip to Georgia by Otpor activists, who ran three-day courses teaching more than 1,000 students how to stage a peaceful revolution.”

Egyptian activists wearing Otpor shirts. Otpor was started by Soros in Serbia and has trained activists in other colour revolutions
Several protest organizers on the streets in Egypt last week were wearing Otpor t-shirts. These t-shirts are given out by Otpor at training sessions. This is only to say that there may be a link here, between Soros and Tunisian protesters.
In 2007-08, Freedom House [funded by Soros and the Middle Eastern Partnership Initiative (MEPI)] ran the following program: “New Generation of Advocates, a MEPI-funded program that supports young civil society activists working for peaceful political change in the Middle East and North Africa, spearheaded the “Lawyers against Corruption” campaign in Tunisia.”(Freedom House website). The group of “journalists, lawyers, and other activists who advocate for democratic reform” had a meeting with then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, on a trip to Washington on International Human Rights Day, December 10, 2008. In May 2009, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met with the group of activist/dissidents. Freedom House reported on their website that the group also visited “U.S. government officials, members of Congress, media outlets and think tanks . . . After returning to Egypt, the fellows received small grants to implement innovative initiatives such as advocating for political reform through Facebook and SMS messaging.” (emphasis added)
And also from the Freedom House website: “From February 27 to March 13 [2010], Freedom House hosted 11 bloggers from the Middle East and North Africa for a two-week Advanced New Media Study Tour in Washington, D.C.”
In 2010, Soros’ Open Society Institute funded a grant called ‘Can It Tweet its way to Democracy? The promise of Participatory Media in Africa’ described on the OSI website as “. . . . Ethiopia and Egypt have been the current focus of the research programme; the OSI funding will allow the project to be expanded to include: Uganda, Zimbabwe, Tunisia, Eritrea and Rwanda. . . . it is hoped that it will contribute to the understanding of the new media in Africa and its links to democratization. It is also intended that the study will be used as a source material for future research.”
Facebook and Twitter were the primary means of organizing the revolution in Egypt: “Activists from Egypt’s Kifaya (Enough) movement – a coalition of government opponents – and the 6th of April Youth Movement organized the protests on the Facebook and Twitter . . . .” (Voice of America)
In the Foreign Policy Journal, Dr. D.K. Bolton (Jan 19 2011) writes, “NED [National Endowment for Democracy] and Soros work in tandem, targeting the same regimes and using the same methods. . . . At least ten of the twenty-two directors of NED are also members of the plutocratic think tank, the Council on Foreign Relations . . . .” (The Council of Foreign Relations is the American sister of the Rothschild’s Royal Institute of International Affairs in Britain: both are instruments of plutocratic control hiding in plain sight.
The following is a partial list of grants from the NED website for 2009 (the latest year available):
In Tunisia the focus was on training youth activists:
“Al-Jahedh Forum for Free Thought $131,000 To strengthen the capacity and build a democratic culture among Tunisian youth activists.
“Mohamed Ali Center for Research, Studies and Training $33,500 To train a core group of Tunisian youth activists on leadership and organizational skills to encourage their involvement in public life. [MACRST] will conduct a four-day intensive training of trainers program for a core group of 10 young Tunisian civic activists on leadership and organizational skills; train 50 male and female activists aged 20 to 40 on leadership and empowered decision-making; and work with the trained activists through 50 on-site visits to their respective organizations.
“Association for the Promotion of Education $27,000 To strengthen the capacity of Tunisian high school teachers to promote democratic and civic values in their classrooms. APES will conduct a training-of-trainers workshop for 10 university professors and school inspectors, and hold three two-day capacity building seminars for 120 high school teachers . . . .”
The above organizations and others have been recipients of ongoing NED grants in Tunisia, as the following list from previous years indicates:
2008: Al-Jahedh Forum for Free Thought received $57,000 to train Tunisian activists; Mohamed Ali Centre for Research got $37,800; Tunisian Arab Civitas Institute, $43,000 for training teachers in “civic values” and the Center for International Private Enterprise, $163,205 “to inculcate free enterprise doctrines among Tunisian businessmen, which reflects what NED is really aiming for in its promotion of “democracy and civil values”: globalization” (Bolton, 2011)
2007: AJFFT received $45,000 to develop Tunisian Activists; The Arab Institute for Human Rights got $43,900; The Center for International Private Enterprise (CIPE) $175, 818; The Mohamed Ali Center for Research, Studies, and Training $38,500; Moroccan Organization for Human Rights $60,000 “To strengthen a group of young Tunisian attorneys as they mobilize citizens on reform issues.”
In Egypt, the number of NED grants doubled in 2009 to 33 democracy projects totaling $1.4 million and the focus changed from promoting private enterprise to training young human-rights lawyers, and identifying and training youth activists. It will be interesting to see when (if?) NED publishes its 2010 grants. From the NED website—a sample of the grants for 2009:
Egyptian Union of Liberal Youth (EULY) $33,300 To expand the use of new media among youth activists for the promotion of democratic ideas and values. EULY will train 60 youth activists to use filmmaking for the dissemination of democratic ideas and values. The Union will lead a total of four two-month long training workshops in Cairo to build the political knowledge and technical filmmaking skills of participating youth involved in NGOs.
Andalus Institute for Tolerance and Anti-Violence Studies (AITAS) $48,900 To strengthen youth understanding of the Egyptian parliament and enhance regional activists’ use of new technologies as accountability tools. AITAS will conduct a series of workshops for 300 university students to raise their awareness of parliament’s functions and engage them in monitoring parliamentary committees. AITAS will also host 8 month-long internships for youth activists from the Middle East and North Africa to share its experiences using web-based technologies in monitoring efforts.
Bridge Center for Dialogue and Development (BTRD) $25,000 To promote youth expression and engagement in community issues through new media. BTRD will train youth between the ages of 16 and 26 in the use of new and traditional media tools to report on issues facing their communities. BRTD will also create a website for human rights videos and new media campaigns in Egypt.
Egyptian Democracy Institute (EDI) $48,900 To promote accountability and transparency in parliament through public participation, and to build legislative capacity. EDI will produce quarterly monitoring reports and hold seminars to discuss the overall performance of Parliament and offer recommendations on legislation proposed in the People’s Assembly. EDI will monitor, collect, and document evidence of corruption in Cairo and Alexandria
Lawyers Union for Democratic and Legal Studies (LUDLS) $20,000 To support freedom of association by strengthening young activists’ ability to express and organize themselves peacefully within the bounds of the law. LUDLS will train 250 youth activists on peaceful assembly and dispute resolution
Our Hands for Comprehensive Development $19,200 To engage Minya youth in civic activism and encourage youth-led initiatives and volunteerism. Our Hands will hold two public meetings for local youth to discuss challenges and to identify youth leaders who would benefit from additional training courses. Participants will produce a short film on youth political participation, and develop and implement action plans for resolving problems facing youth in the governorate. Our Hands will also provide Minya youth an opportunity to learn from the experience of and network with Cairo-based activists and NGOs.
“Youth Forum $19,000 To expand and maintain a network of youth activists on Egyptian university campuses and to encourage the participation of university students in student union elections and civic activities on campus. . . .”
NED and Soros have been injecting millions of dollars into the training of North African, pro-democracy teachers, lawyers, journalists and youth activists. In 2009 they more than doubled their training efforts. Why, at this time, has the 30-year support of these dictators been undermined? The prize is the rapidly-rising economies of North Africa. It coincides with the efforts of Ben Ali to make Tunisia the financial center of North Africa and to promote Islamic banking. The Rothschilds want North African Muslims to borrow from Rothschild banks and pay interest at rates the Rothschild central bank decides: they do not want them to be able to borrow from Islamic banks and not pay any interest. The Rothschilds want Muslims to trade their present political oppression at the hands of brutal dictators for future economic serfdom under the control of banker Lord Rothschild.

About Puppetworld Post

You are probably reading this because you couldn’t find the answers to your suspicions in the other media.
What can I say? The world is a plutarchy–rule by a few ultra-ultra-wealthy. It’s never been anywhere near this bad. By owning the media, the Rothschilds (and their associates) dispense what becomes our reality. They effectively write our history. And, undoubtedly, they have a detailed plan on where they are taking us over the next century.
Even if journalists were allowed to write critiques of the Rothschilds, reveal the faces behind the nebulous international monetary web of federal, central banks and public-policy institutions–it would not happen: journalists don’t have the time (nor did they ever) to do the research required to connect the dots. Budget cuts to newspapers have taken this to extremes: now “journalists” merely reprint wire-service articles from Reuters, AP, etc (all owned by Rothschild (or associates).
Puppetworld Post is an attempt to do the research and present the evidence in a straight-forward and, hopefully, readable style.
Most of all, I would like Puppetworld Post to be a forum where others who have information about who is really behind the big issues will contribute facts–a website where leaks will be published.
And ultimately a call to action.
We have even greater obstacles than the Rothschilds web of control: ignorance and apathy.

Breaking: Anonymous Shuts Down Egyptian Government Website

As of this morning, Anonymous protestors have shut down the Egyptian Government  All morning, the Anonymous IRC Channel “Operation Egypt” has been busy with people downloading the Low Orbit Ion Canon software (LOIC) to launch a DDoS (Distributed Denial of Service) protest against Egyptian government websites.
On the heels of a successful Anonymous-assisted revolution in Tunisia, a new Anonymous cyber-protest was initiated three days ago dubbed “Operation Egypt”. In the streets of Cairo yesterday, protesters for freedom from the repressive rule of President Mubarek demanded reforms and new leadership.
Anonymous protesters were using Twitter to inform and coordinate with Egyptian protesters and citizens. Twitter announced yesterday that it was shut down in Egypt cutting off communication among protesters and the people of Egypt.

The West Cheers On the Protesters Who Occupy Tahrir Square: While THEY EVICT THEIR OWN OCCUPY MOVEMENTS

Historically: Civil disobedience has been an invaluable tool to democracy. Without it, people would not have been able to get the right to vote (e.g. women, racial groups) and other civil liberties. The environmental movement owes its successes to protest and civil disobedience. People all around the globe are free from tyranny today largely through protest and civil disobedience.

  • Controlling Dissent:

Western mayors (and the 1%) control the nature of protests: you can protest the way we (the 1%) tell you you can protest, only–that is, the traditional way that we know how to control–we will not tolerate any innovative ways to protest (i.e. occupying public space). Also, the authorities dismiss and demean the validity of any protest as a means of controlling dissent.

 

  • Balancing rights:

On one side of the balance is the right of the mayor to enforce restrictions on the use of public (and semi-public) space by the public. On the other side is the democratic right of people to protest. At this point, many of the 99% are happy to permit the great sadness of economic inequity in society to continue as long as the right to walk your dog in the park without having to look at an Occupy encampment is protected.

Data And Sources For MENA Islamic Banks, Central Banks and Oil

 

MENA COUNTRIES(MENA is Middle East and North Africa) 

 

 

Middle East

BANKING PROFILE OIL TRAINING ACTIVISTS, ETC.  (DEMOCRACY AND GOVERNANCE) For 2006 -2008   (last year available)U.S Government ——————à| <——-Soros
Central Bank controlled  by their govern-ment Financial Center for Islamic Finance Number of Islamic Financial Institu-tions9(banks + mortgage etc) Market Share of Islamic Financial Institu- tions Oil Bourse-market not selling oil in US$ Reserves Of Oil182007(millions of barrels) USAID +State GJD + NED2006-2008 (millions  of $)15 Population In 200816(millions) (USAID + State GJD + NED)  dollars per 1000 people MEPI –  regional projects, not by country (U.S. + Soros) Open Society Institute(Soros – $ by country not avail-able)
Bahrain       yes6 40 10%11        125 $ 0.6M 1.1M $550 Yes Na
Egypt 3   7%12     3 700 $ 156M 74.2M $2100 yes Na
Iran      yes1,2       yes7 16 100%7      X 136 000 $ 38M 31M $1230 $7M20 X
Iraq until20043 2  na 115 000 $1638M 31M17 $52840 na Na
Jordan 7 10%12        1.0 $55M** 5.9M $9320 yes Na
Kuwait 78 32%11 102 000 $ 0.2M 3.4M $60 yes Na
Lebanon 6  na            0 $ 48M 4.0M $12000 yes Na
Qatar 20 22%11   15 000 $0 0.8M17 $0 yes Na
SaudiArabia 38 37%11 262 000 $ 2M 24.8M $80 yes Na
Syria      yes5 6   1%12     2 500 $ 7.5M 19.6M $380 $5M20 Na
Turkey 5   7%13        300 $ 5.5M 74M17 $70 yes Na
UAE 43 17%11   98 000 $0 5M17 $0 yes Na
Yemen 4 31%14     3 000 $ 8M 24.3M $330 yes Na
TOTAL FOR MID EAST         2       2 268 na      1 737 600 $321 without Iraq 299M $1070 without Iraq na Na
North Africa
Algeria 2 15%10   12 000 $2M 34.6M $58 yes Na
Libya     yes4 0   0% 42000 $ 0.6M 7.3M $82 yes Na
Morocco 112   1%12            1 $ 22M 32.6M $670 yes Na
Sudan     yes 30  na     5 000 $ 171M 38.2M $4480 yes Na
Tunisia        yes8 3   1%12        400 $ 1.1 M 10.3M $110 Yes Na
TOTAL FOR N. AFRICA        1       1 36 na      0   59 400 $197M 123M $1600 na
TOTAL FOR MENA REGION         4         3 304  na 797 000 $518M $422M $1230 $110M19 $90M***

·          Reserve Life = reserves divided by annual production

** includes similar projects from the Millenium Challenge Corporation

***    an estimate based on information on the OSI website –expenditures by country are not available

 

1.     Clarke, Alison; and Paul Kohler.  Property law: commentary and materials. Cambridge University Press. 2005. p 40.

2.     U.S. Department of the Treasury. , Iran: What You Need To Know About US Economic Sanctions, 2010.  Appendix A:  Banks Owned Or Controlled By The Government Of Iran, p 3.

3.     Central Bank (in name only) of Iraq website.

4.     Central Bank (in name only) of Libya website

5.     “The Council on Money and Credit established monetary policy and supervised banking, subject to review by a ministerial committee responsible for the whole economy. The general philosophy was that the banking system should be an agent of government economic policy. Direct controls were used more often than indirect ones; credit, for example, was regulated by setting limits for each sector and each bank.”   Library of Congress, Country Studies: Syria (1987)

6.     Bahrain Financial Harbor  and Gulf Finance House

7.     Dar, Humayon.  Islamic Banking In Iran and SudanBusiness Asia.  June 27, 2010.   “. . .[Iran has] some of the largest Islamic banks in the world. For example, Bank Melli Iran is the largest Islamic bank in the world in terms of assets under management (AUM). It has over US$ 59 billion under management, with 3,300 branches and over 43,000 employees. … Given this prime role played by Iranian Islamic banking in the global context …”

8.     Tunis Financial Harbour

9.     Samy Nathan Garas, Chris Pierce, (2010) “Shari’a supervision of Islamic financial institutions”, Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance, Vol. 18 Iss: 4, pp.386 – 407, Table AI. (Except for Morocco, see 12).

10.   Bourihane, Nouria.   La finance islamique se répand en Algérie.  Le Temps d’Algerie.  06-11-2010

11.   Standard and Poor’s.  Islamic Finance Outlook 2010

12.   The World Bank.  Symposium on Islamic Finance in Roma: Developments in MENA region

13.   Turkey: A Special Dynamic To Islamic Banking. Islamic Finance Asia. July/August 2010.

14.    Yemen: Islamic banks account for 31 % of assets in Yemeni banking.  Yemen Observer.  Apr 16 2009

15.   United States Government Accountability Office.  Report to Congressional Committees.  Democracy Assistance  Sept 2009

16.   Arab Monetary Fund, Statistical Bulletin of Arab Counties, 2010  (unless otherwise footnoted)

What Is Anonymous? It’s Not Hackers, More Like a Digital “Sit In” Protest

The enigma that is Anonymous has played a pivotal role during the imprisonment of Wikileaks’ Julian Assange and during the Jasmine Revolution in Tunisia and the revolution in Egypt by closing down websites that were opposing their cause. Nearly universally, the media (mainstream and online) has labeled Anonymous as hacktivists or a group of hackers. They got it wrong. They don’t get it. They are stuck in analogthink.
Anonymous is not a group of hackers. It is not even a static group. It does not have leaders or even members: People chat on the internet, decide on a common goal (the hivemind forms) and choose an operation (i.e. Operation Payback, Operation Tunisia). Who’s on board for any particular Op (operation) is not known to anyone else since the members for that Op are anonymous to each other. Anonymous is a concept where people come together anonymously for common goals.
Anonymous is a concept/strategy/meme: the concept is presently being used by concerned netizens to oppose censorship. They assemble on internet chat. So far Anonymous Ops: have not been malicious, have been nonviolent, have (in fact) prevented violence, and have expressed a strong ethos for freedom of speech, freedom from censorship. Their means of protest are varied—the most effective is to flood a website with bogus requests (DDoS: Distributed Denial of Service) until it gets overloaded and closes down. This is the digital equivalent of the sixties “Sit In” (where protesters occupied a strategic building with many bodies, sat on the floor and made demands).
The DDoS flooding of sites is Anonymous’ major weapon and no hacker knowledge is necessary. Target sites go down for a short period of time. If Anonymous has hackers they are showing a lot of restraint: a lot (I mean A LOT) more damage could be done. Some low-level hacking is done—defacing homepages of governments which is a prank to bolster the morale of the protesters.
Physical protests have played a vital role in shaping people’s progress in the last century from the Women’s Suffrage to the Civil Rights Movement to the various Anti-war Protests from Vietnam to Iraq. Anonymous embodies a new form of protest: a cyber-protest which has so far been surprisingly effective and very promising. Much of the oppression in the world is done by stealth, in secrecy: the villains are anonymous whether they be part of dictatorships, democratic governments, corporations, or secret societies of the ultra-rich. For a protest group to be anonymous levels the playing field. Anonymous is an experiment that must be conducted.
Anonymous is not a bunch of hackers: Ordinary people from all countries and all walks of life participate in Anonymous Ops. The software they use to make a website too busy—DDoS programs (Distributed Denial of Service) can be used easily by anyone—and there is no defense against DDoS. DDoS has been used to overload websites with bogus requests since the 1990s. The DDoS software (LOIC – Low Orbit Ion Canon) is pretty weak so you need a lot of participants to take down a site: like bees stinging a huge bear—one bee is just an itch–you need thousands of bees stinging at the same time to drive the bear away. This is a very effective check on the integrity of the Ops because a smaller number of people with dubious ethical intentions could not carry out an Op successfully.
I participated on the IRC channel #opegypt yesterday and it was a cocophany of crossing conversations: jokes, philosophy, fury at Egyptian government actions, news about arrests in Egypt, discussion of Middle East politics and religion, more jokes, outing a “newsfag”, trolls screaming that Anonymous is a CIA Op, all amid the discussion of current news out of Egypt and DDoSing target sites with LOIC over anonymous networks. It’s a wonder anything gets accomplished, but many times, serious discussion of Operations in Egypt often prevails and what shines through is the highest moral values of the participants: genuine concern for the people in the streets in Egypt, paramount is the ethic against government control of free speech, abhorrence of violence, and a disgust for oppression by the state. The participants are not nihilist hackers.
Their ideal of free speech was repeatedly put to the test in discussions on #opalgeria and #opegypt channels: citizens of both countries wanted Anonymous to target media outlets spewing government propaganda (as well as than government websites). This goes to the very heart of Anonymous’ ethos. The demands of the protesters on the streets were met with the same response every time — Anonymous is committed to free speech, regardless of who uses it, and will not target the media, no matter what they say — “no media including Fox or state run”.
“You may not agree with what they say,” said one participant, “but you will LOIC to the death for their right to say it.”
Anonymous has developed an idealistic ethos: that people (who join in their enterprise) are an invincible force that can defeat tyranny and bring freedom to the oppressed people of the world. On the Internet, there is a growing awareness that there is a network of councils and organizations and secret societies that control the governments of the world and a slow realization that the economies of nearly all countries are controlled by privately-owned “central banks” masquerading as each government’s bank (i.e. The Federal Reserve). The Anonymous model for activism may be the only hope for people who want to live in a democratic world and not a plutocratic world. The other option is for governments, corporations and the secret organizations of the ultra-rich to have all the power to manipulate the new communications media.
Note: This article was about Anonymous Operations–their public protests (LOIC attacks) to influence political events. On the other hand, individuals or organizations that have attacked Anonymous by trying to infiltrate, expose or run a campaign against Anonymous have experienced their hacker wrath: Anonymous has counter-attacked with devastating hacker force–posting private e-mails on The Pirate Bay and bragging about completely wiping out data.

Tunisia Is The First Anonymous Revolution

Wikileaks played a minor part in the revolution in Tunisia that ended last week with dictator Ben Ali fleeing the country—the information posted on Wikileaks merely confirmed what Tunisians had known all along. The credit has to go to the Tunisian people themselves. The most important factor was the help they got from Anonymous – a group of like-minded individuals who put together a well orchestrated online campaign they called Operation Tunisia.
When Tunisian dictator Ben Ali shut down the open Internet, jailed free bloggers, and closed down Wikileaks in Tunisia, people started to take to the streets. Anonymous, through coordinated DDoS attacks, took down government sites, servers and state-run media channels. The government’s home page was replaced with a picture of a pirate ship under the words “Payback is a Bitch, Isn’t It?” Ben Ali could not communicate with the people of Tunisia.
At the same time, Anonymous opened up the lines of communication for Tunisians on Twitter, IRC, Flicker and YouTube. Operation Tunisia posted videos of support on YouTube. One of the videos described the motives of Anonymous: “No media is able to describe the situation in Tunisia: The (Tunisian) government has jailed the free bloggers and prevented local and international media from getting factual information out of the country. Anonymous is collecting videos and testimonies directly from Tunisian citizens on the streets and on the Internet. Because Anonymous thinks YOU NEED TO KNOW, Anonymous will fight against those who are trying to prevent you from knowing the truth. Anonymous will fight against those who want to steal from Tunisians their right to free expression. . . .”

Anonymous advertises for volunteers
Another Anonymous video on YouTube encouraged Tunisians to, “Join us on the IRC – irc.anonops.ru #opTunisia. If you live in Tunisia – come out on the streets this January 6 and let your voice be heard!
A Reuters article, by journalists Marius Bosch and Georgina Prodhan states, “ Thousands of Anons from around the world took it upon themselves to fight for the people of Tunisia and even discouraged locals from taking part due to the danger of government persecution. ‘If you are Tunisian, do not participate in the DDoS attack,’ One Anon warned on a communications channel. ‘Chances are that you will get traced and arrested. Unless you have means to conceal your IP and know what you are doing, do NOT attack.’”
After victory, Tunisians posted a video on YouTube in German. This is a translation: “On behalf of all Tunisians, I want to thank Anonymous. Anonymous were the only ones to help us. Anonymous has blocked all governmental websites because the government has blocked our internet access so we may not get information. Thank you Anonymous! We want to let you know that you have found new allies and that there are many more people living in oppression.”
Indeed on January 20, Anonymous launched Operation Algeria in response to escalating protests in that country (see below).
Why Tunisia? For Anons the highest ideal is freedom of information—they are radically opposed to censorship. On Jan 21 2010, reporting on the cyber-attacks on Google and computers of Chinese dissidents by the Chinese government, the BBC said that Hilary Clinton said that “China along with Tunisia and Uzbekistan had boosted censorship”. Among Arab countries, Tunisia had the most political prisoners and jailed journalists.
Compare how Anonymous defeated a dictator in Tunisia (bloodless, nonviolent) to how the US government “brought democracy” to Iraq and Afganistan—a ten year quagmire of destruction of the countries’ infrastructure and massive military and civilian deaths that continue to this day.

The dictator of Tunisia, Ben Ali, at the Whitehouse in 2004
The Obama administration has been, at best, ambivalent about Tunisia and, at worst, compliant (by their silence) in the human rights abuses. Just recently, the Bush Administration was increasing links between the US and Tunisia and downplaying human rights concerns. In December 2003, Secretary of State Colin Powell said, “Our bilateral relationship is very, very strong. . . . We are great admirers of Tunisia and the progress that has been achieved under President Ben Ali’s leadership.”
Despite the fact that freedoms of the press, association, and expression were extremely restricted in Tunisia, Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, on a visit to Tunisia in 2006, called the country a “democracy” saying, “We have a very long relationship with Tunisia. . . . Tunisia is a moderate Muslim nation that has been and is today providing very constructive leadership in the world.” (Associated Press)
In their own words, Anonymous says that it is “just an idea – an internet meme – that can be appropriated by anyone, anytime, to rally for a common cause that’s in the benefit of human kind. This means anyone can launch a new ideological message or campaign under the banner of Anonymous. Anyone can take up a leading role in spreading the Anon-consciousness.” While Anonymous began as a group of teenage computer hackers, it no longer is, Anonymous is open to all people. It now represents average people who want to get involved.
Anonymous is growing in numbers: after the jailing of Wikileaks’ Assange in December and Anon attacks on sites that tried to block Wikileaks—Visa, Mastercard, Paypal, a Swiss bank, etc.—many citizens joined them and they now have 10 000 members.
In their Reuter’s article Bosch and Prodhan say, “Global chaos is not Anonymous’ aim. . . . As the WikiLeaks and Tunisia cases show, the group targets specific institutions and its attacks are designed to temporarily delay more than destroy. . . . ‘This time last week, ex-Tunisian Ben Ali president didn’t think he’d be running for the hills, with Anonymous activists on his heels,’ Jon Newton of P2Pnet writes. ‘There’s no doubt about it. The bastions of corporate and government dominance are being battered down by People to People Power.’”

Rothschilds Brought Us Communism – Funded Lenin and Trotsky

The Rothschilds along with Jacob Schiff created the major events of the 20th century by providing the key funding for the Bolsheviks, Lenin and Trotsky. This was largely accomplished through Jacob Schiff who, while a force in his own right, was part of the Rothschild Empire. The Russian Revolution of 1917 eventually led to the domination of Eastern Europe by Communist Russia after World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War and all conflicts associated with the Cold War. All these wars served to undermine nationalism and led to the formation of the United Nations, the IMF, the World Bank, etc.—international governments which moved the Rothschilds toward their goal of One World Government (i.e. The New World Order).
It is frequently claimed that The Rothschilds funded Karl Marx while he was writing his Communist Manifesto. It is said that there are two cheques in the British Museum made out to Karl Marx for several thousand pounds and signed by Nathan Rothschild. This is a myth. However, the nonexistence of the cheques does not mean that the Rothschilds did not fund, or help fund, Karl Marx. At this writing, this journalist has been unable to find hard evidence of who funded Marx (input solicited).
The Rothschilds also had a multi-generational feud with the Czars of Russia, the only royalty who would not cooperate with the Rothschilds. In the American Civil War, Abraham Lincoln invited Czar Alexandra II to send his fleet over as protection (which he did) in order to foil a plot by the Rothschild’s which would see France and Britain intervene on the side of the South. In Russia’s war with Japan, Jacob Schiff (part of the Rothschild Empire) made it impossible for Russia to borrow the money to finance the war and, even more ruinously, he financed Japan. The Russians suffered a humiliating defeat.
The Bolsheviks ended the feud in 1918 by butchering Czar Nicholas II, his wife, his son and his four daughters. As if to say, “Let that be a lesson”.
The Rothschilds Money Power creates the events which will become the history of our planet.

Soros and U.S. Trained Activists in Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Syria, Iran, Etc To Kill Islamic Banking And State-run Central Banks

Islamic banks have been eating into the profits of conventional banks in the Middle East because: they don’t charge interest (Shariah Law), they are growing very rapidly, and (in these catastrophic economic times) they are more stable than western banks.

The New York Times article “Islamic banking rises on oil wealth, drawing non-Muslims” ( November 22, 2007) reported:   “Rising oil wealth is lifting Islamic banking – which adheres to the laws of the Koran and its prohibition against charging interest – into the financial mainstream. . . . In addition to Islamic loans, there are Islamic bonds, Islamic credit cards …In Islamic banking, financiers are required to share borrowers’ risks, meaning that depositors are treated more like shareholders, earning a portion of profits.  …And while the biggest Islamic banks are in the wealthy Gulf states, the most attractive potential markets are in Turkey and North Africa (emphasis added) and among European Muslims… .”

Most people of the world prefer the conventional banking model.   They don’t mind paying 20% interest on small loans (credit card).  They don’t want to share in their bank’s profits: they want their banks to grow even bigger and stronger and more powerful to compete on international markets.  They don’t mind paying income tax to bail out monster banks (i.e. too big to fail) for their bad gambling debts (i.e. TARP in U.S.) [and because that bail out is added to the government’s debt, they don’t mind paying interest on the bail out to the Federal Reserve (whose policies created the crisis)].  They don’t mind children dying in Africa due to third-world usury (countries that can’t pay down the principle have gone further into debt instead of declaring bankruptcy).

With the support of their governments, Islamic Finance is the fastest growing sector in the MENA region (Middle East North Africa) with huge business opportunities ahead in the untapped Muslim populations in many countries.  Middle East regimes threaten to derail the forces of globalization and unseat traditional banking because Islam is setting up an attractive alternate model to conventional banking.  Suffering a setback after the “Battle in Seattle”, the globalists have wrapped themselves in the cloak of democracy to further their agenda.  Conventional western bankers see regime change in the Middle East as an imperative to competing with the success of the Islamic banking system (Henry, Clement Moore, PhD. and Robert Springborg.  Globalization and the politics of development in the Middle East, Cambridge University Press, 2001, 2nd edition 2010).

In their  Islamic Finance Outlook 2010 , Standard and Poor’s says,  “Competition Is Mounting, With Conventional Banks’ Islamic Windows Actively Challenging Fully-Fledged Islamic Banks:  Pioneering Islamic banks that have managed to acquire quasi-monopolies in their domestic niche markets are now facing stiff competition in our opinion. Their first mover advantage is shrinking in their domestic markets and we understand they are now looking at business and/or geographic diversification strategies. Conventional banks entering Islamic banking currently constitute the most active competitive threat to established Islamic banks. …”

Late in 2008, French Finance Minister Christine Lagarde announced France’s intention to make Paris “the capital of Islamic finance” and said several Islamic banks would open branches in the French capital in 2009.  French sources estimate this area of the financial market is worth from 500 to 600 billion dollars and could grow by an average 11 percent a year.

John Sandwick, managing director of Swiss asset management firm Encore Management, characterized the opening of several Swiss Islamic banks as, “the race to control the rich prize: which today is worth hundreds of billions, but in the future will be trillions of dollars of Islamic wealth.”

Reporting on material from Wikileaks, The Telegraph (Islamic Finance Key To Ensuring London As Top Financial Center) reported that Robert Tuttle, the then US ambassador to the Court of St. James in London as stating “Should London successfully position itself as a leading Islamic finance center, it could gain an edge on New York, when the global financial markets recover. . . . Prospects for growth from a Standard & Poor forecast [see above], assesses the [Islamic Finance] industry to potentially contain up to $4 trillion of assets. Other estimates put growth figures even higher, since Muslims account for 20 percent of the world population. Presently only about 1 percent of global financial assets are controlled under finance compliant with Islamic law.”

Islamic banking is not yet established in North Africa (except in Sudan) and Egypt where large Muslim populations represent a very lucrative opportunity for Islamic banking in these emerging economies.  “However, despite the current poor climate, the potential for Islamic banking in Egypt is huge,” states Executive Magazine (Feb 8 2011), “ … Clearly Islamic banks in the Gulf are already anticipating the day when their home markets are saturated. And it appears that Egypt will be on the next front-line in the development of regional Islamic banking and finance.”

“African countries such as Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Morocco, Tunisia and Sudan are keen on future sukuk exercises (issuing Islamic bonds),”  [International Finance Review (Reuters), 2008]

 

ROTHSCHILDS/U.S.  FINANCE REVOLUTIONS IN PLAIN SITE

(This portion was in the previous post.  If you read it already, please scroll down to the table analyzing the banking profile and activist training in each country)

The MENA (Middle East North Africa) revolutions are from the same playbook as the nonviolent “color revolutions”.  The playbook isFrom Dictatorship To Democracy by Gene Sharp of the Albert Einstein Institute (funded partially by George Soros).   These revolutions have been successful in Serbia [especially the Bulldozer Revolution (2000)], in Georgia’s Rose Revolution (2003), in Ukraine’s Orange Revolution (2004), in Lebanon’s Cedar Revolution and in Kyrgyzstan’s Tulip Revolution (2005).    Iran’s Green Revolution (2009) was unsuccessful.

The Guardian reported (Nov 26, 2004) that the following were “directly involved” in organizing the color revolutions:  George Soros’ Open Society Institute, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), the International Republican Institute, and Freedom House.   The Washington Post and the New York Times also reported substantial Western involvement in some of these events.  The network for this strategy is outlined in the Carnegie Endowment For International Peace’s  Fact-Sheet: U.S. Actors Promoting Democracy In The Middle East.   

 

Liberal billionaire George Soros and the US government funded training of activists in North Africa In 2007-08, Freedom House [funded by Soros and the Middle Eastern Partnership Initiative (MEPI)] ran the following program: “New Generation of Advocates, a MEPI-funded program that supports young civil society activists working for peaceful political change in the Middle East and North Africa, spearheaded the “Lawyers against Corruption” campaign in Tunisia.”(Freedom House website).  The group of “journalists, lawyers, and other activists who advocate for democratic reform” had a meeting with then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, on a trip to Washington on International Human Rights Day, December 10, 2008.  In May 2009, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met with the group of activist/dissidents.  Freedom House reported on their website that the group also visited “U.S. government officials, members of Congress, media outlets and think tanks . . . After returning to Egypt, the fellows received small grants to implement innovative initiatives such as advocating for political reform throughIn 2010, Soros’ Open Society Institute funded a grant called ‘Can It Tweet its way to Democracy? The promise of Participatory Media in Africa’ described on the OSI website as being focused in Ethiopia and Egypt.

Egyptian protesters displaying the Otpor protester’s fist originally funded by Soros in Yugoslavia

Facebook and Twitter were the primary means of organizing the revolution in Egypt:  “Activists from Egypt’s Kifaya (Enough) movement – a coalition of government opponents – and the 6th of April Youth Movement organized the protests on Facebook and Twitter . . . .” (Voice of America)

In the Foreign Policy Journal, Dr. D.K. Bolton (Jan 19 2011) writes, “NED [National Endowment for Democracy] and Soros work in tandem, targeting the same regimes and using the same methods. . . . At least ten of the twenty-two directors of NED are also members of the plutocratic think tank, the Council on Foreign Relations . . . .” (The Council of Foreign Relations is the American sister of the Rothschild’s Royal Institute of International Affairs in Britain: both are instruments of plutocratic control hiding in plain sight.)

NED is funded by the U.S. government and private interests (including George Soros).  The following are quotes from the NED website from a few 2009 projects:

“Al-Jahedh Forum for Free Thought $131,000 To strengthen the capacity and build a democratic culture among Tunisian youth activists.”

“Mohamed Ali Center for Research, Studies and Training $33,500 To train a core group of Tunisian youth activists on leadership and organizational skills to encourage their involvement in public life.  [MACRST] will conduct a four-day intensive training of trainers program for a core group of 10 young Tunisian civic activists on leadership and organizational skills; train 50 male and female activists aged 20 to 40 on leadership and empowered decision-making; and work with the trained activists through 50 on-site visits to their respective organizations.”

“Association for the Promotion of Education $27,000 To strengthen the capacity of Tunisian high school teachers to promote democratic and civic values in their classrooms.”

“Al-Jahedh Forum for Free Thought $57,000 [in 2008]  To train Tunisian activists.”

In Egypt, the number of NED grants doubled in 2009 to 33 democracy projects totaling $1.4 million and the focus changed from promoting private enterprise to training young human-rights lawyers, and identifying and training youth activists:

“Egyptian Union of Liberal Youth (EULY) $33,300  To expand the use of new media among youth activists for the promotion of democratic ideas and values. EULY will train 60 youth activists to use filmmaking for the dissemination of democratic ideas and values.”

“Andalus Institute for Tolerance and Anti-Violence Studies (AITAS) $48,900 To strengthen youth understanding of the Egyptian parliament and enhance regional activists’ use of new technologies as accountability tools. AITAS will conduct a series of workshops for 300 university students to raise their awareness of parliament’s functions and engage them in monitoring parliamentary committees. AITAS will also host 8 month-long internships for youth activists from the Middle East and North Africa to share its experiences using web-based technologies in monitoring efforts.”

”Egyptian Democracy Institute (EDI) $48,900 To promote accountability and transparency in parliament through public participation, and to build legislative capacity. EDI will produce quarterly monitoring reports and hold seminars to discuss the overall performance of Parliament and offer recommendations on legislation proposed in the People’s Assembly. EDI will monitor, collect, and document evidence of corruption in Cairo and Alexandria.”

“Lawyers Union for Democratic and Legal Studies (LUDLS) $20,000 To support freedom of association by strengthening young activists’ ability to express and organize themselves peacefully within the bounds of the law. LUDLS will train 250 youth activists on peaceful assembly and dispute resolution”

“Youth Forum  $19,000 To expand and maintain a network of youth activists on Egyptian university campuses and to encourage the participation of university students in student union elections and civic activities on campus. . . .”

—————————————————————————

George Soros is a wealthy, billionaire globalist.  His long-time trading partner was the late James Goldsmith, British banker and cousin to the Rothschilds.   James’ grandfather Adolphe Goldschmidt came to London as a multi-millionaire in 1895 and changed the family name from the German Goldschmidt to the English Goldsmith.   The Goldschmidts, like their neighbors and relatives the Rothschilds, had been prosperous merchant bankers in Frankfurt Germany since the 16th century (Wikipedia).

These revolutions are done under the pretense of bringing democracy and deposing despots, but the real aim is to initially create chaos and a leadership vacuum, then quickly offer a solution: install a puppet that will do the economic bidding of the Rothschilds.   The citizens gain civil liberties, but become economic serfs.

These revolutions are most likely coordinated at the highest levels by the International Crisis Group.  Mohamed ElBaradei is already being touted as a new leader for Egypt. ElBaradei is a trustee of the International Crisis Group.  Another board member of this group is Zbigniew Brzezinski (another frontman for the Rothschilds).  George Soros also sits on the executive committee.

 

TABLE I:   COUNTRY BY COUNTRY ANALYSIS OF ISLAMIC FINANCE AND ACTIVIST TRAINING

(For the exact figures for this table plus oil reserves, and sources see the page on this topic in the menu on the right)

MENA COUNTRIES(MENA is Middle East North Africa) BANKING PROFILE PopulationSize 2008 S: <5MM: < 10M  L:<40M XL: >40M TRAINING ACTIVISTS  2006 -2008 [last year available–does not include MEPI ($110M) and Open Society Institute(est.$90M)]
Central Bank controlled by the state Financial Center for Islamic Finance Number of Islamic Financial Institutions  Is LOW ( < 10) Market Share of Islamic Financial Institutions  Is LOW (< 15%) USAID +State GJD +NED 2006-2008 (million $) (USAID + State GJD + NED)  dollars per 1000 people
Bahrain    Bahrain                 X Small $ 0.6M $550 HIGH
Egypt                  X                 X XXLarge $ 156M $2100   HIGH – EXTRA
Iran           Iran          Iran   Large $ 38M $1230       HIGH – VERY
Iraq  Until 2004                  X                 X Large $1638M $52840     HIGH – EXTRA
Jordan                  X                 X Medium $ 55M* $9320       HIGH – EXTRA
Kuwait   Medium $ 0.2M $60            LOW
Lebanon                  X                 X Small $ 48M $12000     HIGH – EXTRA
Qatar Small $0 $0              LOW
SaudiArabia Large $ 2M $80            LOW
Syria            Syria                  X                 X Large $ 7.5M $380          MODERATE
Turkey                  X                 X  XXLarge $ 5.5M $70            LOW
UAE Small $0 $0              LOW
Yemen                  X Large $ 8M $330          MODERATE
TOTAL FOR MIDDLE EAST                2              2 Na                 X $321M (not including Iraq) $1070 (not including Iraq)   HIGH – VERY
North Africa
Algeria                 X (2)        X (15%) Large $2M $58          LOW
Libya           Libya                 X (0)        X ( 0%) Medium $ 0.6M $82          LOW
Morocco                 X (1)                 X Large $ 22M $670        HIGH
Sudan           Sudan Large $ 171M $4480      HIGH – EXTRA
Tunisia        Tunisia                 X (3)                 X Medium $ 1.1 M $110        MODERATE
TOTAL FOR N. AFRICA              2               1                 X (36)                 X $197M $1600      HIGH – EXTRA
GRAND TOTAL FOR MENA REGION               4               3                304  na Na $518M $1230      HIGH – VERY

* includes similar projects from the Millenium Challenge Corporation

 

Contrary to popular belief, the world’s finances are controlled by privately-owned “central banks” masquerading as federal government banks in nearly every country in the world  [The U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, ruled that The Federal Reserve (U.S.’ central bank) was privately owned in 680 F.2d 1239, LEWIS v. UNITED STATES of America, No. 80-5905].

 

Jacob Rothschild, senior member of the British branch of the Rothschild dynasty

 

 

Though the shareholders of the central banks are guarded secrets, in 1976 a U.S. House of Representatives found that the shareholders of the Federal Reserve (America’s central bank) were the super-elite of domestic and international bankers (Federal Reserve Directors: A Study of Corporate and Banking Influence, Committee on Banking, Currency and Housing, House of Representatives, 1976, Appendix, Charts 1-5).  One author, Eustice Mullins, traced the ownership of these banks back to the Rothschilds–having the controlling interest in the Federal Reserve (Secrets of the Federal Reserve 1983).

With extremely little government input, the economies of nearly all countries’ in the world are strictly controlled by private central bankers (and their tool, the International Monetary Fund) ultimately led by the Rothschild’s cartel.  Central bankers in the MENA region complain about less “independence” from the wishes of those dictators and governments.

Some countries without central banks (privately owned operating autonomous of the government) have names like Central Bank of Iran and Central Bank of Libya and appear on lists of central banks, but they are state owned or entirely state controlled.  Countries without privately-owned (or controlled) central banks are: Iran, Syria, Libya, North Korea, and Cuba.  Iraq did not have a central bank until (after the U.S. invasion in) 2004, Afghanistan did not have a central bank until (after the U.S. invasion in) 2002 and Yugoslavia did not have a central bank independent of government control.  Sudan’s central bank may be privately owned but it is totally run by the government which embraced Islamic banking decades ago (According to an IMF study , Sudan’s score for the political autonomy of its bank is zero out of eight).

Countries labeled as “rogue states” by the U.S. in the late 1990s were Iran, Syria, Libya, North Korea, Cuba, Iraq, Afganistan, Yugoslavia and Sudan.

 

TABLE 2:  IS THERE A CORELATION BETWEEN THE LACK OF CONTROL OF A NATION’S ECONOMY BY INTERNATIONAL ELITES AND U.S. AGGRESSION—ECONOMIC, POLITICAL OR MILITARY?

No private Central Bank (1990s) Iraq Iran Afghanistan Cuba North Korea Syria Yugoslavia Libya Sudan
Rogue States (1990s) Iraq Iran Afghanistan Cuba North Korea Syria Yugoslavia Libya Sudan

 

Half the countries in the first column [of the above Table I (no privately controlled central bank)] have been invaded by U.S. forces and most of the rest have been threatened.   Of the MENA countries: 1)  Iraq was subjected to crippling sanctions and then brutally invaded.  In 2002 economic reforms (a private central bank) were forced upon it.  2) Iran is still suffering under sanctions.   Citizens there have been given very high amounts of pro-democracy activist training by USAID, NED and SOROS and they did have an attempted revolution in 2009 after the election and they have had protests in the last months.  3)  In addition to a government-run central bank, Sudan also has many Islamic banks.  It has received extremely high levels of activist training and it has seen protests in 2011.  4)  Syria received moderate levels of activist training and has also had recent protests.

Countries which are financial centers for Islamic Finance (column 2 in Table I) are also targets:   1) Tunisia which had just opened its Tunis Financial Harbor with the ambition to become the financial center of North Africa received moderate levels of activist training and the ensuing protests seemed to catch the dictator by surprise and toppled The Ben Ali regime.  2) Bahrain was establishing itself with two mega-centers, Bahrain Financial Harbor and Gulf Finance House.  Bahrain received high levels of activist training and has experienced sustained protests for many weeks.   3) Iran embraced Islamic banking early on and Western-style banks charging interest are not allowed.   Seven of the ten largest Islamic banks in the world are in Iran.

If a country has an ‘X’ in columns 3 or 4 (in Table I), Islamic finance has a low market share so it represents a lucrative business opportunity (provided the country does not have a small population).  Egypt would be the prime example of a totally unexploited market for Islamic banking:  with a population of nearly 80 million, it has only 3 Islamic banks with a market penetration of only 7%.   Other countries that represent a business opportunity (low market share with a significant population size) are Tunisia, Jordan, Syria, Turkey, Yemen, Algeria, Libya, Morocco, and Iraq and Tunisia.

Of all the countries potentially in play (nations mentioned in the text above), based on these figures (do not include MEPI and OSI which are not available by country) for funding of activist training:

1)      Low activist funding means protesters will have the least chance of success in Libya, Algeria and Turkey.

2)     High activist funding means the greatest chance for a revolution to be successful would be in Egypt, Iran and Jordan.

USAID, NED and George Soros have been injecting millions of dollars into the training of MENA pro-democracy teachers, lawyers, journalists and youth activists.  In 2009 they more than doubled their training efforts.   The international bankers are competing with Islamic finance in the Middle East.  They have their eye on MENA’s large untapped markets.    If they get rid of autocratic leaders, they will be able to control MENA countries and their Islamic banks through their privately-owned central banks—they may be able to discredit Islamic finance as an alternate model to usury.

The globalist banksters want Muslims to borrow from their (the globalist’s) banks and pay interest at rates their central banks decide:  they do not want them to borrow from Islamic banks and not pay any interest.  The globalist banking cartel want Muslims to trade their present political oppression at the hands of brutal dictators for a future of economic serfdom under the feudal Lord Rothschild.

A third option is for young, new MENA democracies not to let themselves be groomed by old men in Western business suits.  They should elect governments that are not from the globalist money power and they should nationalize their central banks and set up independent monetary policy that will provide a level playing field for Islamic Finance and Western-style banks.